How Prevalent Are Serious Doubters In The Lds Church

[Buckeye]

Hi Bill,

 

To answer the OP, I'm not sure any of us on this board has a good idea of the prevelance of faith crises, especially for the church world-wide.  I can make some localized judgments based off of my personal experiences, but I think the best indicator we have is the increased attention being given church leaders.  Church websites and press statements are being created that give nuance and leave room for a larger variety of beliefs.  The most recent general conferences have had significant, and increasing, attention paid to the issue.  In fact, in my recollection, last conference probably had more references to faith crises than to pornography.  Compare that to 10 years ago where every other address seemed to be about porn.  I don't think that's an indicator that we've solved porn.  If anything we're throwing up our hands in frustration.  Rather, it's a reaction to the growing concern over faith crises.

 

That said, I'll also give my my personal 2-cents:

 

1. Faith crises are a relatively minor but growing problem.  Porn, gossip, and general apathy affect many more members than BOA and polygamy.  For now.
2. Those experiencing faith crises are disproportionally strong members and local leaders - i.e., the "cream of the crop."  So while the numbers may be fewer than for other issues, the affect on the church is more substantial than pure numbers would indicate.
3. Faith crises are faithly unique in how members and local leaders typically react.  For most other issues we react with compassion.  We don't feel personally threatened with Bro. Smith starts smoking.  But for faith crises, very often we treat the person as if they need to be quarantined for the good of others.  They - the person - become the problem rather than the historical issue.  The only thing comprable is, ironically, porn (I know, again?), which also becomes overly personal and so tends to be covered up rather than dealt with. 
4. Faith crises are also unique in that their end-game differs from other problems.  With porn, WOW, etc., the goal is to remove the behavior and restore trust.  For faith crises, there "is no going back."  The person has to find a new paradigm.  While that is very possible, it often means the person will have a different outlook than many of their friends/family.  So not only is there no going back for the person's testimony, there is no going back to the same relationships.
5. Faith issues are very different for youth than adults.  For youth, faith issues are generally not as severe because they have not become as rigid as adults in their belief system.  They rarely feel "lied to" because they haven't been around that many years.  They're used to encountering new, even conflicting, information.  And they don't take it personally when the church changes position.  They were never that wedded to the old position and did not sacrifice for it.  As one example, youth reacted to the women's prayer in GC with an honest "I never noticed."  But for some older adults who had been taught at one point that women should not pray in conference, it was a harder change.  Same thing with the racial priesthood ban.  Expunging "folklore" reasons for the ban affects older members much more because they internalized those reasons in ways the youth never did. 
6. For youth, the primary problems are social and economic issues.  Changing gender roles, female ordination, and especially gays.  Something like 75% of young adults in the US support SSM.  For church youth, the numbers are probably less, but not much.  That issue is a potential trainwreck.  But even more challenging are changes to adulthood.  There is a large and growing gap between leaving the YM/YW program and entering full adulthood with marriage and kids.  Right now we simply don't have much to offer that group.  Not surprising, we have activity rates in the single digits.  Yes, that problem existed in the past too, but I think there is a difference between youth stepping away from the church for 2-3 years and stepping away for 10-15.

[BCSpace]

Is leaving the Church a sin?

 

If the Church is true, then logically, yes it is.  There is also D&C 84:42....

 

Of course it shouldn't matter at all to the one leaving.

[why me]

Doubt has been a product of the church since its foundation. If one would ask that question in 1837 I am sure that many hands would go up too. Even in 1832 most likely hands would go up. At that time we had general authorities leave the church, working their wonders the membership. Aposacy, doubt, leaving the church are throughout the history of the lds faith.

 

We just happen to be living in this day and age where doubt is back in fashion. But we have had such cycles before and the lds church has survived.

Edited August 28, 2013 by why me

[sdc999]

 

 

I don't see why. Ostensibly upstanding members unfortunately are among those who become addicted to porn. An outsider could say, "If Mormonism is supposed to make people so good and strong, why did that guy get addicted to porn?"

