Knowing things can be hard. It puts you in a place where the information you have pushes the comfort zones of the social structure around you, and you find yourself somewhere on the edge, orbiting that core identity (which for me is membership in the church), cycling around and around while you figure out if you can be comfortable there, or if you want to abandon that new place for the old, orthodox one, or leave the orbit entirely; because really, once you find yourself somewhere on that edge, you never can never quite return---when you departed it, you left a blazen path behind you, scorched by the fires of inquiry, and that space will forever be there, a Grand Canyon of cognitive dissonance, ever spanning the space from where you were to where you are now.
Awhile back, I was speculating via social media on women being allowed to act as formal witnesses at baptisms (before the church handbook changed and it became new policy). A friend from high school pitched in and said, “I don’t see that happening, seeing as you have to hold an office of the priesthood to do that.” I commented that it had happened before (Camilla Kimball acted as a witness for a convert baptism that took place in India, 1961)--silence. My attitude on that matter, and many others, reflect the topic of discussion hosted by the podcast “At Last She Said It” in asking the bold question, “where’s the priesthood in that?”[1] Imagine my sense of irony when shortly after that conversation, official church policy changed and women have since been able to act as witnesses. Isn’t it interesting how we think things are static and can’t change---won’t change---until they do?
This is but one example of so many policies, ideas, and doctrines that have changed within LDS church history---women giving blessings, women not giving blessings; ordaining blacks to priesthood office, banning blacks from priesthood office, suggesting racist theory as to why the ban was in place, revoking the ban and eventually disavowing such theories as to why the ban was in place; declaring that polygamous union was the only way to obtain the highest celestial glory, the quietly re-writing the narrative to state that “marriage” is the only way to obtain the highest celestial glory and of which polygynous unions are also a part; unbendingly teaching that homosexual identity was a sin and also a choice, as well as something which someone could be cured of--- then changing teachings to clarify that homosexual identity was not a sin nor necessarily a choice, and disavowing conversion therapy[2]---the list goes on.
In the past, apologetic theological gymnastics have been readily supplied and applied to these scenarios in order to explain why in fact these issues aren’t so problematic---however, such arguments are losing credibility as church history becomes readily available to the masses and platforms aided by the internet allow safe and uncensored discussion on these matters (well, minus the SCMC who have been known to infiltrate, and if you don’t know what that is, look it up).
While reading comments on a recent podcast discussing the current state of membership decline in the church[3], someone commented that the frank and realistic nature of the discussion “made me feel a very unexpected nostalgia for the kind of inspiring, uplifting Mormonism that used to be the core of my noblest aspirations. Alas, my hopes have been utterly dashed a decade ago…” This sentiment of “dashed hopes” immediately struck a nerve in the spiritual memory of my lived experience---I, too, have felt my hopes dashed time and time again when it has been made clear to me that those in authority are not interested in boldly attacking that which ails church membership, leaving them spiritually starving to the point that for survival, they find themselves looking elsewhere for the spiritual nourishment the church isn’t providing. Such was the case for this commenter, who later stated, “I have happily since found greener spiritual and philosophical pastures far removed from anything that could comfortably return to a Mormon theology.”[4]
This may sound dramatic, but the situation of LDS identity and retention is indeed perilous--- despite continued temple construction around the world, the stark reality is that church membership has been in decline since 2012, and in Europe specifically, the decline is staggering (Birmingham, England stake has reported a 40% decrease in attendance since 2011, and out of 47 Stakes in the UK and Ireland, 41 are reporting negative growth trends).[5] Those familiar with the history and narrative behind the “Swedish Rescue”[6] know that the drop in church membership among western countries can, no doubt, be in relation to not just past repression and misrepresentation of church history, but even more so, how the church is currently largely ignoring the need for bold ownership of past mistakes, a clarification of doctrinal positioning, and show of sincere and humble effort to move the theology forward.
