Some close friends of ours recently went on vacation with the wife’s parents. It was our friends and their three kids, and her parents sharing a rather large multi bedroom stateroom on a cruise ship. These friends are former Mormons. Her parents are very TBM, and just returned from a senior mission.
They got together about a week before the cruise to go over the schedule. They also laid out some ground rules, one of them being there would be no discussion of politics (the parents are both MAGA), and no “church” talk. The parents both agreed, but then after a moment, the mom asked “But what will we talk about!” Her life is so tied up in the Church, that she could not think of anything to talk about!
How many of you know people that their lives are so tied up in the Church, that all conversation revolves about it, or lately about Trump? Most conversations revolve around
What calling you have
Recent changes at church
New Temples
Ward gossip
Child/Grandchild on a mission
How great the last General Conference/Stake Conference/Fast Meeting was
Have you ever ran into to someone that all they can talk about is church related subjects? I have been lucky with my kids. Two are still very active, but we seldom speak about church when we are visiting them. What has been your experience when visiting with family/friends that are still very much in the Church. Have you ever had to lay down ground rules like our friends did, and make church related discussions off limits? How did that turn out?
Wheat & Tares 
I understand not wanting the reactivation or reconversion lecture, but placing one’s religious/philosophical life completely off limits seems to place enormous additional burdens on an already strained relationship, doesn’t it? Granted, Maga folks and those in a fundamentalist Stage 3 (Fowler’s Stages of Faith) mindset often have no filter, but with my own children, I want them to share their thoughts, it’s an integral part of our relationship.
I grew up in Utah County but now live in Salt Lake County. Occasionally when I go down to Utah County, I regularly overhear people in the grocery store or whatever public place talk about church stuff. In Salt Lake County, hardly ever.
My wife’s parents and three siblings all live in Salt Lake County. We regularly gather for family events. For the longest time right after conference my wife’s mom would ask what everyone’s favorite part of conference was. This hasn’t happened in a little bit. But I remember the general assumption is that you’re supposed to enjoy conference with different talks standing out to you and inspiring you. Conference is supposed to be a breath of fresh air. There is no room in her mind to even comprehend that someone might find conference to be excruciatingly boring, repetitive, frequently cringeworthy, out-of-touch, and annoying. Albeit sprinkled with a few nuggets of wisdom and inspiration here and there, but for me perhaps 5 minutes out of 10 hours. Hardly worth my time for such a small smattering. Much of this wisdom I find really available from other sources.
I have some relationships that were originally founded on the commonality of our church membership. Some of those relationships ended when I left and that’s ok and no one is to blame. Some of them survived. At first, it actually WAS difficult to find other things to talk about. But we persisted and found common topics we never knew existed. Now there is plenty to talk about. It’s actually pretty cool. If church stuff comes up once in a while, I can dig it.
I think the agreement to avoid politics is wise.
Since the OP brought it up, I just got back from a cruise in the Caribbean. It ended the Sunday morning of conf. There was a large group of LDS on the boat (100-200 people it seemed) and on Sat they all wore matching shirts that said Book of Mormon tours and had a picture of a Mayan temple. Being on vacation mode, my intellectual curiosity curbed my enthusiasm to find out more.
My TBM in-laws don’t have a lot of family visitors so my wife recently tried to convince Grandma that entrance to heaven does not require abstinence from coffee.
Spring has finally arrived here in the Beehive State so I have a chance to show off my first tattoo, and maybe that will help influence conversations.
For the record, I also wear crocs and occasionally listen to Bon Jovi. Furthermore, I ain’t got no quarrel with Russian princesses.
Eight years ago we had a sibling reunion in Utah that coincided with my oldest brother’s 50th wedding anniversary. At the time I was still active, as were 5 of the six siblings. I couldn’t help but notice a stark contrast among us. The anniversary brother, who is the only one who lives in Utah, consistently included church references in every conversation, despite the topic. Having lived my life without ever living in Utah (and never having spent much time with this much older brother) I found this odd. In discussion with one of my sisters, we realized that the church and the church community were truly his entire world. The majority of people he interacted with lived in this same bubble. He had nothing else to talk about. It was weird.
