Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I’ve been lurking very seldomly on this site for many reasons, but seeing Bednar’s comment on “no homosexual members of the Church” as well as Nibbler’s mentioning of it tipped me into commenting. Bednar’s comment is very troubling to me. I understand that perhaps he was trying to make the conversation of “We are all God’s children and so things like sexual orientation don’t matter to God” with the intent of uniting everyone, but really it’s just Heterosexual Privilege screaming. Just like white people overwhelmingly don’t understand black people with race issues, straight people don’t understand gay/trans/queer people with sexual orientation issues. Bednar gets to make the blanket statement of “can’t we all just get along and forget about all these ‘silly’ labels?” PRECISELY because he literally never has to think about his label. Ever. It “worked” out for him: he got a wife, he got his own children, they have paired off with opposite gendered partners. He doesn’t have to think about how to be inclusive because he’s already included. Now I’m singling him out specifically because of his comments, but this applies to basically every straight person ever.
Quote:A better answer to a question seldom comes the the person that believes they already have the answer. Perhaps it’s time to ask again, learn what glorious things god has in store for all of us?
Love this line of thinking, Nibbler. It also makes me wonder, not only are we not open to other answers if we believe we have all of them already, but we also close ourselves off to further questions if we believe that all the questions we currently have are answerable and answered. The inkling to wonder and ponder and be curious is closed off if we think we can pin down everything in the universe, and more importantly, if we think we already have.
Old-Timer wrote:Neither.
Moderation is harder than extremes, but it is where real growth and enlightenment occur, imo.
+1 I’ve had multiple discussions recently about either/or situations, which are false dichotomies to me for the most part. I’ve tried both ends of the spectrum for religion and spirituality and am coming to the conclusion that neither side has all of the answers and it would be best for me to lear from both. Echoing what Ray said, it IS harder than an extreme. But just because it’s no longer as easy doesn’t mean it’s not where I want to be.
I have finally come to a place of peace and acceptance about where I am. It is also in my personality tendencies to not miss (sometimes even disregard, to my detriment) the past and where I came from. However, I will say that I don’tmiss feeling like I’m grasping at everything all the time. During the worst parts of my transition I felt like my very insides were trying to reach out and grasp at something… anything.I do miss having “all the answers,” though. I love the idea that I have lots of control in my life, so the security of having it all, even if I wasn’t versed in all of it, was especially tantalizing. There’s just a certain sense of security that I felt when I thought I had a specific, set, thorough place to go to for anything I needed. Can’t figure out what college to go to? Read the BoM. Can’t figure out who to date? BoM. Not sure if you should take that job? BoM, tithing, and fasting. Even though those answers didn’t really work for me, it was nice being told over and over where to go.
I also miss some of the repetition, ironically. When I was really into and devoted to the church, the repetition bothered me. Now, after being gone for 8 months, I realize that quite a few of those things that were taught all the time (expect to run into trials, you have a place for answers, you are loved, etc) hardly cross my mind anymore. It’s hard to do all of the work yourself! Or at least to take on more responsibility for it. It’s really awesome to be spoon-fed, but once you realize you have your own arms and hands, it becomes something entirely different.
I’m not sure if it directly relates to the OP, and maybe I should just start another thread, but this one makes me think of the movie Big Fish. Basic premise is a man is dying and he’s re-telling his son all the stories of his life. Problem is, the father’s stories are ridiculously embellished. Giants, circuses, time stopping, uncatchable fish, witches, a town you couldn’t find again, and on and on. His son gets increasingly agitated through the movie and it is obvious that this has been a source of tension for their relationship. Eventually, the doctor who delivered the son tells him the real story of how he was born (his father’s story is of course incredibly elaborate). The doctor tells him that he prefers his father’s telling of it, but the son admits he likes the normal, undoctored version. Just so he finally KNOWS. Do we get blessings for following a certain lifestyle because another being has deemed said lifestlye with checkpoints and mile markers? I’m not sure, but I tend to think not. I think the church has some good, practical lifestyle admonitions, though.
But do we want stories like this all our lives? Your mother came in about three in the afternoon. Her neighbor drove her, on account of your father was on business in Wichita. You were born a week early, but there were no complications. It was a perfect delivery. Now, your father was sorry to miss it, but it wasn’t the custom for the men to be in the room for deliveries then, so I can’t see as it would have been much different had he been there. And that’s the real story of how you were born. Not very exciting, is it? And I suppose if I had to choose between the true version and an elaborate one involving a fish and a wedding ring, I might choose the fancy version. But that’s just me.
