Posted on 06/16/2011 8:37:35 AM PDT by greyfoxx39
The Mormon subculture has developed a family form
which is both typical of the broader American culture
and unique to itself.
-SNIP-
There are several issues related to this central
ambivalence of Mormons toward gentiles. First,
Mormonism constitutes a divinely instituted restoration
of ancient pure Christianity. A clear implication of this
stance is that other Christian churches are nol divinely
instituted. This stance, of course, does not ingratiate
Mormons to non-Mormons.
Within the Mormon community itself, this has
resulted in the development of a world view which is
another major source of strain and anguish for some Mormons.
This subconsciously scripted world view implies that
Mormons should be more righteous, happier, more in general,
superior to non-Mormons. The paired
assumptions, of course, are that gentiles are more
decadent, less happy, less inclined to honesty and
integrity, less successful and, in general, inferior to
Mormons. On the one hand this suggests an arrogant
ethnocentricity which fights against the friendly,
outgoing missionary spirit. On the other hand, it sets
some Mormons up for painful disillusionment. Our
world view suggests that our way of life is God-inspired
and thus constitutes in its purity the best of all possible
worlds. Any good person of integrity and personal honesty,
we like to tell ourselves, will convert to Mormonism
once he sees how superior it is as a way of life.
This superiority stance applies strain on Mormons
from two different angles. First, we tend to feel we must
live our lives as an example of Mormon superiority. This
tends to place an enormous burden on the shoulders of
many Mormons. When these Mormons see nonmembers
who are not impressed thilt their Mormon way of life is
superior, they feel like failures.
"What am I doing wrong?" they ask themselves. '1
know gospel living is superior, so I just must not be
measuring up."
As an example, I had a woman tell me a while back
about a convention she attended with her husband who
was a salesman. While her husband and the other men
were in their meetings, the wives had a wonderful time
shopping, sightseeing and restaurant hopping-all but
my client. When the others ordered drinks, she ordered
7-Up. When they laughed uproariously over little offcolor
comments, she tried to maintain some dignity, but
without much success. When the others spent money
frivolously, she would prudently refrain. On Sunday,
she went to church among strangers and spent most of
the day alone while the other women enjoyed
themselves.
Most Mormons go through this type of experience
from time to time, but it gets filtered, tempered and reinterpreted
for use in fast and testimony meeting or
elsewhere in Mormon lore so that it always ends with
the defeat of evil and the triumph of righteousness. The
stories as they get retold result in someone getting
interested in the gospel, or in the heroine getting new
insight into how truly shallow and miserable these
people really are, and a new understanding of the
happiness the gospel brings, or by resisting temptation
and sticking to righteous principles, a terrible disaster
will be averted.
It was almost in tears of humiliation and guilt that the
wife cited above confessed to me that in reality those
other women seemed to really have their lives together,
and had a wonderful time, while she was never so
miserable in all her life. The fact that they were happy
and she was miserable in that situation translated to her
as personal failure, both because she was unhappy and
because as a missionary she was a total failure.
The second strain caused by the Mormon world view
of superiority is that many Mormons look around within
their own ranks and see the same problems that are
found in the larger community and become
disillusioned. "How could those who live God's true
religion," this reasoning goes, "be subject to the same
failings and weaknesses as those who don't." Elder
Packer put his finger on this strain this morning as he
told the incident about being asked what is the purpose
for the occurrence of disasters.
I was seeing a teen-aged incest victim a while back.
Her father was a member of the high council in their
Stake, and was a friendly, outgoing, highly respected
and well-loved man in their ward. (I have to admit that as
a relatively new, inexperienced therapist the situation
shocked me a bit. I can imagine what she was going
through.) All during the years the incest was going on,
people would come up to this girl at church and say
things like, "Your father is such a wonderful man. I'm
sure he'll be the next bishop of the ward."
She told me that the only thing that kept her from
losing her testimony during that period was that in spite
of what everyone said about her father, he was never
called as bishop. This is a testimony to me of the
inspiration of priesthood callings, but it is not a sound
basis for a testimony of the gospel.
