Training for Leaders on Faith Crisis

[Anonymous]

cwald wrote:

DBMormon wrote:

cwald wrote:

Yeah.

I would be careful of the terms testimony and believe.

I would be defensive.

I like the suggestion of “finding value.”

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2

But then does it become too easy to stay firm in the church isn’t true and simply look for value in it that never correlates with truth…. just asking

but I am glad we are all thinking on the same page

What? Why do I have to “believe it is true?”

Maybe I don’t understand your mission.

Bill. I don’t know if it is “true” and to be frank, I don’t care.

If the church can’t accept that position…if I can just find some value in the church…why is that not good enough for leadership?

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2

I am only saying they all of us remain open to truth in whatever form it comes so as not to close ourselves off to truth in the church and truth out of it.

[Anonymous]

Orson wrote:

DBMormon wrote:

cwald wrote:

Yeah.

I would be careful of the terms testimony and believe.

I would be defensive.

I like the suggestion of “finding value.”

But then does it become too easy to stay firm in the church isn’t true and simply look for value in it that never correlates with truth…. just asking but I am glad we are all thinking on the same page

The difficulty here is dealing with everyone’s different interpretation of “truth.” This difficulty is compounded by the disaffected’s shattered definition of “truth” in context of the church.

Example: My prior definition of “truth” as it applied to the church included elements such as “a prophet of the true church cannot/will not speak from the pulpit any shade of falsehood” for such would allow the people to be led astray, and God will not allow members of his true church to be led astray. The issue is not whether my definitions are in fact right or wrong, the problem is that my definitions will not allow me to believe “the church is true” once I learn that an older prophet did in fact teach something that a newer prophet declared to be false.

Changing our personal definitions is another complex topic, one that we spend much time addressing here, but to successfully navigate around the obstacle I think it is helpful to let that difficulty lie. When the word “truth” is a significant personal obstacle, I think it is best to try to move beyond it to other helpful topics and not become stagnant in one narrow argument.

I’m not sure I’ll reach the conclusion that it’s ‘true’ in the way I thought. I’m also removing the ‘absolute’ position of only full truth. But I can imagine a belief/testimony that there is true principles and a true way to God available.

I think that letting go of absolutism while also recognising many people need absolutes to function has been one of the beat ways of coping with my crisis.

[Anonymous]

mackay11 wrote:

DBMormon wrote:

cwald wrote:

DB…have you watched John dehlins presentation, “why people leave.”?

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2

Yes and I loved it. I only wish in the whole thing there was a comment made that in part one reason to hang in there may be that you come to regain a testimony and believe again. That seems to be a thought that gets no air time.

I agree that it’s important to remind each other that it’s possible to find a way to stay and be happy doing it. My hope is to work through all these issues and still “believe again” and have a “testimony of” the divine calling of Joseph Smith (even if I reach a new understanding of what that calling was), the divine origins of the Book of Mormon and the Temple (even if I reach a new understanding of their origins).

I greatly appreciate your continued contribution to the board in sharing the story of overcoming the uncertainties you faced. I don’t know whether I’ll ever be able to ‘go back’ to where I was 12 months ago, but I hope that whatever I ‘go forward’ to in another 12 months will be a deeper, but different, conviction that this church remains one with which the Lord is “well pleased.” Even if it’s one among many. If I can do that, I would consider it positive progress – especially as 4-5 months ago I was considering the option of abandoning all attempts to have any meaningful interaction with any concept of deity. Or even if there was one there to have interaction with.

On the other hand, I can still see a scenario where I reach a conclusion that in order to have that meaningful interaction with God I will be better placed in a non-LDS context. I hope not, but I can see how I could get to that.

+1. Thanks for putting my thoughts down almost perfectly Mackay! Well, except for that last part. A scenario where meaningful interaction with God doesn’t include an LDS context isn’t on the table. It might (and will) include things to supplement my LDS world but can’t (and won’t) replace it.

[Anonymous]

eman wrote:

+1. Thanks for putting my thoughts down almost perfectly Mackay! Well, except for that last part. A scenario where meaningful interaction with God doesn’t include an LDS context isn’t on the table. It might (and will) include things to supplement my LDS world but can’t (and won’t) replace it.

You know, I actually hesitated over my last paragraph. I’m not sure I could either. I feel like I’m leaving that option open as a matter of principle to allow myself to feel I’m being more balanced in my study and pondering. But in reality I can’t really imagine embracing a whole new religious approach if I decide they all have some issues and some value in travelling along the path.

[Anonymous]

Hey DB, I listened to your latest podcast yesterday and really liked most of it. You suggested that the leaders find some one in their ward or stake who is faithful enough to have those that are struggling talk to. I have been thinking about talking to my stake leadership and volunteering to do that but I don’t want to get in to a long discussion with them about all this. Do you think the time is getting right where there are enough leaders that are aware of the problems and are ready to start dealing with them?

[Anonymous]

Honestly, friend, it depends on the leaders.

I am positive my most recent stake leaders would have been open to the suggestion, whether or not they would have acted on it. I am just as positive many stake leaders would not be supportive and actually would question worthiness and righteousness.

