When I was much younger, I worked at a company with a strong sales focus. We constantly had potential clients touring our call center, and every employee was supposed to be “sales-ready” for these visits. The company also had many ideas that are now out of fashion, that were even at the time quite conservative. For example, the company had a strict dress code that prohibited jeans except on specially designated “dress down days.” Hair color could not be “extreme” which meant it was fine to color your hair, but only with colors that occurred naturally in human hair: no magenta, blue, or green. All of this was part of the culture of performing a professional and conservative image so that no potential clients would be scared off. This was important because we had over 200% attrition, and many of our hires were pretty unprofessional. If the rules hadn’t been strict, who knows what people would have worn, done and said in front of potential clients whose own corporate cultures might have been very conservative. This all made sense to me at the time because it was so similar to the Church’s philosophy about missionary dress and comportment. Performative conservatism made good business sense.
Around this same time, Pres. Hinckley made an offhand comment that women should only wear one pair of earrings, and I thought “Maybe people in my corporate job, like kindly Pres. Hinckley, will think I’m too radical if I wear more than one earring.” I had worn three hoops in each ear throughout my mission and college years at BYU–how radical was that, exactly? Statement jewelry was starting to become the fashion in corporate, and I used to wear flashier-looking single pairs of earrings in high school, so I decided maybe his advice was worth heeding because others, particularly older conservative business people, might make incorrect and dismissive assumptions about me if my fashion choices were too “extreme.” Maybe older people would think my jewelry meant I was juvenile or unprofessional. Maybe it would hold me back in my career. So I made the choice at that time to switch to more striking single pair of earrings.
Imagine my dismay when I overhead someone describing me as “exactly obedient” for changing my earrings. The implication was that rather than having my own reasons for my choices, I was willing to defer to “the Brethren” in matters that are completely outside their wheelhouse (women’s fashion, for crying out loud!), just to show my fealty to them. I considered my choice to be a higher principle than that. I listened to his advice, considered his comments in the context of that moment in time and how I, as a woman in a conservative business environment, was scrutinized and perceived, and I made the choice that I thought would lead to better career opportunities. Opportunistic, I may have been. Blindly obedient? Never! Being called obedient for doing that nearly made me put my old earrings back in, even though I was kind of tired of that look by then.
There’s a phrase in Buddhism: “If you meet the Buddha in the road, kill the Buddha.” It means that we should be wary of our very human need for approval from authority figures and teachers, and that we need to find and develop our own moral compass to grow and to achieve our potential. If you constantly rely on others to teach you what is right, you will never be able to practice moral agency because you don’t have the basis for making those decisions. If all your own instincts have to be suborned to what an authority or a community thinks, you aren’t really making choices at all. You are just living in fear of being perceived as wrong. Eventually, we must all become our own teacher.
If I had removed my earrings strictly because Hinckley said so without evaluating for myself what I thought my rationale would be, that would be an appeal to authority. Maybe I shouldn’t have bothered to overthink it. It probably didn’t really matter, I can say with the additional 20+ years of hindsight. When I changed companies 8 years later to a much more reputable organization, those overt conservative norms were completely not a thing. Just being a Church leader, even if all leadership adds weight to the considerations your opinions receive, doesn’t make someone an authority on every topic. Women’s fashion is an obvious area that feels like a stretch for our elderly male leaders (some of whom have some unfortunate opinions about women’s appearance).
I’d like to think Church leaders have life experience that does give them wisdom on aspects of human nature and cultural trends, which I’m sure is often the case, but they are going to be less likely to have a great understand of things that they haven’t really experienced. For example, they haven’t been business leaders in 1990 or 2020. They haven’t been women in business. Their wisdom in these areas may be limited. If Church leaders said they thought natural childbirth was the only “godly” way to give birth, I would sure hope a bunch of women in the Church who have actually given birth would raise an eyebrow at that (not that everyone uses pain medication–personal choice is key). If they wanted to make a pronouncement like that, I would have been happily heretical. Similarly, I trust the lived experiences of black people more than Church leaders to determine whether the Church culture and/or teachings are racist. I trust LGBT people to describe their lived experience more than I trust Church leaders to understand it. I also trust women more than I trust men to know what it’s like to be a woman.
We use appeal to authority in life because we can’t literally know everything, and we have to know a lot more things than we can personally know. Do you believe in things you can’t see? Even people who don’t believe in religion do. I believe Covid exists. I believe germs can be spread through contact and droplets. I believe that if I get a vaccine, I will be safer from disease. I believe that if I leave raw chicken on the counter for too long that it would make me sick if I cook it and eat it. I believe that nuclear waste is dangerous and takes a really long time to degrade. I believe that climate change is real. I believe that the earth is millions of years old. I believe that dinosaurs are now extinct, but they used to roam the planet. I believe that the sun is too hot to touch. I believe that the pills I take every day are preventing me from getting blood clots.
