- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
nibbler wrote:
On Own Now wrote:
Since I am one of the disaffected, then when one of us writes an open letter using my voice, but with which I don’t agree, I’m going to stand up and say, that’s too much. The reason I think it is too much is simply that it is focused outward instead of inward. It is telling someone else that they are wrong and need to change their ways, instead of searching peace within ourselves.
If the group is the tribe of disaffected members, looking inward would include disaffected members, looking outward would include members of the church that are contented. If the “group” is an individual, looking inward would be self, looking outward would be everyone else.
So if I’m understanding correctly, when we identify with a group it would be considered inward focused to tell another member of the group that their approach is wrong if they misspeak while attempting to speak for the group. Makes sense.
I think my concerns are because I may be looking at it from a framework of individuals. If we tell someone else their approach is wrong that’s focusing externally, telling someone else they need to change, regardless of larger context or group membership.
You bring up a great point, and FWIW, I normally lean much more the same way as you in viewing the disaffected as a “framework of individuals”. Just two points of consideration:– When the author of the “open letter” took up the pen and wrote the words “us” and “we” he effectively put his arms around the framework of individuals and defined the group. He brought me into the group. I feel no need for hesitation, then, to respond. I get him, I feel for him, I understand what he is trying to do, but he didn’t represent my views. I feel totally at liberty to say it’s too negative toward people who I consider to be my friends to have it associated with me.
– One oft-leveraged convenience of the idea that the Church is a group and the disaffected are individuals is that we can all, then, attack the Church with impunity, but it is wrong for the Church to attack individuals. In other words, it asserts that the only valid criticism is one aimed at the Church. “Us individuals… we are immune. We are on base. You can’t touch us.”
I appreciate the thoughtful discussion here. I am pondering on your points. :think: Great discussion on the thread. I enjoyed reading it all. My thoughts are that this is a complex issue. There are many situations, many individuals, and multiple points of view… and it can be easy to talk past others who are in different positions than ourselves as we use labels like “disaffected” and “believers” and everything else that generalizes individual behavior in broad strokes. And that doesn’t intend to suggest there are not real issues, and real trends and that generalizations can sometimes be made, and that there are personal experiences and pain that is real.
This is one strategy: Stay and be an agent of change from either side to try to make a difference:
mom3 wrote:
For any of this to change – people on both sides need to be the change agents. If you still attend, but understand the pain, you can represent those who leave, by making loving comments and softening the hard edged comments.
I would say I was probably more in this camp years ago, but no longer. Just my journey has taken me elsewhere.
Another approach:
On Own Now wrote:
while conversing with a Church member, it has always been how WE can do better; never how somebody else can do better.
…I also have used this tactic at times, although I admit at times it feels lacking of empathy to the disaffected with valid pains. But…it is good to at least be able to have discussions in church, and also have had nods from others…I think others think this way also. But not everyone. I often get a rebuttal directly after by the uber-zealous ex-bishop of the ward trying to build up hedges against the evils that attack our faith if we are complacent (in his mind). In other words, others get defensive to this kind of talk. That’s ok too…as long as we are talking.
And I think this is another approach:
On Own Now wrote:
Since I am one of the disaffected, then when one of us writes an open letter using my voice, but with which I don’t agree, I’m going to stand up and say, that’s too much. The reason I think it is too much is simply that it is focused outward instead of inward. It is telling someone else that they are wrong and need to change their ways, instead of searching peace within ourselves.
LookingHard wrote:
He really emphasized trying to get past working against the church and figure out what you want your life to be – not what were you against.
Be focused inwardly, to search for peace regardless of the weather outside.
I guess my point is that different people are at different stages.
Perhaps some are stage 3, or 4, or 5. The language and approaches change for those in different vantage points, and it isn’t easy talking to others who are in different stages. It’s kind of like the idea that if you have never dealt directly with mental illness in the family directly up close and personal, it is really hard to fully understand some other family dealing with it. You can try…but…it can be difficult to really empathize enough what works and what doesn’t work. Those who have dealt with it usually know there isn’t much you can say or do…you simply love and validate and support…not try to “fix” the situation for someone else or tell someone else what to do to fix it.
