Church responds to leaked videos

[anatess2]

4 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

i'll send you a copy of my resume. 

Yeah... lots of people submitting resumes in my company say they have such and such experience and knowledge... you put them on the floor and they are clueless...

[NeuroTypical]

I knew these video leaks would lead to an invigorating discussion.  I had no idea it would lead to two ex-Catholic Mormons going at each other's throats about whether Catholic priests can counsel or not.  

Get along folks.

[Guest MormonGator]

14 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

I knew these video leaks would lead to an invigorating discussion.  I had no idea it would lead to two ex-Catholic Mormons going at each other's throats about whether Catholic priests can counsel or not.  

Get along folks.

LOL! So true. 

We actually do get along, really well in fact. That's probably why we can bicker like this, because we are friends "behind the scenes". 

[NightSG]

49 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Do our leaders need to commit sin in order to council and comfort sinners?

The only one who didn't had some other special tricks up His sleeve.

[NeuroTypical]

Good response from someone who has actually been a presenter in one of those briefings:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2016/10/lds-church-responds-to-leaked-videos-of-briefings-for-mormon-apostles.html

[estradling75]

24 minutes ago, NightSG said:

The only one who didn't had some other special tricks up His sleeve.

So in order to council an adulterer one must be an adulterer?  What a load of "I'm special snowflake mindset" in thinking woe is me because God's chosen leaders can't possibly know what God might want me to do because they never had exactly my problems

[zil]

25 minutes ago, NightSG said:

The only one who didn't had some other special tricks up His sleeve.

Dude, it's not that difficult a question / issue.  Does one need to commit adultery before one can counsel someone who has committed adultery?  Does one need to get addicted to heroin before counseling someone who is?  The obvious answer is, "no".  Nor is personal experience with a particular sin, and having repented, a guarantee that one will make a better counselor to someone in the midst of the same sin.  To insist that experience is the only way to understand something is to deny the rock upon which the Church is built, and the power of Christ to work through those he has called.

[NeuroTypical]

When trying to help someone, there is absolutely a benefit to having personally experienced something similar.  Empathy is when you are able to reach inside yourself, and see something you recognize which closely resembles what the person is going through.  Empathy is very useful to a counselor. 

That said, you can have empathy without having identical experiences.  My wife's male OB, for example, was just oozing empathy, the depths of which I've seen few people able to match.  

To directly address the issue being raised here, no, you don't need to be a YW, to relate to peer pressure, fear of rejection, the pain of loneliness.  

Edited October 3, 2016 by NeuroTypical

[NightSG]

5 minutes ago, zil said:

Does one need to get addicted to heroin before counseling someone who is?  The obvious answer is, "no".  Nor is personal experience with a particular sin, and having repented, a guarantee that one will make a better counselor to someone in the midst of the same sin.

Then why does even the Church prefer recovering addicts as counselors for the Addiction Recovery Program?  Why are women often counseled to talk to the RS President or another member before or in addition to the bishop for most problems of a specifically feminine nature?

A lot of the people leaving the Church are going because they don't feel like they're being heard.  Telling them "we don't need to hear you" isn't going to help with that.

7 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

When trying to help someone, there is absolutely a benefit to having personally experienced something similar.  Empathy is when you are able to reach inside yourself, and see something you recognize which closely resembles what the person is going through.  Empathy is very useful to a counselor. 

That said, you can have empathy without having identical experiences.  My wife's male OB, for example, was just oozing empathy, the depths of which I've seen few people able to match.  

However, I suspect a lot of that empathy comes from closely shared experiences; you mentioned stillbirths, and that is certainly a significant experience that he has been very intimately involved in.  Likewise an immediate family member of an addict would be a better ARP counselor than someone who grew up in a pure TBM family with no personal experience whatsoever.

[Windseeker]

35 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

To directly address the issue being raised here, no, you don't need to be a YW, to relate to peer pressure, fear of rejection, the pain of loneliness.  

I think it's unfortunate that it's become so acceptable to dismiss an individuals ability to sympathize or empathize due to their differing race or sex or age. This is a product of the fake tolerance of the left and their efforts to gain power by sowing division and pitting one group against another. It grinds against the belief that some jew who lived and died thousands of years ago could ever relate with me. 

The only way you can truly tell whether or not a person is out of touch is by their behavior. 

Edited October 3, 2016 by Windseeker

[jerome1232]

Personal experience probably tends to lend someone to better empathize with another going through similiar struggles and may give them personal insight into the matter. I find that true. What is hogwash is that it necessarily does so. Personal experience (off the top of my head) may also slant their feelings and opinions in unhealthy ways. 

I beleive it's quite possible for a person who has no personal experience rearing children, for example, to develop great idea's on how to rear children, deal with problem children, and sympathize with parents having a rough time.

Edited October 3, 2016 by jerome1232
Edited for clarification

[anatess2]

18 minutes ago, jerome1232 said:

Personal experience probably tends to lend someone to better empathize with another going through similiar struggles and may give them personal insight into the matter. I find that true. What is hogwash is that it necessarily does so. Personal experience (off the top of my head) may also slant their feelings and opinions in unhealthy ways. 