These are all beliefs that I have despite not being an expert myself. I have to rely on the expertise of others, and to do that, I have to figure out whose expertise I trust on which things. Recently a friend admonished everyone on Facebook to do their own research before getting the Covid vaccine, claiming that she had, and she wouldn’t be getting it any time soon. She and I are both drawing different conclusions, and both of us are relying on an appeal to authority. I can’t say what her sources are because I clearly don’t include them in my own research. I believe in Dr. Fauci’s ability, and that of other epidemiologists, to determine whether or not vaccines are effective and safe than I trust my own ability as an English major and former business executive to do so. I assume she’s reading some articles that are from sources she trusts, and maybe she’s also talking to like-minded friends who agree with those opinions.
While I was thrilled that Pres. Nelson very publicly got the vaccine, it didn’t change my opinion of the vaccine at all. He’s older than the lady in Titanic, and he’s a doctor, so I was not at all surprised he got it. I was a little disappointed to realize that the reason I felt it was important was that appeal to authority is so important for so many people within the Church. It can substitute for more authoritative sources like scientists. It can even replace a conscience. And the more people who get the vaccine, the better for all of us getting back to normal life again as risk in the community goes down.
I remember reading a post back in 2008 asking whether commenters would pack mud in jars in their basements if asked to do so by Church leaders without being given any rationale. There could certainly be valid reasons for doing such an odd thing, even unseen prophetic reasons such as bolstering a wall that is vulnerable to a future natural disaster. So why is it so critical that we obey absent any reason to do so? Why is this the way we are taught to think as Mormons? Why is it so important that we click our heels together crisply and say “yes, sir!” to every random human command we are given? That may be how to run a military, but I question that it’s how to develop humans into gods. If that’s all it takes to be a god, then I assume planets come in a kit from some cosmic IKEA, and all we have to do is follow the instructions exactly. Hopefully they aren’t in Swedish.
Assuming that every stray opinion a Church leader has is God’s own truth is morally fraught. It also feels like a category error. We think that just because Church leaders are an authority, that they are prophetically able to apply their authority to every possible topic, something that is simply unrealistic. Prophetic authority is to Mormons what Biblical inerrancy is to Evangelicals. If I want to know about economics, I read what various economists have written. I don’t read General Conference talks. If I want to learn about climate change, I read what climatologists have written, not Church leaders.
- How do you consider Church leaders’ advice or opinions in areas that you don’t consider them to be expert?
- Do you believe it’s a feature or a bug for Church members to be obedient to everything Church leaders say, even in areas that aren’t related to religion?
- What side effects do you see when members are too reliant on authority for moral decision making?
- Would you want to live on the planet of a god who only followed orders?
Discuss.
Wheat & Tares 
In this essay, the mention of theoretical statements regarding childbirth that might raise some eyebrows caught my attention.
The Raised Eyebrows captures the underlying issue.
When the highest leadership of the LDS church makes a statement, some will raise eyebrows, but literally no one, within the religion, states in any form or fashion that they disagree with the leadership .
For a religion that has called democracy and the US constitution both God-ordained, it remains odd that there is no democracy within the actual structure of the institution.
In Mormonism, there is no democracy. One does not elect, one does not vote, there is no free speech and there is no talk of disagreement. Those who express significant disagreement are thrown out.
Currently, every bit of useful dialogue and criticism within the LDS culture is being voiced outside the actual structure of the religious hierarchy. This dynamic is unhealthy on every level. How can the hierarchical church structure begin to allow a more democratic process? That is the billion dollar question.
I think you’ve fairly described a conservative part of Mormon culture, but it is in conflict with a recent teaching of at least Elder Ballard. From Nov 2017: He said he worries sometimes “that members expect too much from Church leaders and teachings—expecting them to be experts in subjects well beyond their duties and responsibilities,” Elder Ballard reminded listeners of his role as an Apostle—to invite others to come unto Christ. “If you have a question that requires an expert, please take the time to find a thoughtful and qualified expert to help you,” he said.
I expect there may be many who ignore Elder Ballard’s advice. I’m fairly selective about some of his comments myself. 🙂
“… There is something about the individual and combined wisdom of the [Church leaders] that should provide some comfort. We have experienced it all…. We are not out of touch with your lives.” But that was 2014. Maybe he’s changed his mind or maybe the context should be considered.
For some who crave or are only capable of simplicity, it’s a feature for them to be obedient to everything Church leaders say. For some who have learned to deal with complexity and make their own decisions, trusting either or both themselves and God’s direction to them, it’s a bug. How to balance a culture to include such a wide range of abilities and expectations is beyond me.
Damascene, I have personally heard and participated in disagreement in bishopric meetings and ward councils. I have heard of it in stake councils and regional councils. I also know of and participated in criticism being directed to bishops, stake presidents, and general authorities. In some cases, though not enough by any means, it has been useful and productive.
