FAIR

Faithful Study Resources for Come, Follow Me

Faith Crisis

Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 1: Preface/Introduction

by

In the wake of the CES Letter, several other similar “letters” began making the rounds online. None of them have the reach and influence of the CES Letter, but the distant second-most popular letter appears to be the Letter For My Wife by Thomas Faulk. Because of its second-place status, there are virtually no rebuttals to it. The only one I’ve been able to find is the one at FAIR.

This particular letter is favored by two groups. The first is the group who were themselves turned off by the hostility of the CES Letter. They wanted something similar but much more neutral in tone to help explain their faith struggles with their loved ones. That’s a position I can fully respect. The second group, however, is the group who discovers that many believers are put off by the CES Letter’s tone. They prefer something more neutral in order to rope their loved ones into reading it so they start questioning their own testimonies. I don’t have any respect for this position. It’s manipulative, and that’s gross to do to someone you claim to love. [Read more…] about Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 1: Preface/Introduction

The Enlightenment of Neo-Mormons

by

In Greek, the word neos means “new.” In English, the prefix “neo” generally refers to something that is new, revived, or newly refreshed. We have compounds such as neo-classic, neo-Darwinism, neo-Nazis, neo-Hellenism, neo-Platonism, neo-orthodox Mormons, and more.

While Neo-Mormons might refer to Mormons who take a new or modified approach to Mormon matters, for the purpose of this post Neo-Mormons refer to those who compare their exit from Mormonism to the character in the fictional movie, The Matrix.

For those who haven’t seen the movie, Keanu Reeves plays the character of Thomas Anderson, a computer programmer and infamous hacker known as “Neo” (the name by which he is known throughout the movie). Morpheus, another infamous hacker (who is almost as much myth as legend), contacts Neo to warn him that his life in danger.

After meeting face to face, Morpheus explains that the world in which Neo lives is not “real” but offers Neo the opportunity to transition to the real world. Neo can either swallow a red pill which will extract him from the “Matrix” (the computer-generated world in which he lives) or he can choose to swallow the blue pill which will cause Neo to wake up in his bed at home, forgetting the entire conversation and everything about the Matrix. If he takes the red pill, he could never go back to the way things were. If he takes the blue pill, he could be happily ignorant to reality. Neo takes the red pill, wakes up in the “real” world and discovers that the Matrix was a world of little more than digital smoke and mirrors.

Neo’s red pill vs. blue pill dilemma has frequently been commandeered by former Mormons in their attempt to explain their new perspective of reality once they left Mormonism. According to several ex-Mormons, they, like Neo, were confronted at some point with information that caused (or even forced) them to choose between the red pill and blue pill. In every case in which I’ve seen the analogy used, the former (or teetering) member took the red pill. They became “enlightened,” and discovered the “truth,” or “reality” of Mormonism.

This new enlightenment allowed them, like Neo, to see (sometimes for the first time) truth with eyes wide open. That truth, they claim, destroyed the untruths found in Mormonism and exposed it as a man-made institution sitting on a continuum somewhere between an evil enterprise and a well-meaning assembly of honorable but gullible dupes.

While I understand that there is no such thing as a perfect analogy, I think the Neo Mormon/Matrix analogy falls flat. First, the red pill vs blue pill analogy implies that ex-Mormons are not only open to the truth but can see the truth, while believing Mormons stick their heads in the sand (taking the blue pill) and don’t want to see the new information that comes with taking the red pill.

The fact is, however, that myriad of LDS scholars, lay members, and believing students of Mormonism, are equally as informed about the supposedly troubling Mormon information. Despite seeing this same information they still accept the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith and the continuation of modern prophets today. There’s no hiding of heads in the sand, no rejecting the red pill because they don’t want to see allegedly challenging issues. The eyes of informed Latter-day Saints are at least as wide open to all the same information as any critic.

Secondly, the new information doesn’t automatically destroy basic Mormon beliefs. Taking the red pill does not automatically prove that Mormonism is false. While some people may find the critics’ interpretations of the data to be convincing, such interpretations are not the automatic definitive conclusions to understanding the data. To insist that there is only one way to interpret the data is naïve and sophomoric. There are no slam dunks proving nor debunking Mormonism. There is only evidence, and evidence must be weighed.

Thirdly, everyone assumes they are “right.” We have reasons for our beliefs. Those reasons may not be transferrable; they may not, for example, convince others, even when they make sense to us. The fact is—and a growing number of studies bear this out—intellect alone does not impel humans to believe or disbelieve. In other words, despite the ridicule by some critics who claim that believers rely on “feelings” while they (the critics) rely on reason, the simple fact is that all people’s beliefs are influenced, at least to some degree, by “feelings.” No human is a purely rational creature.

Differences in religious opinions and beliefs are not anything like what we might imagine with a fictional Neo-Mormon who takes the red pill and a believing Mormon who takes the blue pill. Instead, the differences are much more akin to what we find among people who embrace divergent political views. If you are a staunch Democrat it doesn’t mean that you’ve taken the red pill—that your eyes are wide open—and that Republicans have swallowed the blue pill. If you are a staunch Republican, you are not seeing reality while your Democrat friends hide their heads in the sand. Some members of each party may like to think that’s the case, but it isn’t.

