- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Heber13 wrote:
Mr. Sneelock wrote:
I just want to offer my support. Last year I was in a similar situation: I had gone to the bishop for counsel with private doubts I had been struggling with and he ended up denying me the privilege of confirming my child. It was a major punch to the gut that almost sent me off the deep end. Thankfully I didn’t make any rash major decisions and I am just now reaching the point where I can have positive feelings about the church.Anyway I know at least in part what you are feeling. It really hurts.
Sorry that happened to you Sneelock. It just sucks. There sometimes just isn’t much you can do about it. But…it’s good to hear you eventually worked through it. What helped you the most to get back to positive feelings? Does time heal wounds, or did you shift any thinking?
For me it has been mostly just a matter of time, as well as setting healthy boundaries for myself (e.g. if a sunday school lesson is triggering me I am allowed to walk out, I can excuse myself when the congregation sings Praise to the Man, I don’t have to wear garments if I don’t believe in them, etc.). Oh, and getting off of the exmormon subreddit was helpful.Roy wrote:
Sneelock, Just to verify, your bishop did allow you to baptize but not confirm. Is that correct? The handbook does seem to indicate a higher level or “worthiness” is required for confirmation (although both seem to be at significant discretion from the bishop).I am sorry regardless.
That is right. He said that I needed to be temple worthy in order to be the voice of the confirmation and he no longer considered me to be temple worthy.
DoubtingTom wrote:
Thanks to all the well wishes, thoughts, and prayers! My SP said I can go ahead with baptizing and confirming my son, although I may have his grandpa do the confirmation with me still standing in the circle. I am very grateful for all your support!
Congrats, Tom. So happy for you! Here’s hoping the Church leadership will lighten up on the terrible sin of disbelief.
DoubtingTom wrote:
Thanks to all the well wishes, thoughts, and prayers! My SP said I can go ahead with baptizing and confirming my son, although I may have his grandpa do the confirmation with me still standing in the circle. I am very grateful for all your support!
That’s great to hear! I hope it goes well for your son and your family. Thanks for sharing Tom!
Great news! I’m glad for you. One of my biggest regrets is not participating in some of these “milestone” events for my own children. Thank you for letting us know. My heart is happy, although we still have a ways to go. Very happy for you Tom! For me, I find it important to baptize my children and also ordain my son to the priesthood (thus passing on my family priesthood line of authority). I would be ok without doing the temple stuff. DT – I’m glad your SP allowed you to baptize/confirm your son. It’s unfortunate the hoops that have to be jumped through to participate sometimes.
Back in the beginning of the year, after multiple conversations with my Bishop, he wouldn’t let me bless our new son. He did give me multiple opportunities to express “hope” but it felt disingenuous to my own journey to do so (I’m only saying this because had I expressed your level of faith and willingness to be orthopraxic in my religious practice I think he would have been ecstatic, so I’m surprised your Bishop/SP weren’t more willing to work with you up-front).
Anyway, the experience was the catalyst I needed to step away. Unfortunately these milestone might get more difficult in the future, but hopefully your local leadership will be willing to work with you and accept you as you are.
Good luck!
Good news! Glad he recanted. Although I would rather you were able to also give the gift of the holy ghost. But sharing the ordinances is something that doesn’t create shame, and can be concluded as inclusive of family members and patriarchs. I am glad you are getting through this — focus now should be on how to regain their confidence for other ordinances, like ordination to deacon. Navigating the space between doubt and belief is tricky, but it can be done!!
SilentDawning wrote:
Good news! Glad he recanted. Although I would rather you were able to also give the gift of the holy ghost. But sharing the ordinances is something that doesn’t create shame, and can be concluded as inclusive of family members and patriarchs.I am glad you are getting through this — focus now should be on how to regain their confidence for other ordinances, like ordination to deacon. Navigating the space between doubt and belief is tricky, but it can be done!!
He did say I could ordain my son as well. But I may let his grandpa do that part anyway. I am glad for now that I can participate at the level I want and feel comfortable with. That may change in the future as I continue to figure out my place.
But I’ve learned my lesson with being open with leaders. In the future, I will keep these things to myself and be my own guide on how involved I want to be without letting leaders dictate that for me.
SunbeltRed wrote:
DT –I’m glad your SP allowed you to baptize/confirm your son. It’s unfortunate the hoops that have to be jumped through to participate sometimes.
Back in the beginning of the year, after multiple conversations with my Bishop, he wouldn’t let me bless our new son. He did give me multiple opportunities to express “hope” but it felt disingenuous to my own journey to do so (I’m only saying this because had I expressed your level of faith and willingness to be orthopraxic in my religious practice I think he would have been ecstatic, so I’m surprised your Bishop/SP weren’t more willing to work with you up-front).
Anyway, the experience was the catalyst I needed to step away. Unfortunately these milestone might get more difficult in the future, but hopefully your local leadership will be willing to work with you and accept you as you are.
Good luck!
Thanks for sharing. As a current non-believer I may step away more in the future. I could definitely see that happening. On the other hand, I could see myself finding continued spiritual value in attending and using the Mormon “tool belt” (borrowing Bill Reel’s analogy) for my own development, and also as a way of supporting my wife but making the church my own thing as I go about it. I have already come to accept that unless the church changes or shifts dramatically I will always be a fringe member anyway. For now, that works for me as long as I can be true to myself and open with my wife and children.
DoubtingTom wrote:
But I’ve learned my lesson with being open with leaders. In the future, I will keep these things to myselfand be my own guide on how involved I want to be without letting leaders dictate that for me.
