- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Old-Timer wrote:
Just curious: Do you have a problem with that if the answers are, “Correct?”
No, I don’t have a problem if the answers are correct.
Perhaps I need to clarify where I am coming from. 6 weeks ago I was a typical TBM and my wife announced her disaffection with the church to me. It was very difficult and heart-wrenching to me to have her “deny the faith”, so to speak. However, I love my wife very much and I very much value her judgement and insight. I decided that I should do some research into the history of the church. DW had been researching this for nearly a year and I often responded to her criticisms with bad apologetics. Delving into the history, I was convinced I would be able to reconcile everything and that historical facts can be interpreted several possible ways so history would be unable to provide any conclusive arguements on the truthfulness of the restored gospel. Now, 6 weeks later, I have discovered many things that absolutely destroy my old testimony and that make it so I can never go back to being a typical TBM. I am still in “data collection” mode and I am coming to see everything about my old faith in a very different light. However, some days I am more Stage 3 than Stage 4. Listening to the Mormon Stories podcast on Masonry and Mormonism made me think that perhaps there was someway to reconcile all the new information I’ve obtained about Mormonism and Masonry with my old faith in the temple, a very stage 3 type approach (possibly because the podcast was with someone from FAIR and was filled with apologetics). On the other hand, this insight from Valoel is much more in a Stage 5 sort of acceptance, so I am trying to understand what exactly are the implications of these insights on my current Stage 3/Stage 4 understanding.
hawkgrrrl wrote:What if he had been into line dancing? Or fantasy football? We could have a very different endowment today . . .
4 – It being symbolic doesn’t mean that it’s not necessary – what it symbolizes could very well be necessary.
Wow, this is deep, but consistent with what I think Valoel was saying.
It seems that on StayLDS, people come to find meaning in the LDS doctrines that may not have been originally intended or that are contrary to the current teachings of the doctrines. However, most people stay because it is their tribe. From a Stage 5 approach, is there anything wrong with finding stage 5 faith in a different faith tradition than your original tribe?
Quote:It seems that on StayLDS, people come to find meaning in the LDS doctrines that may not have been originally intended or that are contrary to the current teachings of the doctrines.
Well, when it comes to the temple, I beg to differ. There is no current teaching that contradicts this idea. Basically, no ones talks about the temple, and what they do say is consistent with what I said: that it’s symbolic and that we make progressive covenants. Also, how do you know what the original intent was? Again, it’s not taught. Personally, I believe the original intent was to increase the commitment of members and bring them closer to god and godhood. This is done through a symbolic ordinance.
Quote:From a Stage 5 approach, is there anything wrong with finding stage 5 faith in a different faith tradition than your original tribe?
Not necessarily, although most organized religions are predominantly full of Stage 3 individuals. Stage 5 often “transcends” religion – meaning it doesn’t attach to or limit spirituality to the context of a religion’s view. Some religions are better at enabling individual personal spirituality than others, although all do allow for it to some extent.
hawkgrrrl wrote:Quote:It seems that on StayLDS, people come to find meaning in the LDS doctrines that may not have been originally intended or that are contrary to the current teachings of the doctrines.
Well, when it comes to the temple, I beg to differ. There is no current teaching that contradicts this idea. Basically, no ones talks about the temple, and what they do say is consistent with what I said: that it’s symbolic and that we make progressive covenants. Also, how do you know what the original intent was? Again, it’s not taught. Personally, I believe the original intent was to increase the commitment of members and bring them closer to god and godhood. This is done through a symbolic ordinance.
You are right. I guess I’m just basing my perception of the temple on the quote by BY about the endowment and what we receive there, which is what I’ve always been taught. Stage 3 faith takes the temple very literally.
hawkgrrrl wrote:
Quote:From a Stage 5 approach, is there anything wrong with finding stage 5 faith in a different faith tradition than your original tribe?
Not necessarily, although most organized religions are predominantly full of Stage 3 individuals. Stage 5 often “transcends” religion – meaning it doesn’t attach to or limit spirituality to the context of a religion’s view. Some religions are better at enabling individual personal spirituality than others, although all do allow for it to some extent.
The goal of StayLDS is to enable people to effectively continue in the LDS faith, despite the cognitive dissonance and challenge to their faith. I recognize this forum’s goal, but is it always God’s goal for an individual to continue in the LDS faith? What if trying to stay hurts a person’s spirituality more than going somewhere else for spirituality? (I am thinking here of converts to the church who may have a different “tribe”, or homosexuals where the church may actually be a toxic environment for some).
