As I get older, I get crankier. I have little patience with long lines at Walmart or for Costco gas, and for idiots on the TV news. My wife is regularly reminding me that they can’t hear me as I yell at the TV screen. I yell mostly at the local news people. I hate how everything is “officially” one thing or the other. “Today is officially the first day of Fall”. “The Orange County Fair officially opened their gates today”. Were they unofficially open yesterday? People are always “bracing” for strong winds, floods, climate change, the midterm election, etc. There is always a “spike” in some illness, price, or temperature, even though it only went up 10-20 percent. That is no spike. And don’t get me started on “exponential growth”. Has no news writer ever taken a math class?
Several of my posts complain about stupid things at church, and I’m sure a lot of it comes across with a “get off my lawn” mentality. But I’ve come to realize that Mormons don’t have a monopoly on doing stupid things.
I work for the Federal Government (USA), and there is a lot of stupid stuff they do. For example, years ago here in California they used to pay us a minimum amount for jury duty, even for one day. Since I was fully paid by my government job for the day of jury duty, I was not allowed to keep the money. I had to write a check to the US Treasury for the $5.00 the state gave me. But guess what? It cost the US Treasury $12.00 to process that check. So for every day of jury duty, the government lost $7.00. Why not just let me keep the $5.00? “That’s the law” I was told. I could go on and on.
There is stupidity all around. But what makes the church stupidity worse (in my opinion) is that stupid decisions made by Church leaders come with an implicit or explicit message that it is from God. Throw in the word “revelation” and the prohibition of saying “oops, we made a mistake, sorry” and the stupidity takes on a whole new level.
A few years ago my work decided to go with the “open offices” that was all the rage. No more cubicles, just open areas with desks (no dividers) to promote more collaboration. They tried it in a few areas and nobody liked it. With the negative feed back, they stopped it and said “yup, we made a mistake”, and gave us back our cubicles. Contrast that with the Exclusion Policy of 2015 in the Church. Not just a good idea, it was revelation according to Pres Nelson. With negative press and feedback, they stopped it three years later. But there was no “yup, we made a mistake”. It was revelation again that rescinded the policy.
When my boss at work makes a stupid mistake ( or I make one), it is understood that nobody is perfect, and things happen. When the Church makes a mistake, it is quietly swept under the carpet so as not to shake the members faith. How much better it would be if the Church just came out and said “we are not perfect”, and really mean it. And how would they prove they really meant it? By acknowledging the mistakes, and saying they would try better next time.
So what do you think about the mistakes made by Church leaders?
Is our Church any worse than other churches with its mistakes?
Is our Church any worse than any other large cooperation when it comes to mistakes?
Is there a way for the Church to acknowledge mistakes and apologize for past errors while still keeping members believing in the authority of its leaders?
Wheat & Tares 
I think the church could and should apologize and acknowledge errors. I recall long-ago Sunday school lessons that discussed prophets of the bible, who were decidedly not perfect. A good example is Moses, who was not allowed in the promised land. We make choices and there is accountability. We occasionally hear today that our leaders are not perfect, but merely men who are vetted, I mean called. Yet, they are generally treated as perfect by both the membership and leadership.
An interesting hiccup occurred during the prime of Covid when those who are anti-mask did not obediently fall in line with the mask directives. They made the distinction that these policies were the opinions of men, not the will/commandment of God. This is the first time that I can recall that there was a notable rebellion from anything that the Church has dictated. I can imagine that was startling, unsettling, and disturbing to men who are used to complete obedience coupled with cutesy memes. It would be upsetting not because the members were disregarding the health and well being of their fellow saints, but because this was open and wide spread rebellion to a direct policy.
This is only my opinion, but I feel that the reason there are no apologies issued is because that would open the Church (and perhaps individual leaders) further to litigation. They would get sued more than they already do. Like many things regarding the Q15, it would appear that choice and accountability doesn’t apply here. It’s not about shepherding and protecting the flock, it’s about protecting the assets. What they need with the obscene amount of assets they already have is still a mystery to me. I know the Q15 receive generous stipends, but it doesn’t appear that they or their families additionally benefit financially from the hoard. Is it just ego? It doesn’t matter, but protect the hoard is the big priority.
I don’t think our church makes more or worse mistakes than other large organizations in general. I think where we really stand out and not in a good way is in the total inability to acknowledge them and apologize when needed. Which yes, is exactly the point of your post.
