I was recently reading someone’s comment in an online forum about having been asked to meet with the Stake President (as a couple), but no information was given as to what the meeting was about. This person was suffering from depression and anxiety and did not want to be put into a pressure situation that would make it hard to say no to supporting their spouse in a high commitment calling. However, and I think we all know where this is going, nobody was willing to say what the meeting was about.
The Salt Lake Tribune recently reported about two professors at BYU-Idaho who were terminated despite having received an endorsement from their bishop. They were told to call a department to find out more, and when the female professor called, they told her they would only speak to a priesthood holder. She finally had to have her bishop call to ask why she was being fired. Even so, they would not discuss the termination, claiming that it was an ecclesiastical decision.
A few months ago, my back was really hurting me. There are some padded folding chairs at Church, but not as many as there are hard metal chairs. At some point, the Relief Society took back all the padded chairs, leaving Primary teachers like me with only the metal chair options. As I sat there in pain, on a freezing cold metal chair (in a freezing cold building), it occurred to me that in a Church flush with capital, it’s kind of ridiculous that we can’t manage to have more comfortable chairs.
I have known many women in the Church who have shed tears over the prospect of being relegated to someone’s second wife status in an eternal polygamous marriage. There are single women whom Mormon men will not date because they’ve already been sealed to someone else. There are divorced women who feel shut down when their repeated requests for a sealing cancellation to their abusive ex fall on deaf ears. When E. Oaks made a joke in general conference at the expense of the women who have these fears, I gasped at the insensitivity of the remarks, and at the courtesy laugh that followed. Was that joke really worth it? Was the price of that mean-spirited laughter greater than the very real dread most women in the Church feel about the prospect of eternal polygamy?
According to psychologists, contempt in relationships is the leading indicator that divorce will follow. Some signs of contempt:
- Sarcasm and making someone the butt of jokes
- Constantly being corrected and interrupted; redoing work they’ve done
- Being patronised
- Being dismissed, ignored or avoided
- Non-verbal disregard (eye rolling, sneering)
- Being blamed and compared negatively to others
- Constantly being put down
- Gaslighting
Now obviously, being at Church isn’t just one relationship. There are Church leaders at HQ, there are local leaders, and there are fellow ward members. It’s more like a work environment, but instead of being paid, you are paying 10% of your income for the privilege to be there. And doing all the work. And sitting on uncomfortable chairs. And putting on activities with a ridiculously small budget. And expected to be the janitor with no training and mediocre supplies. And told to come to meetings with leaders without knowing why. And being occasionally interrogated about your thoughts and beliefs. And if you are a woman, sometimes being spoken past in favor of your husband.
There are some things that can tip the scales from feeling valued, supported and cherished to feeling used, taken advantage of, and held in contempt. In a high demand religion (or even a lower demand one), a particularly oppressive or micromanaging leader can very easily push you over the edge. A lack of positive personal connections can do it. A lack of friends, appreciation or understanding will do it. Feeling ignored or like an outcast will do it. Being a part of a marginalized group, particularly in our current LGBTQ backlash environment is a sure way to feel you are treated with disregard. That applies to any individual who perceives they are slighted by the organization: women, people of color, singles, divorced people, new move ins, childless couples, those whose children have quit the church, Democrats, and so on.
It’s also important to consider that Churches, unlike other institutions, are often a one-way relationship by design. They often only function because of the commitment and contributions of the membership, even if there is a paid clergy, and those contributions are freely given by those members of the community who may or may not have the requisite skills (including social skills). But when something is freely given without appreciation or while being demanded or told it’s never enough, it brings whole new meaning to enduring to the end.
- Have you ever felt that you were treated with contempt by the Church? Was it local or in general? What happened?
- Have you ever felt truly cherished and appreciated by the Church? What happened?
- What would you do to avoid poisoning the well of good will among Church members if you were in charge?
Examples, please!
Wheat & Tares 
I have never felt truly appreciated or cherished by the church but I have by God. I haven’t thought of it in terms of contempt but yes, the church treats women with contempt, and I’m a woman. I’ve had many spiritual experiences associated with church service and felt the love and approval of God in doing so.
