- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I would like to draw on all the great people here in this community for a project: a list of recommendations. If you had the attention of a stake president, and could openly explain what happens to LDS members who experience a crisis of faith, and they asked you what they could do as a leader to serve and support members of their stake who go through this, what would you recommend?
What could the Church do, on stake level, for the type of people who might be interested in this community? You have to put yourself in the shoes of a Stake President though. You could also include guidance to bishops in your stake, and could perhaps invent a new calling like “Stake Faith Crisis Specialist” or something like that. You will have to balance any program, calling or training with the counterbalance of also needing to care for traditional members who are NOT aware of problems or doubts.
What would you have wanted if you went to a stake president or bishop with your doubts? with the worry that your spouse or family will freak out if they found out, or the concern that you no longer belong, or that you have to take an all-or-nothing stance?
So what would you say or recommend? This situation might actually come up for real in the next week or two (no, not my SP but someone else’s). I started thinking about ideas. You guys are experts on this experience too. What say ye?
There’s rarely a way to a answer or respond to questions about the history that will be satisfying or will help a person. You just need to acknowledge that the concerns are valid but suggest that there really are no deal breakers. And recognize that someone that wants to talk doesn’t want to leave. Figure a way to keep the person engaged since this is their home and we’re their tribe and at the same time find a way for them to be, not just feel, but be needed. Whoever decided to make me a clerk was certainly inspired since as SS president I was on my way out the door.
See if you can get them partnered with their best friend for visiting and home teaching.
Just a few thoughts.
Just be there for them. Don’t be judgmental. I think a lot of people see things like Job’s friends did in the bible, that because you are going through a hard time means you are a sinner. Just because you are having crisis in faith doesn’t mean you are suffering the wrath of an angry God. Life sucks, it is hard and bad things happen to good people. I’m taking a new approach to “less active” members. I don’t invite them to church, I don’t even talk church. I just invite them to social activities and let them know that I am there if they need help with something or want to talk. I tried to list everything I would want from the SP, but unfortunately, I WOULDN’T TRUST THE SP WITH MY DOUBTS. They tend to ostracize and marginalize people who aren’t sure if they believe it anymore. They limit them opportunities even when the person might take them (for callings), and they share the person’s state with other people in meetings like their Presidency meeting, with their clerks and executive secretaries who are there, etcetera (been there, so I know). We’ve had people here who post that after sharing doubts, their Bishop refused to let them baptize their children, and insisted they pay tithing for a while to prove their commitment. I remember that one like a lightening bolt in the night.
If I had a faith crisis, I would rather talk to people here in an unofficial capacity with at least the illusion or hope of anonyminity. People here can say things that are helpful, but not consistent with the Traditional Believer’s approach to spirituality and activity in the Church.
If the Church really wanted to help its members, it could set up a help line people can call into anonymously, giving only their Stake’s Unit Number, or maybe their Ward Unit number and name of their Bishop, but even that is too close to home for me. Better keep it on the Stake level.
However, since this is probably impractical, I like the idea of being non-judgmental, and treating the person like any other active person, while still being sensitive how they might feel about certain experiences after having doubts. No sir, I will never share my contrarion feelings with the priesthood leaders because you simply can’t trust them to treat you the same after you give away the secret sauce…
One possibility I have on my list is to find existing people in the stake who are comfortable with the topics, who are NOT “judges in Israel” for people to talk to — like a “Stake Disaffection Specialist” or something. That way, like SD mentioned, it does not become a worthiness-focused issue or becomes part of the official channels of leadership. I hate to put this issue on par with alcohol or other addictions, but the Church has this model in place for addiction support groups. You can attend those meetings and talk to people, and it is not supposed to be circulated back to the chain of ward and stake leadership.
You are right though, if through priesthood leadership channels, it would require BPs and SPs who would NOT freak out like SD described. Keep in mind though, I am asking for recommendations based on a SP who sounds like they are not going to be judgmental and just wants to help people be more comfortable in their stake. So I think the motivations are right.
Brian Johnston wrote:…If you had the attention of a stake president, and could openly explain what happens to LDS members who experience a crisis of faith, and they asked you what they could do as a leader to serve and support members of their stake who go through this, what would you recommend?
