Mormons are a fiercely loyal group. We know this, and others know this. When I was pregnant, working full-time, and terrified of jumping into the financial insecurity of becoming a stay-at-home mom, an older co-worker I barely knew stated the obvious, “You’re a Mormon. You’ll be fine. Mormons take care of their own.”
She was right, of course. Everywhere we moved we didn’t just have a congregation ready and waiting, we had a ward family. When we had a 10-foot U-haul truck to unload and too few hands to do it, we went to the closest LDS church and found a ward directory. The Elder’s Quorum President’s wife on the other end of the phone, who we had never met, promised us a group of guys there the next morning. They were there. When my husband was hospitalized for a week, we had meals, babysitting, and yard work taken care of within record time. We clean each other’s houses, we watch each other’s kids, we commiserate, we comfort, and we mourn. We take care of each other.
Friends will betray us
President Russell M. Nelson’s Worldwide Devotional address earlier this month has garnered attention for many reasons, but there was another line that has haunted me since I watched it. He was speaking to Millennials and warning them about the difficulties on the road ahead: “You will need that strength because it will become less and less popular to be a Latter-day Saint. Sadly, some whom you thought were your friends will betray you. And some things will simply seem unfair.”
Some of our friends will betray us. In talking with others, it wasn’t long for the comeback that many members feel betrayed by church leaders right now. In reality, there was a feeling of betrayal on both sides in the wake of the handbook/policy changes.
Loyalty to the church led many to publicly voice support for the changes even before the clarification letter from the First Presidency came out. Those members knew church leaders receive inspiration for those in their stewardship. They knew the changes came from the love and concern that leaders have for members, a viewpoint confirmed by President Nelson at the devotional. And what was the reaction? The world attacked them, but that wasn’t unexpected. What hurt was that fellow churchmembers turned on them. Beloved church leaders were labeled bigots, blinded by prejudice. Churchmembers were labelled unChristlike by their peers for showing loyalty to the church’s official position, something all members are obligated to do. How could people betray their own community?
The sense of betrayal on the other side, ironically, also arose out of the fierce loyalty members have for each other. Church leaders weren’t just expressing disapproval of a lifestyle (that had clearly been stated many times before). Church leaders were declaring those who publicly committed to that lifestyle and their family members no longer members of the community. An entire group was being expelled. Members suddenly had to choose between loyalty to affected family members, friends, and other churchmembers, and loyalty to the institution. It felt so incredibly wrong. How could the leaders treat their own people this way? How could they claim that God wanted them to treat their people this way?
Different levels of betrayal
In a 2010 Deseret News[1] article, Kristine Frederickson addressed betrayal after a bad personal experience. She separated a lesser form of “betrayal” from a more grievous “BETRAYAL.” The lesser type is what members in the first group felt: “Most of us have experienced an acquaintance or friend gossiping or saying hurtful things to others about us or those we love. This certainly is one form of betrayal and, as in all its forms, involves a violation of trust. It stings and often surprises because — more often than not — it is unexpected.”
Those on the other side, though, were reacting to the greater form of “BETRAYAL.” Frederickson explained, “This form of BETRAYAL, on a deeper level, equates to being in the ‘household of friends,’ serving and sacrificing for them, only to find that those individuals were neither friends nor upright in their actions toward you…. The level of betrayal increases when those individuals pretend to high standards of integrity and virtue, to be aboveboard in their actions and to adhere to standards of fairness and equity, yet acted duplicitously and unethically.” It’s the intensity of this more severe perception of betrayal that’s making it difficult for those in the second group to move on.
Is healing possible?
Discussion of dissent belongs elsewhere[2]. My purpose is to highlight methods that members could use in the meantime to nurse their wounds and eventually repair the effects of a breach of trust.
Kristine Frederickson described three behaviors that helped mitigate her pain:
- Finding comfort in friends and family. “When my husband, children, family and dear friends heard what had happened they rallied around and their love and support gave me great comfort. It strengthened and deepened the bonds of love between us and thereby enriched my life.” For those who are not themselves troubled (but are dealing with those who are) take a step back and listen. Logical explanations and rationalizations are not effective at easing the emotional pain many are experiencing.
- Using religious methods that still gave her peace. “I turn to the scriptures because they comfort and provide a context for my pain… I listen to uplifting, inspiring music and I pray. I pour out my heart, and try to pray for those that have offended me. This is difficult and I often rise from my knees and forget my good intentions. But this act benefits me because continued, sincere pray decreases bitterness that would otherwise sink deep roots and chancre rather than free my soul.” Ultimately, the type of healing necessary for a breach of trust with church leaders can only come from a higher source. Period.
- Recognizing her own imperfections. “Lastly, as strange as it might seem, I try to remember times I’ve acted duplicitously and hurt others because when all is said and done we are human and we sin. We might call ourselves ‘Saints’ but we are, after all, really ‘sinners’ and Christ’s gospel is a gospel of repentance. Betrayal affords us, almost compels us, to recognize our need of the Savior and of the blessings of the Atonement. In our extremity, we can deepen our relationship with the Savior.” It’s never bad to recognize our imperfections as long as we can recognize how much good God accomplishes through us in spite of them.
Discuss
[1] Yes, I said Deseret News. Stay with me.
[2] Or the futility of dissent, whatever. (Even if in a few decades leaders looked back and scratched their heads at this decision, they would never suggest that anyone did anything wrong. For example, the current description of the priesthood ban from the Mormon Newsroom: “It is not known precisely why, how or when this restriction began in the Church, but it has ended.”)
Wheat & Tares 
The deepest and most disruptive betrayal is parental betrayal and if you were raised in the church the church’s betrayal can easily be experienced as parental. (If you’re and adult convert probably not.) I coach people through this problem regularly. The best indicator of outcome is the *speed* with with the betrayal becomes understood by the betrayed. When it is very rapid, for example when the initial awakening happens say within a few seconds the baby is typically thrown out with the bathwater and worse sometimes the betrayed tosses out a parental part of their own personality often leaving them quite vulnerable. In the case of a TBM raid shelf collapse they may throw out all organized religion or even toss God out! This is why I favor inoculation, not as an apologist to protect the church but to protect it’s members who were raised in the church from great personal disruption caused by the church.
It is quite notable btw that when this occurs the victims of it often held up in a general sense blamed by the tribe as an example of what can happen to you should you get out of the boat! Instead of morning with those who are morning (their totally unnecessary disruptive betrayal).
