Working on a few StayLDS-related projects

[Anonymous]

John, interesting ideas. Let me try to give some of my initial gut reaction.

1) First impression sounds like a book exmo’s and struggling members would hope their family would read, but many faithfuls may not even crack the cover (they already know the answer in their minds – they don’t need a “questionable” book to tell them anything). I would LOVE to be able to get this message across to the broader membership. I see this message as what Bushman’s intro to his summer ’08 conference addressed. The question in my mind is what type of book will faithfuls read that can introduce a more understanding view to them? I actually think “Shaken Faith Syndrome” (hate the title) has a few good bits of information in this regard, and may give clues in how to reach the broader membership.

2) I would love to see this, and love to see someone like Dr. Wendy Ulrich get involved in. I think she’s tremendous. Personally I don’t know that I would be much help with it. My knowledge is very limited.

3) Obviously a topic near to my heart. I think there are different levels to approach it from – as in direct and frank “let the literal go for a while and look for metaphorical meanings”; or a more subtle stance (which would be looked more favorably upon by the broader church). It may be a balancing act but I’d love to see it done right. Ash’s book was a hit from Deseret standards as far as I’ve seen, but most disaffected almost laugh at it (from my limited exposure). I’d love to see something that both sides are more comfortable with.

I’ll try to think of possible titles and directions. Thanks.

[Anonymous]

John, so after a little more thought…

What would you think about a book that addresses what I’ll call the modern faith crisis? In my mind, what the real issue is – is when personal expectations clash with new knowledge of evidences. Here’s a quick example:

When I was reading a very conservative book on Joseph Smith I came across a little segment from his 1832 account of the first vision, the part that says “by searching the scriptures…” he came to know the world was in apostasy. This was a pretty major jolt to my personal impression that he had never thought or imagined that the “true” church wasn’t already on the earth. My image was that he went to the grove seeking the “one word answer” that could have been Baptists or Methodists. My personal expectation was not compatible with the new evidence – that he said in 1832 he knew there was no “true” church before he went to the grove to pray.

The real issue is not the facts, after all the church seeks after truth (in ideal anyway). The issue is when facts or evidence clash with the images that we have set up for ourselves.

Taking this approach I could see the book supporting truth and honesty, or inoculation, and kind of open things up for the potential of new areas for discussion (for many members anyway). I think there are a lot of faithful sources to quote along these lines, and it could prove to be an interesting work.

That’s one potential direction anyway.

[Anonymous]

Yeah. I love it. Unfulfilled expectations and feeling betrayed as a result are both a huge component of the struggle. Those 2 things can fill 10 chapters for sure.

Some of the chapters could be:

1) Expectations of history (overall…as a narrative)

2) Expectation of historical figures

3) Expectations of modern leadership

4) Expectations of spiritual experiences

5) Expectations of religious organizations

6) Expectations of literalness of scripture

7) Expectations of doctrine/theology

How members and culture can set one up to fail

9) Expectations of family members

10) Etc.

The trick will be:

1) Not coming off as too apologetic…blaming the victim and excusing the church for perpetrating the expectations, and

2) Not having the whole message come off as….”Lower your expectations super low…and you’ll be happy.”

Still…I love it. Also, this feels like something Marion Jensen can help us with (Editor of the 2nd volume of the Joseph Smith Papers project). I think this could even sell at Deseret Book.

Ok…tag…you’re it. Iterate!

[Anonymous]

Yes, yes yes. The balancing act between your two points. This is where I see a general tone more like Bushman’s ’08 summer seminar, not blaming those in crisis for doing anything “wrong.” But at the same time, maybe later in the book, I like the idea of taking personal responsibility for one’s own worldview and impressions. At least in maturity. Yes, as children we are coming to know what is real, what is implied, what is fact, what is metaphor, and things can be fuzzy. As adults I like the idea of responsiblity and ownership for what we think and believe.

I also agree that if the tone comes off toward “lower your expectations” too much then it will be rejected by the broader membership. I do think there is some wiggle room in there, created by trusted sources such as Bushman that can be quoted.

P.S. I think I may have failed to express a main point that I had in mind. I would like to see the faith crisis (ideally) re-categorized as a wholly personal experience. Much the way grieving the death of a friend is a personal experience. Different people will grieve in different ways, there is no right or wrong, it is personal and unless it gets completely out of bounds of what’s considered healthy (like failing to continue living for an extended period of time) then people should be given some room to experience their own process. I think a little understanding in that regard could go a long way, and hopefully could work toward removing the “blame” altogether.

While its true that some common perceptions in the church probably contribute to some false expectations, I think some healing starts to occur when the individuals recognize that stepping up and taking responsibility for their own ideas is a big step toward personal health and maturity. Even if it’s a “from this day forth” type of recognition. It’s kind of like someone “allowing” themselves to be in an abusive relationship, but I think there must be a better parallel to use in the book.

[Anonymous]

What Orson just said.

[Anonymous]

…and wherever cultural traditions come across as doctrine, and personal opinion has gone too far under the guise of authority (when the prophet speaks the thinking has been done) I think the best defense is education. How to get this kind of education to become fashionable in the church is one of the biggest questions.

I kind of like the idea of “Searching for Truth and Faith” — with the long background of truth being paramount in the church, modern revelation (as in things can change), and some things are revealed scientifically as well as spiritually. Even with all that spirituality can be real (even more real in my opinion) and the church can be not only valuable, but “real” for its spiritual value.

Random thoughts.

[Anonymous]

Orson wrote:

Random thoughts.

We have in our mormon language the ‘find out for yourself’ palette to draw from. A faith crisis should be couched in this language, and explained to be considered a very normal and essential part of our progress – may help keep TBMs from closing the book too fast.

[Author]

Posts