In the wake of the Sunstone Symposium an interesting conversation occurred on the Association for Mormon Letters email list.
For me, it was quite a challenging conversation because I personally loved every nanosecond of the symposium. I mean, if Sunstone Symposiums were church, I'd be a stake president with 100 percent hometeaching by now. That's how much I enjoyed it.
So when I came across one (very intelligent, spiritual) person writing:
'The one time I went I felt such a void of the Spirit I swore I'd never go back.'
and:
'This acquaintance warned him to leave [the symposium] immediately or he would be in jeopardy of losing his testimony as this now-excommunicated acquaintance had.'
I had to sit back and wrestle with some strong reactions. I personally had never felt such a spirit of community before I had gone to this year's symposium. Mormonism came alive for me. I was actually moved to tears a few times by the stories I heard there ?¢Ç¨Äú and I'm not a teary guy. These were Mormons that I resonated with on almost every level. I finally felt at home.
But evidently something was separating me from the person who came out so strongly against the symposium. It was a separation so potent that the author was willing to declare that the Spirit could not be found at the symposium (how strong a condemnation is that?). What was going on?
A possibility came up when another (very intelligent, spiritual) person posited a divide:
'Those on one side of the line tend to look at those on the other as being frightened of examining ideas, close-minded, possibly shallow. Those on the other side of the line tend to look at the others as lacking faith or even being instruments of the devil to lead us away gently. Both are wrong in these suspicions. But the line exists, and I see now that I cannot straddle the line.'
So according to this second author Sunstone folks aren't the devil, and anti-Sunstone folks aren't stupid. I'm willing to go with that (filing down my horns). Yet, the first author insists that the Spirit is chased away from her and that excommunication is the most likely result of attendance at a symposium. And the second insists that the divide cannot be straddled.
One side or the other. With us or against us. Sheep or goats.
My question: Does the divide exist? If it does, why is it there? Is it because the Spirit indeed passes judgment on the proceedings and leaves? Or is it more a matter of spiritual chemistry? Are some people just more composed to be nourished by symposiums while others are more likely to be poisoned?
Or are we all just overreacting?
I’m not sure what I say will be helpful, but you asked…
I think y’all are taking yourselves waaayy too seriously, and are overreacting.
A few months ago, I sat in a testimony meeting where a good and stalwart man told about a BSA leadership training meeting he had attended. He described it as being so spiritual that the only other time he had felt that way was in the celestial room at the temple. It was right then that I started to hear some twilight zone music playing softly in the background. Can you forgive me if I suggest that some of the ‘stoners give off this unsettling vibe as well?
Please note – I’m not discounting anybody’s experience. When you say that you finally felt at home at the symposium, I believe you, and I’m happy for you. The value of Sunstone, IMO, is to provide a kind of way station for people who are en route to somewhere. For some, it is fuller integration into the church, and for others, it is an exit, I hope with dignity intact. But I think it is an error to mistake the way station for the destination itself.
Lots of people think the church is wonderful and that any criticism is unwarranted and harmful. My guess is that most ‘stoners react stongly and negatively to that view. The symposium quite regularly hands the open microphone to good and wonderful people who cheerfully identify themselves as apostates. Is it really that hard to understand why some of our co-religionists think it is harmful? Sunstone folks are every bit as provincial in their views and narrow in their outlook as their Ensign reading brothers and sisters. And I fault the ‘stoners for this because they claim to be sensitized to it and manifestly are not.
The other thing I find unsettling is the cult of personality that surrounds the proceedings. A typical bloggernacle description of the recent symposium can be summarized like this:
“First I met X. He is SO COOL. Oh, then I went to Y’s presentation. It was AWESOME!!! And then, can you believe it? I actually got to HAVE LUNCH with Z!!! No way am I missing next year! We will plan our vacation around it!” Honestly, doesn’t it sound like a 14 y.o. girl at a Backstreet Boys concert?
To sum up: I glad Sunstone is there for those who find it valuable. I have found it valuable myself. In the same way, I’m glad that boy scouts and homeschooling workshops are there for my fellow saints who find them valuable. But when we start to bear our testimonies of those things, we are missing the real gospel, because it is bigger and grander than any of them. If we want to make any progress at bridge building, we need to quit taking ourselves so seriously. Our own little pet projects just aren’t that important, and we shouldn’t be surprised when others tell us so.
Steven Carter once asked, “A Little Contention Here, Waiter!” (See: May 8, 2006). Finally, someone delivers the goods.
I guess you better count me in with the 14 y.o. girls… I had Michael Quinn and Dan Vogel sign my Sunstone Program and then had it framed for my wall; I’ve since placed it next to my Backstreet Boys poster, he deadpanned.
