[nibbler]

Language is a tricky thing. What we write or say to convey an idea isn’t the idea itself. It’s just an expression of that idea through symbols. In this case the symbols are made up of our language.

Language got off the ground because people have generally settled on common definitions for words and phrases but the reader or listener is still subject to interpreting what they read or hear and filtering it through their symbolic meanings to reconstruct the idea in their minds. The reconstructed idea isn’t always 1:1 with the original idea.

I think a lot of the language we employ to express our spirituality is reductive. Not maliciously, more out of necessity to be more concise in communication.

Faith, doubt, belief, the gospel, hope. Sometimes those words can be used interchangeably, sometimes we choose one word when another might be a better fit.

I try not to get too hung up on beliefs. Beliefs change and I’ve experienced firsthand the trauma that can occur when becoming too attached to a specific set of beliefs.

You used the word faith. I might use the word hope instead, as I have a harder time nailing down a definition for faith. There are things I hope for. What I hope for also changes over time but I find I don’t get as attached to hopes as I once did to beliefs. A specific set of beliefs once defined a large part of my identity. I don’t know whether hopes form my identity. They probably do and I just can’t see it. Maybe hopes are generally things that you don’t currently have so it’s harder to build an identity on things you don’t yet have? I’m meandering.

Last random thought for now. I try not to pit faith or beliefs against doubt. They’re not at odds with one another. They’re largely all about a frame of reference anyway. To believe (something) is to doubt (something different).

These words are very hard for me to nail down. What do they actually mean and what frame of reference am I operating in when I’m reflecting on them?

[nibbler]

AmyJ wrote:

Her main deal is that “human-ing is hard enough” – it doesn’t need to be complicated by gender performance expectations and limitations [snip]

That’s a pretty powerful observation.

[nibbler]

For what it’s worth, there was a talk about callings during general conference. I forget who gave it on what day but I don’t remember any language being employed to insinuate that people can’t say no to callings. I would have picked up on that.

The speaker did ask bishops to review the list of people that don’t have callings and find something for them to do, so the calling-less people out there may be getting a call from their bishop soon.

You can still remain calling-less after your discussion with your bishop though. 🙂

[nibbler]

I think that advice relies on people often finding what they’re looking for. If you’re listening to conference concentrating on getting answers to specific things, you’ll typically inject that meaning into conference rather than conference supplying the meaning directly.

I guess it follows the same reasoning why we read the same scripture over and over again looking for new meaning, because what we bring to the table changes during the course of our lives and what we bring to the table changes our interpretations. Reviewing scripture/conference is more of a pretext to meditate on something and maybe we mine something out of the noise, maybe not.

DarkJedi wrote:

The only time I can say a message really struck me was Uchtdorf’s “Come, Join With Us”…

I can say the same. That was the first talk that really jumped out at me in a long time. It woke me up out of a slump and got me meditating on things again. Up until that talk I thought I was alone in my thoughts but that reactivated me in a way. Probably not the way Uchtdorf intended, but it reactivated me all the same.

Now the best conference can achieve is the occasional talk that will trigger me.

[nibbler]

Roy,

During the Sunday afternoon session, Soares gave a talk where he shared a story about how he lost his second child that was born prematurely (towards the end of his talk). I just wanted to give you a heads up/warning about that talk.

[nibbler]

I assumed Bednar’s talk was intentionally aimed at non-members watching conference. That said, it’s going to be a slog if that talk becomes the subject of too many lessons on Sunday. We’ve already gone over that material so many times at church that it’s going to be difficult to make it engaging.

Conference was conference. A small number of good talks. A small number of bad talks. A whole lot of talks that just aren’t particularly relevant to me.

In the end I didn’t really hear what I needed to hear during conference. Given what’s going on in the world, most of conference felt out of touch. I’m not sure what I’m going to do with those feelings.

[nibbler]

I was mostly bored by Sunday morning’s session. It was difficult to focus.

If I had to select one’s talk to listen to, I’d make it the one that the sister gave.

Oaks also spoke. Oaks is oaks. You know what to expect at this point. I only mention it because he spent a portion of his talk dedicated to people that leave, equating them with the five foolish virgins. Probably best to avoid his talk. Nothing new there.

[nibbler]

If it’s a true passion, the passion typically supersedes the boredom.

If it’s not a passion, I think it’s okay to simply move on.

[nibbler]

The Saturday afternoon session is just a bad session. I’d recommend skipping it entirely.

