- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
But spinning off this — do you think intellectual tendencies reduces one’s ability to accept the Church enough to eventually acheive salvation, even after baptism? Does our tendency to question get us into trouble too much? And how do we guard against the negative aspects of intellectualism so we can stay willingly active and without angst toward our Church membership? I don’t have problems with intellectual tendencies – as long as they aren’t used to deny spiritual tendencies. I think one of the great revelations of the Restoration is the idea that our spirits AND bodies are divinely ordained as conduits/tools of growth and inspiration (“I will tell you in your heart AND in you mind” – among others) and that reaching perfection (“completeness, wholeness, full development”) cannot be achieved by the spirit alone. If intellectualism is defined as the denial of spiritualism, then I think it can be a stumbling block – but without that very narrow definition, I think intellectualism is a vital part of the Restored Gospel.
(and, fwiw, I think the main problem when intellectualism is mentioned by a GA is that the intended meaning usually is that narrow definition – relying ONLY on the brain – but that meaning is not articulated clearly enough, and the message comes out as “don’t think about it”)
Old-Timer wrote:I don’t have problems with intellectual tendencies – as long as they aren’t used to deny spiritual tendencies.
Well said! I love the balance concept…and agree that the perception that we are not supposed to study and learn about an issue that is pertinent to us…coming to our own understanding, is over-stated and sometimes used as justification for not doing our “due diligence.” I know many that do this quite often, and they get quite frustrated when something doesn’t add up to what they expected.
In my experience, those that are well read/educated tend to be more understanding of events that sometimes hit us unexpectedly. But that’s just me….
For me, it’s OK to question as long as it doesn’t degenerate into a negative attitude about the topic I’m questioning. There has to be this abiding certainty that I’m doing the right thing by reflecting on my spirtual experiences with the Church even when things don’t make sense. It seems like one of the traits that’s aspired to if you’re trying to see things in an intellectual light is to be able to say to yourself and other’s, if asked,is that “it doesn’t matter”. But I’ve decided it does matter and I’ve found it increasingly difficult, especially after reading a post over on Mormon Matters, [url= http://mormonmatters.org/2010/05/29/does-god-squash-ets-how-human-is-human/ Those things that keep keep butting up against facts and can only be put on some shelf or ignored or dismissed with an “it doesn’t really matter” and that’s not good enough anymore. I don’t deny that there is something spiritual and some are specially attuned but I’d like some answers other that God’s ways aren’t our ways or have faith or it just not ours to know right now. Sorry for the rant but for me Sunday has gone from a good day to a day that I dread more than any other of the whole week.
GB, fwiw, I rarely take the stance that “it doesn’t really matter” as an exclusive answer, especially when I’m talking with someone else. What matters to any individual is what matters to that individual, and I believe the only way to get past that and find a constructive solution is take one of the following paths – or another one like these: 1) ___________ matters, but not as much as ____________.This allows someone to put worth in something that is troubling, which is healthy, imo, because struggle does have worth, but it allows that person to prioritize – which necessitates a recognition that some things of worth just aren’t worth enough to allow them to over-shadow other things of more worth.
For example, to use something that has been discussed here extensively, whether or not the Word of Wisdom constitutes divine revelation and how it is used as a temple attendance requirement now might not matter to someone as much as supporting those who are prone to addiction, participating in a unique social marker of one’s community, expressing solidarity with one’s ancestors and/or participating actively in temple weddings. Another example might be boredom at church leading to complete inactivity vs. damage to a marriage by refusing to attend church with a spouse – which might be able to be “solved” by bringing a book to read when boredom hits. The admission that there might be something that is more important is what allows solutions to be discovered in many cases.
2) ___________ matters, so I will search for a way to view and/or undrestand it differently.For example, the idea that the Church is “true” in some way might matter, but being “true” meaning it is perfect and inerrant might not be acceptable, so searching for an alternative understanding might lead to the idea that the Church being “true” means it points us to a unique, noble, good and otherwise untaught destination (in this case, becoming godly).
This allows someone to recognize that there always are multiple legitimate ways to view something, to take personal ownership of one’s beliefs and paradigms, and to provide enough wiggle room to hold on to the possibility that their initial reaction isn’t 100% comprehensive and Truth. Much of what I have constructed over the course of my life in the way of a “worldview” and a “theology” has come about because of my willingness to consider lots and lots of possible perspectives until I find one that resonates with my own soul – and that willingness, I believe, is the heart of why I am as happy and joyous and at peace as I am, both within and without the LDS Church.
