DiscussMormonism.com

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2008 2:37 pm**

Anyone interested in understanding why some may have questions, concerns , doubts and are no longer TBM or Monolithic Mormons but choose to stay and participate in the LDS Church should listen to this. Anyone who has left should also listen. Anyone who live Coggins, or Crockett, who view those less Monolithic then they are, who call some like me cafeteria Mormons and use it as a pejorative should also listen. I think John Dehlin does a great job explaining why he and others want to stay in spite of questions, doubts, concerns or a testimony that is no longer in the TBM mold. It is over an hour long but well worth it. He does not argue that one mold fits all. Anyway, I hope some of you will take the time to listen to this. It will be worth your time.

http://mormonstories.org/?p=388

Mormon Stories #109: How to Stay in the LDS Church after Losing Your Faith

In this seminar (recorded live at the 2007 Northwest Sunstone Symposium in Seattle), I discuss techniques for staying in the LDS church after a major trial of faith.

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2008 3:05 pm**

I think that when people start to doubt Mormonism they are also on a fast track out of any organized religion. They will be future agnostics. One could say that 90 percent of the Bible is fiction, 9 percent historical fiction and 1 percent truth. When the Book of Mormon cites Moses when it is likely Moses never exisited then you realize it is all built on a house of cards.

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2008 3:16 pm**

Thanks for the link, Jason. I think John is doing a great job "from within," helping members understand the diversity of beliefs within the church. The LDS Church is indeed a unique culture, and when a person loses the black and white beliefs they once had, it is a challenge to know the right thing to do for them, and for their family. Having a resource to help one through the process is a great support for many. What works for one person doesn't work for everybody...and John helps us understand that.

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2008 4:22 pm**

Jason,

Thank you so much for bringing this to our attention. For those of you like me who are at work, and can't listen to the podcast at the moment, he does have a link to the essay that he based his podcast on.

There are some very good points in the essay. I look forward to listening to the podcast later as well.

I highlighted a portion that I thought was worth bringing here for some of you folks to read. PP and several others have asked me how, as a "cafeteria Mormon", I can allow my kids to go to Church without them feeling like I have lied to them or tricked them because I, myself, don't believe everything the Church has set out blindly, and have questions about the gospel, myself.

Here are some principles that Dehlin has brought to the table that I have tried to teach my kids, and have incorporated in my own life:

Dehlin's essay wrote:De-program as necessary

Early in our transition the middle way, we would use Sunday dinner time to ask the kids what they were taught on Sunday, and to "de-program" or "disabuse" them of any bad teachings. This was valuable because it re-trained them to realize that they didn't need to blindly believe everything they were taught in church.

While there are several traditional LDS or Christian teachings that we reject, here is a short list of a few examples:

* Vengeful God: You can teach your children it's okay to reject the idea that God was behind all the genocidal killings in the Bible (of men, women, children and animals). Take the opportunity to teach them that scripture is imperfect, and often mixes up God's teachings with human interpretations and biases. Yes, it will be a stretch for them to understand. But it would be even more confusing to teach them that God loves them, wants to protect them, and often kills His children as He sees fit.
* Goodness, not "one trueness": Never lie to your children, or mislead them into thinking that you believe things you really do not. This will only come back to bite you in the end. Make it very clear at an early age (I recommend eight years old) that you do not take them to the LDS Church because you believe it to be the "one and only true church." In our experience, this will actually be very intuitive for them to understand. Take the time to explain that you are Mormons by culture and heritage, and you have a great deal of love and respect for the church, but you do not believe everything that the church teaches. They shouldn't feel compelled to believe everything, either. Also, make it clear to them that you deeply value and respect all faiths and denominations. The Mormon Church has some good things that you agree with and some bad things that you don't agree with, and that is the same for other religions. Encourage them to decide for themselves exactly what is truth, and what is error -- both within the church, and without. In the end, teach them to respect the church, but never blindly.
* Fallibility: Do your best to lovingly instill within your children the notion that all people have good in them, and all people make mistakes -- including church leaders like prophets, bishops and Sunday School teachers. This is intuitive for them as well. Do your best to lovingly and subtly de-mystify Joseph Smith, Gordon B. Hinckley, the bishop, and others, without tearing them down continually. Focus on the good, but be open about the bad. Use instances of prophet-worship in church or in General Conference as teaching moments. For example, when Joseph's martyrdom is discussed ("lamb to the slaughter" or "completely innocent"), take the time to explain the full story surrounding Joseph's incarceration. This will help lower your children's unrealistic expectations of leadership, which will help to avoid setting them up for disappointment, or even abuse later on. Also, make sure to reinforce the notion that non-LDS leaders also can have great inspiration and goodness: Gandhi, Mother Theresa, the pope, some people in all other faiths, some atheists we know, etc.
* No superiority: Sometimes it's a bit natural for LDS kids to think that a person is inferior if that person smokes, drinks alcohol, watches R-rated movies, attends another church or no church at all, is gay, has tattoos, or in any other way falls short of the Mormon norm. Make sure to constantly reinforce the falseness and danger of such teachings as completely un-Christlike and prideful. We do hold ourselves to a certain standard, but in no way should we ever use that standard to elevate ourselves above others.
* God is not a bigot: If you're not happy with the historical status of women, blacks, Native Americans, or homosexuals in the church, use it as a teaching moment to explain that churches (like schools, businesses, governments, etc.) have weaknesses, and that they should not ever feel compelled to believe any church teaching that propagates bigotry.
* Science and religion: At the appropriate time, you'll want to explain that religion and science do not have to conflict. Your kids do not need to fear science any more than they do religion.