I have often wondered if the LDS church would be better able to address the problems of modernity and be a real force for good in the world if it didn’t bill itself as the one and only true church and as the only church with a man at the top with a direct hotline to God.
I am pretty sure that it would be.
But then it seems obvious that these same things are its major selling points to most people who join. It is really is the underlying reason for it’s (now fairly ineffective) missionary program.
So I don’t see how the LDS church can pivot it’s message to being a good church among many good churches with some unique takes on God and our relationship to him, even though in the long term that might save the church for the quiet exodus that is happening and help it be a meaningful force for good.
That makes me sad.
When you have a toxic work environment with bad leadership and poor decision making, you move on to a company that is a better fit, or initiate entrepreneurship. Eventually those companies with poor management self-destruct from loosing extensive quality workers and their customer base.
As for the government, that is self explained, but it is a monopoly.
The LDS church acts like it is a monopoly, but many people are recognizing they have better choices and voting with their feet.
Stupid mistakes happen, but only stupid people keep repeating them.
https://www.inc.com/jessica-stillman/7-stupid-mistakes-smart-people-make.html
I don’t think we are any better or worse than a large corporation when it comes to mistakes, but we ARE worse in three areas: 1) “employee experience” is not a priority and “employee feedback” is not continuously solicited AND acted upon, 2) we have a total lack of institutional humility that has more disturbingly extended to its leaders. I am frequently reminded of the D&C line that says it is the tendency of nearly all men when they obtain a measure of power to, you know, etc. Are church leaders any exception? 3) the church seems to have no interest in innovation, or shifting messaging to preach the gospel to more people. Like most conservative and somewhat dogmatic institutions, we are stuck perpetually 50 years in the past.
I actually think the Mormon church is a little worse on decision making than average for churches/corporations for several reasons. One is no communication from the bottom, or at best very filtered feedback from the common member. Others are the age of the leaders, the one gender of all leadership, and the lack of life experience of leadership and the leaders lack of accountability. But I am going to let someone else discuss the ancient guys leading the church and the other issues, otherwise this post will be three books.
The church has no method of getting problems brought to the attention of top leadership. Their think that their official channels will bring problems to the attention of the top, but there are too many filters in each layer of leadership. The first filter is placing the blame for any and all problems on the individual. An example of this is when I talked to my bishop about feeling like in the endowment, I was disowned by God as his daughter, and became nothing but an attachment to my husband. Forever after to deal with God the anther through my husband as some kind of disliked daughter in law. Well, the bishop saw it as totally my lack of faith, because HE didn’t feel that way. I took some of my issues with the temple to a temple president, and when I explained how I felt, and he explained as a male how he saw it, and I said but … and he told me my attitude was going to take me straight to hell. Yup, he said “straight to hell” in the temple. Not only is that not doctrine because Mormons don’t believe in “hell” it was unkind, because rather than being rebellions, I was honestly trying to restore my ability to love a God who didn’t love me, just my husband. But neither the bishop nor the temple president took the problem with the endowment as a problem with the endowment. It was my sin that was the problem. So, of course the problem with the endowment didn’t go up the chain of command, because it was a personal problem with one member. But, was I correct back in 1970 that the endowment needed fixing? Well, in 2019 (or about) they made an attempt to fix it, but haven’t gone far enough in making husbands and wives equal in God’s eyes.
A second problem with this lack of feedback is that people have a tendency to want to pass on feedback that praises the leader, not points out mistakes. “Shoot the messenger” is still practiced among Mormons. So, the feedback leaders get is feedback that is flattering, not critical.
Then there is Elder Oaks telling the membership never to criticize leadership even if it deserved. Just how does he expect to learn about the mistakes he makes?
Looking at my family, the Church provided opportunities for members to thrive economically, physically, and spiritual. For example, one of my grandfathers went from a dry farming upbringing to becoming a doctor. Much of the inspiration for this came from the Church, in particular his mission to western England.
Historically, the Church seemed more invested in its members. Today not so much. Leaders are more interested in mctemples, the stock market, saving in prep for the last days, real estate, etc. And they are promoting a delusion in the quality of education at the BYUs.
We need to think more about the future of members in areas like Africa and South America. The Church needs to invest more their future.
Are the other churches that make mistakes lead by a living prophet who gets revelation from Heavenly Father? What’s the point of making such a comparison?
When President Wilford Woodruff stated, “The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as president of this church to lead you astray”, he really did the Church a huge disservice.
“As I get older, I get crankier.”