Many Mormons tend to idealize Church officials at all
levels, and then are shocked and disillusioned when they
find they are human too. But this perfectionist attitude
is not restricted to Church officials. Another
manifestation is the belief that if you just live the gospel.
everything will work out. As therapists you all know the
havoc this can wreak in peoples' lives. But that belief is
widespread and persistent among Mormons--even a lot
who should know better.
When I first went into private practice as a therapist, I
talked to my dentist, who was a regional representative
at the time. As I explained my plans to him, he looked a
little puzzled and said, "Well, fortunately with our
bishops to handle those kinds of problems and the
Church organization what it is, we really have no need
for those kinds of services among Church members."
The strains caused by these two factors--the need to
live a superior life style, and the belief that serious
personal problems should not exist within the Mormon
community--are acute. A great deal of energy is devoted
to establishing and maintaining an image, both for nonMormons
and for Mormons themselves, that the
Mormon way of life is superior.
-SNIP-
Another issue closely related to the place of gentiles in
the Mormon-world view is that of ambivalent loyalties.
It has been explicitly stated and often reinforced in the
Church that a person's prime loyalty is to the family.
This axiomatic stance is challenged, however, by
another axiom that Mormons should always be ready
and willing to make personal sacrifices for the Church.
The law of sacrifice, as we understand it, and the general
willingness of active, converted members to dedicate
enormous amounts of time and energy to the Church
places another strain on the Mormon family. There is an
implicit conflict of loyalties to Church and family.
(More at link)
Thanks for the links, Alex...glad to see you ALSO posted some text. ;0)
I've never said, “Don't witness”.
What exactly is your problem with my statements? I'm supposed to get mad at the Mormons if they tell me that I'm going to Hell? No, I've lived a life a anger and bitterness, and it's not for me.
Dispute with them yes. How did Paul do more, although more often and more effectively.
Deny them their Constitutional right to free speech and freedom of religion. Not likely to get away with that one.
I'm just saying, and all I have been saying is, that if you want to talk about your religion, and tell others that they need Christ, then you should permit them the same privilege.
Thinking it would be better if Mormons weren't quite so good at what they do is one thing. I agree with that.
Getting personally upset at being “excluded” from their idea of heaven is foolishness. You either have confidence in your faith, or you don't, and if you do, their opinions about it don't matter.
I don't know how I can explain it better.
As for “shepherding”, how is what I say any different from what Paul said? Witness to them, warn them. But they will not all agree.
So what? Despite what so many believe, God never told Cain that he was his brother's keeper. Adult human beings make their own choices and bear the consequences, even eternal ones.
Are ya’ll even reading what I write?? Because you seem to keep missing the point.
“She told me that the only thing that kept her from
losing her testimony during that period was that . . .”
What is “losing testimony”? Losing faith, or willful rejection? Not familiar with the jargon.
“The same reason there are so many liberals, they are either brain washed, born into it, have a financial stake in it or are just plain stupid.”
This must make it excruciating for those within who are critical thinkers and also have personal integrity. What do they do? Leave, or take up isolated hobbies they can do in the garage? Serious question.
Because you are an agnostic it would appear irrational.
The reason why is because those who TRULY BELIEVE in their understanding of spiritual truth, view that belief as being as essential as food, water and shelter - more so, typically, as the consequences of error will affect an immortal soul rather than a mere fleeting life.
“Saving souls” is not a cliche or mere busybody meddling to the truly devout, it is an emergency rescue operation, which some are willing to die for.
Thus the quarrels. To make sure the escape path is to real safety, and not a dead end or to a greater hazard.
The urgency of the argument can sometimes lead to great intensity of expression . . .
But this is the reason why believers of various persuasions quarrel. The differences are not theoretical or abstract to them, they are real, vital and urgent.
“lying for the Lord”
Again, please define. I am not trying to be obtuse, but the very fact you put this in quotes indicates it is a catchphrase, and it is one I am unfamiliar with.
Also, "milk before meat".
