charity wrote:BishopRic wrote:The responses by the active members here are typical of my experience. To protect many people involved in this story, I don't often give details...and I still won't. Just to appease some curiosity, I will say that I was set apart by the SP as an acting bishop. I served in the position for a few months...the bishop had an injury while serving in the military reserves during a weekend training -- broke about 28 bones when his parachute wouldn't open doing a low-flying exercise...he was lucky to land in a tree...
Thanks BR. You could have cleared that up right away, instead of playing coy for a while.
I had a purpose in responding as I did...to show how the Mormon mind works. It worked.
BishopRic wrote:
There has been some "action" taken in the Stake. (by the way, the "ward boss" label was sarcastic, in case you thought I was serious...). I've recently heard that two of the women have sought some professional help, although I don't know the outcome. We moved away from the area soon after the bishop came back (for this and other reasons). Since my shock of the situation, and because of some other personal issues, I learned of other similar actions in other wards. There was even some of this type of cover-up in my own wife's family when she was younger.
Point is, it happened...much more often than it should have. Like TD, I see an improvement in how this is handled today. For a few years, I worked in a professional capacity with LDS Social Services as they made efforts to improve the various challenges in the mental health arena.
And just how does the fact that there are mistakes made sometimes by fallible men shake your faith? I guess by this experience, you should have forsaken Christianity altogether. Judas really messed up and he was an apostle.
Well, first, as I said in my OP, it was a trigger to dig deeper, and I did. It alone did not "shake my faith" (in fact, I like to say that my 'faith' is stronger than it has ever been -- it's just faith in reality now). As you would probably perceive it, I did "forsake Christianity altogether." My experience with Mormonism did create a suspicion of traditional Christian claims as well, and I certainly view the man Jesus very differently today. I love reading about his life, and today, by the way, I actually believe Judas was not the "traitor" you probably do. But that's another thread....
BishopRic wrote:But I would like to invite Charity and others to consider why their Mormon minds immediately go to the suspicion of my story. Why do the FARMS folks focus on whether my friend Grant Palmer is an "insider," rather on addressing his actual work. Why is the common approach to critics to find some deep dark problem in their past, so they are discredited -- and subsequently transfer that to their work, that may otherwise be so right on?
Because credibility is everything.
I suppose you could say "selective credibility." What I find humorous is how nit-picky Mormons can be about the word "Insider" (by the way, I studied with and helped Grant edit his book...and of course he is an insider -- he was the director of seminaries and Institutes for a region for a period of time; the reason he had access to many records from the vaults was because of his position in the CES. Who wouldn't term that an "insider?"), but will swallow hook, line and sinker the claims of Joseph of multiple visitations of God, angels, resurrected beings, etc., without looking at the evidence that indicates so clearly that he lied about so much of his life. I call that "
selective scrutiny."
And order in the Church is a given. A person does not act outside their authority. There is only a bishop, a specific calling with set apart and ordained responsibilities and stewardship. No one else in the ward has that authority as long as there is a bishop in place, incapacitated or not. A first counselor with additional responsbilities is still not a bishop. Bishops have a special place in the Church, to the extent that even after being released as bishop, the title Bishop is still appropriate. For someone to claim that, when it isn't true is a big mistake.
Check around...I think you'll find plenty of instances of "acting" leaders throughout Mormon history. Of course it's only "special" as long as you believe it is uniquely called of God. To me, it's a man-made title to create authority over the lowly and gullible members. The truth is they all do the best they can in their callings, as did I. Of course, we all pray and beg for divine help. Goodness knows, we all need it!
Why do the FARMS folk focus on Grant Palmer's claim to be an insider? Because he did it to lay greater claim to credibility than he deserved. He wants non-members to think of him as more knowledgeable and more believable because he was an insider. Else why trumpet the idea in the title of a book? He wanted to get something out of his status in the Church. But to those who know the organization, a CES employee is not an "insider." Can't you see that "insider" claim as an attempt to deceive? He sure isn't going to be given the red carpet among members of the Church because he was a CES employee!
Of course he used the term to get some attention. He published a book ( and a darn good one at that, IMHO). He wanted it read. We discussed the title before he chose it, and we never even thought it would be an issue. He had appropriate access to material most members did not at the time. Do you know why that was? He was an educater for the church. He was an "insider" compared to the average member. You can slam him all you want, but in my mind that just means you are drawing at straws for ways to attack the brilliant work he did -- and you don't want to admit that it has impacted many members who HAVE read his material and have chosen to leave the church because of what they learned. I can tell you I know hundreds of former Mormons that have left the church because of his work. Right or wrong, it has made an impact.
BishopRic wrote:Charity, with her psychology background, at least should be familiar with this process. We react to attacks. There have been many "attacks" on the LDS claims recently. Most of them have legitimacy, and may imply that the church is less than the stellar organization it claims to be. Since we personalize our faith as being "us," it is natural to "fight or flee" from the attacks. I think it is obvious this is what is happeneing here. Daily. And sometimes the fighting becomes humorous and sooooo illogical.
Yes, there are attacks. I haven't seen any that have legitimacy. Nothing has been claimed about the Church--the restored Gospel-- that has any value.
In your mind, and only yours. If you ask those (and really listen to the answers) of us that have left, you will learn that many of these attacks ARE legitimate. And if you look at them with an objective and open mind, very few folks are not compelled by them. In our little study group with Grant (all lawyers and doctors), every one of us either left or became NOMs after the book was completed. You can justify all you want Charity, but the evidence against Joseph's claims is powerful...and even more accessible today to those interested in the issues....
I think it is obvious what is happening here. The disaffected, exed, resigned, and never-mo's are threatened with the idea that there is a truth that they are going to be held accountable for living. They don't want that responsibility, and that threatens them. So they name call, they insult, they mock and ridicule.
I hear this comment frequently, and all I can say is that is is sooooo wrong. Your perception is created in your own mind Charity, and when you are ever interested in knowing the truth about us, go ahead and ask. THEN, listen to the answers, rather than assume you already know.
BishopRic wrote:
But I understand why it is done. It is easier to fight to stay in one's comfort zone than challenge that paradigm to possibly require the discomfort of complete spiritual alteration. I went through the latter. It wasn't easy. But for me, it was very worth it.
I don't know why you say that active membership in the Church is a "comfort zone." For the truly faithful it is a daily challenge, of self-evaluation, of self-denial, of work, of seeking not just the good or the better way, but the best. It would be a lot easier to not be LDS.
Another common misconception. Believe me, it would be so much easier for us to continue the status quo, remain accepted by our families, don't rock the boat....
But instead, some of us have followed what we have learned to be true for us, and have had the integrity to leave the church, despite the judgment you, and so many others make about our "sinful ways," and the disowning of us many of our families choose to do, and the pain we feel when we can't attend our family's weddings, etc....
I don't know what is "easier" about "not being LDS." Most of us continue loving and spending time with our families, serving charitable causes, giving our time to service organizations...it's just that we don't limit all that to the Mormon box and believing that some humans are more righteous and worthy than others!