How far outside the box, and stay LDS?

If you are not open to being wrong about your dissenting beliefs then I don’t know how feasible it is to stay LDS.

Hmm, first, thanks for the comment, nightwalden.

My first reaction is, does a person have to “hope” it’s true (literally), or is it okay to view as metaphor? For example, if one likes a fairytale…like Cinderella, and a “church” is built around the story, do all the “members” have to believe it all happened literally, or can “we” be a social/culture group and support each other with the messages of the story being our foundation?

You don’t know how many times I have nearly started this very thread! Thank you, Rix. You are so awesome!

Ditto. I will be keeping my eye on this thread to see what others have to say. This is something I have been thinking a lot about lately. There are a few big things that the LDS faith is built upon, and differentiates us from other Christian faiths… the First Vision/Godhead, the B.O.M, temples, and living prophets. So… what if I have little to no testimony of the truth of any of these things? I am to the point where I know I can call myself a Christian, but do I even have the right to still consider myself LDS? What exactly does being a Latter-Day Saint mean? I feel like such a phony. I stay because I love my family.

I have good friends and close family who are literalists, so they stay LDS – since the overall paradigm fits into Mormonism and the LDS Church. (in their minds)

I have good friends and family who are figurative-ists, so they stay LDS – since the overal paradigm fits into Mormonism and the LDS Church. (in their minds)

I have good friends and family who are a combination of literalist and figurative-ist, so they stay LDS – since the overall paradigm fits into Mormonism and the LDS Church. (in their minds)

I’m not sure how to classify myself properly when talking of literalist and figurative-ist. I’m dead center in the middle of the box with some issues, just inside the edges on some, just outside the edges on lots and WAY out there in space on lots of others – and the “seriousness” or “importance” of the issue isn’t much of a determining factor in where I am with relation to the box. (Seriously, if I am open to the Messiah/Christ concept being allegorical and symbolic, I’m not exactly inside the box on the most central issue.) So, I stay LDS – since the overall paradigm fits into Mormonism and the LDS Church. (in my mind)

Here’s the bottom line for me:

Whether I stay LDS or not is MY decision, damnit, and so if I can feel I “belong” in the LDS Church, ain’t nobody gonna convince me otherwise.

If part of that means I don’t go looking for a fight with people who disagree with me about certain issues – if part of that means I have to exercise charity to a higher degree than many around me – if part of that means I need to bite my tongue off occasionally (and not do so at other times, but rather respond thoughtfully and mildly and softly in order to not cause a confrontation) – if part of that means I have to attend and participate enough to build the social capital necessary to be taken seriously and respected as a member of the community – if part of that means I need to be more orthoprax to balance my heterodoxy – so be it. Creating the proper balance for ME is up to ME, and it has taken decades to become what I’ve become within the Church – a visible leader, at least at the local level, who can express heterodox views and have orthodox members listen to and think about what I say.

Not everyone has to be where and what I am to stay LDS. It’s important to me to be in my position, since it allows me to have an impact on a broader scale than if I was in a different position – but THAT’S ME. It doesn’t have to be any other individual. Someone else can bend a little less than I choose to bend, if she or he doesn’t want to be where and what I am. There’s no “better” or “worse” in that discrepancy; there’s only what “is” for each person.

I’m totally fine with my own perspective, since it works for me. When I was released from the High Council in my former stake (when we moved, just after I’d been on the HC just long enough to move to the old farts side of the room), my Stake President thanked me sincerely for my “unique perspective” in that group. I’m not sure my current Stake Presidency knew what they were getting themselves in for when they extended my current calling, but they are going to find out soon enough – and all I hope for is that when I am released they say the same thing that was said in OH. Either way, if I stay in this calling for years or months, it’s not going to affect whether I stay LDS or not – since I don’t give that power to anyone.

So, how far outside the box and stay LDS?

However far I want to be.

I think nightwalden makes a good point. I think it hinges on your desires and your behaviors. If you desire to stay, and your behavior is not disruptive, all are allowed to stay in the fellowship of the church (although social pressures may indicate otherwise, officially the church takes no stance to shun for differing thoughts).

I think it is ok to have doubts if you are trying to figure out those doubts or patiently waiting while things settle, with a hope that you can still make a difference at church, for yourself and for others. Even if ideas are “far outside the box”, but you are not trying to disrupt others’ faith or tear down the church, I do not see how you would be prevented from staying.

I was reading a FAIR article the other day that mentioned some things around this:

The Church of Jesus Christ does not have a formal concept of heresy (false belief), but only a concept of apostasy (false behavior).

