- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
It’s a difficult one, I’m not even sure of the definitions myself. There is a bit of doublethink in it.
Maybe no one is a pure conservative at all. In fact, to accept current prophets’ every word is conservative, but it doesn’t mean that their words match those of earlier teachings/traditions.
Brian Johnston wrote:Enoch wrote:But admit it; all of us feel a little special being in the heterodox club anyway.
Yes. This is something that I know about myself and my personality. I find myself taking similar stances elsewhere throughout my life too, outside of religion. While I personally enjoy being a bit of a contrarian, and have always been fascinated by things on the fringes; I also realize that I need an “orthodox” majority as a background to be the way I am. I need them, on some level.
Interesting. I just found this note I left for myself:
Quote:
I think I would be genuinely disappointed if the church suddenly morphed into whatever it is I think it should be. Not that there’s any danger of that happening.I assume that’s a bad thing, at least in my case.
I do not think the majority of life long members even have a clue as to what the realities of church history are or the incompatibility of our theology with the physical evidence of the world around us. It takes effort to learn those things. Painful effort because you must set aside you lifelong beliefs and accept facts that will be troubling to you and your world view. Although there may be some like us who think the church is heading for a big problem I doubt it. Doubters have always been in the minority and they easily can get marginalized by the majority. I pretty much think the church will continue as it has been for some time to come. I think the best is for those who doubt take what you like about the church such as community and faith in God and apply those in your life and ignore the rest of the dogma, just as most Mormons ignore the facts to sustain their unquestioning faith, I can ignore tenants of Mormonism to sustain my sanity and yet be a part of the community.
Cadence wrote:I do not think the majority of life long members even have a clue as to what the realities of church history are or the incompatibility of our theology with the physical evidence of the world around us. It takes effort to learn those things. Painful effort because you must set aside you lifelong beliefs and accept facts that will be troubling to you and your world view. Although
there may be some like us who think the church is heading for a big problem I doubt it. Doubters have always been in the minority and they easily can get marginalized by the majority. I pretty much think the church will continue as it has been for some time to come.I think the best is for those who doubt take what you like about the church such as community and faith in God and apply those in your life and ignore the rest of the dogma, just as most Mormons ignore the facts to sustain their unquestioning faith, I can ignore tenants of Mormonism to sustain my sanity and yet be a part of the community.
I’m sorry this response is so long but I don’t really know what I would want to leave out because these ideas are all interesting to me to flesh out. I agree that the Church is probably not going to die out any time soon and I don’t really expect to see any dramatic collapse in my lifetime. If the majority of active members have already been ignoring or denying most of these historical issues and inconsistencies in the Church’s official story for so long then there’s not much of any reason to think a very high percentage of them will all of a sudden be phased by this now. However, I still think the Church’s long-term sustainability with the current hard-line doctrines and policies is very much in doubt in large part due to the fairly recent developments of anti-Mormon propaganda on the internet and the trend of active members having fewer children on average nowadays.
Believe me, I have a good idea just how much I am outnumbered when I look around and see so many TBM neighbors, co-workers, and family members that will probably end up going to their graves believing that the Church is everything that it claims to be and that anyone who thinks otherwise couldn’t be more wrong. However, I don’t know if it’s really fair to imply that dissenters are in the minority. Maybe among active members that is true but doubt and/or non-compliance is actually more common than strict adherence among members in general we just don’t see it sometimes because many of the members that didn’t like attending the meetings or obeying strict rules about pre-marital sex, the WoW, etc. often just become completely inactive before they ever really had a good chance of possibly going on a mission or marrying a TBM.
Of course, some apologists could claim it has always been this way and rightly so because the Church wants to maintain “high standards” and can’t worry too much about slackers because they are supposedly a lost cause anyway (not “elect”). This wasn’t as big of a problem back when there were so many members with 5 or more children because even if only half of them remained active as adults it was still a net gain. But now if there are more active parents with only 2 children or less and half of them become inactive it is a net loss and these losses will be compounded in each successive generation.
What’s worse is that anti-Mormon propaganda on the internet is starting to further erode the base and whittle away many active members that in the past probably would have been content to just go along with the Church as long as they felt like that’s what they were supposed to do. But now they are seeing all these problems compounded by the total cost of membership and intolerant all-or-nothing attitudes of the remaining members and it is too much for them to deal with. It is not so much the overall number of members affected by the anti-Mormon propaganda that is significant as much as the kind of members it is affecting at this point such as BIC, return missionary, temple married members living in areas of the Western U.S. where the Church currently has its strongest foothold.
