Let's face it. We in America live in an age where the underdog feels the most entitled to victory. If you feel like the guy at Starbucks deprived you of a couple ounces of foam, you are entitled to a lawsuit. If you feel like a system doesn't give you a fair shake, you have the right to make it known to the world. Which is great in most cases and even expected. America has a long standing tradition of protests and freedom fighters and some of them have done a lot of good. However, there are cases where such actions do not make much sense until you look at it a little more in depth.
In the last couple of years there has been an increase in news about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the member protestors who disagree with some actions of the church. In discussions with such protestors, I can understand how they get to the opinions they have and have sympathy for what they are thinking and feeling. I may not agree with them, but I can have empathy for them and understand the path that lead them to where they are. I can even follow the reasoning behind why they think it's ok to storm certain inappropriate venues so that their voices can be heard. What I don't understand, is how they so thoroughly blurred politics with religion.
In politics, it is essential that all voices be heard where ever they can. Protests are a natural side-effect of people trying to find common ground with those with differing opinions. We live in a land that is governed by one body and as long as we live on this soil claimed by that government we all have to follow that governments rules (i.e. taxes). Therefore, such actions are expected and necessary as a matter of course to make sure nobody is unduly repressed.
Religion is different. In religion, you either agree with and do your best to march in step with the leaders of your chosen church, or you don't actually want to be a part of that religion and you are free to leave. It's that simple. It's a choice. Welcome to America. You can live in the same house, have the same job, and be a part of any religion or no religion and it doesn't really affect your mortal life that much. If you like most aspects of a religion, but find some things fundamentally wrong with it, you either find a new one or create one that is tailored to your individual desires. This is where church's usually divide and new organizations spring up. Last I checked, it only takes six people to create a new religion in America. Yet, this is not the route the protestors have chosen. Instead they are employing political tactics of marching, sign carrying, and shouted outbursts during meetings. Why?
This is where I think I understand the protesters better than they understand themselves. Logically, it would be much simpler for dissenting LDS members of like minded opinions to gather themselves into a body and separate from the church as a whole and form their own church. They won't, because emotionally they know they'd loose too much if they did. Besides obviously loosing millions of people who believe their church was founded by God himself, they'd suddenly find themselves not among the largest bodies of Christian faithful, they would be without a prophet, they wouldn't have any buildings, institutions, or missionaries and may loose contact with many friends and family members. They would essentially have to start from scratch which would be a lot of hard work. Also, if you've deeply associated yourself with a religion long enough to connect right and truth and good with being a member of that church, but you suddenly find yourself in disagreement with it, what do you have left? If you leave, are you suddenly not good anymore? This, of course is wrong because goodness isn't exclusively religious. So these good people suddenly find themselves in a limbo world where they want to be a part of the church, but a part of them nags with increasing intensity that a part of that same church is wrong and must be fixed. When it feels like bishops or stake presidents don't handle your feelings seriously, you may feel boxed into a tight corner where the only option is to protest. It's not, but I can see why people would feel that way.
My point is that disagreements and spiritual upheavals happen all of the time and in every ward in our church. Most of them can be handle through personal study, prayer, temple attendance, and if necessary a trip to the Bishop. In the church, you don't have to go to the highest authority to get your spiritual needs met because your local leaders are acting by the prophets authority. It would be impossible for twelve guys to meet personally with every member as often as the members need council. Moses learned that from his father-in-law. Are these leaders perfect? No, but they do their best which is all any human being can ask of another. Along those same lines, all policies, procedures, and actions start at the very top. God says jump, then the prophet says jump, then the twelve say jump, then the seventy, say jump, then the stake presidents say jump, then the bishops say jump, then the teachers say jump. It's that simple. Same message, same line of authority.
This church is a hierarchy with God as the king, but it also has democratic workings threaded perfectly throughout the system. We vote, but we can't vote God or the prophet out of the system. The vote is so that the leaders know who has questions, who needs extra guidance, and rarely who knows something that makes a leader unworthy for his calling. It happens, but very rarely. I find that most people get into the trouble when they over-complicate the message or when they cross wires with "rights" and God's will. Many times the leaders have said that we tailor ourselves to God, not the other way around. So why are so many people convinced that protesting and telling the leaders to tailor gospel to what they personally believe will ever work? We don't follow scripture according to the interpretation of John from Australia. We've always followed it by the direction of God through his prophets and apostles. This is what fundamentally make the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints earn that title. So why do protestors believe this will ever change?
Believe me, I'd rather people would keep their voiced dissenting opinions out of General Conference and took their questions to the Lord and their leaders. If still unsatisfied, then I'd rather they'd leave the church until they've figured out what's bothering them so much and we remain friends than to have protestors rudely disturb sacred moments for people who do believe and have deep feelings about our meetings. It's like having your annoying cousin crash your dad's funeral with obnoxious political debates. There's a time and a place. And personally, I feel like if you're trying to single handedly change the minds of thousands of people, you'd rather be their respectful relative than the obnoxious one. Bees and honey and all that.