They could say that only if you put that person up on a pedestal and said, hey look, a porn addict.  Most porn addicts don't go around with a sign around their neck.  They also aren't looking to bring others out with them as an apostate would.    Just as a missionary thinks he/she has a good message to share with someone to make their life better, most apostates think the same way.  They believe being away from the LDS church makes for a better life and they are willing to share that with those they care about.   And I do clarify LDS because some do leave and go on to maintain Christ in their lives and worship at other places.  

Some are vindictive and want nothing more than to cause harm to the church. 

[why me]

Members addicted to porn can and do harm the image of the Church. It's not often to a debilitating degree, but the potential for harm is there, particularly if the person is prominent and/or his addiction progresses to sex crimes, the hiring of prostitutes and what not.

 

Most porn addicts are sitting quietly at their computer looking at adult images of people having sex. I think that for most, they look at it several hours a week, mainly through a paid porn channel. And most don't take it outside private viewing. Where it does harm is in the happiness level of the member. A porn addict is basically not very happy with their addiction but they have very little control over it. And it dims the senses which also affects a member's sunday fellowshipping potential.

[The Nehor]

Most porn addicts are sitting quietly at their computer looking at adult images of people having sex. I think that for most, they look at it several hours a week, mainly through a paid porn channel. And most don't take it outside private viewing. Where it does harm is in the happiness level of the member. A porn addict is basically not very happy with their addiction but they have very little control over it. And it dims the senses which also affects a member's sunday fellowshipping potential.

People who pay for porn are doing it wrong. Just saying.

[why me]

They could say that only if you put that person up on a pedestal and said, hey look, a porn addict.  Most porn addicts don't go around with a sign around their neck.  They also aren't looking to bring others out with them as an apostate would.    Just as a missionary thinks he/she has a good message to share with someone to make their life better, most apostates think the same way.  They believe being away from the LDS church makes for a better life and they are willing to share that with those they care about.   And I do clarify LDS because some do leave and go on to maintain Christ in their lives and worship at other places.  

Some are vindictive and want nothing more than to cause harm to the church. 

´But it does affect their soul in small ways that often only they notice. And in this way, it does affect the church as a whole. And porn addicts are not necessarily inactive. I would bet that many are active who know that they have a problem and feel helpless in solving it. And then they take the problem into the marriage if they developed it as a single man or woman.

 

Research suggests that men talk porn with their wives or girlfriends through their speech during the sex act. They don't talk porn per se, but through their action in the bedroom they do.

[Palerider]

 

Hi Bill,

 

To answer the OP, I'm not sure any of us on this board has a good idea of the prevelance of faith crises, especially for the church world-wide.  I can make some localized judgments based off of my personal experiences, but I think the best indicator we have is the increased attention being given church leaders.  Church websites and press statements are being created that give nuance and leave room for a larger variety of beliefs.  The most recent general conferences have had significant, and increasing, attention paid to the issue.  In fact, in my recollection, last conference probably had more references to faith crises than to pornography.  Compare that to 10 years ago where every other address seemed to be about porn.  I don't think that's an indicator that we've solved porn.  If anything we're throwing up our hands in frustration.  Rather, it's a reaction to the growing concern over faith crises.

 

That said, I'll also give my my personal 2-cents:

• Faith crises are a relatively minor but growing problem.  Porn, gossip, and general apathy affect many more members than BOA and polygamy.  For now.
• Those experiencing faith crises are disproportionally strong members and local leaders - i.e., the "cream of the crop."  So while the numbers may be fewer than for other issues, the affect on the church is more substantial than pure numbers would indicate.
• Faith crises are faithly unique in how members and local leaders typically react.  For most other issues we react with compassion.  We don't feel personally threatened with Bro. Smith starts smoking.  But for faith crises, very often we treat the person as if they need to be quarantined for the good of others.  They - the person - become the problem rather than the historical issue.  The only thing comprable is, ironically, porn (I know, again?), which also becomes overly personal and so tends to be covered up rather than dealt with. 
• Faith crises are also unique in that their end-game differs from other problems.  With porn, WOW, etc., the goal is to remove the behavior and restore trust.  For faith crises, there "is no going back."  The person has to find a new paradigm.  While that is very possible, it often means the person will have a different outlook than many of their friends/family.  So not only is there no going back for the person's testimony, there is no going back to the same relationships.
• Faith issues are very different for youth than adults.  For youth, faith issues are generally not as severe because they have not become as rigid as adults in their belief system.  They rarely feel "lied to" because they haven't been around that many years.  They're used to encountering new, even conflicting, information.  And they don't take it personally when the church changes position.  They were never that wedded to the old position and did not sacrifice for it.  As one example, youth reacted to the women's prayer in GC with an honest "I never noticed."  But for some older adults who had been taught at one point that women should not pray in conference, it was a harder change.  Same thing with the racial priesthood ban.  Expunging "folklore" reasons for the ban affects older members much more because they internalized those reasons in ways the youth never did. 
• For youth, the primary problems are social and economic issues.  Changing gender roles, female ordination, and especially gays.  Something like 75% of young adults in the US support SSM.  For church youth, the numbers are probably less, but not much.  That issue is a potential trainwreck.  But even more challenging are changes to adulthood.  There is a large and growing gap between leaving the YM/YW program and entering full adulthood with marriage and kids.  Right now we simply don't have much to offer that group.  Not surprising, we have activity rates in the single digits.  Yes, that problem existed in the past too, but I think there is a difference between youth stepping away from the church for 2-3 years and stepping away for 10-15.

Excellent analysis.

[why me]

People who pay for porn are doing it wrong. Just saying.

Not really. One can always pick up a virus with the free sites. Much safer with a paid site. And many paid sites offer a 'sensitive' view to sex. However, I don't see the connection between doubt and porn. Porn doesn't create doubt in the church since most porn addicts would see that the church is correct about it. In fact, the lds church was in the forefront against porn before it was even considered harmful.

[Palerider]

 

Doubt has been a product of the church since its foundation. If one would ask that question in 1837 I am sure that many hands would go up too. Even in 1832 most likely hands would go up. At that time we had general authorities leave the church, working their wonders the membership. Aposacy, doubt, leaving the church are throughout the history of the lds faith.

 

We just happen to be living in this day and age where doubt is back in fashion. But we have had such cycles before and the lds church has survived.

I don't recall the exact percentage of loss of membership in Kirtland. 30%-50% comes to mind.

I'm just wondering if next Sunday you walked into church to find 50% of your ward missing including some of your top leadership (and you were informed that 5 of the quorum of the 12 had left as well) would you consider that the church had been damaged?

Edit:

I'm guessing the majority of those who left never returned to Joseph or Brigham.

And remember, Porn as we know it, was definitely not a factor then.

Edited August 28, 2013 by Palerider

[Scott Lloyd]

They could say that only if you put that person up on a pedestal and said, hey look, a porn addict. 

A comparable statement could be made about those who fall away for intellectual reasons -- that they harm the Church only if you put them on a pedestal.

 

 

Most porn addicts don't go around with a sign around their neck. 

 

When they undergo Church discipline for causes related to porn addiction, they become more-or-less visible.

 

Many of those who doubt do it in secret as well.

 

 

They also aren't looking to bring others out with them as an apostate would.    Just as a missionary thinks he/she has a good message to share with someone to make their life better, most apostates think the same way.  They believe being away from the LDS church makes for a better life and they are willing to share that with those they care about.

 

 

As I've already pointed out, the Church has survived for 183 years now, despite the constant presence of apostates who become detractors. Most of us are able to take them in stride.