What would you have wanted if you went to a stake president or bishop with your doubts?The problem is that members with doubts about the Church are often treated as if they are broken and need to be fixed. Maybe some people don’t really want to be fixed and mostly just want to be understood and accepted the way they are. When confronted with doubts, it seems like bishops will typically just bear their testimony and tell others to read the scriptures and pray about it which rarely helps once people get to the point that they know about many problems with the Church’s story that are impossible to unlearn. Sometimes this response comes across as an ignorant and judgmental attitude even if they are basically just trying to help and honestly don’t know what to say about some of these issues. So what I would have liked to hear from my bishop is that it’s alright to have doubts and that I would still be welcome and accepted at church even if I don’t believe in it (you can’t always control what you believe).
Brian Johnston wrote:One possibility I have on my list is to find existing people in the stake who are comfortable with the topics, who are NOT “judges in Israel” for people to talk to — like a “Stake Disaffection Specialist” or something. That way, like SD mentioned, it does not become a worthiness-focused issue or becomes part of the official channels of leadership.
I hate to put this issue on par with alcohol or other addictions, but the Church has this model in place for addiction support groups. You can attend those meetings and talk to people, and it is not supposed to be circulated back to the chain of ward and stake leadership.
You are right though, if through priesthood leadership channels, it would require BPs and SPs who would NOT freak out like SD described. Keep in mind though, I am asking for recommendations based on a SP who sounds like they are not going to be judgmental and just wants to help people be more comfortable in their stake. So I think the motivations are right.
I like the idea of having a list of people who are comfortable talking about issues in a non-judgmental way. In trying to look at this from the perspective of a SP, I would suggest the following:
IN advertising these counselor type people, I would stress:
a) These people are not judgmental.
b) Everything is confidential and not shared with the priesthood line, although any limits on what is confidential should be stated up front (some things HAVE to be reported, such as child abuse and such if it comes up).
c) Let the users of this system know the boundaries of confidentiality.
d) Personally, I would like to know the counselor is a TR holder and active. This may not be for everyone, but in the beginning, I wanted to stay active and TBM, but found it near impossible. The STayLDS site actually pushed me further away on some new issues given the diversity of opinion. However, overall the net result has been positive. As a SP, I would want to feel I could trust these counselors to provide advice that is not too “far out” or encouraging behavior that can hurt other members.
e) People should be encouraged to see their priesthood leaders as their first line of attack, but when they are not comfortable doing so, they can use the Faith and Commitment Specialists (I like that name).
f) Purpose is to help people stay involved.
I would also advertise how Specialists can help:
a) Help members navigate through interpersonal problems in their Ward (even with leaders, although I might not broadcast that specifically given our culture).
b) How to manage being in a calling you don’t want, and how to get out of it respectfully
c) Faith and doctrinal problems that are hurting their faith
d) Problems with weariness in your Church service
e) Problems feeling like you fit in with the cultural norms we have in the Church
f) How to participate meaningfully in classes and activities even when you are in the thick of a faith or commitment crisis.
I would also suggest the Stake President give people options for how they can talk to the counselor:
a) Face to face or on the phone using the list
b) Online using a one-one-one communication platform where there can be anonyminity, such as through a private discussion area, chat, or even email to keep it simple. As a seasoned member, I would never meet with anyone face to face with my commitment problems — ever. I would NEED this option to take advantage of the service.
Cynical me, I’m pretty sure anything that requires an investment or software invested in by the Church would hit with “No”. So, any online tools would probably have to be free.
Brian Johnston wrote:If you had the attention of a stake president, and could openly explain what happens to LDS members who experience a crisis of faith, and they asked you what they could do as a leader to serve and support members of their stake who go through this, what would you recommend?