If you take formerly entrenched members like this and simply replace them with converts in Latin America I really doubt that it represents any kind of 1-to-1 trade-off because for every 700,000 members the Church counts in some of these foreign countries maybe 200,000 (if we are lucky) still consider themselves to be LDS. My point is that you will probably have to convert many members to ever find one with the level of commitment to ever stick around long enough pass this tradition on to their children so the true cost of losing one active and fully integrated member is probably much higher than many top Church leaders realize. Sure there’s not much I can really do to change these official policies, I just hate to see the Church continue to alienate so many members mostly for the sake of upholding all these TBM traditions at all costs while showing very little regard for whether or not Church membership is a positive experience (as much as possible) for most members on average; so that’s why I like to complain about it.
I think you make a valid point DA. It’s been one of my frustrations and concerns as well. After this last GC, I finally just threw my hands up and made up my mind that I had to quit caring so much about the future of the church. I have lost faith in the church leadership to meet my, and other moderates and NOM type’s spiritual needs. We’re on our own. The church will serve the 85% of the active membership, and probably, IMO, will implode in on itself within the next 100 years. I want to have faith that the church will correct its’ course, but I’ve grown weary and too discouraged to continue thinking that way. I appreciate the positive outlook and perspectives that many have on this site, I am happy that you still believe and have hope that things can change. I personally just don’t see it that same way. Some will argue we are evolving and becoming a more tolerant and “friendly” church. I personally don’t see it happening. I hear the church leadership saying one thing and then doing/preaching just the opposite in the next breath, and after this last GC with Oaks, Costa and Packers message filtering down through the local leadership, and new CHI changes that stresses TR worthiness for basic traditional family ordinations like church membership and MP, I can see it actually becoming much more hard-core authority, obedience, conformity and fundamentalist.
cwald, I think our local experiences influence our global view to a very large degree. Just saying. Old-Timer wrote:cwald, I think our local experiences influence our global view to a very large degree. Just saying.
No question, as well as my experience growing up in the church. The problem is that is all I really can go off of. If there were other options, say, moving across the street to a different ward, or even across town to a different ward, things might be different. As is, I’m a good 80 miles from the closest ward. That really is not an option, especially in the Winter.
I suppose I can quit the local church and just be an arm chair quarterback mormon from the distance – but what would be the point. The gospel is active, mormonism is active — I don’t think I can really quit the local, and still be considered an active member of the tribe can I?
cwald wrote:I think you make a valid point DA. It’s been one of my frustrations and concerns as well. After this last GC, I finally just threw my hands up and made up my mind that I had to quit caring so much about the future of the church. I have lost faith in the church leadership to meet my, and other moderates and NOM type’s spiritual needs. We’re on our own.
The church will serve the 85% of the active membership, and probably, IMO, will implode in on itself within the next 100 years.I want to have faith that the church will correct its’ course, but I’ve grown weary and too discouraged to continue thinking that way. I appreciate the positive outlook and perspectives that many have on this site, I am happy that you still believe and have hope that things can change. I personally just don’t see it that same way. Some will argue we are evolving and becoming a more tolerant and “friendly” church. I personally don’t see it happening…I can see it actually becoming much more hard-core authority, obedience, conformity and fundamentalist.
I don’t think the Church’s decision makers really care that much about serving the majority of active members either enough to respect their true feelings or wishes. It’s not like members get to vote on these policies because even if they resign it will simply be counted against them as if they were deceived by Satan because the Church supposedly couldn’t possibly ever be wrong. Sure there may be many active members that actually like the WoW and think this is the way it should be but how many of them also enjoy spending so much time on callings like home teaching? For others (like me) tithing could be the biggest stumbling block. Basically, the lowest common denominators have been set at such an unrealistic and specific level with all these expectations that I can’t imagine a very high percentage of members being truly happy about all of these things at the same time.
To me it looks more like most active members put up with many of these things not so much because they really want to but simply because that’s what they have been told they are supposed to do. The problem is that the ones telling them this are basically just higher-ranking TBMs themselves that don’t really know whether these things are truly worthwhile or necessary either (Matthew 23:24-25) because they are mostly just repeating what they have been told as well and will rarely if ever step back and honestly re-evaluate any of these traditions themselves. If we follow the chain back to the beginning for some of these doctrines many of them clearly look more like the product of opinions or haphazard trial and error than any kind of legitimate revelation.