I’ve seen plenty of grown men and women turn into giggling boys and girls when Thomas Monson or Russell Nelson or Sheri Dew or Chieko Okazaki or Richard Bushman enter the room. I think it is natural to be enthusiastic, if not a little star struck when you meet someone whom you admire, someone who has inspired you. In that regard, I don’t think Sunstoners are any different than anyone else, LDS or otherwise.
I’m puzzled by your comment: “But I think it is an error to mistake the way station for the destination itself.” What, a final spiritual destination? A final repository of truth?
I don’t think Sunstone is a way station or a destination for truth or spiritual sustenance any more so than the Church is a way station or destination for such ends. Sunstone is a venue that encourages open dialogue related to Mormon thought and experience. As long as one is interested in such a dialgue, one will be interested in Sunstone. I would say the same for the Church. Those that make the Church or Sunstone the only destination, or the sole venue for spritual sustenance or a search for truth are probably shortchanging themselves.
For many of the giggling boys and girls you malign, Sunstone is the first “way station” on their search for spirit and truth that is *outside* of the Church. As such, it can taste like a tall, cool glass of water after a long, hot march through a barren desert. You forget how good water tastes when you haven’t had it for awhile. To those who drink water on a daily basis, either in the Church or out, its easy to look at the dehydrated soul with the wet lips and the goofy smile on his face and say, “Don’t get so excited… it’s just water.”
Matt Says:
For many of the giggling boys and girls you malign, Sunstone is the first ?¢Ç¨?ìway station?¢Ç¨¬ù on their search for spirit and truth that is *outside* of the Church. As such, it can taste like a tall, cool glass of water after a long, hot march through a barren desert. You forget how good water tastes when you haven?¢Ç¨Ñ¢t had it for awhile. To those who drink water on a daily basis, either in the Church or out, its easy to look at the dehydrated soul with the wet lips and the goofy smile on his face and say, ?¢Ç¨?ìDon?¢Ç¨Ñ¢t get so excited?¢Ç¨¬¶ it?¢Ç¨Ñ¢s just water.?¢Ç¨¬ù
My Comment:
I’m not certain that Sunstone was my first “way station” on my journey out of Mormonism. I think that “Dialogue” might have had that honor, although I stopped subscribing to that journal a number of years ago.
The role that Sunstone Magazine played in my journey is providing an occasional glimpse at alternative viewpoints. (I never had the opportunity to attend a Symposium, fwiw.)
However, the time finally arrived where Sunstone Magazine no longer played a role of much importance in my continuing journey. ISTM that the editors of Sunstone want to demonstrate that it is possible to be a skeptic/questioner and still be a “faithful” Mormon. There was a time when that seemed quite commendable to me. However, it occurred to me one day that I simply was no longer interested in even trying to do that. So, I let my subscription to Sunstone lapse.
I continue to have an interest in Mormon culture, because it is part of my personal history. I have come to accept the fact that “The Mormon Experience” means many different things to different people. There is no such thing as “one-size-fits-all” when it comes to religion in general, and apparently to Mormonism in particular. What I came to realize is that the “size” that apparently fits most “active” Mormons no longer fits me. But, grudgingly, I am coming to accept the idea that it might fit others.
But, to return to the point, Sunstone *was* “like a tall, cool glass of water” at one point in my life. It would be a mistake to trivialize its impact on the lives of people.
Mark,
I appreciate your comments. They pointed out what kind of rhetoric I felt I had to use in order to make myself heard.
See, the critics of Sunstone took a very strong stance, so I felt that, to make my case, I had to take a strong stance too. That’s something I’ve been trying to escape: letting other people set the premise and tone of the conversation. And the tone and premise I dislike getting trapped in the most is the “one true church” premise.
That’s the very reason I was hoping to discuss the approach of the critical authors here, I wanted to prod that black and white presentation and find a find a space for communication.
I’m drawn to your approach, a more disinterested approach. Perhaps Sunstone really is a bunch of people getting together for the same reason a flock of birds gets together, for comfort and a little squawking. But at the same time, as Matt pointed out, in order to go to Sunstone in the first place, you have to really care about Mormonism. People who don’t know William Shatner from Patrick Stewart don’t go to Star Trek conventions.
The problem is, Sunstone folks care.
The problem is, anti-Sunstone folks care.
Caring seems to be the problem.
Great discussion.
I don’t know if there is any line between the LDS Church proper and Sunstone….I know one is perceived, but I’ve not yet felt it. I discovered the magazine on my mission and remember feeling guilty about opening it up….but that left as I read it. Same with the symposium…I was really nervous about going my first time. But again, that vanished once there. My conservative younger brother came with me this year. He’s leaving for a mission next week. BAsically had the same experience–felt unsure on the way there and uplifted on the way out.