So, in my experience, it is not true that “every bit of useful dialogue and criticism within the LDS culture is being voiced outside the actual structure of the religious hierarchy.”
I suspect, from both observation and comments like yours, that my experience is not typical in many wards and stakes.
I was in my early 20’s when the earing ban came into effect and I remember wondering how women in good conscience could wear more than 1.
As I’ve gotten older, I’m almost shocked by my blind devotion to an offhand statement.
I’m further shocked by everyone else’s devotion.
But I’m saddened by the fact that no one in authority said that this was just an opinion and everyone at the top treated it as an edict.
Great article! It’s a nice reminder about our moral obligation to not be blindly obedient but to ask questions.
Part of my faith transition was figuring out that I placed way too much weight on church authority. They are God’s mouthpiece after all. Placing decision authority on myself was uncomfortable, difficult, and required me changing the paradigm of church authority. It was so deeply ingrained that I still find myself instinctively asking if a choice would be church approved even if the church has nothing to do with it.
To address one of Hawks’ questions, over-reliance on authority can lead to blind obedience and abdication of personal responsibility. There are extreme examples of this of course that we can all think of, but you don’t even have to look for the outliers. Over-reliance on authority outside of yourself can lead an individual to unhappiness. For example, If you marry young, give up a desired career, have too many kids, get burned out in church callings, etc, because you’re trying to do what your church leaders told you, you could very easily find yourself wondering where your life went when the promised happiness doesn’t magically appear.
I don’t want to live on a planet of robots and I don’t think God wants us to either. Hence the counsel to not be commanded in all things.
(1) How do I consider leader’s advice on issues they aren’t expert in? I suppose the same way I consider all their advice: by their fruits ye shall know them. If advice bears good fruits, I will take it. If not, I will not. Sometimes that’s taken seeing the fruits in my own life. Sometimes I don’t have direct experience (like with something such as the Church’s position on gay marriage, since I’m not LBGTQ), so instead I listen to the stories of how that advice as impacted others. The problem I see with the Church in general is that we reverse that test. Instead of “by their fruits ye shall know them” we teach “by them ye shall know their fruits.” We call good evil and evil good depending on who said it, not depending on the actual validity or impact of the teaching. See again, gay marriage. Bad fruit. But it gets followed because the leaders say so. (Also, I didn’t *always* use the fruits test. I used to follow the “because they said so” test).
(2) Feature or bug? Feature. If leaders don’t really want us taking out our earrings when asked to by the literal mouthpiece of God on the earth (I took mine out!), they are doing a really poor job of conveying that. For every Ballard quote like the one @Wondering referenced, there are ten more that say “follow the prophet” and “we can be inspired on anything and you shouldn’t listen to experts if it conflicts with our teachings” (see DHO’s teachings on gay marriage discounting worldly theories and psychology).
(Sidenote – ironically, the quote that @Wondering referenced was when Elder Ballard was being asked questions *about Church history and doctrine*. Really? We can’t expect actual apostles of God not to be experts there? So that was more of a cop-out like “don’t blame me for unsavory bits of history that you never knew about” than a “go exercise your own judgment when a Church leader tells you to do something”.).
(3) Side effect, like @Angela says in the OP, I believe it erodes our moral authority. I’ve spent so long listening to leaders and doing what they said that when I realized that wasn’t going to work anymore, I had to figure out how on earth to make my own decisions. I think we underdevelop that capacity. That said, I will acknowledge we do emphasize personal revelation / inspiration a lot (unless it conflicts with church teachings) so I think the seeds are there to figure it out on our own. I also think that like @Andy mentioned, it creates a really big judging / shaming culture. Maybe some people took earrings out because they truly believe Jesus wanted them to. I suspect many did because they knew that if they didn’t, boys wouldn’t date them and everyone would whisper about them thinking they were “disobedient.” In our Church we have an extremely low tolerance for differentiation and it is socially risky to go against the norm if your community or social circles or family is heavily Churchy.
Thanks for this post. I’ve got strong feelings on this one. I’m convinced that the culture of leader worship & absolute obedience that the Church has encouraged where truth is defined not by whether it’s true–not the merit of the idea itself or even whether or not the spirit testifies of the idea–but by its rank of its speaker is the single biggest problem in our Church today and the root of most other problems. It’s allowed the ideas of a very small number of old, white men (especially about race, gender, and sexuality) have an outsized and harmful impact on millions of people, and the impact far outlasts the data showing those ideas are wrong.
@Toad, thank you for that beautiful, sad, all-too common example:
“For example, If you marry young, give up a desired career, have too many kids, get burned out in church callings, etc, because you’re trying to do what your church leaders told you, you could very easily find yourself wondering where your life went when the promised happiness doesn’t magically appear.”