If there is a sin which permeates our current church culture it is the sin of ingratitude. I am afraid that the Widow’s Mite would go as unrecognized today as it did in Jesus’ day. In all honesty, just about everyone is marginalized in some way. So many of us feel unappreciated, most likely because we are unappreciated by mortal leaders and each other. But as noted, the vast majority of members have silently made significant sacrifices to assist others and become part of a religious community. We should make every effort to perceive and appreciate the contributions and sacrifices of others. We should respectfully tell their stories. Sharing the goodness of others is likely one way of bearing their burdens.
I had to wait 21 months for a mission call because the Missionary Department kept misplacing my paperwork. To make matters worse, they kept blaming me for the delay, saying things like “you’re not dedicated enough” or “stop being slothful.” Keep in mind, I didn’t work, date, or go to school during those 21 months because I was convinced that the mission call would come at any moment, so dedication definitely wasn’t the issue. Thankfully, my Bishop and Stake President were my advocates and backed me up with receipts showing that the problems with my paperwork weren’t on our end, but in Salt Lake.
Eventually, I did get the formal call, and I loved every minute of my mission, but I’m still frustrated that I had to go through all of those hoops just to serve a mission.
I am not sure where I picked it up, but I have always found that when someone was showing contempt for me – there was something about who I was (not a gender-performing person), who I represent (myself as an equal to God in a relationship and as an equal to brothers and sisters in the community – the “presided over vs equal partners” headache on all levels of power), or what I was thinking that they were afraid of (becuase I could find scriptures to back me up). I think the biggest threat I was is that I am always gathering information from all kinds of sources and experiences and weaving it together to create better opportunities instead of using opportunities to justify my information and sources.
I wound up with lots of experiences at church where I assessed the situation that the people around me were reacting out of fear to me becuase I was going to challenge their thinking and make them less comfortable by who I am, what I say, and what I think. So yes, I was held in contempt. I also got a few compliments and inspired people to be better.
If I was in charge, we would revamp the entire 4 fold mission of the church with a trauma focus lens. We would aplogize and stop all church-caused trauma. We would become the trauma experts and the balance trauma work among the living with providing peace to our ancestors. Joseph Smith probably wouldn’t care a ton, but this wouldn’t be Brigham Young’s church.
Got divorced and then remarried a woman with 4 children. After my child support and her lack of it and then being a teacher, I had a hard time paying an “honest” tithe. Had “that” meeting with the stake president where we didn’t know what it was about and he talked to my wife first, then me. He said he had a call for me but never said what it was but couldn’t give it to me because I didn’t pay tithing. I asked my wife to tell him why. I worked three jobs and basically gave her the money which she overspent so we were deep in debt as well. She wouldn’t say a thing so I told him what the problem was and he said to pay it and then get help from the church. I said I wouldn’t do that if I couldn’t pay my bills honestly. My wife didn’t speak to me on the way home. I quit giving her the money and started paying all our bills myself. She didn’t like that and we got divorced a couple of years later. So now I was twice divorced which meant that no one sat by me at church, or on the row in front of me or behind me. I eventually remarried but my wife’s experiences about being asked to come home from work early so her visiting teachers could visit her since their husbands wouldn’t allow them to come at night because they had a family to take care of (she was a single mother when they asked this of her). We moved to my little town and her son went on a mission and the bishop and stake president would only talk to me even though I asked them to speak to her since it was her son but they wouldn’t do that or kept forgetting. The last time we went to church was his homecoming. All returning missionaries have their parents speak but not us. Nothing said just done. So we haven’t gone now for a couple of years. Has anyone contacted us, not really. A “minister” (home teacher) came a couple of times and talked about tithing, which I dismissed and then said they need someone like me to teach and I said no one wanted to hear a democrat (even though I’m a registered republican) teach and that was the end of that. It’s been over a year since we’ve heard from anybody.
It’s hard to remember every being loved or cherished by the church because my first divorce was at age 26 and I’m 68 now. I tied to stick with it but it’s been a little to much the past 10 years with my new wife and her family. Besides, I have a daughter who is LGBTQ, married her partner, and has two little boys so I don’t really have anything to contribute to a discussion about an eternal family since I love the family I have and was furious when the church said children of same sex marriages could not be baptized. When they reversed it, the question of who was really leading the church, God or man, because front and center for me. It opened my eyes to a lot of other things and I’m done dealing with it yet still feeling sad because of how much time I put into it.