Too many times…people are stuck in “fix-it” mode…and sometimes that is helpful, and too many times it is a hammer thinking everything is a nail, and becomes more destructive.
We can’t expect everyone at church to have the tone all of you have used here in this thread. It just isn’t realistic.
Whatever imperfect strategy is used or how poorly people execute it…the key is to connect with others and learn from the experiences. Anger, frustration, hurt, apathy, love… all these are valid as part of the experience.
I don’t expect there will be a change in the church that will ever happen where interacting with others will produce anything different. It just is this topic or that topic, as we pass through our journey and practice our religion by interacting with others in different stages than we are…which is the value of interacting instead of going to a cave and shutting everyone else out. We benefit from the interactions. All of them. Even the bad ones.
We’re better for it. Even when we screw up, or see others doing it wrong. It’s ok. Life moves one. Like Mom3’s grandparents or others, in or out of the church, in one ward or another ward, with disaffected or faithful believers, with a Republican or Democrat President….life goes on.
Take it all in.
I feel for the author. I do NOT want to be critical. I want to understand and validate. I will do that as much as possible. However . . .
What On Own Now said.
To use Fowler’s Stages of Faith, I see someone who exchanged one black-and-white view for the opposite black-and-white view. I don’t see “growth”; I see “shift”.
I agree with so much of what was said; I recognize clearly what was left unsaid (and probably unrecognized) and what was implied.
I hope the author moves past this stage and reaches what I think is a healthier balance.
I’m new here, so forgive me for reviving this thread that has been dormant for a month or so. I’m new here because I saw the referrer to the story from the board here – I was unaware it had been shared. I’m the original author. First, let me say that I appreciate everyone’s input. I’ve read all of your comments and even where I disagree, I see value in your words and I’m learning.
I did not set out to write down my anger. I just made the decision this year to leave the church, so I’m still pretty new at this. I’m re-reading the article now, and I still feel like I did the best I could to temper my anger. I mentioned it, I confronted it, but I did not set out to write a negative article or attack the believers in my life. I still love them.
I also did not intend to represent all disaffected members. My apologies to On Own Now if you felt that I was trying to speak for you. I did not intend to speak for all disaffected members. I spent several years in that position and it was very different from the position I now find myself in. I didn’t want to get here when I was there. This article was intended to be more from the perspective of those that consider themselves former members that still have members in their lives.
Quote:If we’ve never spoken since I left the church, but now that you’re an assigned minister you’d like to reach out and get to know me better — that’s not a friendship based on anything but the church. You might be pretty good at not mentioning church right away — I’m pretty good at seeing through the motives.
I didn’t write this because I was angry, for example. I didn’t write it because it was someone else’s experience. This happened to me. Not long after my 17yo son decided to leave the church, his previous YM president was assigned as one of our ministering brothers. I’d served in ward council with this guy for a couple of years (since he returned from a senior mission) but we never spoke outside of church. We’re not close. When I left I asked the bishop not to assign me home teachers (it was before the April change). Then this guy reaches out, out of the blue, and wanted to take my family to dinner. Just to talk, of course. A few days later the ministering assignments refreshed in the app and sure enough, there he was. She and the kids went to dinner with him, we haven’t heard back since.
Quote:Don’t distance yourself from us, we still want and need to have relationships with the people we care about.
I know it may seem otherwise, because former members tend to create some distance from believers.
I know these two statements seem contradictory. I could probably have phrased it differently. What I was trying to convey is the fear that members are only friends with us because we’re members. When they never speak to us again because we’ve left the church, it reinforces that fear. We may not reach out because we fear being rejected by them, preached to, or called to repentance (I’ve experienced all three). I’d never reject someone just for reaching out to me, I’m not going to try and convert them out of the church, but that’s often not a two-way street.
Quote:Whatever else you do, please don’t bear your testimony at those that have left.
