Faith Crisis Training For Stake Leaders

[DBMormon]

Wade, I am a leader in a local congregation. I find Bill's materials very helpful - both personally, and in regards to counseling those I work with. That's just one data point, but it's at least one. I can also affirm that I know of other church leaders who have expressed gratitude for Bill's work (much higher leaders than me). Unfortunately, their time is more valuable than mine and they don't waste it on exercises like this message board.

I also take offense (yes, I choose to be offended) at your insinuation that Bill is doing this in order to obtain fame or financial return. I'd quote something about a mote and beam here, but it wouldn't be entirely accurate as there is no speck of bad intent in Bill's reasons for doing this work. If you attack Bill's motives, you might as well attack Scott Gordon and Henry B. Eyring. They stand to get much more fame and money from their extra-church work (books; conferences; etc), than Bill ever will.

But enough. Bill has already given you the "beef" you asked for. If that's not good enough, please set out a hypothetical fact pattern that you would find to be convincing. I doubt one exists.

For the record, I do enjoy knowing people listen to the podcast and get help from it. I also want my message heard as I know firsthand how much people are hurting. So if that is desiring fame... so be it. Am I trying to be heard... YES, but not to stoke my ego at least not in the way some want to assume.

second - I have accrued just under $600 in donations since I started the podcast but as you can see from here http://mormondiscuss....com/donations/

It has all been spent back into the podcast. So if we think I will make money and that is why I spend about 3 hours a week working on this... then one is crazy.

Wade, I have no problem with criticism, except you seem to criticize me at every turn. Not once have you gone out of your way to say I might be onto something. If I went by your appraisal of me, I would think nothing but negative things of myself. Every thread I have started or engaged in you have sought to but heads with me. I can easily name those who do that on this board and there are about 5 of you who seem to have some sort of vendetta against anything I say or do.

That said I participate in discussions on StayLDS, NewOrderMormon, and FAIR all very diverse and varying ends of the spectrum of faith and belief, and in none of those places am I treated like here. I share the same kinds of thoughts, ideas, positions.... That is weird. Maybe it's me

Edited April 16, 2013 by DBMormon

[DBMormon]

Are you a bishop?

Are you permitted to ask that?

[Tacenda]

As I recall, FAIR President Scott Gordon gave a presentation at the annual conference a couple of years ago in which he shared his observation from experience that with many (perhaps it is most) people, by the time they finally express their doubts to others, they are already beyond the point of rescue. That is, they have pretty much made up their mind already (whether they are willing to admit it or not) and are at the point where they are only seeking validation for the conclusions they have already reached.

What Scott Gordon said on that occasion pretty much squares with my own observation as I have lurked and participated on message boards over the years. That's why I have very recently taken to asking the question (if only in my own mind) when encountering a doubter: Do you really want your questions resolved, or are you merely seeking to have your complaints/objections validated?

The point I am getting to is that I'm not optimistic at how effective any program or paradigm will be with a person who has come to such a mindset.

You never know until you've been there, anything is better than the finality of that doubt.

[DBMormon]

I didn't. I just don't see it as doing the opposite--which was my point.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Episodes of my podcast that very obviously push faith over doubt

http://mormondiscussion.podbean.com/2013/03/04/terryl-givens-qa-god-who-weeps/

http://mormondiscussion.podbean.com/2013/02/26/anthon-transcript-what-do-we-make-of-the-conflicting-stories/

http://mormondiscussion.podbean.com/2013/02/18/why-faith-is-a-choice-and-more-important-than-knowledge/

http://mormondiscussion.podbean.com/2013/02/04/matt-francom-interview-part-1/

http://mormondiscussion.podbean.com/2013/01/10/the-worth-of-souls-is-great/

http://mormondiscussion.podbean.com/2012/12/12/part-1-bill-reels-interview-with-fair/

http://mormondiscussion.podbean.com/2012/12/04/multiple-accounts-of-the-first-vision-contradictory-or-complementary/

http://mormondiscussion.podbean.com/2012/10/26/will-you-receive-the-holy-ghost/

http://mormondiscussion.podbean.com/2012/10/16/a-return-to-fishing-and-a-quest-for-loyalty/

Ones that obviously push doubt over faith

0

Again I feel your missing a chance to be fair in an effort to dislike me on some level.