But while we’re talking about lines:
the only one I’ve really felt is between two types of sunstoners…two types that seem very different to me. The one type participates to be uplifted, to study, to question, etc. Whether they be active or less, Mormon, ex-mormon, post-mormon, non-mormon, fundamentalist mormon, etc….they are there to learn and teach. The other kind are there to whore attention and self-agrandize. I had a conversation last year with someone who had to mention that she was excommunicated about once ever-other sentence….like it was a badge of honor. I don’t expect it to be something to hide or be ashamed of–in some cases people should be proud of it (Lavina Anderson and Mike Quinn come to mind). But in this case it just seemed that he was bragging himself up. Lame.
That’s not unique to sunstone, or any other group. I think there’s the same line of demarcation in the Church (and maybe its even more fostered there–a lot of testimony meetings seem to go that way, don’t they?). But its still something I sense at the symposiums and in some of the articles published.
But………of course this is all coming from me….a narcissistic, kissass social climber obsessed with my image. So……huh.
stephencarter,
Thanks for your response. Just so you know, I don’t think the words you employed in your post were over the top at all. I understood you to be asking for input, so I gave mine. My reaction is not so much to your post as it is to the testimony bearing about the One and Only True and Living Symposium going on in the ‘nacle, which I find offputting.
I applaud you efforts to find some common ground, it certainly needs to be done. But True Believers of any stripe are hard to collaborate with, and to the extent that ‘stoners act like True Believers, the burden lies with them to dial it back a little. It is ironic and sad that Sunstone devotees often replicate the same behavior they find so distasteful in the rank and file membership.
Again, I will reiterate my belief that Sunstone does much good. If it helps good folks like you and Matt T. find peace, I’m glad.
Matt,
Contention? Malign? Sorry, I didn’t intend to malign, or contend with, anyone. If you can help me understand where I did, I will be happy to either rephrase or withdraw the offending statement. My intent was to give feedback, but as I read between the lines of your comment and stephen’s comment, perhaps I overstated my position.
You’re right that many people in the church treat GAs like rock stars. But that sort of giddy, breathless, squealing, wet-my-pants enthusiasm for hero worship is beneath the dignity of those who purport to be grown-ups, don’t you agree? BTW, this isn’t new. I wrote a letter to Peggy Fletcher Stack back when she was still Peggy Fletcher and voiced the same opinion.
Your claim that Sunstone provides a venue for dialogue about Mormon thought and tradition is accurate as far as it goes. I agree with you, in fact. That is Sunstone at its best. But in the spirit of calling a spade a spade, we need to acknowledge that Sunstone is sometimes not at its best, and we can’t blame our more traditional brothers and sisters for noticing the ax-grinders Sunstone seems to attract. Some on this thread have already pointed that out.
In short, I hope you allow me my agnosticism. I am a jack ‘stoner who wishes the Church of Sunstone well, but also wishes they would occasionally examine their assumptions.
And I wanted it noted – it was YOU, Matt Thurston, who applied the term “goofy” to those who find refreshment with Sunstone. 🙂
The divide is real, but it’s more complex than a simple chasm with “us” on one side and “them” on the other, so bridge-building isn’t an especially appropriate metaphore for me.
I know fine people who regularly participate in Sunstone. I have gone several years, and even presented a few times. I attended one session this year, and then only because a friend was speaking. For the past two years when I read the program and eavesdrop on hallway conversations, I get a cold, black feeling that I can only interpret as a spiritual warning. I didn’t see many sessions in the program that seemed calculated to build, while there were many that seemed designed as forums for complaint and whining. I don’t see any need to go to the symposium any more, at least until the program swings back toward the moderate.
On the other hand, I’ve attended the FAIR conference for the past two years. The feeling I got there was just as cold and black. Even though the program topics were clearly intended to build or restore faith with intellectual support, the audience seemed far less interested in hearing new material than in hearing anti-Mormons described in arrogant, amusing ways. There would be absolutely no reaction from the dead-silent audience for 20 minutes, then the speaker would casually mention Ed Decker and there would suddenly be wolfish chuckles from all directions, even before the speaker had reached the supposedly funny part of his comment. I see no need to return to FAIR, either, anymore than to Sunstone.
I’d like the conservative, faithful intent of FAIR without the smugness and self-righteousness. I’d like the tolerance and warmth of the Sunstone credo without the emphasis on dissent and failure. So who’s on which side of what divide, and what do I bridge from and to?
I don’t like Dialogue for the same reason that I don’t like the Sunstone Symposium.
MHA is the best unofficial Mormon community I’ve found so far. AML comes close, except that there’s too much pomposity about why ordinary Mormons don’t support their Great Art. I’m going to try the new Scholars in the Humanities that’s coming up in a few months.
And I keep trying to find an online group that matches my interests and temperament. Not much luck so far.