Lastly, we run into the problem of changing minds. Just as some Democrats become Republicans and some Republicans become Democrats, some members go through periods of disbelief, doubt, and possibly even separation from Mormonism. I have a couple of friends who have been married to the same spouse several times. They get divorced, then remarried, more than once—each time to the same person. Some members or former members seem to have a similar relationship with the Church. They are members (perhaps from birth), then leave the church over “troubling” issues, then return because of spiritual or intellectual resolution, then leave again over spiritual or intellectual quandaries, and so forth.

In which phase of their change can they claim to be the surest of their beliefs? Obviously, it would be the most current phase. They can look back and tell themselves that in their earlier phase they were duped, but this time they got it right. The problem is, however, that we all tell ourselves this same story (it’s a form of confirmation bias). Studies show that our memories of the past are influenced by our present selves—in other words, we can’t accurately remember how we felt about our past situation because we can’t escape our current situation.

As I’ve matured in life, wisdom, and Gospel understanding, I’ve had to modify paradigms many times—rejecting those things that I’ve found to be weak, and embracing those things which I’ve found to be strong. It would be foolish of me to think that I’ve reach a zenith—that I’ve reached a point where I’m right about everything I reject, and never wrong about everything I accept. I’m among those who has seen all the details supposedly hidden in the Matrix. I’ve seen the same data which allegedly is revealed to those Neo-Mormons who swallow the red pill. And yet, I believe.

For me, the same data that causes some members to falter simply illuminates the world I already knew. I absolutely had to modify my worldview by absorbing new facts, rejecting common myths, and by recontextualizing some of the things which didn’t seem to fit my previous world-view (which, by the way, is the same modification process we find in the evolution and revolution of scientific paradigms). From my current perspective, however, I find that most of the data fits comfortably within a framework that I embraced.

While I like to think that my eyes are opened wider with every new bit of data, I’ve found that new discoveries haven’t forced (or enticed) me into rejecting Mormonism as a mirage, a fabrication, or a Matrix of human creation. And just because someone else comes to a different conclusion than my own (based on the same data) doesn’t mean that they are more correct, that they’ve swallowed the red pill while I swallowed the blue pill, hid my head in the sand, and simply ignored conflicting information.

From a Matrix analogy, I don’t think that there are any real Neo-Mormons. There are no red pills and blue pills which ultimately expose or conceal the truth. As both science and religion tells us, we are all related and part of something greater than our individual selves. All humans are very similar—including the fact that we are faced with similar cognitive, physical, psychological, and emotional challenges and strengths— and we are also all unique in interesting and complex ways.

This, to me, is what makes God’s plan—as expressed in the LDS faith—so appealing. It’s impossible for you to fully know me, or me to fully know you. We can’t escape our own heads, or our physiological influences or impediments. We can never fully know when we are the ones who are doing the “acting” or when we are being “acted upon” (2 Ne. 2:14).

We are told not to judge others (outside of specific instances involving ecclesiastical or legislative authority) because we are not only weak ourselves and influenced by too many factors to be good judges, but because we cannot know all the factors involved in someone else’s choices. Only God knows. He knows why we do the things we do, say the things we say, and make the choices we make.

While some of those who have left Mormonism (or who consider leaving Mormonism) believe that they can see reality, the truth is that their eyesight is no better than that of believers. Their logic and reasoning is no better than that of believers. And they certainly are no more open to the “truth” because they decided to reject Mormonism, than those who accept Mormonism. Swallowing the red pill simply means that you consciously chose to reject Mormonism because of how you interpret the data. Swallowing the blue pill means that you consciously chose to accept Mormonism because of how you interpret the data.

If there is an analogy to be made with the movie The Matrix it is this: If we believe that a rejection of Mormonism automatically comes with seeing the ambiguities in Mormon history or the scriptures—that the data automatically compels the intellectually honest to reject the LDS faith and that the data cannot be honestly accepted as consistent with LDS faith claims—then we are believing in an illusion and we are still trapped in the Matrix.

—

Michael R. Ash is the author of: Of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting The Prophet Joseph Smith. He is the owner and operator of MormonFortress.com and is on the management team for FairMormon. He has been published in Sunstone, Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, the Maxwell Institute’s FARMS Review, and is the author of Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt. He and his wife live in Ogden, Utah, and have three daughters.

The Purpose and Mission of FairMormon

by

Podcast: Download (31.8MB)

Subscribe: RSS

LynchDo FairMormon volunteers lack empathy? Where does the organization get its money, and who is really pulling the strings behind FairMormon? Julianne Dehlin Hatton proposes these and other questions to Chairman of the Board John Lynch on the Mormon FAIR-Cast.

Lynch is a Silicon Valley executive and convert to the church, who has served as Elders Quorum President, Ward Mission Leader, Stake Mission President and Young Men’s President. He is currently a counselor to the Bishop of his congregation. Hatton is a media personality and event manager from Kentucky. She has been a News Director at an NPR affiliate, Broadcast Journalist, and Airborne Traffic Reporter.

Music for this edition of the Mormon FAIR-Cast is provided by Arthur Hatton.

Articles of Faith Podcast: In The Gospel, Faith Must Come First – Interview with Taylor Halverson

by

Podcast: Download (41.4MB)

Subscribe: RSS

taylor-halverson-60Bio: Dr. Taylor Halverson received a B.A. from Brigham Young University in Ancient Near Eastern Studies in 1997, an M.A. in Biblical Studies from Yale University in 2001 and an M.S. in Instructional Technology from Indiana University in 2004. He completed Ph.D.s in Instructional Technology and Judaism & Christianity in Antiquity—both from Indiana University in 2006.

