Thoughts on Being Offended

[Anonymous]

We (church members) often talk about not being offended easily and indicate that “inactives” often become that way because they were easily offended by this or that, or some other member. I’m sure we’ve all felt offended at times, and maybe that’s kept us away from church activity. We’ve also probably seen that happen within the church. I’ve wondered, however, about the quick offense some of us take towards the outliers, or the behaviors we deem unacceptable. For instance, I’ve heard young lds men say that seeing a woman with multiple ear rings is offensive to them. ??? Or, that a particular clothing style is offensive. Or, leaders say they’ve been offended by a TV commercial showing scantily clad women selling beer. Or, a particular movie being offensive.

Are we, as a church, too easily offended? Has our PC society also become too easily offended? (Things that come to mind include Washington Redskins, wearing fur, eating veal).

Is God also offended at these things? If He is, does that also give us the license to be offended?

What are your thoughts?

[Anonymous]

I think the question is better worded “Are we too judgmental?”.

The answer is a resounding Yes. As life has kicked me around, I no longer feel I should judge anyone unless

a) I am in a formal position to do so (Bishop, jury member, teacher grading papers).

b) They are asking my opinion

c) They are asking me to do something that requires personal choice — and a judgment of right and wrong.

Beyond that, I have NO RIGHT to judge anyone.

I remember years ago my wife and I decided it was best she go out to work. She was doing little at home, so it made more sense. The flak I got from the women in the Ward over that was astounding. I don’t care how people dress, what they do, unless I’m in a formal position to judge, its none of my business.

Regarding the “he’s inactive because he got offended”. I don’t really like that “write-off” statement very much. I’ve seen people write off huge offences people have borne with that statement “they were active, but then they got offended so they don’t come anymore”.

And with that comes the pejorative judgment that the person is somehow defective or unfaithful because they let something knock them off the iron rod.

Given the tendency for the Church to really love itself, and to take little responsiblity for the actions of its leaders, or its staff, or even its own bad policies, I find that kind of “write off” statement, shallow, uncharitable, and conduct unbecoming a Church organization.

If I know someone is offended, I would want to know why and to listen to them, and to try to make amends. If they are not willing to come back to Church after that, then they need love and compassion. When people ask about them, my answer would be “they need a bit of time; life has dealth them a difficult blow” or something innocuous like that.

We write off people too quickly — if someone is upset or threatens to leave, the prevailing attitude I have seen is “fine, let them”. And then we bend over backwards to attract the people who are stone cold from such treatment that happened 10 years ago. Our priorities are mixed up!!!

[Anonymous]

This is an excerpt from Elder Bednar’s talk on taking offense.

Quote:

In many instances, choosing to be offended is a symptom of a much deeper and more serious spiritual malady. Thomas B. Marsh allowed himself to be acted upon, and the eventual results were apostasy and misery. Brigham Young was an agent who exercised his agency and acted in accordance with correct principles, and he became a mighty instrument in the hands of the Lord.

I have mixed feelings about his perspective. On the one hand, I agree that sometimes this attitude is quite dismissive of those who struggle with these issues. I don’t know that being offended is a sign of spiritual malady but rather the condition of being human. Not just that but being a human that comes into contact with a great many other unthinking, unaware, and sometimes even uncaring humans. I also don’t know that it is really a choice. To be offended is similar to being attacked and when attacked, our body and mind have some automatic actions built in. What we choose is the behavior that we will engage in as reaction to the offense.

On the other hand, some people are simply too prickly. We have probably all known individuals in our wards, families, workplaces that seem ready and poised to take offense at the most innocent of remarks. My wife and I have had to really work with our own children on this. (They have a tendency to be both provoking AND prickly leading to far too many altercations). So in some respects, I have to agree with Elder Bednar. It does seem a trifle foolish to cut yourself off from the Church just because the bishop didn’t say “hello” to you when you walked into sacrament meeting (and yes I’ve known of individuals who have left the Church over something this minor).

That’s not to imply that all offenses are minor. Some are huge. One family I know became inactive because the bishop of their ward, when informed by the parents that a young man in his ward had sexually abused their son, did nothing about it. In fact, the young man blessed the sacrament the next Sunday. Maybe the answer is that the issue isn’t as black and white as we’d like it to be.

[Anonymous]

I have mixed feelings about it too. Some people have it right — they look at offences as “water off a ducks back”. They let it go and are much happier than the average bear as a result. On the other hand, I’ve seen VICTIMS treated like they are the transgressor given the parable of the man who is forgiven a huge sum, and then beats someone who owes him a farthing.

And sometimes — the person who takes it upon himself to remind you of what an unworthy, unforgiving victim you are, is the offender!!!

That has happened to me before.

And, there are times when we do nothing when people are offended in the Church. Had a situation about 3 years ago when a couple vindictive ladies sent the entire Ward council a nasty personal attack letter about me. I’d never experienced that before in my life — not among all the non-LDS people I work with day-to-day. It was terrible, embarrassing, in my view, unjustified, of course. Our Bishop did nothing. I was deeply, deeply hurt and it it triggered my first long period of clinical depression.