“I didn?¢Ç¨Ñ¢t see many sessions in the program that seemed calculated to build, while there were many that seemed designed as forums for complaint and whining”
Which sessions stood out to you as representative of those two categories?
Ardis, have you tried Mormon-Library? Kidding of course. I enjoyed your comments there before your self-imposed exile. I hope you’ll continue hanging around Sunstone Blog.
Mark IV, sorry if I read too much into your post. I actually enjoy a little contention, as long as it isn’t personal. I enjoyed your post, but disagree with some of your broad brush strokes. I’d like to take on your assertion that “Sunstone folks are every bit as provincial in their views and narrow in their outlook as their Ensign reading brothers and sisters.” I disagree, but my response will have to wait for another day. Maybe a blog post. By the way, I am actually Matt III. My son is MAT IV, but we call him “Quade”, for what I hope are obvious reasons.
Having interacted with Preston quite a bit at another site, I got a kick out of this comment: “But, grudgingly, I am coming to accept the idea that it (Mormonism) might fit others.” Grudgingly? For you that’s an understatement! I hope you keep posting here.
My thoughts on Stephen’s post…
Like you, my spiritual switch is triggered by Sunstone. Like you, I feel very much at home, part of a community. If Sunstoners share one thing in common, it is that they get their spiritual ?¢Ç¨?ìjones?¢Ç¨¬ù by asking questions. Many TBM Latter-day Saints seem to get their ?¢Ç¨?ìjones?¢Ç¨¬ù from affirming answers. For example:
Question: Who was Joseph Smith?
Answer: A Prophet of God who ushered in the Restoration of God?¢Ç¨Ñ¢s true Church
The ?¢Ç¨?ìQuestion?¢Ç¨¬ù above is fascinating to Sunstoners. How much printer ink has been spilled in Sunstone Magazine, how many Symposium sessions have been devoted to exploring that question? Yes, Sunstoners offer answers to the question, but they aren?¢Ç¨Ñ¢t final answers, more like theories, ideas, sketches?¢Ç¨¬¶ The point is this: the answers are subordinate to the question. We all show up at the Symposium because of the question, not the answer.
The opposite is true for many ?¢Ç¨?ìIron Rod?¢Ç¨¬ù Saints. The question ?¢Ç¨?ìWho was Joseph Smith??¢Ç¨¬ù isn?¢Ç¨Ñ¢t really asked at Church, and if it is, it is a formality. We are there to affirm the ?¢Ç¨?ìAnswer?¢Ç¨¬ù: Joseph Smith was a Prophet of God. How much printer ink has been spilled in lesson manuals, how many testimonies have been delivered from the pulpit devoted to affirming that answer? The point is this: the question is subordinate to the answer. We show up at Church to affirm the answer, not ask the question.
It isn?¢Ç¨Ñ¢t surprising to me that to an Iron Rod ?¢Ç¨?ìaffirmer?¢Ç¨¬ù, a community of questioners would feel like a ?¢Ç¨?ìdark?¢Ç¨¬ù place.
So it seems that most people engage or feel the ?¢Ç¨?ìspirit?¢Ç¨¬ù either by asking questions, or affirming answers. Maybe some people have a mixture of both, but I think we lean one way or the other. I think the early members of the Church were primarily Questioners not satisfied with affirming answers in their previous religious traditions. At some point, early I think, the Church evolved into an institution that rewarded Affirmers, and discouraged Questioners.
I have a theory that many people that leave the Church, especially young people, are ?¢Ç¨?ìquestioners?¢Ç¨¬ù, or Liahonas, and they don?¢Ç¨Ñ¢t even know it. I?¢Ç¨Ñ¢m NOT talking about people that have fully studied the gospel and/or church history and decided the Church wasn?¢Ç¨Ñ¢t true; I?¢Ç¨Ñ¢m talking about people — teens and young adults mostly — who just kind of drift away from the Church without really knowing much about it.
Our youth are brought up with a set of behaviors to observe and answers to affirm (?¢Ç¨?ìI know this Church is true?¢Ç¨¬¶?¢Ç¨¬ù). Therefore, for our Youth who happen to be DNA Affirmers, the Church is a wonderful place to be. They feel the spirit burning in their bosom. Our Youthful DNA Questioners quickly find out their questions are discouraged, or patronized, or largely left unanswered. What do we tell them instead? Pray and/or fast to find out if X, Y, or Z answer is true. The emphasis is on the answer, but their spiritual switch is the question! By the time the hit their late teens or early twenties, they just drift away. We accuse them of being spiritually lazy. Or we wonder in puzzlement, ?¢Ç¨?ìFor some reason the Church just didn?¢Ç¨Ñ¢t seem to stick for him/her??¢Ç¨¬ù Its no wonder to me: we failed to engage their spirit. I sometimes wonder if many of these kids would stick around if we threw them a Sunstone magazine and said, ?¢Ç¨?ìHere kid, ask questions until your heart?¢Ç¨Ñ¢s content.?¢Ç¨¬ù
Ardis said:
?¢Ç¨?ìI didn?¢Ç¨Ñ¢t see many sessions in the program that seemed calculated to build, while there were many that seemed designed as forums for complaint and whining?¢Ç¨¬ù
I say:
What an interesting comment. Thinking back through the program, I can see how you could say that about some of the sessions. The ones I attended were quite different. One of the sessions I helped put together was about helping your teenagers negotiate the terrain of sexual desire. It was a humdinger, very building for me at least.