Dr. Halverson currently works at BYU full-time at the Center for Teaching and Learning. He is also the founder and co-chair of the Creativity, Innovation, and Design group, acting associate director of the Rollins Center for Entrepreneurship and Technology, and has taught a variety of courses at BYU including: “Old Testament,” “Book of Mormon,” “History of Creativity,” “Innovation Lab: The Design Thinking Experience,” and “Illuminating the Scriptures: Designing Innovative Scripture Study Tools.” Dr. Halverson is a contributor to the popular LDS Bible Videos project and the LDS Scripture Citation Index site and a columnist for the Deseret News. He and his wife Lisa lead travel tours to Israel, the Mediterranean, and Mesoamerica.

Questions addressed in the interview:

In preparation for this interview I went to TaylorHalverson.com, and in reading over the many things you are involved in, various chair positions at BYU, a tour guide for LDS themed travel, writer of multiple text books, articles for various publications and media outlets, this may seem like a judgmental question, and it is not meant to be, but where do you find to study the scriptures, and give time to your own personal faith development?

You are multi-lingual, Spanish, Biblical Hebrew, Greek, and a slew of others considered secondary languages. How has learning and knowing multiple languages changed your approach to learning the scriptures?

The article you wrote for the Deseret News, addresses a challenge or at least a shift in approach that we have seen with the world at large, and that is an evidence first approach. Disbelieve until proven logically true. At first, it seems like this is a prudent approach, but you call it difficult if not outright outlandish. Could you expound on that conclusion?

This relates to an exchange you had while attending Yale as follows:

Yale student: Where is the original Book of Mormon today? Where are the gold plates?

Taylor: They are gone.

Yale student: What do you mean that the original plates are gone?

Taylor: When Joseph Smith completed the translation of the gold plates into the Book of Mormon, he returned the plates to the angel Moroni. So we no longer have access to them. All that remains is Joseph Smith’s translation of the plates.

Yale student: I mean no disrespect, but this sounds both incredible and convenient for the story of the Book of Mormon. (Remember that the word “incredible” means unbelievable.) We have no way of source checking Joseph Smith’s story because the plates he claims to have worked with are no longer available. How can anyone even believe Joseph Smith or the Book of Mormon?

Taylor: Great questions. I have several questions for you.

Yale student: Sure.

Taylor: Are you a Christian?

Yale student: Yes.

Taylor: Do you believe in the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ?

Yale student: Of course. That is the fundamental foundation of Christianity! Without the belief in the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ there is nothing for Christianity.

Taylor: OK, then show me Jesus’ body.

Yale student: (Pausing to think with dawning comprehension) Oh, I see.

Taylor: What is more implausible: That someone claims to have translated a book and now the original book is missing, or that a physically dead body is now alive again? Just as Christians throughout the centuries have exercised faith in the claim that Jesus Christ died and rose again, so too members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints exercise faith in that original claim as well as in the claim that God has brought forth additional scriptural witnesses, such as the Book of Mormon, for the life and mission of Jesus Christ

Sometimes people find themselves in a faith crisis, not simply a position of unknowing something, but that they feel they know something that has caused some cognitive dissonance. How does faith apply to someone in this intellectually conflicted position?

The article title asserts that faith must come first, that it is a matter of approaching spiritual matters with faith first. What tends to be the end result if faith comes second, or third or somewhere down the line?

This idea that we wait to act till we have knowledge is the opposite of what you inject at the end of your article, “As we act in faith, our knowledge increases and our views enlarge.” What sorts of things can we ONLY learn through faith as opposed to traditional empirical learning models?

Taylor Halverson is the author of the article In the Gospel, Faith Must Come First published by the Deseret News.

RiseUp Podcast: Helping People in Faith Crisis

by

Podcast: Download (18.5MB)

Subscribe: RSS

Faith Crisis is a term describing a period of time or event where someone has serious doubts about their belief’s. You may have even experienced a faith crisis yourself. But how are we to approach those who are experiencing or have experienced this “faith crisis?” We have a few ideas….

There is a website called Millennial Mormon’s. It is a blog site that posts some decent articles but does so from a perspective and understanding shared by the rising generation, those of you who are in seminary or institute programs. The tag line of the site is “your grandpa’s gospel, now with #hashtags.

On that site was posted an article by Tanner Gilliland on November 4th, 2014. The article is entitled, “4 “DO NOTs” for Treating People in a Faith Crisis.” I actually found the article to be a pretty good opening reference that addresses some of the things that we may find ourselves doing or thinking with respect to people that experience a faith crisis. While I don’t agree with all the assertions they are minor and I trust that you will be smart enough and in tune enough to take in the correct spirit of the article, and not haggle over a couple of words.

4 “DO NOTs” for Treating People in a Faith Crisis

BY TANNER GILLILAND · NOVEMBER 4, 2014

With more and more information becoming available on the internet, more and more people are asking important questions about the church and its history. Sometimes these questions lead to serious doubts. Many of these doubts and concerns are not easily solved and require much prayerful effort, patience, and study.

Some people feel that they can’t find adequate answers to their questions so they leave the church. This usually is not an easy decision for them. Some lose friends or family, and others even lose their employment.

It is imperative that faithful members of the church, particularly millennials, learn how to appropriately interact with those who wrestle with doubt. To that end, I have created this list of things NOT to do when someone you know raises serious questions about religion:

1) Do NOT assume they are sinning

While sin is certainly darkens our minds, it is not always the cause of doubt. We must eliminate the stigma that those who doubt have some lurking evil, and that those who leave the church were just looking for a way out. This unrighteous judgment can be both harmful to us (it is a sin) and detrimental to the person we are judging.

