If you accept authority, you are more likely to be active

[Anonymous]

Interesting article on a survey of Mormons in America. Shows that the Mormon “left” (I think many people here qualify) is very small — about 10-15% of the total membership.

The article doesn’t specify sample size, and proportions are particularly sensitive to small sample sizes, so I would use the numbers with caution. There may be more in-depth numbers in the report the researchers produced, linked in the article, but I haven’t looked at it.

I would say that that it was when I stopped believing in our local leadership that everything fell apart for me personally. The conclusions in the article seem sound. I’m saddened we represent such a small group (those of us who identify with the description of people who no longer buy, wholeheartedly, into the traditional believe of local and central leadership authority). But I’m happy for the people who are comfortable in the authority-belief-system that apparently typifies active Mormons.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/benjamin-knoll/just-how-big-is-the-mormo_b_5756440.html” class=”bbcode_url”>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/benjamin-knoll/just-how-big-is-the-mormo_b_5756440.html

[Anonymous]

“Mormon left”…the way they describe it…sure sounds a lot like me. I shall adopt that name. I’m part of the mormon left. Go me!

Quote:

In Chapter 3, the authors develop four different indices of “Mormonness”: 1) Activity (degree of religious practice), 2) Authority (degree of obedience to the institutional church), 3) Insularity (degree of social separation from wider society, and 4) Identity (degree of self-identification and affinity with the group). (See page 63.)

I like this approach. Interesting stuff. Thanks for posting, SD.

Regarding your view, my experience was a bit different. I was always able to disagree with local leadership, although my respect for them often made me swallow my view and obey, even if inwardly I felt they were wrong but trying to do their best. Even when I was on my mission, many preached strict obedience, and I always down played that to focus on love and people. I always leaned that way, and was OK with disagreeing with others in authority over me. Sometimes I even wondered if I tried to gently remind them of an alternate view than just strict obedience to authority. I think I always disagreed with local leadership on some things.

It was when I really came to the point where I disagreed with SLC on issues that things really changed for me. I was comfortable disagreeing with individuals when I had the backdrop that the institution was aligned to God’s will. It changed when I accepted the top leadership and prophets had more cracks and wrinkles than I previously allowed myself to see. A lot with the LGBT issues, for example. That was not just local leaders stepping out of bounds. That was local leaders doing as they were told. That bothered me more.

Then my identity was refreshed.

Then my insularity decreased and I saw more value to the wider society.

Then my views on authority were reshaped (although I never abandoned respect for their authority)

And then I saw changes to my activity.

Of course, it wasn’t all done in a vacuum. It was going on while processing the family crises in my life…so it wasn’t all about the institution and doctrine or church history for me. It was living life and making sense of things, and finding disappointment with authority that didn’t understand me.

[Author]

Posts