Some of us have faced very little contempt or other negative social interactions at the local level within the Church. Some of us have enjoyed a very positive social experience at Church even if we disagreed with various aspects of LDS culture. I really can’t think of much to complain about. I was the ultimate insider. And then, when we left, we were basically ignored. I guess my point is that I look back fondly at all my past wards and I’m thankful for those associations. But it seems as if those “friendships” were based on belief as the common denominator and once that disappeared so did most of the relationships.
I too am extremely sad for the news about employees being dismissed at the BYUs without being told why. I simply cannot see Jesus ever acting like this. Jesus had no problem telling people what they needed to do. We are told God’s ways are orderly. This un-Christlike behavior has consequences. I was just telling my wife we should go to church every week in December because I love singing the Christmas hymns. Now I won’t bother. I can play them on the piano at home instead.
To the OP questions: If we want marginalized members to feel nonmarginalized, we need the popular members to sit with them. But good luck with that.
“or·gan·i·za·tion man
/ˌôrɡənəˈzāSHən,ˌôrɡəˌnīˈzāSHən man/
nounDEROGATORY
a man who lets his individuality and personal life be dominated by the organization he works for.”
This is a 50’s term, now obsolete, that is still the perfect descriptor for LDS male culture today. Literally nothing’s changed in the interim except the institutional rate of growth, which has gone right down the tubes. Is there a correlation?
P: We can’t forget that the majority of men are excluded from the power structure of the organization in question. While maleness is the first factor considered, maleness gets one nowhere when other characteristics important to the organization (political ideology, career choice, socio-economic status, extroversion, etc.) remove the majority of men from serious consideration.
IMO, the power structure and social status granted by the Church to some men has become much more exclusive in the last decade. For example, nearly all active men eventually were eventually ordained high priests. Today, a smaller minority of men are ordained. In addition, with the reduction of callings for men (Scouting, YM, and dissolution of the HP group) the average man will likely see long years of his life without a calling or position in his religious community. Younger men know that competition is keen for leadership roles. It may intensify the creation of the highly competitive “organization men” you speak of. It will interesting to see what the long-term effects of this less egalitarian approach will be.
On a SLC level, the Church shows contempt for the members by not sharing the Church’s financial records. The leaders also exaggerate membership numbers. I don’t think any demographer has much trust in the 16+M number. I suspect that real Church membership is closer to 8M and members with TRs is close to 4M. But Church leaders refuse to trust members with real numbers.
But an even bigger problem is the lack of member input into spending priorities. For example, should the Church build more McTemples or work more on assistance to the global poor? Which one of these 2 actions is closer to the message of Christ?
Until the leadership opens up it’s financial, membership, and decision making records to the membership, they are showing contempt for us.
A member of our bishopric wanted my daughter to take over driving a boy with inactive parents to early morning seminary. The bishopric member didn’t like doing this himself because it was out of his way and he had to get up extra early, so he wanted my daughter to do it, even though it was much further out of HER way. When I said he would have to speak to her directly rather than through me, he responded, “Ok, I’ll just make it a calling then.” It is hard to overstate the anger I still have over this relatively minor incident years later. It betrayed his contempt for her and her time and resources, as well as his male privilege in the church to simply make anything he wanted done a calling. It was a huge push down our shared road to apostasy. However, there is a magical word that would quickly end this behavior if only members would use it more often. My daughter said no, and that was the end of it.
Dot: YES! The power of “No” is real. When you are seen as a “sure thing,” sometimes the only person who’s going to advocate for your interests is YOU. Menopause is a fantastic best friend in this regard. Especially as women, we are constantly told how selfish we are if we ever think of ourselves, but menopause is like a still small voice whispering in your ear, relentlessly until you start to believe it: “You matter.” Of course, that’s also why most of the women burned as witches were menopausal.
I believe that one of the main reasons people in the church feel used, taken advantage of or dismissive of their efforts is because in our culture we are taught do what we’re told and not to speak up.