To summarize, teach your kids to do in church what you teach them to do with everything in their lives, including TV, movies, books, school, friends, etc. Seek out the good in these things (for there is great good in all of them). Avoid the bad in these things. Teach them to never blindly believe or follow everything they're told in any of these areas -- church or otherwise. Should your children demonstrate respect? Of course, for those who deserve it. Never blind obedience.

Teach them to use their heads, hearts and spirit -- together -- to determine for themselves what's right, and what's wrong. The church is actually a wonderful laboratory to help practice, and eventually instill this teaching within them.

Here is a link to the essay, or written portion of the podcast. It looks like it's pretty close to a transcript for those who can't listen at the moment. It's a great read!

This is a great Valentine's Day present, Jason! :)

http://mormonstories.org/HowToStay.html ... _necessary

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2008 4:39 pm**

We have talked about this extensively on other boards that have a higher concentration of NOM/Fringe participants.

Having been in the church but not of the church for roughly five years before exiting completely, I see this idea of inoculation as a temporary stopgap, not a permanent solution. The danger is that you have to compromise your integrity to some extent to do this. I understand there are many variables involved and each situation is unique. There was a reason why I was actively involved as an unbeliever...my spouse, my family and my cultural ties as I am in Utah. But there is also no adequate vocabulary to explain my mental/spiritual/emotional relief in being able to walk away instead of continuing to get splinters from straddling the fence.

My current thought on this is if you do not believe in the church, don't support it by going. There are many OTHER things in life you could be positively doing instead of diddling your time in an institution that is so time and energy demanding. Stand for something and walk away. You'll feel better about yourself for doing so.

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2008 4:47 pm**

Some of what you posted liz is good stuff, but I question the wisdom of some of it and wholeheartedly disagree with other parts as well:

Dehlin's essay wrote: * Vengeful God: You can teach your children it's okay to reject the idea that God was behind all the genocidal killings in the Bible (of men, women, children and animals). Take the opportunity to teach them that scripture is imperfect, and often mixes up God's teachings with human interpretations and biases. Yes, it will be a stretch for them to understand. But it would be even more confusing to teach them that God loves them, wants to protect them, and often kills His children as He sees fit.
...
* God is not a bigot: If you're not happy with the historical status of women, blacks, Native Americans, or homosexuals in the church, use it as a teaching moment to explain that churches (like schools, businesses, governments, etc.) have weaknesses, and that they should not ever feel compelled to believe any church teaching that propagates bigotry.

Whether you think god is a nice guy or a vengeful guy doesn't matter, because either way, you're making god in your own image. Who's to say that if god exists, he isn't a genocidal bastard, or a bigot? Is he a loving god simply because that's what you want? Seems to me without any supporting evidence, you can't make an assessment about the disposition of your god.

Personally, I think teaching your kids anything about your concept of god without pointing out it's just a concept and has no basis in reality is doing your kids a huge disservice.

Dehlin's essay wrote:* Science and religion: At the appropriate time, you'll want to explain that religion and science do not have to conflict. Your kids do not need to fear science any more than they do religion.

