- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Mormonism is a creedless religion with (theoretically at least) an ever-expanding canon. We are supposed to “treasure up the good of all faiths” and have been taught that “Mormonism is truth; and every man who embraces it feels himself at liberty to embrace every truth.” So, given that, heterodoxy should be the norm, right? It’s really the fact that there is so much focus on conservativism and orthodoxy that’s so surprising. I think it’s just that the orthodox and conservatives tend to be more confident, more vocal, more organized, and a little power hungry. That’s okay. Let them rule the world. I’d rather understand it than rule it.
hawkgrrrl wrote:I’d rather understand [the world] than rule it.
Beautiful! I love that!
Personally, I don’t think that we have all knowledge or truth yet. We also don’t completely understand the history. I think this is where faith comes in. Unfortunately, with 13 billion members out there, you tend to get as many opinions. It is not outside the realm of my personal testimony that things can change. Afterall, the church has changed a great deal since 1830. You just have to have a couple of constants to keep it going. 1. Christ is our Savior and head of the church. He teaches us through our leaders, line upon line and precept upon precept.
2. That Joseph Smith was a prophet with priesthood authority from God. This does not mean you agree with everything he did, but simply accept the fact that God restored his authority through him.
If you can accept those truths, then you get at the core of the Gospel. We have a Savior, and we have the authority to carry out the work of God and receive revelations that will eventually result in receiving all truth. Until that point, I think it is simply important that we desire to serve God. Afterall, the covenants we make in the church are not that we will be perfect, but that we desire to or are willing to be perfect. The first is rather impossible for us, the second is well within our power.
If your heart desires to serve God and you are seeking to do so, I believe that you fine. God will take you on a journey of learning. Sometimes he doesn’t just give the answer, because the long winded road helps us learn things better and even helps us teach others. One day, we will have all truth, but we don’t at the moment. As others have said, both JS and BY have said that the church encompasses all truth. If you are seeking the truth, you can consider yourself a mormon.
mr_musicman wrote:If your heart desires to serve God and you are seeking to do so, I believe that you fine. God will take you on a journey of learning. Sometimes he doesn’t just give the answer, because the long winded road helps us learn things better and even helps us teach others. One day, we will have all truth, but we don’t at the moment. As others have said, both JS and BY have said that the church encompasses all truth. If you are seeking the truth, you can consider yourself a mormon.
I love the way you described this. Thanks!
The basics of the Gospel are Faith, Repentance, Baptism and receiving the Gift of the Holy Ghost. After that, the search goes on — to find the meaning and accumulate “truth” whatever that may be.
mr_musicman wrote:1. Christ … head … through … leaders
2. Joseph Smith … priesthood authority from God …restored
If your heart desires to serve God and you are seeking to do so, I believe that you fine.
If you are seeking the truth, you can consider yourself a mormon. I be diametrically opposed to you on 1 and 2, but I am sure with you on the bottom line.
kupord maizzed wrote:
I be diametrically opposed to you on 1 and 2, but I am sure with you on the bottom line.Well the bottom line is the most important. Quite frankly, if you believe in God and truly seek Him, you will eventually find him. As for the other two points, for me, they are what keep me going to this church. Without them, almost any other church would do.
mr_musicman wrote:kupord maizzed wrote:Without them, almost any other church would do.
Yes. Almost any other church would do. But so would the LDS Church. And I am LDS, not some other religion, I decided.
That is a cost/benefit analysis that some of us make: If any church might do, and I am already comfortable and integrated into the LDS Church, then I might as well stay where I am and make the best of it. The LDS Church is also seen as a known and understood “risk,” while investing in a new community has unknown variables. I sound like an accounted or something…
I now consider myself more just a Christian than LDS now, but I do value my membership in the LDS church and want to be part of it. I love the VTing program, Family hIstory. I appreciate the most of many lessons and supports in provides to youth. We have to reframe in order to survive and stay in the LDS churchat least I did, and this was the advice of my SP and new bishop. Hang on to the good and let the bad go, and just stay close to the Lord. They have been supportive of my journey as they could be and knew of the crisis of faith that I have had and I, in turn, have helped them by sharing articles with them that will help them have compassion on others in my shoes for whatever reason that brought them there. For me, it was less church history and more of a bad experience in the church, but they definitely teamed up together and made it a profound sense of loss that I had to mourn over. I have seen in my years that many people feel pain with the global church, but even more feel pain and rejection from the local church. The second generally is more personal. LadyWisdom wrote:We have to reframe in order to survive and stay in the LDS churchat least I did, and this was the advice of my SP and new bishop. Hang on to the good and let the bad go, and just stay close to the Lord. They have been supportive of my journey as they could be and knew of the crisis of faith that I have had and I, in turn, have helped them by sharing articles with them that will help them have compassion on others in my shoes for whatever reason that brought them there. I think your experience is fairly specific. For better or worse, local leadership can be compassionate or downright mean and ornery. I’m glad you have found support in the redefinition that you have had.
Ultimately, I think the limits of reframing come from a combination of your individual personality and the situation of the local leadership. Perhaps it might be problematic that the local leadership changes about once very five years. You may have a tolerant and compassionate bishop at one point, but the next bishop is not. You may not have changed much during the window of time, but the reaction of the local leaders may.
This was an old post that I thought we should bring back. It is interesting how our faith transitions over time. Some of us are more open about it.
Others see openness as a weakness.
The main questions being asked is very interesting:
Quote:How far can you reinterpret LDS beliefs before you can no longer be considered LDS? Can you ever be outside the boundaries of the LDS church except by your own definition? (other than through resignation or church disciplinary action)Minyan Man wrote:How far can you reinterpret LDS beliefs before you can no longer be considered LDS? Can you ever be outside the boundaries of the LDS church except by your own definition? (other than through resignation or church disciplinary action)
I think, as you point out, it is highly subjective. I suppose from a very broad point of view, if one identifies as LDS, they’re LDS. On the other hand, when you look at objective views of membership statistics you find that while the church might claim X membership in a given country, those who self identify as LDS is almost universally far fewer.I’m sue there are bishops, stake presidents, and general authorities who believe it is within their purview to decide whether or not someone is actually LDS other than in name (in their role as “judges”). But do they really have that power? They really only have the power you allow them to have.
My view of things that make the church different from other Christians is very nuanced. My views on the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, prophets in general, and temples, for example, are not the “norm.” I believe I’m still LDS, but I’m sure there are people who don’t think I can have these views and actually be LDS.
As part of my faith crisis and transition I have significantly reframed and I’m much more focused on the Gospel of Jesus Christ than I used to be. The gospel is not unique to our church, all Christians hold essentially the same core belief that Jesus is the Christ. Part of that reframing is what led to my nuanced views on the other things unique to the church. I suppose if you reframe to the extent you no longer consider yourself LDS, then you’re no longer LDS. But as I said, I still consider myself LDS.
The discussion feels very similar to the debate over whether the LDS church is a Christian church. Some people will argue no, some people will argue yes. There’s no definitive answer, it’s all dependent on the conclusion the individual is driving at. I wound up reframing my engagement as “Mormon Heritage” once I realized I was not a follower of Jesus Christ personally. Everything else is still a mess though.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.