Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I re-read Sis. Wixom’s talk, and you’re right, it is different. I appreciate your insight on the woman she quoted, Ann. I think the first time I heard the talk, I just heard the “do the basics” part and chalked it up to another one of those kinds of talks. Funny how your frame of mind can shed different light on your interpretations. nibbler wrote:
First I’ll ask, do you want to go back?My experience was that when I began to ask myself that very question it may have been an indication that I could no longer go back. I had doubted before the crisis but those doubts were never accompanied with wanting to go back to a previous mental state. When I asked myself that question I knew that something had changed.
The second question I’ll ask, what does getting back to where you were before mean to you? Back to more orthodox belief, back to a place where you feel at peace/happy, etc.?
I guess what I wish is that I was back in a place where everything was pretty clear. At that point in my life, I felt like I had a clear direction on how to raise my kids and find answers to my problems and how to spend my time. I thought I knew what truth was. I thought people like me had “fallen away.” So, I guess that’s what I wish I could get back to– knowing what I’m doing and being pretty sure about it. I’m realizing more and more, though, that the axiom is true: once you see it, you can’t un-see it.
I taught this lesson yesterday and only realized after the fact that I hadn’t used a single quote from the manual. We talked extensively about agency as it applies both to us and to church leaders, including the prophet, and about how it is vital that we seek our own personal revelation. No one brought up gay marriage or piercings, so I was feeling pretty proud of myself! 😆 I agree with Ray– sustain is a very different thing than blindly follow. That quote is terrible, and even the way it’s positioned in the manual makes me wonder if it is hearsay. A twinkle-eyed private conversation does not constitute doctrine, and I think it’s sad that it has somehow been embedded in our culture and manuals.
I think this is really interesting. I’m studying education, and one of the important ideas in education right now is teaching critical thinking. We want our students to ask the hard questions and really dig deep for the answers. I think that’s a huge difference from the one-right-answer approach of industrial-era education. I love TED talks, too!
Ann wrote:No Deseret Book for a thousand miles and LDS culture – i.e., the people in our ward from LDS strongholds – to me was: People who could build, paint, design, costume, script, sew, remodel, repair, grow, cook, play and sing
darn near anything. They were serious about education and community service. Members and non-members were drawn to them for what they could do and how willing they were to share and teach it to others. They weren’t well-to-do. They were DIY-ers. This sounds absolutely heavenly. I wonder if part of my problem is that I am smack in the middle of the Mormon stronghold. Maybe I should move.
mom3 wrote:I look back to when I did enjoy much of the culture and I marvel at my personal change. Right now I find myself doing much of what you mentioned. Face book is very protected and modified, I don’t have a book store near me, but I would not attend if I did, and I cringe when we create “the world revolves around us” type thing.
I also wonder why it irks me now. If it is so “not me” why does it creep under my skin. Why do panic in embarrassment? Why does my heart sink when family members send me stuff? I don’t think if a Jewish friend or Catholic friend sent me something I would react so much – It’s weird to me.
It’s like running into an old boyfriend. I am always trying to duck.
In short, I hear you. Day by day I feel myself claiming a different culture while still attending this religion.
YES! I am so glad it’s not just me. Sometimes I wonder if I’m the only one who doesn’t want a distressed vinyl quote to hang on the wall or own the latest David Archuleta CD. I guess I’ve been thinking of LDS culture as pictured in the Deseret Book catalog– lots of Mormon-themed art, literature, music, and of course, modest yet fashionable clothing– and that makes me squeamish. Maybe it’s the outward conformity that bugs me. Honestly, aside from the time in YW in the early 90’s when we regularly made wooden crafts painted with the value colors, I have never been fond of LDS pop culture. Pop culture– I think that is what I can’t stand.
This, though, is different…
SilentDawning wrote:
1. The culture of service to others. That is so ingrained in me I can’t go more than a few days without trying to serve someone in some capacity.2. The culture of getting along with people. I have served in the community and there is far more backbiting and disloyalty, and political behavior than in the church.
3. The culture of putting youth first. AT one time it ticked me off when my own adult needs seemed neglected, but now that I have a daughter who needs it, I love that aspect of it. It has helped her so much.
I love the idea of focusing on the positives.
I am a little bit concerned about the 3rd point, though. My son is a deacon and has already run into issues with scouting. He feels a lot of pressure from his leaders to be serious about scouts when he is just not into it. While I am willing to help as much as he needs, I don’t want to add to the pressure and I want him to take responsibility for what he chooses to do with it. So in that regard, I feel kind of frustrated that there is so much focus on grooming the youth to match ideal LDS culture.
