Pastors who do not believe - in the CoJCoLDS?

[_Chap]

It is common-place of Mormon self-description, usually stated with some pride that 'we don't have a professional paid clergy'. Fine. But a recent report that you can download here:

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfa ... Clergy.pdf

from Tufts University, suggests a possible reason why that may spare the church certain problems that other denominations may have had for some time - the problem of clergy who have ceased to believe what they are professionally committed to teaching. This Washington post article sums it up - extract:

... Dennett and LaScola undertook their project with the goal of looking for unbelieving pastors and ministers who continue to serve their churches in "secret disbelief." Their "small and self-selected" sample of ministers represents a microcosm of the theological collapse at the heart of many churches and denominations.

In their report, Dennett and LaScola present case studies of five unbelieving ministers, three from liberal denominations ("the liberals") and two from conservative denominations ("the literals").

Wes, a Methodist, lost his confidence in the Bible while attending a liberal Christian college and seminary. "I went to college thinking Adam and Eve were real people," he explained. Now, he no longer believes that God exists. In his rendering, God is a word that "can be used very expressively in some of my more meditative modes" and "a kind of poetry that is written by human beings."

His church members do not know that he is an atheist, but he explains that they are somewhat liberal themselves. His ministerial colleagues are even more liberal: "They've been de-mythologized, I'll say that. They don't believe Jesus rose from the dead literally. They don't believe Jesus was born of a virgin. They don't believe all those things that would cause a big stir in their churches."

Rick, a campus minister for the United Church of Christ, perhaps the most liberal Protestant denomination, was an agnostic in college and seems to have lost all belief by the time he graduated from seminary. He chose ordination in the UCC because it required "no forced doctrine." Even as he graduated from seminary, he knew, "I'm not going to make it in a conventional church." He knew he could not go into a church and teach his own theological views, based on Paul Tillich and Rudolf Bultmann. He did not believe in the doctrinal content of the Christian faith from the beginning of his ministry. "I did not believe the traditional things even then."

He does not believe "all this creedal stuff" about the incarnation of Christ or the need for salvation, but he remained in the ministry because, "These are my people, this is the context in which I work, these are the people that I know." In the pulpit, his mode is to talk as if he does believe, because "as long as ... you are talking about God and Jesus and the Bible, that's what they want to hear. You're just phrasing it in a way that makes sense to [them] ... but language is ambiguous and can be heard in different ways."

He doesn't like to call himself an atheist, but: "If not believing in a supernatural, theistic god is what distinguishes an atheist, then I am one too."

Darryl is a Presbyterian who sees himself as a "progressive-minded" pastor who wants to see his kind of non-doctrinal Christianity "given validity in some way." He acknowledges that he is more a pantheist than a theist, and thinks that many of the more educated members of his church hold to the same liberal beliefs as his own. And those beliefs (or unbeliefs) are stated clearly: "I reject the virgin birth. I reject substitutionary atonement. I reject the divinity of Jesus. I reject heaven and hell in the traditional sense, and I am not alone."

Amazingly, Darryl is candid about the fact that he remains in the ministry largely for financial reasons. It is how he provides for his family. If he openly espoused his beliefs, "I may be burning bridges in terms of my ability to earn a living this way." .....

It seems that prolonged theological studies may lead to two contradictory things:

1. Increasingly well-informed understanding of faith origins, leading to skepticism.
2. Increasingly greater personal investment in the pastor's role, making it hard to pull out of that career until it is too late

So Mormonism seems to avoid that trap quite well. Maybe that is also why BYU does not offer a Mormon theology degree?

[_DrW]

And yet if one takes the recent posts from Everybody Wang Chung at face value (and I do), there are local leaders in the LDS Church who have serious doubts or outright disbelief when it come many of the its foundational truth claims and doctrine.

I would also imagine that in parts of Utah and Southern Idaho, disclosing one's disbelief of Mormon doctrine could hinder one's advance in a career, regardless of whether that person worked for the LDS Church, or simply for an LDS owned or dominated organization.

One more problem is with the fuzziness, inexact nature, and uncertain status of many LDS beliefs. If BYU were to offered a degree in Mormon Theology, what would the final exam really look like? Think about it.

The main proclamations of faith and belief in Mormonism are not to a creed or dogma, they are to Mormonism's current leaders and to Joseph Smith.

[Guest]

Well, it's not just pastors who disbelive in their church's fundamental doctrines.

For years I have had the pleasure of having a currently-serving LDS bishop as a drinking friend. About two times a month my friend will come to my office and we will have a few glasses of scotch and listen to music. He enjoys this quiet time because he doesn't have to pretend he's the "bishop." He can relax and we talk to each other about our career problems and the issues of the day. After a few drinks he goes home to his very Mormon wife. She probably enjoys these times too, as he probably returns home more relaxed than normal.

He simply doesn't believe in any of it...but serves due to social and familial pressure.

[_Fence Sitter]

It seems that prolonged theological studies may lead to two contradictory things:

1. Increasingly well-informed understanding of faith origins, leading to skepticism.
2. Increasingly greater personal investment in the pastor's role, making it hard to pull out of that career until it is too late

So Mormonism seems to avoid that trap quite well. Maybe that is also why BYU does not offer a Mormon theology degree?

The RLDS (now Community of Christ) are a good example of how No. 1 happens and how quickly it can happen.

[_KevinSim]

And yet if one takes the recent posts from Everybody Wang Chung at face value (and I do), there are local leaders in the LDS Church who have serious doubts or outright disbelief when it come many of the its foundational truth claims and doctrine.

I'm not a leader, but I can see how it's certainly possible for leaders to have "serious doubts" about LDS "foundational truth claims."

I will never forget the day in my ward in Spanish Fork where I was working in the clerk's office (as an assistant clerk) with the other clerks, and my daughter walked into the office and asked if she could help us with what we were doing. I didn't know what to say right off, and she blurted out a question about whether she couldn't help us because she was eleven, and she was a girl.

That question has haunted me ever since. I'm not a liberal, so I have no desire to see LDS women become bishops and stake presidents, but I'm moderate enough that I certainly see no problem with my daughter becoming a clerk, or a Sunday School president, or a ward mission leader.

(By the way, soon after that question I pointed out to her that being eleven might indeed be an impediment, but that once she was twelve she certainly could take on the clerking responsibilities of her Beehives group.)

I would also imagine that in parts of Utah and Southern Idaho, disclosing one's disbelief of Mormon doctrine could hinder one's advance in a career, regardless of whether that person worked for the LDS Church, or simply for an LDS owned or dominated organization.

Disbelief "of Mormon doctrine" could certainly hinder my advance in my career, but it would only enhance (even in Utah) an even more enjoyable and fulfilling career. In the past, during some of my most rebellious days, I've thought about spearheading my own faith organization, that embraced little more than doing thorough investigations into the possible truth or falseness of issues important to humanity. Originally I had thought I'd start this organization in Seattle, where I grew up, but since then as I've gotten more and more entrenched on the Wasatch Front, I've realized such an organization had a decent chance for success even here.

[_Buffalo]

I wonder if there are any GAs who don't take the church's truth claims literally? Maybe one of the 70s.