Church Instructs Leaders on Same-Sex Marriage

[Just_A_Guy]

JAG, I can make a list of things the Prophet asks each one of us to do and we do not do it, . . .

Sure; but there's a difference between "I am a flawed human and I am not living up to what I acknowledge to be the ideal" versus "I'm going to go out and argue against the ideal".

To be honest, IMO it would be very hypocritical and judgmental for any LDS member to think that another member isn't as good as any other just because they think differently. Do we really need that in the Church? Seriously asking.

[Edited to add]It's not a matter of thinking differently; it's a matter of thinking wrongly. The Church has said we should be respectful of differing opinions and that it won't take punitive action against those who hold them. It has not said that those differing opinions are just as valid as the ones the Church has formally espoused.

As I said, the fact that it's "true" doesn't make it "useful" and there's no point in dwelling on it.

No Mormon is especially bad if they struggle with an issue X that you happen to feel especially strong about.

Agreed; but if I say I'm "struggling with" something then that usually means I'm "trying to overcome" it, not "defending and glorying in my shortcomings and trying to get the standard changed".

Not only is that notion completely wrong, it only serves to tear down others by suggesting you are "better" than them.

I agree there's no productive use in dwelling on it.

We shouldn't be creating "-ites" like this.

Agreed; but we shouldn't be creating false equivalencies either. Right is still right, and wrong is still wrong. We all muddle along in the wrong from time to time; but that doesn't mean we have no obligation to pull ourselves up and out of it.

Edited January 16, 2014 by Just_A_Guy
(To try to avoid giving wrong impression)

[The Folk Prophet]

We all have things that the prophets have taught that we struggle with.

That's a fairly bold thing to say. It's also not true.

[The Folk Prophet]

That's a fairly bold thing to say. It's also not true.

Quoting myself because I rethought.

If you mean we struggle to obey, yes. Fair and correct. I took it as struggle to agree with. So I now presume you meant the first. My bad.

[LittleWyvern]

Agreed; but if I say I'm "struggling with" something then that usually means I'm "trying to overcome" it, not "defending and glorying in my shortcomings and trying to get the standard changed".

That's a good point, but there's also a gradient rather than a binary condition here. We're sometimes all over the place on some issues unless you're lucky enough not to struggle with anything in this way.

Agreed; but we shouldn't be creating false equivalencies either. Right is still right, and wrong is still wrong. We all muddle along in the wrong from time to time; but that doesn't mean we have no obligation to pull ourselves up and out of it.

And I do not intend to support any conclusion of this sort.

If you mean we struggle to obey, yes. Fair and correct. I took it as struggle to agree with. So I now presume you meant the first. My bad.

Yes, I meant that in the "are we not all sinners?" sense.

[Vort]

JAG, I can make a list of things the Prophet asks each one of us to do and we do not do it, I suppose then we are not good enough because we undermining counsel or is your comment referring only to this particular issue?

"I do not live up as I should to prophetic teachings" is far, far different than "I think I'm smarter and more spiritually in tune on social matters than our prophets."

To be honest, IMO it would be very hypocritical and judgmental for any LDS member to think that another member isn't as good as any other just because they think differently. Do we really need that in the Church? Seriously asking.

Please explain what is "hypocritical" about making judgments based on people's beliefs. I'm not following your reasoning at all.

[Guest]

This subject just never, ever gets old.

[The Folk Prophet]

JAG, I can make a list of things the Prophet asks each one of us to do and we do not do it, I suppose then we are not good enough because we undermining counsel or is your comment referring only to this particular issue? To be honest, IMO it would be very hypocritical and judgmental for any LDS member to think that another member isn't as good as any other just because they think differently. Do we really need that in the Church? Seriously asking.

Been thinking on this a bit. My conclusion is, yes, we do need this. This is exactly wherein judging righteously comes into play. Of course it depends on what you mean by "good". As in is of lesser value, no. As in is less or more righteous, yes. Not universally, but certainly per situation, and certainly according to righteous principles of righteous judgment.

Example: Johnny pays a full tithing. Billy doesn't pay any. Billy isn't as good. I can make that call. (we'll presume that we know their incomes and their tithing amounts, which we shouldn't, but just for the point we'll pretend).

Example: Johnny keeps the law of chastity. Billy committed adultery 8 times last week. Billy isn't as good. I can make that call.

Example: Johnny just punched Billy in the face for committing adultery. Hmm. Johnny isn't as good this time around. I can make that call.

Final judgment is the Lord's. We know that. But we can see, comprehend, and think, and thereby judge good, better best, bad, worse, worst. In point of fact, we should do this.

I know Billy's actions are wrong and less righteous than Johnny's in these cases. That is a judgment I am perfectly capable of making. How I act on that judgment is a different matter entirely. But I can certainly make the judgment.

When it comes to defending principles that the church has told us we should or shouldn't defend, it's pretty black-and-white as to what is good and what is not. We have been clearly instructed as to how to respond and treat those who disagree with the church, but that doesn't mean that we are incapable, or under a mandate to be unaware of their mistaken thinking. In point of fact, we are mandated to correct false thinking. Moreover, we can judge that someone's opinion that is out of sync with truth is, indeed, wrong. And we can understand that thinking things that are wrong is not good.

