- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
This is a quote from Armand Mauss’s book, “Shifting Borders and a Tattered Passport, Intellectual Journeys of a Mormon Academic”. Quote:My relationship to the LDS Church as an institution has evolved in ways that are rational as well as emotional. I would summarize by saying that it had been one long process of disenchantment to which the changing ecclesiastical culture has contributed but not caused. Note that I use the term disenchantment and not disillusionment. I mean only that for me, the institutional church and its leaders no longer embody an otherwordly mystique, as they did when I was a young man. I confess that sometimes I miss the sense of security and certainty about church leaders that I had as a youth, when I saw LDS prophets and other leaders as virtually infallible spokesmen for Deity. Whatever part Deity played in its origins, the church soon came to operate and develop a lot like other human institutions and organizations. Therefore …it can be understood through sociological analysis. The sociological view is necessary. It was my understanding of this reality that gradually brought my disenchantment.
I am as offended as other intellectuals when I see policies and practices in the church that I consider harmful, or just plain wrong. Yet I have always understood the nature of LDS ecclesiastical polity: I know the church is not a democracy and does not claim to be one. It is a corporate, centralized bureaucracy, in which change occurs slowly.
So it is that I have continued to value my membership in the LDS Church and kingdom and to give it my voluntary loyalty, even when I have believed church policies to be in error in certain respects. Yet — and this is important — it has been precisely my disenchantment that has inoculated me against disillusionment, because of the concomitant reductions in expectations. That is, an understanding of the church and its leaders as human and mortal has kept me from holding out unrealistic expectations for their performance. This has left me free to offer them my own support, loyalty, respect, and appreciation as fellow laborers in the vineyard, but not as contingent on an inerrant execution of their duties. This kind of emotional detachment has left me free to express myself in respectful terms without an accompanying anger that might have led to my departure from the church.Expectation-is-the-root-of-all-heartache
I guess one could say that I have always tried to look on the church and its leaders with faith, hope, and charity, even while keeping my expectations modest. I suspect they might say the same about me.
It was part of a post by Kristine A on Wheat & Tares called Disenchanted but not Disillusioned
http://www.wheatandtares.org/20329/disenchanted-but-not-disillusioned/ I finished this just last week, but had not written up a note about it. It was good, but it very much was his life and interaction with church leaders intermingled with his profession. I have some real respect for the guy. He seemed to be well grounded and not too ticked off when sometimes church leaders gave him reason to get upset (but who writes an autobiography and paints themselves in a bad way???)
I enjoyed it and I wish I had him in my ward along with Kirby from the SLTrib. I would enjoy going to church where I could crack jokes with Kirby and have serious and interesting conversations with Armand.
Good book and worth the read. The title is very descriptive as he talks about how he has seen the church change. Not too long (lots of supporting references for anything you might be interested in.
Now I need to get his “The Angel and the Beehive”.
He attended a Mormon Stories Event as a participant. I also happened to be in attendance. He was super low key. Just a regular guy sitting in the pews. Nothing bold. I barely knew who he was, yet as I watched him, I realized he had serious presence in his own right. Love the quote and the book sounds like an interesting read. I’ll add it to my list (which seems to grow more than it shrinks). Amen on the never ending list of books. I used to only read technical books and a few humor books. My wife does find it odd that I am now reading so much. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I really like the quote and seem to identify with his approach. It seems to me that he is saying when there was a view of it being mystical and “otherworldly” about the religion and god’s interventions in running the church and speaking to prophets, it was powerful and he misses it…but it was also heart breaking and disappointing (“Expectation-is-the-root-of-all-heartache”).
Once he stepped outside the mystical view, and looked at it like he does other organizations…it seemed to make more sense and easier to stay involved in church and accept leaders as they are.
Perhaps it is more realistic to him, not as fantastic.
I wonder if that fits his personality as “the low-key everyday guy in the pew”.
I wonder if others with different personalities have a harder time doing that, and therefore, have a harder time with disillusionment. Do those who feel more passionate about things find they can’t stay when the mystical bubble pops?
I have tried to keep searching for mysticism in it all. I sometimes wonder if it is a wish or dream, but not realistic. Anyone else feel that way?