In the last couple of years there has been an increase in news about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the member protestors who disagree with some actions of the church. In discussions with such protestors, I can understand how they get to the opinions they have and have sympathy for what they are thinking and feeling. I may not agree with them, but I can have empathy for them and understand the path that lead them to where they are. I can even follow the reasoning behind why they think it's ok to storm certain inappropriate venues so that their voices can be heard. What I don't understand, is how they so thoroughly blurred politics with religion.
In politics, it is essential that all voices be heard where ever they can. Protests are a natural side-effect of people trying to find common ground with those with differing opinions. We live in a land that is governed by one body and as long as we live on this soil claimed by that government we all have to follow that governments rules (i.e. taxes). Therefore, such actions are expected and necessary as a matter of course to make sure nobody is unduly repressed.
Religion is different. In religion, you either agree with and do your best to march in step with the leaders of your chosen church, or you don't actually want to be a part of that religion and you are free to leave. It's that simple. It's a choice. Welcome to America. You can live in the same house, have the same job, and be a part of any religion or no religion and it doesn't really affect your mortal life that much. If you like most aspects of a religion, but find some things fundamentally wrong with it, you either find a new one or create one that is tailored to your individual desires. This is where church's usually divide and new organizations spring up. Last I checked, it only takes six people to create a new religion in America. Yet, this is not the route the protestors have chosen. Instead they are employing political tactics of marching, sign carrying, and shouted outbursts during meetings. Why?
This is where I think I understand the protesters better than they understand themselves. Logically, it would be much simpler for dissenting LDS members of like minded opinions to gather themselves into a body and separate from the church as a whole and form their own church. They won't, because emotionally they know they'd loose too much if they did. Besides obviously loosing millions of people who believe their church was founded by God himself, they'd suddenly find themselves not among the largest bodies of Christian faithful, they would be without a prophet, they wouldn't have any buildings, institutions, or missionaries and may loose contact with many friends and family members. They would essentially have to start from scratch which would be a lot of hard work. Also, if you've deeply associated yourself with a religion long enough to connect right and truth and good with being a member of that church, but you suddenly find yourself in disagreement with it, what do you have left? If you leave, are you suddenly not good anymore? This, of course is wrong because goodness isn't exclusively religious. So these good people suddenly find themselves in a limbo world where they want to be a part of the church, but a part of them nags with increasing intensity that a part of that same church is wrong and must be fixed. When it feels like bishops or stake presidents don't handle your feelings seriously, you may feel boxed into a tight corner where the only option is to protest. It's not, but I can see why people would feel that way.
My point is that disagreements and spiritual upheavals happen all of the time and in every ward in our church. Most of them can be handle through personal study, prayer, temple attendance, and if necessary a trip to the Bishop. In the church, you don't have to go to the highest authority to get your spiritual needs met because your local leaders are acting by the prophets authority. It would be impossible for twelve guys to meet personally with every member as often as the members need council. Moses learned that from his father-in-law. Are these leaders perfect? No, but they do their best which is all any human being can ask of another. Along those same lines, all policies, procedures, and actions start at the very top. God says jump, then the prophet says jump, then the twelve say jump, then the seventy, say jump, then the stake presidents say jump, then the bishops say jump, then the teachers say jump. It's that simple. Same message, same line of authority.
This church is a hierarchy with God as the king, but it also has democratic workings threaded perfectly throughout the system. We vote, but we can't vote God or the prophet out of the system. The vote is so that the leaders know who has questions, who needs extra guidance, and rarely who knows something that makes a leader unworthy for his calling. It happens, but very rarely. I find that most people get into the trouble when they over-complicate the message or when they cross wires with "rights" and God's will. Many times the leaders have said that we tailor ourselves to God, not the other way around. So why are so many people convinced that protesting and telling the leaders to tailor gospel to what they personally believe will ever work? We don't follow scripture according to the interpretation of John from Australia. We've always followed it by the direction of God through his prophets and apostles. This is what fundamentally make the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints earn that title. So why do protestors believe this will ever change?
Believe me, I'd rather people would keep their voiced dissenting opinions out of General Conference and took their questions to the Lord and their leaders. If still unsatisfied, then I'd rather they'd leave the church until they've figured out what's bothering them so much and we remain friends than to have protestors rudely disturb sacred moments for people who do believe and have deep feelings about our meetings. It's like having your annoying cousin crash your dad's funeral with obnoxious political debates. There's a time and a place. And personally, I feel like if you're trying to single handedly change the minds of thousands of people, you'd rather be their respectful relative than the obnoxious one. Bees and honey and all that.
No comments:
Post a Comment