I usually had something to talk about going into these interviews, but this time I did not, which in retrosepct was a mistake. My mission president started asking me questions about the area I was serving in, and for reasons that were not all my fault, I didn't have good answers. The questions then became more pointed, and I began to feel defensive even as I simply ran out of answers. I think I felt some loyalty to my previous companion, who had just been transferred out, because we had got along so well during the three months we were together.
I left this interview hurt and angry, and it wasn't long before my new companion noticed that something was bothering me. When I told him about it he suggested I call the mission office and set up an appointment with the mission president. I took his adivce and set up another interview.
When I went in, I wanted to apologize and set the record straight. Because I was one of a hundred missionaries in the mission, I suggested that he might not remember what happened. I also expressed a concern that I might have put a black mark on my record, but my mission president said that I had not.
We ended up spending 45 minutes together, discussing what had happened, the area I was serving in, and other things. At one point he told me that I would soon have the opportunity to "call the shots" in my own companionship and I was blown away. I had been hoping for quite sometime to become a senior companion.
The lesson here, besides always having something to talk about in an interview with the mission president, is that when you feel hurt or offended you should go to the other party to talk about it.
In the Sermon on the Mount, the Savior said, "Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift" (Matthew 5:23-24). I think this principle can work both ways; if you are hurt and offended, you need not wait until the other party comes to you; for one thing, you might end up waiting a long time, for another, they might not even be aware that there is a problem.
An unfortunate occurance, which appears to happen often, takes place when an individual chooses to separate themselves from the rest of their family over an offense given or perceived to have been given by another individual. In refusing to be near the "offender", the other, innocent, family members are also denied the presence of the "offended". These other family members may themseleves feel hurt and offended, and further rifts in the family may be opened. As the poet wrote, "No man is an island."
These things ought not to be, not when it is possible to prevent these breaches by going to the offender or the offended and discussing what happened, what was said, or what was done. Whether we are the offended or the offender, we need to swallow our pride and do whatever is necessary to make things right. The Lord will forgive who he will forgive, but of us it is required that we forgive everyone (see Doctrine & Covenants 64:34-35).
So what do we do when the other party refuses to talk? The simple answer is that we have to accept their decision, at least eventually. You have to know when to weary the unrighteous judge (see Luke 18:1-5), and when to walk away, at some point the law of diminishing returns takes effect. We can receive peace from the Lord even as we accept the other party's decision not to talk; it may take time, but we can have that peace.
What if the offender refuses to or does not change? When family is involved, it is my humble opinion, that we should not avoid family events in order to avoid the offender -- unless they are downright abusive and it would be unsafe to be around them.
No comments:
Post a Comment