Since I admitted to my mom that I was struggling with testimony, the year before making the decision to leave the church, every interaction had some element of her bearing her testimony. She’d tell me a story about a friend that returned to the church. She’d find ten dollars. She’d have a feeling about something that turned out to be true. Every time, these would be related to me as testimony. After I left the church, she testified to my 17yo son and 13yo daughter that she knew I’d return someday. I have no problems with people owning and sharing a testimony – I have a problem with being testified
at. Old Timer, I appreciate your kind words. It’s hard to self-examine sometimes, harder to do so objectively. It doesn’t feel like I’m seeing things in black and white now, though I could be. I’m still trying to be better. I’m letting go of the anger as quickly as I know how and moving on. My spouse being somewhere close to the same page as me has helped significantly. One of the things I still struggle with, one of the things I’m most angry about, is my 13yo daughter’s continued involvement. She goes to church and then feels guilty for not doing more to get me back there. She disagrees with the church on LGBTQ issues and the harmful messages she hears disturb her. But she believes, so we support her. It hurts me to see her hurt that way. I worry about her a lot. My parents, siblings, in-laws – they’re responsible for their own well-being and if the church is right for them, I’m happy for them. The church does not seem to be doing my daughter any good, but she believes. I won’t be the one to tell her she has to believe a certain way just because I do.
I’m trying not to be too defensive. I hope I haven’t come across that way. It’s hard to convey tone and feelings on the internet with people I’ve never met before. Even if I’ve disagreed with something or added explanation that I think helps to clarify things, I really do appreciate everyone’s input. I’m still learning, still growing, and I think healthy discussion is a significant part of that.
Hello IT_Veteran (love the name 
Thank you for coming to this site. I know it was initially because of the linked article, but I hope you stay. This is the kind of site that can really help when we have family members who are still in, as in your case with your daughter. If you do stay, I will look forward to your perspective and voice here.
IT_Veteran wrote:
I’m still learning, still growing, and I think healthy discussion is a significant part of that.
Amen, brother. I don’t think the “still learning, still growing” part ever stops, or ever should. It’s funny, when I look back on my initial stages of FC, it sometimes makes me kind of smile at where my priorities were then compared to now. The Kinderhook Plates were a big hurdle for me. Now I just yawn at them. I suspect I will continue to learn and grow until I don’t know who I am anymore, which is unfortunately getting closer every year.Anyway, glad you came, hope you stay, and I wish you the best in your path forward, which to some degree or another, we all share.
Thanks for the welcome, I appreciate it. I may hang around a bit, we’ll see how that goes. As I said, I don’t have a goal to deconvert everyone. It’s a hard line to walk sometimes. IT_Veteran wrote:
Thanks for the welcome, I appreciate it. I may hang around a bit, we’ll see how that goes. As I said, I don’t have a goal to deconvert everyone. It’s a hard line to walk sometimes.
Welcome and thanks for joining the discussion.
I think you do a pretty good job of speaking and framing things from your own experience, and allow others to be different. And that is all that matters.
There is bound to be emotion around the experiences and the reactions to things that have happened. It is just a good thing to get together as a support group and share those and how we deal with them, and hear from others as well.
I know when people get “assigned” to reach out, it probably doesn’t feel right like the motives are manipulative or something. I also think that can be overplayed as it isnt’ always a bad thing. Whatever motivates us to reach out and develop friendships is what it is. What happens after the “reaching out” is what really matters. Perhaps someone is assigned to minister…but they end up being a friend, accepting and realizing you don’t want to attend church, or you want to do things on your own terms. I think it matters how they minister and if they require you to do something in order for them to stay friends, or if they just be good friends no matter what you choose to do.
It can go either way. It can go bad, or good. That is all apart of the human interactions we have with all social groups.
Perhaps that is more important than what motivates initial contact, how they act after the initial contacts.
I am at the point where I don’t care what others believe. Everyone is allowed to worship as they see fit (which includes not worshipping at all). But I find I don’t know how to reach out to strangers unless there is something to reach out about. I seem to not force it..and end up reaching out less than I should. So…I have some respect for people who take an assignment to reach out to others. Unless they start preaching or challenging or judging others.
