Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
GBSmith wrote:Heber13 wrote:
So the question remains:
How does one be supported to find their own way? Is it at church? Outside of church? John gave up trying to prescribe something that helps all. What do you all think?
It is clear that one path will not help all. It depends on so many factors. As SD pointed out we all have different reasons for “Staying”. We all have very different ideas from the nature of God to the WoW. It will depend on how differently you see the world from the basic tenants of the Church. The closer you are the easier it it to stay. It also depends on how much value you find in the Church. The more value you find in the Church the easier it is to stay.
I don’t think many people would feel the need for a forum like StayLDS or NOM or any of the facebook groups if they felt like they were supported at church. Staying in the Church can work for some but not all.
I am a little confused about the fear there seems to be with using the term “middle way”. I have always understood it to mean a belief somewhere between complete literal orthodoxy and leaving the Church. I have never heard anyone try and implement one “middle way” or “the middle way”. Is the fear because of Cwald and the idea that the “middle way” is some kind of movement or organization? There are a lot of Mormons who are struggling with their faith and trying to reconcile beliefs. We would not be here if the Church was a safe place to deal with these issues.
We are all here because we are not finding the support we need at Church or in our home. There may be a few that are here because they feel like they can help but this is a support forum.
The original question was does finding your own personal path, within the church, work long term? It sounds like GBSmith has had a really crappy experience with his family and to not face the question because we are uncomfortable with the wording is not helpful to GBSmith nor is it very supportive.
GBSmith- I am sorry that you had to deal with family like that. I have had similar experiences and it really SUCKS. I wish the collect Church, leadership and members, were more open to questions. From my experiences you are correct it is difficult to find support within the Church when you question. WE all have to make a conscience decision, is staying worth it? If it is you can stay forever. If not maybe it is best to cut ties and move on.
I have not been at StayLDS long nor do I post often but the question of how long can I do this has been pressing me for sometime now. I have used this board for help and support when I have needed it and to see that some questions are not safe to ask makes me question how helpful this board can be.
I believe Staying involved within the Church CAN work but you have to want it to work and you have to find value in the Church.
Heber- I love the definition of middle way you gave. Ray I agree that the correct ” middle way “would be a definition that admits ALL are “in the middle of their ideal and their reality” and that ALL are trying to “work out how to eliminate or lessen the gap between the two”. This seems to me to be an aspect of the pure love of Christ. How can I accept all and find common ground between us.
Question for All
The problem is we are dealing with an organization that does not “admit ALL in the middle of their ideal and their reality”.
I can work towards my own enlightenment and follow the spirit in all that I do. But what happens when my spirit tells me that beer is okay or that I don’t like the Churches teaching on several topics? Then what? Do I continue to try and force a square peg in a round hole?
I enjoy the philosophical discussion of what the “middle way” is or is not but I don’t think it gets to the crux of the problem. If I remember correctly there was a thread a while back about what it means to be a “stayer” or the difference between being a “stayer” or NOM or something to that effect. In it someone mentioned that a “stayer” was someone who found value in the Church and makes the conscience decision to stay. Value is what I see is the key ingredient in staying involved in any organization. Without finding some value in the church, that really works of you, staying involved will not last for any significant period of time.