I’d add that you might then think you must not have been obedient enough or something is wrong with you for not being happy living this prescribed formula. It wouldn’t cross some people’s minds that the advice was actually bad advice. That’s how deep this problem goes.
I love these short answer posts. I’m good at tests.
How do you consider Church leaders’ advice or opinions in areas that you don’t consider them to be expert? I ignore them. Unless my wife takes them seriously, in which case I try to minimize the negative impact or just grin and bear it.
Do you believe it’s a feature or a bug for Church members to be obedient to everything Church leaders say, even in areas that aren’t related to religion? It’s certainly a convenient feature for the institution if members think this way. But it’s a bug as to individual happiness and moral development.
What side effects do you see when members are too reliant on authority for moral decision making? Well, just the fact that they aren’t really making moral decisions, even though they think they are. The Church is about obedience, not ethics, which is why some Mormons find it so easy to behave unethically in a variety of contexts.
Would you want to live on the planet of a god who only followed orders? I’m stuck on the “buy a planet at Ikea” idea. It will come in a box, a very big box. Some assembly required. They come with nice Swedish names. You get a bag of cosmic meat balls at the check out stand.
“a bag of cosmic meat balls”
I’m trying to decide if this phrase best makes a great name for an alt rock band, an indie video game or a parody porn flick.
Here’s how I view Church leaders: First, I don’t even consider the opinions of ward and stake leaders. I’ve been one. Why should anyone care what I had to say? Second, I view GA’s as only one natural step above stake leaders. So again, I don’t care what they think either. When we get to the Q15, I am willing to consider the possibility that they are indeed “special witnesses of Christ”. Whether they really are or not, that is the role they have been assigned. SO when a member of the Q15 speaks about Christ, I listen. But beyond that, their opinions on virtually any other topic are simply that, opinions. And I don’t know why I am supposed to care about that.
Let me be even more clear. I’m not just talking about opinions on social matters or life decisions. etc. I’m talking about their views on Church policies and doctrine too. That might sound harsh, but the reality is that we can go back through conference talks from the past and pull out of them some really ridiculous stuff. Try it sometime. I’m not looking for the Q15 or anyone else to explain to me Gospel doctrine. That doctrine has shifted too many times with the times. And I’m definitely not looking to them for advice on marriage, fatherhood, sexuality, gender, etc. Why would anyone want to do that? Would you ask them about cancer if you had it?
I’m with Joshua H; I consider the utterances of Church leaders to be nothing more than well-intentioned advice given in a certain context, which I am free to disregard if it doesn’t apply to me or otherwise conflicts with my internal moral/ethical scale (or sets off my BS alarms).
I’m not sure whether obedience culture is a feature or a bug. On one hand, it is an effective way to maintain control across a global organization that is rapidly expanding and diversifying. On the other hand, history teaches us that cultures who value loyalty and obedience to leaders above reason and critical thinking usually come with a raft of negative consequences, many of which I believe the Q15 would not be pleased with.
“Prophetic authority is to Mormons what Biblical inerrancy is to Evangelicals.”
YES!!!
And framed copies of the Proclamation are our Crucifixes.
@Joshua H, I hear you, but the answer to your recurring question of “why would I do that” or “why would anyone do that” is because that’s what we are told to do, and we are threatened with eternal consequences if we don’t.
I don’t think that’s right, but I do think that’s the water many of us are swimming in.
I hope more people follow examples like yours.
What side effects do you see when members are too reliant on authority for moral decision making?
Well, since this is an LDS forum, let’s hear from our founder:
“[Prest. J. Smith]said… that they were depending on the prophet hence were darkened in their minds from neglect of themselves— envious toward the innocent, while they afflict the virtuous with their shafts of envy.”
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/nauvoo-relief-society-minute-book/48
Full quote:
Prest. J. Smith rose, read the 14th Chap. of Ezekiel— said the Lord had declar’d by the prophet that the people should each one stand for himself and depend on no man or men in that state of corruption of the Jewish church— that righteous persons could only deliver their own souls— app[l]ied it to the present state of the church of Latter-Day Saints— said if the people departed from the Lord, they must fall— that they were depending on the prophet hence were darkened in their minds from neglect of themselves— envious toward the innocent, while they afflict the virtuous with their shafts of envy.
I wish I could click like 10 times on Elisa’s comment.
A 70 year old family friend was dead set against getting the Covid vaccine until we told him President Nelson got it. He had an immediate change and scheduled his vaccine. Which is good, but what about issues where president Nelson does not show leadership? Not to mention all the areas where the prophet does not have expertise. What some areas where the church leadership may be lacking or going in the wrong direction (definitely my opinion here; just trying to steady the ark a little bit)
– climate change: the majority of members in my experience are climate change deniers of some form. Either they believe that the climate is not changing, or that it’s not due to humans, or that it’s not worth preventing because everything will change in the millennium. How many of these members would change their tune if church leaders would advocate for environmental stewardship?