There is a fine line to walk on it. But…church is a social group with social interactions. How we do it is how we practice our religion.
Anyway…I’m glad you’ve joined the conversation. It’s interesting to hear your experience with it so far. I think it sounds very familiar to many of us on how you feel about things.
Heber13 wrote:
[I know when people get “assigned” to reach out, it probably doesn’t feel right like the motives are manipulative or something. I also think that can be overplayed as it isnt’ always a bad thing. Whatever motivates us to reach out and develop friendships is what it is. What happens after the “reaching out” is what really matters. Perhaps someone is assigned to minister…but they end up being a friend, accepting and realizing you don’t want to attend church, or you want to do things on your own terms. I think it matters how they minister and if they require you to do something in order for them to stay friends, or if they just be good friends no matter what you choose to do.
I tried to acknowledge this in the article too. It just felt really duplicitous when he did it though. I’ve known him at church for a few years. As I said, we attended WC together. He’s not said one thing since I left. I can get over that, but as I said in the article – it’ll take me some time that he’s not just there out of a sense of duty.
When he did reach out, he reached out to my wife and invited all of us to dinner. She told him I was out of town (I was) but that she and the kids would meet him for dinner. She told him that I wouldn’t likely be interested because I didn’t want to be ministered to, and he referenced a conversation I’d had with the bishop about being okay with just being friends with people. I haven’t heard from him since – that was in July.
I don’t mind being friends with people, truly. I just don’t want it to be conditional.
Honestly, I was a little nervous about interacting here because I get a sense that everybody here knows the issues but decided to stay in. I didn’t want to come here and have y’all feel like I’m trying to convert you or just dismiss everything I have to say *because* you know the issues and decided to stay.
I appreciate that it hasn’t felt like that at all. Thank you again for the warm welcome.
IT_Veteran wrote:
He’s not said one thing since I left. I can get over that, but as I said in the article – it’ll take me some time that he’s not just there out of a sense of duty.
See..that’s totally valid for you to feel that way. Based on what he is doing…it sure doesn’t seem like he is doing it out of anything but duty, and that kind of thing sucks and isn’t right. I don’t know…maybe it isn’t a big deal…it just isn’t something worth your time worrying about probably, right? I mean…you don’t sound like you are out to get him…you just don’t trust him. That’s fair.
I see no problem with you having that opinion on him and avoiding him. Just…letting it be what it is.
IT_Veteran wrote:
Honestly, I was a little nervous about interacting here because I get a sense that everybody here knows the issues but decided to stay in. I didn’t want to come here and have y’all feel like I’m trying to convert you or just dismiss everything I have to say *because* you know the issues and decided to stay.I sure hope I didn’t make you feel dismissed in any way. Far from it.
Many of us here have different circumstances, and there are various reasons to stay or leave. Not all have to stay. And I don’t think what is said here on this board will influence too much one’s decisions. We try to be more open minded to allow everyone to have their own path, even if we share some of these experiences on how the church handles things.
I would be dubious and suspicious of people’s motives too. And just think you should do your thing…you either participate and make friends or you don’t, but you don’t let them pressure you into anything or feel guilt.
You’ve said it well several times….you want to let go of the anger. That is good. But I imagine it will be hard to never have an emotional feeling when people manipulate or make you feel obligated to do something with conditions. Instead…you should feel they accept you as you are. And if they don’t…that is their deal.
One thing I liked in your article was this:
Quote:Someone that’s never actually left the Mormon church has no concept of what it’s like. My brother left the faith nearly 20 years ago, but I can’t say I know what it was like for him. Even though I understand him better now, our experiences were still very different.
I also think everyone’s experiences differ so much. I guess that is why it should just be something we talk about and share ideas…but allow others to have their own way they work through things. We can’t really know exactly what it is like for others.
I think that is what religion should be teaching us. Regardless of the dogmas or creeds…how is it helping us become more loving, more compassionate, more pure in thought and spirit so we are our true selves, regardless of how others process their earthly experience.
I don’t think there is much harm you can do by sharing how you honestly feel with this group.
