Long time no read, amirite!? It has been almost three months
since I finished my last personal blog post. I don’t know that my blog has done what I had hoped it would do,
which was build understanding among believing members of the church for those
that leave, but the blog’s
impact on me has been what I had hoped. I am feeling better. I have
externalized what I needed to and the information is at least available for
those that want to understand.
Three months ago, I decided to be done writing about my
thoughts and process through my faith transition but I hinted that there may be
other posts, just not posts written by me. This is one of those posts. I’m really excited to publish something
a little different than what has been on my blog in the past. This one was written
by a friend of mine that is an active, believing member of the LDS/Mormon
church. He has chosen to remain anonymous but has assured me that if anyone was
interested in discussing these beliefs further, he would be open to do so. My
friend has researched quite a bit and has found one of the best ways, at least
in my mind, to reconcile church history with remaining a believing member of
the church. The way he makes it work doesn’t work
for me, as it is not what makes the most sense in my mind, but it’s okay for us to disagree. We are
still friends and these differences don’t get
in the way of our friendship.
I have a lot of respect for this individual for many
different reasons. He was willing to sit down with me at a very vulnerable time
in my life just to understand me and allow me to give words to what I was going
through. Never did I feel judgement from this person and I have always felt
acceptance. This is what I hope for from every believing member. A desire to
understand. A willingness to show empathy and support. Care and love that isn’t conditional on believing the same
way. This is what I feel from my friend.
I want to include one final thing before I wrap up and let
you read the actual post. James Fowler was a professor of Theology at Emory
University and a minister in the United Methodist Church. He wrote a book
titled “Stages of Faith: The
Psychology of Human Development and the Quest for Meaning.” He created what he called the Six
Stages of Faith Development. Stage 1 is the Intuitive-Projective stage, where
beliefs are defined mostly by what your parents believe. Fantasy and reality
often become confused during this stage, which predominantly explains belief in
young children. Stage 2 is the Mythical-Literal stage, where individuals begin
to think more logically but continue to accept the stories told to them by
their faith community. However, they interpret these stories in extremely
literal ways. Stage 3 is the Synthetic-Conventional stage, where an
all-encompassing belief system is adopted, typically determined by your social
circles (family, friends, etc.). People have difficulty seeing outside of their
“box,” often
not even realizing that many of their opinions are due to being part of their
belief system. They accept the authority of their faith tradition absolutely.
Many people never leave this stage. Stage 4 is the Individuative-Reflective
stage, where people begin to critically examine and question their beliefs, as
they start realizing the validity of other’s
religious beliefs. They often become disillusioned with their previous beliefs.
Fowler states that those in the previous stage (Stage 3) often view those in Stage
4 as “backsliders,” when in reality they have actually
moved forward. Stage 5 is the Conjunctive Stage, where people begin to appreciate
the paradoxes and mysteries of life and recognize the limitations of logic.
They may return to sacred stories and symbols but this time view them as
allegorical rather than literal. They can appreciate and learn from these stories
and symbols while no longer being obligated to believe everything within their
previous theological box. Stage 6 is Universalizing, which very few people
attain. During this stage people live their lives to the fullest, typically
focusing on others and community rather than the self, without any real worry
or doubt.
The reason I bring up this faith model is that many of those
in the church are in Stage 3. By saying this I am not trying to be disparaging
in any way! Members of the church typically have not opened themselves up to
analyzing and researching their beliefs from all perspectives to determine what
makes the most sense to them. Faith is often based on family history and
personal experiences without looking further. Stage 4 is where people like me start
out. Doubt is a constant companion and what you are researching is continually
on your mind. Many family and friends believe we have fallen backwards in our journey
through spirituality. To be perfectly honest, I don’t know if I am through this stage or still in it. I am not
against spirituality but I know if it does return to my life it will be much
different than it was in the past. But to the point, I believe that my friend
may be in Stage 5. While these stages do not deal with incontrovertible truth,
they do deal with finding a balance between belief and evidence. My friend
seems to have found a way to do exactly this. Fowler would call my friend’s belief a Mature Faith. So, without
further ado…on to their post.
We often hear comparisons made between religion and science.
