- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I am sitting in HP today listening to the instructor who happened to be the group leader. After his opening minutes where he did his usual talking about how God was one a man and how we can become Gods he made a statement to this effect “everything thing we do in the church must be done only if it enhances the family” On the face of it it sounds pretty good, but then I wondered just where did this family concept come from. I mean it is not like the scriptures are constantly talking about the need for family structure. Jesus said to leave your family behind and follow him. Also the concept of family as we know it today is a relatively modern invention, at least from an anthropological viewpoint. Mormons would say the family unit goes back to Adam, but not so sure that is the case. Anyway when did we start making the family the center piece of our theology? Is being the perfect family unit really that essential to our salvation? I know the church uses the protectoin of the family to make all sorts of statements against others lifestyles, and predicts dire consequences to the family if we do not shape up and fly right. Do you think the family unit is essential?
I’m not sure that the perfect family, or families in general, are essential for “salvation” or “exaltation.” I highly doubt it actually. I think that the traditional family pattern that the LDS church promotes is a good pathway for MOST people to find “
peace.” It’s worked for me. It’s all about peace – nothing to do with exaltation in the CK. It is a safe road to travel, and I do think in most cases it would be considered “optimal.” There are always exceptions.
I think there are two aspects to the “family thing”. 1. The first is rooted in doctrine which forecasts eternal offspring to populate worlds, and eternal increase. People with testimony’s will point to this.
2. There is also a temporal motive behind it, in my view. Joseph Smith wanted his Church to survive, to grow and to flourish. He wanted commitment from his members. Family strikes at the heart of people’s motivation. Many will do just about anything to keep their families together, and if that means living the gospel as defined by Mormonism, then so be it — it’s a strong motivator to stay active, pay tithing, service, and to keep the Church flourishing as an organization.
Family also fuels population growth — the emphasis on NOT curtailing family sizes so spirit children can get bodies and come to this earth is not only for the benefit of the spirit children (if you believe in them) but for the size of the Church on earth. Plural marriage was another case in point — I think it was as much about increasing the population of Mormons as it did with obeying some commandment. I think plural marriage can be viewed as a way of swelling the ranks with children who are likely to grow up to be strong in the Church to assure its longevity. That was why only certain people were commanded to practice it — the strong-in-the-Church ones.
Also, the emphasis on temple marriage is there partly to ensure that people marry within the faith. It’s pretty obvious that the next generation will be more likely to stay active when both parents are LDS.
So, you can look at this two ways — family is a essential for eternal progression and Plan of Salvation reasons, or it’s there as a means to perpetuate the Church as an organization.
I vascillate between both interpretations.
I think the family thing is a by-product of Mormon history. Think of the persecution and isolation early members experienced. The families held it together. Then they became a vast support network.
There is also the issue of keeping folk in the church. Now that’s more easily done in a family. In our ward, certain families are the foundation and glue. (Mixed metaphor!)
I think there is so much out there destroying families. More and more people live alone, unsupported and unloved. I don’t blame homosexuality for this (!), I think it’s the atomization of society.
It’s not really fair on ugly people is it though? I mean, if you’re good looking and social, you can get married easy. But uglier people get left on the shelf unfortunately. That’s where family falls down perhaps.
In my own life, I am extremely grateful for my parents, who supported me and loved me during my childhood. They provided me with most of the happy experiences of my childhood, and helped me through the not so happy ones. If I hadn’t had that, I suspect I’d be dead, in jail or on hard drugs by now.
I am not disputing in anyway that families are good. MIne is good and I love them. I am just wondering if being a family is so important to salvation.. Cadence wrote:… I am just wondering
if being a family is so important to salvation.. I doubt it.
Quote:Do you think the family unit is essential?
It seems to me that modern Mormons have adopted and expanded on a Victorian family model. In the days of polygamy, it was physically impossible for a father to be around all his children, so the concept of family was beaten out of the Mormons via anti-polygamy legislation. The church has adopted the gentile “Leave it to Beaver” model.