If I may, Bishop Bill, I’ve noticed. I used to look forward to your posts more than any other permablogger, regardless of whether I agreed with them. Just in the last couple of years, I’ve noticed more and more cynicism creep in. I realize you’ve given some real reasons for this, and that your bark is generally greater than your bite, but I have found them to be less fun.
You’ve got roughly 20+ years on me, but I’ll admit I was growing a little crankier too. I finally discovered some health issues that have been plaguing me for over a decade and was lucky enough to nearly eliminate them. It’s amazing how much of a difference that makes.
I don’t think the Church is worse than any corporation or similar entity, and in many ways quite better. And although leaders have and continue to make mistakes from time to time, my experience, studying, and pondering, haven’t always led me to believe that everything the bloggernacle or greater society at large labels a mistake constitutes an actual mistake. Or perhaps I’m just guilty of overthinking it.
I can’t immediately find the source, so maybe it didn’t happen, but there’s a story of Brigham Young in a session of conference telling the saints what exactly they had to do in a certain political crisis. The next session, he supposedly said (paraphrasing) “This morning I told you what I thought you should do. Now, I’m going to tell you what the Lord wants you to do.”
I realize the Church is now bigger with arguably more to lose, but if someone like Brigham Young can be brought low and own up to an actual mistakes in conference, I find it more difficult to believe subsequent leaders are unable to do the same.
Truthfully, I have been trying to get better at spotting the moments in Church History or the present where the situation can be chalked up to stupid men making stupid decisions. Making those discoveries hasn’t affected my faith nearly as much as I thought it would, and in some ways has increased my faith and confidence in the Lord’s ability and willingness to work with someone like me. But at the same time, I’ve come to feel that just as many faithful members may be wearing rose-colored glasses when it comes to looking at the Church, there is also a sizeable number of members and former members using a lens of cynicism that also gives them an equally distorted view. I’d love to see more meeting in middle.
Thank you for the feedback Eli. I will try to see if I can find the “fun” that seems to be lacking from my post lately!
“As I get older, I get crankier.”
This may actually be the problem. I turn 60 soon. Cynicism is overtaking me as the years go by. I see institutions and their leaders aging and being overcome by that same cynicism.
Why? What happens to people and institutions as they age? Do we become more self-focused? Worried about our longevity, our legacy, the respect we’ve earned?
Jesus knew his death was coming soon. Yet, how did he spend his time? Talking to women, listening to the downtrodden, healing the sick, playing with kids, breaking stupid rules, and chastising hypocrites leading the institutions. What a legacy.
@Eli: “And although leaders have and continue to make mistakes from time to time, my experience, studying, and pondering, haven’t always led me to believe that everything the bloggernacle or greater society at large labels a mistake constitutes an actual mistake.”
Can you share some examples?
My own age-based cynicism comes from looking back at how much effort I’ve put in, and how little change/results have come about. I really thought I could make a difference, in my own life, in my sons’ lives, in the community around me. The older I get, the more I see that I haven’t changed the world and I don’t expect to change the world in the future. I’m nobody, and I wanted to matter. Don’t get me wrong – I like my life. I have a good job, I love my sons, my hobbies nourish my soul, i have good friendships. But the changes I thought i could make when I was younger haven’t happened despite my best efforts, and that’s resulted in me thinking “why even try?” about some things I used to care deeply about.
But about the post – others have addressed the problems caused by the Church’s refusal to apologize. I’d like to address a consequence of that policy that I don’t see mentioned much: the bad example it sets for men as individuals. The Brethren can’t give a Gen Conf talk about the healing power of apologies; the necessity of apologizing during the repentance process; the way an apology restores trust in a relationship. While all those things are true, they can’t teach them because they would look like hypocrites. So instead, we get talks like “Choose not to be offended” and “forgiveness heals relationships” that dumps the responsibility for fixing relationships on the person who was hurt, who is typically the less powerful person in the relationship (women, children, men who don’t get called into leadership). The responsibility for fixing a relationship destroyed by someone’s actions rests with the person whose actions caused the problem – and that person needs to lead with an apology. The Brethren’s bad example means men follow that example in their personal relationships, causing damage because they expect they don’t need to apologize.
I find my crankiness has become more nuanced over time. In general,
-I am less tolerant of bad actors
-I am more patient of people over all.
I recognize a large breadth of people’s experiences, and how we are all subject to weaknesses in the human condition.
I also cringe when I look back at some of my own choices, and try to be more aware of how I *want* to live my life, then acting by those principles.
Wow. Janey, you nailed it.
Great post and great comments everyone. Thumbs up to Janey.
