I’m getting cheerful correspondence from local LDS leadership again:
My attention was recently called [to] the 5/26/07 posting on your website. I was frankly surprised at the obvious lack of sensitivity for the beliefs of your present and former friends and associates in the Church. Such is not only disrespectful, but is a direct perversion of Church doctrine disseminated in a very public way. Pursuant to your current membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, I now request, as your priesthood leader, that you cease from any such activity in the future.
I’m a little surprised by his response (and ‘request’). First of all, this is a (mostly) topical site run by two atheists who are often critical of religion. It’s not an anti-Mormon site (if you doubt me, I can link to a bunch for comparison). I’m not writing with the sensibilities of easily offended staunch believers in mind, because I don’t imagine that they’re part of my readership. I figure that our audience is self-selecting: if you’re okay with the mix of critiques and satire and sometimes intelligent analysis of religion, you will keep coming back. If this offends you, you won’t.
Secondly, as I’ve stated before, if you believe in an omniscient god, then said god sees everyone pee. And worse. I’m just pointing that out. It’s ridiculous to be offended by this, unless you believe that your god closes their all-seeing eyes when you’re nekkid. I challenge anyone to refute this theologically.
Also, it also shows that this person doesn’t get the lolCats meme. But a lot of people don’t, so I’m okay with that.
I’m also surprised is that this person is essentially responding to a satirical comic. It seems more like an indictment of my poor taste (which I might ‘fess up to). In other posts, I’ve been openly critical of the Mormon hierarchy and have attacked belief in a monotheistic God, and I’ve been pretty clear about my atheism.
At any rate, the irony is that this kind of threatening will likely draw more of such undesired attention to the image, when chances are it would have been quietly buried under a steady accretion of daily posts. Also, because I am at my core anti-authority and anti-censorship (which is why I posted the excerpt from the email above), I’m now tempted to make more of such images. But I’ll try to avoid such a knee-jerk reaction. (except that I will link to this one.)
I do want to make one thing clear: I believe that the bishop is a good man, trying to do what he feels is right, and I hate to cause him any pain. At the same time, I feel strongly that attempts by religious institutions to silence criticism or satire need to be broadcast widely. If you’ve followed MoF regularly or read my previous post, you know about my overriding concern with the abuse of power.
To the self-identifying Mormons who are regular visitors (and especially commenters) to this site: How did you react to the lolCats + religion mash up on this post? First of all, were you familiar with the lolCats meme before encountering the post? Secondly, were you offended, amused, or confused by the images? Third, what is your primary motivation for returning regularly to Mind on Fire?
Oh, here’s the image in question:
18 responses so far ↓
1 Elise // Jun 2, 2007 at 10:43 pm
I’ve always thought one’s ability to make fun of and laugh at one’s own self is important. I think you are right about the letter simply attracting more attention to the post.
At the risk of drawing attention to my own ignorance, I didn’t take the time to read the LOLcats meme link and didn’t fully get the jokes to begin with. They were mildly funny anyway, but probably would have been even better had I understood the context.
I always suspected bishops and stake presidents were lacking in the sense of humor department.
The mantle of the calling perhaps inhibits the innate mantle of comedy and wit!
2 Chris Rusch // Jun 3, 2007 at 1:10 am
I thought that you had asked to have your name removed from the records of the Church? This seems odd, because in my experience when someone asks to either be left alone, or have his or her name removed, after that there is ocasional contact for the first, and none for the latter. Funny how that works.b
3 C. L. Hanson // Jun 3, 2007 at 1:29 am
I didn’t get the joke either, actually, since I wasn’t familiar with that meme.
That’s weird that the church would contact you, though, and base the complaint on your current membership in the church. It’s especially weird considering that anyone who reads your blog knows you’re an atheist and a Quaker, and I think others who are still officially on the books have posted worse…
It makes me wonder if the church is going to contact me about my blog one of these days. Even though C. L. Hanson is not my real name, I’m pretty sure they know who I am, or at least they could figure it out if they care to.
Maybe I just haven’t posted anything as offensive as the LOLcats meme yet…
4 nee // Jun 3, 2007 at 6:21 am
How did you react to the lolCats + religion mash up on this post?
Meh.
First of all, were you familiar with the lolCats meme before encountering the post?
In passing.
Secondly, were you offended, amused, or confused by the images?
The me of 2 or more years ago probably would have viewed it as disrespectful. Although, I would have found it far more disrespectful had it been on an active member’s page. Some of the things card carrying, devout members post blow my mind. They make your joke look like a prop from the church library.
The me of today was neither amused or offended. Maybe confused. Similar things have made me thing either people are making fun of ESL (English as a second language) people (the has cheeseburger thing, for example) or they’re written by grammatically ignorant kids who will have a difficult time in the real world unless they become professional gamers or reality mtv stars.
The Buddha LOL! one, however, I like. And it’s fitting.
Third, what is your primary motivation for returning regularly to Mind on Fire?
One of the few places online with a reasonable sized group of folks with similar enough thoughts to enjoy the company thereof and different enough to motivate me to consider a slightly different angle. Also, a safe, respectful place to share opinions.
