Standing up together to Make a Change within Mormonism.

[_Hades]

You're starting to remind me of my mother. She is always trying to invalidate my thoughts and concerns so that I can return to the church. She is afraid for my immortal soul.

You should listen to your mother. She is much older and wiser than you are. She gave you life, after all. Listen to her.

I appreciate all that my mother has done for me. She has been a good mother.

We all choose our own paths. That should be the nature of things. Her fears are unwarranted. They came from her mother. We should be proud of our children as they take off on their own and discover what they will. Nothing should come between mother or father and child in my opinion.

[_ShadowFax]

Rather than using the Anonymous Bishops technique of looking for symbolism, as mentioned in the opening piece, I would have better success understanding or justifying Mormon doctrine and G.A. leadership by saying it was a test in my life.

Yes, the test would make more sense to me and it wouldn't jumble my brain quite so severely as this poor bishops mind is being disturbed in his quest to justify and make sense of his leaders and their doctrine.

I would far rather say it was a test to see how I chose and what I chose. A test to establish my boundaries involving ethics and standards and understand what that means to me. A test to see if I could discern truth or not.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Whatever, Hades. Whatever.

If we did indeed have the same definition/answer you wouldn't be so defensive over your inability to be unbiased and objective.

Defensive?

Get it?

No.

If you accept that your definitions of shame,guilt and fear are different than mine in this case you are saying your definition is right; and we both know that's not correct.

But I don't accept that they're different any more than I buy the notion that, by disagreeing with you, I automatically and definitively prove myself wrong.

Perhaps your investment keeps you steadfast holding on to an incorrect answer

LOL. This is priceless stuff.

You assume that your position is default correct and then poison the well in the same sentence.

It only means that you don't recongize it for what it is and you have an enabling support group.

Good grief.

[Guest]

Get it?

No.

We all have our own journey in life. Good luck to your on yours, whatever that may be.
Mine is not to help you figure it out if you don't get it.
I can try help those who have a better ability to get it and provide alternatives for them.

If you accept that your definitions of shame,guilt and fear are different than mine in this case you are saying your definition is right; and we both know that's not correct.

But I don't accept that they're different any more than I buy the notion that, by disagreeing with you, I automatically and definitively prove myself wrong.

I don't know how to describe this any clearer. I have a definition which you said yourself you didn't agree with. You contested it in fact, and yes very defensively I might add. In the last 2 of your posts you've said that you insist that our definitions are the same. Which of your statements am I to believe? The one where you elude to the differences - not seeing the blatant textbook examples of fear, shame and guilt within the Mormon system? or the one where you say we don't differ. It's very confusing and quite exhausting. We all have our own road to walk. I can't walk with you any longer on yours in this conversation as it simply doesn't make sense.

You assume that your position is default correct and then poison the well in the same sentence.

I have no idea what your talking about in this sentence. It's exhausting to try figure out.

It only means that you don't recongize it for what it is and you have an enabling support group.

Good grief.

I wish you well. May you have a deep and sincere desire within your heart to seek out truth.

[_moksha]

I want to go on the public record as strongly opposing any church or movement of any kind in which the dominant -- or even prominent -- emotions are fear, shame, and guilt, and which is based upon indoctrination.

How would this affect Family Home Evening programs run by faithful families throughout the Church? Should the children be read a disclaimer statement stating that they are encouraged to seek out their own values apart from what is being taught?

Should the whispered to testimonies of tykes be banned outright? I would heartily endorse this idea.

[_Daniel Peterson]

We all have our own journey in life. Good luck to your on yours, whatever that may be.
Mine is not to help you figure it out if you don't get it.

Yours is, rather, to inform me that you're right and that I don't get it.

I can try help those who have a better ability to get it and provide alternatives for them.

Or, in other words, to find those who will agree with you.

I have a definition which you said yourself you didn't agree with.

Where?

I said that it was "unlikely" that we have different definitions of "fear" and "guilt."

You contested it in fact, and yes very defensively I might add.

Where?

In the last 2 of your posts you've said that you insist that our definitions are the same. Which of your statements am I to believe?

The ones I've actually made.

I have no idea what your talking about in this sentence.

I believe you.

May you have a deep and sincere desire within your heart to seek out truth.

Thank you. I do.

