The Thread about LDS with doubts

[LA Ute]

This podcast interview is quite interesting if you can make the time to listen to it:

http://www.fairblog.org/2013/11/06/fairmormon-frameworks-9-richard-bushman-helping-those-in-doubt/

I think skeptics, doubters, critics and believers alike will find something here.

[LA Ute]

At 18:30 the interviewer asks Bushman to comment on his statement that “rather than destroy the critics, we want to loosen their grip.” This follows:

[Richard Bushman speaking]


Well, I think one of the problems is that you get dogmatism vs. dogmatism. So many of the people who have their faith shaken “knew for sure”; they had a certain testimony. So when they lose their testimony and then they “know for sure” that the Church is false. They are just as dogmatic after the change as before. Neither one of them is sound or based on a real search for understanding.

These things are just immensely complicated and there is no way that through picking through and looking at everything you can arrive at certain conclusions. That’s easy for me as a scholar to say because that’s the nature of historical knowledge. Every historian knows that the biggest questions are all unanswerable or you have very restrictive answers to most of the big questions.

So, I think the better way to say is “there is a way of looking that is favorable to the Church. You don’t have to interpret everything in a negative way.” So, all I aim when I talk to people is to keep the conversation open. Don’t close your mind. Don’t decide it’s now all over.

I’m trying to rehabilitate the word “investigator.” We make “investigators” a preliminary stage to full-fledged membership, but “investigator” is a wonderful description of a religious life. You’re always investigating It requires an open mind and a questing spirit, and out of that comes beautiful results, if we can tolerate it.

That’s my aim: to keep the conversation going and keep people looking at the possible meanings of all the things we turn over.

[Bill Reel speaking]

I think you hit on a beautiful point as you’re talking about that. If rather than we try to bury the critic and their argument, we simply say “hey, there’s other possible conclusions; other ways to look at this information,” then all of a sudden agency is back on the table. For those people who want to lead with faith, now they have two conclusions they can go to, and with faith being on the table, with both conclusions being reasonable and perhaps valid, it then puts the choice back in their own hands. Which I think, more times than not, can lead one to stay in the Church and make their way through it and figure it out.

[Richard Bushman speaking]

Yeah, I’m with you 100% on that.

This was not my favorite segment but it gives you an idea. His comments on the Book of Abraham were interesting. I'll try to post more.

[Two Utes]

At 18:30 the interviewer asks Bushman to comment on his statement that “rather than destroy the critics, we want to loosen their grip.” This follows:

[Richard Bushman speaking]


This was not my favorite segment but it gives you an idea. His comments on the Book of Abraham were interesting. I'll try to post more.

"Well, I think one of the problems is that you get dogmatism vs. dogmatism. So many of the people who have their faith shaken “knew for sure”; they had a certain testimony. So when they lose their testimony and then they “know for sure” that the Church is false. They are just as dogmatic after the change as before. Neither one of them is sound or based on a real search for understanding."


Really? Because the church is the organization that spends vasts amounts of time "encouraging" members to bear their testimony that they KNOW the church is true. And now this apologetic is saying that is not sound as if the members are mistaken in doing this? It's eerily similar to excuses about not teaching that Smith interpreted the plates by looking at a rock in his hat. It was the church who intentionally misled on that topic, not the members, yet official apologetics claim there was just a "misunderstanding" of what happened. The church then wonders why those who leave are pissed?

Bushman's excuses piss me off more than the actual misleading in the first place. This stuff is not helpful. In fact, it harms more than it helps.

[Utebiquitous]

Two Utes,
I don't see Bushman as an apologist - I don't think what he's suggesting is necessarily what the Church would suggest. I really like his suggestion that people of faith embrace the description of investigator. I also agree - from experience with a number of friends who have or are leaving the Church - with his dogmatism vs. dogmatism comment. I'm struck by the equal certainty these friends have about either a new-found faith or their new-found atheism.

I share your frustration with the how the church "encourages" members to share testimony. It's going to take some real courage and commitment of those believing and doubting willing to share those publicly for the tide to turn even just a little. It's also going to take some bishops stepping back from the brainwashing-like method of encouraging the "I know..." format to their young men and young women. I'm not against encouraging young people to express spiritual feelings. I think it can be a good thing but I'm for encouraging authenticity in that expression not imitation of the brethren, the stake presidency or the bishop.

[Two Utes]

Two Utes,
I don't see Bushman as an apologist - I don't think what he's suggesting is necessarily what the Church would suggest. I really like his suggestion that people of faith embrace the description of investigator. I also agree - from experience with a number of friends who have or are leaving the Church - with his dogmatism vs. dogmatism comment. I'm struck by the equal certainty these friends have about either a new-found faith or their new-found atheism.

I share your frustration with the how the church "encourages" members to share testimony. It's going to take some real courage and commitment of those believing and doubting willing to share those publicly for the tide to turn even just a little. It's also going to take some bishops stepping back from the brainwashing-like method of encouraging the "I know..." format to their young men and young women. I'm not against encouraging young people to express spiritual feelings. I think it can be a good thing but I'm for encouraging authenticity in that expression not imitation of the brethren, the stake presidency or the bishop.


My point is it is the church who purposely created the dogmatism. Now this guy is suggesting the the "members" are misguided in taking this approach, as if somehow the church isn't responsible.

[LA Ute]

Two Utes,
I don't see Bushman as an apologist - I don't think what he's suggesting is necessarily what the Church would suggest. I really like his suggestion that people of faith embrace the description of investigator. I also agree - from experience with a number of friends who have or are leaving the Church - with his dogmatism vs. dogmatism comment. I'm struck by the equal certainty these friends have about either a new-found faith or their new-found atheism.

I share your frustration with the how the church "encourages" members to share testimony. It's going to take some real courage and commitment of those believing and doubting willing to share those publicly for the tide to turn even just a little. It's also going to take some bishops stepping back from the brainwashing-like method of encouraging the "I know..." format to their young men and young women. I'm not against encouraging young people to express spiritual feelings. I think it can be a good thing but I'm for encouraging authenticity in that expression not imitation of the brethren, the stake presidency or the bishop.

Good points, 'biq. Two Utes, I urge you to listen to the podcast while you're driving or working out or walking your dog. Bushman is totally sympathetic to your views. I only quoted that one part because it was already transcribed somewhere. (I'm lazy, in other words.) Later, Bushman goes right into the who question if "I know" and makes a great case for letting people feel OK about simply saying "I believe." There's is more like that in the podcast.

[LA Ute]

I thought this was pretty good, and at least interesting:

How to Stay Mormon When You're Tired of Mormons (http://dinosaursarefun.blogspot.com/2015/05/how-to-stay-mormon-when-youre-tired-of.html)

[LA Ute]

I thought this was pretty good, and at least interesting:

How to Stay Mormon When You're Tired of Mormons (http://dinosaursarefun.blogspot.com/2015/05/how-to-stay-mormon-when-youre-tired-of.html)

An interesting response:

Some Thoughts on Discipleship and “Staying Mormon” (http://www.millennialstar.org/some-thoughts-on-discipleship-and-staying-mormon/v)

[DrumNFeather]

I thought this was pretty good, and at least interesting:

How to Stay Mormon When You're Tired of Mormons (http://dinosaursarefun.blogspot.com/2015/05/how-to-stay-mormon-when-youre-tired-of.html)

For me, the most valuable part of that post is the rock wall analogy.

[LA Ute]

For me, the most valuable part of that post is the rock wall analogy.

I liked that too.

[mUUser]

I thought this was pretty good, and at least interesting:

How to Stay Mormon When You're Tired of Mormons (http://dinosaursarefun.blogspot.com/2015/05/how-to-stay-mormon-when-youre-tired-of.html)


Passed this along to my 17 y/o daughter who struggles on 2 fronts: the weirdness of the church, and getting caught up in the "weeds" of the church. For example,a recent mutual activity was a treasure hunt at the mall to hunt down members dressed as early church prophets and pioneers. Thats just bizarre. On the second front, it's too easy to get sucked in to the oddball teachings of early leaders, or learn about some of the uncomfortable history of the church.

Fortunately, I'm not an all-in guy so am able to take a measured approach to what bothers her. Plus we have a bishop that has been in her shoes, is empathetic, and meets with her regularly. I try to get her to focus on the atonement and the plan of salvation, reminding her that history in general is a messy business, and the history of the church is no different. You try not to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

[LA Ute]

Passed this along to my 17 y/o daughter who struggles on 2 fronts: the weirdness of the church, and getting caught up in the "weeds" of the church. For example,a recent mutual activity was a treasure hunt at the mall to hunt down members dressed as early church prophets and pioneers. Thats just bizarre. On the second front, it's too easy to get sucked in to the oddball teachings of early leaders, or learn about some of the uncomfortable history of the church.

Fortunately, I'm not an all-in guy so am able to take a measured approach to what bothers her. Plus we have a bishop that has been in her shoes, is empathetic, and meets with her regularly. I try to get her to focus on the atonement and the plan of salvation, reminding her that history in general is a messy business, and the history of the church is no different. You try not to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

I like, respect, and support your approach.

For me it's really eye-opening to attend church in other countries -- or even in US locations distant from Utah. To me it is a reminder of how much cultural silliness goes on inside "Zion." The gospel is so much bigger than local cultural traditions. This is not a knock on Utah at all -- I love Utah. We just need to acknowledge our warts, that's all. Meanwhile, if we're serious about our faith, we have to love and be patient with the wart-bearers too. We're all just trying to figure life out and do our best.