2) Do NOT pretend that you know all the facts

Our religion is very complex. There are aspects of our doctrine and history that are very difficult to understand and we don’t claim to know all the answers. People who are deeply concerned with these issues have often given them many hours of study and consideration, so the “seminary answers” often don’t quite cut it. Rather than throwing out platitudes, try to understand their perspective. Share what you know and understand, and acknowledge that you don’t know everything. Always be honest.

3) Do NOT belittle their concerns

As one who ventures “down the rabbit hole” so to speak, I can testify of the frustration that comes when someone tells you not to worry so much. If we believe that our religious convictions will affect the our eternal destiny then of course we should worry about getting it right! What seems like a minuscule molehill to you may be a monstrous mountain for another. We can’t solve problems by ignoring them. Remember that our religion started with a boy who had some serious religious questions. Instead of disregarding the question, listen to the concerns and help find the answers.

4) Do NOT ostracize them

Though this is the last item, it is probably the most important. Nobody should feel like they aren’t able to express their concerns for fear of losing friends or family. Our love cannot be conditional upon someone’s level of belief. Christlike love is unconditional.To individuals with spouses whose beliefs are different, remember the counsel of Paul: “And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband.” (1 Cor 7:13-14)People need your love, not your diagnosis. Expressing doubt or even leaving the church does not equate to being a bad person. In the end, even the acts of good by atheists will be accounted to them as righteousness. God’s love does not have a membership number or require a temple recommend. Neither should ours.From the Joseph Smith Papers project to the video about temple clothing, the church is taking progressive steps toward transparency and more open dialogue about controversial issues. I believe that our generation will be instrumental in continuing that trend. Let us always be quick to lend a listening ear, a supportive shoulder, and most importantly, an open heart.”

– End Article –

Wether you know someone right now experiencing some challenges to their faith or not, you will likely encounter someone in the not so distant future. So it is best to have this information and resource at the ready should this come up.

Should you be experiencing a faith crisis right now yourself, and someone is not following these 4 basic principles, try to do your best to also extend the same level of understanding you want others to have with you. Take these 4 things and reverse them…with a slight adjustment.

1) Don’t assume that people are judging you harshly.

2) Don’t assume that people know nothing about faith challenges – many go through them, and many come through them with even stronger faith than when they entered the faith crisis.

3) Do not belittle people who are trying to show concern but may not be the best at being crisis counselors.

4) Do not ostracize yourself. I once heard the analogy that the worst time to leave the storm shelter is when the hurricane is passing over you. In other words, if you are having a faith crisis and you are scared or upset and don’t know where to turn for help or answers, it is best to not leave the church, the source of strength that you need to help you through this time, especially when you are in the middle of the trial.

We don’t always know how to respond to people when they encounter difficulties in life, wether they be faith related or not. So, remember to be patient with others, as you would want them to be patient with you.

In conclusion I want to share with you a thought that was kind of sneaky from the October 2014 General Conference. Elder Anderson gave a talk and in the foot note of that talk was a quote from President Eyring that says this about how to approach those in faith crisis:

“In your love for them you may decide to try to give them what they ask. You may be tempted to go with them through their doubts, with the hope that you can find proof or reasoning to dispel their doubts. Persons with doubts often want to talk about what they think are the facts or the arguments that have caused their doubts, and about how much it hurts… You and I can do better if we do not stay long with what our students see as the source of their doubts… Their problem does not lie in what they think they see; it lies in what they cannot yet see… We do best if we turn the conversation soon to the things of the heart, those changes of heart that open spiritual eyes.”

(“‘And Thus We See’: Helping a Student in a Moment of Doubt” [address to Church Educational System religious educators, Feb. 5, 1993], 3, 4

FairMormon-Rise-Up-iTunes-logo

Articles of Faith 16: Margaret Blair Young – The Heart of Africa and The Welcome Table

by

Podcast: Download (56.7MB)

Subscribe: RSS

Margaret-Blair-Young-150x150Margaret Blair Young was raised in the Church and learned the standard Mormon clichés and customary phrases of a Mormon testimony. As a child, she could imitate the strokes and expressions of Mormonism well, in time she came to understand these were expressions of an immature, inexperienced faith. Time propelled her further into the faith. In time she began to be immersed in more controversial areas of LDS history: race issues and the priesthood restriction, keeping those of African lineage from receiving the priesthood or temple blessings for over a century. She wrote three books and made two documentaries on these subjects with Darius Gray, a black man who joined the Church in 1964, fourteen years before the restriction was lifted.

Margaret Blair Young is the past president of the Association for Mormon Letters and has published eight books—novels and short stories. Three of these were co-authored with Darius Gray and give the history of Black Latter-day Saints. She and Gray also made the documentary Nobody Knows: The Untold Story of Black Mormons. She has written six encyclopedia articles and other scholarly papers on Blacks in the western USA, and particularly on Black Mormons. She used to teach creative writing at BYU but now travels the world in her off time.

Questions addressed during the interview:

You just got back from Africa. Where were you and what were you doing there?

How is the church doing in Africa? What is it like on a day to day basis?

What are some of the difficult questions or situations for which the African Saints are seeking answers or solutions?

