The Question of Hypocrisy---Help Me Understand....

[_Yoda]

PP, Merc, and rcrockett have called out Jason, Harmony, and myself on multiple occasions for being hypocritical in posting here and openly sharing concerns we feel about certain Church tenets.

I ask again...How is this hypocritical?

Have you never belonged to an organization where you didn't agree with everything that went on?

[_Ray A]

PP, Merc, and rcrockett have called out Jason, Harmony, and myself on multiple occasions for being hypocritical in posting here and openly sharing concerns we feel about certain Church tenets.

I ask again...How is this hypocritical?

I think it depends on how far a person goes with open criticism. I would resign from the Church if I felt I was too much at odds with it. But that's me. Others seem to define their questioning as "loyal opposition".

Have you never belonged to an organization where you didn't agree with everything that went on?

It's obvious you don't agree with everything in the Church, but you have defended it many times from crass criticism. That, in my book, is an honourable thing to do.

[_moksha]

Actually, I see the greatest fidelity in understanding the weakness of an organization and being willing to stick around anyway and help it improve. As Titanic passengers, some would be content to gaze upon the wonder of an iceberg and deny its existence, while some would content themselves with remaining below deck. Liz, Harmony and Jason who have been called out, seek to alert the deck hands to the impending collision. Should they be castigated or commended? Depends upon how well you swim, does it not?

[_Dr. Shades]

Actually, I see the greatest fidelity in understanding the weakness of an organization and being willing to stick around anyway and help it improve.

So tell me. . . how many times, over the years, has the church been assisted, with the loving gratitude of the First Presidency, by rank-and-file individuals helping it improve?

As Titanic passengers, some would be content to gaze upon the wonder of an iceberg and deny its existence, while some would content themselves with remaining below deck. Liz, Harmony and Jason who have been called out, seek to alert the deck hands to the impending collision. Should they be castigated or commended? Depends upon how well you swim, does it not?

Do the deck hands even want to be alerted?

[_Yoda]

So tell me. . . how many times, over the years, has the church been assisted, with the loving gratitude of the First Presidency, by rank-and-file individuals helping it improve?

I think that public opinion of the members is what made a difference with the change in the temple ordinances. Apparently, there was a survey given to temple goers. Shortly after the result of that survey was tallied, the changes occurred.

I think that change can happen from the inside. It's slow moving (obviously...look how long it took for a "revelation" to happen for the blacks to have the priesthood, and for the polygamy manifesto to occur,) but they did happen.

[_Yoda]

Do the deck hands even want to be alerted?

Some do. Some don't.

[_Yoda]

It's obvious you don't agree with everything in the Church, but you have defended it many times from crass criticism. That, in my book, is an honourable thing to do.

Thanks, Ray. Sorry...I missed this post last night. I was REALLY tired and up way too late. Ask Bond and Tarski. We were all on chat at some ungodly hour. LOL

As far as the Church goes, I call things the way I see them. There are things I like and things I don't like...but there are more things I like, so I maintain my membership.

I guess I'm one of those fools who would really like to implement change from the inside. LOL

[_rcrocket]

I think that you fully understand my position on hypocrisy but you choose to ignore it and formulate your own version of it.


It is not hypocritical to openly oppose an organization of which you are a member to induce change. Or to learn. Or to flush out hidden meaning. Or whatever. (Whether the organization permits such dissent is another matter, but that matter is unrelated to hypocrisy.)

But "openly" is the key. Hypocrisy arises when you say one thing in one venue and say another in a different venue. Or do one thing in one venue and do a different thing in a different venue. Jesus condemned hypocrisy more than any other sin, a detail I find interesting about the New Testament. I really suspect that few posters on this board read their New Testament.

As long as you act consistent with your beliefs in all venues, you are not a hypocrite.

But, if you use the Internet as a place to vent anonymously where you wouldn't do it using your own name, you are a vile hypocrite. You will certainly stand condemned in the same fashion as the Pharisees were; they will burn in hell and so will you, maybe. I'm not your judge. Combined with personal attacks against people with real names, be it Gordon B. Hinckley, or Boyd K. Packer, or Robert D. Crockett, not only are you a hypocrite you are a coward. "You" speaking generically and not necessarily you personally.

I see many people on this board who admit to being good members of the Church; admitting home teachers, and keeping their names on the records of the church when the things they say on this board would get them de-admitted. The only thing that protects them is the anonymity.

It is an insufficient argument to say that the Internet facilitates anonymity so there isn't any harm in doing what everybody else does. Well, darkness facilitates rapists; masks facilitate bank robbers; copy machines facilitate counterfeiters; telephone poles in the old day facilitated the posting of defamatory material, and so forth. Just because the medium exists doesn't mean that the wrong can be justified. Best to stop posting and keep your feelings to yourself than be one person in your ward and with your spouse and a different person on the internet where you can do real damage to the mission of the Church by your continued mocking. "You," generically, not "you" personally. Don't come back to me and challenge me to show where in the past you've made hypocritical posts; I have no interest in doing so.

But, your continued re-casting of the issue of hypocrisy to merely one of free speech to challenge an organization I think is supercilious. The more you do that, the more you will confuse and persuade the stupid, so have at it.

And don't come back to me and tell me to go on some other board and deride the faithful members of the Church who also post anonymously. Again, you just want to confuse things. Although I do not admire anonymity in any form, if you say one thing with your public face and the same thing with your anonymous face, you are not a hypocrite.

So, let me suggest that if you (generically) have any integrity and personal character at all, and want to post vicious things against the Church, then resign. If you want to post vicious things against living people, use your real name. But, you (you, personally) know what? Personal character and integrity is sharply wanting on this board.



rcrocket

[_Yoda]

Although I do not admire anonymity in any form, if you say one thing with your public face and the same thing with your anonymous face, you are not a hypocrite.

First of all, thanks for responding, rcrockett, and for clarifying your view.

In your definition then, I, personally, am NOT a hypocrite, because I have said nothing here that I haven't said in a public venue, and have said nothing that my Church leaders are not aware of.

Now...have I gone into the in depth discussions we tend to go into here in a Church meeting? No, because it wouldn't be an appropriate venue to do so.

[_barrelomonkeys]

Liz, I most definitely am a hypocrite.

I come on these boards and speak of finding God. I search for Him and hope to know the truth whatever it is one day. I speak of my pain of not having the assurance of His love, or atleast not recognizing it. I find advice here and I've witnessed faith and blessings that I envy.

This is something I can not bring myself to speak about in real life. My husband dismisses me and thinks I should be a content atheist as he is. I am so uncomfortable about anything dealing with religion I try to avoid those that talk about it. And yet, here I am.

I just started reading the New Testament, and I find much truth in it, that is compelling to me. I don't know what happens, but I do know that Jesus would not condemn me for whatever path I have to walk to find Him (if indeed I do). So, I'll happily be a hypocrite.