I’d rant about this . . .

I’d rant about this: LDS Church News: When the Correlation Committee Speaks, The Thinking Has Been Done, but A Marvellous Work and a Blunder has already done a great job dissecting everything that is wrong about it, including the monumentally fake story of the daughter who teaches her mother how to put her brain back in a jar where it belongs.

Just a couple of thoughts of my own, though:

  1. I had to triple-check the URL of the article to convince myself that it wasn’t a work of satire penned by a disgruntled ex-Mormon. No, it is in fact an official website of the LDS Church.
  2. Two words: Thought Police
  3. I want to hope this article was just hastily written and poorly thought-out, because the Church will only retain hardcore Kool-Aid drinkers if they think this sort of drivel is a good idea.

15 thoughts on “I’d rant about this . . .

  1. This prescription is only bad when we assume that free-form lessons would, in fact, be better than the drivel in the book. My experience, however, has been the opposite–especially when I was in a student ward. Every other “lesson” was about why so-and-so was marrying the wrong person, or why those of us who were “too Molly” (I fell into that group) were holding the rest of the bra burners back (I’m not kidding), or the “evils” of coffee. Something from the book would’ve actually raised the intellectual standard of our meetings, sad as that is.

    I wonder if this article isn’t geared more toward situations like our ward’s, way back when, and less toward the “thought police” angle. For every free form lesson I experience, or hear about on FMH, that’s actually uplifting and helpful to a modern woman, I’ve probably experienced five that would be horribly damaging to anybody who actually listened to them–and were, quite honestly, far more anti-woman than anything an actual church authority might put out. Really.

  2. Molly, God bless your honesty. I am an ex-mo but rather friendly. I love your blog. I have got to say, I also had to re-check the url and I still find it quite unbelievable!

  3. Hi Molly — Sorry for a bit of an off-topic comment. I found your blog through your comment on MoHoHawaii’s blog.

    Since you’re “mentally ex-Mormon”, can I add your blog to Outer Blogness and the blogroll of Main Street Plaza? Even though you haven’t made a complete break with the LDS church, you’d fit right into our community — we have people who are at lots of different places with respect to the LDS church.

  4. Pingback: What is Mormon culture? « Irresistible (Dis)Grace

  5. Molly, I loved this post. I found it, like Chanson, through MoHoHawaii.

    But what got me here was your first point…checking to see if it wasn’t some ex-Mormon satire. I was particularly skeptical because ldschurchnews.com is different than newsroom.lds.org, which I’m more familiar with. Even worse, ldschurchnews was the pro-LDS twitter account that *did* get hijacked by someone a long time ago. (The twitter account doesn’t exist anymore, I don’t think.)

    But in the end, this appears to be legit. And, I don’t know if you should take this with a grain of salt, but it seems that even the oh-so-sickly-sweet-and-convenient conversation between mother and daughter is based in fact if this comment on Times and Seasons has any shred of accuracy to it ( http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2010/01/underwhelming-thoughts-on-correlation/#comment-306197 )

    Unfortunately, I don’t know if this will have the backlash you predict. I don’t think most members will be bothered, sadly. Either that, or there are a lot more koolaid drinkers than I thought.

  6. I wouldn’t consider myself a Kool-Aid drinker, and I definitely perceive a LOT of problems with the church, with the culture it fosters, and with organized religion in general. However, on a sliding scale of bothersomeness, this article ranks pretty far down on the list. Many other issues bother me far more–which is not to say that it isn’t worthy of discussion, only that compared, to, say, the church’s insistence on sanitizing its own history (and destroying the testimony of members, “there’s no Santa Claus” style, instead of helping them develop more complex, adult, rationally-minded testimonies based on true understanding), it doesn’t seem that important.

    • That’s an unfortunately dismissive response from a priesthood holder. Telling doubting members (especially women) they don’t matter is not a good way to keep us in the church. 😦

      • I’m confused…what is? If you’re referring to my response (which is, perhaps, more dismissive than it should be), I’m not a Priesthood holder. I’m a girl.

        • My mistake for making the assumption that you were male. I probably jumped to that conclusion because it sounded so much like the dismissive responses I often hear male LDS give to feminist concerns. I apologize for the assumption.

          But just to show up and say “that doesn’t matter” when it clearly does to quite a few people just invalidates those of us who feel that way. From many discussions with LDS and post-LDS women, fewer things are more infuriating/depressing/hurtful than when we raise what we feel is a legitimate issue and then just get brushed aside with “that doesn’t matter.” It matters to us.

          If it really doesn’t matter, why bother making the comment? It must matter or there wouldn’t be the need to invalidate it.

          I think comments like this are never said to be deliberately hurtful; but LDS members do cultivate a lot of certainty in their speech patterns, and often can be dismissive without realizing it.

        • I didn’t say it didn’t matter; to be honest, I’m surprised you took that out of what I said. I made two points, basically both poking fun at active members: that the ideas members come up with on their own are even more hurtful, upsetting, demeaning, and narrow-minded (I was, after all, talking about Relief Society), and that there are other, even worse problems that I feel should be addressed first. In neither of those ideas am I remotely suggesting that anyone’s thoughts, feelings, or ideas don’t matter, or that people don’t have a right to be upset. I was only attempting to give some perspective. It’s interesting to me how, often, the very people who take issue with labels, conformity, and assumptions are very eager to apply those things to their neighbors. Because I’m not immediately on the “this is 100% awful” bandwagon, I’m therefore a repressive Peter Priesthood. I’m certainly not dismissing the possibility that I’m just a horrible communicator–I’ve certainly made mistakes in this department before–but I think it’s also possible that, sometimes, we tend to hear what we want to hear, and see what we want to see. I realize that many so-called “faithful” members DO take this “your opinion doesn’t matter” attitude, and it’s hurtful, but that doesn’t mean that, therefore, everyone who has a different perspective is promoting the same “let’s all conform” drivel. I’d hope, from other comments I’ve made, and from my blog, which you’ve read at least once, you’d know that I’m not exactly Ms. Conformity.

  7. At the risk of further offending you, I blogged about our exchange, because I felt like it, indirectly, anyway, highlighted some important ways in which we, as members of the church, are failing to serve each other. You seem to dislike me, and think I’m a dismissive, arrogant jerk, but please take my post in the spirit in which it was intended, which was (is) positive. It always makes me sad when people (including myself) fail to communicate.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s