Last week I received an email assignment from our EQ presidency. Attached to the email was a calendar for the next six months, and for each week someone’s name from the quorum was listed on it. The email explained that on the week you were assigned (I did not volunteer for this nor was I asked to volunteer) you were to go down to the church building each evening (which takes around 12-15 minutes each way, depending on weather) and make sure that all the windows were closed and the doors locked. I replied to that email saying to remove me from this list since it wasn’t my responsibility to make sure other people who use the building were locking it up properly, and furthermore, correcting other people’s irresponsible actions was the same as rewarding bad behavior. PLUS, the amount of time involved and the amount of gas consumed over the course of a year was absolutely ridiculous. I received a reply stating that I would be removed from the assignment and then noted that, as a presidency, they were wondering why this assignment was being made from the stake when there were other wards with protocols in place and key systems that kept track of who came and went. I said that was a great question, ask the stake, not me.
Do you think they will?
I never thought to apply the word “contempt” to how the church treats its members, but, yeah, unfortunately it fits. I was made RSP at a very young age and how the bishopric treated me can only be described as contempt. They help PEC, then dictated to me the assignments. There was no discussion, just dictation of what I was supposed to do. If I brought up problems, like a family with no food in the house and no money to buy food, I was informed that they would discuss it next month at PEC and get back to me. I was horrified that they would leave small children hungry for a month because they couldn’t discuss it *in front* of a (gasp) woman. WTH? They met together, same exact men, then they met with me, but they couldn’t possibly discuss anything with me. They we even incapable of discussing it in front of me. They were rude as tRump, and treated me like the hired help. Yeah, that is contempt all right.
There was one point, where I was pregnant with my third child, that I was threatening to miscarry. My doctor ordered me to stay in bed. But one of the bishopric called and told me that sister x was ordered to be on bed rest and I had to find someone to taker her children. I had my own children to farm out. I explained to him that I was also doctored ordered to be on bed rest and could not spend the day on the phone….and the asshat just interrupted me, said he didn’t care and I had a calling I had to fulfill and I needed to find babysitters for this woman’s children. But I already knew nobody in the ward would taker her never disappointed brats, and I ended up on the phone for three hours, when I was supposed to be flat on my back. I finally just called a human who gave a * and told her the situation and she, being the ward battle ax, got on the phone and bishopric jerk got an earful. The man really needed to be put in his place, and it didn’t matter if I did have a calling, I also had a baby to protect. So, yes, contempt.
Then my husband was asked to be in the bishopric and he was fine with that, but his next calling was scout master. Oh, gee, no wonder they have trouble filling that calling. He was taken for granted, left with no support, expected to babysit, expected to miss his children’s birthdays, and all kind of events that girls or little boys have because scouts always came first. That was his taste of being treated like the ward servant.
About that time, I put my foot down and told him he was badly neglecting his children in favor of the Boy Scouts. We had the come to Jesus talk about how the church asks for more and more and more and doesn’t care about your own needs, or your family’s needs.
After that we both started saying no to big callings.
I can’t say I’ve been treated with contempt by local leaders, but I have been by other members. I noped out of a mission as a teenager and would literally get confronted by ward weirdos in the hallway asking why I wasn’t on a mission. I would start explaining and then get it explained back to me why I’d change my mind and go. Being disregarded made my desire to not serve a mission evolve from a true lack of interest in a mission to not going out of spite for all of the people who tried telling me how I felt about it.
I’m an introvert, voting for democrats, speaking my own mind in meetings even if (and especially when) I disagree with something said in GC. Yet I keep getting leadership callings despite trying my best to signal that I’m not the guy they want. I went through a stretch of almost 14 consecutive years of being on ward council. I think wearing a suit to church each week and actually showing up on time makes people think you’re leadership material. So very annoying.
Angela: Yes exactly!
Call Me Mark: I think no. Should we take bets?
Oh wow – that first story about the couple being asked to meet with the Stake President but no one would say why is so relatable. My XH and I (when we were married) got called to meet with the bishop. I just figured it was a calling for XH, since I already had two. Nope. They wanted me to take a third calling. I may have had a tiny meltdown and, just possibly, hollered at the bishop when I said no. The next day in sacrament meeting, the bishop vague-talked about the blessings of service over the pulpit and I knew he was talking to me. I was so lacking in a backbone at the time that I went to the bishop, apologized, and accepted the calling. I carried out one assignment, got overwhelmed, and did exactly nothing else in that calling until I got released. It was awful.