I’m also struggling with visiting teaching. One of the sisters I visit is so nice, but I get the idea that she does not want us in her home. She often cancels or just waits for us on the porch. I completely understand– between work and school, I’m often gone during the day, so it’s a pain trying to find a time for my VTs to come. On top of that, I always feel like my house needs to look perfectly presentable, and sometimes, I just don’t want people to come over and hang out for an hour. I feel like I want to tell her that I get it, even if her reasons are different than mine, and give her an out, but I feel like the culture tells us that we need to have in-home visits as often as possible.
LookingHard wrote:
BTW – What are some of the podcasts?I have had a long commute for the past little bit, so I’ve been listening to podcasts A LOT. And of course, I can’t remember exactly who said what.
I listened to this podcast today, and I just loved it. I wish this was required listening for all bishops. I have wanted to speak to mine for a while now, but based on some things he says over the pulpit, I just don’t think there is any way that our conversation could be productive for either of us. This podcast gave me hope, though, and I am trying to think of ways I could get it to him anonymously. One thing you said on the podcast is that people who grew up in very rigid black & white homes are the ones who are often hit the hardest with faith crises. This describes me exactly; in fact, I am still struggling with obedience to my parents even though I am well into adulthood and have children of my own. Any advice?
I am admittedly quite new to the fringe scene, so is it just me, or have there been A LOT of excommunications lately? I had heard about the September Six, but then it seemed like things were pretty quiet until Kate Kelly, John Dehlin, the Calderwoods, etc, etc. Is this the norm and I was just enjoying ignorant bliss, or is there some major cracking down going on? On the actual topic of this conversation, I remember my dad talking about a feminist who was excommunicated in the 90’s and how she would certainly be going to outer darkness. I think he even equated her punishment to a “cast off forever” kind of thing, along with mass murderers, devil-worshippers, and, you know, fornicators. Eternal damnation stuff.
As I’ve been thinking about life and afterlife and all of the stuff that goes along with the evaluation of faith, I keep coming back to this central idea: God is love. God loves us. I believe that the last thing God would ever want to do is destroy love. Our views are so very limited, so what makes us think that we would ever have the power or authority to separate someone from God’s love?
I think it’s a mix of both. There are some quotes in the lesson that definitely point to currying favor, in my opinion. There is one where ETB compliments SWK on basically giving the best talk ever given which, in my mind, sounds more like sucking up than acknowledging that God is speaking. I also get a definite feeling of arrogance from ETB, like supposedly giving a half-hearted apology for the 14 F’s after being reprimanded by SWK. But I also agree with Ray– I think he truly believed what he was teaching. It reminds me a little bit of when I took over a small team at work, and my boss spoke to me at length about making sure my team knew that I was in charge and that the buck stopped with me. You’re absolutely right, Heber. And I think I’ve been looking at it as a black and white issue as well. Thanks for the link to the thread– it’s very helpful. I love this, too:
Quote:I follow my heart, focus on the purpose of things, don’t try to complicate it, and try to do good things to add to the ward family.
I feel less riled up today. I think that’s a good thing.
One of the most frustrating things about my anger is that it isn’t about one thing or directed to one source. I feel like I’m angry about everything. I’m angry about the history things, but I’m more angry about the stuff that happens now. I feel my blood start to boil when any number of subjects comes up, and I have to keep fighting this urge not to start screaming and throwing things. Not really, but sometimes. I’m starting to believe that God is much more hands-off than we currently teach because otherwise, I’d have to be angry at Him, too. And I’m angry that I can’t go back to just chalking stuff up to another thing we’ll understand in the eternities. After a while, there are just too many things on that board. I’m so jealous of that peace some of you have found. I know that I just need to be patient, but patience makes me angry.
hawkgrrrl wrote:One more thing that a life coach of mine said once. He said you should act as though you are 100% responsible for everything that happens. He pointed out that it’s not true, but it’s the only approach that empowers you.
Can you explain this a little bit? He doesn’t mean act as though you are responsible for EVERYTHING? I could see that getting overwhelming really fast. As in, my throat tightens just thinking about it. He just means everything in your life… or your choices…?
DarkJedi wrote:But what if you don’t consider it doctrine, Roy? It could be argued, of course, that we don’t get to pick what is and isn’t doctrine and that’s the prophet’s job (which would fit in the lesson in question). On the other hand, it could be argued we are expected to understand whether something is or isn’t doctrine and gain a testimony of the doctrine.
