We’ve heard the talks to the priesthood about Peter Pan syndrome: grown men who still play video games and live in their parents’ garages, not taking adult responsibilities seriously, and not taking the initiative to get married. Likewise, there have been posts in the bloggernacle about the infantilisation of women in the church: male leaders and husbands protecting women, not letting them hold meetings without a man around, limiting their choices, requiring priesthood sign off for all decisions, and encouraging passivity in how YW manuals are written.
While the tendency to delay adulthood may be related to societal trends in general, does the church prolong childishness through rules and limitations on trust? Do we really mean it when we say “I am a child of God”?
[poll id=”232″]
Discuss.
Wheat & Tares 
I think it was Elder Oaks who told YSA to grow up, however I think that message has been lost on nearly everyone. I have so many anecdotes about infantile behaviour in the Church, it’s crazy sometimes. However on one hand you have all this happening yet on the other hand you have people growing up far too quickly with quickie dating/marriages/kids etc, they are in over their heads
I think any religion that encourages young people to marry and start having and RAISING “infants” ends up making them grow up really fast whether that was the intent or not.
Growing up that early may be a bug or a feature, but it definitely is a noticeable part of the software!
The church is parental it stresses following, obeying and avoiding not learning on your own, thinking for yourseld or learning from your mistakes. It brokers your relationship with God instead of encouraging you to create your own.
I think this has more to do with cultural changes, and the church’s inability to keep up with it. In the 40s it was popular for women to be married by 21. Now a days marriage is something better saved for after college. Society hasn’t changed in the regard where eventually everyone ought to be married, it just changed the time frame before the church has.
You also have to take into account the vast majority of youth leave into inactivity, so the rate of crazy has the possibility to increase because the sane ones left (assuming they’re the ones leaving and not the other way around). Which would explain the whole “grow up” message if cultural values does not.
The church is incredibly infantlizinh, and I think we are seeig this as at a greater rate post-Correlation for a reason.
We can’t choose the church (building) we go to, and are marked absent like truant children.
We are called in to the principal (bishop) to explain our naughty doings.
We pretty much speak when we’re spoken to and answer when we’re called.
We are told what not to drink, what to eat, when to have sex, how to spend our money, and if we go against these things, there will be consequences! We’re even told what kind of underwear to wear–and they’re uglier and more restrictive than Pampers.
Chandee….
Yea! Seriously, what’s up with the roll taking?! I was getting irrationally irritated by it every single time I saw it when I was still attending!
” KT on January 27, 2013 at 12:13 PM
Chandee….
Yea! Seriously, what’s up with the roll taking?! I was getting irrationally irritated by it every single time I saw it when I was still attending!”
You can’t find someone if you don’t know they’re lost.
Re #5
We can’t choose the church (building) we go to–
so that things can be done in wisdom and order–if we are commmanded to shepherd it can be done much more effectively when you have regular contact with those placed in your stewardship.
and are marked absent like truant children–
not that I am a fan of role taking, but it provides a basis for stastical reports that are of some use to stakes and general authorities in providing direction on shepherding efforts. The quarterly reports do not identify members by name, so the only real value of tracking individual attendance is for those called to be a leader directly over the quorum/group/class wherein the member resides
We are called in to the principal (bishop) to explain our naughty doings.
I have never been ‘called in’ in my life. I’ve sought out the Bishop’s advice to deal with the spiritual impact of naughty thing I’ve done. I’ve been involved in a couple of councils where individuals were called in. One individual declined to attend the council and was content with whatever action was taken. Did not want to be shepherded by the church any longer.
We pretty much speak when we’re spoken to and answer when we’re called
I’ve seen many opinions freely expressed by brothers and sisters in ward council meetings, and the expression of such opinions has served a purpose in the outcome of the meetings. True we raise our hands to sustain (or object), but such is the process in many business meeting settings outside of religion. Not everyone attending a board meeting is allowed to participate in the discussion of the board.
We are told what not to drink, what to eat,
Alcohol, tea, and coffee restriction? (I wouldn’t even call tobacco something we eat or drink) Really? The word of wisdom offers many other bits of advice, but the interpretation of that is left for memberhips to decide for themselves with fairly wide latitude.
when to have sex,
Other than after marriage, there isn’t much said. If you ask for more specifics on which acts are appropriate, you are advised (now) that those matters are left to the discretion of a husband and wife.
how to spend our money,
Well, 10 percent of it anyway.
and if we go against these things, there will be consequences!
Such as losing priviliges that really must not be that important to an individual if the few requirements cannot be followed.
We’re even told what kind of underwear to wear–and they’re uglier and more restrictive than Pampers.
Well, I will give you some latitude on that one. While I would say that the symbolism is beautiful,the details of the physical pattern are rather arbitrary. I support others who have placed on lists of requests (for matters to be brought to LDS women’s leadership) the question of what can be done to increase the comfort and practicality of garments. I’m curious to see if the rogue website that creates pseudogarments to be sold to curious non-LDS customers will one day create garment fashions of innovative redesign that will be marketed to LDS women. Sure it’s not going to be sold as “authorized pattern”, but I can see a marketing niche for those who are willing to live the spirit of the law without feeling guilt about the letter of the law. If variations can be created for the practicality of military service, variation in itself would not seem to be a divine prohibition.