Good! I don’t say that with the condescending “You learned a lesson” tone that some people like to share, arrogantly, when people have felt the negative consequences of a particular line of reasoning. But leadership roulette is so chancy, you can’t take a chance on sharing doubt for fear of exactly happening what happened to you. I don’t blame people for making the mistake. Bishops are “fathers of the ward” and supposed to be spiritual adviser. When there doubt involved, you would think they would be kind and understanding and nurturing — not punitive.
The part in bold was the key to me. To “get on your own clock” as Brian Johnson said. Get comfortable in your own skin, while maintaining a good relationship with the church.
So, you have an adventure in front of you as you figure out your own way…glad you made it past this particular hurdle. I assume you didn’t have to mention getting an area authority involved? What changed his mind?
SilentDawning wrote:So, you have an adventure in front of you as you figure out your own way…glad you made it past this particular hurdle. I assume you didn’t have to mention getting an area authority involved? What changed his mind?
I’m not sure what changed his mind other than me going in and trying to be honest with him that my beliefs really haven’t changed, but that I am trying to find things that I can maintain a hope in, or at least try to have hope in, and that I am willing to act on that hope. I explained that is the most faith I can muster right now, but it is still faith, according to the scriptures. Also, I expressed my sincere desire to be involved for my own sake and also because my son wants me to baptize him. I was sincere and honest, non confrontational, and tried to “look” humble (whatever that looks like). Anyway, it worked, and I was able to do it in a way that I felt maintained my integrity. I didn’t feel I had to lie to him or even be shifty with my answers or explanations.
There were definitely times when I just had to nod and bite my tongue but that’s ok.
DoubtingTom wrote:
Also, I expressed my sincere desire to be involved for my own sake and also because my son wants me to baptize him. I was sincere and honest, non confrontational, and tried to “look” humble (whatever that looks like). Anyway, it worked, and I was able to do it in a way that I felt maintained my integrity. I didn’t feel I had to lie to him or even be shifty with my answers or explanations.There were definitely times when I just had to nod and bite my tongue but that’s ok.
Looking back over my TBM days, there were times when I was offended and saw the person as antagonistic when they shared negative belief about the church, or doubt. It can come off as disloyal even though the person saying it has no intention of being oppositional or antagonistic — and may even be asking for help with their doubt as in “help mine unbelief”. As a narrow-minded, TBM leader, you can see the person expressing doubt as the “enemy”. although that is a bit of a strong word for it. So, if he had that kind of reaction to your initial meeting, you can see how it morphed into restrictions and punishment. He was punishing perceived apostasy rather than giving for support for someone wanting more faith. He reacted improperly — way improperly given your situation.
The antidote is exactly what you gave — humility. And yes, that means’ biting your tongue. I think it takes the sword out of their hand because they see you are not there to hurt anyone, have hope and want to be “faithful” again.
Sad isn’t it? So often, in PEC or Ward council I would hear about families that have the most nonsensical reasons for not being involved. They obviously were giving fake reasons to hide the real reasons. Based on your experience, its clear that leaders often create this situation through actions similar to your SP’s. Their judgmental attitude actually closes the door of trust, so they never get to the heart of the reasons people don’t want to engage fully with the church. So there we sit, sifting through half-truths about it, never able to deal with the doubting members’ true concerns.
The other thing that gets me is their lack of broad vision. I have a friend who is an ex-Bishop. He once told me he wonders why I don’t just get my name removed. If I don’t believe it fully anymore, as he perceives it, then I should leave it and look for the truth elsewhere. Basically, telling me he didn’t care if I stayed or not. I countered that leaving could impact my marriage or even destroy it, would likely reduce the chances of me having my own Road to Damascus experience in the church, and could cause the next generation to apostasize. Plus I pointed to all the good I was doing in the church in spite of my heterodoxy.
That still didn’t change his mind. I see that closed-minded judgmentalism as a problem with our leaders. They say “one in the hand is worth two in the bush”. Sure, they have a heterodox father, but they have a TR-holding, leadership-serving wife, and active, TR holding children. Why push the father out the door and risk everyone else ???? You’ve already got him attending, and therefore, subject to the weekly power of the gospel. If you truly believe in that power to change lives, why alienate the guy to the point he doesn’t even want to come anymore???
They don’t get it.
It sounds to me like your humility, and perhaps the fact the SP felt he gave you enough of a a slap on the wrist for being “disloyal” (in his mind) saved the day.
I am happy for you. Also, I think StayLDS has benefited. Sure, we hear stories of superhuman Bishops who are loving and kind when people come to them with faith issues. But we hear enough stories like yours to reinforce the advice that the odds aren’t necessarily in your favor when a person goes with a well-meaning heart to a priesthood leader asking for help with faith issues.
SilentDawning wrote:
The other thing that gets me is their lack of broad vision. I have a friend who is an ex-Bishop. He once told me he wonders why I don’t just get my name removed. If I don’t believe it fully anymore, as he perceives it, then I should leave it and look for the truth elsewhere. Basically, telling me he didn’t care if I stayed or not.
In a very real way this is a form of boundary setting/policing. We, as Mormons, are very critical of the church actions during the “great apostasy”. We say that they worked so hard to accommodate the heathens into Christianity that they twisted and destroyed any purity and saving effect that Christianity had. Similarly, I believe many establishment Mormons fear that accommodating members on the fringe would ultimately dilute or even pervert the “pure”, clear, and unapologetic Mormon teachings. “Better to cut off the bad branches, than risk the whole tree,” they reason.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.