From studying and observing Joseph Smith (the best I can from today’s perspective), and studying how he developed the temple ceremony, I think that JS desperately wanted people to experience the epiphany he had — of seeing God and communing with gods and angels. He wanted to share this. So how was he going to do that exactly? He couldn’t repeat his experience, so I see him trying to find ways of getting people into that spiritual state where they would experience their own enlightening endowment (theophany). The Kirtland era washings and annointings took great amounts of time and effort. It was fine for a small group of people, but it was not practical in a lot of ways. It was not systematic or very repeatable either. In Nauvoo, shortly before JS’s martyrdom, he took a radical shift in direction. That was the point where he borrowed a lot of different ideas, some from masonry, and put together the basic framework of what we experience today in the temple (although it still changed more after his death).
I believe in the concepts of the temple. I think the symbols and transcendent ideas that are presented have power, and they are divinely inspired. I feel like I have experienced that power towards something we call exaltation. I just am no longer so sure exactly what that is, except that it seems to be more or less what JS intended — that we commune with God, and become one with this being or level of existence.
I think the temple contains a wonderful presentation of ideas and advanced spiritual concepts that have been around for as long as human history. Does it save us literally? I am not so convinced of that. I don’t think we learn secrets to get past guards. If that were true, then anyone who googled the temple ceremony is getting into the celestial kingdom, right?
I accept HiJolly’s correction. The ceremonies do something by starting a process, call them a seed. But they don’t do anything for someone just because they did the motions, wore the clothes and bothered to show up.
I kind of also feel like the temple can’t be the only path to this enlightenment. If it is, than so few humans have benefited from it that is is totally irrelevant. That was the plan designed by an all-knowing God? I do think the temple is a very effective and compact tool to get moving along the road to exaltation.
Quote:is it always God’s goal for an individual to continue in the LDS faith? What if trying to stay hurts a person’s spirituality more than going somewhere else for spirituality?
A couple of thoughts:
– I don’t think God has goals. People sometimes conflate God with man or earth with eternity. If you believe in LDS scripture, he refers to his “work” and “his glory” being to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. Those are spiritual goals, not religious ones. Religious goals are things like church attendance, how much tithing is paid, temple recommend holders, etc. Spiritual goals are things humans can neither see nor measure – the yardstick of our souls against our potential.
– There are probably some for whom staying LDS is more damaging than leaving. I absolutely believe that is the case. The environment may be toxic for some, or they may be toxic to Mormonism. Perhaps they need to get out before they can deal with it. Or maybe they can never deal with it. Personally, I think there is a real risk to get stuck in Stage 4 in leaving. I think it’s more powerful to get over stuff and to find one’s own reserves. There is more spiritual power in working through stuff than in not working through stuff. It’s possible to work through things and leave, but what you are leaving (the stuff that bugs you) is not really part of you anyway. Disaffection is making it more important than it is.
– Religions are not the source of spirituality. They only help (or don’t help) you tap into your own spiritual reserves, to help you achieve your human potential, to help you get closer to God. Humans are inherently spiritual. Religions are human organizations to achieve those aims, presumably with inspiration as well, but every religion has flaws. Trying to find one without flaws is to find one with no people in it at all.
MisterCurie wrote:What if trying to stay hurts a person’s spirituality more than going somewhere else for spirituality?
I don’t think anyone here will try to tell you that the LDS church is the one and only place for spiritual nourishment. We simply enjoy our association here when we have chosen it as OUR personal way, or among our personal ways.
I get the impression you already have an answer in your heart as you ask the question. We will validate it for you – but do you really need us to? What feels right to you IS right for you. Go with it.
My bishop once said he didn’t think anyone could do wrong and feel right about it (or do right and feel wrong about it). I think I agree with that.
Orson wrote:I get the impression you already have an answer in your heart as you ask the question. We will validate it for you – but do you really need us to? What feels right to you IS right for you. Go with it.
I disagree that I have an answer yet. I was TBM just 6 weeks ago, I’m still gathering information. I just need to know what the options are. I realize the options are as numerous and I am willing to believe they are. However, maybe I belong at NOM more than here, for the time being.
MisterCurie wrote:Orson wrote:I get the impression you already have an answer in your heart as you ask the question. We will validate it for you – but do you really need us to? What feels right to you IS right for you. Go with it.
I disagree that I have an answer yet. I was TBM just 6 weeks ago, I’m still gathering information. I just need to know what the options are. I realize the options are as numerous and I am willing to believe they are. However, maybe I belong at NOM more than here, for the time being.
I apologize if in my mind I put you ahead of where you actually are, I was simply trying to boost your independence. I don’t think anyone has authoritative answers. I know it’s a difficult time, I hope you’ll spend time with us even if you want to explore points of view at NOM.
Orson wrote:I apologize if in my mind I put you ahead of where you actually are, I was simply trying to boost your independence. I don’t think anyone has authoritative answers. I know it’s a difficult time, I hope you’ll spend time with us even if you want to explore points of view at NOM.
