quark wrote:The bishop just called Dear Wife this morning to set up a meeting with us.
Sigh...
Do it on your own terms, quark. One of the bishop's tools is to have you come to him. Make him come to you when you are available - your house, your time. And don't wear a suit. These are all signals that are important and disarming.
quark wrote:To answer the questions above, yes the bishop cried - he really did. I was not lying. In fact, I could see the tears welling up in his eyes again as he related to us our personal information.
"You went on a mission speaking ____ language?"
"Yes."
"You were married in the ____ temple?"
"Yes."
etc...
Total strangers sharing intimate information and crying in front of each other is simply wrong.
Crying is a rhetorical device; tears are rarely sincere. Like the pregnant pause, crying is used to invoke an emotional response in the listener. The response could be sorrow; you feel sorrowful because the person is crying for you and your misgivings. The response could be spiritual; you think that you feel a communal spirit that has filled up the person who is crying. The response could even be tears on your part. No matter - the intent is to capitalize on the emotional vulnerability of the listener to drive home a particular message.
I will freely, and with some shame and embarrassment, admit to using these techniques when I have taught lessons or spoken to congregations or individuals. I was never a blubberer; more so, I used the following patterns:
1. 'cracked voice'
2. 'obvious-pause-to-compose-myself-and-prevent-myself-from-crying'
3. 'say-five-words-then-pause'
4. 'make-voice-lower-and-raspy'
These patterns always, and I mean *always* elicited responses of "Brother LDST, when you said <insert banal wisdom here> the spirit was just so strong". Well, of course the "spirit" was strong, I completely manipulated your emotions! The same happened when I extended callings, when I made assignments, or even when I was just speaking one-on-one with members - employing these patterns, purposefully, I could guarantee the response I was looking for.
The best way to combat this is to ignore any sympathetic emotions that well up and address your concerns head on, like this:
"Bishop, your emotional response to my story is appreciated, but I have the benefit of the facts on my side - I know what is best for me and my family, and we are happy, despite your sorrow."
Fight emotion with the opposite emotion. Do not show that you are influenced by your natural sympathetic inclinations. Take a deep breath and tell the bishop why his emotions are not a valid response to your situation.
Anyway, I hope all goes well in your interview. Do not commit to anything that you do not wish to commit to.
I wish you and your family well,
H.
"Others cannot endure their own littleness unless they can translate it into meaningfulness on the largest possible level."
~ Ernest Becker
"Whether you think of it as heavenly or as earthly, if you love life immortality is no consolation for death."
~ Simone de Beauvoir