We need to be good parents, raising righteous children. I’ve said it before that even though I’m sealed to my parents and my children, I don’t think we’ll be hanging out in each other’s heavenly living room constantly. To me, the important ordinance is the sealing to spouse, and these other sealings aren’t all that necessary. But the church’s emphasis on raising a righteous seed is a great teaching. Emphasizing family so much makes society better, so the family unit is essential to maintaining a healthy society. Deadbeat dads and promiscuous moms hurt society, and I think terrible fathers and mothers will account for neglecting their children in the next life.
mormonheretic wrote:.. Emphasizing family so much makes society better, so the family unit is essential to maintaining a healthy society. Deadbeat dads and promiscuous moms hurt society,..
Well said I think.
I think the ideal is critical – no matter what the next life looks like. I really like the theological move away from viewing the ultimate objective as an individual goal, but I think preaching the importance of the family is even more important in the here and now than in the there and then. I’ve worked in the inner-cities extensively, and I’ve seen WAY too much in some of my jobs of what life is like without a strong family emphasis to question the validity of teaching the ideal – as long as exceptions are noted and valued, as well. That’s the tricky part, imo – validating the single adult, the divorced parent, etc. while still preaching the ideal.
Cadence wrote:I am sitting in HP today listening to the instructor who happened to be the group leader. After his opening minutes where he did his usual talking about how God was one a man and how we can become Gods he made a statement to this effect “everything thing we do in the church must be done only if it enhances the family” On the face of it it sounds pretty good, but then I wondered just
where did this family concept come from.I mean it is not like the scriptures are constantly talking about the need for family structure….Mormons would say the family unit goes back to Adam, but not so sure that is the case. Anyway when did we start making the family the center piece of our theology? Is being the perfect family unit really that essential to our salvation?…Do you think the family unit is essential? When the Church talks about family I think they basically envision their supposed ideal scenario where everyone is on the same page as active and obedient members. I think this strong emphasis on family is mostly based on fear due to seeing many members without sufficient support from their families repeatedly “fall away” from the Church and this fear is compounded by the “one trueness” doctrine because of the supposed eternal implications if these lost sheep don’t ever repent of their apostasy and return to the fold.
Think about it, if people don’t feel like going to Church but their spouse, parents, etc. expect them to go then it often provides the extra motivation they need to get them to attend the meetings regularly. That’s the main reason why the Church puts so much emphasis on family in my opinion. Also, in addition to the fear of losing members the “eternal family” doctrine has been a fairly effective sales pitch to help differentiate us from other competing sects and inspire continued loyalty to some extent. Maybe the emphasis on family is also a way to try to deflect some of the criticism and change outsiders’ negative perceptions of the Church by pushing the idea that we are essentially good, happy, family-oriented people.
On the other hand, it looks to me like the Church doesn’t really care that much about families when there is only one person who is an active/believing member and the rest are uninterested because in that case it seems like they are completely indifferent or oblivious to any strain or misunderstandings that some of the traditional hard-line LDS doctrines can cause between active members and outsiders or dissenters in many cases. Would they really feel that bad about it if a faithful member in a situation like this basically abandoned their family and married a TBM instead to create a new active Mormon family? I really doubt it because that’s basically a happy ending from their perspective.
I don’t DA? I think that whole family thing is one of those issues, one of the few issues, that the church has actually got right, and I personally think their motives are pure. You may be right, but I guess I choose to believe that the family is the source of happiness and peace for most people.
I guess, if I leave the LDS church – I will take the family teachings I learned from the church with me, as I believe they are “true.”
cwald wrote:I don’t DA?…I think that whole family thing is one of those issues,
one of the few issues, that the church has actually got right, and I personally think their motives are pure.You may be right, but I guess I choose to believe that the family is the source of happiness and peace for most people…I guess, if I leave the LDS church – I will take the family teachings I learned from the church with me, as I believe they are “true.” I’m not trying to say they should stop emphasizing the importance of families in general or that their motives for doing this are completely wrong. Actually, I think marriage is generally a good thing and healthy for people in most cases. I just wish the Church would be a little more sensitive and understanding toward families where not everyone is an active obedient member. Even if they try to suggest acting nice in cases like this it seems like there is always the hope or expectation in the back of their mind that some of these family members will eventually come around and accept their way of thinking.