It’s a big difference between thinking God expects you do something and feeling like it’s just another man telling you what to do. The fact is that they have been wrong before and have contradicted each other many times and once people start to recognize this it is difficult if not impossible to really take some of their dogmatic claims seriously anymore (John 8:32). I think this is one of the main reasons the un-sanitized history is such a thorn in the Church’s side because it basically makes these LDS prophets and apostles look very human and lacking in the mystical powers they claim to possess while it seems like they still want to deny this at all costs and continue to pretend that prophets are nearly infallible. What they don’t realize is that paying too much attention to the standard LDS scriptures, conference talks, and Church publications can also lead to the same conclusion anyway that whatever revelation there may be just doesn’t appear to be nearly as trustworthy and reliable as we have been lead to believe.
Quote:The problem is that is all I really can go off of.
Amen. It’s hard to believe something you haven’t experienced personally.
That applies not just to discussions of institutional change but also to overall perspectives. It’s hard to value a perspective that isn’t your own – especially the further it moves from your own. It’s a central part of charity, imo – but it’s also one of the hardest parts.
I agree with you basically DA – especially during the cynical phase of my “cycle.” In an effort to be objective today, I think the church has put themselves in this position, and they really don’t have a good way out of it. I also don’t think there is a grand conspiracy to manipulate and “keep the people” down. I just think it is basic human physcology. Most people on this planet are stage 3, Guardian believers — which is what is reflected in religion, politics etc. I think the church works for most people, and the leaders truly believe they are leading” folks down a “safe” pathway. It doesn’t work for me and I don’t believe it, but, well, you take out the 50% inactive members, I think the church works for 85% of the remaining folks.
And lets be fair, just how many of those 85% would survive a “liberalization” of the LDS church? Seriously, we have, IMO, more or less, created a culture of religious fundamentalist that are spiritually immature and lazy. Spiritual welfare on grand scale — we (the LDS culture) rely on “prohpets, apostles and local leaders to get revelaion for US – revelation that we are responsible for and privledge to receive. What do we do as a church? We wait for the newest issue of the Ensign to get our answers? It’s wrong and unnecessary, but it is the way it is today.
It really is the whole problem — if the church leaders cut the strings so to speak like you and I suggest and want and NEED, how many of these stage 3ers are going to sink? Most? Our culture has become so reliant on priesthood authority telling them what to do, how to think and what to believe, could they just overnight be capable of surviving, spiritual, on their own? I doubt it. On another thread, we talked about how most here feel more spiritual than ever and more worthy than ever — I think that is because we have been working through our crisis of faith on our own and have “found god” and understand how it works and how to truly work out one’s salvation. Does the LDS culture in general, have that tool worked out? I don’t think so. We like to play it safe, which is good for teenagers, but we never really teach and expect spiritual maturity from the general membership.
Quote:we never really teach and expect spiritual maturity from the general membership
I agree, generally, with much of what you just wrote, cwald, but I only will say that I think spiritual maturity is taught and desired by the global leadership. I’m not sure they expect it from the general membership (and
I think they might be correct in that lack of expectation), but I do think they teach and want it. It’s just that many don’t understand at the personal level (meaning through personal experience) that many people have to struggle mightily to get it.Some people honestly have a mature faith and spirituality without ever having to stuggle mightily to get it, so, like you said in your other comment, their relative ease in the journey is all they know “internally”. They might understand “us” intellectually, but it’s not the same thing as personal, internal understanding. Old-Timer wrote:I think spiritual maturity is taught and desired by the global leadership. I’m not sure they expect it from the general membership (and
I think they might be correct in that lack of expectation), but I do think they teach and want it. . Sure. I agree with that. They teach and want it —- but then in the next breath they publish a 400+ page CHI because they “know” the general membership can’t do it without it — or they teach the concept of the WofW as “advice and counsel”, and then they make it a commandment for a TR (exaltation/salvation) because they believe that the majority of the members NEED it to be a commandment to survive spiritually. The Jews have 613 commandments. That wouldn’t hold a candle to how many “commandments” we have to deal with.