Personally I think Richard Bushman is one of the greatest voices they could listen to:
http://www.lifeongoldplates.com/2008/08/bushmans-introduction-to-joseph-smith.html “I am truly sorry for your loss” is one of the greatest things a local leader could say to someone in a crisis of faith – in my mind. I had a discussion on this topic with a local leader and it is my belief that when the subject is presented as a PERSONAL event they can make great strides in dealing with it effectively. The truth is a crisis comes (in most cases) when someone experiences a crushing blow to their personal expectations. I don’t think it matters so much what those expectations are, what matters to the person is that they were meaningful and in some way foundational to their personal faith structure — then they learned something that convinced them that those expectations that they held so closely to their heart are ultimately unreliable. As a result the personal faith either tilts or tumbles.
If leaders are able to frame this as a “personal” event instead of a “universal” blow the results shift from the potential of “the church isn’t what it claims to be” to a tolerable “the church isn’t everything that
I thoughtit was.” The difference can be as simple as “I never knew Joseph had more than one wife.” The facts don’t need to be argued, the effect on a personal faith structure is what needs to be addressed.
This is an important topic and could easily be a series of books. I hope any discussion on the subject goes well.
My first piece of advice would be really simple: Read Elder Wirthlin’s April 2008 General Conference talk, “Concern for the One”.
Notice what he says about those who leave. If a leader couldn’t understand anything else, I hope he at least could understand that MANY of those who leave do so because:
1) They are different;
2) They are weary;
3) They have strayed.
Notice, TWO of the three types he mentioned HAVE NOT strayed. That’s SO critical to understand. They are “lost”, but they haven’t strayed. They just are different and/or weary. So, what can a leader do for them?
1) Recognize and acknowledge that their differences are OK – that being different does NOT mean straying. If nothing else can be accomplished, that one single thing, I believe, would save many people great and terrible heartache and suffering and would, in a very real way, “save” them.
2) Stop heaping burdens on people who are weary – and allow a way to receive a timely and honorable “release” during weariness that does not include the implication that needing a break means someone is weak or has strayed. Show by action that Elder Packer was right when he said that the Church is meant to help the members – that the members aren’t meant to staff the Church.
As for those who have strayed, find them – then truly get to know them – then love them no matter if they return immediately or ever. Love them for who they are, not as projects – or objects to reactivate.
Preach the Church as God’s orchestra. Nurture that analogy obsessively. Tell your members to celebrate diverse instrumentation in the Church. Preach Zion as such an orchestra – NOT as a bunch of piccolos playing the same, solitary melody.
Finally, focus passionately on making each and every church meeting a spiritual, Christ-centered experience. Differentiate between the purpose of Sacrament Meeting, Sunday School and Priesthood/Relief Society Meetings – and insist the Bishops focus on the different purposes, as well. Preach the development of Christlike attributes, the chief being charity. Preach service strictly for the sake of helping others – NOT for the sake of conversion. Partner with non-members and other organizations (including other churches) in this effort. Ask members to sacrifice to lift others – and almost nothing else. All the law and prophets hang on love, so teach and model love – by understanding and living Elder Wirthlin’s message in “Concern for the One”.
Old-Timer wrote:My first piece of advice would be really simple:
Read Elder Wirthlin’s April 2008 General Conference talk, “Concern for the One”.
Notice what he says about those who leave. If a leader couldn’t understand anything else, I hope he at least could understand that MANY of those who leave do so because:
1) They are different;
2) They are weary;
3) They have strayed.
Notice, TWO of the three types he mentioned HAVE NOT strayed. That’s SO critical to understand. They are “lost”, but they haven’t strayed. They just are different and/or weary. So, what can a leader do for them?
1) Recognize and acknowledge that their differences are OK – that being different does NOT mean straying. If nothing else can be accomplished, that one single thing, I believe, would save many people great and terrible heartache and suffering and would, in a very real way, “save” them.
2) Stop heaping burdens on people who are weary – and allow a way to receive a timely and honorable “release” during weariness that does not include the implication that needing a break means someone is weak or has strayed. Show by action that Elder Packer was right when he said that the Church is meant to help the members – that the members aren’t meant to staff the Church.
As for those who have strayed, find them – then truly get to know them – then love them no matter if they return immediately or ever. Love them for who they are, not as projects – or objects to reactivate.
