Molly Mormon, Peter Priesthood

[Anddenex]

10 minutes ago, Maureen said:

There is a difference when someone shares and when someone brags, and I'm sure people can tell the difference.

M.

Sadly, not always the case though. I have seen this judgment given and it is unwarranted.

[estradling75]

6 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

Sadly, not always the case though. I have seen this judgment given and it is unwarranted.

Indeed... we have two factors at play with this...

What the person/speaker intends...

and

what the person/listener takes away.

 

There are some people who put on a display of self-rightousness

And there are some people who feel attacked/shamed/guilty at the slightest hint and deflect/attack back

the two are not always connected

[Guest MormonGator]

43 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

. Why do we as a people want to bring someone down who is trying to better themselves in an area they feel will help them be closer to God?

 

 Human nature my friend. We (and everyone is guilty of this to some degree) focus on the negative. We tend to nag and peck at people who have the best reputations because we wonder "Why am I not like this?" 

That, and we let our personal feelings get in the way. "I don't like Jack because we disagree on things. So he can't be that moral. Only people I like can be moral." 

I don't exclude myself either, I am just as guilty of these things as the next guy.  

[Guest MormonGator]

16 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

 

There are some people who put on a display of self-rightousness

And there are some people who feel attacked/shamed/guilty at the slightest hint and deflect/attack back

the two are not always connected

 They aren't always connected, you are right. And while it's good to put on a display of morality and self-righteousness sometimes, it can also backfire.  We both know of people whom we thought to be highly moral and wonderful people but have been caught in affairs or cheating business partners. We never know. 

Again, just so that I'm clear-I don't mean everyone who preaches morality hasn't been able to live the standard. And it's always important to remember that even the most moral and righteous man/woman has flaws and isn't perfect. 

[Guest MormonGator]

43 minutes ago, Maureen said:

There is a difference when someone shares and when someone brags, and I'm sure people can tell the difference.

M.

I agree. It can be a slippery slope between "I'm just trying to be a better person" and "I am a more moral person than you because of it". 

[omegaseamaster75]

1 hour ago, Anddenex said:

So...because you DON'T want to hear it, they CAN'T share it because it hurts your happy bubble (a drawn line in the sand), and if they do they are MM or PPs? Ya, that makes sense. Just make sure then you don't share anything at all, because you will eventually break your own line and become a PP yourself.

 

It's all about context, I'll give an example. A recently married young lady gave a talk and the premise of the talk was that we should follow the prophet. So she gave a few examples and then went on to Quote GB Hinckley and how he said we shouldn't drink caffeinated drinks and that she didn't do that because the prophet said so, and if we are doing it we should examine how closely we are following the mouth piece of God here on earth.

Now if she had gone up there and said "I made this choice because of something that the prophet said and I feel great/closer to God/more spiritual about it" and left it at that then no issue.  It is the summary judgement that gets passed that I have an issue with.

1 hour ago, Anddenex said:

A young married woman in sacrament shared some principles, applications, they choose regarding dress code. 1) I think it is great that they are willing to share their thoughts and what they do. 2) Why be bothered, unless you (general) feel some guilt. 3) If they speak a truth, I had better be listening otherwise we are held accountable for truth we dismiss so frivolously. 4) I didn't agree with everything she shared, but she has the same right to share and express what she feels is following God as anyone else (oh but shame on her for sharing...what a self-righteous MM -- sarcasm intended) without a person in the audience, self-righteously (irony) specifying they are PPs.

 

I think that is great, did she disparage anyone who did not agree with her application of the dress code? No she didn;t she said how it helped her in her life decisions I think that that is wonderful. I may not agree with it all but she didn't look down on anyone who didn't agree with her. That's the point I'm trying to make.

1 hour ago, Anddenex said:

From your definition, my goodness, Nephi was the biggest PP ever. He did. He shared (his brothers didn't like it). And he repeated the cycle. He did. He shared. His brothers didn't like it.

Again context....you have interpreted my thoughts to fit your own little world of what you think that Omega thinks

[Anddenex]

24 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

It's all about context, I'll give an example. A recently married young lady gave a talk and the premise of the talk was that we should follow the prophet. So she gave a few examples and then went on to Quote GB Hinckley and how he said we shouldn't drink caffeinated drinks and that she didn't do that because the prophet said so, and if we are doing it we should examine how closely we are following the mouth piece of God here on earth.

Now if she had gone up there and said "I made this choice because of something that the prophet said and I feel great/closer to God/more spiritual about it" and left it at that then no issue.  It is the summary judgement that gets passed that I have an issue with.

I think that is great, did she disparage anyone who did not agree with her application of the dress code? No she didn;t she said how it helped her in her life decisions I think that that is wonderful. I may not agree with it all but she didn't look down on anyone who didn't agree with her. That's the point I'm trying to make.

Again context....you have interpreted my thoughts to fit your own little world of what you think that Omega thinks

I understand context Omega, and you tend to share the same example type. In this scenario you share a young married woman. In another thread you shared a teenager (bishop's daughter) with the same example (caffeinated drinks). How we respond is more important than what they say, and how we respond shows more about who we are than the person speaking. The individual isn't wrong. We should be examining ourselves. My response would simply be, "Yes, we should be examining. What have the prophets said, and in this case she isn't correct. But if she feels that will draw here closer to God, then great." In both scenarios you and I would respond differently. There is absolutely no reason to loose ourselves and belittle a person for doing what they feel is right before the Lord (especially a teenager who is trying to understand everything in relation to the gospel and what they have been taught by parents, that isn't self-righteous). The title of "self-righteousness" is so often abused in our Mormon culture it is saddening. I remember on my mission when coming across addictive substances and teaching the thoughts of drinking caffeine and explaining to people we should keep this counsel. There was no self-righteousness in my expression and invitation to examine ourselves. Now, I know I was not in-line, but if a person considered my summary judgement had any hint of self-righteousness that would speak more volumes about them than me, as I was doing my best with the knowledge I had at that time.