Or this? It occurred to me then, that perhaps the reason for my growth was I was intended for larger things. After all, a giant man can’t have an ordinary-sized life. Or this? You know about icebergs, dad? Do I? I saw an iceberg once. They were hauling it down to Texas for drinking water. They didn’t count on there being an elephant frozen inside. The wooly kind. A mammoth.
Nice question, SD. I have actually been thinking about this often recently and was considering making a post about it. Glad someone did! Even from when I first got it, mine has kind of honestly been….anti-climactic. And I don’t mean that to be derogatory, but there’s nothing super impressive about. One thing, however, that the patriarch did note was that he had never had a blessing say something so specific as mine in relation to church service. Mine says something to the effect that I will serve with YW and my life will be an example to them. Most of the rest is fairly basic, and over the years I’ve noticed that it’s just basic principles, really. I have always had an inkling about the marriage part. I’ve always felt that the temple marriage and kids will not happen in this life, whatever that may mean. It’s funny, because I just got out of a relationship with an agnostic atheist so it might’ve played out!
😆 It does, however, say that I will be led to my husband and that it will require patience. If anything, this last guy I dated I felt incredibly led to or prepared for, due to a previous dating experience. However, he’s battling pretty heavy depression and comes from a past of abuse so the relationship has ended, and even though we work together (that’s how we met, and I turned down the job the first time and called back a month later to see if they would still take me..), I can’t do the friends thing very well right now.So I’m conflicted about it, to be honest. If I’m perfectly frank, I would love for that to be true, especially in relation to him. It also helps that I’ve always felt that the temple/kids stuff would not happen here (I used to believe it was because I couldn’t find anyone, but that has proven to be false). It’s treated as a personal road map for people in the church, but I know family who have consciously chosen to not fulfill parts spelled out (IE mission) in theirs, so I don’t completely understand the whole point. I did go to my sister’s blessing, however, and that girl has a novel. Seriously. Mine is 1 page, front and back. Hers is like 3-4 pages, front and back. It’s ridiculous. So basically…
I don’t know.
Ooh, I may not be so well-versed with anger techniques as others have replied with. 😳 
Out of the range of human emotions, anger is one that I tend towards the most. It’s almost always coupled with some form of arrogance (also, for MBTI geeks, I’m an INTJ and I’ve found that anger and arrogance are qualities that are almost inherent in us so…). Depending on the situation, I can pass through it in a certain amount of time. For things that seemingly come out of the blue, I need ample space and time to vent. It may not be right away, but it needs to be soon. I need someone to talk to, almost incessantly, to the point where I start to repeat myself. Then I start getting tired. Through my many bouts of anger, I’ve learned that anger is extremely exhausting and I can’t sustain it for too long anymore anyway. Once I start getting tired, I can move on to distractions. When I’m distracted, my brain (or HG or Spirit or whatever is doing the work, I don’t know) goes to work linking things without my conscious attention. Then, some time later, just as out of the blue as the initial situation may have come, I get a small nugget of an idea on how to address the issue. Of course, that doesn’t mean that I’m super great the next time a similar situation comes around.
😆 Plus, it’s taken me about 8 years since my angsty, angry teenage years to get this far, so I also think that some it will just work itself out as I keep living. At least I hope so.😯 amateurparent – I’m sure those situations happen all the time. I had a friend who right before she was going on her mission worked at a restaurant that served alcoholic drinks, and she was required to serve them should the patrons order them. She was months away from a mission, and imbibing with liquor isn’t in her beliefs. But her job isn’t to make sure her beliefs are followed by others, it was to serve what people ordered. Another example: if I ran a public bakery (IE anyone in the public can come in and order from my store by exchanging money), and a Scientologist couple came in wanting a cake for their Scientology based wedding, am I allowed to refuse to serve them? I certainly don’t believe their doctrines. But they’re coming into my store, to give me money to buy my product. What they use it for is honestly not my concern. Should toilet paper companies stop selling toilet paper to teenagers who TP people’s houses? Should farmers not sell their eggs anymore because someone could cook them wrong or just eat them raw and that’s not what the farmer wants for their eggs? If there’s this whole Libertarian streak, maybe it should be used to allow others to do what they want with your product. A business is a business, not a religion. And I don’t think anyone should be in the business of dictating what other people do with their lives by virtue of restricting their products to only those who walk, talk, and see like they do. If you want to own a public business, do so. If you want to have certain clients come to you and you choose whether or not you provide services, then do that. But I think where we get into trouble is those who want both. Also, I think it may be worth noting that despite Chick-fil-A and Hobby Lobby, this seems to be more of an issue for small businesses rather than larger, national, international corporations. Does that affect the situation at all, does anyone think?