[UTEopia]

"I know" vs "I believe" - I believe that there are some out there who truly know what they testify about. I believe that the majority of the rest of us hope and/or believe that what we testify about is true. Being great followers, however, we hear leaders saying "I know" and believe that we too must say I know in order to be faithful LDS. For myself, most things I hope and believe in. There are a few things, however, that I know. I have learned to the point of knowledge that in general, my life is better, our relationship with one another is better and our relationship with our children is better during those periods of time when my wife and I read the Book of Mormon and pray together than during those times when we are not. This does not mean that we consistently do these things. We go through periods of time when we lapse in our reading and praying until we are almost compelled to return to those two things to get our lives and our relationship back on course. Stubborn folks that we are, we recognize the need to start engaging in these practices again and still refuse to do them for weeks because we don't like being forced to do stuff.

[chrisrenrut]

"I know" vs "I believe" - I believe that there are some out there who truly know what they testify about. I believe that the majority of the rest of us hope and/or believe that what we testify about is true. Being great followers, however, we hear leaders saying "I know" and believe that we too must say I know in order to be faithful LDS. For myself, most things I hope and believe in. There are a few things, however, that I know. I have learned to the point of knowledge that in general, my life is better, our relationship with one another is better and our relationship with our children is better during those periods of time when my wife and I read the Book of Mormon and pray together than during those times when we are not. This does not mean that we consistently do these things. We go through periods of time when we lapse in our reading and praying until we are almost compelled to return to those two things to get our lives and our relationship back on course. Stubborn folks that we are, we recognize the need to start engaging in these practices again and still refuse to do them for weeks because we don't like being forced to do stuff.

Well said. Faith is one listed of the basic principles of the gospel, not knowledge. No one should be ashamed of saying they beleive or have faith instead of saying they know. I have said it from the pulpit myself, and there didn't seem to be any repurcussions. But something in the culture has warped this faith vs. knowledge dynamic.

[LA Ute]

"I know" vs "I believe" - I believe that there are some out there who truly know what they testify about. I believe that the majority of the rest of us hope and/or believe that what we testify about is true. Being great followers, however, we hear leaders saying "I know" and believe that we too must say I know in order to be faithful LDS. For myself, most things I hope and believe in. There are a few things, however, that I know. I have learned to the point of knowledge that in general, my life is better, our relationship with one another is better and our relationship with our children is better during those periods of time when my wife and I read the Book of Mormon and pray together than during those times when we are not. This does not mean that we consistently do these things. We go through periods of time when we lapse in our reading and praying until we are almost compelled to return to those two things to get our lives and our relationship back on course. Stubborn folks that we are, we recognize the need to start engaging in these practices again and still refuse to do them for weeks because we don't like being forced to do stuff.

Good thoughts. To me "'know" means different things in different contexts. When Jesus said "Ye shall know the truth, and the Truth shall make you free," or Moroni said "And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things," they're talking about spiritual knowledge. What they're talking about is really a level of belief that is close to certainty. We could probably do a better job of articulating that. I recognize that we are trying to express something that is ineffable, but I still think the "I know with every fiber of my being" talk is confusing to a lot of people.

[USS Utah]

Alma 32 is still the best explanation of how this works, imo. We plant a seed, we nourish it, and it grows and bears fruit, and we know, therefore, that it is a good seed.

[LA Ute]

Interesting piece by Peggy:

Memo to Mormons: Those essays have been approved by the faith’s highest leaders
http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/2667419-155/memo-to-mormons-those-essays-have

[LA Ute]

"Few American theologies are more complex than that of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but its flagship Brigham Young University teaches off-the-shelf, industry-standard evolution. That has been the case since 1931, when the church officially said: 'Leave biology, archaeology, and anthropology, no one of which has to do with the salvation of the souls of mankind, to scientific research.' … What the church requires is only belief 'that Adam was the first man of what we would call the human race,' says Gordon Hinckley, the church’s living prophet. Scientists can speculate on the rest, he says, recalling his own study of anthropology and geology: 'Studied all about it. Didn’t worry me then. Doesn’t worry me now.'”

Larry A. Witham, Where Darwin Meets the Bible (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 176-177.

[SeattleUte]

"Few American theologies are more complex than that of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but its flagship Brigham Young University teaches off-the-shelf, industry-standard evolution. That has been the case since 1931, when the church officially said: 'Leave biology, archaeology, and anthropology, no one of which has to do with the salvation of the souls of mankind, to scientific research.' … What the church requires is only belief 'that Adam was the first man of what we would call the human race,' says Gordon Hinckley, the church’s living prophet. Scientists can speculate on the rest, he says, recalling his own study of anthropology and geology: 'Studied all about it. Didn’t worry me then. Doesn’t worry me now.'”

Larry A. Witham, Where Darwin Meets the Bible (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 176-177.

Is this supposed to put doubting Thomases at ease? I really don't see how the rest of the quote follows from the premise that LDS theology is so complex. I'd draw the opposite conclusion. By the way, Oxford University Press puts out a fair amount of crap. Also, I disagree that science is about "speculation". On the contrary. But as a trial lawyer I'm sure you know that.

[LA Ute]

Is this supposed to put doubting Thomases at ease? I really don't see how the rest of the quote follows from the premise that LDS theology is so complex. I'd draw the opposite conclusion. By the way, Oxford University Press puts out a fair amount of crap. Also, I disagree that science is about "speculation". On the contrary. But as a trial lawyer I'm sure you know that.

I think you're exalting form over substance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ma'ake]

'Biq makes an essential point, if the goal is understanding each other.

There was a lot of fire and brimstone in LDS teachings, like telling kids they're going to Outer Darkness if they lose their testimony. This heavy sell caused a lot of fear and guilt, which was coupled with very strong "certainty" about other teachings and truth claims.

We now know there was a lot of detail left out of what was previously taught about church history, and a lot of the old teachings are no longer emphasized, such as the belief that the Catholic Church was the "great and abominable church".

Many disaffected Mormons believe they were taught a "whitewashed" version of LDS history and theology, but based on what former church historian Marlin Jensen said, I think that might be an overly harsh term. (Jensen said they didn't teach all the details that are now causing doubts because they didn't think it was essential.)

I think the LDS church has adjusted impressively to the avalanche of historical information that is troubling many, and Richard Bushman's book about Joseph Smith does a good job of covering thorny issues, but from a faith-promoting perspective.

My hunch is LDS youth today are getting a more positive version of Mormon theology, the fire and brimstone has gone out of style. The negative experience many of my generation absorbed is less likely today, though issues like homosexuality and women and the priesthood might color people's views of things in the future.

EDIT - I had to trim the previous epistle. That was excessive.

[mUUser]

Oh, the irony. Another one that reads like The Onion.....


http://www.sltrib.com/home/3032642-155/speaker-cancels-talk-at-byu-says


Seriously, lawyers, are students at BYU not protected from this under the Equal Protection Clause?

[NorthwestUteFan]

It would seem to be so much better if byu-P would simply allow students who leave the church to remain in good standing and pay the non-LDS tuition rate. Instead they can/will pull their ecclesiastical endorsement, place holds on records, and tell future schools that the student left byu for violations of the Honor Code. At most schools that means the student got caught cheating on a test or some other kind of academic malfeasance, when all that really happened was they changed their opinion on a specific religion.

It is especially egregious because a Baptist student can convert to Catholicism, then to Methodist, then Buddhist, then to Flying Spaghetti Monster, then to Ba'Hai, then ultimately to Hare Krishna after a transcendental experience at the Festival of Colors, and nobody at the school will care one bit.

But if any of those transitions are from LD-s to anything else, and the Honor Code office finds out about it, then the student is screwed. They will get treated about the same as a poster on Cougarstadium who dares to go through a faith transition.

[Rocker Ute]

It would seem to be so much better if byu-P would simply allow students who leave the church to remain in good standing and pay the non-LDS tuition rate. Instead they can/will pull their ecclesiastical endorsement, place holds on records, and tell future schools that the student left byu for violations of the Honor Code. At most schools that means the student got caught cheating on a test or some other kind of academic malfeasance, when all that really happened was they changed their opinion on a specific religion.

It is especially egregious because a Baptist student can convert to Catholicism, then to Methodist, then Buddhist, then to Flying Spaghetti Monster, then to Ba'Hai, then ultimately to Hare Krishna after a transcendental experience at the Festival of Colors, and nobody at the school will care one bit.

But if any of those transitions are from LD-s to anything else, and the Honor Code office finds out about it, then the student is screwed. They will get treated about the same as a poster on Cougarstadium who dares to go through a faith transition.


Should they have to back pay the discounted tuition the recieved too? ;)

[LA Ute]

I think that people who leave the church but want to stay at BYU are a little bit nuts. I also wonder if they want to stay just to cause trouble.

[Diehard Ute]

I think that people who leave the church but want to stay at BYU are a little bit nuts. I also wonder if they want to stay just to cause trouble.

Couldn't you say the same thing about anyone who isn't LDS? Why admit anyone who isn't LDS in the first place. Oh wait. Football. Never mind :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mUUser]

...... I also wonder if they want to stay just to cause trouble.

Presumptuous. May want to continue in the accounting program, for example. One of the best in the country, and opens doors to many good opportunities. Also, a strong alumni connection.

[Rocker Ute]

It's been a while since I ranted about BYU tuition. Thanks for reminding me.