We are all in very different places in our journey as well. Sometimes it helps to talk with others about it. Even if we don’t all share the same ideas on what we do believe, we can share feelings about how to deal with church people from various points of view.
You don’t have to stay in the church to stay in our group.
My sister left the church decades ago. We talk on the phone now. We both share many ideas about life and have lots in common. I go to church, she doesn’t. But we understand each other, and I think it helps her see that I don’t fit into this Mormon mold of thinking she assumes that everyone must have if they go to church all the time. She and I have had very different experiences. But we are pretty close on the idea that we should find ways to live gospel principles and love others. We’ve both been offended by bishops, and both have accepted some bishops and members are kind when they reach out. We’ve shared both experiences.
I just have my reasons I stay. She has hers for why she doesn’t. We’re both good with that.
Heber13 wrote:
I sure hope I didn’t make you feel dismissed in any way. Far from it.
I haven’t felt like that at all. I feared that I would, but as I browse the forum, I see a much wider spectrum than I had anticipated.
I also found a great example of what I wrote about in the original article, but was very happy to see everyone disagree with the OP(
http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=9181 I think that’s been a difficult aspect of this too. My DW shared the article and immediately had a couple of women from her ward start listing all the problems with it. They couldn’t recognize that it’s just how I feel, and instead wanted to belabor each point on why I was wrong. It was frustrating.
IT_Veteran wrote:
They couldn’t recognize that it’s just how I feel, and instead wanted to belabor each point on why I was wrong. It was frustrating.
it is frustrating. It sounds more like they needed to reassure themselves how they feel, forgetting about how you are feeling.
So much of church turns into affirmations of “we have the truth” and “we are right” …
🙄 it gets frustrating but they seem to do that a lot. I guess it is important to those who need the “flock” to be protected from the evils of the world…or whatever story they tell themselves.I guess I tell myself that that is them. And I want to accept them on how they are, just as I would like to be accepted how I feel. I frankly don’t think any of us really know anything for sure about God and this life…so…they can believe what they want.
But others will do what they do. i guess it determines if we remain friends with them or not.
I loved your article towards the end where you wrote:
Quote:How Can Members Support Those That Leave?
Simply love your family and friends that leave the church. Don’t judge them for taking a different path than you chose. Try and view your relationship from their point-of-view. Are your interactions based around helping them feel the spirit, or are they based on a mutual friendship? There’s nothing wrong with members that choose to leave.
That really is the answer. Stop looking at those who leave as if there is something wrong with that choice. Perhaps that is just very hard for those who are fully immersed in drinking the kool-aid. But i like how you expressed your experience.
We’ve got teenagers in my home. Last night we were talking about how some youth leaders have said to them “Only date those in the church”…and both my teenagers thought that was weird (we don’t have many church youth in my area).
I chimed in…”I’d rather you date a really good person who treats you well and respects your standards than decide to date based on what religion they are.” They agreed. My step-daughter is dating a non-member whose family is very religious…and probably has more strict standards than we do. We should accept others based on how they act and who they are…not on what religion they profess to be a part of.
I would think your kids will respect you the more you can show that kind of wisdom and loving acceptance of others, even if it isn’t always reciprocated to you.
Heber13 wrote:I guess I tell myself that that is them. And I want to accept them on how they are, just as I would like to be accepted how I feel. I frankly don’t think any of us really know anything for sure about God and this life…so…they can believe what they want.
That really is the answer. Stop looking at those who leave as if there is something wrong with that choice. Perhaps that is just very hard for those who are fully immersed in drinking the kool-aid. But i like how you expressed your experience.
I think this gets to the heart of why I struggle with members. I’m perfectly happy being friends, having close relationships, etc, with the members in my life. I would never exclude someone simply because of their faith. To be entirely fair to them, I don’t feel like they’re excluding me because of my lack of faith.
My frustration is that it seems to be all they want to talk about (I don’t mean all, I mean many of the members in my life). If they only conversation they’re interested in having relates back to church and their spirituality, where does that leave us? How do I set boundaries with a parent that not just prays for me to return, but tells my kids that they have to be examples to me, or asks DW and I if she can take our (currently) 13yo daughter on a church history road trip next year?