Ray, I tend to agree with your position. If someone runs a business where the only parameters is to exchange goods for money (IE literally almost all businesses these days), then anyone with money can technically come and buy your product. What if they bought it because they were making a presentation and needed an example of a terrible product? Would you legally be able to discriminate against them because you don’t support what they’re using it for? To me, beliefs may or may not come into play. I’m in nursing school, and I’m pretty sure I’m not allowed to refuse care to someone because I suspect they abuse their spouse. I have a legal obligation to report them and don’t have to condone their actions, but I don’t get to choose whether or not they receive the care I and the hospital provide. Even incarcerated people receive medical care, so I don’t see how beliefs always get to come into play.
Recently I heard the term “Christian privilege.” I had never heard of it before, but I do think about it now. I wonder if these sorts of cases are just where the majority of people, often Christians, shout “religious freedoms” because the legal system has usually been set up in their favor.
I can definitely relate to the experience of being surrounded by people who equate the church with happiness. After finding out that I’m stillnot going to church of my own volition, as opposed to my agnostic/athiestic ex-BF “influencing” me not to go, my mom overwhelmed me with talk about her wanting me to be happy now, in 5 years, in 20 years, and forever. I realize that her heart was in the right place, and I appreciate her support, but I just had to roll my eyes. Personally, I’ve found less stress and worry being “an inactive.” It brings me more happiness, even though I do miss singing hymns and letting loose my theological opinions every week.
2 Cor 7:10 For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.
I think “godly sorrow” is more about that love you mentioned, and can be productive. Perhaps wordly sorrow is more the manufactured guilt??? What do you think?
I agree with what you said at the end there, Heber. Guilt is a selfish emotion, meaning that it draws you constantly inward; hoping that you’ll become a black hole from whence there is no recovery. If you’re able to be free of guilt, then what’s the use of it? If guilt can’t get you to keep it around, then it’s admitting that itself is not necessary (woo anthropomorphism!!) Love, OTOH, is freeing. It wants to be used and applied to yourself and others. In order for it to stick around, it has to be nurtured and shared. Which may sound totally frilly and rainbows and butterflies, but I’ve found it to be true. Love, or godly sorrow as you made the connection, inspires change as we see how we are standing in our own ways. Guilt is just another boulder you’re placing in front of yourself while trying to put 1st Place Blue Ribbons on it because you’re capable of feeling so bad about yourself. In my experience, guilt isn’t helpful. I know other people who will not agree with me, but it’s ok because I don’t agree with them!
😆 Old-Timer wrote:People tend to think God sees things the way they see things -or, at least, approves of how they see things.
Viewing God in our image is a wonderful thing, except when it is terrible.
Love this. As many people here can attest, it’s a difficult thing to admit that how you’ve been living your life up to this point may not have been the best use of your time (which can also be debated because who’s to say that you would’ve arrived at the same conclusion had you lived another way? But I digress…).
I tried to find it, but haven’t been successful; I swear President Uchtdorf said in one of his talks that personal revelation is good and wonderful, but people run into trouble when they take their part and apply it to the whole. I think most people EVER can be charged as guilty on this one.
😈 Where I’ve arrived at in my journey is that the church does what it needs to so it’ll survive as an organization. That doesn’t mean that I have to keep my path on course with it, and that that fact is ok. It’s more than ok, it’s just life! I do not believe in a One Size Fits All approach to anything.Dependent on how you define God’s Will, I would say Yes and No. Yes in the sense that everyone is entitled to live authentically and fully. No in the sense that everyone has the same checkpoints. So mostly no.
hawkgrrrl wrote:If I go back about 15 years, I used to feel obligated to try to feel guilty about certain things, which was very difficult to pull off because deep down, I didn’t really feel guilty. It’s possible I felt guilty for not feeling guilty. But it’s just a circular way to think. I really enjoy Buddhist practices of being mindful and present in the moment rather than spinning around thinking about the past & future. But I also simply discovered that manufactured guilt was just dumb, and my husband didn’t feel guilt over that stuff, so why did I feel obligated to pretend to feel guilt.