Some are able to find harmony between them while others find them
irreconcilable. One key difference between them that I don’t hear discussed as often is that
while science only aims to discover and publish truth, religion has the added
burden of teaching truth in a way that motivates action. Often these actions
require personal sacrifice and the deferral of things we want now for better
things later, which is very difficult to do across a wide audience. It is interesting to see a case today where
the science of climate change is compelling many to try to convince people to
make sacrifices and give up comforts now to ensure a better future for the
world. It’s not exactly the same, but I
do notice many of the motivators historically employed by religion used in this
effort. Prophecies of impending catastrophes motivate out of fear, charismatic
leaders try to persuade, data that would confuse the masses is supressed, and
apologists quickly shut down every criticism. I recently saw a version of
Pascal’s Wager that said even if
climate change ends up being false, there is only good that comes from caring
for the planet, but if it is true then we will be glad that we acted on it. I
hope it is clear that I’m not
criticizing the climate movement. I’m just
trying to point out how hard it is to motivate large populations to act in self
sacrificing ways in order to achieve a greater good.
My core religious belief is that spirituality is real and
that it is worth my efforts to live my life to develop it and to help others to
do the same. My definition of spirituality includes gaining an awareness of our
true nature and potential, forming a loving connection with a greater power and
with each other, and to change our life from one that is compelled by natural
instincts to one motivated by love and concern for others. Greater spirituality
results in a general feeling of peace and contentment within ourselves and in
our lives in general. While I have my ups and downs, I am generally
experiencing increasing spirituality in my life and I can say with certainty
that it is worth the effort for me. Beyond my own experience, I find the
testimonies of many other people from different cultures, religious backgrounds,
and time periods that have had similar experiences in their lives very
convincing that spirituality isn’t a
learned response to a particular upbringing, but an actual reality.
Based on this core belief, I feel the main purpose of good
religion is to teach people the reality of spirituality and to provide an
effective means of motivating them to do the things that will develop it in
their lives. The religions that are most effective will be deeply motivating
across a wide population and throughout time. As I’ve already said, this is very difficult to do, but I feel
fortunate that the religion I was born into is doing this for me. I’m sure that others are developing
spirituality within other organized religions or are finding their own ways
outside of a religious practice, but for me personally I have found incredible
depth in theology and practices of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day
Saints and I expect that it will provide a framework that will allow me to
continue to grow for the rest of my life.
When Dason posted a letter about his faith transition we
didn’t know each other very well,
but I wanted to reach out to him and see if he would be willing to go through
the issues with me. I hadn’t taken
the time to study them carefully, and I hoped that we could have some good
discussions. I’m grateful that he took me up
on it and that over the past year and a bit he’s
become one of my closest friends. I know that he is a genuine seeker of truth
and I hope that our discussions have been at least a little bit as helpful for
him as they have been for me. The process of going through the issues with
someone who has studied so much has helped to focus my beliefs and practices
and to become so much more aware of the different points of view that
intelligent and good people can have about the church.
During this past year I have
become settled on the difficult issues that Dason outlined in previous posts.
This doesn’t mean that I’m not still learning new things,
which changes my perspective or beliefs on certain topics. I feel like that is
still happening often, but I feel that I have a solid base for belief that is
flexible enough to handle issues as they arise. The most important result for
me is that it has allowed me to focus on developing my spirituality rather than
focusing on the issues, which has been much more rewarding. I’d like to share the beliefs that I
feel are foundational to how I handle issues, with the hope that it is helpful
for others to consider when dealing with difficult issues in church history and
doctrine.
1.
I believe in God and that the main
purpose of this life is to develop God-like attributes through experience.
I acknowledge that it is possible to pursue spirituality
without a belief in God, however I have found it essential in my own experience
to focus my devotion on God. I love the God of my religion. Each of the 3
members of the Godhead provide incredible depth to ponder and find comfort,
strength, and meaning in my life. The theology of Heavenly Parents that are a
more developed form of our same species creates space to approach God in a very
personal way. The fundamental doctrines about the nature of God have been a
great starting point for my own studies and experience. I choose to believe it,
and I feel completely at peace with that decision because of the spiritual
growth that I see is possible starting with this foundation.
Another way to summarize spirituality is the process of
becoming like God. I believe the most fundamental attribute that must be
developed is a genuine love for each other. The longer I live, the more I am
convinced that this world provides that opportunity for all of us. The
separation from God, the uncertainty about the future, the physical trials and
emotional difficulties, it all creates an environment where we can learn and
grow in ways that help us to reach our potential. Love can not be compelled; it
must be chosen when there are alternatives and I believe that this world
provides the environment for that choice to be made.
I believe that our lives are not mapped out, that our
choices are real and that they matter. God is committed to allowing these choices
even though the consequences of them may cause pain to ourselves and others. I
find it much more difficult to rationalize the stories in the scriptures where
God intervened in a spectacular way, than the times where He is seemingly
absent. The latter is far more consistent with my experience and how I
understand this life must be. I do feel God’s love
and guidance in my life, but it is subtle and leaves me uncertain about what
the outcome will be. It does, however, give me confidence that it will all somehow
work out in the end.
