Why Do Mormons Have a Tendancy to be Judgmental?

[_Yoda]

Great comments, guys!

I love all of your contributions. I'll comment more when my 3 year old goes to bed.

Thanks again!

:)

[_moksha]

1) Do I have a problem with judgementalism?

Yes.

2) Why do I think I have this problem?

For the most part, I believe it is a function of my insecurities, and a propensity to distract myself from my own discomforting issues by focusing on the issues of others.

3) How do I overcome this problem?

By working to improve my self-security and sense-of-self through concentrating on becoming the kind of person I can better admire and appreciate, and by developing more functional skills for attaining mutual love, value, and respect. The motivation being: I, personally, and those I love and care about, will be far more benefited by me doing so than were I to resort to judgementalism.

To the extent that I have been successful in this endeavor, the stated motivation has been realized, and I would commend the same to one and all.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Right you are Wade. We all are judgmental to some degree, but your example of self-knowledge and introspection is essential for all of us.

[_marg]

In many ways, we suffer from the same ignorance the followers of the Law of Moses suffered. They refused to accept the new law of Christ because it messed up their idea of record keeping...their idea of keeping score on how close they were to reaching salvation. They couldn't see the forest through the trees.

Because this relates to this thread, I brought it over here. Could you explain to me what you are talking about Liz.

Who are the followers of the Law of Moses that you are referring to?

What was their ignorance that you are referring to?

What do you mean by your second sentence?

What "forest through the trees" couldn't they see?

[_Blixa]

Judgementalism is one of the characteristics that most defined my experiences with Mormonism. I tend to agree with runtu, and even more with Satanwassetup that there are specific features of Mormon doctrine (that hazy blur) and culture that both produce and encourage it. The tendency to only address outward behaviors, to overemphasize the visible as exactly correlative of abstractions like "worthiness," is built into Mormonism in many ways. Combine that with a hierarchical pecking order which demands and assigns surveillance and you've got your explanation.

There's nothing wrong with encouraging neighborliness and looking out for one another. Those are comendable efforts. The trouble comes with the structured enforcement of checking up on people, tallying observations, passing on information, and the obsession with record keeping that extends to retaining every untutored jackass in authority over you's half-thought-out opinion in a "jacket" that follows you throughout your life, around the globe, and into the eternities, apparently.

What can be done? Well, a lot needs to be done on many levels including restructuring the instutional organization of the church, actually training its much vaunted "lay ministry" in psychology, counseling, and common sense, repeated exhortations from the pulpit for people to regard each other with compassion first and foremost, and a refocusing of GA attention from the outrageously petty (earrings) to the serious.

Its a daunting task. Wade says "the best place to start with most any solution to interpersonal issues is with me," and I couldn't agree less. I think that the best place to start---with any issue---is with as accurate a conceptual grasp of the problem as possible. In other words, looking beyond one's own experience ("me") in order to understand a given situation in all its historical and institutional complexity. Only with this in place can one create a strategy for attacking, solving, or changing as the case may be.

It's a basic lesson I often address with my students, usually through a close reading of A Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass. I use this text repeatedly, not as an artifact of "the past" but as a narrative about pedagogy: a story about learning and acting on the basis of that knowledge applicable well beyond its "period."

Douglass had first to grasp slavery as a system before he could do anything other than merely react to it as an individual. No matter how he changed his behaviour: becoming a good submissive slave, or a continually rebelling one, it wasn't going to affect an institution much larger than himself. Once he committed to educate himself on it (by teaching himself to read, then reading, then thinking, then observing, then more reading, etc.) then he could truly see what he was up against. This led to his strategy: escape and join with others to combat it systemically, not just individually. As Douglass said, thus a slave was made a man. A man, I might add with an accute grasp of the interdependence of self and community.

-----------

On other tip: I've found reading liz and harmony's posts extremely interesting. Theirs are voices I don't think I've yet heard "within" Mormonism, and they interest me very much.

[_Yoda]

In many ways, we suffer from the same ignorance the followers of the Law of Moses suffered. They refused to accept the new law of Christ because it messed up their idea of record keeping...their idea of keeping score on how close they were to reaching salvation. They couldn't see the forest through the trees.

Because this relates to this thread, I brought it over here. Could you explain to me what you are talking about Liz.

Who are the followers of the Law of Moses that you are referring to?

What was their ignorance that you are referring to?

What do you mean by your second sentence?

What "forest through the trees" couldn't they see?

In looking at this statement, I realized that I wasn't clear in who I was referring to. Thanks for bringing this over here, Marg. I agree. It does relate to the current topic.

I was referring to those followers of the Law of Moses (Old Testament law) who had a hard time accepting Christ's message in the New Testament. The people during His time were so used to following the ancient Law of Moses, and were so busy "taking x amount of steps to the temple....only eating this or that" that they failed to recognize that Christ, in his coming, not only fulfilled the old law, but He brought with Him a new law, a higher law.

