I have written a few posts about
things being blown out of proportion because of something in the background
(here) or interpreted in a way that was never meant to be the forerunner (here)
and will share a piece of the latter.
I believe it was Corey’s senior year in high school when the student
directory came out. On the cover was an art student’s work depicting the mascot
and school spirit. [The artist] had signed his artwork “Zion” as he had with many (if not
all) of his other pieces. It wasn’t meant to stand out as the main theme of his drawing
but rather blend into the design. However an instructor who was anti-religion especially
anti-LDS had discovered the “hidden” Zion and made such a great fuss over it
that it drew much more attention to the drawing and the word than was intended.
I don’t remember what year I had
attempted to share Tara Parks video – though it feels like it may have
been three years ago. I meant to put it
on the RS page but had posted to the ward page instead (they both have the same
area name) At the time I was in a different presidency than I am currently and
had added the 1st counselor to my monitoring list. I did not get the approval for ward posting –
which is fine as I had not intended to share with the ward but rather just the
sisters.
My current bishop called the 1st counselor to see if I had posted the video to the RS page and requested
that the video be removed. I didn’t even
notice the word “damn” had been used in the video until the third time I
watched it – and only because I was looking for it. So we took it down as it might be offensive to
some members. I think that is when our
bishop decided to join the RS page – which is why I think it was three years
ago (as that is how long he’s been a member of the RS page). I think many members get so caught up in the
letter of the law that they miss the big picture. But okay.
I get it – but do they? I thought
Called to Share (here) did a great job with it.
Wish I had had it to refer to back then.
I know the video had had at least one
view before it was taken down (here 2nd example). It was
from a sister who had been inactive for and was returning to church and wanted
to share the video with her husband.
Sometimes those who have struggled, are returning, or are unbaptized
members who may express interest in the church.
How many of those people do we offend by removing said post? What about Tara Parks?
Yesterday I noticed the cover on the
RS page still had a Christmas theme going and so I decided to change it. I
clicked on a photo that had been posted by another. She had posted the picture
in June with a message that she was willing to share her lavender with anyone
who wanted one. That is the photo I used
as the cover on the Relief Society page. Today I received a message from the
bishop which indicated that he “loves the flowers on the RS page” but pointed
out the gay pride flag in the background and perhaps I could crop it. I explained the picture was from another
member in the congregation and don’t feel I have the liberty to crop as I would
be offending her and her household and countless others.
So where is the greater offense? To those who might have a Pharisee attitude
or those who recognize the diversity and want to fellowship with those who may
not be as righteous at one affiliated with the letter of the law of the
Latter-Day Saint?
I mean, I get it. Representing church. Setting Boundaries. When I initially set up the R.S. page I did
not have the authority nor did I think to ask.
Someone suggested I change the name to the newsletter hand out – which I
may do just to not confuse myself with the ward page. It’s true I have not prayed about every
decision I’ve made regarding the page.
Perhaps I should. We need to understand our hearts as the Savior
would. He didn’t follow the letter of
the law. He didn’t go out of his way to
pass Samaria. He performed miracles on
the Sabbath. He was in the wrong, you
know.
.png)
.png)