You may ask, “what do you mean by ‘move the theology forward?’” Allow me to explain:
I recently listened to a discussion where Phil McLemore (who happened to be a former CES area director and S&I instructor) referred to the fact that once you become aware of some of the more complex and controversial aspects of church history (both LDS and Christian in general), Biblical Hermeneutics, and alternate theologies, you involuntarily become part of an exclusive group he referred to as “The Brotherhood of Unsavory Secrets[7].” When I heard that phrase, my internal voice said “ahh so that’s it! Yes, you’ve been a member of that club for quite some time now.”
Indeed, being raised in a home where the more difficult topics of church history and culture were frequented, by the time I read the infamous CES letter, I found that I was already familiar with the apologetic gymnastics that provided orthodox answers to about 90% of its content. What perhaps “officially” inducted me into this club was my time in graduate school where my eyes were opened to the inconclusive reality of academic positions on religious matters---I was more than a little stunned when I realized there were persons with PhD’s in Theology, New Testament, Religion, Greek, ect. who had converted from Catholicism to Seventh Day Adventist, or from Baptist to Greek Orthodox, or even from an evangelical non-denominational church to the Messianic Jewish movement. All such persons were looking for missing pieces to the great puzzle of religious identity---and ironically, all such persons were very much content with their newly adopted theologies, finding the answers they were looking for.
In all my naivete, I was somehow certain that “someone” would know the answer to all the conflicting narratives. That “someone” would be able to answer my questions in a way that would either solidify the reality that the religious tradition I had been raised in was all it claimed to be, or, show clearly that it wasn’t, and put me on that alternate path to truth. Nothing like that happened, obviously. Nor do I continue to look for validation outside of myself. Upon reflection, I have since realized that while perhaps well intentioned, though the LDS tradition plays lip service to personal revelation, it draws clear lines on where the revelation crosses the line of “truth,” both generally and for the individual. This approach takes one from spiritual independence to spiritual insecurity, relying on a “go between,” usually a patriarchal one (a Bishop, a Stake President, a husband, a father) to ascertain your worthiness and lay down a clear and acceptable life path. Once someone’s thoughts, opinions, and conclusions conflict with the approved narrative, the patriarchal system is there to correct and discipline, and in the process, silence the tender developing inner voice that struggles to bud within so many of us, indeed, the very freedom in Christ that Paul the apostle was so bold to proclaim (Galatians 5:1).
So again, what of moving theology forward?
Sometime during my studies, the small seed cognitive dissonance between what I was learning and what I was taught to be true eventually grew, creating a crack in my paradigm; I realized that previously, I had experienced what could be characterized as indoctrination, where information was pushed into my mind and correct answers provided, rather than education, where one is taught how to think and then draw the most rational conclusions. I suddenly I realized I no longer believed that any system had it “right”---that no system fully holds God’s authority, but rather, WE as individuals have the authority to live with integrity and perfect the systems we engage with.
This realization, for me, was terrifying. At its core, it challenged so much of Mormonism’s current trends, and yet, at the same time, reflected the very ideas so celebrated in the narratives of what our tradition terms “the restoration.” The tension that existed between these concepts set my soul into a state of anxiety that lasted for years, and continues to raise its ugly head---for if I believe this, where do I belong? Am I “in” or am I “out” of the church tradition I was raised in? Is there a place for me now that I find myself in this space?
This was, perhaps, my “here I stand” moment. According to tradition, while Martin Luther was on trial for challenging the orthodoxy of the Catholic church, he boldly and meekly declared, “here I stand---I can do no other. God help me, Amen.” While scholars now admit this is most likely an embellishment on the narrative, the reality of Luther’s conviction is one I admire and resonate with. Luther’s studies convinced him that we are saved by faith in the reality of Christ’s ability to transform, and that our works are merely a reflection and natural byproduct of that faith. No amount of good works can become the salvational vehicle we hope for without a metanoia, a repentance, a change of mind about who we are in relation to God and his kingdom.
