NOM

Anyone else feel like the church made sense for their parents' generation but not now?

Reasons:
1) The church was the biggest growing church in the world and that was evidence that it was part of a great work and the Lord's church
2) It was an American church. America was a light to the world and was revered around the globe. I'm in the UK now and people just don't hold the US with the same level of admiration as they used to - sorry I don't mean to be rude.
3) No internet - e.g. it was easier to believe in angels and visitations to J.S. and the present Brethren. A quick google and your into the CES letter.
4) Roadshows, a lack of correlation, and less of a feeling of legalistic corporatism, e.g. mine and my wife's parents were involved in building the local chapels - that work, rightly or wrongly, is contracted out now. Now we know the church builds malls and holds real estate.

In many ways it still makes sense for my parents: they won't look at anything negative, to find out the church is not what it purports to be would invalidate what has largely been their lives' work. They are in their twilight years (why upset them?). All their friends are church members. At this stage I wouldn't want them to go through the grief of losing their religion.

But for me, there really is not enough to hold me.

I definitely think this is true of my parents.

They joined the church in the mid-seventies just as the whole drugs, sex, and rock and roll thing had run its course and they were looking for something more stable. They were in their mid-twenties, were looking to start a family, and had no idea how to do it because their own families really weren't ideal. Right in the middle of that they get invited to church by a couple of missionaries, they see rows and rows of perfect families, and they were sold on the spot.

The church gave them rules, purpose, and structure for raising their new family. One of their prized possessions was that old Family Home Evening manual with a mom, dad, and kids sitting around a table. It was a pretty good deal. Just follow the handbooks, go to church, and your kids will turn out like these smiling children from Utah. Compared to the chaos they were coming out of, the Mormon church was an absolute godsend. But it's a different time now. I think there's just more structure in society in general, more information and support available to parents, church activity is in decline, and its more socially acceptable to live a secular life.

I wonder if attitudes toward child rearing has had an effect on new member conversions. I'm okay with my kids exploring the world and becoming whatever they decide to become. You don't need a rigid belief system to allow kids to follow their own path, you just need to be supportive.

That's a pretty good list of some of the challenges.

I would only add another couple of reasons that your parents' generation will not critically analyze the church, is that they were taught not to do that. I don't think this present generation shuts off their thinking skills quite like the generation that proceeded me. That, and the sunk cost fallacy. The HPGL that ratted me out as a non-believer is a good example. None of his immediate family are active, perhaps a grandchild or two, and so, what is his life worth? Why has he remained active when everyone around him left? It HAS to be true or his life has no meaning. I get it. I'm just glad I wrote off the sunk costs a long time ago, and can deal with the ramifications of that.

I do not feel that old. Yet, I remember being a little girl -- when my Dad helped to build a church building in Colorado. I remember roadshows. I loved them. I was part of the "cast", in a few. My Mom wrote the scripts for them. She cared about church events, even while not caring so much for the 10 children she helped to bring into this world-- because the prophet said it was her duty to do so. She still only cares about church events, as far as I can tell.

My kids don't even know what a Roadshow (or a church Bazaar, or an uncorrelated lesson/activity) was. I feel sad about that. I remember those days with fondness-- I remember feeling a sense of belonging that I never feel any more. I don't think my kids have ever felt that-- even the 3/5 that are still active/members.

redjay wrote: ↑Tue Jun 13, 2017 11:55 am Anyone else feel like the church made sense for their parents' generation but not now?

Reasons:
1) The church was the biggest growing church in the world and that was evidence that it was part of a great work and the Lord's church
2) It was an American church. America was a light to the world and was revered around the globe. I'm in the UK now and people just don't hold the US with the same level of admiration as they used to - sorry I don't mean to be rude.
3) No internet - e.g. it was easier to believe in angels and visitations to J.S. and the present Brethren. A quick google and your into the CES letter.
4) Roadshows, a lack of correlation, and less of a feeling of legalistic corporatism, e.g. mine and my wife's parents were involved in building the local chapels - that work, rightly or wrongly, is contracted out now. Now we know the church builds malls and holds real estate.

Good observation here! I am probably one of the oldest here on NOM. I remember when it was basically an American church. I could name the temples, participated in road shows, and stained the baseboards with the whole primary for our new ward building which my dad helped build. It was expected of us children to live in the world but not be of it. Mormonism insulated and inoculated us from the world of sin which surrounded us. Dad passed 10 years ago at age 88. He passed at home in bed. His well worn and heavily highlighted and scribbled in BOM and Bible were on the night stand next to him. He wanted "I did it well" put on his headstone. Redjay I get where your parents are as I have been there. As you stated:

In many ways it still makes sense for my parents: they won't look at anything negative, to find out the church is not what it purports to be would invalidate what has largely been their lives' work. They are in their twilight years (why upset them?). All their friends are church members. At this stage I wouldn't want them to go through the grief of losing their religion.