[Scott Lloyd]

Are you permitted to ask that?

I don't see why not. He is free to decline to respond.

I'm not digging for personal information, just specifics on what is meant by "leader in a local congregation." I think it is germane to the conversation. If that means bishop, why not say so?

If not, well, I would wonder why a clerk or secretary or Sunday School president would be counseling people who are going through faith crises. It seems to me that is the province of a bishop or stake president.

[sethpayne]

Faith Crisis Training Fireside for Stake Leaders.

.....

Hey DB,

Kudos to you for taking the initiative to do something like this. Sounds like you are working with your SP which I think is great because undoubtedly, he can share some insight on the specific needs of Bishops/members in the stake.

As to whether this type of info would be helpful to the Church generally .... well, I don't know. I think that is one of the many good things about local leadership. They can determine what is best for their congregations.

Seth

[DBMormon]

I don't see why not. He is free to decline to respond.

I'm not digging for personal information, just specifics on what is meant by "leader in a local congregation." I think it is germane to the conversation. If that means bishop, why not say so?

If not, well, I would wonder why a clerk or secretary or Sunday School president would be counseling people who are going through faith crises. It seems to me that is the province of a bishop or stake president.

My point is I do not believe the rules of the board permit that

[Scott Lloyd]

My point is I do not believe the rules of the board permit that

Well, I want to follow the rules. Can you cite a specific one that I am violating?

Bear in mind I am not seeking to know his personal identity, only what he means by "leader in a local congregation."

[DBMormon]

Well, I want to follow the rules. Can you cite a specific one that I am violating?

Bear in mind I am not seeking to know his personal identity, only what he means by "leader in a local congregation."

Yes but I have told who I am and where I live and he has mentioned knowing me, so deciphering who he is with a couple of answers wouldn't be hard.

[Scott Lloyd]

Yes but I have told who I am and where I live and he has mentioned knowing me, so deciphering who he is with a couple of answers wouldn't be hard.

As I said, I'm not interested in that, only in understanding the meaning in this instance of "leader in a local congregation."

If he wants to decline to respond, that's fine. I think I've made my point about vagueness in such phrasing.

[Scott Lloyd]

... you might as well attack Scott Gordon and Henry B. Eyring. They stand to get much more fame and money from their extra-church work (books; conferences; etc), than Bill ever will.

Scott (who posts here on occasion) can correct me if necessary, or perhaps calmoriah, who is in a position to know, but I don't think Scott earns any money from his work with FAIR. I understand that the annual conference is a break-even affair.

[stemelbow]

How could they have already been shunned because of their doubts when they haven't been open about their doubts until after they've already made up their mind?

lol you got me. but it seems safe to say that people feel guilty about having doubts. Based on what I"ve heard that seems to be true.

[Scott Lloyd]

lol you got me. but it seems safe to say that people feel guilty about having doubts. Based on what I"ve heard that seems to be true.

That could well be the case.

And I can see the need for some kind of effort to motivate them to reach out for help before they become so entrenched in negativity and darkness that they cannot be easily dislodged therefrom. I applaud DBMormon and others for trying to do something in that regard.

In a broad sense, I can see the Church trying to do that with all of us, wherever we may be in terms of the strength of our faith and testimony. When the scripture speaks of going to the house of prayer on the Lord's day to offer up our sacraments so that we may more perfectly remain "unspotted from the world," I think it has direct application to what we're discussing here.

To put it another way, letting doubt overcome faith is one way in which we may be increasingly "spotted from the world."

Edited April 16, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[Tacenda]

Did I read someone say Henry B. Eyring? Here's a quote I read on FB today....

A quote from Henry Eyring that I really like-

"The fundamental principle that has guided my religious life is that I need believe only what is true. The gospel is the truth as learned or discovered by whatever means and tools I can lay my hand or mind on".

Edited April 16, 2013 by Tacenda

[wenglund]

Wade, I am a leader in a local congregation. I find Bill's materials very helpful - both personally, and in regards to counseling those I work with. That's just one data point, but it's at least one. I can also affirm that I know of other church leaders who have expressed gratitude for Bill's work (much higher leaders than me).