Now please, before you go throw me under the apostate bus, hear me out---
I realize that by holding these views, I am pushing myself outside of my orthodox community. Yet, what other choice do I have but to live with the integrity of my own understanding? Is that not where our genesis takes us as Mormons---to the grove, seeking divine acceptance and furthered truth? Consider the words in our official LDS narrative in Joseph Smith History, “Joseph, thy sins be forgiven thee”---this lays down the fundamental truth that God SEES us, he KNOWS us as individuals and that WE ARE acceptable to him. As we are. Right now. Additionally, it is from that encounter in the sacred grove that we get the radical notion that “creeds” demanding dogmatic allegiance are an abomination. How is it that we have wandered so far from those basic truths revealed in the grove, only to complicate salvation through demanded orthodoxy, creedal fideism, and refusing to formally find fault with glaring issues in church history and current church cultures, for fear of “speaking evil” of church leaders?
Richard Bushman, prominent LDS historian, unpardonably stated that “for the Church to remain strong it has to reconstruct its narrative. The dominant narrative is not true; it can’t be sustained. The Church has to absorb all this new information or it will be on very shaky grounds and that’s what it is trying to do…”[8] What IS the dominant narrative, you may be wondering?
I’ve heard it jokingly said that “the Catholics teach papal infallibility but they don’t believe it, the Latter-day Saints teach prophetic fallibility but they don’t believe it either!” As LDS history becomes more accessible, with the reality of the streamlined, white-washed, and neatly packaged narrative being inaccurate at best, and deceiving at worst, comes the responsibility of members and church leaders to abandon the overly-simplistic paradigm of emphasis and allegiance to the prophetic mantle, and in return embrace the messy, organic, and imperfect nature of how things have been done in the church, how they are currently being done, and how they will be done in the future.
Is this possible? I argue that not only is it possible, but further, it is essential if we as a membership want to overcome the current malaise within our congregations. The story of God and his interaction with Israel is a metaphor for all of humanity, for our interaction with God, our covenant and redemption with and through him. Mormonism is a 19th century reflection of belief in that truth, yet somehow we’ve forgotten its always been about the people, the individual, and not “the church.” There is a need for bold with creative theology, seeking for possible conclusions that have not yet been discovered that elevate and illuminate on women’s roles, individual authority/personal revelation, lgbtq issues, and social justice. Our integrity as disciples demands it.
In conclusion, let us reflect on the words of Roberta Bondi---
“Theology, I would now say, is about saving lives, and the work of theology…is saving work. First, it involves learning to see the ways in which false images of God, ourselves, and the world have bound us and taken away the life God intends for us. Second, it involves learning to know God and who God is, as a healing God, and learning to know ourselves, individually and communally, as people who correspond with that God in whose image we are made. Third, it involves imagining a future that is consistent with the God we come to know.”[9]
[1] https://atlastshesaidit.org/episode-035-wheres-the-priesthood-in-that/ [2] https://abcnews.go.com/Health/mormon-gay-cures-reparative-therapies-shock-today/story?id=13240700; http://www.mormonthink.com/glossary/electroshock-therapy-at-byu.htm [3] https://radiofreemormon.org/2020/12/radio-free-mormon-209-christians-v-pharisees/ [4] Shared with permission of Nathanael Taekema [5] Based in data made public by UK Charity Commission for England and Wales as well as a leaked document that can be found here (source confirmed credible): https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=42CC14E97C160EBE!880574&ithint=file%2Cxlsx&authkey=!ADq6BksNRYJVn-M&fbclid=IwAR08x7doH6fWk_lcuFp8HNeX8lZgCreX2AkwRtkSFTvBy7lB8mI9-hUTXEY [6] http://www.mormonthink.com/glossary/swedish-rescue2.htm [7] https://radiofreemormon.org/2020/10/radio-free-mormon-203-confessions-of-a-ces-director/ [8] https://ldsanswers.org/dominant-church-history-narrative-not-true-lds-scholars-encourage-new-history-new-policy-new-church/ [9] Roberta Bondi, Memories of God: Theological Reflections on a Life