Faith Transitional Model – More Effective then Fowler

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

I think my brother, my stake president, and my bishop would all say they would fit into the Green phase. Even my prior bishop who was a straight arrow, by the book guy, would likely identify with green, though, i would call him Blue. Yet all seem stage 3 to me.

There is much overlap with this description of Green and Fowler’s stage 3, I think. I think most people who get older get more nuanced.

You are probably right. I don’t think anyone would want to label themselves as blue as currently described (someone who blindly follows every word spoken from the pulpit and expands the commandments beyond their intent). Perhaps the blue description could be reworded to be more friendly. But I still like a way to view faith change that doesn’t get the knee-jerk of apostasy.

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

Basically it is fairly typical for people to go through a skeptical and/or rebellious phase but the Church is currently so unfriendly and uncompromising toward anything other than the traditional orthodox LDS beliefs, rules, and routines that it makes it difficult for very many people like this to stick around or return to full activity in the Church after truly testing out some of the alternative answers for themselves.

I mostly agree DA. I see great value in this model in explaining faith transition to Stage 3 Mormons. If they can interact with the member in faith crisis without defensiveness, blaiming, etc. Then everybody wins. I wish my bishop had a copy of this model.

I think that another common misconception about Fowler’s stages of faith is the idea that the higher stages are better and people should automatically want to move up to Stage 5 or 6. However, it sounds like many people will be perfectly content to remain in Stages 2, 3, or 4 the rest of their lives and there is no major reason for them to change until the stage they are in no longer works for them anymore and they can’t really make sense of the world around them by trying to make everything fit with the relatively simple and clear-cut beliefs they had before.

[Anonymous]

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

I think that another common misconception about Fowler’s stages of faith is the idea that the higher stages are better and people should automatically want to move up to Stage 5 or 6.

The way I see it people don’t automatically look at higher stages as “better” as in “you will be happier here.” But when they are explained as more advanced or further down the road people may feel they are missing out or somehow lacking experience if they don’t make their way down to the higher numbers. I think a color code can also have this problem if any stage is explained to come after another, or conditional on the experience that must be gained in another stage.

[Anonymous]

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

another common misconception about Fowler’s stages of faith is the idea that the higher stages are better and people should automatically want to move up to Stage 5 or 6. However, it sounds like many people will be perfectly content to remain in Stages 2, 3, or 4 the rest of their lives and there is no major reason for them to change

Well said, DA. I agree. Although I also think many stages aren’t changed because a person chooses to remain or to move…stage 4, for example is often thrust on people even if they really didn’t want to leave stage 3 where they were content. Instead, like growing up and having a family on your own where you start to see your parents differently not because you want to but because now your experiences change things…changing circumstances present the need to re-evaluate faith to fit the reality or experiences one is having, not a conscious move to try to progress. Perhaps a move to Stage 5 or 6 is made with effort, not necessarily to progress, but to reduce the suffering of stage 4, which is also important to note that returning to stage 3 is an option to reduce suffering.

So, I whole-heartedly agree with you that it is taken too often as some are “better” than others and we should all seek to be a certain stage. If we are going to describe some Apostles as firmly Stage 3 members (which not all are, but some may be)…well then, they certainly are not lacking in development of faith. As much as I love Ray (good example of Stage 5 to me)…I wouldn’t say he is more developed than Dallin H. Oaks, and Elder Oaks needs to catch up to Ray.

[Anonymous]

If this new model is to be accepted, I think, as Roy said, Blue could be developed more to not be so patronizing to Iron Rod members of the church, or so prescriptive on everyone should think like middle-wayers. Red could also allow for people to remain in that state of chaos or skepticism because that is just what makes sense to them based on their experiences, without a need to break to the Green phase, because some people may return to Blue, or they may remain in Red.

I might suggest as an idea:

Yellow – Primary level faith…it is all black and white, whatever my mom or my bishop says (or any direct authority to me) is the way the world works (usually won’t last past adolescence). Blind faith. Some adults have this, but not many.

Blue – Faith lies with the acceptance of external authority as the source of truth, and therefore, one truth, one faith, one baptism for all (there may never be a need for some people to move beyond this phase, since that external truth may carry them through their life’s experiences)

Red – Skepticism from lost trust in prior authorities such no real authority exists for a source of truth (leaning towards disbelief answers can be found, or an agnostic lean…some never need to leave that phase if the skepticism protects them from the pain experienced from being in the Blue phase and were knocked out of it, or who can’t buy in to a Green phase because it sounds too dishonest or nuanced to really have value. Red may be where they stay because of no evidence to suggest anything else is better)

Green – Confidence in the faith that personal revelation is the source for personal truth and the ultimate authority, where truth is a large enough tent to include multiple external authorities that may be in line with personal truth (some may return to accepting the external authority that is secondary to their internal compass, or they may have no further need for external authority…not everyone is comfortable in this phase, especially extroverts who seek approval from the community or need to validation through conformance)

We did a Colors seminar in work many years ago, and found people at work fit into different colors, and there were good and bad of each color…not one is better than the other. The idea was to become aware of these differences, and seek ways to work together despite differences, not try to get everyone to progress the same way to the same spot or same color. Just simply be aware people are different.

In this way, I like colors rather than numbers because it can reduce the implication there is a natural or desired progression.

For what it sounds like Bishop Bill is wanting to do, this can work if we make people AWARE of differences (especially leaders who deal with different people)…without telling people they need to progress or move from one phase to another…that will happen at an individual level and time. But we don’t need to fear Red phase people, nor dismiss Green phase people, nor look down on Blue phase people. Its an orchestra, or a rainbow. In fact, its more beautiful by embracing all the colors, even if I prefer one.

Rescuing the sheep is not moving everyone to one phase, but making all sheep feel secure in the flock. As President Uchtdorf said, “Come, Join with us” – that is shepherding.

[Anonymous]

Yes, if we can about this in terms of “conditions” or “perspectives” instead of “developmental stages”, I think it can reach more people in a way that will breed understanding and acceptance.

Quote:

I wouldn’t say (Ray) is more developed than Dallin H. Oaks.

Amen – and this is exactly why I think “developmental stages” is not the best way to talk about our different perspectives.

[Author]

Posts