I don’t see value as the only factor in “staying” As Ray mentioned everyone in the tent has to be willing to “admit ALL”, I don’t see this willingness in the church today. I wish it were different but I don’t see it changing anytime soon. I think this is where people feel like they are being less than honest with themselves. Sometimes you have to compromise so much to stay that might not be worth it. Some might have better luck with their spiritual paths outside organized religion. John maybe should have said “the middle way (staying involved in the church) is not right for everyone. And I no longer see it as the ideal path for everyone”
Ray- I agree with you that faith is an individual pursuit and that we should all find our own way. But you can’t ignore what DA said in regards to the Church not being very open to those that do not fit the mold. We talk about having a large tent in Mormonism but in truth we are not open to those with different beliefs or more importantly behaviors than the prescribed believes and behaviors set forth by the GA’s. I think it is easier to be a participating non traditional believer if you still feel strongly about the “clean living” or find some special meaning in the temple or some other strong connection. If you cannot find that strong connection then John is right the “middle way” or “Staying” will not work long term. Like I said earlier if you like what they are selling regardless of how you feel about it’s origin great you can nuance the heck out of it, stay and find a lot of meaning. Like you said most members of the church do this in one way or another. If nothing resonated with you no amount of nuance is going to work. I am finding it more and more difficult to find/ live the “middle way”. I am not sure I even understand the middle way. While enjoy the discussion I have at church it is becoming increasingly more exhausting to attend. I find myself spending most of the time trying to decide if I agree with what is being said and more often lately I don’t. I just asked to be released as GD teacher because I am tired of teaching lessons that don’t match what is in the scriptures. Last week I had a woman say that the Holocaust happened because the Jews killed Jesus and no one batted an eye. We have tried over the last two years to find a middle way that works for our family. I am starting to feel like we are in search of Utopia. We either put on a face and keep our mouths closed or open our mouths and expose our beliefs to the world. Not a lot of good options here. Ultimately, it comes down to do you like the product the church is selling? If you do great who cares how it was made. If you don’t like the product, well no sense it choking it down every week. The world is a beautiful place and there is no sense in beating myself over the head with a club. Right Bro. Packer?
I HATE the way the Church teaches the Law of Chastity. I don’t have a problem with the Law of Chastity as taught in the Temple, don’t have sex with someone you are not married to. But we have gone WAY TOO far. We have so many crazy teachings and practices with regards to the LoC.
1)We teach our youth that girls are damaged goods if they fool around with a boy or that boys are damaged goods if they look at porn or masturbate. I rarely hear anyone talk about self respect or that one can be forgiven for their mistakes. The message is don’t do this because others will not accept you if you do. And by the way God will not forgive you because what you have done is next to murder. So it is worse to have premarital sex than it is to physically beat a child? Why does it always have to be consequence or scare tactic? What about don’t do it because you love yourself and there can be real consequences for premarital sex. Or that when you look at porn you are contributing to the exploitation of women and could be supporting the sex trade and human trafficking.
2)We teach the young women they are the “Guardians of Virtue” and that they need to dress modestly to protect the young men, this is ridiculous. We are giving the boys an out. Are we creating a culture where we think boys cannot control themselves?
3)We even sexualize the nursery. Some members don’t let their kids wear tank tops because shoulders are immodest even at the age of 3. This is crazy. They can wear a swim suit but not a tank top? I know I’ve heard the argument that we need to train them to wear what is garment appropriate but they have not made any covenants. And again shoulders and quads are not sexual.
4)The church’s EFY Europe website has a kid on there saying that “we learn from Elder Oaks that we an girl chooses to dress immodestly she becomes pornography” This is on a Church website!! This is crazy!! So every girl who’s shorts are above the knee is now pornography? Whether or not Oaks said this does not matter it is on a Church website.
I am not advocating we should let our youth or ourselves dress however we want but these messages are not right. These teachings are contrary to the message of forgiveness and love in the NT. They go against the plan of salvation and agency. We are more concerned with following rules than with becoming good citizens and loving neighbors. The way this is taught especially to our daughters makes me very concerned about raising a daughter in the church. Sorry about the rant but I think how the church teaches about sex and dress standards does more harm than good.
SS- I really appreciate your insight on this topic. I hope you don’t mind but I read your post to my gospel doctrine class yesterday (I did not tell them the source I only said a friend wrote it) and they really liked it. We had a great discussion about how we create barriers in our lives that keep us from showing Christ like love to our fellow men. Everyone recognized that we in the church create an US all the time and the problems that causes with our neighbors. Thanks again for the great post I hope you don’t mind I used it. HiJolly- thanks for the explanation. Nelson’s article is a very funny way to say that God will not bless you if you sin. I now want to know how does God bless our lives? In conference over the weekend I heard that if you pay your tithing God will bless you with all sorts of things from the blessings of heaven to fire insurance to protecting you from divorce. Trouble is I don’t see God as giving anyone any of these “Goodies” regardless of their behavior or tithing status. The only way I see God blessing our lives is through His love. I don’t see God intervening in any other way. The idea that God blesses humans with goodies does not correspond with what I see in the world. Why would God bless my family with a house or safe travels when he allows children to go without food or allows the genital mutilation of little girls. Do I feel fortunate or blessed for my life? ABSOLUTELY!! But do I see God withholding or granting material blessing or protections to anyone? Absolutely not.