How did I handle it? After a reasonable period of inaction, I called a meeting with our Bishop, his counselor, and the people involved in the problem, and stated my case. Used the old “When you did this, I felt like this….”. Indicated I did not feel proud of our Ward, felt like taking my family and attending another Ward permanently, disillusioned about the meaning of TR when supposedly good members choose to handle conflicts in such a destructive manner meant to publicly harm their brother or sister in the gospel -as they did with me.

The meeting ended well, with the offenders gently reprimanded……the worst of them gave a half-hearted apology after the Bishop pressed. Bishop’s counselor apologized for reprimanding me without having all the facts. One person hugged me. The real offender saty there stony faced and gave me a cold handshake.

Some will say I was wrong to seek some kind of release from what I was accused of, but for me, I did what I had to, to stay active and involved in the Ward.

For me, I think we should be uber-conscious of the people we offend, and reach out to make amends. If the parable I quote settles on the mind of the offended so be it– but I never remind them of that parable. We need to focus on being more like Peter who said “is it I???” when Jesus indicated one of them in the circle would betray him. The same with offences — we need to ask if we behaved offesnively and apologize. Half the time we may find we did no harm, which is fine. Better to apologize when no offence was given than to walk away heartless was offence WAS in fact given.

[Anonymous]

Cnsl1 wrote:

We (church members) often talk about not being offended easily and indicate that “inactives” often become that way because they were easily offended by this or that, or some other member. I’m sure we’ve all felt offended at times, and maybe that’s kept us away from church activity. We’ve also probably seen that happen within the church. I’ve wondered, however, about the quick offense some of us take towards the outliers, or the behaviors we deem unacceptable. For instance, I’ve heard young lds men say that seeing a woman with multiple ear rings is offensive to them. ??? Or, that a particular clothing style is offensive. Or, leaders say they’ve been offended by a TV commercial showing scantily clad women selling beer. Or, a particular movie being offensive…Are we, as a church, too easily offended? Has our PC society also become too easily offended?…Is God also offended at these things?…What are your thoughts?

Yes, I think people are often too sensitive (both inside and outside the Church) and they would typically be better off if they didn’t let things outside their control (others’ beliefs and behavior) bother them quite so much. However, I think the Church is mostly using these stereotypes about members that have fallen away supposedly being weak, lazy, easily offended, etc. as an excuse to avoid facing some of the real problems because they don’t want to even consider the possibility that something could be seriously wrong with the Church itself.

If the Church doesn’t provide a positive experience overall for many members then it’s not their fault for feeling dissatisfied with it. Similarly, if too many of the Church’s doctrines require confusing and unconvincing apologetic arguments to even attempt to defend then it’s hard to blame people for doubting or not believing some of this. Personally, I think Church leaders should at least try to understand where inactive Church members or ex-Mormons are coming from rather than just jump to conclusions that if they can’t accept something about the Church then they are automatically wrong. As far as God being offended by earrings, beer commercials, etc., it looks to me like God is content to let people believe whatever they want to because if not it seems like he could have made “the truth” easier for everyone to agree on.

[Anonymous]

In the many years that I’ve been inactive, it hasn’t been because I was offended.

I don’t have major issues with doctrine, church history or leadership.

What surprises me is: no one asked me.

It is too easy to just assume that I was offended in someway.

We have a tendency to put people into neat, easily defined, categories.

It occurs when we meet someone for the first time & ask the standard questions:

1. Are you visiting?

2. Are you investigating?

3. Are you moving into the ward?

4. Ok, what’s the last unspoken category? (INACTIVE)

What’s interesting to me is how members treat you when you try to come back.

With investigators you are welcomed with open arms.

With inactives you get the cold shoulder, as if you are carrying a disease that can be caught like a cold.

This isn’t a rule chiseled in stone. There are some who will welcome you back. They are few.

I must admit too that I told our Bishop that I would like to be a “fly on the wall” & participate at my own speed.

Now, it sounds like I’m complaining because I’m being treated like the fly.

After reading this it sounds like Iam offended. I might be wrong after all.

Mike from Milton.

[Anonymous]

I think a better way to frame this is that people always feel self-justified. All people always feel justified. We couldn’t deal with it otherwise. People just can’t admit when they’ve done something wrong that hurt another (certainly what I did wasn’t bad enough for this overreaction; my intentions were good), and we also can’t believe that something bad happened to us as a result of our own actions (maybe I did make a mistake, but not to this extent!). Unfortunately, self-justification isn’t the word used in the KJV – it’s “offended” and “giveth offense.” So we’re stuck with this word that’s slightly off.

Saying that someone else was offended in the church is tantamount to saying they are the bad guy, playing the victim unnecessarily; they are being negative. We can still feel good about ourselves. We don’t need to change. They do. Once these stories of self-justification get created (on both sides), we feed them with more and more examples of our own goodness / victimhood and their badness / offensiveness. In reality, when we started this process, the original rift was quite small.

This is a common enough reason for people to go inactive. But it’s the one that gets the most air time, even though there are other reasons, too. I think people also just get bored and quit going and then it gets easier to keep not going. Or something else is more captivating to them. Or lots of other reasons. Offense is one that members can actually remedy (well, they could quit being boring, but what are the odds?).

[Author]

Posts