2.
Belief is most likely to begin through
literal teaching and understanding, then deepened by personally pondering
symbolic aspects of the scriptural stories and the ordinances and rituals.
In the church we are very comfortable with examining some
scripture, including many of the teachings of Jesus in the gospels, as allegories
and metaphors. This might be because the text itself gives us permission to do
that when it offers explanations of parables, which are always something beyond
the literal meaning of the story. The Bread of Life sermon (John 6:22-71) is an
interesting example, where Jesus taught the symbolic meaning to the manna story
that the audience was all very familiar with as a literal story. He taught by
metaphor throughout and never let them know that he wasn’t speaking literally. A literal reading would leave no
conclusion other than he was teaching cannibalism. He lost a lot of followers
because of that sermon, so why did he choose to teach in that way? I believe it
was because the depth of what he was teaching could not be communicated
powerfully enough to motivate the required action by talking about it
literally. How much power is in the words: “You
really, really, really need to take what I’m
teaching seriously. If you don’t you
won’t be able to have the conversion
experience I’ve been talking about.” or something like that? The metaphor
is so much more powerful and can be pondered deeply to find more meaning
throughout your life.
It is interesting that Jesus didn’t tell his audience that he was speaking metaphorically.
Would this be considered deceptive in the strictest sense? Is it wrong for us
to teach a story in the church today literally when it might actually be
figurative? I believe the power of the metaphor is diminished when it is
explained rather than discovered. It is more powerful and life-changing to come
to understand the meaning through individual pondering and inspiration. It’s interesting to me that even when
you have this experience of gaining a deeper understanding of a concept,
attempts to explain it to someone else directly using words usually falls flat.
I find discussing concepts at this level has to be in an intimate setting where
all involved are participating at that level and forgiving of the times that words
don’t convey the meaning very well. If
there is someone there that is struggling to understand what is being discussed
they often feel confused and frustrated by the experience. In short, I believe
that the deepest, most important religious teachings need to be taught
literally to the general audience but pondered figuratively by individuals
building on their current understanding.
This is how it worked for me. I didn’t arrive where I am in my beliefs directly, I had to start
with a very literal and basic belief and slowly, through study and experience,
come to a deeper understanding. I expect that is how it is going to continue to
be. Slowly, bit by bit, I will gain a deeper understanding for how I need to
live and what I need to believe in order to progress spiritually.
3.
Everything in this world is imperfect.
Every person and any thing that was created or influenced by
a person is imperfect. This includes prophets, historical records, scripture,
and the church itself, both in policy and doctrine. Out of all those the doctrine might be the
most controversial to include, but I maintain that there are still more great
and important things to be revealed and clarified. I think the doctrines of the
church represent our best understanding of truth as it has been revealed so
far, but we should always be seeking further light and knowledge. This doesn’t diminish the value I place on any
of any of these things, and I believe this perspective puts me in a better
position to receive personal revelation and to accept changes as they come to
the church in general.
A key point is that imperfect people and things can still be
used by God to do His work and by us to become closer to God. A prophet can
have many faults and still be a prophet. A book of scripture can be influenced
by the person who received it and still be capable of connecting people to
God. The details of our ordinance
ceremonies can change over time without invalidating the power that was felt in
the previous versions. These things don’t have
to be perfect to be useful. If they are inspired by God, then they can help to
increase spirituality and to build a closer relationship with Him.
The most difficult aspect of this for me is the pain that is
caused by these imperfections. There have been many people that have been hurt
by bad decisions, actions, and teachings of church leaders. It would be so hard
to be hurt by something you love and have served. I am motivated to try to
learn from my mistakes and from the mistakes of others in my own church service
and in the rest of my life. I recognize the pain that my imperfections have
caused my family and others and I want to do better. This perspective helps me
to be more forgiving when I am the one that is hurt. None of this is easy. It
is a result of living in this imperfect world, which I trust is slowly helping
me and others to grow, but I recognize that this idea isn’t always comforting and feel empathy
for all those who have been hurt. I hope we can do better.
4.
Revelation involves people, so it is also
imperfect.
I believe that God works the same way with the prophets as
he does with any other person on the earth who is seeking His guidance. I admit
that this wasn’t always the way I saw it,
but since I’ve settled on this it has
made a lot of issues easier to handle. In my own experience of the times that I
felt inspired, it has never been completely clear what I was supposed to do or
what the outcome would be. I love the phrase that Paul uses, that “we see through a glass darkly”, which I feel describes the
revelatory process for me. I think it is intended to be this way. It makes
growth possible as we exercise faith to act and learn from both our mistakes
and successes. While I believe it is possible to become more sensitive to
spiritual inspiration and better at interpreting it, I think there is always a
possibility that we will impose our own desires and biases on inspiration. This
doesn’t make it worthless and I
have still had pivotal experiences in my life as I’ve tried to receive and act on revelation.