So much about the LDS church is built around an idea of fairness. Tithing is 10% for everyone. Callings are rotated around and even voted on (at least symbolically). Ward budgets are not larger for wards in Federal Heights than they are for wards in Rose Park. Missions cost the same regardless of location.

Then there's BYU. We have everyone subsidizing college tuition for the few kids who are accepted. The kids who are rejected subsidize the tuition of the kids who are accepted. Then the general authorities come and tell them to be humble because they are a small group receiving special treatment, but all they hear is "you are smart and BYU-Idaho and UVU are for dumb people." The real kicker is that most of the accepted kids could afford to pay a real tuition. They don't even need the tuition assistance they are receiving. I would love to see BYU go to a need-based scholarship system like most other private schools. Let the rich kids pay $20,000 a year. Or subsidize every member in any college. Many foreign mormons have the PEF. Now that's a system that seems fair.

What about a PEF concept for discounted tuition at BYU? You pay back your discount over time.

[UtahsMrSports]

EDIT: Read the article, my "take" isn't really valid now. lol.

[UtahsMrSports]

There was a kid in my mission who either straight up left the church while out there, or very shortly afterwards (he was fairly new when I left so Ive heard several accounts). At any rate, he completed his two years and then became a youth pastor/advisor of some kind at a Christian church in Utah County almost immediately thereafter. Bronco knew, heck, the guy put it on his facebook page. Anyway, he completed his three years post mission playing for the cougars. This makes me wonder if they bent the rules for him.

[LA Ute]

Presumptuous. May want to continue in the accounting program, for example. One of the best in the country, and opens doors to many good opportunities. Also, a strong alumni connection.

I suppose you are right about many people.

[NorthwestUteFan]

What about a PEF concept for discounted tuition at BYU? You pay back your discount over time.

That could work, almost like a lease. Since students already pay 7% interest on the PEF loans it would be a moneymaker (especially since all of the principle plus the interest goes back into the church's coffers anyhow).

UMS, the existence of the Freebyu movement (comprising many hundreds of students and drawing on thousands of stories) only shows that your mission comp was a statistical outlier. Also, Football. (Bronco really cares about his players and is good at running interference for them, acting under the belief that his #1 goal is to turn his players into college graduates who are outstanding citizens)

LA, it isn't about causing mischief. That is an egregious assumption on your part. For many people who leave the church it is the single most emotionally painful experience of their lives and one which they would never wish on their worst enemy.
Also, If a student transfers as a Sophomore, no harm/no foul (beyond relocation hassles) and they can graduate on essentially the same timeline. But Jrs and Srs who transfer can delay graduation by up to a few years. That is a real loss of up to two years of salary for grads who go straight into the workforce.
For students who plan to go on to grad school anyway it is smart for them to just keep their heads down and move on after getting the diploma, hoping some do-gooder roommate doesn't spoil everything for them by dropping a dime to the HCO saying so-and-so 'has doubts and is an Apostate...'. The chances are good that the HCO will force them to do crazy things to remove the hold from the record (e.g. write 5-page essays in General Conference Talks - yes that happens) or force them to leave the school. It might simply depend on whether the student's Bishop is a vindictive type who would withdraw the EE.

Sancho, you nailed it precisely. Perhaps the biggest problem with the CES schools is the fact that the students do not bear the cost of education. If students all paid ~$25-35k tuition (typical mid-major private school ;) ), with stipends based on need, then the admissions policy would seem to be far more egalitarian. As it is now it seems the Widow's Mite from Ecuador goes to pay tuition for the rich kids from Alpine and Pepperwood who can afford to go anywhere. And it would severely cut down on the number of applicants, who view byu as extremely cheap and also a decent education. As it stands now byu is barely more expensive than our community colleges, and is significant cheaper than our state colleges (esp UW, which is now $20k/yr minus housing for in-state).

[Rocker Ute]

That could work, almost like a lease. Since students already pay 7% interest on the PEF loans it would be a moneymaker (especially since all of the principle plus the interest goes back into the church's coffers anyhow).

UMS, the existence of the Freebyu movement (comprising many hundreds of students and drawing on thousands of stories) only shows that your mission comp was a statistical outlier. Also, Football. (Bronco really cares about his players and is good at running interference for them, acting under the belief that his #1 goal is to turn his players into college graduates who are outstanding citizens)

LA, it isn't about causing mischief. That is an egregious assumption on your part. For many people who leave the church it is the single most emotionally painful experience of their lives and one which they would never wish on their worst enemy.
Also, If a student transfers as a Sophomore, no harm/no foul (beyond relocation hassles) and they can graduate on essentially the same timeline. But Jrs and Srs who transfer can delay graduation by up to a few years. That is a real loss of up to two years of salary for grads who go straight into the workforce.
For students who plan to go on to grad school anyway it is smart for them to just keep their heads down and move on after getting the diploma, hoping some do-gooder roommate doesn't spoil everything for them by dropping a dime to the HCO saying so-and-so 'has doubts and is an Apostate...'. The chances are good that the HCO will force them to do crazy things to remove the hold from the record (e.g. write 5-page essays in General Conference Talks - yes that happens) or force them to leave the school. It might simply depend on whether the student's Bishop is a vindictive type who would withdraw the EE.

Sancho, you nailed it precisely. Perhaps the biggest problem with the CES schools is the fact that the students do not bear the cost of education. If students all paid ~$25-35k tuition (typical mid-major private school ;) ), with stipends based on need, then the admissions policy would seem to be far more egalitarian. As it is now it seems the Widow's Mite from Ecuador goes to pay tuition for the rich kids from Alpine and Pepperwood who can afford to go anywhere. And it would severely cut down on the number of applicants, who view byu as extremely cheap and also a decent education. As it stands now byu is barely more expensive than our community colleges, and is significant cheaper than our state colleges (esp UW, which is now $20k/yr minus housing for in-state).

Where are you getting that 7% interest rate number for PEF? I happen to know and have helped mentor a few kids in that program and they aren't paying anywhere near that (interest rate covers inflation and currency rates basically) They also get almost a 40% reduction in their principle if they get good grades, pay on time, get a job in their vocation and a few other things. There are plenty of things to criticize in the church but that isn't one of them. I wish the government would set up a similar system for underprivileged kids.

Go to LDS business college and you have kids from all walks of life who are part of PEF.

On a side note, discounted tuition isn't just going to rich kids. It has been a major advantage for my niece who wouldn't be able to afford going to anything better than a community college without it. She is a top notch student and with some scholarships can now get an education from, as much as this pains me to say, a quality school.

BYU should fix this issue, or give someone a reasonable path of they do leave the faith, I agree. How exactly that is done (I was being only partly facetious about back pay on discounted tuition) I am not sure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rocker Ute]

She would be able to go under a need-based system like that used at most private schools (in fact, if BYU had not admitted her, she would have been able to choose from and afford any number of good schools with need-based financial aid).

I have no idea what the numbers are, but I'm pretty confidant in saying that the vast majority of BYU families could afford and would pay much more.

Edit: I suspect the real reason BYU keeps tuition so low, knowing that most families could/would pay more, is that it keeps them in the US News ranking game. Without the insanely low tuition, BYU falls out of the first tier, which is unacceptable.

Not knowing her situation or what was offered I'm not sure how you can make that assessment, but okay. I'm not sure why I am defending BYU here, as I've often made cracks about making sure none of my tithing goes to BYU, so I'll just shut up now.

[NorthwestUteFan]

7% is what my BIL paid when he emigrated, but maybe they have a sliding scale based on need. That is also the amount quoted by Goatnapper's BIL in his book (by Daymon Smith, written when he worked in the COB , as a study in organizational behavior and anthropology, not as an 'exposé' ). The PEF does a lot of good for a lot of people, but it is also a good investment vehicle. Contributions to the fund only build the principle, and only interest is loaned out. My parents give a lot of money to the fund and a few years ago were told that it can't accept new contributions for an undisclosed reason. I believe it is again growing now.

Again Sancho nails it. If the price of attendance was in line with similar competition their all-important USAToday Tier 1 ranking which could be devastating.

[LA Ute]

LA, it isn't about causing mischief. That is an egregious assumption on your part. For many people who leave the church it is the single most emotionally painful experience of their lives and one which they would never wish on their worst enemy.

"Mischief" was the wrong word, I admit. My concept was that many would want to hang around and agitate. That is OK on normal campuses but on a private religious one you don't get to do that. Honor Code, etc., blah blah blah. My view is, if you don't want to play by the rules you agreed to going in, move to a different playground.

[LA Ute]

Many of Your Assumptions About Mormons Are Untrue

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/8804912


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

Many of Your Assumptions About Mormons Are Untrue

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/8804912


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bump.

[LA Ute]

For those interested in the "Letter to a CES Director."

The CES Letter: A Closer Look (http://debunking-cesletter.com/)
http://debunking-cesletter.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Debunking-CES-Letter-10-9-15a.pdf

[LA Ute]

Quick Thoughts from Patrick Mason on Studying the Past and Presentism

http://www.plonialmonimormon.com/2015/12/quick-thoughts-from-patrick-mason-on.html

[SeattleUte]

Quick Thoughts from Patrick Mason on Studying the Past and Presentism

http://www.plonialmonimormon.com/2015/12/quick-thoughts-from-patrick-mason-on.html

I hate this newspeak like presentism and scientism that religious apologists make up.

[LA Ute]

I hate this newspeak like presentism and scientism that religious apologists make up.