For example when both parents and church are somewhat conflated and the shelf collapse is rapid they may psychologically toss out both religion and the parential part of their personality leaving them without much in the way of values or inhibition and suddenly they are willfully sinning because psychologically they are temporarily uninhibited teenagers and at the same time (naive) TBMs are condemning them for it instead of succoring them, making them victims twice over.
Inoculation helps to turn a faith crisis into a faith transition by slowing it all down and offering a much better prognosis for healing with reconciliation.
I will disagree the notion that church leaders have betrayed the membership. I think that is an unfair and untrue characterization.
A member’s perception of a betrayal does not mean that one occurred. Such a perception might be based on faulty reasoning.
ji,
Truth doesn’t hid itself it needs human help to become obscured. Who are you suggesting did that some clerk?
Howard,
You and I will differ, but I think the truth is that the leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are good and honorable men, even holy men, who are called of God and sustained by the membership to administer the affairs of the Church. I choose to receive the Lord’s servants, amenable to His instruction.
That’s a dodge ji, how did unfortunate historical and doctrinal truths become obscured without the brethrens direction or conscent???
Ji, this post is about the perception of betrayal. About *why* people are so upset. That is why I went to great effort to present both sides. You align with the first group and I’d submit that the majority of members feel as you do, but that doesn’t help members on the other side pick up the pieces. You seem to have missed the point of the first suggestion at the end of the post.
Sorry, Howard, I cannot play your game. Call it a dodge if you wish, but I choose to stand with the Lord and His servants. It is a purposeful and honest choice on my part. I hope you and others won’t mock me for my choice, but I understand why that sort of thing happens.
Mary Ann:
You are one of the most converted people I have ever known. You are spiritually indestructible.
Mary Ann –
Yes, two sides have a point of view, but both sides aren’t usually equal. In this case, one side usually has the power to discipline, shun, and expel. The other side can only try to persuade, complain, shut-up, or walk away. It is never a fair fight.
The powerful are the last to see their own faults and correct them.
Brother of Bared, correct. This isn’t a fair fight and I can’t see that it will ever be. But the bitterness and grief shouldn’t last forever. It’s not healthy. It’s not good. There will always be something to be angry about in this church. Leaders mean well, but people still get hurt unintentionally. And this hurt a lot of people.
“[1] Yes, I said Deseret News. Stay with me.”
Made me smile.
You are right, I did not expect to get good advice from the Deseret News. We are all a bunch of idiots just mucking it all up every day of our lives (from top to bottom). Hopefully we’re doing our best, and for those of us operating life by first, rule #1 do no harm…..the last three months have been difficult.
Healing from betrayal is infinitely more difficult when the offending party refuses to admit they did anything wrong in the first place. Or when said party claims to be speaking and acting with divine authority.
I’ve been watching The Tudors, a series full of the political and religious intrigue of the Protestant Reformation in England. In a recent episode, the King is quashing the rising Evangelical movement, and some council members use it as a way to target their court rivals, have them arrested, tortured and executed.
One unfortunate soul, caught in the cross-hairs is offered cold comfort by his fellow reformer who has not been identified who tells him to endure what lies ahead and threatens his family if he names him as a fellow heretic: “We all know the day may come when we have to walk in the path of Christ. But if we are afraid, if we turn away, then we have no right to call ourselves true Christians.”
It’s easy to tell someone to be stoic and deal with their pain when you aren’t the one being put on the torture rack. But eventually, at least in a court ruled by fear and power, anyone could be on that rack.
Hawk, most of us will be on that rack at some point in our lives. It’s one thing to debate dissent. It’s another entirely to be able to plead your case before the person capable of doing something, and to have that person give a soft smile and respectfully tell you they’ve received revelation to the contrary. To plead your case to an ally who has considerable influence, only to have them come back with a confused and apologetic look on their face and say their personal revelation also aligns with the first. The blood drains from your face and you feel completely hollow inside. You walk away numb and become incredulous when they ask, “Is there any other way we can help you?” You get through it by getting on your knees and screaming angrily at God. He doesn’t take away the bitterness or anger, but he gives you just enough peace to get you through the next day. Then the next night you scream at him again, and he gives you just enough to last another day. And so on. Eventually the anger and bitterness diminish, though a scar remains. Your trust in leadership isn’t the same as it was, but your knowledge that God stands by you and helps get you through your trials becomes firm.
I want people to start screaming at God. He honestly doesn’t mind (at least I never felt like he did with me). Relying on him is the only way to heal a wound like this.
I’ve been around for an Long while, to cope with betrayal both by ” friends and fellow saints” and seeing some really appalling treatment by ” leadership” at a high level to both individuals and from the church at times.
My way of handling this is to separate the Gospel from the Church.
I do realise the ” Church ” and the ” Gospel” do interweave at times but in my mind I have ” juggled” the separation.
I love the gospel, I delight in reading the scriptures and teaching my YSA Class, this gives me great joy, in preparing for my lessons ….the reflection and seeking the lords help and most of all hearing my classes response to the gospel and their insightful observations…….BUT
I learnt some time ago that the Church is full of us imperfect people, who for a myriad of reasons do things or don’t do things. I could list some absolutely terrible experiences and yes some leaders in very high office ( and yes I have personally experienced and witnessed them) and having said this I am not excluding myself from offence to others either…..there lies one of the problems…the other is the Church itself….a growing list of ” spins”, the gay issues, the lack of openness about a whole lot of things, mainly historical but others too including “running” a business corporate model instead of some real ” religious” model. These I see as mainly cultural. To me the a Church is ” locked” in a Western American romanticism which thrives on “folklore” and ” feeling”== sentimentality which gives itself a level of entitlement ( have you ever worked on a mission with couples from the West…it is no joy …believe me !!!)
So my ” healing ” has led me to this separation.
Have I mastered it? Not fully but at my age it has helped me just teach and keep away from church leadership =”bureaucracy”
“I want people to start screaming at God.”
I agree. We keep trying to blame each other when God is the one who put us in an impossible situation, giving us gays but also giving us a doctrine negating them. The leaders are not to blame for upholding doctrine, that is their job. Members are not to blame for standing up for gays, that is their duty as Christians. There is no solution to this mess except ignoring it and moving on.
The reason to scream at God is for not intervening. But I don’t really believe that God is the author of this confusion. This is a human knot to untie. A tangle created by a human lack of empathy and in some cases, good intentions gone overboard.
We know that people love the family-centric nature of the church, that this is our silver bullet in missionary work, so we amp that up a thousand notches until all we talk about is cishetero families. Then we remember “Oops! Gay people exist and keep being born into our perfect little cishetero families.” So instead of dealing with gay people, we just go back to the same thing we know has worked for missionary work: the cishetero family.