There’s intellectual stimulation here, not overbearing, scholarly S&M.
This is a good thing.
5 Jonathan // Jun 3, 2007 at 3:30 pm
John-
Although not a morman or ever was one, I thought I’d respond - I apologize if I’m commenting outside the audience you asked -
My wife and I saw that picture and thought it was hysterical. We both had tears. I didn’t know at the time that it had anything to do with Mormanism. I do have a juvenile sense of humor, I’ve been told.
I think it’s fun to laugh about stuff like that. I’m familar with the lolCats thing, and I’m very familar with the text language from World of Warcraft- putting it all together was very funny. I visited the site and loved it.
I enjoy coming here because I like being part of a community who is free to criticize religion because the Christian communities I find myself in don’t condone criticism or intellectual skepticism at all - I’m hungry for a community that does this and I especially appreciate perspectives different then my own to challenge me. I agree with nee - it seems a safe place to share opinions even though we all come from different backgrounds and belief systems.
6 Bored in Vernal // Jun 3, 2007 at 4:33 pm
I don’t know what to say first. I’m full of thoughts that want to vomit themselves out onto the page.
First reaction: oh, no no no. It cannot be true that your LDS leaders are still reading your blog and attempting to control what you choose to put on it. Or perhaps that Mormon “brothers” or “sisters” are lurking around and reporting you? I have an awful feeling in the pit of my stomach. It brings out all the fear that for me is a huge deterrent to my being an authentic person. My blog and the bloggernacle are the only places where I have tentatively tried to present myself as a real person. I think (and hope) that it is clear to my readership that the Church is just everything to me, but at this point in my life I have to have a place where I can present myself as an honest person, whether that is with strange humor, gospel hobbies, criticism, or whining. Everyone deserves respect as they open themselves to others. Any attempt by Church leaders to force one of their members into compliance or a stereotyped mold is wrong, wrong, wrong. It is an abuse of power. It is what has made me so conflicted and mentally ill.
Next: confusion. I, too, thought you had your name removed from church membership. Why would your leaders feel that they have any business tampering in your spiritual life? (if your name has not been removed, I would be so pleased, since my Church needs John Remy desperately. But your leaders would still not have the right to take the action they have.)
Next: I’m so proud of you for posting this email and taking the anti-authority and anti-censorship stand you do. Everything you do on this blog is kind, loving and fostering of a spiritual (albeit unconventional) community.
OK, I do have some thoughts on the comics, too. You will notice that I did not comment on the original post. I am (slightly) familiar with the lolCats. Sorry, but I don’t find them all that amusing. I lump them in with the kind of humor found in “Dude, where’s my car,” “Dumb and Dumber,” and “Night at the Roxbury.” It mystifies me when my husband is found in front of the TV laughing uproariously at one of these types of videos. I generally roll my eyes, leave the room, and find something else to do. I didn’t find Steve’s lolCats at BCC very funny (well, maybe the N.Oman knowz my historiez…)
Interestingly, although I didn’t find your Joseph Smith lol very funny or in good taste, I did think about the sentiment behind it. As I read it, I recalled how I used to pray in the shower sometimes since I seemed to receive revelation when I was warm and relaxed and alone. But feeling a certain angst over whether it was proper to be calling God’s attention to me when I was naked, I discontinued doing this. At the time, and again while viewing your comic, I saw the irony in this!
Lastly, I continue to visit this blog because I have found here a community of nonjudgmental friends with whom I can explore my sometimes unconventional thoughts and feelings. I feel accepted and even admired at times, and I absolutely bask in this. It is an atmosphere where I can explore who I really am and attempt to find truth and wisdom. I love the posts which stimulate thoughts or open me up to different paradigms. I like to see how others deal with their deep existential feelings and thoughts and how they respond to difficulty and struggle. (In other words, an ideal Ward!)
7 pilgrimgirl // Jun 3, 2007 at 4:39 pm
Just to chime in on the church membership issue:
Neither John nor I (nor our children) have requested that our names be removed from church rolls even though our church leaders encouraged us to do so a few months ago.
8 Bored in Vernal // Jun 3, 2007 at 4:52 pm
Thanks for the clarification, Jana.
9 jjohnsen // Jun 3, 2007 at 4:59 pm
I’m with Bored, I don’t think this particular meme is very funny. This particular one doesn’t bother me in any way though.
10 Elaine Frei // Jun 3, 2007 at 6:34 pm
I think this is interesting. “Being offended” is seen as a sin within the Mormon church. However, this individual (did you say it was the bishop of the ward you attended, John?) is very quick to be offended by something you posted. Not only that, but he also feels free to try to order you to cease posting such things even though you no longer believe in or associate with the church and, I assume, no longer recognize his authority to tell you what you may or may not do.
There is apparently a double standard, in which leaders of the church are allowed to be offended at things others say about the church, but non-believers are not allowed to be offended at anything the church do, say, or teach. Or at least the officials of the chruch feel that those with other opinions or feelings should not be allowed to express that in any form. I don’t much like double standards, and I don’t much like censorship, which is what his message amounts to - an attempt to censor what you may say on your own blog.