I believe that spiritual feelings do have a purpose and can
be trusted over time to direct us toward God. I believe the main purpose of these
feelings is to personally motivate us to make decisions that will bring us
closer to God. Where our conscience is a universal influence, spiritual
feelings are individually suited for our own lives. This could result in two
different impressions for two people sitting beside each other with the same
question in their heart. The spiritual feelings I get are imprecise, but still
of worth to me. They give me confidence to continue on and comfort that
difficult times will pass. The fact that people all over the world, in many
different cultures and backgrounds, experience the same feelings is a clear
indication to me that it isn’t the
product of specific teachings, but that it is part of the human experience. I
choose to believe that it is the influence of God in my life and that has been
a beneficial belief for me.
I believe that the prophets and apostles today are very
experienced with receiving revelation for themselves and the church as a whole.
It is not a perfect process, even for them, but I have a lot of trust that they
are seeking for and receiving revelation. For my own life, it is my
responsibility to decide what I will believe and how I will live, and I seek
revelation from God to help guide me in this as much as possible. I value the
teachings of the prophets that give me ideas and inspiration to ponder. I
respect them as good men with incredible life experience and spiritual
capacity. I am confident, however, that God doesn’t
intend for me to hand over responsibility for my thoughts and actions to them.
I still have to seek answers and be sensitive to spiritual promptings.
In the cases where my thoughts and promptings don’t seem to align with the teachings of
prophets, I ponder questions like: Is this something that could be true, but
wouldn’t be helpful, appropriate, or
maybe even possible to effectively teach to the church in general? Is there a
possibility that the church leader was speaking their opinion at the time? Is
there something that could be wrong in my own thoughts that I should
reconsider? As I’ve pondered questions like these, I’ve been able to get to a place where I feel true to myself
and more confident that my beliefs are on solid ground.
5.
Historical events are messy.
As I’ve
already said, I believe that spiritual truths are taught with the most power
when done by allegory or metaphor. An inspired story can provide material for
deep study and contemplation for a lifetime. The value of the allegory is in
the spiritual ideas that it can create in our minds with power that would not
be possible with a direct recitation of facts. What I have only recently
appreciated is how little value the historicity of the story adds for me.
Consider the parable of the prodigal son. This story can be pondered in so many
ways and has provided deep meaning and lessons for millions of lives even
though none of the people ever existed. I would argue that it is that powerful because
it is not historical. Every word in the story seems carefully chosen. Every
detail has meaning. You can trust the investment of time and energy into
studying it, because there is truth there that is only found through deep reflection
and pondering.
Historical events involve actual imperfect people who are
not acting out a script. Their actions, thoughts and motivations will not
always be relevant to the purpose of the story and will lead to wasted effort
if you try to glean deep meanings from them. When historical events are
successfully turned into a spiritual lesson, it must come at the cost of
historical accuracy. We might flatten the people into caricatures that serve a
purpose in the narrative, we may omit unnecessary words and actions or add some
that help with the message. These are all improvements if we keep in mind that
the goal is to teach a spiritual truth or some sort of moral, not to faithfully
tell history. Actual history is always messy.
When I study the scriptures now, I do so with faith that
there is a deeper spiritual lesson to be learned from them. Some scriptures
feel deeper than others, so I’ll
spend more time with them, but my default assumption is that the story is there
for a reason. I don’t have to spend any energy on
proving it is historical, because to me I don’t care
if it is or not. Even if it is historically based, the story will have to be
simplified and even altered to be effective. If this weren’t the case, then the scriptures would
be far less powerful for me. I would have to spend more effort trying to sort
out where the meaning is than what it is. It would be difficult
to rely on them as sources of spiritual strength. My energy now is focused on getting spiritual
meaning from them, which I often do. It would be a wasted opportunity to
discount the value of scripture because it isn’t
likely to be historical.
6.
It is understandable why the church leaders
chose to present church history in a faith promoting way.
While I don’t place
a high value on historicity of scripture, it is obviously different when we are
talking about history itself. In the case of church history, it can be
particularly difficult to discern what is the true history because so much of
it has been presented with the primary purpose to try to show the church in a
certain light, both positive and negative, rather than presenting the history
without an agenda. Good primary sources for the more difficult issues are
scarce and even if we do have solid evidence of what happened, the motivations
for everyone involved and all the circumstances surrounding the events is
usually not clear. Historians do a good job of taking all the available sources
and crafting a story that fits it as much as possible. We can listen to all
these stories and decide which one is the most believable, but in the end, we
know that we don’t have the full picture, just
the one that made the most sense to us with the available information.