[_moksha]

I do believe if many, many people stood up and petitioned for change and answers it could certainly not do any more harm than this silent secrecy (from fear) that people like the Silent Bishop endure.

It is obvious that your thinking cap has been very active and I appreciate you for that effort. I think the Silent Bishop has a valid concern, since expressing those concerns openly would invite Church censure and punishment. Thank goodness for the miracle of the internet, so such people as the Silent Bishop and many others do not have to suffer alone in silence. Specifically, the Lord has granted these souls the gift of Mormon Discussions, the LDS Forum at Beliefnet and the New Order Mormon forum to have a chance to communicate their concerns and cares with others who also have similar questions and concerns.

As to how these questions and concerns can be conveyed to the leadership in a generalized manner, I am at a loss, but someone like Dr. Peterson who has experience with the process might know and could share that information. If the concerns were transmitted precisely by apologists who monitor the internet then fasting and praying on such matters, by the Brethren, over a period of time may yield answers.

[_Inconceivable]

ShadowFax,

I think what you don't quite understand is that Monson and his 13 are fully aware of the church's sordid history. They receive letters on a regular basis imploring them for an explanation. I wrote one myself. I didn't send it after seeing so many that had already been sent and later posted on the internet.

Write them a letter, see what happens. If you don't, then ask your stake president for an explanation. Mine wasn't particularly aware of the history, so he referred me to FARMS/MI (Daniel Peterson's group).

So, the husbandmen (the 13) have commissioned yet additional husbandmen to field the tough questions - enter Daniel Peterson. I know, most would hire lawyers for damage control but whatever.

Peterson is a nobody in regards to church authority, yet he speaks unofficially on behalf of the church on these matters. Keep in mind, if the church truly objected to his comments, they would simply fire him from their employ (BYU) along with all the perks that attend to it and then hire another to demonize his character and works. There's a pattern here.

For this reason, you can rest assure that whatever he writes is within line with church policy, doctrine and procedure. If you disagree with his opinions, they are only a reflection of those that permit him to speak.

Conclusion: Time to either shutup or leave. And Dan is fine with that.

good luck and welcome to the board.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Just for the record:

I speak for myself. I speak for nobody else, and nobody else (not even my intimate friend Inconceivable) speaks for me.

I've been commissioned by nobody, and I'm not fine with people leaving the Church.

As for "demonizing," well, it ain't me doing it here.

[_ShadowFax]

ShadowFax,

I think what you don't quite understand is that Monson and his 13 are fully aware of the church's sordid history. They receive letters on a regular basis imploring them for an explanation. I wrote one myself. I didn't send it after seeing so many that had already been sent and later posted on the internet.

Write them a letter, see what happens. If you don't, then ask your stake president for an explanation. Mine wasn't particularly aware of the history, so he referred me to FARMS/MI (Daniel Peterson's group).

Yes, singular approaches have been too easy for them to dismiss. So much secrecy and members ignorance to the details of the situation is still in place and they know it.
That's why I wondered if a full unified en masse approach would be better than a singular approach. An appeal that used news articles, a t.v. spot if it could be pulled off in specific areas with high LDS population, bulletin boards and internet advertising to inform the community of a mass appeal project for a G.A. confrontation. Group action may have more effect than singular action. I'm curious. It couldn't hurt to try spearhead a project of this nature.
If the 13 refused it could be countered publicly used as leverage against them.

At the least it would educate members more about the situation and concerns. If internet advertisements, not just Facebook adverts, were also in place along with a mass appeal campaign more avenues for education could be located.

Below is a link for the Facebook campaign donations which are tax deductible:

http://www.exmormonfoundation.org./

I think if a campaign were launched with larger advertising projects, more member and non-member education opportunities could happen resulting in a hemorrhage that bandaids can't fix or can't just be swept under the floor by the churches traditional means of secrecy and anonymity. The secrecy is what has caused the lack of Mormon education for generations and exmormons tend to play into that somewhat, myself included.
Standing up in the easiest ways possible to break these secrecy binds is one of the only ways I can think to release people like that poor anonymous silent Bishop.

I'll contact the exmormon foundation and see if their willing to invite other websites to put the Facebook donation campaign link front and center on their website and ask if they'd be willing to broaden the campaign to include internet locations other than Facebook.

thanks for allowing me a place to vent this, to think about it and get some feedback. I really appreciate it.