There is an article on your blog through patheos, The Welcome Table, the article is entitled Developing Spiritual Taste. In your world travels and in your film directing efforts on church related themes, you have no doubt encountered critics or at least statements that seem to be critical of at least perceptions of church doctrines and culture. You even address the motivation for the article, at least in part, by offering this brief anecdote: When I was in my late twenties, someone said to me, “You’re too smart to be a Mormon.” Clearly, I’m not. But the picture of Mormonism this person had in mind does not represent the kind of Mormonism I live.” What is the kind of Mormonism that you live, the kind that you layout in this article?

You talk about, in your Mormon Scholars Testify Page, a story where your husband once gave you a priesthood blessing during a particularly trying moment. He said these words: “I bless you that your memories will be sanctified as the larger picture unfolds, and you will view all of the difficulties and trials you’re enduring now with gratitude and love.”This is the blessing of perspective. It illuminates not only my personal history, but the hard historical episodes of my religion. What has that blessing meant in your research into as you put it, the more controversial parts of Mormon History?

Margaret Blair Young is the author of several titles as well as director and producer of several documentaries on the history of Black members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Click here for more information on Margaret Blair Young’s upcoming Film Project, The Heart of Africa.

Click here to read from Margaret Blair Young’s entries at Patheos under the heading, The Welcome Table.

Mormon FairCast-Book Review: The Crucible of Doubt: Reflections on the Quest For Faith by Terryl and Fiona Givens

by

Podcast: Download (52.8MB)

Subscribe: RSS

 

Terryl and Fiona GivensTerryl Givens holds the James A. Bostwick chair of English and is Professor of Literature and Religion at the University of Richmond and the author of several books. His writing has been praised by the new York Times as “provocative reading” and includes the most recent title, When Souls Had Wings, a history of the idea of pre-mortal life in Western Thought.

 

Fiona Givens is a retired modern language teacher with undergraduate degree’s in French and German and a graduate degree in European History. She is now an independent scholar who has published in several journals and reviews in Mormon studies, including the Journal of Mormon History, Exponent II, and LDS Living.

 

Terryl and Fiona are the grandparents of five, and parents of six. Welcome Terrly and Fiona Givens. They co-authored the book The Crucible of Doubt: Reflections on the Quest For Faith published by Deseret Book.

 

Questions addressed in this interview:

 

With two authors to a title I am always a bit curious as to who wrote what, or how that process took place. So how did that process take place?

 

This book is entitled The Crucible of Doubt and subtitled, Reflections on the Question for Faith. You have written on having doubts or experiencing what has been termed a faith crisis, would you call yourselves doubt scholars?

 

Now another word for crucible is trial, so the title itself implies that you approach having doubts or questions about LDS beliefs is a trial, but what makes these doubts such a trial? Why can’t they simply be viewed as a natural occurrence and something to address in some sense of normalcy rather than a “trial?”

 

While the book is primarily a devotional text, there does seem to have an apologetic subtext to it in that it helps the reader to reframe themselves with respect to the LDS Theology is such a way that questions are more answerable. What that part of the intent in your writing or did it simply speak to me that way?

 

Some introductions to books are superfluous. Your’s does not fit in that category, in fact, I would venture to say that if you skip over the introduction to the book, you will miss a good bit of the remainder of the text. That introduction starts out with a profound analogy using James Mossman’s front door in Scotland. Please help me to not sound so random in my reference. Please explain that story.

 

What are some of the common “wrong questions” that we encounter in current discourse?

 

The book continues to give an appraisal on the value of reason or in another sense the place of scientific information as the foundation upon which reason is based. Your argument sounds a little like a literature professor seeking to give more weight to their subject of scholarship.\

 

Let’s talk for a minute about the role of suffering.

 

It is the position of some today that questioning certain teachings, or even publicly advocating for things that shake up the norm is the act of an apostate, while others praise their actions as bringing people to a higher plane of Christianity through their advocacy. The next chapter of your book The Crucible of Doubt, deals with this idea and is entitled On Provocation and Peace: Of Life’s Fundamental Incompleteness. So is Christianity. What then is the role of questioning, of even experiencing a gospel that shakes us to our very core?

 

The Role and Function of the Church, a chapter that walks a line that few have articulated the way you have. There are those that feel that the church is the answer to all problems, and others that feel that church is the cause of all their problems. In order to talk about this concept we need to first put out your definition of religion, and your definition of church—then if you could go into what is the role of true religion and a true church in our spiritual journey?

 

Much has been talked about with the role of grace and works. A quote from your book comes from the German theologian Dietrich Bonhoffer, “cheap grace is the mortal enemy of the church” and one version of cheap grace is “baptism without discipline of community.” As we are talking about the disciples journey through doubt to greater faith and spirituality, what then do you attribute the role of ordinances and spiritual ritual in the overcoming of doubts?

 

There is a progression in your material as you address various paradigms that some have adopted, The Use and Abuse of Scripture, The Perils of Hero Worship, another interesting chapter is the Mormon’s and Monopolies chapters, and I am going to go ahead and leave those sections as a tease to go get the book, but these chapters lead in some ways to this idea of Spiritual Self-sufficiency, subtitled, Find Your Watering Place. What does Spiritual Self-sufficiency look like?