I totally agree with what 10ac is saying. I think many of the church’s problems would be reduced if they stated “We are part of the Kingdom of God, but the Kingdom of God is much bigger than the LDS church.” It would take away the need for the church to be perfect and could allow it to apologize, and just be good.
I liked the quote from President Oaks talk “God is using more than one people for the accomplishment of his great and marvelous work. … It is too vast, too arduous, for any one people.” It would be helpful if the Prophet expounded on this quote and said – “This doesn’t just apply to charity, it also applies to God’s marvelous work of bringing to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.”
How many thousands of LDS homosexuals have killed themselves over the decades because of the Brethren’s ignorant hostility? Where was the inspiration to shepherd this vulnerable population humanely and wisely? How much damage did the Brethren do in California alone during Prop 8 – and this just among the Mormon population?
No apology.
Never forget.
[There was] no apology
[We should] never forget
Guess I should have spelled that out.
p, how many thousands have killed themselves? I’m thinking the number is relatively low, less than 1 — any suicide is tragic, but if the number really is in the thousands, that might change some perspectives.
Janey,
thank you for clearly saying what needs to be said. The basis of a relationship of trust includes honesty and openness. Nobody is perfect. That includes parents, spouses, friends and church leaders.
Without a way for members to communicate problems, open acknowledgement of errors, and apologetic efforts to change, the church cannot maintain a relationship of trust with it’s members in the long run.
It’s a bad example of how to run a relationship. I do not doubt that it has a bad influence on relationships of members with each other in the long run.
This can be fixed if only the brethren are able to see it, and are brave enough and humble enough to do it. I think in the long run it would maintain more members of the kind that think for themselves. It could also help those who don’t think for themselves grow and mature.
I guess we can keep praying for our leaders and sending them letters that may not be read.
Ji—In 10 seconds of research I found a list of 12 people on Wikipedia for you. That’s just a start. Now go talk to a few people and you’ll quickly find that the number is NOT “relatively low.” Reminds me of Gordon B. Hinckley’s “blip here, blip there” comment on abuse. Church leaders’ perspectives have not changed, regardless of the numbers. They just pay their lawyers and move on. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_Mormon_suicides
https://www.the-exponent.com/guest-post-byu-lgb-policies-and-the-death-of-stuart-matis/
Chadwick wrote “Can you share some examples?”
I actually have in the past. Those discussions didn’t really lead anywhere (and not just because I’m not the most articulate or smartest guy on the planet) and I hate to derail. If you’re serious, I can try, but please allow me to try being more general first.
Even for a blog that focuses on Mormonism, with frequenters of the blog often sharing common roots in it, I’ve seen so much diversity of thought here. Despite that diversity, the two most common paradigms I’ve seen are A. The Church is true and some men were stupid and made a mistake, or B. The Church is not true and some men were stupid and made a mistake. That thinking is way too binary for me. Faith and reason tell me there are other options, with speculations that could reasonably be much more likely than options A and B. If you fall in camp B, you’ve already widened the gap of bridging understanding and perspective with someone who falls outside A and B, but even A can be a little alienating at times. Life is complicated, the Lord doesn’t think the same way I do, and for me, A and B often just don’t seem satisfactory enough. Other options may be more plausible for me personally. In essence, I find Occams’s razor is a rapidly changing shape-shifter when it comes to matters and spectrums of faith. That tends to add frustration, in my experience, to obtaining basic understanding, let alone agreement, but I guess sometimes those discussions are still worth having.
This morning I read an interview at Salon with author Jeanna Kadlec about her new book, “Heretic.” It I clouded this comment regarding her Evangelical upbringing:
“It’s very difficult to be a nominal evangelical. It might be easier to step away and casually come back with other kinds of Christianity. It allows a more gentle relationship that isn’t as monitored by the community.”
That led me to wonder just how difficult it is to be a nominal Latter-day Saint? And what does that mean? Could that be something between Eli’s options A and B?
“included” not “I clouded”
Not sure if that was fat thumbs or autocorrect.
Dot,
Twelve suicides is tragic — your research jibes with my supposition — but p wondered how many thousands there were. I suppose the answer to her question is far less than one, maybe something starting at 0.012. In serious matters such as this, some semblance of truth is important and p will be greatly relieved by your research.
I hope things are getting better.