I also have to say, John, that I think it is immaterial whether or not you’ve officially asked to have your name removed from the church’s records. Part of what this country stands for is free association (or at least that is what I was taught) and it seems to me that principle includes the right to leave a church without asking permission from the hierarchy of the church to do so. And then there’s that whole First Amendment thing.
I hope nothing I have said here offends anyone who still chooses to associate with the Mormon church. I have no quarrel with individual members of the church, and I like and respect those of you I have met here very much. However, I have some serious issues with the institution itself, which I feel has some serious “control” issues.
11 Elaine Frei // Jun 3, 2007 at 6:39 pm
Ouch. I just read back what I posted. Serious grammar and spelling issues in paragraph two. The obsessive-compulsive part of my personality is horrified.
The rest of me is just ticked off that someone would try to order John around like that, and I guess I posted in somewhat of the heat of being ticked off.
12 John // Jun 3, 2007 at 7:30 pm
Elaine and others: I’m humbled and deeply grateful by your support. Thank you. I count on you all to keep me honest (and I’m actually pleased that you all are comfortable telling me when I’m not funny).
I’m especially thankful that many of you see this as a community and a safe space. You’ve accepted me even when I’ve shown my human side. I hope that I’ve been able to return the favor.
Jana and I have chosen to keep our names on the books for a variety of reasons. I do so mostly because Jana prefers it that way. I guess this complicates things for the Church hierarchy–I think we would be easier to dismiss if we were bona-fide ex-Mormons.
chanson, does your local church leadership know who you are?
nee, I think the lolCats meme pokes fun at lazy, ungrammatical ‘chatspeak’ more than anything else.
Jonathan, your regular presence here keeps us connected to an community. Thank you.
BiV, you said:
It brings out all the fear that for me is a huge deterrent to my being an authentic person. My blog and the bloggernacle are the only places where I have tentatively tried to present myself as a real person.
I can’t tell you how much I can relate to this. My greatest trial in the church was that I could not be authentic and accepted. I, for one, love the you that you present to the blogging world.
13 C. L. Hanson // Jun 3, 2007 at 9:11 pm
Yes, the local leadership knows about me. I gave the local missionaries my name and invited them to my house and told them I’m a member. (I told that story here the mishies and me II.) So logically the local ward probably has my membership records.
I’ve gotten hits on my blog from I.P. addresses identified as “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,” so the church is at least vaguely aware of my blog. And it’s not as if there are a hundred million wards in Bordeaux, France…
I don’t think there’s an official policy of doing anything to/about individual bloggers though. The few cases I’ve heard of people being contacted about their blog (you, Simeon), it looks like it was on the initiative of local leaders who were aware of the blogger (and not through being tipped off by the church hierarchy).
In my case, I think the local leaders have placed me on the “do not contact” list. I didn’t actively request it, but I don’t mind.
14 John White // Jun 4, 2007 at 6:34 am
I think that I originally missed that the original artwork was Mormon-specific.
Is it possible that that’s the issue? That if you had used something generically Christian, you wouldn’t be getting this note?
15 pilgrimgirl // Jun 4, 2007 at 7:39 am
Biv (and others):
You can find my fairly serious response to the issue of god’s omniscience here.
16 mel // Jun 4, 2007 at 10:01 am
FWIW — I thought the lolReligion gig was pretty damn funny. More so after doing enough googling about to appreciate the subtlety and inside-jokiness of the meme.
And thanks for linking to my First Version/FSM post. It’s one of those things which really offend those who consider the stuff uber-sacred … which is part of the reason it’s so funny, truth be told.
So in the end, this kind of thing is exactly what the faithful have so warmly pre-packaged for them in Nephi’s vision of the Great and Spacious Building. Rather than get offended, you’d think they’d take comfort in some self-fulfilling prophecy.
17 Chili Pepper // Jun 4, 2007 at 11:12 am
“Pursuant to your current membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, I now request, as your priesthood leader, that you cease from any such activity in the future”
God, this makes giggle. Sounds like another pro-censorship, authority-driven LDS leader making threats, more or less. Threats of no real consequence.
I also agree with Elaine Frei that the LDS Church has some serious “control” issues. I think these control issues will become more publicly apparent over time, especially as more and more LDS members disaffiliate for their own reasons. Man John, how obnoxious, …but also amusing
18 Miko // Jun 7, 2007 at 10:03 am
I’m really not trying to play the age card here, but I think I’m the youngest MoFer here and saw a lot of these (or similar) memes running around in college, where they spread like wildflower. I hadn’t seen LOLcats until John linked to it, but I ROTF, LMAO when I did. John’s pics reminded me mostly of All Your Base (if you don’t find that funny, don’t check out Badger Badger).
Incidentally, I’m clearly not being inflammatory enough, I actually am anti-Catholic. But I guess my name’s not on a list somewhere (except with my family)…
Leave a Comment