 

Let’s conclude with the articulation of what just might be at the heart of true faith, and that is the risk it presents. There is this quote, “The question may remain, how does one lock onto the propositional assertions of a restored gospel that is also laden with claims about gold plates and the Book of Abraham and a male priesthood and a polygamous past and a thousand other details we may find difficult? One might consider that the contingencies of history and culture and the human element will always constitute the garment in which God’s word and will are clothed. And one might refuse to allow our desire for the perfect to be the enemy of the present good. Finally we might ask ourselves, with the early disciples, “to whom [else] shall we go?” The Worst risk such a life of faith entails is not that such a life might be wrong—but that it might be incomprehensible to those unprepared to take such a risk.” It then goes to assert that to be faithful or to be a Christian disciple (that is my word not yours) that to live in faith is to live in such a way that one’s life would not make sense if God did not exist.”

 

Terryl and Fiona Givens are the co-authors of The Crucible of Doubt: Reflections on the Quest for Faith. Available now through Deseret Book at Deseret Book.com and other LDS retailers.

 

Letters to a Former Missionary Companion – Letter 2

by

MAThe following series of articles is a fictional dialogue between Shane and Doug, two former missionary companions many years after their missions. Shane writes to his friend Doug who has posted comments about his on-going faith crisis on Facebook. The characters are fictionalized composites of members who have faced these same dilemmas but the issues are based on very real problems which have caused some to stumble. Likewise, the responding arguments are based on the author’s own personal engagement with these same concerns as well as his discussion of these issues with other members who have struggled. (By Michael R. Ash, author of Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt, and Of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith.)

Dear Doug,

I’m glad to hear that you received my previous letter and have thought about some of the things I mentioned. I can certainly appreciate how overwhelming this can be. You are getting different information from different sources and it’s difficult to know what information (or really which conclusions based on the information) is reliable. The turmoil you are engaging will eventually drive you to seek relief—most likely by choosing one side or the other. Since I’ve been there myself, I hope that I can show you how I found this relief and strengthened my testimony.

In my last letter I explained how I discovered that the Church was not involved in a “cover up” regarding the truth–––and especially the truth of early Mormon history. I mentioned that my studies have shown that many of these things have been discussed in previous official LDS publications as well as publications officially associated with the Church. In response to your query about where you can find such pro-LDS discussions, let me offer a few sources. A 1993 Ensign article by Russell M. Nelson (“A Treasured Testament”) mentions Joseph Smith’s use of a stone in a hat to translate the Book of Mormon. The Kinderhook Plates were addressed in an Ensign article in 1981. Joseph’s revelation about plural marriage was discussed in the Sunday School manuals in 1979 (and that manual was used for many years) and again in 1986 (which, again, was utilized for many years). The changes and revisions made to the Book of Commandments and early editions of the Doctrine and Covenants have been addressed in Ensign articles published in 1984, 1985, 2009, and 2013. The various accounts of Joseph Smith’s First Vision were examined in the Ensign in 1985 and again in 1996. Joseph’s treasure digging days were discussed in 1984 in a series of articles in BYU’s own BYU Studies. Many of the tougher issues have also been discussed in the earlier FARMS Review (mentioned in my previous letter)—a group that is officially under BYU’s umbrella (currently known as the Maxwell Institute).

You ask, “Why aren’t these things discussed in Church? Why should someone have to be a scholar and read the FARMS Review to find discussions on these topics? Why can’t we discuss them in Sunday School?” Those are good questions, Doug, and questions I’ve contemplatedmyself. Think about it though. We’ve both taught Gospel Doctrine classes, and if your priesthood quorums are anything like mine, do you really think these topics are the best way to spend two thirds of our three-hour block? When I go to Church I want to be spiritually renewed. I want to hear things that will lift my soul, to help me contemplate areas in my life I need to change, to feel fed as I contemplate Christ’s sacrifice, atonement, and the goodness of God. I want help in overcoming my weaknesses. I want spiritual enlightenment of how I can be a better father and husband, and to feel the peace that comes when I know I’ve recommitted myself to the Savior.

As a universal Church, the correlation of materials and teachings is aimed at harmonizing lessons and instructions and to accommodate the tender new member with basic Gospel principals—those teachings that affect our relationships with God and fellow brothers and sisters. Thousands of virtually untrained volunteers, with varying degrees of gospel and historical knowledge and education (or lack thereof) attempt to bring the Spirit into the classroom so that class members can be spiritually edified. While some Gospel Doctrine teachers may be knowledgeable enough to share detailed historical information (Dad could have), the manuals generally give basic historical outlines that specifically relate to lessons focusing on one or more gospel principles and how to apply those principals in the lives of members. In short, Church is a place for worship, spiritual edification, and enlightenment, not for in-depth historical discussion.

That’s why I used to think that my Dad was really just pursuing fluff in his spare time. The historical, scientific, and scholarly things don’t really matter in the end. In the end, it’s about relationships. Relationships with your parents, children, and spouse; relationships with those who are in need, as well as your enemies.Most importantly, your relationship with Heavenly Father and His Son. None of the secular stuff will secure those relationships.

Having said this however, I know only too well from firsthand experience that my relationship with Heavenly Father took a hit when I began struggling with critical arguments. How ironic, right? The secular stuff cannot create those relationships, but they can hinder those relationships. Conversely, I’ve found that some secular information can strengthen those relationships by giving them an environment wherein the testimony can grow. In Matthew13 we find the parable of the sower. In that parable the seed (the Word) grew or died depending on the soil (which allowed the seed to take root or not) as well as well as if it was nurtured or killed off by thorns. So likewise with a testimony: the Word of God may or may not take root and may or not may not flourish depending on if it is nurtured or chocked off by thorns. Our relationship with the divine needs to be nurtured spiritually, and for some people intellectually. A lack of spiritual and/or intellectual nourishment can stunt or kill growth. The thorns, thistles, and weeds–––the challenges to our testimony–––can kill our spiritual growth. When these weeds appear there is a need to do some gardening and weed pulling. While some intellectual arguments can cause a testimony to wither and die, other intellectual arguments can pull those weeds and allow growth to take place.