Preach the Church as God’s orchestra. Nurture that analogy obsessively. Tell your members to celebrate diverse instrumentation in the Church. Preach Zion as such an orchestra – NOT as a bunch of piccolos playing the same, solitary melody.
Finally, focus passionately on making each and every church meeting a spiritual, Christ-centered experience. Differentiate between the purpose of Sacrament Meeting, Sunday School and Priesthood/Relief Society Meetings – and insist the Bishops focus on the different purposes, as well. Preach the development of Christlike attributes, the chief being charity. Preach service strictly for the sake of helping others – NOT for the sake of conversion. Partner with non-members and other organizations (including other churches) in this effort. Ask members to sacrifice to lift others – and almost nothing else. All the law and prophets hang on love, so teach and model love – by understanding and living Elder Wirthlin’s message in “Concern for the One”.
Ray, this is absolutely brilliant. I love it. I think if this was preached consistently throughout my life in the Church I would not have descended into this constant fight against negativity and the recurring thought that this Church is out for itself, and doesnt’ seem to care about the well-being of its members — who are simply tools to meet its own interests. This is another entry that goes into my personal journal.
And by the way, I’m gonna try to look at my Church experience through these glasses your present here. It sure must exist in spots if only we can open our minds to finding it.
Brian — what would prevent someone from creating a website that allows people to connect one on one, privately with people like yourself for one-one-one private messages or emails and even phone calls to help people with Faith and Commitment Issues? Be unofficial, uncalled Faith and Commitment Specialists, and let it be known on the Bloggernacle (which I take to mean the online, unoffical websites centered on Church-like discussions). I think this could do a tremendous amount of good, and would prevent people from feeling they are placing themselves at risk by posting contrarion ideas on the public web, risking discipline, or future leadership opportunities, or being classed alongside more vocal people with harsh things to say about the Church — harsher than their own orientations (I’ve seen some sites out there where it’s just way harsher than what I’m comfortable with). It would also insulate them from contrarion, faith-detracting thoughts they never would have thought of, which often happens in public forums.
It wouldn’t have to be an elaborate site at first. It could be a static site that allows phone and email contact at first — these can be created easily with point and click technology at many free website hosting places in probably less than a morning, perhaps with a form the user submits for an initial contact. It could be all anonymous for the user.
I have created two such sites in my lifetime for various enterprises that need only a web-front, with the annual cost being $1 for first time domain regisration in the first year, and $35 a year after that. It could accept donations for the maintenance of the site, also easily set up through PayPal, but that could be low-key. It could give the mission of the concept, a brief background/bio of the Faith and Commitment Specialists, perhaps their pictures if they are comfortable with that, and reassurances of confidentiality. Perhaps a brief questionnaire to match you up with the Faith and Commitment Specialist who is right for you, or just let people select the Specialist they are most comfortable with.
What is cool about it is that no formal education or licensing background is needed to be a “Faith and Commitment Specialist” that I’m aware of — you are just someone who is willing to listen without being judgmental, and be someone with experience in the Church who has an opinion to share. I think there are a host of articles and resources that could be made available that people can look at for their own situation — many articles by GA’s that are actually forward thinking like the Concern for the One.
I could envision these Faith and Commitment Specialists having specialties based on their experience. Some people tend to be very compelling on certain topics — these could be made explicit in their bios. Typical areas — Testimony and Spirituality, History, Conflicts with Members, Weariness, Book of Mormon, Tithing, Joseph Smith, Temple…I’m sure after years of participating at StayLDS, you know the themes.
The reason I suggest this is that I don’t think a Stake will ever initiate something like the list of faith and commitment specialists as you suggest (great idea by the way). The Church will say “we have the home teaching program, the Bishops, etcetera” and will think it’s an additional system which duplicates existing efforts.
Also, the faith and commitment specialists are too forward thinking for the Church, in my view, to do it in an official capacity. And anyone working in that capacity as an official, church-called Faith and Commitment Specialist would feel bound to share the party-line rather than the kind of advice people who are worn out with SMA’s actually need. And I think a non-official site would attract Faith and Commitment Specialists who have a passion for the job, rather than people called to it as part of their Church callings….the responsiveness I have received here to my PM’s and questions and problems in the Church has been sustained, passionate, and valuable — far better than what I see in many callings in the Church.