Ji—what I did was not conclusive research; it was a 10-second search. My point was not that p can now breathe a sigh of relief because only 12 people have killed themselves over this issue, but that it’s very easy to find tragic examples, and that’s only the beginning. I don’t want to hijack the comments, but I find it appalling that on the one hand you call this a serious matter, but on the other, you dismiss it with “I suppose” and “maybe.” I can tell you that every time Dallin Oaks (for one) opens his mouth, a network of people organizes to field suicide prevention calls, and it’s for a lot more than 12 people.
Bill, I too am struggling with age-related crankiness. My tolerance of idiots has decreased. My willingness to drop sharp barbs on others has increased along with life experience leading to ever-sharper barbs in my quiver. I would be interested in your thoughts on how to resist this crankiness. I see myself getting crankier, but don’t want to! I’d love to hear thoughts on how to “get along with idiots” or some such. Maybe you could put this on the agenda for a future topic after you let it stew for a while. You’ll have at least one eager reader.
For some reason that I do not understand, I have observed my father become less cranky and less cynical as he ages. He smiles more. He’s kinder. I will have to figure out why that is and report back. It probably helps that his job as he nears retirement is not as stressful as it once was.
Dot, I don’t know what the real number is, but I honestly do not think it is in the many thousands. I don’t know if p really thinks it is, or if he or she is fear-mongering. I hope it is not the latter, as this is a serious matter and some semblance of the truth is important.
I regret that you found even twelve cases in your research, and no doubt there are some others, but it is good that you did not find thousands or many thousands. Thank you for your efforts both with your suicide prevention network and also in this discussion.
You need not be appalled by whatever strawman of me you are imagining — I am much on your side in caring for others.
“In the late 1990s psychiatrist Jeffery R. Jensen[31] directed his presentations’ comments to church leaders and LDS Family Services stating that “far too many of our lesbian and gay youths kill themselves because of what you say about them,” and “those who believe your false promises and remain celibate in the hopes of eventual ‘cure’ are consigned to a misery.”[32][33] Soon after, the American Psychiatric Association disavowed therapy trying to change sexual orientation as ineffective and destructive, and current publications find that these efforts can be very harmful.[34][35] Church leaders taught for decades that members could and should try to “turn off” gay attractions through means including personal righteousness.[36] A 2015 survey of 1,612 LGBT Mormons and former Mormons found that 73% of men and 43% of women had attempted sexual orientation change, usually through multiple methods across many years.[37]: 5 A survey of over 30,000 teen and young adult LGBTQ individuals found that LGBTQ youth who had undergone sexual orientation or gender identity conversion efforts (SOGICE) were more than twice as likely to report having attempted suicide and more than 2.5 times as likely to report multiple suicide attempts in the past year.[35][38]: 1222–1223 ”
LGBT MORMON SUICIDES
Exact numbers impossible to ascertain due to family shame/denial & institutional reticence & secrecy – but we’re talking the better part of a hundred years here.
In reply to yourfoodallergy, squidloverfat, and BishopBill: My greatest fear is becoming old and cranky. (I have had a lot of negative experiences/borderline abuse experiences with old cranky people, especially grandparents). Because of this, I’ve always taken a firm stance that I don’t want to get old. My plan has always been to live 95 years worth of life in 65 years time.
Recently, I’ve been reading some books that have given me hope that I can become old and not get cranky. Richard Rohr thinks he’s figured out the secret in his book “Falling Upward.” His ideas correspond with the later stages of Fowler’s stages of Faith, and McLaren’s stages of faith.
I haven’t cracked the code yet, but I at least have a vision of where I want to go. I am considering the possibility that I can get old and kinder like yourfoodallergy’s father. If anyone has any wisdom to drop (in a future post), I’d be willing to listen to it.
The brethren use the word “revelation” the same way I would use the word “idea.” A lot of the stuff they say makes more sense of you substitute the word “idea.”
@Ji
Perhaps lay aside the question of numbers, and look at what an LGBTQ+ who is a faithful member of the church experiences as they begin to accept their sexuality. Much has been written. Many interviews are available. A recent example is in People magazine, featuring David Archuleta speaking about his experience (11/1/2022). Link to follow
David Archuleta on Stepping Back from Mormon Church After Coming Out as Queer: ‘I Feel Liberated’
https://people.com/music/david-archuleta-steps-back-from-mormon-church-after-coming-out-as-queer/
Sasso,
I am more up-to-date on reading than you might imagine, and I care more about individual circumstances than you might imagine. But I am troubled by reckless (even if impassioned) hyperbole in sensitive matters — I think some honesty is important in matters like this. In matters like this, some honesty helps build credibility.