(Eventually we may also realize that individuals are more than just their role in the family, but that’s not on the radar yet).
“level of betrayal increases when those individuals pretend to high standards of integrity and virtue, to be aboveboard in their actions and to adhere to standards of fairness and equity”
Enter Prop 8 campaign with misleading and untrue, campaign material was taught and presented in Sunday services by leaders–and okayed for use by higher leaders, with threads being repeated and used in various church associated settings.
You bet I feel betrayed, having been taught my long life in the church, “we have the truth.” “We stand for truth.” “We should never be afraid of telling the truth.” And, when we make “mistakes,” repentance includes restitution and admitting the mistake to the aggrieved parties.
(One day I would be interested in someone examining how church ownership of the Deseret News provides a veneer of church approval for opinions and articles within its pages and if it serves to shape and inform the membership/church leadership base, perhaps resulting in Mormons being the most reliable Republicans demographically in the U.S.)
I son’t think God gives most of what we think comes from God, I’m more with Hawk – upset w God for not intervening. The afflictions we face in this life are mostly of man’s creation. Most of our trials are just a fallen world with fallen people.
“The reason to scream at God is for not intervening. But I don’t really believe that God is the author of this confusion. This is a human knot to untie.”
Yes!
I think you’re right about people feeling betrayal on both sides Mary Ann. Not sure why it’s so difficult for those on the betrayal side to recognise the BETRAYAL the other side feel. And *feel* has to be the operative word I think, whether or not others think it justified to feel that way. ji’s comments pretty much display that lack of recognition I think, along with a fear that expressing empathy somehow endorses the point of view, which I really don’t think is a given.
I found Howard’s comments very interesting, particularly regarding inoculation. And if my own experience is anything to go by, it doesn’t take too much to provide enough inoculation to slow down the process to transition rather than crisis. I was fortunate to have had heard the phrase “mountain meadows massacre” raised in an institute lesson as a student, even though the teacher hadn’t wanted to go into any detail, for instance. I was loaned a copy of Mormon Enigma at much the same time. This was prior to the September 6. Things seemed to be much more tightly controlled afterwards. I know the Institute library (rare in Britain anyway, but this was London) had to be cleared of all non-approved material around then. But still, the relationship with / attitude towards leadership is never the same as it once was. I agree with Mary Ann on that.
This is a practical question about an issue I face right now.
I feel betrayed at a fundamental level about something that is important.
Background; My now 22 year old son was blessed with a strong body and has little interest in sports. He did take considerable interest in scouting from the first grade. Our ward had a single digit number of scouts, untrained leaders who cheated on requirements and who often exposed the scouts to unnecessary legal and physical dangers while camping.
We thought of it as like basketball. The church has a basketball program, pretty good in some wards but not so much in others. If your offspring is exceptionally interested and talented, you might want to get them on track to be on the school basketball team and not count too much on ward basketball.
We did scouting with a wonderful non-LDS pack and troop, being active in the leadership as parents. I have camped over 300 nights with scouts (including last weekend), led 3 high adventure expeditions and planned dozens of weekend trips (including one next month). My wife has done just about every training available including wood badge, except swimming related and was the troop committee chairperson for several years.
My son went on 5 high adventures, and 4 more he planned just with dad. He was elected senior patrol leader in a troop of 80 boys. His nick name was “Sherpa” because of his tough but unwavering help and compassion for younger scouts. He saved a scout’s life (another story). He earned his eagle and several palms in a troop that really makes it difficult (<10% eagles). He earned a presidential service award (200 hours of service), the "panda" award, and he was named the top scout by the American Legion his senior year in the entire state of 10 million people. He didn't serve a mission, instead he completed a 5 year degree in 3 years at a top science and engineering school in physics and math. He is in graduate school now.
When my son was learning to walk I served as the clueless, untrained ward scout master, the single most frustrating calling I ever had and later as the troop committee chairman. The YM/YW programs in every ward I have attended were the top priority and I expected them to do a better job helping me raise my son. I was a supportive parent of ward scouting when my son was that age and we went camping a few times with the ward. That was a joke. My son refused to "stain his sash" with any Mormon merit badges or other awards and he asked the bishop himself to take the plaque down on the wall in the church memorializing his eagle award.
Currently they want me to be involved in the ward scouting, especially since they can't get anyone to willingly camp very often and I love camping. Organizationally it remains the same nightmare I can never forget 20 years later. I feel that our ward collectively has betrayed generations of boys with their terrible scouting program. We are surrounded by non-LDS troops of excellence with several different flavors of scouting available,(extreme boy-led chaotic vs more regimented, rigorous activities vs car camping, inexpensive vs elaborate, etc.)
I do not think our leadership at the top is innocent and will not lay this back in the laps of the local members. The top LDS leaders have implemented a wide range of policies that make excellent scouting difficult in the best of circumstances and then they divide the wards up into so many small units that what happens in my ward is virtually inevitable. I have written them many times and receive no response beyond the bishop telling me to stop writing them.
LDS scouting is highly subservient to the agenda of the Aaronic Priesthood which is mission preparation, chaste temple marriage, unquestioning management-leadership style and absolute loyalty to the church (all external). It is by design weak on building character, honor, independent thinking and visionary leadership (all internal) fostered in normal boy scouting.
I see these trends, even in better troops out west, while visiting relatives and camping with them. The question of excellent non-LDS scouting versus decent LDS scouting is purely hypothetical in my current situation, the latter being an impossibility.
I have long felt an obligation to try and get as many of the parents of the few boys in my ward as possible to put their sons in better troops. Parents and ward leaders stand together in opposition. Over the years only three other boys have been persuaded to do it and two only lasted a year or less because they were too lazy to meet the more demanding requirements and wanted the easy eagle available in the ward. The third quit both scout troops and is not active.
I am certain that my ward leaders feel that I have betrayed them and continue to be a threat with my agenda to draw boys out of LDS scouting and into better troops. This is balanced by the enormous desperation they suffer getting anyone to go camping. I grow old and weary, my best days behind me and my coronary arteries now stented in multiple places.
Sorry for the long rant. I would appreciate any practical advice on what to do and how to heal from this betrayal, especially from the more devote and orthodox members here.
One of the themes of Pres. Nelson’s talk was institutional loyalty. This is ironic because millenials (the target audience of the talk) don’t resonate with that topic, and even find it distasteful. It also demonstrates how out of touch our leaders are with the younger generations, and their best answer again is to double-down on faith and obedience.