No offense taken. Perhaps you see more clearly than I do. Your post helped me realize that I am progressing from where I was 6 weeks ago and I think that I am entering an angry phase. I know that StayLDS is for people who have largely overcome their anger and have decided to stay LDS. I really appreciate this forum. I love the openness, non-judgemental character, fellowship, and serious intellectual striving that I find here. I intend to stick around, but I think some posts will probably be more appropriate for NOM and others may be more appropriate for StayLDS. I’m also on FacesEast, but there are definately some posts that don’t belong there that I have posted here, I anticipate it will be similar with NOM.
Fair enough MisterC, I think you have the right idea. I’ve always enjoyed your questions and comments here. I think you have a good head on your shoulders, and a good heart to share. I think it is important to consider the “restoration” aspect – the condition of the world concerning an eternal perspective prior to Joseph establishing the endowment. I think there is GREAT power in the idea of becoming like God. Sure, it is a two-edged sword that can lead to problems with perfectionism and judgmentalism and other things when fanaticism sets in, but that simply points to the foundational need for “opposition in all things”.
The easiest way for me to think of “the endowment” is a gift that allows people to experience a radical shift in perspective – but that can ONLY be accomplished, imo, if people learn to see the presentation figuratively and symbolically. I like to phrase it in terms of a grand morality play – with the incredible casting that allows ME to be the central actor in the play and the incredible screenwriting that allows ME to improvise and roam around the stage each time it plays out around me.
I can’t really explain that adequately, but I liken it to Nephi asking about his father’s vision and getting transported mentally / spiritually into his own vision that, really, was RADICALLY different than Lehi’s. He wanted to understand the things of God, but he conflated that with the things of Lehi’s experience with God – so the Lord showed him something totally different that was his own experience with God.
When I sit in an endowment session, my “focus” is on what God will show me for the next couple of hours. The atmosphere / setting / imagery / etc. of the “play” puts me in the mood to open my mind and heart and “reach out” for what is floating around me at the moment. I don’t really listen much to the actual words of the presentation anymore; rather, I send out feelers and see what gift I am given that day – what understanding with which I am endowed during that short time.
I’m not trying to memorize words anymore, like I did when I was younger; I’m trying to experience God.
I love this last post. This is one of the most important things that keeps me in the church despite my conflicts. No matter what doubts I have, I can never deny the feeling of peace I experience in the temple, and this has come from just allowing myself to experience the rituals without the internal banter of validity and historical significance (which I have considered when I am outside of the temple). And, not being able to have access to the temple has been my lifeline to church activity-however tentative at this point. Quote:is it always God’s goal for an individual to continue in the LDS faith? What if trying to stay hurts a person’s spirituality more than going somewhere else for spirituality?
I really feel for you. 6 weeks is not long. You will be angry at times. You will be upset and disillusioned. You will feel foolish or that you were somehow tricked perhaps. The whole world and all you depended on is being ripped out from under you. It takes time to take it all in and process everything. I totally know about that uncontrolled frenzy to collect all the information and figure out what the FREAK is going on, staying up late nights reading websites and books, and for me it was a lot of arguments with my wife who wanted to dump it all and run. We still have issues with the kids. She doesn’t want our youngest of 6 to be baptized.
I don’t know about God’s goals anymore except in general concepts, so I am not sure how to answer that directly. FWIW my wife left the Church and it did make her more peaceful and happy. She will probably never return. People go different directions as they pass through their “crisis of faith.” It seems many are attracted to Buddhism or forms of less-organized spirituality. My ex-brother-in-law considers returning to Catholicism sometimes. He was a convert and later left the LDS Church. StayLDS focuses on people who decide they want to try and make Mormonism work. It’s just one path. We obviously promote that here, since it is the focus of the site. We explore ways to use Mormonism by approaching it from new perspectives.
This process happens to people in other organized religions too. I am good friends with a lady who started out Catholic. She drifted to being a Pagan as an adult, and was even married in a Pagan ceremony with her first husband. She goes to a non-denominational, rock concert style worship, Christian church now. She was trying to explain to my wife (who is deep in a Stage 4 type of view these days), why she enjoys being active in her church, even though according to my wife she knows it’s all “a lie.” (the story of the Bible, Jesus etc — my wife’s words). Our friend listed off all these profound, personal experiences she had at this church. Then at the end, she was insightful to point out: “notice that after all these stories, I never mentioned God, Jesus or any church doctrine, even though I am attending a Christian church.”
So there is an example of someone who went through all these doubts (which had nothing to do with Mormonism), she still lives with the doubt, but finds great satisfaction participating in a mainstream Christian, Bible-based church.
Thanks, Valoel. I appreciate the support. I realize that I need to let things play out a bit more naturally and just accept that I will get disillusioned and angry. It’s nice to think about Fowler’s stages to realize that I don’t have to stay angry, but I also realize that I need to accept my emotions and trust that I will move through stages of grief, etc. As was the advice for moving slowly into Stage 4 (although 6 weeks is not slow by any means, is it?), I also need to accept that I will move slowly through stage 4. And NOM may be a better place for dealing with some of the stages of grief until I reach acceptance.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.