Just sharin’ the idea. Most people would say “Great idea SD, so why don’t YOU go and do it”. Because I’m just ideating, that’s all…. If I was retired I think I’d consider establishing something like this, particularly if I ever come this period of outward activity and inward less-activity. And even if I didn’t, I could see myself managing something like this without being a formal Faith and Commitment Specialist — keeping the site up and the vision happening. I think it would be better use of my time than much of the chasing of less-actives I’ve done over the years as a priesthood leader….
Just sharing….ideas flow like water.
I think SPs should survey inactives, and find out why they’re going inactive. They should listen to what they do not want to hear, and also not punish them for being frank in their answers if the research is kept reasonably private. Brian, I think the list to the SP should include a huge “YOU ARE WELCOME” message to all.
It always makes me wonder why our congregations get so exclusive out of fear (ie. fear that the less faithful will influence others away from the church, or smokers will pollute the chapel, or homosexuals will influence our children, etc).
Members of the church need strong leadership to remind them to accept others with differences, and focus on gospel teachings…not judgments and ostracism. The people the SP and Bishop need to help most are the ones that freak out when others are different…not those that are different.
The other thing that I think can really help is a support group and open discussion for those that want to talk openly about these things. Trust that truth will prevail, and let people open up and talk about questions they have about what they read on the Internet or what they experienced in their crisis of faith.
I think you should tell the SP how many people visit this site (and go to other sites) looking for support they cannot get in church. That is where the Church is failing to help a part of the flock that is searching for help.
…or just tell the SP to recommend StayLDS.com.
I’m also skeptical of any approach that asks a church leader to institute a new program of the type that has been suggested here. Obviously I can see the need, and I agree with the sentiment behind it, but I don’t think it would ever fly. It is asking the church leader to, in effect, admit that in some important way, the inspired structure of the church is inadequate, since there is a segment of society for which it is unable to minister effectively. I would say, have them read this (oft-repeated here) quote from Jeffrey Holland:
Quote:“… If someone can find something in the Book of Mormon, anything that they love or respond to or find dear, I applaud that and say more power to you. That’s what I find, too. And that should not in any way discount somebody’s liking a passage here or a passage there or the whole idea of the book, but not agreeing to its origin, its divinity. …
I think you’d be as aware as I am that that we have many people who are members of the church who do not have some burning conviction as to its origins, who have some other feeling about it that is not as committed to foundational statements and the premises of Mormonism. But we’re not going to invite somebody out of the church over that any more than we would anything else about degrees of belief or steps of hope or steps of conviction. … We would say: “This is the way I see it, and this is the faith I have; this is the foundation on which I’m going forward. If I can help you work toward that I’d be glad to, but I don’t love you less; I don’t distance you more; I don’t say you’re unacceptable to me as a person or even as a Latter-day Saint if you can’t make that step or move to the beat of that drum.” … We really don’t want to sound smug. We don’t want to seem uncompromising and insensitive.”
Of course that quote can, I think, be appied to any aspect of Mormon orthodoxy with equal effect. If a stake president can feel good about what Elder Holland has to say there, then that’s something to build on. I don’t know what the next step would be. Provide sensitivity training for unit leaders? I’m skeptical about that, too. I don’t think training a TBM (not intended as an insult … here) church leader to be able to empathise effectively with a person who has honest questions is something that can be done. I think it’s a skill that you either have or don’t have. If this is an important issue to the stake president in question, he should actively try to find these kinds of people to fill leadership roles.
doug wrote:If this is an important issue to the stake president in question, he should actively try to find these kinds of people to fill leadership roles.
Doug, I think that is a very good point. It is one thing for leaders to be tolerant of people with different views, but when it comes down to how people are treated, callings and worthiness privileges are where things seem to show how the leaders really feel about such members of the ward/stake. Too often, worthiness is equated with obedience on small matters, ignoring the weightier matters of the gospel.
I agree, the SP should look at where some of these members of the stake can serve based on their capability to act in the calling, not whether they have doubts or not.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.