Nelson’s hijacking of the phrase Cafeteria Mormon was brilliant. By taking credit for the phrase and redefining it he now owns the phrase and everyone in the church knows it is a bad thing to be a Cafeteria Mormon. It pissed me off to the point I turned conference off and enjoy the rest of the day with my family. He took a phrase that described members who struggle with historical evidence and changed it to someone who can’t hack it and wants to break the commandments. I saw this as a power play and a way of saying there is only one way to be and if you don’t follow the rules you are not welcome. Nelson knew exactly what he was doing. TBMs got a good laugh and think he coined a cute phrase and the doubters got minimized and painted as only wanting to sin. I feel like everything I have been trying to do as of late is for not. I want to look for the good in Mormonism, I want to stay involved but it has been increasingly more difficult as of late and this was just another do what you are told or you are not committed and less of a Mormon. Am I reading too much into the comment?
Thank you for your comments and support. I have sent an email to the EQ president apologizing for the way I publicly attacked him and asking if he had time to meet so I could personally apologize. I also took the opportunity to express my feelings toward excluding our daughters from spending time with their dads. Thanks again for your support. I will let you know how things go.
Martine- Thank you for sharing. I am happy to hear that you have support from friends. I think anyone that is contemplating outing themselves worries about how they will be received and it is nice to know that their are some in the Church that will still be accepting. Roy- thanks for sharing the quote from Oaks, This is the topic that started me on my journey. It appears to me that Oaks is giving yet another interpretation for the ban, or at least he is backing Young, saying it was a commandment from God. McKay said that it was not prophecy but was just a policy of the church. Unfortunately, for the Church and African Americans the leadership in the Church acted as if the ban was prophecy and came up with all sorts of reasons for the ban. The two most common being the seed of Cain and fence sitters in heaven.
I like the fact that Oaks is saying the reasons are man made and he does not put any stock in them. However, in an attempt to make it all seem alright Oaks has muddied the water more. By saying the ban was from God but the reasons were from man Oaks is saying two past Prophets were wrong and now he is right.
At least McKay was saying none of it came from God, not a great position if you want the 14 fundamentals to be true, but an honest statement. I don’t see how Oaks can hold his position that the ban was from God but the reasons were made up? It must make him feel better but it also shows that the GA’s make crap up. If all the reasons the GA’s gave for the ban are man made then why should I listen to them?
Falcosp, I am fairly new to Staying, I understand that it can be very difficult to listen once you realize that it is “all made up.” But like Brian said you can usually find something good in the Church. I agree that staying might not always be the right answer. However, after having a few friends leave and attempt to replace the religion with other churches I have decided that I am not going to trade one cult for another.
I do recognize that we all have different church experiences based on family and the ward we live in. For me I was very close to leaving and I may leave one day. I don’t have the family pressures you do, my wife is ambivalent to the whole thing. I have decided right now that I own my spirituality and there is nothing the Church or its members are going to do that is going to make me change or conform to what they want me to be. I own my relationship with God not the Church. A few things that have helped me is I have eliminated all of the things I don’t like or don’t believe in. I don’t go to the temple, the G’s sometimes don’t get put on, there is the occasional mild barely drink, ultimately the Church has no power over me. I own my life and that is good enough for me.
Three weeks ago I was ready to leave but I had a realization that their is more for me to do in the Church. There have been a lot of people who have helped me and my family and I have a lot of helping left to do. If I never get anything more out of it than an opportunity to help than so be it.
Take your time and go slow I am still knee deep in it and all I can say is you are in for a wild ride no matter you decision. Hang out here for a while, the people are great and it is a wonderful place to help put life back into perspective.
I know that Mormon Stories has an interesting podcast (149-152), with Daymon Smith, on this topic. From that I remember that the Church is a “corporation sole” same as the Catholic Church. It only has one office and that is the president of the the Church. Also, it is my understanding that their is no legal entity called “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints” it is actually a trade mark of the “corporation sole”. So unlike other churches where you actually become a member or shareholder in that church when you are baptized we are not joining any legal entity.
I also know that the Church owns several other corporations, like Intellectual Reserve Inc which holds all of the copyrights of the Church.
If you are interested I think the podcast was very interesting.