And yes, we can be aware that we are more or less righteous than someone else regarding a specific behavior without being unduly arrogant or falsely humble.

If I pay my tithing and you don't I can fairly safely understand that in that case I am being more righteous than you. Alternatively, if I'm downloading movies illegally and you are not then you can fairly safely understand that you are being more righteous than me in that case. Neither of these judgments are false or improper.

[LittleWyvern]

Example: Johnny pays a full tithing. Billy doesn't pay any. Billy isn't as good. I can make that call. (we'll presume that we know their incomes and their tithing amounts, which we shouldn't, but just for the point we'll pretend).

Example: Johnny keeps the law of chastity. Billy committed adultery 8 times last week. Billy isn't as good. I can make that call.

Example: Johnny just punched Billy in the face for committing adultery. Hmm. Johnny isn't as good this time around. I can make that call.

Final judgment is the Lord's. We know that. But we can see, comprehend, and think, and thereby judge good, better best, bad, worse, worst. In point of fact, we should do this.

I know Billy's actions are wrong and less righteous than Johnny's in these cases. That is a judgment I am perfectly capable of making. How I act on that judgment is a different matter entirely. But I can certainly make the judgment.

While I don't disagree with you, I would make the same general point I made to JaG that we should be very careful about the scope of these judgments. For instance, in your example of "Johnny pays a full tithing. Billy doesn't pay any. Billy isn't as good," I would take issue with the conclusion of "Billy isn't as good" just stated as is. It is true that Billy isn't as good as Johnny on the subject of tithing in this example, but to say he isn't as good as Johnny in general may or may not be true (the contrapositive is also true: we can only say that Johnny is more righteous than Billy regarding tithing, not in general). While I'm sure you didn't mean those judgments in a general sense - to your credit, you did mention "regarding a specific behavior" later in your post, it is often a point of misunderstanding and conflict when our judgments are not carefully worded and scoped.

[Jenamarie]

"Don't judge me because I sin differently than you do." -Pres. Uchtdorf.

[Vort]

"Don't judge me because I sin differently than you do." -Pres. Uchtdorf.

Which I think is worth pointing out is not the same as saying, "Don't judge me." As Christ said, we should judge righteous judgment. Condemning someone for a sin you don't have part in while absolving or ignoring the sins of yourself or those who sin as you do is hypocritical. But condemning sinful behavior IS NOT.

[The Folk Prophet]

While I don't disagree with you, I would make the same general point I made to JaG that we should be very careful about the scope of these judgments. For instance, in your example of "Johnny pays a full tithing. Billy doesn't pay any. Billy isn't as good," I would take issue with the conclusion of "Billy isn't as good" just stated as is. It is true that Billy isn't as good as Johnny on the subject of tithing in this example, but to say he isn't as good as Johnny in general may or may not be true (the contrapositive is also true: we can only say that Johnny is more righteous than Billy regarding tithing, not in general). While I'm sure you didn't mean those judgments in a general sense - to your credit, you did mention "regarding a specific behavior" later in your post, it is often a point of misunderstanding and conflict when our judgments are not carefully worded and scoped.

Yes. Good to point out. The fact that I pay tithing and someone else does not doesn't mean I'm not our secretly murdering prostitutes at night whereas.... Well...you get the point.

Uh....that's not a confession, by the way.

Edited January 17, 2014 by church

[Just_A_Guy]

While I don't disagree with you, I would make the same general point I made to JaG that we should be very careful about the scope of these judgments. For instance, in your example of "Johnny pays a full tithing. Billy doesn't pay any. Billy isn't as good," I would take issue with the conclusion of "Billy isn't as good" just stated as is. It is true that Billy isn't as good as Johnny on the subject of tithing in this example, but to say he isn't as good as Johnny in general may or may not be true (the contrapositive is also true: we can only say that Johnny is more righteous than Billy regarding tithing, not in general). While I'm sure you didn't mean those judgments in a general sense - to your credit, you did mention "regarding a specific behavior" later in your post, it is often a point of misunderstanding and conflict when our judgments are not carefully worded and scoped.

I get what you're saying, LW; but doesn't saying "You have this weakness, so you're not as good as me" ultimately involve the exact same kinds of judgments as saying "I have this weakness, but I'm still just as good as you [because I know you must be fouling up in some other aspect of your life]"?

Edited January 17, 2014 by Just_A_Guy

[jerome1232]

I get what you're saying, LW; but doesn't saying "You have this weakness, so you're not as good as me" ultimately involve the exact same kinds of judgments as saying "I have this weakness, but I'm still just as good as you [because I know you must be fouling up in some other aspect of your life]"?

No because [at least in my mind] it's I have this weakness, but I may still be just as good as you because you may be fouling up in unseen aspects of your life.

[Vort]

No because [at least in my mind] it's I have this weakness, but I may still be just as good as you because you may be fouling up in unseen aspects of your life.