3) This is closely related to #1: ____________ matters to me, but it doesn’t matter to _____________ – and that’s OK.For example, polygamy as an historical practice might bother someone a great deal, but it might not bother anyone else in that person’s family, congregation or close circle of friends. Therefore, if a person has decided to continue attending church and/or being a valuable part of family, congregation or circle of friends, letting go of the need to try to make it matter to others by recognizing that it’s OK if it doesn’t matter to them can remove a huge burden from one’s shoulders in a way that no amount of effort to make it important to others can provide.
There are other mechanisms, but these are the ones that are the most common and effective in my own experiences, both for myself and for those with whom I have spoken over the decades – and, if you notice, each one is a combination of “intellectualism” AND “spiritualism”.
I would ask which is more reliable. Intellectual or spiritual understanding. Both paths can enlighten and cause problems. Neither one seems to be used exclusively by members on this site. For me it has become a matter of availability. I can pursue intellectual ideas and concepts whenever I want. The spirit on the other hand I am not so good at conjuring up on request. Hence I have become much more intellectually driven. Cadence wrote:I would ask which is more reliable. Intellectual or spiritual understanding. Both paths can enlighten and cause problems. Neither one seems to be used exclusively by members on this site. For me it has become a matter of availability. I can pursue intellectual ideas and concepts whenever I want. The spirit on the other hand I am not so good at conjuring up on request. Hence I have become much more intellectually driven.
I think similarly. I wonder if salvation has to do with not only “spiritual feelings” but feelings in general…& psychology. It seems that EVERYTHING (power, money, righteousness etc.) is motivated by the feelings it produces. I’ve noticed that I’m more open to & appreciative of happy & spiritual feelings after experiencing some less pleasant ones. But depression or other mental issues could take hold too long, if reason is not brought into the picture. I think it’s about learning to harmonize intellectual thought with feeling.I read the book Religion and the Pursuit of Truth by Lowell L. Bennionand really got a good picture that intellectualism does not have to be a hindrance to spirituality, that there are ways to embrace the pursuit of truth and knowledge with increasing faith and spirituality. Like many things in life, there is usually not just “one way” to do things most effectively. And so some things in life can be approached through the mind and intellect, but not all situations lend themselves to those tools in the tool box.
I think sometimes with Intellectualism, the idea is to work things out on your own, with your own mental capacities…and sometimes that can breed pride of becoming RELIANT only on oneself or only on that one tool. In that, there is danger, I believe.
In Buddhism, they teach:
Quote:In Buddhism, both learning and practice are extremely important, and they must go hand in hand. Without knowledge, just to rely on faith, faith, and more faith is good but not sufficient. So the intellectual part must definitely be present. At the same time, strictly intellectual development without faith and practice, is also of no use. It is necessary to combine knowledge born from study with sincere practice in our daily lives. These two must go together.
Quote:But spinning off this — do you think intellectual tendencies reduces one’s ability to accept the Church enough to eventually acheive salvation, even after baptism? Does our tendency to question get us into trouble too much?
Short answer: Yes.
But instead of being pariahs, such people should be part of the evolution of the church.
The CoC has a very intellectual approach that is complemented by spirituality. Yet it doesn’t necessarily speak to my soul either. “To be learned is good if they hearken to the precepts . . .” as it says in the D&C. I think intellectualism is our language, our comfort zone, but the opposite of it isn’t spirituality – it’s sentimentality. The problem is that many in the church mistake sentimentality for spirituality, but that’s seldom viewed as a threat. I think it’s a more insidious threat actually. hawkgrrrl wrote:I think intellectualism is our language, our comfort zone, but the opposite of it isn’t spirituality – it’s sentimentality. The problem is that many in the church mistake sentimentality for spirituality, but that’s seldom viewed as a threat. I think it’s a more insidious threat actually.
I never thought of it that way, but I like it. Of course we confuse spirituality with sentiment. It explains all the crying for little reason.