I understand "summary judgement" is what you were specifying and still in order to judge the speaker we ourselves must make a "summary judgement" also. Why is your summary judgement any better than theirs? They believe something, whole heart, and want to share what they have felt. Great. If they tell me to examine my life, OK, I will examine myself, test what they say, and allow God to lead me. I won't think they are self-righteous, because again, the title of self-righteousness is often misused and abused in our Mormon culture.

As you are unaware of the full context of the speaker in my ward, I can understand why you think it would be different. She indeed was specifying that everyone should follow the code of dress she was expressing, which then implies disparaging anyone who does not follow. I understood your context, which is why I shared this example. I disagree with her sentiments, doesn't make her a MM. Doesn't make her self-righteous, and she could be right. The Lord may possibly be backing her up, as to my knowledge, I would disagree. I think it is great though she is willing to share her thoughts, could it have been said in a different way....sure, but it wasn't. My wife on the other hand now changes her clothes in connection with this speaker. She would before this sometimes change into other clothing and sometimes not. Now, anytime she is in this clothing, and we need to go out, she changes. The invitation spoke differently to my wife, and for me, well...I don't think she needs to but if she feels that is right before the Lord, than great!

As to "my own little world" Omega needs to better explain himself because you have used the same example in multiple threads and from what you have shared I don't appear to be wrong in how you think, but openly admit I could be, but it doesn't appear so, when someone makes a statement, (paraphrased) "When she (the teenager) shared about caffeine and we all need to stop and listen to the prophets...I [ignored] gave a deaf ear to the rest of her talk." That doesn't leave much to the imagination on how you think Omega.

 

 

[omegaseamaster75]

57 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

I understand context Omega, and you tend to share the same example type. In this scenario you share a young married woman. In another thread you shared a teenager (bishop's daughter) with the same example (caffeinated drinks). How we respond is more important than what they say, and how we respond shows more about who we are than the person speaking. The individual isn't wrong. We should be examining ourselves. My response would simply be, "Yes, we should be examining. What have the prophets said, and in this case she isn't correct. But if she feels that will draw here closer to God, then great." In both scenarios you and I would respond differently. There is absolutely no reason to loose ourselves and belittle a person for doing what they feel is right before the Lord (especially a teenager who is trying to understand everything in relation to the gospel and what they have been taught by parents, that isn't self-righteous). The title of "self-righteousness" is so often abused in our Mormon culture it is saddening. I remember on my mission when coming across addictive substances and teaching the thoughts of drinking caffeine and explaining to people we should keep this counsel. There was no self-righteousness in my expression and invitation to examine ourselves. Now, I know I was not in-line, but if a person considered my summary judgement had any hint of self-righteousness that would speak more volumes about them than me, as I was doing my best with the knowledge I had at that time.

I understand "summary judgement" is what you were specifying and still in order to judge the speaker we ourselves must make a "summary judgement" also. Why is your summary judgement any better than theirs? They believe something, whole heart, and want to share what they have felt. Great. If they tell me to examine my life, OK, I will examine myself, test what they say, and allow God to lead me. I won't think they are self-righteous, because again, the title of self-righteousness is often misused and abused in our Mormon culture.

As you are unaware of the full context of the speaker in my ward, I can understand why you think it would be different. She indeed was specifying that everyone should follow the code of dress she was expressing, which then implies disparaging anyone who does not follow. I understood your context, which is why I shared this example. I disagree with her sentiments, doesn't make her a MM. Doesn't make her self-righteous, and she could be right. The Lord may possibly be backing her up, as to my knowledge, I would disagree. I think it is great though she is willing to share her thoughts, could it have been said in a different way....sure, but it wasn't. My wife on the other hand now changes her clothes in connection with this speaker. She would before this sometimes change into other clothing and sometimes not. Now, anytime she is in this clothing, and we need to go out, she changes. The invitation spoke differently to my wife, and for me, well...I don't think she needs to but if she feels that is right before the Lord, than great!

As to "my own little world" Omega needs to better explain himself because you have used the same example in multiple threads and from what you have shared I don't appear to be wrong in how you think, but openly admit I could be, but it doesn't appear so, when someone makes a statement, (paraphrased) "When she (the teenager) shared about caffeine and we all need to stop and listen to the prophets...I [ignored] gave a deaf ear to the rest of her talk." That doesn't leave much to the imagination on how you think Omega.

 

 

Simple Definition of self–righteous
: having or showing a strong belief that your own actions, opinions, etc., are right and other people's are wrong

I don't think that the title of self-righteousness is misused in the Mormon culture at all...I see examples of it everywhere, we are all self-righteous in our own ways. 

You have your opinion of who I am and how I think. I will tell you that you are most likely wrong in your assumptions about me.  I am perfectly fine if you misunderstand me we do not communicate the same way and that is ok.

[NightSG]

3 hours ago, estradling75 said:

There are some people who put on a display of self-rightousness

And there are plenty who should podcast their testimony:  Anti-insomnia podcast.