What if he isn't fouling up in any unseen aspects of his life? Are you still as good as him?

Perhaps the problem comes in staging Goodness Competitions in our mind.

[Just_A_Guy]

Now I'm thinking of a scene from Arsenic and Old Lace where Dr. Einstein is comparing the victims of the murderer, Johnny, and the victims of his two elderly aunts (also murderers):

No, Johnny, don't brag: you got twelve, and zey got twelve. Ze old ladies is just as good as you!

[LittleWyvern]

I get what you're saying, LW; but doesn't saying "You have this weakness, so you're not as good as me" ultimately involve the exact same kinds of judgments as saying "I have this weakness, but I'm still just as good as you [because I know you must be fouling up in some other aspect of your life]"?

If you've been paying attention to my posts, you'd know that I've been making an argument against this scorekeeping kind of judging. We can certainly judge between right and wrong, and judge that a person is doing X wrong, but we cannot make the judgement that "I am better than person X" unless we're holding the full record of everything person X has done. Only God can make that judgement. Thus, in that form, both statements are nonsensical for the same reason. If you really want to go that route and judge that you're better that someone based on how they feel about prophetic teaching X, I'll respect that but disagree with it.

In some sense, though, we're all sinners. The phrase "I'm just as good as you" on it's own without your additions may be referring to that fact depending on how it's meant.

Edited January 17, 2014 by LittleWyvern
I still can't grammar.

[The Folk Prophet]

If you've been paying attention to my posts, you'd know that I've been making an argument against this scorekeeping kind of judging. We can certainly judge between right and wrong, and judge that a person is doing X wrong, but we cannot make the judgement that "I am better than person X" unless we're holding the full record of everything person X has done. Only God can make that judgement. Thus, in that form, both statements are nonsensical for the same reason. If you really want to go that route and judge that you're better that someone based on how they feel about prophetic teaching X, I'll respect that but disagree with it.

In some sense, though, we're all sinners. The phrase "I'm just as good as you" on it's own without your additions may be referring to that fact depending on how it's meant.

I think it's impossible to not be aware, in certain instances, that we are doing better than another. How we react to that awareness is the important thing. I don't consciously compare myself to others (well, usually-- I make mistakes, of course) but it's pretty clear that I'm doing better than some and to say otherwise would be a lie.

It's like the people who say "I don't see color." Well, yes they do. What they really mean is that although they see, it doesn't play into how they feel or act.

I can be aware of someone's seriously screwed-up life without letting it cause me to think, act, or be un-Christlike.

[Suzie]

Reading some of the posts on this thread reminded me of something that happened many years ago in Sunday School, true story and sorry in advance for the offtopic. The teacher opened the class with a simple yet profound question. She said:

How many of you are humble? Please raise your hand.

More than half of the class raised their hand (no kidding) and they weren't joking.

[Guest]

I have a BIL and SIL who won't let anyone forget how humble and pure of heart they are, because they constantly tell us so.

[LittleWyvern]

I think it's impossible to not be aware, in certain instances, that we are doing better than another. How we react to that awareness is the important thing. I don't consciously compare myself to others (well, usually-- I make mistakes, of course) but it's pretty clear that I'm doing better than some and to say otherwise would be a lie.

I suppose in very rare circumstances you can make that general judgement, but I am loathe to trust my imperfect perspective on such a sweeping judgement. Maybe this is all up to what we feel about our "skill" of judging other people. I know I'm not very good at it.

[Vort]

Reading some of the posts on this thread reminded me of something that happened many years ago in Sunday School, true story and sorry in advance for the offtopic. The teacher opened the class with a simple yet profound question. She said:

How many of you are humble? Please raise your hand.

More than half of the class raised their hand (no kidding) and they weren't joking.

That's a funny story, but of course it's a manifestly unfair question. Had Jesus been present, would he have raised his hand? If not, would it have been because he is not humble? If he had, would that have made him unhumble? If you manage to achieve true humility in your life, is it somehow sinful to recognize and even acknowledge the point? I think it surely must not be.

Also, in its basic definition, "humble" just means "low", as in low dignity or low importance. If someone considers himself low in rank or importance, I don't think it is wicked to say so.

[The Folk Prophet]

Humility shaming. Awesome!

[jerome1232]

What if he isn't fouling up in any unseen aspects of his life? Are you still as good as him?

Perhaps the problem comes in staging Goodness Competitions in our mind.

I'm not even sure how that matters. I'm the one saying to stop ranking me on your scale of goodness, and pointing out there are unseen aspects you may not be considering.

[Suzie]

On a serious note, Elder Jensen said once in Conference that he heard one of the Seventies say about humility that "if you think you have it, you don’t." and suggested we should try to develop humility and be sure we didn’t know when we got it, and then we would have it. But if we ever thought we had it, we wouldn’t. I thought it was a pretty awesome way to describe it.

[skippy740]

But Suzie...

... I'm the most humble guy I know.

... I take great pride in my humility.

... My humility makes me better than you.