Heber asked, Quote:
I have tried to keep searching for mysticism in it all. I sometimes wonder if it is a wish or dream, but not realistic. Anyone else feel that way?I feel like a pinball machine on this one. My spirituality still finds mysticism. Unexplained things that happen. I could use words like “Holy Ghost” “God Speaks” a believer would embrace it, a non-believer would mock it. Yet – I can’t deny the moments. They don’t come often, and sometimes it feels like they never come, then suddenly like some deja vu type thing it’s here.
Where I hit the other side is the over application people take with mysticism. My evangelical friends use it all the time. If you were damaged in a car accident it was God’s will and he has a purpose for it. Likewise if you missed the car accident it was God’s hand and he has purpose for it.
As to the early Saints – I really do think they felt something. I can’t name it or put my finger on it but it was powerful and life driving in a way that nudges toward some mystic sense.
My comment would be a repeat of mom3’s. I am a pragmatic mystic. It works for me.
Loved the quote above. I have sufferred from high expectations and as others have pointed out to me on this forum, it has been a major cause of the depth of my own dissafection. Mauss’ comments above hit it right on — stop expecting leaders to be bigger than life even thought the culture teaches us to think that way. In the process, we lose our high expectations, and leaders can fall as hard and as long as they want without damaging our commitment — because we had low expectations of them in the first place. Hurrah. Great quote. Can’t wait for the book to arrive — I ordered it a few days ago before reading this review. What hooked me was Mauss’ statement that embracing mormonism is a choice, not an imperative based on truth. After I read that I decided the book was worth the price, shipping, and time to read it…
Just want to say how much I admire Armand Mauss. He says exactly what I have been thinking…..comes from a similar background as I do…and is very candid in his memoirs about his true feelings on certain topics. The section on how he was called into SP’s offices (gatekeepers as he calls them) and how it went was very enlightening and indicative of the risks you take when you are an intellectual spreading ideas that are not mainstream. There are many pages I could have written…with ideas like these:
1. Disenchantment with leaders is actually healthy because it inoculates you against leader worship/deification and the inevitable testimony-shattering that occurs when they make mistakes.
2. The church and the gospel are two separate things — that the church is like any other large bureacracy. How we learned to separate the two.
3. Membership in the church is a choice, and given the lack of evidence of many of the claims our church makes, it really is simply a matter of faith, and hope — and a choice — to be a Mormon. In fact, he seems to imply you choose to be a member of it while recognizing it has severe limitations.
4. He describes the Strengthening the Members Committee as possessing an “Orwellian” name — something that I thought myself.
5. His section on his feelings toward leaders provides a balanced way of presenting less than orthodox ideals. It is characterized by balance with phrases such as:
a) in MY experience, I have not been treated unfairly, but I know of firsthand accounts where others have been.
b) conflict between intellectuals has its roots in a variety of factors — from academics who intentionally provoke to leaders, to overzealous leaders who exercise over-energetic measures to bring intellectuals to accountability. It seems that when you acknowledge inadequacies on both sides, this makes you less of an apostate.
c) He affirms his commitment to the church while expressing serious reservations about the experience, the policies at times, etcetera, without really openly criticizing the church. A masterful balance.
d) He acknowledges that leaders are generally well-intentioned and well-meaning, but that there are some he has appreciated more than others.
6. Interesting, he indicates that sociological theory embedded in a pilot that he was involved with influenced church policy.
He found that wards that people are more motivated about what they may become that by what they “are” led to the church accepting the term “prospective elders” for people who are Aaronic Priesthood but are adults. Also, his recommendation (with a local committee) that adult AP holders meet with the elders rather than ostracizing them in their own class. He is modest about taking the credit, but acknowledges his influence in the decision.
7. I liked his analogy that in the 40’s and 50’s intellectual discussion and scholarship was encouraged in the church. But then, later, the scriptures were replaced with the Kleenex box on the pulpit. A very powerful metaphor for how the higher ups have encouraged emotionalism and testimony bearing rather than intellectual thought.
8. More later…
He inspired me to want to write my own memoirs about my life for the use of may family and close friends. Unfortunately, my experiences would not be as positive as his, and it will take some serious reflection to present the same kind of balance that Mauss did.
Nice recap of the book. I am reading (slowly) my second book from him. I would love to be able to meet him. I think he is getting quite old now. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.