Fast forward eight years – 3 of the 6 have formally resigned, 1 is very nuanced and continues to take what good she can, and the two oldest brothers are all in. We have a quarterly sibling “reunion”. We generally have a “theme” to our meetings – something each of us will share that often generates discussion/memories – something like: what was the best Christmas gift you ever got? This has cut down church talk immensely. What I’ve found intriguing is how often church related comments still arise from all of us. My parents were very much of the generation that practiced hands-off parenting. Yes, we had lots of rules/expectations, but they didn’t interact with us much. We did nothing socially/fun outside of limited church activities. For my parents, work and church consumed their time, and that consumed our home life. During our sibling zooms, I’ve realized that the frequent church references in regard to our childhoods are because so many of our memories are tied to those limited church activities. Despite living in a non-LDS community, our family memories are tied to church. So, I get it when someone wonders what they’ll talk about if church is off the table – that is their whole world. That is sad.
On politics being talked of, my family used to bring it up a lot. During the COVID years it seemed inevitable. You’d wear (or not wear) your politics on your face, almost. The 2020 protests were so widespread that, again, it was an impossible topic to fully avoid. I got into two rather huge spats with my brother-in-law over COVID and race in 2020. Our relationship has been tense ever since.
As I’ve dwelt on this issue for some time, it has dawned on me that my family simply assumes that everyone in the family is some variation of conservative. Perhaps traditional mainline conservative or some form of libertarian. They simply cannot comprehend that someone could be liberal or progressive in the family. In fact, I’ve tried to tell them on several occasions that I’m liberal, and they simply cannot believe it. They think that I don’t know what I’m talking about, or have become oversensitive on environmental or racial issues and am in a state of frequent overreaction. Part of the challenge has been not just talking about politics but getting my family to recognize that family members can have views that are so contrary to theirs that a productive conversation cannot be had unless they first recognize that I actually do hold such contrary views. Not only that, but that I have arrived at those views legitimately and informedly. Inasmuch as they cannot bring themselves to that realization, no productive conversation can be had.
It is my belief that when religious or political views are so diametrically opposed, conversations that focus on the what of issues are destined to come to sharp dead-ends and even hurt feelings. Instead, if conversation must be engaged, the focal point must then be epistemological. How we know things and how we are arriving at our positions. Only then can these sorts of conversations be productive.
But ultimately I’ve had to tell my family, several times, to stop talking about politics around me. It is simply too much. Religion, I can stand. They don’t know I’m fully out of the church. I’ll never tell my parents. At the same time, I won’t pretend too much.
I think maybe the thing to do is when people talk MAGA politics is to ask in a sincere voice, what would Jesus do or some variation of that referring back to the scriptures. Of course the opposite of that is to ask someone that is constantly talking church is “how does that apply to what’s happening now with life?” In other words instead of making statements, ask questions and let them justify the dichotomy of what they are saying.
There are times when peacefully eating turkey and the associated giblets is not worth the cost. Speaking up for the right is something that must be done, even if an uncle is offended.
When a brother-in-law promotes the latest violent video game, he should be condemned. When the disinter-in-law promotes the latest excessive Dua Lipa video, she should be condemned as well.
What good is being part of a family if most members are too afraid to speak up? Letting a couple of blowhards dominate every family gathering is doing everyone else a real disservice.
So let us not be afraid to speak against nonsense, even if it comes from relatives. It is not enough to simply turn up the volume on the televised hot dog eating contest so loud that no one can hear Aunt Matilda.
When I got married and started attending in-law family gatherings, I was surprised at how different the conversation was from my own family. My family’s conversation centered on Church and children; most typically funny anecdotes. We talked about each other, not in a mean and gossiping way, but passing on cute stories about the kids and “oh did you hear about so-and-so’s new calling?” My in-laws, in contrast, hardly talked about each other at all and never told funny stories about their kids. They talked about politics – and there were a range of viewpoints – and work, and current events, and gardening, and computers, and the next camping/hunting trip.
At first I thought their lack of stories and gossip meant they didn’t love their family very much. And then I figured out why my family talked about nothing but the lightest of small talk. My father was on a hair trigger, and we had all learned to speak of only topics he could tolerate without dominating. If you whispered a mention of current events or politics, it was like putting the batteries in Dad. Once, a sibling invited a friend to a family dinner and she said something about education. Dad went off. Everyone related to Dad got up and walked out of the room, one by one so it wasn’t too obvious, and abandoned that poor family friend to Dad.
We had an unspoken rule about avoiding topics with Dad because he was so darn rude if he had an opinion. That’s where I would draw the line with family about certain topics. If someone can have a civil discussion, then by all means, have the discussion. But if someone cannot allow someone else to disagree on politics (right or left), or acknowledge someone else’s differing experience with Church, then the topic needs to go off limits for the sake of the relationship. Monologuing is rude. Refusing to shut up if you suspect someone has a differing opinion is rude.