Many years ago the Church didn’t need to discuss the difficult issues. The events happened and the Church moved on. In the context of the day, histories were written as evangelizations of movements–––political or religious. Strict accuracy was less important than retelling events in heroic fashion. This wasn’t limited to Mormons but was the typical style of most historical biographies. Subsequent histories drew upon earlier histories. The more critical details of the events weren’t so much buried under the rug as they were all but forgotten (mentioned only in scholarly literature).

For the average member, there was no need for Sunday lessons to address the fuller historical accounts–––which required greater historical understanding for context and background. This would have been a waste of  valuable (and limited) time which was better utilized for perfecting the Saints. The Internet, however, has brought these issues to the forefront among new generations that aren’t always familiar with the past events or issues, and I can guarantee the Church is noticing the problem and is finding ways to address them. Policies and procedures change according to changing needs. Not every generation needs an Ark. In past times bishops didn’t need much in the way of policies on pornography–—sure there were always a few guys that read girlie magazines, but because of the pervasiveness of Internet porn new policies and procedures have been established. The Church is currently addressing many of the historical issues on the LDS.org website and we will likely see more open discussion in future Sunday School classes—not because it was purposely covered up in the past, but simply because in previous years there was no immediate need to address the issues. Now there is.

The more we (as in the World) learn, the more answers we’ll have on some things and the more questions will be raised for other things. The great thing about a living Church is we have not only the ability to receive new revelation as new questions arise, but also to receive inspiration for changing circumstances. Lastly, we Latter-day Saints don’t believe that all truth is contained within the walls of the Chapel. We acknowledge and welcome the discoveries of science and secular scholarship. While such secular findings may present temporary speed bumps or unseat erroneous traditions among the faithful (both within the Church as well as among the members of other denominations), we can welcome truth from all sources knowing with confidence that all truth ultimately comes from God.

Your friend,

Shane

Putting Together an Awful Story

by

picard-facepalm2An anonymous author* writing at the MorningStar Post blog “had an awful time putting [a] story together” on “the number of Latter Day Saints [sic] that are actually considered active,” and that Mormons are, per the title of the post, allegedly “leaving their religion in record numbers around the world.” (Link) What is the cause of this dire situation for the Church, and why was it so awful for the author to write on it? According to the article, which quotes an unnamed “high-ranking leader in Salt Lake City,” it is because “of unprecedented scrutiny of our doctrines and beliefs and stemming from the white washing of our own history, and the rise of social media sites where members and potential converts can learn of our hidden problems.”

This claim has been made before on many websites critical of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It is a common trope for critics to say that the Church is nearing extinction because of the supposedly damning real history of Mormonism it has been hiding from its unsuspecting members. Instead of revisiting these claims in general, I want to focus specifically on the content of the blog post published by the MorningStar Post. To put it bluntly, and very charitably, the article is highly problematic. The author’s use of anonymous sources is extremely questionable, and both factual errors and blatant plagiarism also plague the article. In short, the article makes totally dubious and unsubstantiated claims about both LDS Church hierarchy and Mormon history. [Read more…] about Putting Together an Awful Story

Letters to a Former Missionary Companion

by

MAThe following series of articles is a fictional dialogue between Shane and Doug, two former missionary companions many years after their missions. Shane writes to his friend Doug who has posted comments about his on-going faith crisis on Facebook. The characters are fictionalized composites of members who have faced these same dilemmas but the issues are based on very real problems which have caused some to stumble. Likewise, the responding arguments are based on the author’s own personal engagement with these same concerns as well as his discussion of these issues with other members who have struggled. (By Michael R. Ash, author of Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt, and Of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith.)

Dear Doug,

It was wonderful to hear from you again. Glad that your family is healthy and well. Exciting times now that your oldest daughter is off to college–––gray hairs on your head are sure to follow.

As an extension of our discussions on your Facebook page, I thought we could exchange some personal emails wherein we can address some of your concerns in greater detail. I can certainly appreciate your current struggle with your faith. I never told you this (my wife didn’t even know until recently) but I myself went through a similar faith crisis a number of years ago. I remember how my stomach hurt and how I had trouble sleeping. I had put so much of my life into the Church and suddenly I felt like I had been conned. I was angry, sad, and didn’t really know where to turn for answers. I started to bring up some of my issues in Priesthood and Sunday School classes, but the confused looks on other ward members’ faces quickly taught me to just keep quiet.

I tried talking to my bishop about it once. He was concerned for me but I don’t think he really understood what I was going through. He emphasized the importance of reading the Book of Mormon every day in addition to the New Testament (the Sunday School curriculum we were studying at that time) and reminded me of the importance of humility and prayer.

None of that seemed to soften the distress I was feeling from the things I was reading on the Internet. While I felt like a spiritual person, I began to wonder if I was deluding myself about my core beliefs. It wasn’t like there was a single silver bullet that had killed my testimony, but there was an accumulation of things–––like a thousand cuts (some were paper cuts, some were knife wounds) that were causing me to bleed out my religious convictions.