Personally, I think the Church should emphasize getting along with outsiders and inactive members as well as possible with no expectation that they will ever become active and obedient members but simply because it is the right thing to do. My guess is that all the emphasis on being separate from and better than “the world” is really going to backfire and cause a lot of unnecessary problems now that there is so much anti-Mormon propaganda on the internet causing more active members to suddenly lose faith in the Church than in the past.
Quote:Even if they try to suggest acting nice in cases like this it seems like there is always the hope or expectation in the back of their mind that some of these family members will eventually come around and accept their way of thinking.
Sorry to be a bit blunt with this response, but my immediate reaction was:
Quote:Duh! That’s true of anyone who really believes something. Isn’t that your own hope about others seeing things eventually as you do?
Now, being more compassionate toward those whose situations aren’t the “ideal” that is preached? I can agree with that completely.
cwald wrote:I don’t DA?
I think that whole family thing is one of those issues, one of the few issues, that the church has actually got right, and I personally think their motives are pure. You may be right, but I guess I choose to believe that the family is the source of happiness and peace for most people.
I guess, if I leave the LDS church – I will take the family teachings I learned from the church with me, as I believe they are “true.”
I also think they are good teachings. HOwever, I often wonder if they are there for the good of the Church in the long run, and are there to harness the power of loyalty to family toward organizational ends. Family heartstrings are powerful heartstrings, and the gospel as espoused in the Mormon Church certainly attaches faithfulness and activity to eternal relationships. It creates a form of peer pressure that so many have to face head-on when they feel disaffected from the Church.
When I mentioned my TBM wife told me I don’t have to go to Church anymore, I was amazed with how many people focused on congratulating my wife and telling me how lucky I was! This shows the power the family gospel has on members of other families out there to stay active in the Church. I’m sure many people know how powerful the cultural expectations of family can be, which is testament of just how effective the interweaving of family and gospel can be to keeping people involved in Church — perhaps that was the original intention?
Intention or not, there are many benefits that flow over into daily family life, such as expressions of love and unity and such, as well a family home evening programs.
Old-Timer wrote:Quote:Even if they try to suggest acting nice in cases like this it seems like there is always the hope or expectation in the back of their mind that some of these family members will eventually come around and accept their way of thinking.
Sorry to be a bit blunt with this response, but my immediate reaction was:
Quote:Duh!
That’s true of anyone who really believes something.Isn’t that your own hope about others seeing things eventually as you do?
I don’t believe that’s actually the way it is at all as if this kind of intolerant attitude is unavoidable because some people are more adamant about various pet causes than others. In reality, some people could care less if others believe the same thing as them unless it has the potential to adversely affect them in some way like politics. To me, it looks like it is mostly intolerant extremists that typically expect others to believe exactly the same thing as them in great detail and have difficulty accepting the fact that many people will probably never agree with them no matter what. As far as I’m concerned, expecting everyone to believe the same thing is completely unnecessary and unrealistic in many cases and especially when it comes to religion.
I don’t think this kind of “my way or the highway” attitude is automatic at all as much as a learned behavior or reaction to some outside influence. In my opinion, Mormons think this way to some extent mostly because the Church puts so much emphasis on the eternal family and “one trueness” doctrines. It looks like some ex-Mormons think this way mostly because they feel like they were victims of the Church so now they have a personal grudge or vested interest in trying to fight it. In contrast, there are “ecumenical” movements that are mostly aimed at promoting unity and trying to resolve some of the differences rather than emphasizing them so much as if they are critically important.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.