I believe strongly that the top leadership is aware of and sympathetic to it, speaking collectively and not individually.

[Anonymous]

church0333 wrote:

Hey DB, I listened to your latest podcast yesterday and really liked most of it. You suggested that the leaders find some one in their ward or stake who is faithful enough to have those that are struggling talk to. I have been thinking about talking to my stake leadership and volunteering to do that but I don’t want to get in to a long discussion with them about all this. Do you think the time is getting right where there are enough leaders that are aware of the problems and are ready to start dealing with them?

I know no better time then now. But more has to happen then a stake leader know, they have to find a way for you to let everyone know. If I am a struggling member, and am afraid to put my faith crisis out there and am afraid to hurt anothers testimony, how would I find out about you. Maybe you get permission to do one fifth Sunday combined lesson fireside in every ward – that would work. Otherwise maybe an evening fireside in each ward. But the subject matter would have to be in your face kind of publicity, so every struggler knew here was his chance to hear someone talk about it. Of course as Bishop I have the ability to put myself into situations but I have given sacrament talks on it bad assumptions, a fireside on faith crisis in Canada (friend live there), talked to my stake leaders about doing training for Bishops which happens in March. Now is the time, but you have to make the decision to open the dialogue. And yes some leaders will resist and be defensive.

I would have them listen to my interview with FAIR

read Terryl Givens “letter to a doubter”

read Marlin Jenson’s comments at virginia university

One must see there is a problem, once they do and realize how unaware they are of it, then any good leader will want to address it.

[Anonymous]

Old-Timer wrote:

Honestly, friend, it depends on the leaders.

I am positive my most recent stake leaders would have been open to the suggestion, whether or not they would have acted on it. I am just as positive many stake leaders would not be supportive and actually would question worthiness and righteousness.

I believe strongly that the top leadership is aware of and sympathetic to it, speaking collectively and not individually.

Then shame on them…… We are all so defensive… the problem is their mentality. As I looked at February’s ensign I saw a magazine that has shifted its focus. The church is kicking it into gear to rescue those in faith crisis. It is coming, hang in there. An apostle has assured me the effort to address it is happening, yes slowly, but happening and a lot more is coming

[Anonymous]

I think it is too late…for my generation.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2

[Anonymous]

Maybe; maybe not, cwald – but it isn’t too late for the next generation, which includes my children.

[Anonymous]

Old-Timer wrote:

Maybe; maybe not, cwald – but it isn’t too late for the next generation, which includes my children.

Sure.

[Anonymous]

DBMormon wrote:

Old-Timer wrote:

Honestly, friend, it depends on the leaders.

I am positive my most recent stake leaders would have been open to the suggestion, whether or not they would have acted on it. I am just as positive many stake leaders would not be supportive and actually would question worthiness and righteousness.

I believe strongly that the top leadership is aware of and sympathetic to it, speaking collectively and not individually.

Quote:

Then shame on them…… We are all so defensive… the problem is their mentality. As I looked at February’s ensign I saw a magazine that has shifted its focus. The church is kicking it into gear to rescue those in faith crisis. It is coming, hang in there. An apostle has assured me the effort to address it is happening, yes slowly, but happening and a lot more is coming

Okay “billy boy.” Please tell me what you think the apostles are going to do to rescue those in faith crisis. Please tell me what the apostles are going to do to stop the bleeding.

Short of conceding and apologizing for past mistakes, and taking responsibility for the pain and the way things are today…it will be a waste of time.

Are they planning on doing that Bill? Are they going to come clean…or continue to make it the “apostates” fault they don’t believe?

[Anonymous]

Speaking on the HC every month and I could

start there , I have been pretty opened alsrady. Just an idea. Any thoughtss?

[Anonymous]

church0333 wrote:

Speaking on the HC every month and I could

Stat there , I have been pretty opened alsrady. Just an idea. Any thoughtss?

Let people be angry…That is a start.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2

[Anonymous]

Let them be angry – but don’t do anything to encourage continued anger – and do everything possible to soothe the anger – and don’t seem condescending to those who are angry – but don’t appear unfeeling either – and make our history accessible in all its messiness – but don’t apologize for everything, since many things need understanding not apologies – but apologize for those things that really were beyond the pail with no reasonable excuse – and distinguish between those things clearly enough for people to realize you aren’t trying to justify or hide but sincerely trying to strike the right balance – etc., etc., etc.

I don’t mean that to be snarky, but I do mean to make a point that is important to me:

This is not an easy task, and we each can make it much harder by demanding detailed actions that are exactly what each of us would love to see – and demanding that they happen all at once – and not seeing or respecting what is being done.

My own request is quite simple:

Recognize what has caused and is causing pain and try to act in a way that lessens and/or eliminates that pain.

Frankly, I see that happening at the topmost level recently on a regular basis and in multiple ways. Yes, there are plenty of areas that remain to be addressed, but our part of the request is patience in allowing those areas to be addressed in good time – to recognize and accept the current sincere efforts and extend the attitude we request.

Unfortunately, it will take time for the water to get to the end of all the local rows – and that is the most painful aspect for many people.

[Author]

Posts