I beleive it's quite possible for a person who has no experience rearing children, for example, to develop great idea's on how to rear children, deal with problem children, and sympathize with parents having a rough time.

My OB said the exact same thing as the bolded line above.  He told me, an advantage to having a male OB that balances the lack of personal experience on the matter is that when I say it hurts, he tends to be more objective about it and analyze all the indicators instead of having a "preconceived bias" from a personal experience.

In any case, a parent disciplining a child has an objective to "spare the child" from the negative experience.  This is not an exercise in making the child less empathetic.  Empathy is gained not only through personal experience but more importantly through the bedrock principles of honest and humble Service.

[anatess2]

2 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

I knew these video leaks would lead to an invigorating discussion.  I had no idea it would lead to two ex-Catholic Mormons going at each other's throats about whether Catholic priests can counsel or not.  

Get along folks.

 

1 hour ago, MormonGator said:

LOL! So true. 

We actually do get along, really well in fact. That's probably why we can bicker like this, because we are friends "behind the scenes". 

Although I would love a go at MG's throat, I couldn't possibly do that.  We Gators stand by each other... besides @zil and the rest of the sisters hidden in their compound would bake me into their pie if I even bend a hair on MG's head!

[pam]

Personally I think the brethren who lead us are far more intune with things than we even begin to give them credit for.

[NightSG]

1 hour ago, zil said:

To insist that experience is the only way to understand something is to deny the rock upon which the Church is built, and the power of Christ to work through those he has called.

To insist that personal experience isn't critical to understanding is to deny there's any reason for a mortal existence in the first place.  Everything else could simply have been provided to us without the need to come here at all.

[estradling75]

11 minutes ago, NightSG said:

To insist that personal experience isn't critical to understanding is to deny there's any reason for a mortal existence in the first place.  Everything else could simply have been provided to us without the need to come here at all.

To demand that God's chosen leaders experience everything that you have personally experienced in order to have any counsel to give... Is to state that you are wiser than God in knowing how things should be done.  

 

[NightSG]

7 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

To demand that God's chosen leaders experience everything that you have personally experienced in order to have any counsel to give... Is to state that you are wiser than God in knowing how things should be done.  

Then please explain why they have "subject matter experts" come in at all.

[estradling75]

13 minutes ago, NightSG said:

Then please explain why they have "subject matter experts" come in at all.

I did... my very first post...

Please explain why your very first post felt the need to complain about the leadership of the church's based solo-ly off a highly edited video put out by those who clearly have axe to grind against the church... as if that video somehow was sum total of all truth on the matter.

Explain how Leaders who job it is to help people come to Christ...  how that ability is some how rendered null and void if the person in question is a single parent or divorced.

 

 

Edited October 3, 2016 by estradling75

[Guest MormonGator]

11 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

To demand that God's chosen leaders experience everything that you have personally experienced in order to have any counsel to give... Is to state that you are wiser than God in knowing how things should be done.  

 

 

7 minutes ago, NightSG said:

Then please explain why they have "subject matter experts" come in at all.

One thing to remember (and this might be where the communication gap is) is that no one here is insulting the leadership of the church. For me, it's the complete opposite. I feel much more comfortable talking with the leadership of the church because they have the experience needed-in certain fields. Not only that, but if they don't have the experience needed to answer you they can direct you to who can help. That said, becoming a leader in the church doesn't mean you have knowledge in every field known to man and can answer every question. Even the church leadership would admit that. 

I think people might  become overly defensive because they view any question as an attack on church leadership. It isn't. 

[pam]

6 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

 

One thing to remember (and this might be where the communication gap is) is that no one here is insulting the leadership of the church.

I disagree.  I just went through the entire thread.  First time back to it since I started it...and that's all I got from this thread.  Full of insults regarding the leadership of the Church.  My first thought was those who are struggling or are even non members...and here we have a thread where members are rather insulting to the leaders of the church.

[Guest MormonGator]

4 minutes ago, pam said:

I disagree.  I just went through the entire thread.  First time back to it since I started it...and that's all I got from this thread.  Were insults regarding the leadership of the Church.  My first thought was those who are struggling or are even non members...and here we have a thread where members are rather insulting to the leaders of teh church.

Well I'm certainly sorry if I came across that way. I speak only for myself, of course.

[Just_A_Guy]

4 hours ago, NightSG said:

I dunno; out of curiosity I watched most of the one about YSA issues, and I was pretty unimpressed.  It seems to me they didn't have a subject matter expert.

Well, I think maybe we're at cross purposes about what that "subject matter" should be.  The problem, from the Church's standpoint, wasn't how to get these singles properly rounded up and paired off; it was how to keep them active and engaged in the church even if marriage for these kids didn't come right away--or, in some cases, ever.  To that end the recommendations that were made--make sure YSA's don't fall through the cracks in their local congregations, improve the programs offered to YSAs and ride heard on Stake Presidents to make sure they and their subordinates are meeting singles' needs--seems very much in line with the sorts of things that many singles here at LDS.net have suggested in other discussions.

