An example:
I have lived in quite a few wards in my life. In one particular situation, our Gospel Doctrine teacher brought up the topic of Divine Investiture (the idea that the Son often speaks as if he were the Father, since he represents the Father). The extreme version of this is that the Father never once spoke directly with man until he appeared to Joseph Smith in the First Vision. Our GD teacher believed this firmly, for no other reason than a previous Church President had said it - so he used it to say that a passage we were reading was the Son (Jehovah) speaking, even though it referred to "Mine Only Begotten Son".
Glancing around the class, I could tell that about half of the members attending weren't totally comfortable with that - but not so uncomfortable that they felt like making an issue about it. I raised my hand and said, essentially:
"I know lots of members who believe differently about that particular issue - but I personally don't care. The words are the Father's no matter if he or the Son is saying them, so as long as we recognize that they are the Father's words I'm fine with it."
I could have made an issue or confrontation out of it, and I could have remained silent - like everyone else there who didn't agree totally. Instead, I simply said that it's ok to not see it that exact way - and the conversation moved on.
The interesting thing is that a couple of weeks later, there was a similar situation with something that was taught, and one of the very respected sisters in that ward spoke up and said, "I just can't see it that way. When I read it, I get (a different message)." After the class, before Priesthood meeting, another brother who was in a presidency in the ward leaned toward me and said, "Whenever we get into those types of deep discussions (controversial ones is what he meant), my brain starts to hurt - so I just tune it out until they're done. I figure I'll understand it someday, but I just don't care right now." Both of those members are seen by everyone as faithful, dedicated members (because they are) - and actually as orthodox, conservative members (because they just don't care about correcting everything with which they disagree).
As I said, I think this happens WAY more often than most members think.
11 comments:
And I think doctrine is way less important than lifestyle, because our faith is predicated upon a set of behaviors that improve our personal revelation and our ability to know God by becoming God. We certainly can't be saved in ignorance, but more and more I think that real knowledge only comes personally. That brother who is doing an amazing job with his home teaching, really caring for his families, teaching his children, pouring out his soul in prayer, searching and pondering the scriptures ... isn't going to be tripped in the least because his brain hurts in GD. I teach GD, and I recognize the responsibility and the futility of investing too much angst in the whole thing.
I admire your balance and your smooth methods of generally bringing people together in a discussion. I'm much more outspoken and confrontive, we end up with different outcomes. Your style is much more appropraite for church than mine.
This mirrors my own experience, too, Papa D. (For me it's the Lovely Wife Eye-roll Test -- if she'll roll her eyes, I will try not to speak...) And I also admire those who can advance a different point of view while avoiding conflict.
It's not always appropriate to say "that doesn't matter" by itself. Saying "I see it differently, but it's not that big of a deal to me" is much more effective in my view.
I find it very freeing to consider that I don't have to know everything, a concept reflected in both your post and other's subsequent comments. Unfortunately I've not yet developed the capacity of grace under fire,although I've improved where it matters most, in my home . Acknowledging how little I know with my kids,and emphasising our mutual right not to know and to make up our own minds has avoided much conflict. At church, I am learning that it's not my responsibility to put everyone right. I always thought I was responsible for everything.
Bonnie. The old orthopraxy v orthodoxy debate?
I know your discussion of divine investiture is used here as just an example of making your point, but it is interesting. I mean, who really is talking in Moses 1 and other places? And it's not just in "LDS" scripture. Who are those guys that visited Abram and Sariah? God? heavenly angels? prophets? Pizza Hut delivery? An equivalent to this is when discussion is made during Gospel Doctrine class of the several Book of Mormon statements of how Jesus is "The Very Eternal Father". A few heads will nod at the explanation from the manual, while others will wonder "Really? Is there anywhere else that He is called that?"
But, speaking of divine investiture, it's interesting that the 2nd century church father Justin Martyr dealt with the same topic. He writes:
"When you hear utterances of the prophets, you must not suppose that they are spoken by the inspired themselves, but by the Divine Word who moves them. Sometimes He (God) speaks as from the person of God the Lord and Father of all; sometimes as from the person of Christ; sometimes as from (a) person...one man being the writer of the whole but introducing the persons who converse."
"Really? Is there anywhere else that He is called that?"
BTW, Isaiah doesn't count. Okay, well, he does, but I'm speaking more of common useage in scripture and GA talks.
Who said the Father first appeared to Joseph?
Yeah, larryco, it's a fascinating topic.
cadams, I've actually heard that belief twice in my life - and I was just as incredulous the second time, since I figured the first person was the exception who proved the rule. Granted, twice in 46 years isn't a pattern . . .
I didn't realize it at the time, but looking back I think one of the biggest reasons I had to stop going to church was because I couldn't sit there and say nothing, but I felt like I shouldn't speak up. The anxiety and craziness I felt in that conflict was too much to handle...
I was always complimented and thanked (in private after the meetings) when I did speak up and say something. In the meeting, I was told that I didn't understand the gospel, or I needed to have more faith, or my comments were completely ignored.
I love the Mormon Stories or Post Mormon gatherings, because I feel freedom to have my own thoughts and to share them. I wish church had had that feeling to it.
I wonder why I don't say anything when I disagree. Sometimes it's to avoid troubling the teacher, or derailing the lesson, or actually offending the teacher, or just to avoid contention, or to avoid arguing with a fool, or to avoid inflating my own opinions. But to not say anything is sometimes probably dishonest of me or at least inauthentic. The open exchange is needed in our classes, especially for new members. How do they learn doctrine from opinion?
Post a Comment