Also this, +1000. I’m also excellent at manufacturing guilt. I’m slowly learning when to recognize when I feel it and why. I think there may be some sort of paradoxical nobility in the ability to feel guilty. As if your ability to feel guilty about something is proportional to the amount of change you are capable of. Which is a load of crap. I don’t think it’s the guilt that ever permanently causes someone to change. I think it’s love for the people around you and, more importantly, love for yourself that you just don’t want to be this way anymore and you deserve and can be better.SilentDawning wrote:The guy sounds a lot like me 20 years ago, but I didn’t have depression, only periods of low mood.
Ability to process disappointment positively? I find that after I’ve been “hit” there is a period of euphoria where I realize I am experiencing something new. It’s not really joy-euphoria, but this feeling of having transcended something. I felt the same way after I totalled my car years ago and then walked away from the accident unscathed. Sort of powerful…
And then, reality sets in. And I no longer feel the transcendance. It’s kind of like when you cut yourself — there is a period when you don’t really feel it — it’s as if the brain and body are processing what happened, and the nervous system hasn’t caught up to the event yet.
This is a pretty good description of the past couple of weeks. I did feel that power at first, and then in the following days I wasn’t so great at it anymore. I fluctuated between feeling that power and feeling like a regular, ol’ human being. It’s been exhausting to have those kind of mood changes, so I decided to take an introspective look. We also work together so I feel like I had to do this or else going to work would be torture for both of us. I’ve realized that his situation isn’t about me. That action towards me is about him. I think that’s how humans are naturally programmed to work: our actions towards others reflects how we view ourselves. Unless we’re really, really good at faking it, which is totally a possibility!
SilentDawning wrote:For me, processing wounds in a peaceful way simply takes time.
I agree. To be able to develop the kind of transcendence that you mentioned earlier takes time and experience. It’s not as if there are no more periods of elation or sadness or anger, but that they’re seen for what they are: emotions. Emotions that have information about how we see the world and can do with what we will.
Ann wrote:(What in particular about Taoism has helped you?)
The biggest thing is that everything is impermanent. Situations, people, organizations, relationships. They’re all impermanent, in one way or another. That’s helped me to learn how to stop having such a tight grip on some things. Last year, I was in a situation that I was grabbing on tighter and tighter. The more I did that, the more I felt like I had dust in my hands. So I’ve let go. Or at least tried to.
nibbler wrote:Too often reactivation is focused on telling people what role the church should have in their lives. You can try asking: What role do you want the church to have in your life?
I wholeheartedly agree. I just started nursing school a month ago, and one of the KEY parts of care plans for our patients is learning what they think works and doesn’t work. I can give someone morphine for severe pain, but if they think that ANYTHING synthesized in a lab, even if it comes from nature usually, will taint their bodies and not aid in healing, then morphine will not work near as well as something they approve of. Regardless of physiology, in their mind it isn’t as good. If they want nothing to do with it, that’s what they get. If they want a community of people to socialize with, then that’s what they get. If they want a refuge to receive spiritual answers from, then that’s what they get. It’s best when left up to the individual.Old-Timer wrote:Love them – truly and unconditionally, whether or not you think there is any chance of them returning to activity. Leave activity out of the equation completely. Ask them what they need and/or want and do that, whatever it is. If it is nothing, so be it; thank them and do nothing. Tell them you love them and ask them to let you know in the future whenever they need something.
Assign them a HT and/or VT (perhaps a couple who knows and loves them already) and LEAVE THAT ASSIGNMENT ALONE. Carve it in stone and walk away. Don’t play revolving door games with them.
If you can’t do that, leave them alone – except to send a note about the lessons regularly. If you can’t do that regularly and consitently, leave them alone. They will spot programmatic insincerity right away (after all, they’ve experienced it in the past, almost surely), and it will make things worse. They will contact someone if they want to return. Do what you think you can do without ceasing; nothing is better than temporary, programmed efforts that will stop and only reinforce negativity.
I also fully agree with this. As someone who stopped going to church only ~5 months ago, I still have all the traditional tactics fresh in my mind. I even used them less than a year ago! I know what they are, and can smell them a mile away. I know the people are usually good meaning, but I don’t care to be the object of good meaning actions. I care to be an object of intention. I have no problem (usually:crazy: , but it’s how I operate and am at peace with it.