I resigned at age 63. It is tough at any age to loose a support system. I never got that chance to discuss this with my dad but I am sure he would refuse to hear or read anything I found about the church. I can't imagine loosing a support system when you're elderly where that vital connection is most needed. Where one is long past the point of fighting battles for truth and right and lack the physical and mental strength to jump ship. Thankfully, I am not my parents generation and as information exploded when the internet came on the scene, so did my world. And I could not hold back.

You do realize the same leaders of the church back then are still running the church today, right? So what's changed over the years if the leaders haven't?

Unfortunately my parents don't see any difference between the 1950's church and the 2017 church. It's the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. In reality the church hasn't changed all that much but rather a shift in who they deem to be their enemy. Non family values in the 1960's like sex, drugs, and rock & roll have been replaced with pornography, secularism, and same sex attraction/marriage today. In 100 years those issues will be replaced with issues like technology induced laziness creating no purpose in life for the current generation, ethical dilemmas regarding genetic cloning, and sins associated with addictions to flagrant robot sex (either physical or virtual reality based).

redjay wrote: ↑Tue Jun 13, 2017 11:55 am
3) No internet - e.g. it was easier to believe in angels and visitations to J.S. and the present Brethren. A quick google and your into the CES letter.

This one is very true for both my parents. I asked one of them about it recently, and they said that there just wasn't any information that told them all of the true things about the church that the church didn't want them to know. They had heard about some of it, but those were anti-mormon lies and there wasn't anywhere to go to verify the truth. I asked my dad what he remembered about Mark Hoffman and he said there wasn't anything to remember - they didn't live in Utah, there was no 24 hour cable news, and the church certainly wasn't going to broadcast it. You could have all the questions and doubts in the world, but there wasn't really a way to explore it - particularly if you didn't know the right people or live in the right places where that information could be found. Access to information is huge, for both the believing party and the one responsible for the story telling. The church really did control the one and only true narrative.

Now for both of them, things have changed. I'm not certain, but I think the Priesthood Essay was what verified one parent's disbelief and the admission of Joseph Smith's polyandry did it for the other. I don't know as the the other items were that important to them - maybe america being the light of the world (number 2) for my mom.

I think the church is less relevant today. The church is a social institution. People went to church to have conversations with people. To have dances and hang out with friends. You didn't get that much, especially as a married woman. So church was the outlet. Times changed. The telephone came along. You could then talk with people without meetings my up at the church. The internet changed many things. Cell phones and text messaging. Facebook. You get the drift here. Today, you don't have to go to church for social interaction. You can do it anywhere. Church becomes irrelevant for many. This trend will only continue.

Wow! The next time someone asks me if I'm Mormon maybe I can say, "my parents are," with a big smile. Just might work.

2bizE wrote: ↑Tue Jun 13, 2017 4:27 pm I think the church is less relevant today. The church is a social institution. People went to church to have conversations with people. To have dances and hang out with friends. You didn't get that much, especially as a married woman. So church was the outlet. Times changed. The telephone came along. You could then talk with people without meetings my up at the church. The internet changed many things. Cell phones and text messaging. Facebook. You get the drift here. Today, you don't have to go to church for social interaction. You can do it anywhere. Church becomes irrelevant for many. This trend will only continue.

AMEN 2bizE! (user name checks out) Ha!

You all just described my parents and 2 of my siblings. One of my TBM siblings is in her late 40's but still adopts the head-in-the-sand mentality that we still live in the 1950's

Mormorrisey wrote: ↑Tue Jun 13, 2017 12:38 pm I don't think this present generation shuts off their thinking skills quite like the generation that proceeded me.

I n some respects I agree - I had a conversation with someone not too long ago ago where the person was talking about a government security agency that was saying something similar: young people are not as willing to be told what to do without a clear rationale, and making their own value judegments (this was in reference to recruiting young people).

However, for a lot of people/young people out of the church there is a deep distrust of organisations, which manifests itself as apathy - so they don't even get to the thinking part. I look around campus today and it seems to be very apolitical, long gone are the days of scruffy hair and causes; students seem to be more interested in designer clothes and going to work for a good company.

SeeNoEvil wrote: ↑Tue Jun 13, 2017 1:30 pm Thankfully, I am not my parents generation and as information exploded when the internet came on the scene, so did my world. And I could not hold back.

At the risk of sounding condescending: I think it's awesome that you have been able to rationally examine your position - and not just go along with the sunk cost fallacy which Morrisey cited as a factor.

Red Ryder wrote: ↑Tue Jun 13, 2017 1:44 pm You do realize the same leaders of the church back then are still running the church today, right? So what's changed over the years if the leaders haven't?

The perceived need for a church by people. And if you do need a church, then why the mormon church, considering the truth claims seem to be on shaky ground, I might as well go to the unitarian church down the road, save my 10% and put towards a deposit on one of them robots you were talking about.