– racism and anti racism: it was nice to hear Oaks call out racism in general conference. But it was also a bit wishy washy. Frankly, most white people do not understand the structural racism faced by black and brown people. In fact, a popular opinion is that white people face substantial reverse racism, a philosophy that feed into Trumpism. And most Mormons are white: I suspect these ideas pervade most Mormon communities. What would happen if the church leadership had some continued, ongoing discussions to promote anti-racism?
– gays: at this point, I think homophobia is becoming unpopular in the world, but promoted in the church. In this case, church leadership is actively preventing people from using their own brains. Certainly, homophobia would persist without church leaders, but to a lesser degree.
– media sources: a recent change to church handbook encourages members to seek out reliable sources of information. Fat lot of God that does. Besides the fact that almost nobody reads the manual, the problem is that people on the right and left tend to think that there media sources are reliable. Right wingers trust OAN and Breitbart (Fox news might be on the outs after calling the election for Trump) and left wingers trust their left wing sources. Telling people to use trusted sources doesn’t actually change anything.
I agree with your article. I’m a convert, and I joined the church many years ago at age 18. At the time, the priesthood ban on blacks was still in effect. It was not mentioned by the missionaries who taught me, and I came across it just before my scheduled baptism. I made it a matter of prayer, and I realized that the church president and apostles are all old men who formed their opinions in a different era. I was able to trust in church leaders to eventually come up with a policy that was more consistent with scripture. Eventually they did. There are other areas now in which I don’t agree with church policy, but I’m willing to tolerate some ambiguity and remember that the church is led by imperfect human beings. I choose to believe that they mean well and even that they are godly men. But it’s true they are still men.
I do believe the FP and Q12 are all inspired. But with about the same degree of inspiration as bishops, SPs, RSPs, etc. Sometimes it comes on strong, most often it is hard to distinguish between inspiration, perspiration, or desperation. We all see through a glass darkly. So I am willing to cut those folks some slack. They are trying to do the best they can. But just as I recognize my own frequent lack of inspiration, the same for them. There is a whole lot of perspiration going on, punctuated by inspiration and desperation. No unqualified obedience then –but we frequently go along with bad calls because we are trying to push the same wagon along. Or we just ignore irrelevancies such as number or earrings on an ear.
Some years ago in a stake HC meeting, the stake exec sec declared that every call made by the SP was totally inspired. Not possible! And we definitely dont sustain SPS or anyone else based on their degree of inspiration. We sustain leaders because we are all working together (theoretically anyway), and sometimes its our turn to take out the garbage, uninspired call or not.
I see Buddhist Bishop’s description of inspiration and attending results as about the same as it is for any sentient human trying to navigate the vagaries of life. Sure, cut them some slack, about as much as you would cut yourself for doing your best and sometimes making mistakes. The question, then, becomes why would we ever give anybody special consideration when evaluating what they say, especially when it falls outside their wheelhouse? Do the Q15 have more inspiration than other people, or are they just more attuned to trusting their own internal compass based on a host of factors, the confidence that comes with their position among them.
I think hawkgrrrl’s explanation of the ‘kill the Buddha’ reference is particularly useful because it illustrates that the goal is to come to an understanding of oneself and one’s place in the universe absent anyone else telling you what that should be. The Mormon church does not want a bunch of self-realized believers who tend to voice their opinions, object when they disagree, question direction and decide not to pay tithing. It’s more like herding cats than sheep, and there are no cats in the numerous Christian animal metaphors.
I might end up butting heads with Church Authority when it comes to modern music. I’ve listened/performed/recorded Rock, Jazz, Heavy-Metal, Prog (my favorite), Classical, Country and Opera. Setting aside the obvious points about vulgar/suggestive lyrics, the main comment from Church sources about music is that it should “invite the spirit”. Well, I’ve heard secular music that moved the spirit within me; and sacred music that made me wanna upchuck. And vice-versa.
My talent (God-Given) and training (acquired) in music makes me very analytical ; and I have stood my ground with Ward leadership on music ideas for church services/socials. Usually the response is “We’ve never done that before”. Well, let’s try it!
I guess it’s good that there are no ten commandments on music (yet).
I get church messages on facebook, and most of the comments are “we love you Pres Nelson, and know that you are led by God.” These same people when trump left the whitehouse said similar things “you are the best president we ever had, you were chosen by God, we love you and hope you will be back.”
Grooming for a despot?
Sorry if you have heard this before.
I was married in 1970, we were obedien, unquestioning at that time. The church was teaching get married immediately after your mission, don’t worry about education or employment, the Lord will provide, and birth control is satans way of undermining the lords commandment to multiply and replenish. These two edicts combined, resulted in 10 years of poverty, and the beginning of loosing trust in leadership of the church. They broke our faith in them.
