Planted Ch 1: Faith & Trust in a Secular Age

My quotes

By its very nature faith is not based on tangible, empirical proof. Fundamentally, faith is a matter of hope and of trust, not much different than love.

Essentially, we must recognize at the outset that in the majority of these cases, not only is the pain and struggle read, but so are the issues.

After having spent time in the scholarly trenches with many if not all of the issues that typically trouble people, and as one who has had countless conversations with those who feel their faith is teetering on the edge, I can strongly assert that the challenges are real and that most of the people who face them are earnest. How we deal with doubt in the church today is one of the most pressing tests of our collective discipleship.

So annoyed. My first response took me so long that I was kicked off and I hadn’t saved it. :sick: So here’s the short version.

Thanks, hawkgrrrl, for doing this review.

I’m not reading ahead, so I know he’ll probably develop these ideas as we read on.

I’ve only been in Patrick Mason’s presence once, but he was very approachable, and I’m really glad this got published. I hope it does spark “pastoral dialogue.”

Maybe you all can help me with a persistent stumbling block of mine in these conversations: lumping all doubt together, and what we categorize as a doubt in the first place.

“For most doubts, there are no magic words or ready-made formulas that will immediately make them go away. Doubt is thus less a problem in need of a solution than a common part of the mortal experience that should, like all things, be treated with charity and ultimately consecrated to God.”

I just don’t think that it moves the conversation forward very much to be putting the hot-button short list of Internet-era Mormon doubts into the same category with the profound unknowables like the very existence of God or the reality of a resurrection. I can see that they all affect each other, but I’ve felt from the get-go that putting them all together like this is a way of waving people off and, to some extent, dismissing concerns.

“Stigmatizing doubt to the point that people feel guilty for even having questions is not conducive to spiritual growth.”

But if we first define doubt as any thought divergent from the manuals or GC talks, isn’t spiritual growth still blocked?

I agree when he says:

“How we deal with doubt in the church today is one of the most pressing tests of our collective discipleship.

“If you or someone you know has doubts or questions about historical or doctrinal issues in the church, there are answers to be found….good answers, intellectually rigorous and honest answers, faithful answers.”

I wish we could say that there is documentation, teachings, dogma, etc., that we can use to find our own answers, because then we feel respected, and we can

“…talk faithfully, constructively, and honestly about difficult things.”

And, FYI, there are 30+ pages of notes, recommended reading, and indexes at the back.

I’m looking forward to reading with you all.

Before even getting into chapter 1, I had a comment or two about just the Intro.

It is worth noting this is from Deseret. A few other books have been carried by Deseret, but this is one of the biggest issues about doubt/questioning/nuanced members.

I look at this in two ways.

One is that it shows a positive change in the church and the leaders. It help allow questions to be aired with other members by potentially reducing the stigma. Coming from Deseret I think many more TBM’s will read it and that is a great thing. This is a book I can ask my bishop and Stake President to read. He even states

Essays can be disagreed with and still be a faithful member

.

Then there is the more cynical part of me that says this issue is being forced on the church and it is not nearly as proactive as it is reactive.

Then on to Chapter 1.

He does then frame a common faith crisis scenario. As mentioned above, there is not “one” script for this, but he frames a common path by talking about Hans Mattsson and how after years of serving and defending the church he finds out most of what he argued against was actually true and how he felt the church had lied to him. It is helpful for a TBM to have a better understanding and not just default to “they just want to sin and have a excuse to walk away from the church.”

I do like that he addresses the knee-jerk reaction of some TBM’s to other’s doubts to just do the stuff your are supposed to do and stop doubting.

But is’t not that simple. Remember, most of these searchers are already active Latter-day Saints who have spend counless hours reading their scriptures, praying, and serving. They are RM’s, Gospel Doctrine teachers, RS Presidents, bishopric members.

He also talks about how much more open the church is about discussions. I agree to an extent and have a bit of my “2 sides of the coin” as above with it being positive, but probably mainly thrust upon the church with no other choice.

I picked up this book with a hope that I can pass it along to TBM members and leaders. It’s not the perfect mode, but of the ones we have had I find it the most useful at present.

I asked DW to read this with me with the hope that she could understand more of what I am experiencing and to know what she can do to help me and what is not helpful. Reading the intro was fine, but chapter 1 did not go well. From the very beginning (with the story of Hans Mattson), she was very uncomfortable. She does not understand why I can’t just choose to believe and not worry about all the things that I don’t understand.

I really enjoyed the Andrew S. post that Hawk linked. It really speaks to the differences between how individuals see the world/church and what they get out of it.

Also funny that many of us try to “fix” people in the other groups by changing their lens orientation (IOW “Just don’t worry about it and keep doing stuff”, “Talk to these apologists they have most of this stuff sorted out”, and the StayLDS/relational fix of “look at it with nuance/cafeteria approach/or the sense of community.”