MerrieMiss wrote: ↑Tue Jun 13, 2017 2:33 pm
Now for both of them, things have changed. I'm not certain, but I think the Priesthood Essay was what verified one parent's disbelief and the admission of Joseph Smith's polyandry did it for the other. I don't know as the the other items were that important to them - maybe america being the light of the world (number 2) for my mom.

That IS interesting MM, so are they still active? TBM? NOMish?

2bizE wrote: ↑Tue Jun 13, 2017 4:27 pm I think the church is less relevant today.

BIngo

2bizE wrote: ↑Tue Jun 13, 2017 4:27 pm I think the church is less relevant today. The church is a social institution. People went to church to have conversations with people. To have dances and hang out with friends. You didn't get that much, especially as a married woman. So church was the outlet. Times changed. The telephone came along. You could then talk with people without meetings my up at the church. The internet changed many things. Cell phones and text messaging. Facebook. You get the drift here. Today, you don't have to go to church for social interaction. You can do it anywhere. Church becomes irrelevant for many. This trend will only continue.

I agree with you. The wider American culture and western culture is diverging from Mormons at this point. The greatest fear of the LDS church is not persecution or anti-Mormon material, it's being ignored and irrelevant.

Thought bubble:

The only reason that the church made sense, or was "relevant" for our parents, grandparents etc. was because the church was able to control their own narrative, and literally "make up" it's own relevancy. (Basically #3 from the original post: The church was able to hide information, and make up their own story, hiding the true foundational warts.)

But, when you get down to the bare nuts and bolts: Was it really relevant? Was the church when our parents/grandparents were young able to live up to it's grand and wonderful promises? (I don't think so.)

Was the church really relevant before 1978 when mormon god changed his mind about black people?

Even today, is it really relevant for our parents/grandparents with it's bigotry and hateful policies against gays?


The only true relevance the church has ever had is it's ability to use guilt, fear and shame to basically force people to hand all the decision making (and 10% of their money too) over to church leadership, and "follow the prophet" blindly. Pretty much nothing that the church "teaches" actually works for building strong, meaningful relationships, problem solving skills in real life, or really surviving day-to-day life as a contributing member of humanity in general. (Sure there's the "community" within the church that supports itself, and does a decent job of keeping that community going, but in the grand scheme of contribution to the well-being and betterment of the entire population of the world, what that small community does is next to nothing. The church really IS NOT a contributing member of society as a whole.)


My useless [threadjack] of an opinion. (Probably just a unintelligible, nonsensical, fluffy ramble...)

redjay wrote: ↑Thu Jun 15, 2017 3:42 am

SeeNoEvil wrote: ↑Tue Jun 13, 2017 1:30 pm Thankfully, I am not my parents generation and as information exploded when the internet came on the scene, so did my world. And I could not hold back.

At the risk of sounding condescending: I think it's awesome that you have been able to rationally examine your position - and not just go along with the sunk cost fallacy which Morrisey cited as a factor.

I don't take your comment as condescending at all. I take it as a compliment! Most people don't understand why they do the things they do and do it just because they see no other way. There is absolutely nothing wrong in switching gears in life. I might have came late to the exodus party but I have no regrets. It's pretty common to get sucked in the trap of thinking that just because one has invested considerable money, time and history in the church then they feel an obligation to stay. I surprised myself when I put the brakes on the madness and looked for another way. I was always the dutiful daughter.

I agree that the church is an American church. As such its best days were also America's best days, and as America falters the church falters with it. The Prosperity Gospel made a lot more sense when the prosperity was not leaving so many behind. The church officially abandoned its prior racism. Clean living and the protestant work ethic looked like very progressive ideas on the heels of the hippy movement. The church was, in culture as well as policy, more tolerant of pluralism, as was the Country.

Now the church preaches tithing to the growing population of the destitute. Today's church has staked out territory in divisive cultural issues, reflecting the division in the USA. Church leadership looks like an elite country club, as do the big money interests who control our government. The only moral issues the church really cares about have to do with sex, not things like civil rights or social justice. I can certainly see how this church has made itself irrelevant to my kids who are all disaffected to one degree or another.

DPRoberts wrote: ↑Thu Jun 15, 2017 9:17 pm Now the church preaches tithing to the growing population of the destitute. Today's church has staked out territory in divisive cultural issues, reflecting the division in the USA. Church leadership looks like an elite country club, as do the big money interests who control our government. The only moral issues the church really cares about have to do with sex, not things like civil rights or social justice. I can certainly see how this church has made itself irrelevant to my kids who are all disaffected to one degree or another.

Is this winning strategy? I'm not talking about eternal truths supporting the "one, true church" and sacred priesthood ordinances of salvation. I'm simply wondering about organizational longevity, demographic resilience, and simple survival of an LDS culture. Will current LDS policies lead to growth or even preservation of the church?