You know what it reminds me of Ray – it’s the ancient Israelites and Moses all over again. JS did something good – he learned and showed us a “better way.” 190 years later, we are right back to living the “Law of Moses” — out of necessity perhaps. The question I ask myself — did the church leaders give us the Law of Moses back, or did we do it to ourselves – much like the Israelites did in their history?
From my observation, there may seem to be many members who are obedient but spiritually immature. However, I don’t think its fair to brush the membership with such a broad stroke.
I also know many members who have gone through incredibly difficult trials (greater than anything I’ve gone through)…and for them, it solidified their faith in the church and being obedient. The church in its current form helped them through their crisis, and I think the ones I know are very mature spiritually from it.
I guess that is what I find interesting. It does seem to really work for some people. That is one thing that draws many people to cling to the rod even stronger, or attracts converts who want some standard or stability in their lives they can’t find elsewhere.
The struggle seems to be sometimes that it can become portrayed or internalized by many as “the one true way”, or the only way, or the way that will
alwayslead to happiness regardless of individual differences or circumstances…in other words, Eternal Truth and God’s way for all His children, and there is no other way. That, to me, is when historical evidence or sometimes personal experience doesn’t seem to support such claims, and there is a conflict.
But I disagree that members aren’t spiritually mature if they are orthodox. I truly believe it does work for many, many people, and is why the church rolls forward. But for some people, I think the complexity of the personal journey is also real, and in many respects, I agree with cwald:
Quote:We’re on our own.
I’m just not sure if that is because I chose to take a path less traveled, or if it was intended by God to help me grow by trying to be more independent in my spirituality. While I try to figure that out, I believe the church continues to work for others, and there is truth to be found in it.
Well said, Heber. It really does work for some, and many orthodox members really do have mature faith. Many others don’t – but, otoh, many heterodox members don’t have mature faith either. For many of them, it’s nothing more than an immature rejection of orthodoxy – not maturity in and of itself. It really is an individual thing – and that is SO hard to understand in the throes of a personal crisis.
cwald wrote:I agree with you basically DA – especially during the cynical phase of my “cycle.”…
I think the church has put themselves in this position, and they really don’t have a good way out of it.I also don’t think there is a grand conspiracy to manipulate and “keep the people” down…Most people on this planet are stage 3, Guardian believers…lets be fair, just how many of those 85% would survive a “liberalization” of the LDS church? Seriously, we have, IMO, more or less, created a culture of religious fundamentalist that are spiritually immature and lazy. Spiritual welfare on grand scale — we (the LDS culture) rely on “prohpets, apostles and local leaders to get revelaion for US… if the church leaders cut the strings so to speak like you and I suggest and want and NEED, how many of these stage 3ers are going to sink?Most? Our culture has become so reliant on priesthood authority telling them what to do, how to think and what to believe, could they just overnight be capable of surviving, spiritual, on their own? I doubt it…We like to play it safe, which is good for teenagers, but we never really teach and expect spiritual maturity from the general membership. They’ve definitely painted themselves into a corner and created a complicated dilemma by putting so much emphasis on prophets and “one trueness.” However, you could have said the same thing about polygamy and the priesthood ban based on race because this was supposedly commanded by God but the Church has survived fine after completely reversing these policies. I’m not suggesting that they should just come clean about Joseph Smith marrying other men’s wives, questions about the Book of Abraham translation, etc.; I just think they should tone it down a little bit with some of the prophet mythology and the expectation of unquestioning obedience.
I don’t think many members would really notice or complain much if they simply stopped preaching about these ideas so much or if they tried to cut back on the amount of time required to fill callings by combining classes and/or eliminating some meetings, etc. It seems like there are a quite a few things they could improve without needing to implement a complete overhaul. My guess is that the bigger problem than not really knowing what to do about these issues is simply that most of these leaders haven’t really acknowledged the relative weakness of their position given so many discrepancies between their official story and the evidence.
Basically, I think they are in denial assuming they have even considered some of these tough questions in detail to begin with because it was probably too painful for them to really face the facts so they just try to ignore these problems and pretend they don’t exist instead. There may be a few leaders like Gordon B. Hinckley, Hugh B. Brown, President Uchtdorf, or BH Roberts that have possibly suspected that maybe the Church isn’t everything that it claims to be but don’t dare to really speak up about it or else they don’t want to burst peoples’ bubble if they think they are happy with the Church but personally I think there have been very few if any leaders like this because most of the people that think this way probably wouldn’t last long enough in Church leadership to ever work their way up through the ranks this high to begin with.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.