I also attended a session involving couples who had somehow stayed intact through significant spiritual and religious crises. That was my favorite.
Another fascinating one was Rick Jeppson’s on how to use language to explore one’s ideas and feelings about the gospel, rather than sticking to just the cliches.
However, Ardis, I also strongly agree that there are groups that, though they seem to fill some people’s needs, leave me cold. I was involved with an online group for a year where I was able to find my online voice and learn to direct my encounters with religion in a more constructive way. It was a lifeline to me. But after that year was over the people there seemed stuck, they seemed unwilling to move on. And then new people would move in, starting from scratch and going through the same steps. It got frustrating, and soon the group had nothing to offer me, though I tried to offer it something. But they didn’t really want what I had, so I moved on.
For now, this forum is doing well for me. The people here are thoughtful, intelligent and spiritual. I think the quality of conversation here is quite high compared with most blogs. Hopefully you’ll stick around and keep that quality up.
Some of my thoughts on Stephen’s post…
Like you, my spiritual switch is triggered by Sunstone. Like you, I feel very much at home, part of a community. If Sunstoners share one thing in common, it is that they get their spiritual ?¢Ç¨?ìjones?¢Ç¨¬ù by asking questions. Many TBM Latter-day Saints seem to get their ?¢Ç¨?ìjones?¢Ç¨¬ù from affirming answers. For example:
Question: Who was Joseph Smith?
Answer: A Prophet of God who ushered in the Restoration of God?¢Ç¨Ñ¢s true Church
The ?¢Ç¨?ìQuestion?¢Ç¨¬ù above is fascinating to Sunstoners. How much printer ink has been spilled in Sunstone Magazine, how many Symposium sessions have been devoted to exploring that question? Yes, Sunstoners offer answers to the question, but they aren?¢Ç¨Ñ¢t final answers, more like theories, ideas, sketches?¢Ç¨¬¶ The point is this: the answers are subordinate to the question. We all show up at the Symposium because of the question, not the answer.
The opposite is true for many ?¢Ç¨?ìIron Rod?¢Ç¨¬ù Saints. The question ?¢Ç¨?ìWho was Joseph Smith??¢Ç¨¬ù isn?¢Ç¨Ñ¢t really asked at Church, and if it is, it is a formality. We are there to affirm the ?¢Ç¨?ìAnswer?¢Ç¨¬ù: Joseph Smith was a Prophet of God. How much printer ink has been spilled in lesson manuals, how many testimonies have been delivered from the pulpit devoted to affirming that answer? The point is this: the question is subordinate to the answer. We show up at Church to affirm the answer, not ask the question.
It isn?¢Ç¨Ñ¢t surprising to me that to an Iron Rod ?¢Ç¨?ìaffirmer?¢Ç¨¬ù, a community of questioners would feel like a ?¢Ç¨?ìdark?¢Ç¨¬ù place.
So it seems that most people engage or feel the ?¢Ç¨?ìspirit?¢Ç¨¬ù either by asking questions, or affirming answers. Maybe some people have a mixture of both, are “bi-spiritual”,?Ǭbut I think most of us tend to lean one way or the other. I think the early members of the Church were primarily Questioners not satisfied with affirming answers in their previous religious traditions. At some point, early I think, the Church evolved into an institution that rewarded Affirmers, and discouraged Questioners.
I have a theory that many people that leave the Church, especially young people, are ?¢Ç¨?ìquestioners?¢Ç¨¬ù, or Liahonas, and they don?¢Ç¨Ñ¢t even know it. I?¢Ç¨Ñ¢m NOT talking about people that have fully studied the gospel and/or church history and decided the Church wasn?¢Ç¨Ñ¢t true; I?¢Ç¨Ñ¢m talking about people — teens and young adults mostly — who just kind of drift away from the Church without really knowing much about it.