Millenials came of age during the 9/11 attacks, they grew up around divorce and acceptance of gay people a lot more than their parents did, they graduated from college right into a recession, carrying unprecedented amounts of student debt. When they do find employment, they won’t be staying at the same company for very long, let alone provide 20+ years of loyalty in exchange for a nice pension, which no longer exist. They won’t have the retirement plans and financial security their predecessors did. The various institutions (financial, economic, social, religious, government, educational) that have asked for their implicit or explicit trust have betrayed them, over and over. It shouldn’t be any surprise that millenials are turning away from the Church (and organized religion in general) in growing numbers. Instead of trying to understand and relate to millennials on their level, Church leaders retrench, chastising them for delaying marriage and children, while admonishing them to invest all of their loyalty in an institution that continues find new ways to marginalize LGBT people, while feeling the need to purge members who publicly expresses independent thoughts.
The leaders of our Church are well-intentioned mortal men doing the best they know how. They are, for the most part, financially successful from their respective professional arenas and live on comfortable pensions along with Church stipends. Throughout their lives they have received tremendous benefits (financial/temporal/social/spiritual) from pledging unwavering loyalty to the institutional Church, so it makes sense why they would expect young people to do the same. But not everyone gets the opportunities they had. They don’t understand the cognitive dissonance resulting from the Church going against its own teachings, or from generally making mistakes, because they have too much to lose from even questioning it.
(Betrayed) Mike – you recognize that the leaders probably need you, and they’ve probably outright told you you’re one of the few people they know that can do it (and do it well). The problem is that you don’t feel that you can even fake the enthusiasm for the calling in that environment. I’ve done those jobs before, gritted my teeth and did my duty. In those cases where I had *serious* misgivings, where I was very upfront with the problems I saw ahead and disagreed with the way things were being handled, I always left that calling or assignment with a bad taste in my mouth. Even when people would happily tell me what an inspiring job I did, that I pulled off the necessary miracle no-one else could do, that I was such an awesome trooper, I could never shake the feeling that I shouldn’t have been asked to do it when they *knew* how much I was against it.
So looking back, I wish I would have just gone with my gut and said no on several occasions. At the same time, those hardships taught me some important lessons, you know? So I think you really have to make it a matter of prayer. If you really feel you can’t commit, it’ll take a strong effort to stand against the leader. A lot of guys are pretty understanding of personal circumstances, but I don’t get the feeling this is the case in your situation. You’ve also got to keep in mind that once you accept the call, you’ll have wait until they feel *they* should release you, even if you’re really having a hard time. Some people could just choose to go inactive, but if you’re committed to showing up and doing the job to the best of your ability because you can’t just let those boys go without a leader, you will inevitably feel frustration and resentment towards your church leaders.
Btw, I have a brother-in-law who works for the BSA, and he doesn’t allow his boys in the LDS troops, either.
Jack, loved your comment. Have to add that there seems to be even less understanding about what motivates the youth if the online seminary lessons are anything to go by – my kid’s wearying of a recent stream of “follow the prophet” devotionals opening each on-line lesson, and today my daughter commented that she really disliked the way doing good was always presented in terms of what blessings will you get. She finds that very distasteful. I find the current crop of youth to be very altruistic and concerned for others, including LGBT, and the constant appeal to self-interest is a big turn-off.
(Betrayed) Mike, I completely get where you’re coming from, but let me tell you how it looks from the other side of the story.
I enjoyed Cub Scouts as a child, but hated Boy Scouts. It was “hey, let’s play basketball.” While I love basketball, the leaders were worthless. I dropped out as a second class scout.
Fast forward to being an adult. I get called to 11 year old scouts. I complain to my neighbor the whole time (just 2 months) and they split the ward. Neighbor becomes bishop, knows I hate scouts. I was safe for 5 years.
Enter new bishop, doesn’t know I hate scouts. Calls me to Webelos. I tell him I’m not a fan, and he tells me “just show up. That’s more than the previous leaders did.” So, I vow to actually do scouts when we’re there. Pretty much every kid who came every week got his Arrow of Light. But I wasn’t that tough on them, so I’m sure you would have been tougher than I.
After 3 years, I get a bunch of rowdy boys. I’m yelling at them to listen. One of the rowdiest is the (now former) bishop’s son. After 3 years, I’ve had it. I don’t like it. I tell new bishop that I’m tired of yelling at the boys. (I will add that every scout leader asked to be released with this group prior to me.) Bishop is cool and releases me.
I’m in a new ward now. I made it very clear to the bishopric that I hate scouts. So far I’m safe. I don’t know how good leaders on in my ward, but I just got an email for a Klondike campout. I hate camping, even in good weather. I’m happy to say I’m working that weekend and can’t attend. (My son, on the other hand, LOVES scouts and will probably go. Go figure.)
I appreciate people like you, but I just hate the scouting program period. Maybe if I had a leader like you, I would have liked it. But this is the problem when you get a lay clergy with a bunch of people indifferent to scouting. It sucks.
Jack, I agree, the institutional authority was HUGE in that talk, which was why the betrayal thing bothered me so much. A good portion of the sermon seemed to be justifying recent actions, and then at the end seeming to label anyone who may disagree as denying the “spirit of prophecy.” There was good stuff about the Holy Ghost and personal revelation, but the institutional loyalty was a bit overpowering.
At the same time, most of the YSAs that’d sit down for a worldwide devotional would likely be on the more mainstream/orthodox end, listening with “the intent to obey.” I don’t know that many who went there would have questioned anything they heard. It just deepened a rift already existing in the wake of the handbook changes.
At the same time, most of the YSAs that’d sit down for a worldwide devotional would likely be on the more mainstream/orthodox end, listening with “the intent to obey.”
I think that’s an honorable intention.
One of the thing that mystifies me is how this one particular policy is considered so very different from the rest of what goes on an church, deserving of particular notice and outrage and compassion.
It seems pretty consistent with other policies. It is not uncommon for a cohabiting hetero couple to be pulled into the bishops office and given an ultimatum that they must marry or face charges of fornication. Some marry and are sealed in the temple a year later, some split up, some walk out of church and never return, some are disfellowshipped but continue to attend. It is their “rack” experience. Why do we not have blog posts about their experiences? Why do the experiences of other people somehow matter less than the recent policy?
And as far as practices that are “exclusionary,” what about Christ refusing to preach to the Gentiles? Was He wrong?
Also, in my experience it is not uncommon for children not to be baptized…in the country where my husband served his mission, the law requires that a married couple be of the same faith. So if a member marries outside the faith, then they are legally considered to be that other religion, and thus the church will not baptize the children that come out of that marriage even if both parents would give permission.