Yes. And here is part of my problem with this lesson: I don’t believe that it is doctrine. I don’t believe that Wilford Woodruff was directed by God to say that no prophet could lead the church astray, and I don’t believe that Ezra Taft Benson was directed by God to give his tips on following the prophet. My testimony of deity, in fact, relies on prophets being completely fallible. I need to believe that prophets have misunderstood the Spirit’s promptings or decided to do things their own way because otherwise, it really is true that God doesn’t love me the way he loves my husband and sons. I’ve believed that in the past, but I just can’t do it any more. I’m not trying to turn this into a feminist rant or anything, but this is a very critical issue for me. So then I have a really hard time stomaching, let alone saying out loud to people I am
teaching, that prophets always speak for the Lord. But I agree, Ray, that I agreed to teach the Church’s doctrine, not my own. And truly, I think my mental/emotional/spiritual state is making this into a much bigger deal than it needs to be.
hawkgrrrl wrote:
6 – juxtapose quotes from evil dictators that sound a whole lot like the 14F and then ask who said it (that’s sort of a bad idea maybe, but it amuses me). It’s hard not to see the similarities between the standard for following leaders laid out in the 14F and things Kim John Il has said.Oooh! I saw something on facebook or somewhere where you had to guess whether Dumbledore or Uchtdorf said it. Maybe I’ll put a whole bunch of old white guys on the board and have them do a matching game.
😆 Thank you, all, for the insights. It is Lesson #11, the 14 Fundamentals lesson, and I feel like this is one of those topics that is really difficult to say that you don’t believe some of the doctrines without causing… I don’t know… without causing something that I’m not ready to cause. Either you follow the prophet, or you’re an apostate/heretic, right? I mean, Pres. Hinckley told us not to have more than one earring, so if you are dating a girl who doesn’t take her second pair out, she is really showing you how shallow her testimony is, right Elder Bednar?? This talk was recently brought up in RS, and several women shared their personal experiences of taking out their multiple piercings immediately, and the general consensus was exactly what the manual is saying: the prophet says it, you do it, the end. And if he’s wrong, you’ll be blessed anyway, so no worries. I vacillate between just teaching the lesson and swallowing my anxiety, trying to walk that careful line between supporting the lesson and inviting dissension, and just asking to be released. I feel like the RS sisters need a teacher who can speak from a place of surety and confidence. Frankly, I’m anxious about bringing up any contradictory ideas because I don’t feel secure in those any more than I do in teaching the concepts in the lesson. Sigh.
And then, of course, I realize that this is a 40 minute lesson during which at least half of the people will leave with a crying child or diaper change, and likely no one will remember an hour later.
Heber13 wrote:It’s kinda scary to let go of the picture perfect world we think it “should be” to start to really see things anew, but I believe there is a time God thinks we are ready for it. A time when the pain and doubt and uneasiness in our lives is greater than the fear to travel such a road…and so we start a journey that may not seem safe from other people’s perspective, and others may warn us or even call us to repentance to stay safely in the fold. But it doesn’t take away that inner feeling that we need such a thing for growth.
Exactly! I just wish that growth was easy and comfortable.
SilentDawning wrote:Welcome, sounds like you will fit right in here. That is quite a homogeneous ward — to the point of being a real anomaly in my experience. Looking forward to hearing more from you. How does your husband react to the church, and does he know about your FC?
Thank you, all, for the warm welcome!
Yes, my ward is abnormally homogeneous. We’re in SE Idaho, so the percentage of LDS population is high anyway, but then our neighborhood has just seemed to attract people who are all in a very similar stage of life. One of the struggles with a ward like this is that differences stick out in a pretty major way. Our ward is also really competitive– not so much with money, fortunately, but with spirituality. My ward friends are constantly bringing up the family testimony meetings they have for FHE, or the time they overheard their three-year-old daughter’s unbelievably heartfelt and profound personal prayer, or the fact that their son will earn his Eagle the day he is eligible. I feel like a full-blown TBM would have trouble keeping up, let alone someone struggling with the basics. It’s exhausting.
Yes, my husband knows about the FC. I have to admit that the first few times I brought up my questions, his knee-jerk reaction was fear and blame. For me, when I really started to verbalize my feelings, it often came out in this angry confrontation, and I’ve realized that that approach triggers defensiveness. We’re getting better, though– we’re both working on recognizing that we can disagree without anger, and I am working on expressing my views without diminishing his. It’s a work in progress. I should say that my husband is not in the devoted TBM camp, though. He read
Rough Stone Rollingwhen it was first published, as well as several other historical texts, and I think he has had a lot of time to come to terms with some of the issues that I am just now learning. So my shock and outrage is kind of his shoulder shrug. I’ve noticed that when we approach our conversations with kindness, both toward each other and the church, I realize that we actually have very similar feelings about most issues. We’re just still trying to figure out what that means for the way we live and raise our kids.