After learning about the issues and trying to come up with
my own way to make everything work, I’ve now
decided to stop trying to discover the one true history. Instead I learn what I
can and decide what is the range of stories that I think are possibilities that
can’t be dismissed. As long as I can
accept anything in the range being true then I can live with the uncertainty of
not knowing exactly what happened.
For the most part, the church has not placed the highest
priority on teaching history. When it does present a historical narrative, the
primary purpose is to try to build faith in the members of the church and present
the church in a positive light to those outside the church. There are many
books/essays written that put the decision to take this approach into
context. In my opinion the key time
periods are the early 1900s, when Joseph F. Smith was leading the effort to
change the narrative surrounding the church from plural marriage, the Utah war,
and other unfavorable events to something that would be perceived better by the
outside world and build cohesion within. There was an obvious bias in the
resulting stories not only to present the church in a positive light, but also
to defend the names of his own father and uncle. The version of history that
was created at this time dominated the narrative from the church through the 20th
century and has only recently started to be carefully shifted with the release
of the Saints books.
The other key time began in the mid-80s, when church leaders
chose to suppress the movement toward openness that was led by Leonard Arrington
and others in the previous decade. Again, there is a lot written about this
time period that helps to put it into context. It led to the culture that most
of us were raised in and I think has led to the greatest feelings of betrayal
among those leaving the church today. For many, I think it is more difficult to
deal with the sanitization of church history than the history itself.
For this to become settled in my
own mind, I had to come to a place where I could believe that the church
leaders were acting in what they believed to be the best interests of the
church and its membership as a whole. I can understand that it was a difficult position
to be in, and the more I consider the context of the situation of the church
and the background of the church leaders, the more I feel settled that they
were doing what they thought was best. I acknowledge the pain that has been
caused by this approach for many and feel empathy for those who were hurt and
continue to be hurt. I’m happy
to see the direction the church is starting to take, and I feel hopeful that it
will lead to a more transparent culture in the future.
As the central figure of my religion, Jesus Christ stands in
contrast to what I’ve written about the world. I
believe that He came to earth and lived a perfect life. I believe that he
taught a way of life that will lead every person to know God. I believe that he
suffered the pains of all humanity and died and I feel the power of that
atonement in my own life as I meditate on it and reach out to God and ask to be
healed from the wounds that I have in my own soul. He is the focus of my
religious worship as I try to emulate his life and live his teachings, and I
feel sure that this will continue for the rest of my life.
I am grateful to be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-Day Saints. I know that it is imperfect and lead by imperfect people,
and I don’t excuse the mistakes that
have been made in the past, but I hope that we are learning from them and
progressing toward a better future. I see evidence that we are. I love my local
ward community and I know I am learning and growing from serving them and being
served by them. There is power in being part of a group of people with a common
goal. Even though we are all very imperfect, we are a community that is there
for each other when we know someone needs help and I get a lot of strength and
motivation from being a part of it. This
religion has been instrumental in my own spiritual development and I believe a
lifetime of growth is possible for me within it. It is deep and unique, and I
love the expansive experiences I have as I explore it. I can see the blessings in my life, and in my
family, that are promised by the gospel of Jesus Christ as taught by the church
so in that way, which is the most important to me, I know the church is true.
This statement sums everything up very nicely:
ReplyDelete"My definition of spirituality includes gaining an awareness of our true nature and potential, forming a loving connection with a greater power and with each other, and to change our life from one that is compelled by natural instincts to one motivated by love and concern for others. Greater spirituality results in a general feeling of peace and contentment within ourselves and in our lives in general." This should be our sole motivation.
I respectfully disagree on one point:
ReplyDelete"Even if it is historically based, the story will have to be simplified and even ALTERED to be effective." If a story, that the listeners are taking for absolute truth, is being altered for effect, "then the scriptures would be far less powerful for me" and "It would be difficult to rely on them as sources of spiritual strength." So, as you see, I have a different take on this. If the history portrayed is not actual, historical and trustworthy fact, it is not relevant to me. If history is incorrect, don't use it to teach .... just teach the actual spiritual lesson directly, with power and conviction, and the listeners will benefit more than from false or altered history, which has been changed subtly to suit the needs of the time. Just my opinion and offering another viewpoint.
I appreciate this well-written and thought-provoking post ... it really makes you think and has has made MANY great and enlightening points. It is good to accept others' points of view and it is okay to agree or disagree -- that is the purpose of positive discussions.