While it's true that children should be taught to embrace science, it is completely erroneous to assert that "religion and science do not have to conflict." Faith is the very antithesis of science. The only way to eliminate the conflict between religion and science is for religion to jettison the idea of faith... and I don't see that happening any time soon.

Dehlin's essay wrote:Teach them to use their heads, hearts and spirit -- together -- to determine for themselves what's right, and what's wrong. The church is actually a wonderful laboratory to help practice, and eventually instill this teaching within them.

I imagine the concentration camps would also serve as a "wonderful laboratory to help practice, and eventually instill this teaching within" someone's kids, but I wouldn't wish it on anyone. You don't need an artificially created uncomfortable environment to teach your kids these ideas. It's one thing if you feel forced to be there (due to a spouse or whatever) but if one has a choice, they'd be better of raising their kids elsewhere.

Still, I liked the overall feeling I got from reading this guy, and it at least sounds like he's making the best of a crappy situation.

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2008 4:55 pm**

Trinity wrote:We have talked about this extensively on other boards that have a higher concentration of NOM/Fringe participants.

Having been in the church but not of the church for roughly five years before exiting completely, I see this idea of inoculation as a temporary stopgap, not a permanent solution. The danger is that you have to compromise your integrity to some extent to do this. I understand there are many variables involved and each situation is unique. There was a reason why I was actively involved as an unbeliever...my spouse, my family and my cultural ties as I am in Utah. But there is also no adequate vocabulary to explain my mental/spiritual/emotional relief in being able to walk away instead of continuing to get splinters from straddling the fence.

My current thought on this is if you do not believe in the church, don't support it by going. There are many OTHER things in life you could be positively doing instead of diddling your time in an institution that is so time and energy demanding. Stand for something and walk away. You'll feel better about yourself for doing so.

What works for you does not word for others. And as in my case there is a lot I still believe and have faith about. Also, personally I enjoy the sociality it brings in my life and it is a great way for me to serve some part of humanity. Sure I could serve other places and in fact plan to so some community service in another venue when I am done with another thing in the Church.

Trinty, I think your comments are fine but for your last paragraph. You have no way to know that someone will feel better by walking away. Some do, you did, some may, some may not. Why is it so many who have walked feel that they have some nobility in their life that those who work through things in a different way don't. This really borders on teh same view point that someone like Crockett holds. Get the hell out if you can't swallow it all and be an what they think are TBMs

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2008 5:05 pm**

Jason Bourne wrote: Why is it so many who have walked feel that they have some nobility in their life that those who work through things in a different way don't. This really borders on the same view point that someone like Crockett holds. Get the hell out if you can't swallow it all and be an what they think are TBMs

I know you didn't ask me this, but I'll offer my own reaction to it: I don't consider myself more nobel for having walked away. I do feel good about my own personal integrity for not participating in something I don't believe in, but that doesn't make me judge others who do.

What I will say about it, however, is that I believe the recovery process will go much faster for those who complete divest themselves from the church. I think it's better for kids to not grow up in such an institution (which is to say, more optimal).

But I have nothing against the folks like you, liz, Rollo, etc. who attend despite their issues with the church. I understand you have your reasons. At least you're not a sheep; you think for yourselves. That's the biggest thing, in my opinion.

I actually feel great sympathy for folks who are in situations where they feel the safe thing to do is stay in church. That's got to be really tough.

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2008 5:10 pm**

liz3564 wrote:Here are some principles that Dehlin has brought to the table that I have tried to teach my kids, and have incorporated in my own life:

Dehlin's essay wrote:De-program as necessary

The church is actually a wonderful laboratory to help practice, and eventually instill this teaching within them.

??? So, he's saying that it's a good idea to have your children drink poison, so that you can have a wonderful laboratory on the workings of antidotes?

I will never, EVER understand that mindset. I could live to be a million years old and still never understand that mindset. I mean, c'mon: Why not just skip the middleman and not have them drink any poison in the first place?

A little help, please?

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2008 5:14 pm**

Seems to me there are some people who don't so much 'believe', but do 'believe in belief'.
...I don't particularly agree, but I equally don't think it's a damaging attitude, if kept in perspective. (And if beliefs are 'cherry picked' carefully enough!)

As long as a parent is teaching a child to make sure they investigate, question, learn, grow and - most importantly - make up their own mind, then - in my opinion - that's the most important lesson to teach them. The starting point you give them can matter, not trying to suggest it doesn't mean 'anything'.

But as long as they know it's up to them to find their own path, you've given them the best chance possible.