And that is also a strongly Muslim country, in which Muslims are not baptized until after months (years?) of regular attendance and a series of interviews. So in any given week, there are a fair number of people of all ages who have not been baptized in attendance.
In the older Primary classes that I have taught, it is not unusual to have a third of the kids be unbaptized for a variety of reasons. They were accepted as being just like the kids sitting next to them.
I have read of cases where such kids were bullied, and of course that is horrific and unacceptable. Adults who know about it should do whatever they can to be clear that is unacceptable.
So I guess the one thing that we can all agree on is that anyone who walks through our doors should be welcomed. Full stop.
Ji, so here’s how that conversation was going:
Others: Millennials don’t like “X.” They’re going to be completely turned off by being told “X.” This just goes to show how out of touch leaders are with their audience.
Me: Yes, but the kids who would be the type to attend that devotional in the first place aren’t going to be like the other Millennials. They’re already predisposed to like “X,” so they would not have been turned off at all when President Nelson said “X.”
You: “X” isn’t a bad thing.
Naismith, excellent common ground.
Thank you for your support. I expected a lecture and judgment and possibly getting deleted. I felt guilty dumping that load on y’all.
In spite of that many words I still failed to convey my situation clearly to the point where your advice would be specific. But I understand the spirit of it given with compassion and agree with it and find comfort in it.
Mary Ann: I totally agree with you. I was asked about 2 years ago. I haven’t done a dang thing except a few organizational meetings. Camping with the non-LDS troop and working half the weekends keeps my schedule too full and this not a priority.
Last weekend the non-LDS troop went to Cumberland Island, a gorgeous place for 3 days and 2 nights. (Google image it). The ward went to somebody’s back 40 for one night, no cost. Back for church. I would have taken any of the boys in my ward to the island and paid the $100 expense for them myself. They do keep after me continually and wonder why I persist in putting worldly things ahead of Godly things. The arrogance of it is appauling. Instead of the integrity of simply saying no, I have kept saying maybe next week or next month.
The thing that keeps me from washing my hands of it entirely is the weekly sacrament ordinance performed by a few boys and a few adults. I watch them fumble around with that and realize how much participation in our many scouting ceremonies prepares a boy to handle something like that with far more dignity and confidence than they do. And the firt thing I think to repent of is my chronic failure in ward scouting. From there it is off to the races…
MH: I get what you describe. Pretty typical and it could be worse. Don’t take this wrong but your description provides such a perfect seqway into a couple of the major crucial differences in LDS and non-LDS scouting.
First scouting is voluntary, it is not conscription. The US military knows how important this difference is and will pay soldiers a lot more to keep it that way. Many problems disappear when only people who actually want to be there are there. In the community here only ~30% of boys ever do cub scouts and about 10-15% do boy scouts. Mormons are busy with all their other competing responsibilities and I suspect less than 10% really want to do scouting. But I also know there is no other program that will give your son the same kind of practical training in leadership and character building than scouting when properly done.
Next scouting is boy led. Our scouts elect their own leaders and when it gets rowdy the elected boy leaders, usually the older boys have to deal with it. I try not to discipline teenage boys, you can go to jail for that now-a-days. Democracy empowers leaders. The rowdy little boys who drive you crazy often grow up and make the best leaders. Adults only step in when it reaches a level that probably will require medical attention at the hospital or severe vague moral consequences.
You would be amazed what 16-17 year old boy leaders who have participated in this process for 6 years will do. Last weekend we didn’t get to the camp ground until midnight and the gate was locked. We had to carry our gear for 2 miles, coolers and trunks, etc. It was supposed to be car camping and we were not prepared for backpacking. The boys wanted to break the gate open and we vetoed that. They needed a little direction in organization but they took it from there. We got to sleep at 4:00 am. Our boy leaders had 30 scouts in the vehicles and ready to go at 7:00 am so we wouldnot miss the ferry. No adult intervention needed. We were hussling just to get our own act together since we cooked our own elaborate breakfast. Yes, there was some swearing and sleepy little scouts being physically thrown out of sleeping bags. Their food wasn’t cooked the best.
The next night we adults saw tents not properly pitched with ground cloths not tucked that would collect rain and soak the kids. This was a double failure; the younger scouts not pitching the tent correctly, and the older boy leaders not checking on them. It rained hard and we let them get wet and the temperature was as low as 38F. The older boy leaders had to deal with the young scouts whimpering in the night when they got wet, gave them their dry bags and they had to dry out the wet sleeping bags the next day. Think of the lessons learned without preachy adult intervention.
The plan when we left was for a late leisurely breakfast, a devotional which the boy leaders skipped on sunday (and I let them do it-probably a mistake) and then the long drive home. The boy leaders held a counsel and changed the plan. They wanted a 5:00 am departure where they could sleep the 6 hours drive home and have time to do home work or see girlfriends, etc. We adults said it was a safety issue, us driving with lack of sleep. The boys told us to go to bed early and drink a coke. We compromised for a 6:00 am departure. At 5:30 am the trailer was loaded but it was just one big messy heap of mixed up gear. Two adults got in the trailer and threw all the gear not properly packed out on the ground and told them to deal with it. It was amazing, within minutes the backpacks and trunks were packed and properly stacked in the trailer. We left at about 6:15 am.
One of the older boys stole a bra from either his sister or girlfriend and slipped it into the backpack of a younger scout. One whose mother he judged seems to helicopter more than average. The boys are instructed to pack and unpack their gear, not their parents. If this 11 year old scout had followed this advice and unpacked his gear nothing would have happened beyond some giggles. But the mother unpacked his gear and hit the ceiling when she found the bra. Guess to whom the scoutmaster referred her angry phone call? The 17 year old in charge of the expedition! (“Sorry, that is a boy leadership issue. Call _______. Good bye.”) I can only imagine how that conversation went. But I trust much growth was experienced by all.
Finally, adult leaders are not selected by the church minister, randomly or by inspiration. It is a quasi-democratic process with quite a bit of behind-the-scene deal-making. Experienced wise leaders such as my wife act sort of like king-makers. The goal is to fit our unique approach to the scouting program around adult leader strengths and it is voluntary at every step. Right now our scoutmaster has a 16 year old son. We all know he will age out in less than 2 years and maybe stay a bit longer. We are already grooming at least 2 sucessors. There will be a year overlap with the new scoutmaster working directly with the older one. Similar process goes with each of the major committee leaders.
Everyone gets as much official training as possible. One adult leader’s only job in the troop is to encourage the rest of us to get trained and makes it easy for us to do it. If anything there is an over-abundance of training available by the BSA and in my experience LDS leaders do far too little to take advantage of it. We don’t need training for higher Priesthood callings, why bother training for lower scouting callings. Better to pray to be released and promoted in the Priesthood as soon as possible.