Also, I disagree with JCS. Someone who feels morally called to condemn everyone who likes something that he disapproves isn’t standing up for truth and virtue. That person is a self-righteous blowhard and no one wants to carry on a conversation with them. Learn that people can like things you don’t like, and if you want a real relationship with people, you accept that. You don’t have to participate in it – by all means, if BIL asks you to play the violent video game, tell him no. Don’t watch SIL’s Dua Lipa video. Telling people that you find them morally reprehensible for liking what they like is going to get you (rightly) ostracized, or at least have the relationship fade to the point where you talk of nothing but the weather.
I see a difference between asking someone not to talk about politics or Church, and telling someone that it’s bad to like a violent video game or a Dua Lipa video.
Calm down, JCS just has a crush on Dua Lipa. It’s ok. I mean who wouldn’t.
It does kind of go both ways.
I’ve become increasingly convinced over time and experience that a large portion, possibly the larger portion, of “shunnings” that take place in the Church aren’t real shunnings at all. There are members who have made the Gospel such an integral fabric of their life, and have found it has enhanced almost every aspect of the life they live and who they are. When a friend or family member has managed to nearly remove that fabric from his or her own life almost entirely, what do you do? Do you continue to impose your true nature on someone who may despise all that that lifestyle stood for, or do you give him or her room to be themselves? How keen is your friend on hanging out with someone who still holds to faulty beliefs and a corrupt church? Those may not be rational thoughts, but I think they often go through the minds of active members, such that they create an awkward situation of little to no contact, so as to avoid another awkward situation of imposing possible discomfort and being less able to relate to those who once had much more in common with them. Admittedly, real shunning situations occur at times, and are awful.
On the other hand, it’s when people fail to share anything with me about their beliefs and how it affects their life that I start to doubt the convictions they have in them. If you’re not willing to share them with me, what kind of value do you truly place in them?
I think part of the cause of such a wide divide is avoiding religious and political conversations in the first place. I get it, there’s no easy answer. Even in my best efforts to be polite, tame, and thoughtful I’ll still get some strong and rather uncivil responses at times. I think it’s just as much of a problem as being too pushy.
What do we talk about? For starters, funny stories of our shared history, that may or may not have taken place in relation to church, but are in the past and are fun to share when we visit. We talk about our own families, things we read in the news (although most of this is a no go with partisan divides), books or articles we’ve read, observations, pets, house repairs, health issues, etc.
I think I have a finger on what the core problem is for someone like the OP’s matriarch. She’s obsessed with just one thing, and literally is operating full-time as a shill for the church. That may be fine / expected when you are a full-time missionary (although I’ve suggested elsewhere that even in that case it’s not really healthy or effective), but the concept of “every member a missionary” is just a way for the church to worm its way into irrelevant topics, into every waking moment of every day. It is literally a cult mindset, highjacking the normal thoughts we might have that are just part of being human. It’s being hyper-focused on one thing, unnaturally, that you’ve conditioned yourself to do.
My mom usually doesn’t go for more than 2 minutes without talking about the church or a church related topic. Often times it’s done in a very unnatural way, like the comments are coming out of left field. It almost seems like it’s involuntary for her to talk about the church, I don’t think there’s anything that I could do or say to change how often she brings it up. It’s difficult to be around. I can handle it in small doses.
At the same time, I recognize that my mom has nothing but good intentions, and she has a heart of gold. I think the propensity to constantly talk about church comes from a variety of factors, including the family that she was raised in, rhetoric from church leaders, and her desire to be “good” and to do everything she can to teach the gospel to her children and grandchildren. I still get annoyed, but mostly I have compassion for her.
Priya Parker’s The Art of Gathering actually has a lot of say about the “what will we talk about” and “what will we do” question. When in doubt, there are scads of “question deck cards” and related lists online to go nuts over:)
Robert Fulghum had an interesting idea that perhaps we could do a non-alcoholic version of for a slightly tamer effect:
“If you want an interesting party sometime, combine cocktails and a fresh box of crayons for everyone.”
You and a few like-minded friends could always secretly turn it into a Bingo game.
Or try substituting the jargon of some other religion. I recommend the Church of the SubGenius. (Remember–all propaganda is God-breathed, provided you take it literally.)