Heber13 wrote:
We’ve got teenagers in my home. Last night we were talking about how some youth leaders have said to them “Only date those in the church”…and both my teenagers thought that was weird (we don’t have many church youth in my area).I chimed in…”I’d rather you date a really good person who treats you well and respects your standards than decide to date based on what religion they are.” They agreed. My step-daughter is dating a non-member whose family is very religious…and probably has more strict standards than we do. We should accept others based on how they act and who they are…not on what religion they profess to be a part of.
I’m glad your kids have you there to focus them on what is important. Certainly, believers (and I don’t know your family dynamics, but I’m assuming there are a few) see it as reasonable to set the expectation of temple marriage. If they’re not talking about how to date, how to select a potential spouse, when does that message come in? I run into many former members online that regret choosing the partner they did. They point to the emphasis on marrying as soon after a mission as possible, marrying someone that can take them to the temple, etc.. Spoiler alert – not everyone that can take them to the temple is a good match. That’s not even getting into problems of abuse and dishonesty, just mismatch in general (the other problems are not insignificant, I just don’t think they’re a factor in the majority of cases).
There’s one other problem that I see: many of the members in my life take criticism of the church as a personal attack on them. After Oaks’s Saturday morning talk last GC, I posted a response (the following day). I asked that before sharing the talk or gushing about how much they loved it, to please consider the silent voices of LGBTQ+ people, many of which are still closeted and unknown to others, and how the message would affect them. I said some not very nice things about Oaks too, I’ll freely admit to that.
My mom sent me a long text message later that day and told me that I cut her to the core, she’s at a breaking point with me, and that I’ll destroy my family if I continue to react in anger and criticize the church. She felt targeted by me, I explained that I thought she’d unfollowed me some time ago. I don’t know how to deal with that. She did tell me at the end of her text that even though I don’t think our relationship would ever be the same (she read the article!) that she was my mom and she knows it can be. I just told her I love her, explained why I was angry that day, and that if we’re to have the same relationship we used to, she can’t just see me as a deceived or broken person.
Hi IT_V! 1) It sounds like you would be very welcome here. I feel that we encourage people to slow down and not make rash decisions … to “doubt your doubts before you doubt your faith.”
There’s one other problem that I see: many of the members in my life take criticism of the church as a personal attack on them. After Oaks’s Saturday morning talk last GC, I posted a response (the following day). I asked that before sharing the talk or gushing about how much they loved it, to please consider the silent voices of LGBTQ+ people, many of which are still closeted and unknown to others, and how the message would affect them. I said some not very nice things about Oaks too, I’ll freely admit to that.
2) I would be very careful of sharing church related things on social media. Social media is not a good place to have thoughtful discussions about just about anything but especially politics or religion. If you feel the need to share your disagreement with a particular church talk – feel free to share here. It is possible that we are already having a discussion about it. This can allow you to get your feelings out without the collateral relationship damage. One of the best things that I found when I came to StayLDS was that I was not alone, was not crazy, was not being misled by Satan. I am just a person experiencing a fairly predictable pattern of change in stages of faith (reference to Fowler).
Glad you found us. I hope we can help each other as we share our perspectives and experiences.
I am presuming you were once a devoted believer. With that presumption – I would postulate, that if you were still a devoted believer, you would likely have the same response to an unbelieving family member. That is not a judgement. It is how the story goes.
We are a perfect, safe, venting ground. We don’t cross over into bashing. We also care deeply for the other relationships people have in their lives.
As hard as this advice may be – try to remember how it felt to be a devoted believer. Don’t guilt or shame yourself. But keep a section of your heart open to that memory. Not so you will return, but so you might have intuition as you communicate.
I also second Roy’s social media line. Don’t use social media, even email, to communicate.
Finally – follow the Golden Rule – Love them and treat them ask kindly and respectfully as you want them to treat you. This ball is in your court. They will learn better through your loving towards them and good works in life than anything you write or say.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.