So our Mormon visitation is continuing — while I think Jerry is getting a little tired of it all, I’m still keen on having them come over. Maybe it’s because I like being friendly to them in a big-sister kind of way. I just figure that they must be rejected, mocked, or not taken very seriously in most of their visits — and at least in our home we’re not out to deconvert them or to recruit them to our “right” religion. Besides, these guys epitomize the meaning of “nice” (though I think you could also find their faces under the words “sheltered” and “naive”).
Anyway, last week they brought one of their Mormon sisters along for the visit, in order to better talk about the LDS church’s view of family relationships. Now up to this point, I’ve been pretty quiet in these visits, with occasional outbursts when talking about the church’s view on black people and homosexuals. This visit, however, was about family roles — my roles — as a wife and mother. This is where things started to get really interesting.
The elders passed out the LDS church’s proclamation on the family for us to read. It’s pretty standard religious faire — the male “presides” over his family, the woman “nurtures” it, blah blah, blah. The objections I have to their views on roles are pretty similar to the ones I’ve always had in traditional evangelical churches.
The only difference in this conversation was the discussion of gender, and its role in our pre-mortal, mortal, and eternal life. Apparently our pre-mortal spirit has a gender, though when we pressed our guests on how gender is defined, they could only point to the assignment of sexual organs. This adds a whole new dimension to things, or as Jerry put it, “the power of the penis.”
Toward the end of the proclamation, this is stated:
We warn that individuals who violate covenants of chastity, who abuse spouse or offspring, or who fail to fulfill family responsibilities will one day stand accountable before God. Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.
I pointed out this statement toward the end of our talk, and asked them if these statements were supposed to be a threat (I later asked for clarification about which “calamities” were being specifically referred to). The reply to my question was that this wasn’t a threat, but instead, a warning.
Which puts a whole new spin on things, doesn’t it? I suppose it’s all in how you view what’s being said. They see this as a warning to nonbelievers, I see it clearly as a threat for those who don’t comply with their doctrines. Maybe that’s one of the (many) reasons of why I’m not involved with religion anymore. I couldn’t accept these types of righteous threats as warnings, and because of that, I didn’t want to involve myself with any of its doctrines or practices.
So while I may not be any closer to converting to Mormonism, I am getting better perspectives on the human traditions of faith — and also learning more about myself in the process.