Quote

They had some people who thought they were, but asking a bunch of older married men about current singles issues makes about as much sense as asking them how it feels to be an unwed mother.  It wasn't a discussion about whether unicorns like fried chicken; there are hundreds of thousands of people living their subject matter throughout the Church and they didn't solicit input from them.  Instead, they brought in more older married men to repeat the party line of "if they serve more, they'll be fixed."

I see that as people who just want their preexisting conclusions affirmed, whether they're true or not, and that worries me when those same people are supposed to be receiving revelation about the most important things in this life.

They did solicit input.  That was explained by the presenters, who had talked to numerous singles as well as local leaders who were "in the trenches". 

It may feel gratifying or validating to imagine someone walking into the Church Administration Building and tearfully screaming at the GAs that "you just don't know what I suffer!!!!"  But if you actually want the problem fixed, then meetings at this level need to deal with statistical evidence to identify general trends and to see what has been tried where, what has worked, and what hasn't.  That's what I saw going on in the meeting. 

[NeedleinA]

I think I am seeing one group say "experience" with a certain subject matter is necessary, AND a second group saying that experience is not necessary.

When it comes to the Church, the earthly leadership ponders/discusses items, scenarios, situations, possibilities...they are doing as @estradling75 mentioned, they are studying out in their minds first. Second, it gets turned over to prayer. I hope we don't forget who actually is the head of the Church, it is after all the Church of Jesus Christ, not the earthly leadership. When it comes to empathy and experience he knows all and has experienced all. So with the guidance of the Savior, who has experienced all, it is not necessary or even possible for the earthly leadership to have experience in every aspect/difficulty/sin/sorrow of life.

I think in this sense, both groups can be satisfied.

Elder Oaks:

"Our Savior experienced and suffered the fulness of all mortal challenges “according to the flesh” so He could know “according to the flesh” how to “succor [which means to give relief or aid to] his people according to their infirmities.” He therefore knows our struggles, our heartaches, our temptations, and our suffering, for He willingly experienced them all as an essential part of His Atonement. And because of this, His Atonement empowers Him to succor us—to give us the strength to bear it all."

Edited October 4, 2016 by NeedleinA

[NightSG]

5 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Well, I think maybe we're at cross purposes about what that "subject matter" should be.  The problem, from the Church's standpoint, wasn't how to get these singles properly rounded up and paired off; it was how to keep them active and engaged in the church even if marriage for these kids didn't come right away--or, in some cases, ever.

I don't think anybody mistook it for a debate on whether arranged marriages would be the next Church policy.  That still doesn't negate the fact that second and third hand information is less useful than first hand information.

Quote

To that end the recommendations that were made--make sure YSA's don't fall through the cracks in their local congregations, improve the programs offered to YSAs and ride heard on Stake Presidents to make sure they and their subordinates are meeting singles' needs--seems very much in line with the sorts of things that many singles here at LDS.net have suggested in other discussions.

Which has all been run through before...in fact, given that we're several years after that video now, it's showing to be just the same as the semiannual "we'll do better about getting the chapel unlocked and the equipment set up for next General Conference" claims in my ward.  All the talk in the world does nothing if the actions don't follow.

Quote

They did solicit input.  That was explained by the presenters, who had talked to numerous singles as well as local leaders who were "in the trenches". 

Again, second hand information, filtered through the personal opinions of the presenters.

Quote

But if you actually want the problem fixed, then meetings at this level need to deal with statistical evidence to identify general trends and to see what has been tried where, what has worked, and what hasn't.

What hasn't worked is still going on; they could at least come up with some new platitudes every ten years or so.  I haven't even been a member for five years yet, but I can find everything that's been said to me on blogs of inactive or fully ex-Mormon singles ranging back well before then.

Statistical evidence has the same disadvantages it always does; do you know of any families with 2.4 children?  Reducing the entire population to a single average archetype (which, like the four tenths of a child, likely doesn't even exist) ignores the fact that every one of them is an individual, which should be the first and foremost consideration when dealing with people in a delicate circumstance.  Obviously the GAs don't have the time to hear from every SA/YSA in the Church, but giving two or three of them from different backgrounds and current situations a ten minute block to share in the meeting would provide both first hand information and a basic idea of how the situation varies between individuals.

[NeuroTypical]

1 hour ago, NightSG said:

Then please explain why they have "subject matter experts" come in at all.

That's easy - they're following the scriptures. 

D&C 8:8 But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right.

The videos are part of the "studying it out in their mind" part.  

 

D&C 109:7 [...]seek ye diligently and teach one another words of wisdom; yea, seek ye out of the bestbooks words of wisdom, seek learning even by study and also by faith;

The videos are part of the "seek learning even by study" part.