Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Dark Jedi, That is pretty much where I am too, although I think response #2 for the Abraham example is s fun one to play with. Same with Nephi and Laban. Whether or not the events actually happened (I believe they didn’t), I think it is still up for debate whether or not killing Laban was actually the right thing to do. Anytime someone in any story or setting gets a revelation that someone should be killed, I think there ought to be a pretty high bar of vetting and consensus among multiple people before it should be acted on.
I am baptizing my oldest son this coming Saturday. I really appreciate the views expressed so far. For me it is mostly about the meaning to my son. I saw an episode of “Last Man Standing” where Tim Allen’s character’s daughters and wife were upset about a tree getting cut down in their front yard by the city. He ended up going to some lengths to try to save the tree. One of his daughters said, “Wow, Dad, I didn’t think you cared about the tree.” His response is how I feel about my son’s baptism, “I don’t care about the tree, but I care about the people who care about the tree.” I am happy to participate in this ordinance because it means a lot to my son and my wife and our extended family. He understands that he is promising to become the best him that he can be and to repent when he makes mistakes. I can’t find anything in that simple view of it that I disagree with.
I really appreciate your view. There are people out there who are genuinely seeking spiritual connections and communities to worship with. The challenge is to identify those people without annoying everyone else. I could never serve as WML right now. I just recently asked to be released as EQP because of the heavy emphasis on “Hastening the Work.” It was just overpowering every other aspect of service. I wish there was more room for people to approach the church at their own pace. This is how I would envision the perfect missionary experience…
My family and I are not perfect, but we feel generally and genuinely really happy most of the time because of the things we do and believe in that are influenced positively by our participation in the church. We are friendly and happy people and have many friends that are not members of the church. Organically, it becomes apparent to many of these friends that we are members of the church, that we value it, and that it contributes to the positive aspects of who we are. We don’t talk about religion all the time, but when friends bring it up, we answer their questions. After years of intimate friendship and watching how church participation works in our lives, some small percentage of these friends become interested and ask how to become more engaged themselves. I invite them to attend church with us. They are welcomed warmly (but not cloyingly so) by other ward members. They are not attacked by missionaries and asked to make commitments. They begin attending off and on for a few months. Eventually, they begin attending very regularly, and in the course of regular Sunday School instruction and Sacrament meeting talks, they learn about baptism and how membership in the church starts. They decide to be baptized. The bishop will have been getting to know this family over the months (or years) they’ve been attending and sees that they really understand what it means to be members of the church and the level of commitment expected. He interviews them, just to make sure, and authorizes their baptism. In my idealized picture of missionary experience, there is no requirement to even have full-time missionaries. Young people gain a lot from serving missions, though, so maybe there could be a part at the end, where the family asks to be baptized, when full time missionaries could teach them a set of lessons.
In this scenario, retention would not be an issue because all of the change was self-motivated and based on genuine attraction to something they were already experiencing. They would have had time to amply prove to themselves (and less importantly to ward leadership) that they are able and willing to make the commitments involved in membership. They will have had time to acclimate to membership in the ward family and to make their own genuine friendships with other ward members besides us. They will have had opportunities to learn about most of the historical and social issues that are negative/problematic and reconcile them prior to making their commitment (or not commit if they perceive the problems to be irreconcilable).
I know that’s just a pipe-dream but it’s something I wish the church could move toward. Maybe full-time missionary work could be more similar to the way other christian religions do it (i.e. humanitarian service and generally being a positive influence among the people they are living with). I feel like there is just no room for this kind of genuine inquiry and interest because people are instantly mobbed and pushed. We, as a church, are like a venus fly trap, where I wish we were more like a flower that actually provided nectar and then allowed people to move on, or stay, as they see fit. It’s no wonder that so many people outside the church are wary of interactions with Mormons in general, and missionaries in particular.
Bringing back less actives is even more problematic in some ways. My view is that they have been members (they at least had to attend twice to get baptized). They know where the church is and how to get there if they want to. If they are not attending, they have a reason, and generally, the reason is none of my business. I have no problem making periodic visits (or even regular visits if they want them and and enjoy them). However, when someone dodges me at the door or doesn’t return my phone calls, they are communicating a message to me. the message is, “I don’t want to talk to you.” I feel compelled to respect their indirect expression of agency and let them come back in their own time (or not). For those brave enough to actually answer the door and tell me they don’t want visits, I certainly feel that respecting their wishes is paramount. My bishop’s approach is to send me back to find out why and “what we could do to bring them back.” If someone says, “don’t come back,” I don’t think they mean, “send someone else back to find out why I’m saying this.”
Anyway, I really appreciate everyone’s focus on love and service. If what I’m doing is truly helping someone, and they want the help, then I should do it. If it isn’t or they don’t want it, then I won’t.