[Scott Lloyd]

 

Those experiencing faith crises are disproportionally strong members and local leaders - i.e., the "cream of the crop."  So while the numbers may be fewer than for other issues, the affect on the church is more substantial than pure numbers would indicate.

Absent reliable statistics, I doubt the accuracy of this.

 

And let me hasten to add that I don't find John Dehlin's Internet "survey" of self-selected respondents all that compelling.

[ERayR]

There have always been those that accept the church or were raised in the church and then distance themselves from it.  Looking at this statistic to judge the health and vibrancy of the church is misleading.  If one wants to see what is really happening in the Church look at those who embrace it and change their lives.  They are the real measure of the Church.

[ERayR]

 

I don't recall the exact percentage of lose of membership in Kirtland. 30%-50% comes to mind.

I'm just wondering if next Sunday you walked into church to find 50% of your ward missing including some of your top leadership (and you were informed that 5 of the quorum of the 12 had left as well) would you consider that the church had been damaged?

Edit:

I'm guessing the majority of those who left never returned to Joseph or Brigham.

And remember, Porn as we know it, was definitely not a factor then.

 

I think that others would be called to assume the duties that were abdicated and the work would continue to move forward.  There is no doubt that those who had left would be missed but they are not irreplacable.

[Buckeye]

Absent reliable statistics, I doubt the accuracy of this.

 

And let me hasten to add that I don't find John Dehlin's Internet "survey" of self-selected respondents all that compelling.

 

I agree there are not great statistics.  Can you provide a basis for why you disagree?  I believe this is accurate because (i) Dehlin and others' statements (which while limited are better than nothing), (ii) personal experience, and (iii) simple logic.  It takes a lot of time and interest to delve into historical issues.  Those that choose to do so, therefore, would tend to be those who are most vested in the church.  And to be clear, by "strong members and local leaders" I don't mean just stake president-types.  I mean regularly attending and likely endowed.  In my judgment, a fully-active member who runs learns about the BOA issues is much more likely to have a "crisis" than someone who hasn't attended in years.  The less active don't experience the same crisis because it doesn't alter their lives that much.

 

But that's me.  How do you see it differently?

[Scott Lloyd]

 

I don't recall the exact percentage of loss of membership in Kirtland. 30%-50% comes to mind.

I'm just wondering if next Sunday you walked into church to find 50% of your ward missing including some of your top leadership (and you were informed that 5 of the quorum of the 12 had left as well) would you consider that the church had been damaged?

Edit:

I'm guessing the majority of those who left never returned to Joseph or Brigham.

And remember, Porn as we know it, was definitely not a factor then.

I question your recollection about the extent of the loss of the membership in Kirtland.

 

I found this:

 

Scholars have generally assumed that there was a general apostasy in Kirtland. Brigham Young, for instance, said that the apostasy affected witnesses to the Book of Mormon, many of the Twelve, other authorities, and members in all the quorums.¹⁵ One eyewitness of the Kirtland events declared that “scarcely twenty people still considered [Joseph Smith] a prophet of God.”¹⁶

These statements seem to be supported when we look at who apostatized. All of the Three Witnesses, three of the Eight Witnesses, and one-third of the General Authorities, including three Apostles, left the Church in 1837 and 1838. Moreover, two other Apostles criticized Joseph Smith’s leadership and were nearly cut off from Church membership.

A look at early records, however, indicates that the apostasy was not general among the average members. Although no known ecclesiastical records exist that identify all who were disfellowshipped or excommunicated in 1837 and 1838, and no membership records for the 1830s have been found, minute books, biographies, autobiographies, and other primary and secondary sources provide clues to early membership. Furthermore, a study of migration patterns of early Latter-day Saints provides useful insight into the number affected by the crisis in Kirtland.¹⁷

To ascertain the extent of the apostasy, I first prepared a list of members in Kirtland, using a variety of records and histories. Second, I divided the members into two categories: those who probably resided in Kirtland, and those who possibly resided there. The “probable” Saints were identified through land and tax records, biographies, and autobiographies as living there.