As Rockwell says if you are wanting to tell members who believe trump lies, they are lies, putting advice in the handbook is the best way to communicate with them. Not. Unless there are conference talks from senior 15 on this subject, failure. Another loss of credibility.
How do you consider Church leaders’ advice or opinions in areas that you don’t consider them to be expert? I would say like a regular person’s, but I might actually pay more heed to the advice of a regular person’s advice who isn’t in a position of power. For the leaders are limited in what they can say. They know that they have to be extremely careful in their words and put numerous guard rails around every public utterance. So whatever advice they may have on any topic is inevitably going to be strained through a heavy filter and reconciled to their historic doctrinal teachings. Now it is that reconciliation that causes many believers to give special heed to their advice.
Do you believe it’s a feature or a bug for Church members to be obedient to everything Church leaders say, even in areas that aren’t related to religion? A feature. That is exactly what the leaders were aiming for. Now, if someone comes along and claims to the leaders that they are preaching blind obedience, they’ll deny this and say that they simply teach correct principles and let members govern themselves. And then they’ll turn around and demand “exact obedience.” It is doublethink all the way.
What side effects do you see when members are too reliant on authority for moral decision making? Phariseeism. I always marvel at how much the general members, who claim to revere Jesus’s words that condemn the teachings and attitudes of the Pharisees, act like Pharisees and strain at gnats and swallow camels. Going to BYU 1998-2004 I felt like much of the Mormon experience was about avoiding R-rated movies and debating whether or not we could drink caffeine. It got truly mind-numbing.
Would you want to live on the planet of a god who only followed orders? Clearly, there is a balance between rule-following and free-thinking. Not everyone’s opinion should be given equal weight. We should heed the advice and teachings of experts in a range of fields. We should have governing authorities who set laws made by popularly elected representatives. On the question of freedom, I’m more on the side of order than limitless liberty. But order with an informed society. Order in an uninformed society might mean that authorities exploit and take unfair advantage of the general populace. Have healthy skepticism of authority, yes. But don’t be paranoid. Have the mindset of doing your civic duty and helping order (as opposed to disorder) prevail.
My mother is 83 years old. She was taught by her mother (her father died when she was young) to obey the commandments as found in the scriptures and as spoken by the leaders perfectly in every aspect and she would be happy. All words from the Q15 were as from the mouth of God. Because of the emphasis on perfect obedience in her home and at church along with the threat that if she didn’t obey and do everything perfectly she would not be worthy of the love of her mother or Heavenly Father and Jesus she developed toxic perfectionism.
Obeying the Church’s edicts about early marriage and starting a family ASAP Mom gave up a four year full ride scholarship to Stanford University in order to marry my dad on her 19th birthday. I came a few days after my parents‘ first anniversary. My father was in the first class of graduating MBAs at his university and got a job with an international firm based in San Francisco, but he really wanted to be a history teacher at the high school level. He too bought into the 1950-1960’s church view that the husband ought to be the sole provider for his family, so he gave up his dream in order to “obey” so that he could make enough money to support all of us even if he didn’t enjoy his work. Both of my parents took on every calling even when it required them both to be gone from home for inordinate amounts of time which then made me, and, after I went to college, my sister the de facto head of the household whether or not we wanted to and whether or not it conflicted with our after school and evening schedules.
Growing up my sibs and I were continually forced to try to fit into molds that we didn’t fit. We all rebelled in one way or another. Unfortunately we all became perfectionists ourselves although the perfectionism was only turned toward ourselves and never towards everyone else as our mother’s was and still is. It has taken years and a lot of counseling to overcome the shame and perfectionism we learned at home and at church.
Mom did everything that the Church asked her to do. Unfortunately we kids grew up and moved away. My dad died 10 years ago. Church, her only remaining hobby, is off limits because of her health and the pandemic. Every time I talk to her she tells me how unsatisfying her life is. She gave up having a real life outside of the home and church in order to be a 1000% member and has nothing to show for it, not even a sense of God’s love. My sibs and I are much less perfect in our following the pronouncements of the Q15, but I feel like we have richer and more satisfying inner and outer lives because we have refused to slavishly follow the brethren and have chosen to make thoughtful and informed decisions instead.
Except for the obvious every-day simple decisions (Golden Grahams or Captain Crunch, white shirt or blue shirt), most other decisions that we make either please Christ or please Satan. Or said another way, our decisions show that we obey/follow Christ or obey/follow Satan. Sometimes I see people, especially teen-agers, who want to make their own decisions outside of any other influence or authority figure, like parents, teachers, or church leaders. They don’t want to obey/follow anyone. They want to do their own thing. They don’t realize that disobeying or not following Christ means that they are obeying or following Satan. You can’t do your own thing. You can’t not obey or not follow anyone. In everything we do, we are obeying/following someone, either Christ or Satan.