How long are we going to put up with the nonsense when our leaders are obviously not leading us in the paths of righteousness? How many thousands and maybe even millions of people will be betrayed by false expectations? I guess I will carry these questions with me to my grave.
Mike, while I appreciate your angst, the scouting situation does vary from place to place. We’ve been in several wards where non-member scouts chose to participate in our church-sponsored troop rather than a group that might be more convenient for them.
In the ward where my husband last served as scoutmaster, the District Roundtables were held at our church building and they were very appreciative of the support and participation from LDS units.
To be fair, my husband first served as a scoutmaster during his graduate school under a great leadership team. As you said, the mentoring and stability and depth of leadership really helps.
I just don’t think LDS troops are uniformly inferior.
There are inferior non-LDS scout troops. But, unlike inferior LDS troops, non-LDS troops have to respond to the marketplace and if they aren’t good they wither and die. Which means that non-LDS troops that endure are good, many of them very, very good. Meanwhile we ignore the marketplace and our inferior troops live on and on.
Naismith:
I pray that you are correct. That would make me happy.
I haven’t seen it. Thus the sense of betrayal.
I see what, from my very limited experience in one LDS and one non-LDS troop, are fundamental organizational flaws that are widely institutionalized and documented in the LDS instruction books in print and on line.
Are these LDS troops of excellence by-the-book or do they make major modifications?
*****
Skip the rest of this if not interested in more scouting drama.
Market pressure is huge outside of LDS scouting. We had a father of a scout with enormous leadership ability and talent who did not like our approach. He tried to take over and change what we do. He went around undermining our boy leaders and trying to force people to do it his way. He disliked the level of adult democracy involving many parents in various stages of learning which can get messy versus strong leadership by one (like him) with a few trusted (and overworked) disciples doing as they are told. Eventually my wife, the troop committee chair person at the time, dealt with him and he didn’t seem to like strong leadership in other people and so he left us.
He started his own troop and initially he only took 6 scouts from us which wasn’t much. (Bigger than the LDS troop, though.) But he was far more effective in getting the fearful parents of 11 years olds in our pipeline to not join our troop and initially grew and thrived while we managed to mostly recruit the bad-news-bears scouts he wouldn’t have.
The church minister cancelled our cub pack and half a dozen men and women worked hard for several years to get that going strong again and independent from the church. But another source of good scouts dried up for a few years.
The other crippling issue was the simultaneous emergence of a group of boys in our troop (our founder of the rival troop hated and wanted kicked out) who called themselves “the Swedish mafia.” They tested our extreme boy-led approach to the very limit. They got themselves elected through a combination of swag and intimidation and they basically acted like hoodlums (with good, lenient parents). Things got way out of control. In retrosepct we should have been more strict on them and maybe not let them even get elected. At its worst, scouts were arrested smoking pot in uniform on camping troops, all kinds of vandalism, bullying, locking younger scouts in closets all night, etc.
This finally started to settle down when my son, after losing 2 elections for senior patrol leader against them, ran on the campaign slogan of being a “communist dictator tyrant” and promising to whip the troop back into shape. Many of the boys were tired of the nonsense and they elected him. (Oh, that our nation had as much wisdom on election day as this scout troop). My son, under the influence of some of the best men I have ever known, restored order to the troop in his strong but gentle way and reined these boys back in. Tactics included his extremely difficult hikes and his famous 20 mile midnight runs (probably more like about 5 miles). And there were his constant tests of strength; push-up contests, 150 pound backpacks, arm wrestling, etc. He and his friends carried the backpacks of their rivals up the hardest mountains. He gave them food when they ran out and his warm dry sleeping bag when theirs got wet, etc. He became in deed their sherpa. He intimidated the Swedish mafia out of their mischief through the collective and undeniable strength and goodness of all the boys.
The nonsense slowly ended and the boys pulled together. The worst of the Swedish mafia had a few tough years after scouting; flunking out of college, more arrests, fired fom jobs, etc. But almost all eventually came around, some sooner than later. They credit our scout troop for never giving up on them and being something they could count on when they finally hit bottom.
When they were around 20-21 years old, 3 former Swedish mafia guys who were doing fine asked me to go camping with them one more time and they brought along one of their friends, also a former scout, who had just gotten out of jail for drug use. They asked me to sit around the fire and tell them some of my bear stories; that they knew I contrived at the moment to teach them whatever moral lesson I thought was needed. That was the hardest bear story I ever told. In another instance, the worst guy in the Swedish mafia repented and now has a large tattoo of the scout symbol on his chest where he can see it every day and be reminded of what it means to him; honor, duty, service, etc.
At age 18 my son emerged as a better leader than anyone I know in my ward and I would sustain him as the bishop above any other holder of the Priesthood and most of the women there.
The rival troop prospered and helped mold many boys but with one weakness, they couldn’t keep very many older boys interested. Their scouting skills are great because they are constantly drilling them. But our camping trips are better and more challenging. Their zeal has increased and now we are seeing a trickle of boys coming to us from them. We have been slightly more successful the last 2-3 years recruiting the cubs than they have been. They are looking to us to maybe modify their methods to a small degree. We now have almost all pretty good boys (not perfect) at every age. The troop is growing to be too big and our bad reputation is fading away. New boys and their fathers are putting their new stamp of excellence on the troop and I hope they let me be a small part of it.
In the same place and time frame the ward LDS troop is virtually identical. No serious problems ever get solved. Boys grow up and move away and most of the leaders cycle through but there is no reason for anything to change. “All is well,” or at least “good enough” seems to be the LDS scouting motto.
The LDS troops have both strengths and weaknesses, though. If a troop isn’t working well, the church might bring in an experienced scouter from elsewhere in the stake, assigning them to serve in that branch or ward for a season. And if two units are meeting in the same building, they can disband one troop and combine into the other to provide a critical mass of youth and leadership.
Just trying to paint an accuratge picture, not trying to be a mindless supporter of BSA–which I keep expecting to go away, since it isn’t part of the church program elsewhere in the world.
Naismith #29:
I join you in your mystification. The church includes and excludes based on a variety of standards, just as every group does. (Including feminism, progressivism, who’s-cool-in-the-bloggernacle, etc.)
Naismith writes:
“…not trying to be a mindless supporter of BSA–which I keep expecting to go away, since it isn’t part of the church program elsewhere in the world.”
Am I reading this properly? Does it mean what I think?
I see it as a profoundly arrogant and ignorant comment. Explanation?