The “possible” Saints were those who were in the community in 1837 or 1838 but were not identified in other records as residents of that township. Some may have lived in Kirtland without ever paying a tax there or ever writing anything about their residency. Some may have lived near but not in Kirtland. Others may have been visitors or may have been passing through on their journey west. Many of the Saints signed their name to the Kirtland Camp constitution in March 1838, anticipating travel west under the direction of the seventies. We do not know when most of these people arrived in Kirtland, but they were in that community in the spring of 1838.

Finally, I compared the names on the two lists with the names on reconstructed membership lists for western Missouri, Nauvoo and vicinity, southwestern Iowa and northeastern Nebraska, and mid-nineteenth-century Utah. Though a few known apostates migrated from Kirtland to Far West, Missouri, most of those who went retained their loyalty to the Restoration. The comparison shows that 71 percent of the Kirtland Saints of 1837 and 1838 migrated to western Missouri, 69 percent settled in Nauvoo and its neighboring region, and 35 percent crossed the plains to Utah (or died during the migration). Eighty-seven percent appear on at least one of these records as having remained faithful. Thus, based on an estimated 475 Latter-day Saint families living in or near Kirtland, only about 13 percent, or approximately fifty families, left the Church during the Kirtland crisis. This estimate harmonizes with a statement by John Smith, writing from Kirtland in January 1838, that mentions that forty or fifty had recently been cut off from the Church.¹⁸ Records also indicate that about 40 percent later returned to the Church.

In light of these statistics, the statement that scarcely twenty people still considered Joseph Smith to be a prophet of God may have referred to Church leaders, not to all the members living in the Kirtland area. It’s also possible that a high percentage of the membership were critical of the Prophet but repented before they came to the point of leaving the Church. Clearly, though, the majority of the dissidents came from the ranks of the leading authorities.

Although their numbers were not great, their once-prominent positions in the Church gave them much visibility and power after they left. While some dissidents, like Luke Johnson, did not participate in or condone oppressive action against the Saints, others provided leading voices that agitated Church antagonists into action.¹⁹

In spite of this anti-Mormon activity, the Kirtland apostates did not prosper. They could not agree on a united course of action, and they split into multiple factions. Bickering and contention, which marked the dissenters’ passage from the Church, continued after excommunication. No major religious group emerged from this apostasy.

 

(Emphasis in bold face mine.)

[BCSpace]

With regards to porn usage, many Wards and Stakes have addiction specialists called and they serve kind of like it's a mission to help those with substance and porn addictions.  A few years ago, some gave the 5th Sunday lesson in my local ward and the men and women were addressed separately in different rooms.  We men were asked to look at the person on our left and then the one on our right and then told that statistically one of the people we looked at was involved with porn.  If I had to guess, the numbers might be higher now.

[DBMormon]

 

Hi Bill,

 

To answer the OP, I'm not sure any of us on this board has a good idea of the prevelance of faith crises, especially for the church world-wide.  I can make some localized judgments based off of my personal experiences, but I think the best indicator we have is the increased attention being given church leaders.  Church websites and press statements are being created that give nuance and leave room for a larger variety of beliefs.  The most recent general conferences have had significant, and increasing, attention paid to the issue.  In fact, in my recollection, last conference probably had more references to faith crises than to pornography.  Compare that to 10 years ago where every other address seemed to be about porn.  I don't think that's an indicator that we've solved porn.  If anything we're throwing up our hands in frustration.  Rather, it's a reaction to the growing concern over faith crises.