…

While the Church does not actively seek out and target non-believing members, it does not always stand idly by when a member stops being a thinking non-believer and becomes a proselytizing non-believer. In other words, when a member starts publicly promoting ideas that seek to justify their non-belief or encourage non-belief in others, the Church is within its rights to separate those persons from the body of the Church, based on “open and harmful apostasy”.

“Motivation, Behavior, and Dissension, by Allen Wyatt, FAIR, 2002.

So I believe I can stay LDS with a different interpretation of my faith, but continue in the faith to have a desire to keep learning and building up the ward with love, friendship, service, and also new perspectives that promote the spirit, like the orchestra concept we’ve discussed on this forum. And since that is my DESIRE, I think I can realistically stay. Once I lose that desire, I can remove myself. Or if I act out in public that I don’t want to stay, the church can remove me.

Great question Rix. I agree with Ray that I can be as far out as I like.

:: begin self-analysis ::

It’s tricky for me to be honest. I remain in a state of uncertainty about most of the truth claims, awaiting further light and knowledge. I probably come across like I don’t believe anything at all, but that’s not entirely accurate. In terms of confidence probability (the way I like to discuss these things) my previously narrow Gaussian (having a very small standard deviation) has become much wider, with a much larger standard deviation. In fact, it may not even be a Gaussian anymore, it might be a uniform distribution. Or, most likely it’s just some nonlinear distribution (waxing nerdy here I know) believing it probable that some things are true, but thinking it highly unlikely other things are true.

I appreciate the metaphor much of the time, but the truth is, I’m not someone who really deals well in metaphor. I try to be, and I try to appreciate it, and sometimes I really do, but generally speaking I’m very much a realist. I’m an engineer (if that’s any indication of my personality). I love to think and debate, but my thinking is almost always an analysis of whatever the daily special is. Basically, I’m just not a mystic. In part, however, that’s why I stay. I know I need to learn from the mystics, as well as the orthodox.

So I dunno. I know that many would consider me dishonest for having a temple recommend. But I feel like I live the same standards everyone else does, and I derive benefit from the theology, either through analysis, or metaphor. So I feel justified in remaining, even though, in terms of belief, I am probably quite far removed from the box.

:: end self-analysis ::

Hope some of that rambling means something to someone. 🙄 🙄 😆

You don’t know how many times I have nearly started this very thread! Thank you, Rix. You are so awesome!

I really wonder this. So, I guess I don’t have an answer for you. But I’m feeling itchy…like I need to shed my old skin and be my new self. Whatever that means. Can I do that without making any external changes in my life? How many external changes can be made while staying LDS?

I think the answer must be different for everyone. That kinda sucks because it means I have to dig deep in me for the answer and ya’ll can’t just tell me what to do.

The problem I see is that I can believe in the symbolism and mythology, but the dogma and authority has fallen away for me. Obviously authority and certain core beliefs are very imporant in the LDS church. The manuals also teach that certain scripture stories mean certain things. If my interpretation of each and every story is completely different where does that leave me? I dunno.

Rix, I am more interested in HOW you stay LDS!

Oh, and there does seem to be a line in the sand as to what you are able to think, say and do while remaining LDS. We could point to examples of people who have been excommunicated. However, even they can continue to attend quietly. To me staying LDS is more than attending as an ex’d member, though.

Great thoughts, just me!

I think I’ll respond by saying first that since I no longer believe in the literal concept of authority and ordinances required for “salvation” (btw, I’m fine with that as sympolic or metaphorical…), I may approach this different than most. I agree that it is difficult to participate in many activities…since most members approach church stories as literal. So I attend occasionally to support family members’ special occasions, and for service activities that I can help with. I don’t attend regularly, and avoid callings by offering the Bishop a beer when he comes over.

(just kidding — I never have the type he likes 😆 )

I have a perception that the future of most religions will involve much more tolerance and respect of other approaches, and that each will slowly transition to a philosophy that our “stories” work for each of us individually, and the general purpose of religion will be to provide an avenue to attain spiritual experiences (whatever that is for each of us), and a culture for support, service, and social expression.

I was born and raised LDS, served a mission, temple married, various leadership callings…before my own transition, and what I’ve learned about myself is that mormonism IS my make-up. I am, and always will be “Mormon.” I may sarcastically jab others about the silliness of some of the church processes, but I will always admire the diligence and compassion the members have in their lives. I sincerely have not seen another culture that cares for others as much as Mormons. Really!

So, my own approach is not to be as actively involved as I once was…but I am actively involved in dialoque and supporting those who, like me, have had challenges with the literal interpretation of scripture and foundational stories…and how to live life more peacefully than when we did.

But I could be wrong….

I Here’s the bottom line for me:

Whether I stay LDS or not is MY decision, damnit, and so if I can feel I “belong” in the LDS Church, ain’t nobody gonna convince me otherwise.

And THIS is why I love Ray!