Edit: Uchtdorf gave a talk during the Saturday afternoon session that’s worth listening to. I’d skip the rest though.

[nibbler]

Elder Andersen is using his Easter platform to talk about abortion. Again.

[nibbler]

Thanks for the summaries. I lack the energy.

[nibbler]

Longsuffering is a good quality but I wonder sometimes if taking it to extremes might cause us to focus too much on Jesus’ suffering and not enough on his triumphs.

Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy.

Another soapbox that I always get on is that the gospel, church, life, you name it, shouldn’t be a plan of happiness deferment. It should bring joy to our lives in the here and now. If it isn’t making us happy sometimes the answer isn’t to muscle through it, sometimes the answer is to shake things up. Do something different. Try something new. Experiment.

Jesus didn’t sacrifice so we could share in his misery. He sacrificed so we could mitigate our own misery or avoid it altogether.

[nibbler]

Halverson issued an apology video. He seems sincere and he’s trying.

https://www.instagram.com/unshakensaints/reel/DH06jbisdK2/” class=”bbcode_url”>https://www.instagram.com/unshakensaints/reel/DH06jbisdK2/

I do like his comments about listening to people to learn how to improve. A criticism I routinely raise is that often the cultural church comes across as being arrogant and insinuates that the church and its teachings are unassailable. His apology video feels like the opposite of that. It shows evidence of genuine humility and it’s appreciated.

[nibbler]

Welcome.

The lesson I learned from the Book of Mormon was that any book (or non-book source for that matter) can be scripture to us if it speaks to us and helps us learn valuable lessons.

[nibbler]

Chamelea wrote:

I don’t think my mental health could take the disappointment, pressure (well-intended I’m their minds), and persecution/harassment from friends, family, parents, in-laws, etc., that I’ve witnessed for others in my family who have stepped away from the Church.

I’ve certainly been there.

Church (and family) can be difficult when the discussion ventures into tearing people down. Especially when you can empathize with the group being torn down. More especially when you are a part of the group that’s being torn down and the people doing the tearing aren’t aware.

I try to be charitable. I tell myself that the “in” group gains some level of validation that they need by highlighting the differences in the “out” group. It still hurts though. If you’ll allow me to be a little judgmental…

When an orthodox member denigrates the doubter it may be more the case that they’re trying to justify to themselves all the sacrifices they’ve made for believing. Putting the doubter down is a roundabout way of elevating and justifying their life choices. The judgement we pass on others is more about ourselves than it is about what other people are doing. Myself included. 😳

Chamelea wrote:

I guess the old me especially gets reanimated at church, hearing all the familiar dialogues and I just feel ashamed and guilty that I’m no longer living up to that and being the “ideal” person I once was.

That “ideal” was given to you by someone else. What ideal would you give yourself?

It’s like a church calling. Here’s the calling the leaders stuck me with but what calling would I pick if given the choice?

Getting reanimated at church is perfectly normal and expected. All these years later and I still hear something triggering at church from time to time. That’s okay. Things ebb and flow.

Chamelea wrote:

I guess I just need to figure out how to switch off that old self so that I keep going to church (that’s the goal—”Stay LDS,” right?) without feeling that personal connection that believes it’s all true and feels guilty for not living up to my old expectations of myself.

I don’t really know what my goal of staying LDS is. I think maybe finding ways to mitigate negative thoughts and experiences while finding ways to accentuate the positive ones. For me that doesn’t translate to going to church every Sunday or always having a callings. I define my own boundaries, where my boundaries are things that can help make the church experience a positive one for me. Feeling that out is an ongoing process.

Chamelea wrote:

And how do I stop feeling angry about the judgmental comments surrounding the celestial kingdom, eternal families, “the covenant path” and all that?

I hope people come along with better experiences than mine, but I say be angry. It’s okay to feel angry, there’s nothing wrong with that. In my opinion it’s a part of the healing process. That said, I don’t think it’s a good idea to take permanent residency in an anger stage but it’s okay to experience anger and even let it run its natural course. Meaning that stage can last a while and it’s hard to know when that stage will end.

Like I mentioned above, there are times where things at church will trigger me. It’s okay to not be perfect, to not have completely transcended getting angry. Heck, some things should get people angry. 🙂

Sometimes I find it helpful to bail out of the meeting or conference talk. Just leave the room. People do it all the time for reasons varied and unknown.

“If that guy says covenant path one more time, so help me…”

“Covenant Path.”

[internal scream, time to get up and go powder my nose]

[Author]

Posts