Again, wonderful. However, it is a data point for some nebulous notion of "helpful," and not specific to Bill's claims. If that is fine for you, then great. I am just looking for a bit more rational substantiation.

I also take offense (yes, I choose to be offended) at your insinuation that Bill is doing this in order to obtain fame or financial return.

I made no such insinuation. So, your offense is evidently a product of your own mind. Feel free to self-apologize.

Rather, I was speaking to things Bill has explicitly requested on his web site--i.e. spread the news and his needing financial help.

I'd quote something about a mote and beam here, but it wouldn't be entirely accurate as there is no speck of bad intent in Bill's reasons for doing this work.

I can only speak for myself, but I haven't suggested otherwise. So whatever mote and beam application you may have in mind, may best be said to the person in your mirror.

If you attack Bill's motives, you might as well attack Scott Gordon and Henry B. Eyring. They stand to get much more fame and money from their extra-church work (books; conferences; etc), than Bill ever will.

I haven't attacked Bills motives. You, on the other hand, have worked yourself up into hysterics over something you falsely assumed. You should be ashamed of yourself.

But enough. Bill has already given you the "beef" you asked for.

No, he has not. He has posted some vague testimonials about how his podcasts have made people feel and helped them, but it doesn't come close to reasonably substantiating his specifics claims.

If he and you and others are fine with that, then so be it. I am simply and genuinely answering his question as I reasonably see fit. To each their own.

If that's not good enough, please set out a hypothetical fact pattern that you would find to be convincing. I doubt one exists.

You are incorrect. I have in mind a number of concrete social science research techniques used to test the efficacy of various counseling practices, like Research on School Counseling Effectiveness, not the least of which is quantitative analysis and use of case studies.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[CASteinman]

Thoughts?

I am thinking this is a bit weak while at the same time being a bit too intellectual. There is a sense of the "rubber hits the road" that is missing here for most people who will have these struggles. In addition, I really do not see any flavor in here of a sense of sacrifice and commitment being required of those who struggle.

The video from Packard at BYU seems to get more to those things. Yet it is not included.

Seems also, not a single Apostle is included in the presentation. But wouldn't it be helpful to include the words of men like Jeffrey Holland or Dallin Oaks, who have sometimes addressed these issues?

So, those are sort of the weaknesses. But on the other hand, this is a difficult matter to wrap your arms around and I like it that you are working on this. I think that getting the balance must be very challenging.

Edited April 16, 2013 by CASteinman

[wenglund]

Wade, I have no problem with criticism, except you seem to criticize me at every turn. Not once have you gone out of your way to say I might be onto something. If I went by your appraisal of me, I would think nothing but negative things of myself. Every thread I have started or engaged in you have sought to but heads with me. I can easily name those who do that on this board and there are about 5 of you who seem to have some sort of vendetta against anything I say or do.

Actually, I have said very little to you over the last few months, and in this case, my criticism was intended to enhance your efforts rather than impede them. So, you may want to scale way back on the persecution perception. You also may want to consider your own negative part in our interactions.

That said I participate in discussions on StayLDS, NewOrderMormon, and FAIR all very diverse and varying ends of the spectrum of faith and belief, and in none of those places am I treated like here. I share the same kinds of thoughts, ideas, positions.... That is weird. Maybe it's me

Maybe. But, unlike you, I am not looking to blame. Rather, I am looking to provide what I believe to be efficacious insights. To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

Episodes of my podcast that very obviously push faith over doubt

http://mormondiscuss...-god-who-weeps/

http://mormondiscuss...icting-stories/

http://mormondiscuss...than-knowledge/

http://mormondiscuss...terview-part-1/

http://mormondiscuss...souls-is-great/

http://mormondiscuss...view-with-fair/

http://mormondiscuss...-complementary/

http://mormondiscuss...the-holy-ghost/

http://mormondiscuss...st-for-loyalty/

Ones that obviously push doubt over faith

0

Again I feel your missing a chance to be fair in an effort to dislike me on some level.

I don't have the time to go through all your podcasts, nor would it be relevant to what I said. I wasn't speaking about your podcasts in general, but rather about the specific presentation that is the topic of this thread. I listened to all of your presentation except for the end of your testimony, and at no time did I hear you making the point about leading with and/or prioritizing faith over doubt. Since you likely have the transcript, feel free to quote from it to the contrary.