Our youth are brought up with a set of behaviors to observe and answers to affirm (?¢Ç¨?ìI know this Church is true?¢Ç¨¬¶?¢Ç¨¬ù). Therefore, for our Youth who happen to be DNA Affirmers, the Church is a wonderful place to be. They feel the spirit burning in their bosom. On the other hand, our Youthful DNA Questioners quickly find out that their questions are discouraged, or patronized, or largely left unanswered. What do we tell them instead? Pray and/or fast to find out if X, Y, or Z answer is true. The emphasis is on the answer, but their spiritual switch is the question! By the time the hit their late teens or early twenties, they just drift away. We accuse them of being spiritually lazy. Or we wonder in puzzlement, ?¢Ç¨?ìFor some reason the Church just didn?¢Ç¨Ñ¢t seem to stick for him/her??¢Ç¨¬ù Its no wonder to me: we failed to engage their spirit. I sometimes wonder if many of these kids would stick around if we threw them a Sunstone magazine and said, ?¢Ç¨?ìHere kid, ask questions until your heart?¢Ç¨Ñ¢s content.?¢Ç¨¬ù
I’m one of those who tends to think the divide is real, or can be in many cases. My most recent attempt to explain why is here.
Stephen’s post here highlights the fact that notions of community are a big factor in the divide. At the end of the day the Church is about developing a Zion community, and it perceives itself as revealing through prophets to the world what God wants Zion to be like. I gather that for some (though surely not all) Sunstone becomes a preferred or replacement community to one’s local ward, and once this occurs the divide is concretely realized, in my opinion.
When people say they feel the Spirit (or a lack thereof) in a particular group setting, as described in the post and some previous comments, I think to a large extent what is going on is nothing supernatural, but simply the human experience of feeling at peace with a particular supportive group with whom one resonates and would like to cast one’s lot with (or on the flip side a group with which one feels out of place, or seems to be opposed to a group in which one is already invested).
#11 Matt–
Thankyouthankyouthankyou for that!!! I am printing out your comment and putting it in my journal (after I sleep with it under my pillow tonight.) I DO love questions, I DO! I DO!
And even more important, I think your post is helping me to come to terms with people that have irritated me immensely up until this very moment.
I am experiencing Enlightenment. You are my new guru.
Matt’s observations of the questioners v. affirmers rings true for me. Growing up in the church, I never felt comfortable with various aspects, but could never articulate my discomfort because I was not allowed the vocabulary nor the opportunity to express such. It was only years later, during college and beyond that I came to see the questions were real and part of my experience should be to ask them. I struggle with the fact that the “answers” to many of my questions are not comfortable either. Sunstone offers a place where questions are the norm, and that is comforting in itself.
Hey! You changed the order on me. My favorite scripture is now Matt 12.
Well, thanks for your kind remarks, B.i.V. I’m not sure that my observation was all that original… in some ways, my comment was just a riff on Richard Poll’s now 40-year-old talk entitled, “What the Church Means to People Like Me.” If you’ve never read it before, you can find it here (among other places, including Dialogue, I presume):
http://www.zionsbest.com/people.html
Oh, that article is in my journal too. But your turns of phrase are so devastating–“they get their spiritual jones by asking questions…” Richard Poll didn’t use that term, did he?
Ha! No, I don’t think Brother Poll, a high council member at the time (I think), used the term “spiritual jones”.
Nor did he theorize that many who leave the Church, especially at an early age, may have been frustrated or closet (closeted to themselves, I mean) Liahonas. They were just bored, and probably didn’t know why. Affirming answers just didn’t speak to them.
I’ve wondered this about a couple of my siblings who have left the Church, who are probably hardwired Questioners like me. I can’t help but wonder if either of them would still be active if they could have plugged into Sunstone’s open-minded and “questioning” community. And who knows if I would have eventually followed them? I had absolutely flat-lined spiritually for about five years until I discovered MHA/Sunstone/Dialogue/Bloggernacle/etc. I’d sit in Elder’s Quorum feeling almost despondant, wondering if I had anything in common with my fellow Elders who seemed happy and perfectly content with the Answers.
Matt,
I want to continue to engage on this issue because I think it is tremendously important – I hope you don’t mind.
Christian captured eloquently what I was trying to say in my original reference to way stations. He said:
At the end of the day the Church is about developing a Zion community….I gather that for some (though surely not all) Sunstone becomes a preferred or replacement community to one?¢Ç¨Ñ¢s local ward, and once this occurs the divide is concretely realized, in my opinion.
I have no desire to devalue the sense of community people feel with Sunstone. It is important, and can serve valuable purposes for people who feel like square pegs at church. The sense of alienation is real, and we ought to so something to alleviate it. But to the extent something reinforces the alienation, or emphasizes the separateness, I think it is ultimately self-serving and unproductive.