You need to get out of your Seattle bubble more. Here's a piece by the President of the American Historical Association:

Against Presentism (https://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/may-2002/against-presentism)


And here's a piece from that right-wing rag, The New Republic:

The Trouble with Scientism (https://newrepublic.com/article/103086/scientism-humanities-knowledge-theory-everything-arts-science)

[SeattleUte]

You need to get out of your Seattle bubble more. Here's a piece by the President of the American Historical Association:

Against Presentism (https://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/may-2002/against-presentism)


And here's a piece from that right-wing rag, The New Republic:

The Trouble with Scientism (https://newrepublic.com/article/103086/scientism-humanities-knowledge-theory-everything-arts-science)

Neither of those pieces use those terms the way your religious apologists do. They are always eager to hijack the language of academia for their own bad faith purposes.

[LA Ute]

Neither of those pieces use those terms the way your religious apologists do. They are always eager to hijack the language of academia for their own bad faith purposes.

You don't even know who Patrick Mason is. That much is now clear.

[Rocker Ute]

You need to get out of your Seattle bubble more. Here's a piece by the President of the American Historical Association:

Against Presentism (https://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/may-2002/against-presentism)


And here's a piece from that right-wing rag, The New Republic:

The Trouble with Scientism (https://newrepublic.com/article/103086/scientism-humanities-knowledge-theory-everything-arts-science)

I've known Patrick (or Pat as our group of friends always called him to his mom's dismay) since 7th grade. His scholastic achievement is actually quite impressive, including a stint as a professor of religion at Notre Dame and a few other places. I was frankly a bit surprised that he ended up at Claremont. We've had a few interesting discussions in the past, but I've always appreciated his approach. I'm concerned that these quotes make him look like an apologist, when really my experience with him would indicate that what he is saying is take a scholarly approach and seek out the reputable sources and put in the time. Looks like SU has already labeled him as such though.

[LA Ute]

I've known Patrick (or Pat as our group of friends always called him to his mom's dismay) since 7th grade. His scholastic achievement is actually quite impressive, including a stint as a professor of religion at Notre Dame and a few other places. I was frankly a bit surprised that he ended up at Claremont. We've had a few interesting discussions in the past, but I've always appreciated his approach. I'm concerned that these quotes make him look like an apologist, when really my experience with him would indicate that what he is saying is take a scholarly approach and seek out the reputable sources and put in the time. Looks like SU has already labeled him as such though.

Well, he does insist on "respectable, evidence-driven, peer-reviewed scholarship." That makes his approach scholarly in my mind. The current debate is over whether "presentism" or "scientism" are "newspeak," made up by apologists, as SU asserts.

[Rocker Ute]

Is being an apologist an inherently bad thing? The validity of the argument should matter more than the label.

I guess I'm viewing the term 'apologist' as someone who will bend to any length to explain or justify a position. Pat is anything but that.

[Rocker Ute]

Ok, I'ver never really been sure of the definition. Is it someone who will do anything to justify a position, or is it just someone who defends something unpopular?


I think the latter is the technical definition, but I believe the term is now popularly used and in particular how SU is using it as a derisive term for someone like I described.

[SeattleUte]

You don't even know who Patrick Mason is. That much is now clear.

As of yesterday, when I looked him up on Wikipedia, I knew he was an American historian (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historian) who is the Howard W. Hunter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_W._Hunter) Chair in Mormon Studies at Claremont Graduate University (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claremont_Graduate_University) in Claremont, California (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claremont,_California).

[SeattleUte]

I guess I'm viewing the term 'apologist' as someone who will bend to any length to explain or justify a position. Pat is anything but that.

I think this is a little extreme but the term definitely connotes a bias or an agenda. I do think an apologist can believe that his ultimate objective promotes a greater good. See, e.g., my Whittingham posts. They are not always cynical or mercenaries.

[SeattleUte]

https://www.facebook.com/events/667227996662013/

So, Claremont obviously accepted a large donation to establish this HWH chair. There probably was a requirement upon which the donation was conditioned that a believing Mormon fill the HWH chair. I'm all for academic freedom so what the heck; so be it. But I wonder how many institutions would have made that bargain. (Undeniably, Claremont Graduate University is a phenomenal institution and in one of my favorite places on earth.)

[Rocker Ute]

I think this is a little extreme but the term definitely connotes a bias or an agenda. I do think an apologist can believe that his ultimate objective promotes a greater good. See, e.g., my Whittingham posts. They are not always cynical or mercenaries.

Pat and I have had a few talks about being a scholar and a historian regarding his own religious beliefs. I'm comfortable in saying that he likely isn't going to be employed by FAIR any time soon. You'd probably enjoy him SU, although he may run circles around you regarding this subject, no fault in that, it is his livelihood.

[LA Ute]

As of yesterday, when I looked him up on Wikipedia, I knew he was an American historian (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historian) who is the Howard W. Hunter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_W._Hunter) Chair in Mormon Studies at Claremont Graduate University (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claremont_Graduate_University) in Claremont, California (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claremont,_California).

Here's his official Claremont bio:

http://www.cgu.edu/pages/9241.asp

I do not think that (1) the terms "presentism" and "scientism" are newspeak or that (2) he is abusing those terms. You seem to have abandoned both positions.

[SeattleUte]

Here's his official Claremont bio:

http://www.cgu.edu/pages/9241.asp

I do not think that (1) the terms "presentism" and "scientism" are newspeak or that (2) he is abusing those terms. You seem to have abandoned both positions.

Why doesn't it say anywhere where he went to college? My guess is he went to BYU and he's ashamed of it.

[LA Ute]

Why doesn't it say anywhere where he went to college? My guess is he went to BYU and he's ashamed of it.

Well, who can fault him for that? ;)

[Rocker Ute]

Why doesn't it say anywhere where he went to college? My guess is he went to BYU and he's ashamed of it.

He did and I'm ashamed of it. He was on the Benson scholarship.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

Interesting interview with Patrick Mason about his new book.

http://bycommonconsent.com/2016/01/09/planted-an-interview-with-patrick-mason/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

On Not Being an Ex-Mormon (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/peculiarpeople/2016/02/on-not-being-an-ex-mormon/?ref_widget=popular&ref_blog=danpeterson&ref_post=with-god-as-my-witness-i-will-never-vote-for-donald-trump)

I recently had the opportunity to see Jeremy Runnells talk at a café off Main and Broadway in downtown SLC. He was there to talk about his pending church disciplinary court (if you don’t know what I’m talking about, go here (http://fox13now.com/2016/02/10/lds-author-says-he-faces-excommunication-after-writing-letter-to-a-ces-director/)), and though I’m glad I went, I have to admit it was a pretty awkward experience for me. From what I could tell, the crowd was overwhelmingly ex-Mormon — which is pretty understandable, given the circumstances — and I am still an active believing member. I don’t think I had ever fully appreciated the vibrancy of the existing ex-Mormon subculture until that event. The speakers (which included John Dehlin of Mormon Stories fame) seemed tapped into a world full of its own ideological consistency. There was a rhythm to the communication. A vocabulary so insular, I may finally know how my non-member friends felt attending all those YA dances I dragged them to. It was a world that I’m simply not a part of. . . .

[mUUser]

Had an interesting lunch with my 18 y/o daughter recently. She finally said out loud what I suspected for awhile......she's a non-believer. She teaches primary and goes to church with us every week, and is so sweet to us. Has never given us a moment of trouble. It must've been so hard for her to keep it inside, and then also finally tell me. Makes me feel sad that she felt like she needed to carry that burden herself.

[Diehard Ute]

Had an interesting lunch with my 18 y/o daughter recently. She finally said out loud what I suspected for awhile......she's a non-believer. She teaches primary and goes to church with us every week, and is so sweet to us. Has never given us a moment of trouble. It must've been so hard for her to keep it inside, and then also finally tell me. Makes me feel sad that she felt like she needed to carry that burden herself.

I'm not LDS. My wife's father is, and still active, it's been hard for her as someone who hasn't had any interest in being LDS to officially cut ties. Her dad is very supportive, but knowing that the LDS church was important to him has made it more difficult for her.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

Had an interesting lunch with my 18 y/o daughter recently. She finally said out loud what I suspected for awhile......she's a non-believer. She teaches primary and goes to church with us every week, and is so sweet to us. Has never given us a moment of trouble. It must've been so hard for her to keep it inside, and then also finally tell me. Makes me feel sad that she felt like she needed to carry that burden herself.

Freedom of conscience is supreme, to my mind at least. Many people of faith struggle with that where their children are concerned. Parents live their lives according to their beliefs and teach their children, but in the end the kids get to decide. Your daughter is fortunate to have you as her dad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

At about 21:30 here Elder Ballard makes some important remarks.

https://www.lds.org/broadcasts/watch/evening-with-a-general-authority/2016/02?lang=eng

Summary from Dan Peterson:


He said, flatly, that earlier Church Education System curriculum was not adequate to today’s challenges from critical materials on the Internet, etc., and that it left our young people unprepared. They are no longer “sheltered.”

He repeatedly spoke about “inoculating” students against difficulties and faith crises by candidly approaching such specific, controversial issues as polygamy and past statements and practices regarding race.
He said that we can no longer dismiss issues by telling students “don’t worry about it,” or avoid grappling with challenges by merely bearing testimony.
He exhorted teachers to know the Church’s new “Gospel Topics” essays “like the back of your hand.”
He acknowledged his own reliance upon experts when his personal knowledge was inadequate to a topic, and he encouraged teachers to make use of solid scholarship in their teaching, and to be ready for honest, faithful discussions on difficult topics.