Someone above said something to the effect that it is difficult to find truth in our day, difficult to know who to trust. You can find conflicting data from “experts” on a variety of topics. It boils down to the fact that it is difficult to know how to make decisions, some being important life decisions. Most of us have a collection of voices that we trust, and we include the statements and opinions of these people in our decision-making process. For some of us, the prophets and apostles are in the collection. For others, trusted friends and family, experts in various fields of study, etc. There may come a time when we are not able to hear the voices of the people in our collection. What then?
Hopefully we have learned, or are learning, how to hear the ONE VOICE that can never be stopped – the voice of Christ. I have been grateful for the recent suggestion to learn how to Hear Him. Ultimately, that is the only voice that truly matters.
bwbarnett, a very difficult decision that some parents have to make is how to deal with an LGBTQ child. The leaders of the church, supposedly more attuned to Christ’s voice than most, made a decision about that very issue in 2015, and their decision turned out to be wrong, some might say disastrously so. So, is rejecting children based on their sexual orientation or having been born to a gay parent following Christ or following Satan?
@jaredsbrother Yes that is a very difficult decision for some parents, and my heart goes out to them. I suppose my suggestion to such parents and in response to your question, I would say, learn to hear the voice of Christ, then ask Him.
@bwbarnett. as for me and my house, we will chose our LGBTQ child. I would ask any parent who thinks that is a difficult decision what kind of God they think they actually believe in.
@10ac First off, I know of the difficulty that parents of LGBTQ children go through in the church. Not from personal experience, so it is not a full appreciation of the difficulty, but through the experience of a very close friend, with whom I have spoken often. I know it is heart wrenching. I hope I didn’t make you think that I thought a parent needed to choose between their LGBTQ child or God.
bwbarnett, I don’t share your understanding that most of our decisions are influenced by Christ or Satan.
I am not sure how many jobs are christs v satans.
Does either care where you live, or whether you buy a house or build it yourself
I do know that Christ prefers european cars v especially toyotas (satans)
How many children? Couple decide not moral component.
I took my wife to the beach (heavenly) and then to lunch. Don’t think either influenced me.
I do believe we should aim to become Christlike/moral people so for example; I would never vote for trump, but even then I am not sure people who did vote for him were influenced by satan. I think many of them believed things things that were not true, but not sure satan is influencing.
I also believe discrimination agains people on the basis of race, sex, or homosexuality, are all wrong/immoral, and not something needing individual prayer for each case.
I think we are responsible for our decisions, and their consequences. I do think we are responsible to make them based on fact, but usually the consequences follow naturally.
If you believe either Christ or Satan influences our decisions, do you also believe the consequences of those decisions are rewards from the influencer?
Our stake recently had a youth standards night on the topic of “developing spiritual self reliance.” There was a panel of adults in the stake fielding questions that had been written in advance from the youth.
It was so ironic to me that in a night focusing on spiritual self-reliance, a topic that should encourage developing one’s own internal authority, there was an abundance of “follow the prophet” type of advice as the best path to spiritual self-reliance. One panelist even brought up President Hinckley’s directive to only wear one pair of earrings and how she followed that at the time when some others around her did not.
Another panelist fielded a question about how to love our LGBTQ brothers and sisters by saying that of course we love them, but if they act out then they are subject to discipline for their sins. How that fit into the overall theme is beyond me, but it did strike me that our youth are being given these sorts of messages rather than focusing on developing as a loving and thoughtful human being into the type of person that is strong enough to make individually unique decisions about moral questions.
Of the panelists, only my loving and thoughtful believing wife (the only reason I tuned in) gave answers that would actually encourage any sort of actual individual spiritual self reliance. I was proud of her and also grateful that my children, who were with me at home watching the stream, seemed to not be paying any attention unless I called their attention when their mom was speaking.
Also, let’s not forget that this is the message being given to the children in this church:
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/media/video/2020-05-0030-follow-prophets-they-speak-for-god?lang=eng
I don’t think helping individuals develop their own moral authority is very high on the priority list in a church that so highly values following the prophet.
@Geoff-Aus After reading your comment, I re-thought the way I had described my beliefs about most of our decisions showing that we either obey/follow Christ or obey/follow Satan. I think a better way for me to have described it would be that all of our decisions can be categorized into two categories:
1. Decisions that Christ and Satan care about.
2. Decisions that Christ and Satan don’t care about.
(I’m positing that any decision Christ cares about, Satan also cares about.)