 

That said, I'll also give my my personal 2-cents:

 

1. Faith crises are a relatively minor but growing problem.  Porn, gossip, and general apathy affect many more members than BOA and polygamy.  For now.
2. Those experiencing faith crises are disproportionally strong members and local leaders - i.e., the "cream of the crop."  So while the numbers may be fewer than for other issues, the affect on the church is more substantial than pure numbers would indicate.
3. Faith crises are faithly unique in how members and local leaders typically react.  For most other issues we react with compassion.  We don't feel personally threatened with Bro. Smith starts smoking.  But for faith crises, very often we treat the person as if they need to be quarantined for the good of others.  They - the person - become the problem rather than the historical issue.  The only thing comprable is, ironically, porn (I know, again?), which also becomes overly personal and so tends to be covered up rather than dealt with. 
4. Faith crises are also unique in that their end-game differs from other problems.  With porn, WOW, etc., the goal is to remove the behavior and restore trust.  For faith crises, there "is no going back."  The person has to find a new paradigm.  While that is very possible, it often means the person will have a different outlook than many of their friends/family.  So not only is there no going back for the person's testimony, there is no going back to the same relationships.
5. Faith issues are very different for youth than adults.  For youth, faith issues are generally not as severe because they have not become as rigid as adults in their belief system.  They rarely feel "lied to" because they haven't been around that many years.  They're used to encountering new, even conflicting, information.  And they don't take it personally when the church changes position.  They were never that wedded to the old position and did not sacrifice for it.  As one example, youth reacted to the women's prayer in GC with an honest "I never noticed."  But for some older adults who had been taught at one point that women should not pray in conference, it was a harder change.  Same thing with the racial priesthood ban.  Expunging "folklore" reasons for the ban affects older members much more because they internalized those reasons in ways the youth never did. 
6. For youth, the primary problems are social and economic issues.  Changing gender roles, female ordination, and especially gays.  Something like 75% of young adults in the US support SSM.  For church youth, the numbers are probably less, but not much.  That issue is a potential trainwreck.  But even more challenging are changes to adulthood.  There is a large and growing gap between leaving the YM/YW program and entering full adulthood with marriage and kids.  Right now we simply don't have much to offer that group.  Not surprising, we have activity rates in the single digits.  Yes, that problem existed in the past too, but I think there is a difference between youth stepping away from the church for 2-3 years and stepping away for 10-15.

 

 

I loved this post and would agree with almost every word of it.   AAA+++

[Scott Lloyd]

I agree there are not great statistics.  Can you provide a basis for why you disagree?

I think, in this instance, you have the burden of proof.

 

 

I believe this is accurate because (i) Dehlin and others' statements (which while limited are better than nothing),

 

Not necessarily.

 

 

(ii) personal experience, and (iii) simple logic.  It takes a lot of time and interest to delve into historical issues.  Those that choose to do so, therefore, would tend to be those who are most vested in the church. 

 

Among those who choose to do so are scholars who have made careers out of studying the doctrine and history of the Church and who have maintained very strong testimonies indeed. The incident of a Hans Mattsson, for example, still seems more the exception than the rule -- so much so that somebody like him gets a lot of attention when he goes public.

 

On the other hand, one is not apt to hear about the person who quietly resolves his doubts and maintains his testimony. Why? Well, because he has quietly resolved them.

 

 

 

And to be clear, by "strong members and local leaders" I don't mean just stake president-types.  I mean regularly attending and likely endowed.  In my judgment, a fully-active member who runs learns about the BOA issues is much more likely to have a "crisis" than someone who hasn't attended in years. 

 

 

I think such a person is just as apt not to be troubled by it or to place it in perspective when recalling the past spiritual experiences and knowledge he/she has gained, or to put it in abeyance pending further learning and study (and here, I speak from personal experience).

Edited August 28, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[sdc999]

With regards to porn usage, many Wards and Stakes have addiction specialists called and they serve kind of like it's a mission to help those with substance and porn addictions.  A few years ago, some gave the 5th Sunday lesson in my local ward and the men and women were addressed separately in different rooms.  We men were asked to look at the person on our left and then the one on our right and then told that statistically one of the people we looked at was involved with porn.  If I had to guess, the numbers might be higher now.