Looks to me like part of a welcome sea change.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NorthwestUteFan]

There are some things that are fun for you, that just aren't fun (or uplifting/fulfilling) for others. They just aren't. It's just life.

[LA Ute]

There are some things that are fun for you, that just aren't fun (or uplifting/fulfilling) for others. They just aren't. It's just life.

1794

[NorthwestUteFan]

1794
e1UUAhZ3JzM

Sometimes (what feels like) darkness can show you the light.

[LA Ute]

Mormon seminary teacher responds to blogger’s 6 ideas for helping teens - See more at:

http://janariess.religionnews.com/2016/03/15/mormon-seminary-teacher-responds-bloggers-6-ideas-helping-teens/#sthash.xHEetxPO.dpuf

[Two Utes]

Mormon seminary teacher responds to blogger’s 6 ideas for helping teens - See more at:

http://janariess.religionnews.com/2016/03/15/mormon-seminary-teacher-responds-bloggers-6-ideas-helping-teens/#sthash.xHEetxPO.dpuf

I know Doug and his lovely wife very well as may several others on here

[LA Ute]

Mormon church’s PR boss discusses LDS history & LGBT, race, women’s issues (http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/3769761-155/mormon-churchs-pr-boss-discusses-lds?fullpage=1)


Interesting summary. Beginning paragraphs:


Since Mormonism's founding nearly two centuries ago, the faith's vocabulary and perspectives on women, gays, immigration and history have evolved — sometimes softened, sometimes enlarged — but its eternal doctrines have not.

That's the view of Michael Otterson, head of public affairs for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, who explored such shifting awareness and reasons for it in a 50-minute address Tuesday at a Utah Valley University symposium in Orem.

For example, he said, some members use the word "betrayal" to describe finding out about controversial aspects of the faith's founding in upstate New York in 1830....

[NorthwestUteFan]

Wasn't Kate Kelly supposed to be on some kind of humanitarian lawyer mission in Africa?
Her (now ex-) husband is doing field research for his PhD over there. She accompanied him.

[LA Ute]

Wasn't Kate Kelly supposed to be on some kind of humanitarian lawyer mission in Africa?

I don't know. She described herself as an international human rights lawyer. <shrug>


"It's men in shorts." -- Rick Majerus

[mpfunk]

I don't know. She described herself as an international human rights lawyer. <shrug>


"It's men in shorts." -- Rick Majerus
She is now back in Utah working for Planned Parenthood.

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk

[UtahsMrSports]

I don't know. She described herself as an international human rights lawyer. <shrug>


"It's men in shorts." -- Rick Majerus

What is an international human rights lawyer?

[LA Ute]

What is an international human rights lawyer?

Beats me. If what she says here is true, her self-description as such a lawyer seems legit:

http://www.katekellyesq.com/

[LA Ute]

"The Courage of Our Convictions: Embracing Mormonism in a Secular Age"

Interesting talk by Patrick Mason:

http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2016-fairmormon-conference/courage-convictions

Excerpt:

"Since Planted was published, I’ve received lots of e-mails from people who are reconsidering, renegotiating, or otherwise transitioning in their faith or membership in the church, as well as from concerned family members of those who are struggling.

"By show of hands, how many of you personally know someone—a friend, a family member, someone in your ward—who has recently not just slipped into inactivity, but proactively left the church over historical, doctrinal, or contemporary issues?

"It’s even more clear to me now than when I wrote the book that there is a lot of confusion out there, and a lot of very real pain, felt by sincere people who are trying to figure it all out. Many of the people I’ve heard from haven’t yet left, and are holding on with their fingertips, trying to find a way to stay in the church with intellectual, spiritual, and emotional integrity. But many others have already left, and no amount of reclamation work is going to bring them back, because their feelings are so deep, and often their paradigms have shifted so profoundly...."

[concerned]

I read a stat the other day (dont remember where, but it sounded authoritative), that 64% of persons born LDS are practicing adults. that is down from about 75% a generation or so ago, and is the primary reason the mission age was lowered.

[Two Utes]

"The Courage of Our Convictions: Embracing Mormonism in a Secular Age"

Interesting talk by Patrick Mason:

http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2016-fairmormon-conference/courage-convictions

Excerpt:

"Since Planted was published, I’ve received lots of e-mails from people who are reconsidering, renegotiating, or otherwise transitioning in their faith or membership in the church, as well as from concerned family members of those who are struggling.

"By show of hands, how many of you personally know someone—a friend, a family member, someone in your ward—who has recently not just slipped into inactivity, but proactively left the church over historical, doctrinal, or contemporary issues?

"It’s even more clear to me now than when I wrote the book that there is a lot of confusion out there, and a lot of very real pain, felt by sincere people who are trying to figure it all out. Many of the people I’ve heard from haven’t yet left, and are holding on with their fingertips, trying to find a way to stay in the church with intellectual, spiritual, and emotional integrity. But many others have already left, and no amount of reclamation work is going to bring them back, because their feelings are so deep, and often their paradigms have shifted so profoundly...."


One need only look around this town lately. The demographics have severely shifted over the past ten years. Yet statistics show there is not a huge influx of out of towners moving in (except those who go to BYU and folks like LA Ute).

[sancho]

One need only look around this town lately. The demographics have severely shifted over the past ten years. Yet statistics show there is not a huge influx of out of towners moving in (except those who go to BYU and folks like LA Ute).

SLC sure has changed. It was pretty sad when they tore down the chapel I grew up in. It's not all people leaving the church, though. When I think of the people my age I used to go to church with, almost all of them live out of state now. There are relatively few professions now that don't end up shuffling you around the country. Those of my old friends who do still live in Utah can't afford to live in the parts of SLC they would want to live in.

[LA Ute]

One need only look around this town lately. The demographics have severely shifted over the past ten years. Yet statistics show there is not a huge influx of out of towners moving in (except those who go to BYU and folks like LA Ute).

I left in 1982. Spending a lot of time there now, I can say it sure ain't my dad's SLC anymore!

[concerned]

I left in 1982. Spending a lot of time there now, I can say it sure ain't my dad's SLC anymore!



As Sancho said, I think a lot of it has to do with real estate. In our neighborhoods (basically East and Highland High areas, east of 13th east), the house sizes and prices don't allow for larger families so much. Our immediate neighborhood (Uintah elementary) is well less than half LDS, exactly the opposite of my childhood too. Often the wards combine youth activities for the stake because there are not enough in a single ward. Wards have been merged, with building overcapacity that are now used as regional singles wards.

[Two Utes]

As Sancho said, I think a lot of it has to do with real estate. In our neighborhoods (basically East and Highland High areas, east of 13th east), the house sizes and prices don't allow for larger families so much. Our immediate neighborhood (Uintah elementary) is well less than half LDS, exactly the opposite of my childhood too. Often the wards combine youth activities for the stake because there are not enough in a single ward. Wards have been merged, with building overcapacity that are now used as regional singles wards.

I go out quite a but for dinner with my wife. Last night we went out. It's actually strange how full the restaurants are on a Tuesday night in Salt Lake City. 10 or 20 years ago, there weren't a lot of restaurants ( way less than half) and they were half-empty except on weekends. And we NEVER deal with crying babies or a bunch of children at any restaurant (although we are starting to have to deal with the dogs--don't get me started on dog lovers).

But I have several friends from high school who don't live far from me. I live in one of the few remaining neighborhoods in Salt Lake that is majority Mormon. My neighbor joked that they should call our neighborhood the Garment District.

[SeattleUte]

I go out quite a but for dinner with my wife. Last night we went out. It's actually strange how full the restaurants are on a Tuesday night in Salt Lake City. 10 or 20 years ago, there weren't a lot of restaurants ( way less than half) and they were half-empty except on weekends. And we NEVER deal with crying babies or a bunch of children at any restaurant (although we are starting to have to deal with the dogs--don't get me started on dog lovers).

Are there any good restaurants in SLC yet?

[LA Ute]

As Sancho said, I think a lot of it has to do with real estate. In our neighborhoods (basically East and Highland High areas, east of 13th east), the house sizes and prices don't allow for larger families so much. Our immediate neighborhood (Uintah elementary) is well less than half LDS, exactly the opposite of my childhood too. Often the wards combine youth activities for the stake because there are not enough in a single ward. Wards have been merged, with building overcapacity that are now used as regional singles wards.

The ward we attend when we are in town is like that - on the upper east end of the Avenues. They combine Primary and youth meetings and activities with another ward. When they do stake-level youth activities they combine with another stake. It's just the reality now.

[Two Utes]

Are there any good restaurants in SLC yet?

Ok, restaurant snob. Yes there are. But, there isn't a restaurant in the Utah or Washington that is good enough to wait more than 40 minutes for a seat.

[sancho]

As Sancho said, I think a lot of it has to do with real estate. In our neighborhoods (basically East and Highland High areas, east of 13th east), the house sizes and prices don't allow for larger families so much.

It's also tough for one-income families.

My parents block is down to two LDS families. The rest are almost all lawyer/doctor power couples who tore down existing homes to build ugly mcmansions. It's a great block for my aging parents. Doctors and surgeons are always easy to find.

[sancho]

The ward we attend when we are in town is like that - on the upper east end of the Avenues.

My childhood chapel was on 9th avenue and K street. I remember an old Dutch sister taking me by the hand one day and leading me to a particular brick to point out that she laid that brick herself. Those avenues wards were full of elderly couples. When they died in the 90s, the wards and stakes started consolidating like crazy.