And, you are certainly free to look overly-defensively for dislike in whatever I say, whether it is there or intended or not. Nevertheless, it is beside the perfectly reasonable and helpful criticism that I have proffered. Take it or leave it.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[mfbukowski]

I like it but it's not gonna happen in my stake unless it has some kind of "church authorization" so no one has to review it or think about it.

If it's not a church turnkey operation, I don't think it will fly very far unfortunately. No one can afford the time to review it and give it an ok.

Sad but true, methinks.

[Robert F. Smith]

Well, I want to follow the rules. Can you cite a specific one that I am violating?

Bear in mind I am not seeking to know his personal identity, only what he means by "leader in a local congregation."

He already gave us his personal identity on this thread, so he may be a bit hesitant to let it all hang out.

[cinepro]

As I recall, FAIR President Scott Gordon gave a presentation at the annual conference a couple of years ago in which he shared his observation from experience that with many (perhaps it is most) people, by the time they finally express their doubts to others, they are already beyond the point of rescue. That is, they have pretty much made up their mind already (whether they are willing to admit it or not) and are at the point where they are only seeking validation for the conclusions they have already reached.

True or not, that would definitely make for a quicker presentation.

[CASteinman]

I like it but it's not gonna happen in my stake unless it has some kind of "church authorization" so no one has to review it or think about it.

If it's not a church turnkey operation, I don't think it will fly very far unfortunately. No one can afford the time to review it and give it an ok.

Sad but true, methinks.

This is not exactly all bad. The Church has a larger body of people and experiences it can draw on with regard to both the problems encountered and what is useful to do.

[canard78]

Be that as it may, I can respect how people struggling with faith seem to rally around people like Bill and Dehlin. It just strike me as ironic that those seemingly most apt to advise testing and challenging the beliefs of the Church, seem the most defensive when the same may be applied to their pet approach to the Church.

All I am asking is, "where's the beef?" Give me something solid to hold onto. Is that unfair and asking too much?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Come off it Wade, Bill is nothing like Dehlin. I mean that in a good way. They are facing in completely opposite directions.

I was not around this board during Bill "faith crisis" so I don't know what your history is with each other. But I still find your reaction to this excessive.

[mfbukowski]

This is not exactly all bad. The Church has a larger body of people and experiences it can draw on with regard to both the problems encountered and what is useful to do.

Well for me and for my SP, fortunately or "un" it is a question of "who is this guy and what gives him any authority to speak for the church?" "Does he have all the doctrine right?"

Now we have to answer that question which requires research, and time, time time, when there is little of it and it is precious. "Ask your bishop" is an infinitely easier answer to someone's faith crisis, unfortunately

At least Mike Ash's Shaken Faith Syndrome is published by Deseret, which oddly gives it a bit of an "imprimatur"- and it is informally provided not implying church authorization.

When priesthood leaders allow a presentation, it implies endorsement which is a responsibility.

If the author is known personally by the SP all those concerns go away- the guy is known in his stake as a good scriptorian etc and he does a fireside etc- no problem

But going outside of his area, he is going to need some kind of authorization.

I mean even if an unknown (to the bishop) general authority comes to baptize his great grand child, he better have a current temple recommend and an authorization from his bishop or it ain't gonna happen.

Today you have to have a "who the heck is this guy- and what's he doing here" attitude about everyone!

[Scott Lloyd]

I like it but it's not gonna happen in my stake unless it has some kind of "church authorization" so no one has to review it or think about it.

If it's not a church turnkey operation, I don't think it will fly very far unfortunately. No one can afford the time to review it and give it an ok.

Sad but true, methinks.

I pretty much agree with you about the initiative not having any legs beyond the local units where it has originated. But I don't see that fact as being all that "unfortunate" or "sad."

As I hinted in a prior post, I am not one who makes a boogeyman out of top-down priesthood correlation. I believe there is great safety in it, and I regard it as inspired of God.

Local leaders have a certain degree of leeway as they seek inspiration and implement programs for the benefit of those under their own watch care, but I see obvious red flags with any attempt to spread some sort of ecclesiastical movement from stake to stake without direct involvement from the general leadership of the Church.

Edited April 16, 2013 by Scott Lloyd