Some commenters think they have never been treated with contempt by church leaders. So, being in a grumpy mood, because my family won’t step up and make decisions or help plan the family Christmas party and I don’t want to be *that* mother (or *that* mother in law), I will take it out on those who can’t see contempt when it smacks them in the face.
1. Church leaders demanding your money and then (a) changing the definition of tithing from the Bible and Joseph Smiths definition from your increase (surplus) to your income. (b) not spending it how scriptures say the should, on the poor. (c) refusing to account for how they spend it or mention that they have well over 1,00 B. sitting in the bank making more money, which interest they then spend on commercial money making projects. (c) Then they claim that interest on tithing is not tithing. But, if it belongs to tithing when it goes in the bank, then the interest still belongs to tithing.
2. Tell other leaders that they “face” and talk to the members. That they should not listen to the members and report problems the members are having to upper leaders, but only tell members what upper leadership says to tell members. Cutting off all feedback from members, then telling us how much they care.
3. Expecting members to work without pay, by doing not only callings, often more than one, but by doing janitorial work, when the church has plenty of money to pay janitors. Meanwhile top leaders claim to not be paid, but collect a generous “stipend” of much more than the average member makes, plus mega tax free benefits and they don’t pay tithing on the stipend or the value of the benefits.
4. Hiding the true history of the church as not faith promoting, but claiming to be as honest as they know how to be.
5. Hiding statistical information about church growth, church finances, as if members do not deserve the truth or to know what their money is actually being spent on.
People, that is all contempt and it comes right from the top, and unless you are a general authority, that means they hold you in contempt.
This line from Alma 5 pretty much summarizes the Mormon approach.
I speak by way of command unto you that belong to the church; and unto those who do not belong to the church I speak by way of invitation.
Leaders do all they can to appeal to potential converts. The “love bombing” can be over the top. They want investigators to feel loved, wanted, and needed. That ends after baptism or at least once they see a new member is fully committed. Members don’t realize until the temple that they have covenanted to give everything including their life to the COJCOLDS. (First finding this out in the temple is definitely a form of contempt, especially since there’s no way to back out at that point.) Mormon leaders recognize this so they speak by way of commandment. You essentially give your agency to an institution, not Christ, or face loosing everything you value. You owe the Church everything. It owes you nothing—no apologies, no transparency, etc.
Could we add to the list professors and CES instructors who have given their heart and soul to the church and its educational institutions only to be fired unceremoniously and without explanation? Is this the definition of contempt? Will expanded religious freedom give religious institutions the ability to bypass norms that we take for granted in our society? This makes the September 6 look mild as employees lose their livelihoods after years of career building and dedicated service. Is the church experiencing a crisis and might there be better ways to handle it? Could there be lessons to learn from the positive building the Community of Christ did after facing serious crises?
“BYU-I instructors fired for failing ‘ecclesiastical clearance.’ They can’t find out why: Was it over LGBTQ issues or something else? Even their bishops aren’t sure” by Tamarra Kemsley, Salt Lake Tribune, Nov. 28, 2022
Link in comment below to avoid spam filter.
https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2022/11/28/byu-i-instructors-fired-failing/
“BYU-I instructors fired for failing ‘ecclesiastical clearance.’ They can’t find out why: Was it over LGBTQ issues or something else? Even their bishops aren’t sure” by Tamarra Kemsley, Salt Lake Tribune, Nov. 28, 2022
I got chewed out by one branch president because I knew the scriptures better than he did. I had just pointed out that the Savior healed people first, and then told them to sin no more, not the other way around
I am absolutely appalled and heartbroken reading the stories of individuals who are being dismissed from employment at the BYUs without being given cause. That is absolutely not what Jesus would do. Jesus did not seem shy at providing information about his actions. This behavior is shameful.
Also what Anna said.
To CS Eric’s point, a real sticking point I’ve heard a few times in Southern California is how unfair it is that our early morning seminary teachers work without pay, unlike people doing the exact same thing in Utah. Talk about sticking it to the membership. That calling is a lot of work for no pay.