In my opinion, people who see themselves as liahona members ought to have the greatest empathy for others, and should have outstanding skills at connecting to people who are different from themselves. There is plenty of raw material to practice on, after all. Who better to practice inclusion than someone who know what exclusion feels like? I believe you when you say church meetings made you despondent. I know exactly what that feels like, although I’ve never had a five year dry stretch. That must have been rough. But if I’m honest with myself, I have to acknowledge that the loneliness I felt at those times is not qualitatively different from the struggles felt by the single mother, or the man who is almost overwhelmed by feelings of guilt from previous wrongdoing, and both of those people live in my neighborhood and sit by me each week at church. To the extent that I allow anything to become an ersatz community, I am letting those people down, and, I believe, acting in a way that is contrary to God’s will.
I think you are mostly right that our attitudes and approaches to certain questions are not conciously chosen. Individuals are unique, and it shouldn’t surprise us when some of us see questions where others see answers. But I don’t think you go far enough. I think everybody has questions, we just have different questions. For instance, Peter and Molly are untroubled about the nature of Joseph Smith’s prophetic calling, but they are probably very interested in the question of how living with hope can increase charity. A pretty good question, that, and one that I would love to see Sunstone attempt to answer.
Mark,
You’re right on the money. That’s exactly what I’m interested in, building community in my own ward. I addressed this in an article I wrote for Sunstone a year ago. Basically what I was trying to do was open a door to authentic discussion in the classroom setting so that we could find those things out about our fellow ward members. My lessons were always getting mixed reviews though, some people loved them, some hated them. And of course, the ones who hated them made sure the bishop knew about it.
After I published that article, somehow I never got asked to give a lesson again, and even when the bishopric knew my family and I were leaving, somehow none of us were asked to give a farewell talk.
I’m still looking for a way to create environments in church that facilitate people actually talking with eachother. This new ward I’m in has a lot of possibilities, but first I need to learn their style and figure out how to talk with them. My last ward thought it was a Utah ward and no one was willing to stop being a turbo Mormon long enough to be real. Not that I was perfect.
What I’m interested in is people’s stories rather than their exhortations. I guess the reason I liked the symposium so much was because it had what I wanted to feel in church: a chance of communicating with people in a nonjudgmental, yet rigorous, environment.
That’s what I was addressing in my King David post , how it seems to me that the focus on teaching correct behavior squashes the potential of building community in church environments.
stephencarter says:
I?¢Ç¨Ñ¢m still looking for a way to create environments in church that facilitate people actually talking with eachother. This new ward I?¢Ç¨Ñ¢m in has a lot of possibilities, but first I need to learn their style and figure out how to talk with them. My last ward thought it was a Utah ward and no one was willing to stop being a turbo Mormon long enough to be real. Not that I was perfect.
I respond:
Please let us know if you are successful. I know many people, including myself, who tried to create such an environment. I was not successful, nor has anybody else I know who has tried to do so.
Ultimately, I decided that I could neither change the environment, nor live with the one that was emerging, so I disengaged completely.
I now find my religious environment almost entirely online.
Mark IV (#20):
The Church may talk about developing a Zion Community, but it seems to be is on its own, rather narrow, terms. If you look at Mormon Theology at its most expansive, or highest level, there may be room for people like me. But as it is commonly practiced, I feel like a square peg in a round hole. I’d like to integrate more fully into the Mormon community, but I can only conform my beliefs and behavior so much until I cease to be myself.
Sunstone is a supplementary community that fills in the holes the Church cannot. I feel a closer kinship with the Sunstone community not only because it accepts me on my terms, but because it gives me what I had hoped the Church would give me: intellectual and spiritual nourishment.
I don’t want my Church/Mormon community to become an ersatz community, but I admit I am short on ideas about how to integrate myself more fully into that community. It doesn’t surprise me when people (like Preston in #22) fail to make it work.
I wonder too if the Mormon Community is really the end-all-be-all community… should this be the ultimate goal, or am I shortchanging myself? Is it a waste of time? Are there bigger and better things out there? Eugene Kovalenko’s comment #10 on community at the “Sunstone Symposium Day 3 – Friday thoughts” Blog Post hit on some questions or suspicions I have relative to the quality of the Mormon Community. (See: http://sunstoneblog.com/?p=96#comments ) I have the book Kovalenko referenced (“A Different Drum” by Scott Peck), but haven’t read it yet. I remain committed to my Mormon community (for a variety of reasons) and have no plans to bail, but it doesn’t keep me from wondering.
Since I am committed to the community, the key question is this: “To the extent that I allow anything to become an ersatz community, I am letting those people down, and, I believe, acting in a way that is contrary to God?¢Ç¨Ñ¢s will.” I think I have something to offer my Mormon Community, I just wonder: 1.) how to offer it; and 2.) do they want it?
My next Blog Post on Thursday is actually about integreting personal beliefs that are at odds with institutional beliefs. I offer no answers, only questions. I’m interested in feedback.