That is way beyond scary that a non-qualified person is giving that type of advice.    Giving a lesson to a class is quite different that working with someone one on one.    The church should just call some random person in the ward to be the electrical consultant.  No training required but the Lord has called them so it has to turn out good. 

[canard78]

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865585321/How-LDS-Church-members-can-help-themselves-and-loved-ones-deal-with-doubt.html

We all know that to get a real grasp of how many people in the LDS faith have doubts is a tough stat to wrap one's hands around but This quote is curious

Is this an indicator?

No. This isn't how to do research. How many people in the room would have raised their hands if asked:

- Do you know someone gay (2-5% of global population)?

- Do you know someone British (1% of global population)

I could go on. But in cases of even low penetration most will know at least one of the minority. We all have 100s of associates. Even if only 1% of Mormons have serious doubts, that's still enough for everyone to know one.

How busy are the most popular 'doubting' forums?

A thoughtful faith group on FB has about 1000 members.

Staylds has about 20-30 active posters

NOM maybe 100. Add to that a couple of 1000 lurkers.

The biggest, John Dehlin's mormonstories apparently had 20,000 subscribers. But not all are doubters.

These of course are only an indication of those actively discussing their doubts online.

I can't find the link, but the 2011 Pew research on Mormon showed about 20% of BICs an 30% of converts doubted 'some' of the teachings of the church. That's not an indication of 'serious doubters' though. I would 'guesstimate' less than 5% of active members. It also depends on what less actives are classified as. Clearly there is enough doubt in something to cause non-attendance. But I'm not sure many less-actives have deeply engaged in church history. If that's what you mean by serious doubts.

[The Nehor]

Not really. One can always pick up a virus with the free sites. Much safer with a paid site. And many paid sites offer a 'sensitive' view to sex. However, I don't see the connection between doubt and porn. Porn doesn't create doubt in the church since most porn addicts would see that the church is correct about it. In fact, the lds church was in the forefront against porn before it was even considered harmful.

It is important to note that not all users are addicts. Some in the church throw the word addiction around too much without knowing what it means. If all users were addicts most of the male population of this country would be addicts and they are clearly not.

[Scott Lloyd]

That is way beyond scary that a non-qualified person is giving that type of advice.    Giving a lesson to a class is quite different that working with someone one on one.    The church should just call some random person in the ward to be the electrical consultant.  No training required but the Lord has called them so it has to turn out good. 

It's my understanding that those with such callings are trained in implementing a 12-step program similar to Alcoholic Anonymous, but with a gospel bent.

 

Do you find it "way beyond scary" that non-specialists such as those involved in AA programs are involved in giving support to those with addictions?

Edited August 28, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[Buckeye]

Scott,

 

I think we're speaking past each other.  I don't approach this board as litigation.  I'm not here to win, but to understand.  So there is no "burden of proof."  I've told you my thoughts.  I'm sincerely interested in your experience.  

 

If my statement was not clear let me make it more so.  I do not think that most members who encounter historical issues go into a faith crises.  Only a minority do.  But we should care about that minority. 

 

I do not think that faith crises are the most significant struggle for any group of members, including "strong members and local leaders" (to use my original group definition).  Porn, apathy and other issues affect strong members and local leaders more so than faith crises.  Again, "for now."

 

What I said, and still maintain, is that if one looks at the whole of those who experience a faith crisis, there will be a larger percentage of strong members and local leaders in that group than in the church population as a whole.  In other words, faith crises disproportionatly affect strong members and local leaders.

 

Hope that helps.

[The Nehor]

It's my understanding that those with such calling are trained in implementing a 12-step program similar to Alcoholic Anonymous, but with a gospel bent.

 

Do you find it "way beyond scary" that non-specialists such as those involved in AA programs are involved in giving support to those with addictions?

It basically is the 12-step program. A member of our bishopric usually is in charge (and is recovering from addiction). He tells me that they use it and add scripture and gospel principles. It is not segregated by addiction. Alcohol, drugs, codependency, porn, and whatever else all meet as a group.