The BSA despite its faults is not going away and it is in many ways much larger with far more influence for good than the LDS church. Might sooner join with some of our critics and keep expecting the LDS church to go away before the BSA.
Scouting is organized in about 100 countries around the world:
http://www.scouting.org/jota/countries.aspx
I am not an expert on international scouting. Far from it. I camp, hike, tell bear stories, etc. Not much else. I have only passing knowledge of what we, on the outdoor committee, call “parlor scouting.”
LDS friends from Canada report that the LDS church is involved with scouting in a similar fashion as in the US. This in spite of a more open acceptance of gays and on other issues. In my experience Canadians seem to be more mellow and get along better across these differences.
LDS friends from Australia report a similar but more stormy relationship between us and their scouting. In Australia boy and girl scouting is almost completely integrated including cub scouts. Similar as I would image having a joint YM/YW camping trip every month and the weekly meetings together with the primary somehow trailing along. They call cub scouts “joey scouts” which I find charming.
LDS friends from Mexico and other Latin American countries report that they don’t think the LDS church has scout troops there. No scouting in Japan where I served my mission about 40 years ago.
I am curious about England, the rest of Europe and also New Zealand, Samoa, Tonga, etc. Are there LDS scout troops? How do they function?
One new scout in my non-LDS troop is a transfer from a troop in Korea and he reports it to be pretty similar. Less discipline, scares mom more, and more fun.
In any country where the LDS church is established to the point of organizing stakes, they could certainly organize a boy scout troop. It is a matter of choice for leaders at various levels.
Sorry if I sound harsh. This is one of my trigger issues. Scouting is NOT an appendage of the Aaronic Priesthood! It is a complex proven organization that stands on its own and we borrow strength from it. We Mormons stretch its flexibility beyond reason at our own risk.
Alison, all groups police their borders (officially or unofficially). In the church there is an added level of gravity – being declared an “outsider” doesn’t just reflect your status in the church, it reflects your status before God. As my bishop said yesterday in church, *God* is deeply disappointed with those who refuse to follow the prophets. This is deeper than just club membership.
Just as polygamy was polarizing a century ago, and the priesthood ban was polarizing at the height of the civil rights movement, gay marriage is polarizing now. In spite of a general avoidance of politics, leaders activitely campaigned legally and politically over the last couple decades to block gay marriage and requested members to follow suit. Those who objected could simply choose to not participate, and the church seemed to tolerate that as long as those members didn’t publicly say they believed the church was wrong.
With the policy came an additional layer of gravitas. Not only was gay marriage morally wrong, it is now, by definition, apostasy. You *cannot* be a member in good standing and believe that gay marriage is okay right now (hence the requirement for those adult children of gay couples). Just like you *cannot* be a member in good standing and believe that polygamy is okay right now (hence the requirement for those adult children of polygamists).
As Hawkgrrrl says, you can’t stop gay people from being born into Mormon families. You have a lot of Mormons who are looking at their gay parents, siblings, children, friends, or whatever. They are looking at them through the eyes of a loved one and beginning to wonder, “Is God really as disappointed in this person and their actions as the church is telling me He is?” As the church policy declares a more emphatic, “Yes!” A lot of members are having a stronger gut reaction, “No!”
Mike, there are no LDS scout troops in Britain. It was trialled back in the 1980s for a year or two, but really didn’t work. Whether that was due to insufficient leader training or not enough church members over a given geographical area, or that there simply wasn’t the time available for yet another church sponsored activity I don’t know. My younger brothers were of an age to be involved at the time, and have nothing good to report of the experiment. Seems it was a relief all round when it ended.
“I see it as a profoundly arrogant and ignorant comment. Explanation?”
Why do you demand an explanation if you have already made up your mind?
While the church in the US utilizes BSA as an integral part of the Aaronic priesthood activities program, I did not think that was true of church units outside of the US and Canada.
I guess I am ignorant because I’ve only lived on three continents, but that was my impression.
When we lived in Brasil in the 1990s, there were no church-sponsored scout troops, nor in the parts of Asia where we travel regularly.
In these areas, there are alternative Aaronic priesthood activity programs. As the church moves to becoming a worldwide church, simplifying and consolidating programs across the globe, I have assumed that at some point the church will replace BSA with those other activities, even in North America. A lot of us thought that change might come this summer, based on reports such as the July 2015 Salt Lake Tribune article in which LDS Church spokesman Eric Hawkins confirmed that the church was “considering creating its own international program for boys, separate from the Boy Scouts of America,” but in the end the church decided to stick with scouting in the US for now.
One of the issues that may be driving decisions internationally is the high cost. Families that can barely cover the cost of school uniforms and book fees required for local schools cannot easily afford the costs of uniform shirts, books, and badges. Of course now the merit badge brochures are online rather than requiring purchase, and a lot of troops run a uniform lending library/passalong program to recycle uniforms as boys grow up and provide them to families in need.
When we lived in Brasil, every family in the ward sent their kids to private schools, often struggling to make the fees, because the public schools were so inferior. There were kids who got up for early-morning seminary, worked all day in their family business, attended high school from 7 to 11 p.m. and then got up and did it all again.
In Indonesia, even the public schools require uniforms and fees for the use of textbooks. I’m grateful that in those areas, the church does not inflict the expense of scouting on church members.
I didn’t realize that the church still sponsored scout units in Australia. I thought that had ended, based on sources such as
http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/59886-international-lds-scouting/
And yes, while the church theoretically could do scouting all over the world, please understand that BSA is different from scouting in other countries. We were kinda surprised the first time we saw female scouts in Indonesia, wearing a mixture of long and short skirts depending on whether they were Muslim.
And if this has degenerated to quick insults, I have no interest in discussing further. Take your threadjack elsewhere.
Naismith:
I agree with every paragraph above except the last. I even agree that this is a thread jack. We are more in agreement than not.
I guess I too found your comment a “quick insult” to scouting in the US. My point is in spite of its flaws scouting is still a great program in many places in the US. Honestly, I know very little about international scouting beyond tidbits of gossip some of it decades old.
The cost issue is serious and it is getting too expensive. Ironically, again, my ward fails while the non-LDS troop shines. My LDS troop has a budget of about $2000 for 7 boys and the scout master/assistants are paying about $100 a month on gas or camping gear and are getting tired of it. The ward seems incapable of raising this money and it comes right out of the parent’s pockets and they constantly bicker over exceeding budgets and people not paying.I watched a meeting go on for 2 hours about a $500 dollar unpaid debt involving several people I could easily guess are paying collectively at least $50,000 in tithing every year.