My point was that I think that LDS culture makes it very easy to have that same type of "Old Testament" mentality. It's easy to get caught up in tracking and record keeping. Instead of going to Church to worship, it becomes like another work day. We get caught up in meetings (I'm talking about organizational meetings, not Sunday School or Sacrament Meeting), turning in reports (Visiting Teaching/Home Teaching reports, Missionary reports, etc.). We get lost in simply "going through the motions", and actually following the teachings of Christ gets put on the back burner. We're too busy.

[_Blixa]

I forgot to say, that I don't think Wade's prescription is worthless, far from it. It is commendable to always engage in self-criticism and strive to deal with other people with as much kindness as possible. My disagreement is that this individual behavior is the most useful place to begin (and/or end).

[_Yoda]

I forgot to say, that I don't think Wade's prescription is worthless, far from it. It is commendable to always engage in self-criticism and strive to deal with other people with as much kindness as possible. My disagreement is that this individual behavior is the most useful place to begin (and/or end).

I think that Wade's assessment is a fine place to begin. After all, the text that you use with your students focussed on how Douglass first looked inwardly. Then, when he recognized that changing his individual behavior was not going to solve the problem with the "bigger picture", he moved on to further educating himself so that he could become part of the larger solution.

I absolutely agree with your statement here:

What can be done? Well, a lot needs to be done on many levels including restructuring the instutional organization of the church, actually training its much vaunted "lay ministry" in psychology, counseling, and common sense, repeated exhortations from the pulpit for people to regard each other with compassion first and foremost, and a refocusing of GA attention from the outrageously petty (earrings) to the serious.

It seems to me that there is a need to "get back to basics". The focus of Church leadership seems to be on the "wrath of God", which was prevalent throughout the Old Testament. The focus of "justice tempered with mercy", which was Christ's message in the New Testament, where he actually came and fulfilled the Law of Moses, gets lip service paid to it, but little else.

[_Blixa]

Point taken, as a first step in an implied series of steps, it is not only "good," but maybe the only place anyone ever can start. But it will prove insufficient, and often deadly (as in Douglass's case) unless coupled with a perpective that allows you to see beyond your own individual experiences and situation.

But to the issue at hand: I don't know if any of my prescriptions could ever really happen. I tend to doubt it based on my historical knowledge of the church as an institution. I don't think any movement to change it from within would have an effect without other threats to its overall existence: economic or political threats.

I admit my understanding of recent church history (in the last few decades) is spotty, as is any deeper grasp of church history at the level of policy and finances. I'm trying to fill in those gaps a bit now, for my own personal understanding and also as research for a writing project that will touch upon church/western history. The kind of discussion I've read and participated in on various lds-themed message boards has been extraordinarily helpful to me: both in turning me on to scholarly works I need to read and also giving me a "feeling" for how issues are playing out right now in the real lives of real people.

[_Yoda]

But to the issue at hand: I don't know if any of my prescriptions could ever really happen. I tend to doubt it based on my historical knowledge of the church as an institution. I don't think any movement to change it from within would have an effect without other threats to its overall existence: economic or political threats.

I suppose that's why, in my own life circumstances, I have taken more of what can best be described as a "cafeteria Mormon" approach.

I believe the basic core of the gospel, but as far as callings, time commitments, etc., I try to balance these things very carefully, and family always takes precedance. I have no problem telling a bishop or any other Church leader "no" if I am asked to do something that conflicts with family or work commitments.

Some, like Plutarch, brand me a hypocrite because of my approach. But I really don't care. It's that judgmentalism creeping in again, I suppose. ;)

I just don't understand why, as members of the Church, we have to be so hard on each other. Everyone has their own set of trials to bear. Instead of looking down on each other, why not offer support? There is a difference. You can accept another person for who they are, and help them in their circumstances if it's possible without making a judgment.

This is where I disagree with all of the hierarchies in the Church which have been established. I think that these were created more out of cultural means than spiritual.

[_Blixa]

Thanks for making me rethink the whole "cafeteria Mormon" thing...

Its something I've always had a problem with, not because I'm TBM, but because I'm no longer a member, never liked church, and really, really dislike it now. I've always seen it as a selfish position that just uses what parts of Mormonism fit best for individual reasons, ignoring any problematic issues and blithely caring less about the less than beneficial effects the church-as-total-institution might have on others.

I don't think this fits you, from what I've read, so its instructive to me to see other variations. Living as a "critical" Mormon is something I've run across before and I need to think again about my responses. It strikes me as such an impossible position in so many ways...

You've probably discussed this before--probably to death. So, no need to respond at length, I'll just keep reading and thinking...