The avenues were a great place to grow up.

[tooblue]

I go out quite a but for dinner with my wife. Last night we went out. It's actually strange how full the restaurants are on a Tuesday night in Salt Lake City. 10 or 20 years ago, there weren't a lot of restaurants ( way less than half) and they were half-empty except on weekends. And we NEVER deal with crying babies or a bunch of children at any restaurant (although we are starting to have to deal with the dogs--don't get me started on dog lovers).

But I have several friends from high school who don't live far from me. I live in one of the few remaining neighborhoods in Salt Lake that is majority Mormon. My neighbor joked that they should call our neighborhood the Garment District.

It's an American phenomenon. Americans are eating out more. As someone who doesn't live in the states and has spent a lot of time in Europe over the past several years, eating out in America is cheap, and the variety of choice is incredible from fast-food, greasy spoon options, to lunch and dinner chains, to offerings for your favourite gourmet.

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2015/04/15/americans-spend-more-on-dining-out-than-groceries-for-first-time-ever/
http://mentalfloss.com/article/84712/new-app-lets-you-buy-leftover-restaurant-food-discount
http://www.forbes.com/sites/neilhowe/2014/07/02/millennials-struggle-to-pass-life-skills-101/#a23f44067776

[LA Ute]

Sometimes when I am in certain parts of Salt Lake I feel like I am in Boulder or Berkeley. Nothing wrong with that -- I like it. But it is different from what I knew as a native Salt Laker.

[mUUser]

I left in 1982. Spending a lot of time there now, I can say it sure ain't my dad's SLC anymore!


We moved back a couple of weeks ago after almost 25 years away. Agree that things are different. Other than the rude drivers, I think I prefer it now....just a lot more to do, and a lot more diversity. Having said that, I haven't yet experienced the rampant anti-LDS fan base that Utah has become.....so I'm told.....guess I'll find out for myself this season.

[LA Ute]

We moved back a couple of weeks ago after almost 25 years away. Agree that things are different. Other than the rude drivers, I think I prefer it now....just a lot more to do, and a lot more diversity. Having said that, I haven't yet experienced the rampant anti-LDS fan base that Utah has become.....so I'm told.....guess I'll find out for myself this season.

I like SLC a lot now and enjoy being there. We'll probably retire there someday.

[SeattleUte]

We moved back a couple of weeks ago after almost 25 years away. Agree that things are different. Other than the rude drivers, I think I prefer it now....just a lot more to do, and a lot more diversity. Having said that, I haven't yet experienced the rampant anti-LDS fan base that Utah has become.....so I'm told.....guess I'll find out for myself this season.

Oh brother. Maybe the LD S church should reflect about why.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ma'ake]

Many good LDS feel the world is deviating away from them and their values. It's a little less friendly out there. As with post Prop-8, some of the concern is absolutely real.

Now we have BYU itself under the microscope / "being discriminated against" on the LGBT letter, regarding potential Big-12 admission.

Hordes of young Mormons hear the conventional message "the world is turning away, we must be strong", they can easily check out this change for themselves and see if it actually represents the wicked turning their backs on God, ala before-the-flood, and they're concluding "I just don't see it".

And they edge away...

[sancho]

and they're concluding "I just don't see it".


Or sometimes, "I just don't care."

[Ma'ake]

Or sometimes, "I just don't care."

True.

Religions/societies have always struggled, when older generations try to convey the importance of tradition/belief/ritual to youngsters.

When you're a teenager and in your 20s, you're invincible, warnings bounce off.

Kids: "I don't care / I don't see it / it's a new world, daddio."

Traditionalists: "Make no mistake - gay marriage is a threat to traditional marriage."

Kids: "Go back to bed, grandpa"

[NorthwestUteFan]

Traditionalists: "Make no mistake - gay marriage is a threat to traditional marriage."

Kids: "Go back to bed, grandpa"

In this case the Kids also think about the gay friends they have and say, "Grandpa certainly isn't being very Christian...", and take a peek behind the curtain.

Often they will see the problems in the belief structure and will choose to be somewhat heterodox with the belief system. In many religions this is perfectly acceptable. In others it is unacceptable and can lead to judgement/punishment/shunning.

The difference between the two may down to whether we base or spirituality on our own personal experiences (commune with 'the divine', however we interpret that to be), or do we base our spirituality on what somebody else tells us?

[Rocker Ute]

Or sometimes, "I just don't care."

This is probably more accurate meaning the kids edging away aren't leaving because they don't see the shift it is because they don't care or want to be part of what is now considered normal society.

Really the only thing I see 'good LDS kids' disagreeing with their church about is the LGBT thing. Most of the other standards they get.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

Traditionalists: "Make no mistake - gay marriage is a threat to traditional marriage."

As the board defender of the Faith, I will simply try to bring some proportion back to the discussion here. The trope you've quoted above is a bit of a strawman. That was never a talking point during the Proposition 8 battle, for example. (I don't think it is now, either.) It was raised by opponents to Prop 8 in the sense of, "How is my gay marriage jeopardizing your traditional marriage?" Like all strawmen, it is pretty easy to knock down.


In this case the Kids also think about the gay friends they have and say, "Grandpa certainly isn't being very Christian...", and take a peek behind the curtain.

I think a lot of kids say that, but you know that there is a pretty well-developed response to that concern, and the discussion might begin with that very simple sentiment, but it certainly should not end there.

[LA Ute]

This podcast interview is quite interesting if you can make the time to listen to it:

http://www.fairblog.org/2013/11/06/fairmormon-frameworks-9-richard-bushman-helping-those-in-doubt/

I think skeptics, doubters, critics and believers alike will find something here.

Bump.

[mpfunk]

Are there any good restaurants in SLC yet?
Yes

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

A new book that's pretty good (I have a copy myself):

Laura Harris Hales
A Reason for Faith: Navigating LDS Doctrine and Church History

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/review/B01DV864WK/R23COHM68KJ4OX/ref=cm_cr_dp_mb_rvw_3?ie=UTF8&cursor=3

[Ma'ake]

Often they will see the problems in the belief structure and will choose to be somewhat heterodox with the belief system. In many religions this is perfectly acceptable. In others it is unacceptable and can lead to judgement/punishment/shunning.

The difference between the two may down to whether we base or spirituality on our own personal experiences (commune with 'the divine', however we interpret that to be), or do we base our spirituality on what somebody else tells us?

That's another thing that has changed - Mormons are far less orthodox about things, at least compared to what I remember. Part of it was growing up in the 60s and 70s, but the McConkie book was pretty much scripture. The Catholics were the great and abominable church, all the other Christians were confused - at best - and so on.

When McConkie announced in 1978 "forget what I or anyone else has written on this topic - it is inaccurate now", that undermined a common belief that much of what came out of the mouths of Bishops - or certainly Stake Presidents and above - was sort of real time communication from God, or Jesus, or the HG.

(Back when I used to argue this stuff more vigorously, I posed the question on some other forum how God could call a pedophile to be Scoutmaster, and got a boardmail response from somebody who claimed they were in the Bishopric, and admitted sometimes they felt inspired, but a lot of time they were just trying to do the best job they could. To me, that was a great answer that started to soften my own heart about the motivations of TBMs, and other religionists.)

By the time BY was thrown under the bus with the recent essay trying to answer the race question once and for all, those folks - who hadn't concluded that large amounts of what has been taught could be simple fabrication - have largely taken a much more nuanced view about the difference between material that is the result of inspiration, and the Moses-type of dictation scenario.

I think this is a good thing, for the individuals involved, and for the church.

.38 Special's "Hold On Loosely" approach is a lot wiser, in the days of everything online and social changes at light speed.

[Ma'ake]

That was never a talking point during the Proposition 8 battle, for example. (I don't think it is now, either.) It was raised by opponents to Prop 8 in the sense of, "How is my gay marriage jeopardizing your traditional marriage?" Like all strawmen, it is pretty easy to knock down.

As the best kind of California Republican, educated at the U, I'll take your word for how the Prop 8 issue transpired. I read a lot about it, I wasn't there, and I remain very uncomfortable with the backlash, having seen some of my neighbors in the online database of Prop 8 donors.

But I think there was discussion for how gay marriage would diminish regular marriage - admittedly not predictions of specific marriages that would dissolve, but how marriage was essentially the vehicle for society to protect and nurture the best model for procreation and child rearing. Here's a Catholic piece on why traditional marriage was justifiably a protected exception to a variety of other types of marriage, models that would inherently undermine the sanctity of the traditional model:

http://americamagazine.org/issue/487/article/threat-same-sex-marriage

On your role of defender of "the Faith", we're loosely kindred. One of my friends from college who had tried out numerous churches and decided religion was BS has gone through a crisis of faith, or rather, non-faith. When you get past the half-century mark, have a health scare or two, lose siblings / friends... who *doesn't* start to crap bricks on the essential question of life?

I have my own faith, and sometimes "fellowship" doubters / atheists / agnostics on why it's not irrational to think there actually *could* be more to this thing than just what we know, regardless of what crazy experiences you've had with religion, and the religious. We just don't know / can't know everything, and I think there are reasons to be optimistic... beside optimism being better for you, in general.

I don't think my friend is ready to go door-to-door with my handful of thoughts - lol - but it was nice to see a bit of relief and some "hope" return to their eyes.

[Rocker Ute]

I don't think my friend is ready to go door-to-door with my handful of thoughts - lol - but it was nice to see a bit of relief and some "hope" return to their eyes.