Here’s one I haven’t seen anyone mention, that is legitimately making me question my own memory of the past: Didn’t GBH give a double-karate-chop talk insisting that we all say TOJCOLDS instead of Mormon? Like, 20 years ago, or so? As I recall, and I’m not entirely sure that I’m not making this up, it was around the time of the typography change of the TOJCOLDS logo (the words, not the Jesus logo.) GBH didn’t go as far as RMN (no MoTab rename, no little victories for Satan) but did insist (emphasize?) that we use the whole name, not the nickname. I recall seeing passionate social media posts from my TBM friends detailing the spiritual growth they had experienced by adding 9 syllables to their standard vocabulary and asking that we all do the same. Then I recall being confused that the “I’m a Mormon” campaign seemed to contradict this prophetic admonishment. I’ve seen discussion of RMNs talk from both TBM and ProgMo perspectives, but never any mention of it being old news. Am I making this up? Was it an example of plausible deniability / speaking out of both sides of the mouth, like Andrew S describes?
It’s been quite some time since I’ve been a fully active participant in the church, and clearly I’m not bothered enough by this to go look it up.
graham, I think President Hinckley was okay with Mormon as a descriptor for us as a people (like “I’m a Mormon” and “Mormon Tabernacle Choir”), but not as the name of the church — as I understand, he preferred of our use of the full name rather than “the Mormon church.”. At least, that is how it settled in my brain.
@Amy–Agree so very much with your comment, “If I was in charge, we would revamp the entire 4 fold mission of the church with a trauma focus lens. We would apologize and stop all church-caused trauma. We would become the trauma experts and the balance trauma work among the living with providing peace to our ancestors.”
We could all benefit from implementing principles of trauma-informed care within our faith communities. There are so many resources and we are overdue in incorporating these principles within our practices.
Can you imagine an entire general conference focused on trauma and educating members on how to understand trauma and how to best reach out to one another? I’d be blown away if we even just focused a Sacrament meeting or 5th-Sunday lesson on the topic. It’s time.
https://www.ncchurches.org/sacred-series-toolkit-becoming-a-trauma-informed-faith-community/
https://www.traumainformedcare.chcs.org/what-is-trauma-informed-care/
@Anon 2:12 PM EST
“Can you imagine an entire general conference focused on trauma and educating members on how to understand trauma and how to best reach out to one another?”
– You could easily touch on “Inter-Generational Trauma” in lessons on “Turning the Hearts of the Parents [Fathers] to the Children”.
– I think that “Trauma-Informed Leadership in the Home” would be a powerful General Conference topic because a lot of trauma happens there. If you want true “Love at Home” moments – you have got to get the Trauma out of the households.
– If you are in the YW or YM program, you have kids who are experiencing or inducing trauma in your classes. I think it is an unavoidable part of the process of upgrading from a child to an adult. They need helpful judgement and post-traumatic growth stories and resources.
– If we as a people talked about how Trauma informs some decisions to leave the church, or even how we can avoid traumatizing people who are leaving (which falls into the 12th and 13th articles of faith actually), that would be so, so different.
For sure, I receive “contempt” as it is defined as “worthlessness” and “beneath consideration”. In a that regard, all rank and file saints are “contemptuous” because they are nameless, faceless cogs. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, because any sacrifice or philanthropy one gives to the church is for God, your fellow man, and yourself, not for recognition or praise by other men/women.
So, it follows that most of the time, the element of “scorn” is not met because that would require individual attention, which the big church cannot and does not give.
However, when you lose local leader roulette , you can be the recipient of scorn. Happens too frequently and is abominable when it does.
A few years ago – when I was still fully engaged – I was asked to be the main speaker for an upcoming Sacrament Meeting. I worked diligently in preparation and research to make sure that I was ready and would be “standing tall”. On the assigned day, I was sitting on the stand waiting for my turn when the Stake President decided to make a surprise visit and took over the podium to “say a few words”. This grand, self obsessed, “God’s gift to mankind”, never once acknowledged that there were others on the stand who had taken an assignment and were waiting for him to finish his bloviated ramblings. At five minutes to the hour, the Bishop leaned over to me – and to others – and asked that we simply “bear our testimonies”; and then sit down. “Bear my Testimony” my ass…you’re lucky I didn’t throw the podium over the side of the Sacrament Table. This narcissistic old bastard treated us with total contempt; and like dirt on his shoe. We were not even worthy of a glance….