SilentDawning wrote:But spinning off this — do you think intellectual tendencies reduces one’s ability to accept the Church enough to eventually acheive salvation, even after baptism? Does our tendency to question get us into trouble too much? And how do we guard against the negative aspects of intellectualism so we can stay willingly active and without angst toward our Church membership?
Certainly some people can easily go way too far with their hatred and criticisms of the LDS Church to the point that they mostly end up hurting themselves with bitter feelings and strained relationships with TBM family and friends. Once people start to go down this road sometimes it’s hard to stop. If we assume that fully accepting the Church is truly necessary for salvation then certainly thinking too much and asking lots of questions is definitely a bad idea and the safe bet would be to just not worry about it. However, I have a hard time believing that God is really going to condemn everyone except for the active and obedient TBMs that represent only about 4 million out of something like 6.8 billion people in the world. I know the Church has contingency plans for people that haven’t had a fair opportunity to accept the gospel in this life but that still seems like a huge waste of life experience if everything is going to work out exactly the way the Church claims.
I guess if you want to view it as earning a higher reward then that would be great as long as you have any degree of confidence that the Church really has the knowledge and power to deliver on all their promises but personally I think the best bet is to do what seems right according to your own conscience and common sense primarily for the sake of this life and let God worry about what happens afterwards. Personally, I think the whole mindset of blind obedience to Church authority figures is actually part of the problem and the only foolproof solution that will actually work more often than not would simply be for the Church and individual members to honestly acknowledge that Church leaders are only human and make mistakes.
It’s an undeniable fact that many LDS prophets and apostles have contradicted each other and have said many things that are very questionable or flat out wrong and they will probably continue to do so. Of course some members that see this will inevitably start to think, “Why should I listen to these guys? It’s obvious that they don’t know what they are talking about.” It wouldn’t be such a big deal if we didn’t glorify prophets and apostles quite so much and give members unrealistic expectations about how great and trustworthy they are supposed to be. I don’t think calling people with legitimate doubts about this evil apostates and even excommunicating some of them will really help the situation it only adds fuel to the fire.
I am starting to see questioning/seeking as a requirement of true Mormonism. Modern culture may say otherwise, but I think Joseph declared and demonstrated that we need to seek and find — as Ray said in conjunction with the spirit and not opposed to it. They key in my mind is to become comfortable with what the “spirit” is to you, and how it speaks to you. To me it’s all about love and goodness. I agree with hawkgrrrl. I think sentimentality has, in many cases, replaced spirituality. And in our hyper-sensitive society, anything that threatens the sentimentality is strongly condemned. But if I’m being honest, I think the entire idea that somehow intellectuality hinders spirituality represents a misunderstanding. I cannot understand why a God would implant such abilities into the beings it creates, then ask them to sideline those abilities in favor of something they’re not comfortable with. I respect spiritual manifestations as a mechanism for getting to truth (though I admit I find them less reliable due to the tight coupling of emotion) and recognize some people will be better at that than others. Being “intellectual” can stumble in the same way (being tied to emotions) but also has favorable mechanisms for dealing with those stumbling blocks (i.e. peer reviewed journals, a society of colleagues who will critique your work etc.). Such mechanisms don’t exist for religious experience. My spiritual manifestation is supposedly just as valid as anyone else’s is even if they say entirely contradictory things. Furthermore, the society surrounding intellectual ideas is ruthless. If your ideas suck, it will be made known to you disregarding your feelings. In the religious community such a tactic would be completely unacceptable.
As a result, the religion I accept as “true” will need to hold up to both intellectual and spiritual scrutiny. If it does not demonstrate itself on both accounts I don’t think I can concede that God is the author. I don’t think this means I need to be able to understand everything, but it should add up intellectually, as well as spiritually. And I will say that if the attitude of needing to understand something intellectually prevents my salvation then I will accept my hell with open arms. I would rather live a hell than have a heaven that requires me to suspend my reasoning and better judgment (not saying this is the case in Mormonism)!
Perhaps part of the problem is that we continue to subject our religion to intellectual scrutiny. If we saw it more as personal truth rather than absolute truth we would not feel the need to subject it to such rigorous intellectual standards. Maybe it is a major misinterpretation to conclude that Mormonism represents absolute truth. Maybe that’s not what God intended. Maybe Islam, Buddhism, Catholicism, etc. are just as valid personal truths as Mormonism and that’s really what’s important.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.