I dashed this off so I’m not sure it fully articulates my thoughts on this subject. But its a start…
I appreciate and enjoy reading your comments.
Stephen (#21)
I suspend my criticism of fanboy groupieism and hero worship long enough to tip my hat in your direction. A man who can put Fear and Trembling and Barry Manilow together in the same coherent sentence is a man worth listening to. Nice going! Actually I had read that article before, but it made even more sense, and was even more enjoyable, the second time through.
I got a laugh out of the advice someone gave you to lower your expectations, because I received that advice myself once. For me, the trick was not so much to lower my expectations, but to change them. Once I quit expecting the three hours of church on Sunday to meet my needs, I became a lot happier. Now I view church attendance as the dues I need to pay to be taken seriously, but most of the service I find satisfying takes place in smaller settings outside of Sunday church meetings. I love, really love, home teaching. I get to visit friends and have conversations with them that serve their needs. I love having people over for dinner, and I find most of them interesting and convivial. There are some wonderful people in my ward and neighborhood who have interesting lives and who have overcome adversity and tragedy that probably would have done me in. I’m grateful to the church for putting these people within my circle of friends.
Just a quick question – I read your King David post with interest, more or less agreeing with your take. Without wanting to focus on the negative, I do need to ask: What’s the deal with comment # 12? I realize you don’t have control over people’s comments, but jeez, you could at least challenge it. If I posted a comment here saying Sunstone was (quote)stupid, BS, crap, evil, crap again, full of farty old men, BS again, anybody who believes it doesn’t have half a brain, the people who started it are a bunch of horny old pervs, hypocrites, liars, con-men, and lies(unquote), I would fully expect you to take exception. When Sunstone allows it bandwidth to be used by someone to peddle this particular brand of shinola, we don’t really need to wonder why Peter and Molly don’t appreciate Sunstone, do we?
I hadn’t seen Comment #12 at Stephen’s “David” post until you pointed it out. I agree with Mark, it doesn’t appear to meet the standards of Sunstone Blog’s motto: “Faith Seeking Understanding”. I’ll mention it to the powers that be.
At the same time, its not like Sunstone Blog is the only place where someone manages to slip some shinola past the gatekeepers. I don’t think that comment is representative of most Sunstone Blog comments. If Peter and Molly were to freak out over the exception, then Peter and Molly have no business being anywhere on the Bloggernacle, as I occaisionally bump up against shinola in some of the Bloggernacle’s most hallowed halls.
But thanks for pointing it out.
Thanks, Matt. I am relieved to hear it was an oversight. My comment about Peter and Molly was meant as an attempt to answer Stephen’s original question. Where do people get the idea that Sunstone is hostile to the church? Even though people may not share our views, they aren’t dumb. They know what the Internet is; they know how to type sunstone dot com. And, voila, right there under the official masthead, on a thread to which Wotherspoon himself contributed heavily, is a toxic rant about the church. It really is just a minor housekeeping detail, and as you say, sometimes some pretty obnoxious material gets past the admins. I’m just saying that we ought to be able to recognize Molly’s concerns as having some kind of sound basis, and not dismiss her out of hand. Your response was constructive and appreciated. By the way, I got a chuckle out of your hymn suggestions.
In response to your # 23, I think you are right to see your (and my) association with Sunstone/MHA/Dialogue/bloggernacle as supplemental approaches. Gordon B. Hinckley said:
[Everybody needs] a friend in the Church to whom he can constantly turn, who will walk beside him, who will answer his questions, who will understand his problems.
It is clear to me that those needs often go unmet. That is why I finally concluded that Sunday church was never going to get it done, at least for me. And if I read between the lines of Hinckley’s comment, I think he believes that, too. I think our needs for fellowship and intellectual and spiritual nourishment will be met in settings outside of Sacrament meeting, Sunday school, and Priesthood/RS. That is why I participate here, and elsewhere in the ‘nacle. And that is also why I have tried to go the extra mile in my ward. There is a lot we can do, outside of our official callings.
Matt, thanks for continuing to engage here. From one square peg to another, I can say that I’m enjoying this conversation.
I think the interesting thing about that final comment on the King David thread was that it elicited no response. Not that plenty of my comments haven’t gone unresponded to. But evidentally the way the commenter worded his ideas didn’t really resonate with many people on this site.
It would be interesting to talk with that person more and see what kinds of stories led to his/her current attitude.
My thanks to Mark IV for pointing out the post in question in these past few comments. I, too, hadn’t seen it until noted here in this thread as it was posted the day after the symposium closed and I was vacationing.
I’ve just deleted the post as it clearly was out of harmony with the SunstoneBlog comment policy and mission of the Sunstone Education Foundation.