"Common members see such examples as situations where lying is justified. For the Mormon, loyalty and the welfare of the church are more important than the principle of honesty, and plausible denials and deception by omission are warranted by an opportunity to have the Mormon organization seen in the best possible light. This is part of the larger package of things that lead many to describe Mormonism as a cult. "Lying for the lord" is part of Mormonism's larger deceptive mainstreaming tactics, and conversion numbers would drastically lower if important Mormon beliefs were fully disclosed to investigators.
Robert L. Millet is a professor of ancient scripture at Brigham Young University.
Is “lying for the Lord” a phrase used by the practitioners? I ask because if so it indicates a truly compromised mindset, one so twisted as to be perpetually self deceiving. I can see the “mild before meat” sophistry being used by apologists, and as a self reassurance that it is all OK.
Is this sort of like the dichotomy of “Name it and Claim it” doctrine as espoused by those who believe it, compared to the same notion being described as “Blab it and Grab it” by those who reject the notion?
I have to say these links are interesting. It it reveals something like a whole elaborate tunnel and bunker system underneath a simple shack used as a cover. Very deceptive.
If Robert L. Millet was an attorney, and advised a witness to answer questions in that manner and it was discovered, he would be disbarred at a minimum, and likely imprisoned.
I begin to understand the Mormon suicide rate. I always assumed the pressure was external, but this approach to life would make the pressures internal in any person who retained some decency.
"Worthy" mormons who take part in temple rituals vow this:"The Law of Consecration: You and each of you covenant and promise before God, angels, and these witnesses at this altar, that you do accept the Law of Consecration as contained in the Doctrine and Covenants, in that you do consecrate yourselves, your time, talents, and everything with which the Lord has blessed you, or with which he may bless you, to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, for the building up of the Kingdom of God on the earth and for the establishment of Zion."
Warring religions. If people would worry about their own souls instead of attempting to save others, it is possible that millions of deaths wouldn’t have occurred in the last hand full of centuries.
Wow. I assumed the “testimony” was conviction, or loyalty. Instead it is a mere sales gimmick.
In reading these posts, some long standing puzzles from over 30 years ago are finally resolved. My only prolonged exposure to Mormons was in a trade school, where two Mormon couples had been sponsored by their church to attend. They made mighty efforts to convert me (I was single at the time, and quite cluelessly lost) and a Christian couple who were close friends of mine. The principal targets of their efforts were my friends - I was incidentally included as a tag along. I remember a discussion where my friend was debating grace and works with one of the Mormon men. It was all a yawner to me (being lost), when in this odd disconnect moment the Mormon out of the blue started this “testimony”. That pretty much concluded that visit.
The pair of couples was interesting too. One couple was just very nice, both of them. The husband was the outreach guy, the one who was debating my friend and who’s home we were in. His wife was invariably relaxed, warm and welcoming. She had the persona of a confident matron of twice her years. Lovely person, terrible coffee. The other couple, who were very close and cordial with the first couple, was very different. I liked the man, but he always seemed distant and sad. I detested his wife. She was invariably smug, condescending, supercilious and nasty nice. I assumed her husband’s melancholy was due to the wife’s personality.
At the time I suspected they were as much missionaries as they were students in the trade we were all in, and I also thought that not only husband and wife were there as couples to keep each other motivated, but that the two couples were there to keep each other on the reservation. I could never figure out which couple was dominant. The gregarious and affable man, or the insufferably arrogant woman. Their efforts continued the whole duration of the our stay at the school.
Thank you for your answers. They are providing some landmarks within an otherwise bewildering geography.
You answered: This must make it excruciating for those within who are critical thinkers and also have personal integrity. What do they do? Leave, or take up isolated hobbies they can do in the garage? Serious question.
A serious question that has crossed my mind as well. The explanation that has occurred to me, is that there are some who were raised in mormonism and are so emotionally invested in it, that they simply cannot let go and refuse to see the things that are so obviously wrong with it.
Then there are the converts, who are also everything you described, they are a bit harder to explain (Glen Beck) (Greta VanSustrand - Scientology). Did Beck convert to please his wife? There is a plethora of things I don't understand about why people do the things they do.
As for me and my house, we will serve the living God and He was never a man.
You have FReepmail.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.