The non-LDS troop has about $200,000 flow through its account each year. They have about 10 times as many boys and spend about ten times as much on each boy. About $65,000 of that is pine straw we buy and sell clearing about $15,000. We do 2 or 3 annual high adventures of 8-10 boys at about $1000 each. Summer camp is $300 per boy with 40-50 boys going. Monthly camping trips range from $20 to $80. Registration is about $100 per boy.
The boys can sell popcorn and one scout sold $15,000 worth and about 1/3 goes into his account. The troop sells $50,000 of popcorn, I think. We have several men who own businesses and will hire scouts to worth for them. The average eagle project usually begins with a fund raising event netting probably $500-$1000 dollars. I am only guessing at these figures I am not he CFO of the troop. But you get the idea.
We have generous friends of the troop who will quietly fund a few boys whose parents can’t afford it. I have no idea how common it is.
I can see how internationally this is ridiculous. But how did scouting survive the Great Depression here in the US? I think it is flexible enough that it could work. We Mormons could be the vanguard in this work. Or we can rejoice when the church leaves scouting and the few sincere families will be free to do something better.
“…not trying to be a mindless supporter of BSA–which I keep expecting to go away, since it isn’t part of the church program elsewhere in the world.”
Am I reading this properly? Does it mean what I think?
I see it as a profoundly arrogant and ignorant comment. Explanation?
The BSA despite its faults is not going away and it is in many ways much larger with far more influence for good than the LDS church.
Mike, I think you didn’t read it properly. You seem to be interpreting Naismith’s comment to mean that she expects the BSA to disappear completely, but I think it’s obvious that she is commenting about the BSA disappearing as an LDS sponsored activity in the church in North America.
My html skills are inadequate, in the above the first three paragraphs are quoted from Mike’s previous comment, the last paragraph only is my additional comment.
Oh, duh–thanks for that clarification.
Yes, my comment began “LDS troops” and ended with “church programs elsewhere” so I thought it was clear that I was only talking only about the LDS sponsorship of and involvement with BSA.
I have no opinion about the future of BSA in general.
Naismith and Allison,
Please. You both know why people are particularly upset about this policy. You give a false equivalence, an ironic one at that.
A non-married heterosexual couple is sanctioned for not making commitments to each other. No court is *mandated* for unmarried heterosexual couples even though they are clearly not living the law of chastity. However, a gay mormon is sanctioned for making such a commitment. Apparently committed gay sex is WAYYY more gross than unmarried hetero sex. Additionally, I have NEVER heard of a bishop refusing to baptize a child under 18 because his/her parents are married. We don’t tell the kid – “Sorry, your parents are living in sin so you can’t be baptized”. I would love to hear that discussion. “Hi Margaret and Don, we are going to refuse to give your 12 year-old a saving ordinance both she and you want for her because of your sins. So get with the program and get married so your kid can take the first necessary steps toward eternal salvation”. Are you ladies comfortable with that discussion?
Look, I totally get that you don’t agree with how many of us understand homosexuality or why we are incredibly skeptical that our understanding of it from the bible is at best incomplete. You may believe that acceptance of homosexuality is going to lead all kinds of societal catastrophe. I think it is fair to say that with the shared background we have I can at least *understand* where you are coming from. I don’t think it is too much to ask for you to at least try and understand why so many people see the policy as different and much more difficult than other boundary maintenance policies.
Following the policy and rhetoric around it we are seeing a horrible, tragic spate of LDS LBGT suicides. So maybe there is something qualitatively different going on that we should really worry about. I have to imagine that you care about these individuals as individuals. Keep these children of God in your prayers. They are certainly feeling betrayed in deep and profound ways and their “subjective” feelings can have real consequences.
“You may believe that acceptance of homosexuality is going to lead all kinds of societal catastrophe.”
I don’t believe that. I work with gays, I have been in carpools with gays. And I have great compassion for anyone who struggles with anything that threatens their soul.
My mystification is why your concern is reserved only for those affected by this particular policy, to the extent that it is in capital letters and we are also supposed to know which policy is being talked about?
Where is your compassion for single women who have a baby through artificial insemination? Folks who can’t quite give up that cup of coffee in the morning? For those who marry non-members and can’t attend the temple? And while no court is mandated for heterosexual couples living together, if one IS called the it is 100% just as impactful for that couple as anyone else–why so quick to dismiss their pain as being less?
“Additionally, I have NEVER heard of a bishop refusing to baptize a child under 18 because his/her parents are married.”
So you are calling me a liar? You don’t believe that there are countries where children with Muslim parents cannot be baptized? And the discussion is generally not what you propose, but more along the lines of, “You are welcome to worship with us each Sunday. We appreciate your participation. And when you reach the age of majority [which varies by local government], you can be baptized if you so choose.”
Years ago, those who married non-members could not be endowed. Later that policy was changed so that they only needed the spouse’s consent. But during that era, people did not ask, “Is God really as disappointed in this person and their actions as the church is telling me He is?” It wasn’t interpreted as disappointment, just that things would work out later. And those women faithfully built the church. BYU professor Brent Barlow did his dissertation on women in North Florida who were married to non-members, and recounted the tremendous contributions of those women. Their sons were the first to serve missions, then came home and provided local leadership. Of course the women could not be there at the temple when their children were endowed or married.
The declaration of this particular policy as so very different and so much more difficult strikes me as pedestalizing. You seem to be saying that these poor little LBGT folks can’t be expected to stand up and do what is asked of them.
I have to wonder if that sense of incompetence and too big a burden only adds to their mental anguish.
Would it not be more empowering to see themselves as one of many saints, who each struggle with their own challenges on the path to spirituality?
“And I have great compassion for anyone who struggles with anything that threatens their soul.”
While individually it may be fine or not, as a cultural attitude it is very demeaning. (and not empowering)
In the world wide Mormon Church, the majority of members who know they are members live in the intermountain west. Having this cultural attitude in a dominate cultural region intensifies it. It is damaging to not only insist on others struggling, but making others engage in futile struggle is soul destroying.
What is soul edifying should not be called threatening.
Furthermore, it warps the meaning of compassion.
Naismith,
In didn’t say I didn’t believe you about people in Muslim countries. That is a real policy and I personally have dealt with versions of it in the mission field. The problem is you keep drawing parrelells between these policies when they are not the same! Not Baptising a minor against country laws or the wishes of their legal guardian is completely different then refusing to baptism a child when it is legal and the parents and person desire it due to the parents behavior. Completely different. You argument seems to be any exclusionary policy justifies every other exclusionary policy. Again I am not asking you to agree about positions on the policy just that it is understandable why some of us see the policy as different from the examples you use.