Plus that 'dead behind the eyes' look of atheists gets pretty depressing in grocery store lines. ;)



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

As the best kind of California Republican, educated at the U, I'll take your word for how the Prop 8 issue transpired. I read a lot about it, I wasn't there, and I remain very uncomfortable with the backlash, having seen some of my neighbors in the online database of Prop 8 donors.

But I think there was discussion for how gay marriage would diminish regular marriage - admittedly not predictions of specific marriages that would dissolve, but how marriage was essentially the vehicle for society to protect and nurture the best model for procreation and child rearing. Here's a Catholic piece on why traditional marriage was justifiably a protected exception to a variety of other types of marriage, models that would inherently undermine the sanctity of the traditional model:

http://americamagazine.org/issue/487/article/threat-same-sex-marriage

On your role of defender of "the Faith", we're loosely kindred. One of my friends from college who had tried out numerous churches and decided religion was BS has gone through a crisis of faith, or rather, non-faith. When you get past the half-century mark, have a health scare or two, lose siblings / friends... who *doesn't* start to crap bricks on the essential question of life?

I have my own faith, and sometimes "fellowship" doubters / atheists / agnostics on why it's not irrational to think there actually *could* be more to this thing than just what we know, regardless of what crazy experiences you've had with religion, and the religious. We just don't know / can't know everything, and I think there are reasons to be optimistic... beside optimism being better for you, in general.

I don't think my friend is ready to go door-to-door with my handful of thoughts - lol - but it was nice to see a bit of relief and some "hope" return to their eyes.

You're a good man, Ma'ake. I agree that we Mormons have mellowed out (Grown? Evolved? Reformed, sorta kinda?) over the last 30 + years. Most of that, IMO, comes from growing into a truly worldwide, multi-ethnic, multi-cultural church. We can't help but become more open and less provincial. As for Prop 8, it was a wild and woolly time. Ballot initiatives are always wild battles, and that one was on steroids. I am glad it is fading farther and farther into the past.

[Ma'ake]

Plus that 'dead behind the eyes' look of atheists gets pretty depressing in grocery store lines. ;)


lol

Listening to the liberal millennials I work with, a whole lot of disillusionment / disenfranchisement with "the system", hence Bernie Sanders' rock star status at This is the Place monument.

Wait... "the Bern" as the 2016 version of Brigham Young?

My minds eye... ouch, ouch, ouch.

[Diehard Ute]

lol

Listening to the liberal millennials I work with, a whole lot of disillusionment / disenfranchisement with "the system", hence Bernie Sanders' rock star status at This is the Place monument.

Wait... "the Bern" as the 2016 version of Brigham Young?

My minds eye... ouch, ouch, ouch.

Well after reading this.....

http://www.sltrib.com/entertainment/4248909-155/scott-d-pierce-millennials-offended-by


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Two Utes]

A new book that's pretty good (I have a copy myself):

Laura Harris Hales
A Reason for Faith: Navigating LDS Doctrine and Church History

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/review/B01DV864WK/R23COHM68KJ4OX/ref=cm_cr_dp_mb_rvw_3?ie=UTF8&cursor=3

I deposed this woman once. I will not be reading this book.

[Two Utes]

Well after reading this.....

http://www.sltrib.com/entertainment/4248909-155/scott-d-pierce-millennials-offended-by


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It is shocking how "outwardly" millenials talk about "acceptance" and "tolerance" of what others bring to the table, yet they are so fucking easily offended.

I try not to be so frustrated by the younger generation for fear I am just acting like parents of the baby boomer generation. But there is clealry a generation gap as big as the generation gap of that time and both generation gaps have to do a lot with me me me.

[Diehard Ute]

It is shocking how "outwardly" millenials talk about "acceptance" and "tolerance" of what others bring to the table, yet they are so fucking easily offended.

I try not to be so frustrated by the younger generation for fear I am just acting like parents of the baby boomer generation. But there is clealry a generation gap as big as the generation gap of that time and both generation gaps have to do a lot with me me me.

Yeah I don't get it and I've given up trying.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

This is from Jana Reiss's "Flunking Sainthood" blog. Some of you will know of her. She is a respected progmo.

What one bishop offers Mormons who don’t ‘know’ the church is true
http://religionnews.com/2016/09/09/what-one-bishop-offers-mormons-who-dont-know-the-church-is-true/#

[Ma'ake]

This is from Jana Reiss's "Flunking Sainthood" blog. Some of you will know of her. She is a respected progmo.
What one bishop offers Mormons who don’t ‘know’ the church is true


This guy sounds pretty wise. The common prescription for dealing with doubting Mormons is often unintentionally offensive, itself.

"It must have been something that you did"

"Read scripture and pray more"

"Beware the Adversary works through your friends"

I fell away in the late 70s, the common prescription helped push me toward my own future - and so I'm grateful for the nudge, in hindsight. It actually helped me, though I'm sure not in a way good Mormons would appreciate.

To the extent this guy helps current folks who are struggling, I say it's a good thing, because that's a horrible predicament to be in, and there is far more struggling with issues of faith than many people like to acknowledge. It seems to be a central part of life. I counsel friends who doubt the existence of God because of all the bad things that happen to good people. I tell them God is not Santa Claus on steroids, and life is difficult, but there's still reason to be hopeful.

Even Mother - err - *Saint Theresa* had her moments of doubt.

[Brian]

I can understand how someone would want to hear something different. "Hey, I'm not one of the sheep. My questions are real. Don't just give me the same line you give everyone else."

If I were to recommend continued study of the Book of Mormon to someone, it would be sincere advice because the Book of Mormon is a source of at least semi-regular insight and strength for me. This bishop is wise in that he recognizes what some people do and don't want to hear. But the "read and pray" advice can be very heartfelt. People should never take offense at heartfelt advice, even if they don't like it.

I think I would also remind people that, in addition to logic and evidence, truth can come from beauty, spirituality, and experience.

Here Brian, this one's for you:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0OdNY8Aybw

:clap:

Very cool clip. Hadn't seen that one. Thanks.

[LA Ute]

Interesting article by Peggy:

Mass exodus from Mormonism? LDS stats paint a different picture (http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/4535962-155/mass-exodus-from-mormonism-lds-stats)

[LA Ute]

Mormons with doubts shouldn't give up faith without 'intellectual and spiritual kicking and screaming'

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865668355/Mormons-with-doubts-shouldnt-give-up-faith-without-intellectual-and-spiritual-kicking-and.html

Pretty interesting set of perspectives. I could have done without some of the speakers' statements, like "'What I have been able to understand is why people stay,' she said. She boiled it down to "character." Ouch. But overall pretty good.

[LA Ute]

A response to the conference linked in my last post:

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/4660975-155/op-ed-those-who-leave-church-deserve

I think she makes some excellent points and I noticed the same wince-inducing statements she did.

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/4660975-155/op-ed-those-who-leave-church-deserve


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mUUser]

Interesting article by Peggy:

Mass exodus from Mormonism? LDS stats paint a different picture (http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/4535962-155/mass-exodus-from-mormonism-lds-stats)



Yet another young family we know has left the church recently, at least temporarily. A former Ute whose name everyone on this board would recognize. Returned missionary. Such a great young family.

I don't care what the "stats" say, my eyes and my experience tell me that millennials and gen-x'ers are leaving the church in droves, my daughter included. Today's church just doesn't resonate with far too many young families. I could write a book on what I believe the major problems are, but, it starts at the top. There needs to be a seismic paradigm shift that trickles down to the general membership. For example, the bungling of Prop 8 was a killer in terms of instilling confidence in leadership for these two generations.

[Scorcho]

Yet another young family we know has left the church recently, at least temporarily. A former Ute whose name everyone on this board would recognize. Returned missionary. Such a great young family.

I don't care what the "stats" say, my eyes and my experience tell me that millennials and gen-x'ers are leaving the church in droves, my daughter included. Today's church just doesn't resonate with far too many young families. I could write a book on what I believe the major problems are, but, it starts at the top. There needs to be a seismic paradigm shift that trickles down to the general membership. For example, the bungling of Prop 8 was a killer in terms of instilling confidence in leadership for these two generations.

I think there was a time when young people left the LDS Church that they simply became less/non-active, but it seems that more and more are asking that their names be removed. It definitely seems more black and white these days. I have a daughter who has done the same as have many of her friends. Its a bummer for me and my wife personally, but she needs to make her own choices.

On a related note, I hope this lady has an understanding bishop and stake president.

https://www.ksl.com/?sid=45603520&nid=148

[Rocker Ute]

Hard to say on this really. For my area there were about 9 people who withdrew their names when the church announced the policy on gays. All but three of them hadn't darkened the door of the church in decades. One of the three who left has come back.

My neighborhood has a number of duplexes and so we have lots of transition with newlyweds couples. Truthfully I've been impressed with how strong in their faith they seem to be.

So my little bit of anecdotal info would indicate that there hasn't been a lot of drop off. Really I think people have been a lot more open about their doubts and people have also been more accepting of them too. There are always turkeys but that is what I've observed.

A woman in my ward gave a wonderful talk on Sunday about respect for other beliefs and non-beliefs. She talked about her son who stopped going and the sting but also talked about her conversion from Catholicism and her respect for that and the sting her parents must have felt too. It was a very nice "big tent" approach.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

On a related note, I hope this lady has an understanding bishop and stake president.

https://www.ksl.com/?sid=45603520&nid=148

She shouldn't have a problem. Cannabinoids are different from marijuana, as I understand them. They aren't the part that has the psychoactive effect.