The thing that hurt the most was the same thing you pointed out on one of your Facebook posts–––I felt I had been lied to. It really bothered me that critics seemed to know more about the true history of my Church than I did. Why hadn’t I learned any of those things in my lifetime as a member of the Church? Why had I never been told that Joseph used a seer stone in a hat to translate the Book of Mormon? Why wasn’t I told the details about his many marriages (some of which sounded deviant)? It was hard for me to imagine that Church leaders didn’t know this information if critics knew about it. And if leaders knew about this information and weren’t sharing it with us–––the members–––it smacked of a “cover up.”

I really wished my dad was around to talk with. He loved to read church books. Sometimes he tried to share his findings with me but quite honestly, I reciprocated with perfunctory interest. I had a strong testimony since I was a kid. I went on a mission, married in the temple, and served as a bishopric counselor twice. I really didn’t get why Dad found interest in intellectual studies about the Church. I brushed it off as his “gospel hobby.” After he died I inherited his library of books but never read them. I nearly gave them all away to Deseret Industries but decided it looked cool to have so many books on my bookshelves.

At the peak of my own faith crisis–––with no one to talk to about my struggles and the issues that challenged my testimony–––I decided to categorize Dad’s books on the shelves according to topic. I found books on the Old Testament, the New Testament, the Book of Mormon, the Book of Abraham, Church history, and the lives of modern prophets. There were also books on philosophy, science, and early Christian and Jewish writings.

I found a number of books written by general authorities, books by authors I’d never heard of (and had no idea if they were LDS), and several books by the late Hugh Nibley. I don’t think I had ever read anything by Hugh Nibley (unless he had published something in the Ensign) but I knew who he was. I decided to read some of the things Dad found so interesting by starting with Nibley’s Since Cumorah.

It was a fascinating read and it opened my eyes to things about the Book of Mormon which I had never before considered. For me, the scriptures–––including the Book of Mormon–––where almost like untouchable faxes from the mind of God to the pen of prophets. I took everything they said as literal, or nearly literal. When I had first stumbled upon the writings of critics, I was badly shaken because they were able to show that some of the things that seemed literal to me were impossible, illogical, or contradicted by other scripture or the word of modern prophets.

After reading Nibley’s book I realized–––for the first time in my life–––that real people who interacted in real ways with a real ancient environment recorded the scriptures. The obvious had never occurred to me before–––I was reading the scriptures from my 21st century mind-set instead of trying to understand the scriptures from within the framework of an ancient context.

Since Cumorah was the first glimmer of light in my darkening testimony. It didn’t necessarily convince me that the Church was true, but it did make me realize that I really didn’t know that much about my own scriptures–––scriptures I had been reading regularly since my mission–––and offered hope that maybe there were logical answers to the critical claims I had read online.

It took me less than four days to devour Since Cumorah, so I dug deeper into Dad’s books. My dad was raised on an Idaho farm but got his agricultural degree at Utah State University. So mixed in his collection were several books on agriculture. As I categorized Dad’s old library I tried to separate his Church books from his agricultural books and novels. Suddenly I realized that several books that I had been putting in the agricultural pile (the books were entitled FARMS Review) were actually Church books–––most of which contained multiple essays, and all of which were tied to an organization supported by BYU. Apparently FARMS was an acronym for The Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (since that time I’ve discovered that they changed their name to the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Studies). Dad had probably a dozen different FARMS Reviews dating back to the late 1980s.

To my wonderful surprise, this collection of books addressed many of the exact issues with which I was struggling. While I didn’t find answers to all of my questions in that collection, I found enough to convince me that the critics didn’t have the last word on any of these topics. I also found that there are strong intellectual reasons to believe. One of the most important things I discovered from my research was that there was no Church “cover up.” Many of the issues that troubled me were actually acknowledged and discussed in official Church publications and in publications officially supported by the Church.

The other very important thing that I realized–––and this is obvious in hindsight–––is that the same data can be interpreted in different ways. This happens all the time in science, history, politics, and so forth. It’s inescapable in religious matters as well. I’ve read some critics who imply that they’ve won the argument by declaring, “See Mormon scholars don’t deny that Joseph Smith’s various accounts of his First Vision contain discrepancies.” However, while critics and believers often agree on the data, they can disagree with the interpretation or significance of the data.

When I went through my faith crisis, it seemed that there was no way to understand the troubling information and still believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet. The new pro-LDS scholarly material that I discovered, however, showed me that such things could be understood in a context of belief. I didn’t need to abandon my faith. If my previous spiritual experiences meant anything to me–––if I felt that there was a spiritual element of truth to Mormonism–––I could harmonize seemingly difficult issues in a worldview that saw Joseph Smith as the prophet of the Restoration. I even found that such a worldview was supported (not proven, but supported) by historical and archaeological evidences that made more sense in the context of belief than they would in a context of unbelief.

My testimony had been bruised and healed. Once my brain recognized that belief was a viable and logical option, my heart was once again able to enjoy the wonderful peace I feel with the companionship of the Holy Ghost.

After devouring every Church-related book my dad bequeathed to me, my thirst for knowledge lead me to the Interpreter Foundation (www.MormonInterepreter.com)–––a site conceived by many of the scholars once associated with FARMS–––and the website FairMormon.org, which helps struggling members who are beset by the same challenging issues that damaged my faith. I found tons of answers on the FairMormon site, as well as videos, podcasts, and a bookstore with many books that helped me think more critically about my beliefs and assumptions. All of this–––my past history with the same difficult issues with which you are currently struggling–––has given me an insight into what you are going through. If you are willing, I’d really like to correspond with you and discuss those issues you raised on your Facebook page.

Your friend,

Shane.