Here are a few examples showing that there are some decisions that Christ doesn’t care about:
“yea, even altogether, or two by two, as seemeth you good, it mattereth not unto me;” (D&C 62:5)
“whether to the north or to the south, to the east or to the west, it mattereth not” (D&C 80:3)
“Let there be a craft made, or bought, as seemeth you good, it mattereth not unto me,” (D&C 60:5)
The word you used was “influence”. Like you I don’t believe that all decisions come with an influencer. I do, however, believe that category 1 decisions come with an influencer. As for the consequences being a reward from the influencer, I don’t believe this idea. The idea of a reward seems to imply to me that the reward could potentially be withheld. My belief is that when you choose a course of action, you also choose the consequence. They choice and the consequence are an inseparable packaged bundle.
bwbarnett: I think your entire Satan/Christ dichotomy is problematic from a moral reasoning perspective. People do wrong things all the time while thinking they are doing right things.
For example, if you believed the lie that the election was stolen, and that you needed to storm the capitol and hang Mike Pence to restore democracy and prevent what you believed would be a corrupt misery for millions of people, a curtailing of their rights to live a moral life, then you would feel justified in committing acts of violence, you might even believe that you were in a holy war (as so many seemed to think based on the religious symbols in the insurrection).
But people are responsible for their motives and the things they believe. How much of the aforementioned belief is a rationalization based on a deliberate lack of self-awareness, consumption of pleasing lies instead of reputable news, and aggrieved white culture? They believe they acted morally, and that’s certainly what their defense attorneys will say. Did they? Does believing you are in the right equate to “pleasing Christ” or “pleasing Satan” as you say?
What if that same individual had a low IQ and was easily tricked (this is certainly not the case for the majority of the people identified, just to be clear)? Are they equally culpable for being misled?
Life is complicated. Moral issues are fraught, not black and white.
Neither I nor, apparently, Dallin Oaks believes that all decisions Christ cares about come with an influencer. Oaks: “We believe in continuing revelation, not continuous revelation. We are often left to work out problems without the dictation or specific direction of the Spirit. That is part of the experience we must have in mortality. ” It seems insisting upon an influencer entails a lack of belief in the capacity of humans as moral agents to do good, or ill, of their own accord. Have I misunderstood bwbarnett? If so, maybe “the devil made me do it.” 🙂
@Angela C – Trying to understand the point you are trying to make. So if someone makes a decision to do something that is wrong but based on the knowledge, or lack of knowledge, that they have they believe it is right, will Christ be pleased? Is that sort of what you’re asking my opinion on and that situations like that kinda blow my Christ/Satan idea out of the water?
@Wondering – Haha, yes it was the devil. 🙂 I’m glad you found that Dallin Oaks quote. I wondered about the word “influencer” when @Geoff-Aus used that wording. I’ll have to modify my thinking that not all category 1 decisions come with an influencer, at least not the Christ side of the equation according to Dallin Oaks. Maybe Satan still tries to influence us on all category 1 decisions?? Anyway, thanks!
I’ve appreciated all of the comments about the pressures people feel to be obedient. I have felt those, too. I married young in the temple and had six kids. I decided to go to college and completed my masters and became a licensed clinical social worker. When I was in school, I worried about the fact that I was turning my back on the whole stay at home mom thing, which was heavily promoted by my local leaders. I felt some conflict there, but did what felt best for me. Interestingly, now that I have a career, those same leaders treat me with a greater level of respect than they did when I was a stay at home mom. So sometimes what they are saying doesn’t match what they are doing. I am also a proud parent of a gay son. Fully accepting, loving, and celebrating my son was not the challenging part. My soul won’t let me do anything else but lean hard into loving this kid. The spirit won’t let me do anything else but be so grateful for exactly who he is. Managing the reactions of other people has sometimes been challenging. However, again, something interesting has happened. In my congregation, another family’s son came out and they chose to reject him. Even though my ward does a lot of Family Proc/Defend the Family business, they are very uncomfortable with this family rejecting their son. I see small signs of the ground shifting. Sometimes, I worry that those people who lean hard into these over pulpit suggestions and strive for absolute obedience eventually get thrown under the bus by leadership with a cavalier “nothing to see here” kind of attitude when church members socially move on. I’m not quite sure how to explain it, but even though I’m probably the most progressive member of my ward, I find myself feeling a tremendous level of compassion for the rigid conservative thinkers sitting in the pews with me. It kind of feels like they are being exploited until they are not needed anymore or the tides change.
The scriptures contain some terrible examples of rigid obedience: genocide, guidelines for enslaving people (including the selling of your daughter)(Exodus 21), stoning your rebellious and gluttonous son (the elders of the church can help)(Deuteronomy 21) or wife or daughter….
There is also some justice and charity: judgements about nations that ignore the just causes of people who are poor, needy, widowed, fatherless; not blaming the poor for their circumstances; leave the corners of your fields unharvested so hungry people can get food; not grinding the faces of the poor; not oppressing the hireling; paying your taxes; recognition that those in prison are human and should be treated humanely; examples that some are imprisoned due to lack of justice….
Even in canonized scripture there is hardly a sharp contrast between good and evil.
Our lesson manuals often (usually) ignore both the evil and many good teachings.
Seek out good information. Use the critical thinking ability God gave you.