[LA Ute]

So my little bit of anecdotal info would indicate that there hasn't been a lot of drop off. Really I think people have been a lot more open about their doubts and people have also been more accepting of them too. There are always turkeys but that is what I've observed.

THat's been my sense too, FWIW. Overall I think there's a healthy willingness -- both on the church leadership's side and that of those with doubts -- to openly admit and discuss doubts and faith crises.

[Diehard Ute]

She shouldn't have a problem. Cannabinoids are different from marijuana, as I understand them. They aren't the part that has the psychoactive effect.

There's a lot more to her than what's in that article.

She's said in past interviews that she has to have THC and Cannabinoids, but it's the THC that helps her most

She plead guilty in Utah to class A misdemeanor possession in a restricted zone

She was originally charged with felony child endangerment after witnesses called police reporting she was using in a car with a child present

She's denied her child was in the car but admitted using in the car. She's accused police of changing witness statements in some interviews




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NorthwestUteFan]

Jeez. Just legalize it already.

[LA Ute]

Jeez. Just legalize it already.

2234

[UTEopia]

A friend of mine who lives in Utah who was in the Bishopric at the time he was receiving treatment for testicular cancer used marijuana to help him get through the chemo with the knowledge and support of his Stake President.

[Scorcho]

it just seems twisted that until recently opiods were never questioned but cannabis was/is still taboo. What were we thinking?

[LA Ute]

THat's been my sense too, FWIW. Overall I think there's a healthy willingness -- both on the church leadership's side and that of those with doubts -- to openly admit and discuss doubts and faith crises.

Here's an example I was thinking about when i wrote the above. Not too long ago a publication catering to the mainstream LDS population would never have published something like this:

https://www.facebook.com/LDSLiving/videos/1533509466670830/

[Dwight Schr-Ute]

it just seems twisted that until recently opiods were never questioned but cannabis was/is still taboo. What were we thinking?

This is how I feel. My wife suffers from anxiety. Ever since it's become legal here in Nevada, I've told her that I'd rather her use marijuana for her anxiety than Xanax.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[concerned]

Baby steps here. Start with coffee and the WoW. Its a lot healthier than Coke and Dr. Pepper.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/10/health/coffee-leads-to-longer-life-studies-reaffirm/index.html


http://www.healthline.com/nutrition/top-13-evidence-based-health-benefits-of-coffee

[UtahsMrSports]

Here's an example I was thinking about when i wrote the above. Not too long ago a publication catering to the mainstream LDS population would never have published something like this:

https://www.facebook.com/LDSLiving/videos/1533509466670830/

Add this to the Church's recent enthusiastic endorsement for the 'Love Loud' festival and their statement condemning Ayla the Purposeful Wife and her ilk, and a person has to acknowledge that the church is trying to take steps toward being more inclusive.

I dont understand the Nov 2015 policy and hope that one day its removed or significantly altered, but I do think they are trying. And I think that is a great thing.

[Scorcho]

https://www.ksl.com/?sid=45621556&nid=148&title=no-more-pot-for-pets-utah-prohibits-hemp-in-pet-food

:shocker:

We have a Corgi/Healer with anxiety issues, and once again the State of Utah is stepping in to save us from ourselves.

[Rocker Ute]

https://www.ksl.com/?sid=45621556&nid=148&title=no-more-pot-for-pets-utah-prohibits-hemp-in-pet-food

:shocker:

We have a Corgi/Healer with anxiety issues, and once again the State of Utah is stepping in to save us from ourselves.

My dog is an atheist, if it becomes legal in Utah he can have all the pot he wants.

[LA Ute]

America’s Invisible Pot Addicts

More and more Americans are reporting near-constant cannabis use, as legalization forges ahead.

The first three paragraphs:


The proliferation of retail boutiques in California did not really bother him, Evan told me, but the billboards did. Advertisements for delivery, advertisements promoting the substance for relaxation, for fun, for health. “Shop. It’s legal.” “Hello marijuana, goodbye hangover.” “It’s not a trigger,” he told me. “But it is in your face.”

When we spoke, he had been sober for a hard-fought seven weeks: seven weeks of sleepless nights, intermittent nausea, irritability, trouble focusing, and psychological turmoil. There were upsides, he said, in terms of reduced mental fog, a fatter wallet, and a growing sense of confidence that he could quit. “I don’t think it’s a ‘can’ as much as a ‘must,’” he said.

Evan, who asked that his full name not be used for fear of professional repercussions, has a self-described cannabis-use disorder. If not necessarily because of legalization, but alongside legalization, such problems are becoming more common: The share of adults with one has doubled (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26502112) since the early aughts, as the share of cannabis users who consume it daily or near-daily has jumped nearly 50 percent (https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/NSDUH-FFR1-2016/NSDUH-FFR1-2016.htm#summary)—all “in the context of increasingly permissive cannabis legislation, attitudes, and lower risk perception,” as the National Institutes of Health put it (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29885150)....


https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2018/08/americas-invisible-pot-addicts/567886/?utm_medium=offsite&utm_source=google&utm_campaign=newsstand-health

[LA Ute]

A good read.

Why People Leave the Church and Never Come Back (https://medium.com/s/story/why-people-leave-the-church-and-never-come-back-410e3e817a3a)

It’s time we examine how we treat those questioning their faith.

[sancho]

A good read.

Why People Leave the Church and Never Come Back (https://medium.com/s/story/why-people-leave-the-church-and-never-come-back-410e3e817a3a)

It’s time we examine how we treat those questioning their faith.

Yeah, that was good. It's just a tricky situation. You have genuine love for someone, and that love can easily be interpreted as judgment or an "agenda." Somehow, his bishop hit the right place and right time for this guy, but I doubt the bishop was the first person to show sincere love for him.

My sister left the church, and I love her like always. But it's tricky. Sometimes, that love will be interpreted the wrong way. I just don't talk to her about church at all. Then she realizes I'm not talking to her about it, and she wonders why no one asks her about it. She feels like we're afraid, and she's probably right.

We all have different strengths. Some of us are compassionate, some are patient, some are wise, some are just. We're all a combination of various abilities and weaknesses. Unfortunately, being judgmental is a natural weakness shared by many of us. I'm working on it!

[Sullyute]

A good read.

Why People Leave the Church and Never Come Back (https://medium.com/s/story/why-people-leave-the-church-and-never-come-back-410e3e817a3a)

It’s time we examine how we treat those questioning their faith.

I assume that he shared that at the Saturday adult session of stake conference and not the regular Sunday session.

I have had this conversation multiple times with my wife and I really don’t think there is space for the casual member. We are an all-in or all-out church. Because there is so much asked of the lay members (cleaning the church, week at scout camp, early morning seminary, 3 hours of church, priesthood leadership meetings, attend the temple, serve at the bishop store house, etc., etc., etc.) that we expect everyone to serve and pick up the slack when needed. That doesn’t leave much room for someone that shows up once a month or less. Mormon salvation is demanding.

I personally feel that much of what we do is busy work and just a way to check a box to let us (but mostly others) know we are righteous. I do think we need changes in church culture.
Should we be less judgmental and self-righteous, absolutely. Should we be more understanding of each other’s doubts and limitations, of course. But as long as lay members do the lion’s (or better yet, lioness’) share of the church’s work, it will be difficult for the non ‘all-in’ members to feel truly welcome.

[sancho]

That doesn’t leave much room for someone that shows up once a month or less. Mormon salvation is demanding.


Yeah, but at the same time, each of my past few wards have a handful of casual members who show up once a month or less.

It's hard to integrate socially into an organization in that way. My Mormon friendships usually come through shared callings or elders' quorum moves (got one of those tonight!).

[LA Ute]

My sister left the church, and I love her like always. But it's tricky. Sometimes, that love will be interpreted the wrong way. I just don't talk to her about church at all. Then she realizes I'm not talking to her about it, and she wonders why no one asks her about it. She feels like we're afraid, and she's probably right.

Yeah, this is a challenge for a lot of us. It’s possible to develop a mutually comfortable approach but that does need to mutual — both parties must want that. I’ve succeeded at that with one relative and haven’t with another.

I’m over-generalizing here, but if an occasionally-attending member feels uncomfortable, the fault for that’s almost always on the more active members. Just my opinion.

[mUUser]

A good read.

Why People Leave the Church and Never Come Back (https://medium.com/s/story/why-people-leave-the-church-and-never-come-back-410e3e817a3a)

It’s time we examine how we treat those questioning their faith.


Yes, it is a good read. Thanks.

I have three kids. My second just didn't connect with the church, and as such, has taken a vacation from it. She's exploring other options (other churches, no church etc.....) and so its uncertain whether its truly a permanent disassociation or not. Yes, I'm disappointed because I want her to connect with the faith of our family, but, she's so doggone nice to us (even allows me to give her father's blessings) that any disappointment quickly passes with the feeling of "dang she's a great kid, especially to me and my wife." After our son's football game last night the four of us (the two adult girls at the U and my wife and me) went out for pancakes, and we laughed and laughed and laughed till all of us were crying.

I love my association with the church -- and it hasn't always been that way -- but, I love my association with my family even more so I've become better at accepting my kids' decisions as their own unique journey. Since I've been able to accept that for my own kid, where I have a ton of skin in the game, it's been a breeze to accept full activity, less activity or no activity of others. Easy peasy. Plus, see SeattleUte's signature line for the right way to live -- "be kind to all, for everyone you meet is fighting a great battle."