Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Are Doubters Welcome

HappyJackWagon

By HappyJackWagon
in General Discussions

Recommended Posts

  • Popular Post
Mars Experienced

Mars

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

I thought this had been hashed out previously?  Guess not.

 

It depends on how they handle their doubt. I'll use my judgement as best I can and I'll probably agree with calmoriah, mfbukowski, and others.  I'll probably disagree with some of the more - ahem - hardliners on the board.

 

As a rule, yes.  I hope you hear something that changes your life.  I hope you're there to have your mind changed.

 

As an exception, if you're there to try and convince me I'm wrong and you take many opportunities to point out what you perceive to be errors, inconsistencies, or what have you, then no.  Please find a better platform, time, and place to express your doubt.

5
  • Popular Post
Grudunza Collaborator

Grudunza

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted (edited)

I would say that doubtERS are welcome at church and certainly in The Church, but not so much doubtING while at church.  Forums like this and others are great places to express and hash out some doubts and issues, and I appreciate having this kind of outlet and place for honest discussion to help me work through some things.  But while in church on Sundays, it's more about worship and instruction and edification and service.  

I think it's okay when a teacher or member in a class setting says something that you disagree with to *very tactfully* express that you understand that issue in a different way, and I do think that can be important to do now and then so that the urban legend and "cultural doctrine" kind of stuff doesn't keep getting perpetuated forever.  But even then, I would be wary of correcting something that could lead specifically to *doubt,* in a time and setting that is meant for worship.  

Edited by Grudunza
5
  • Popular Post
thesometimesaint Grand Master

thesometimesaint

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

I just read this article on Wheat and Tares addressing the issue of whether or not Doubters are welcome in the church.

 

http://www.wheatandtares.org/15843/are-doubters-welcome/

 

 

What do you think? Are doubters really welcome at church or are they merely tolerated when necessary?

 

Yes they are. We ALL see through that glass darkly. So in some sense we are all doubters. However there is a big difference between being a doubter and being a  critic.

6
  • Popular Post
bluebell Grand Master

bluebell

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

Doubters are welcome, critics, as TSS said, are welcome if they can be quiet.  

 

There are too many straw man right now when it comes to this topic.  People (who often have no idea what they are talking about usually as they have never stepped foot in a mormon church and have a very cursory understanding of JD or anything else to do with the topic) are too often suggesting that Dehlin is under scrutiny for having doubts or for talking about difficult things, or for interviewing ex-members and anti-mormons, or for supporting OW or SSM, etc..  They ignore (or are completely unaware because of their ignorance of the topic) the letters that John has published from his stake president outlining exactly why he is in the situation he is in.   

 

In my understanding, the question is can someone actively and publicly teach doctrine contrary to the doctrines of the church and then still try label themselves as merely a doubter and retain their membership in the LDS church?  I like that the blog attempts to distinguish between two very different groups of people who both might think of themselves as 'doubters' when one group is probably more accurately called a critic.

7
Duncan Grand Master

Duncan

Posted
Posted

Questions are fine but don't be annoying with it, i.e showing off how much you know "well, on page 213 of Elder McConkie's book it says ...." or something similar. When I was in Grade 11 biology the kid next to me would interrupt the teacher with all kinds of questions and the teacher was constantly getting annoyed, he even called him "Question boy", listen first, read the text and then ask if something doesn't make sense. Don't doubt for doubt's sake, setting you up as some holier then thou self righteous doofus, "we intellectuals types actually believe this and you lowly good for nothings believe in these fairy tales"

HappyJackWagon Grand Master

HappyJackWagon

Posted
  • Author
Posted

So doubters are welcome to sit in church as long as they don't voice opposition. That seems to be a common theme to the comments. But should a worthy priesthood holder, who has serious doubts about the power of the priesthood, be able to participate in priesthood ordinances. For example, should a worthy man be disinvited from standing in on a loved one's baby blessing based solely on his doubts about priesthood power?

why me Grand Master

why me

Posted
Posted (edited)

Since faith and doubt go together I would guess that doubters are welcome. And since faith is believing in something when common sense tells you not to ( quote from Miracle on 34th Street) I would think that doubters are welcome. I think that the person who wrote the blog is stirring the pot.

 

Is there proof that god exists? I don't think so. So, doubt is always at hand.

Edited by why me
ERayR Grand Master

ERayR

Posted
Posted

So doubters are welcome to sit in church as long as they don't voice opposition. That seems to be a common theme to the comments. But should a worthy priesthood holder, who has serious doubts about the power of the priesthood, be able to participate in priesthood ordinances. For example, should a worthy man be disinvited from standing in on a loved one's baby blessing based solely on his doubts about priesthood power?

 

Not what was said. Doubts may be expressed but for Serious doubts Gospel Doctrine class is probably not the best venue.  For serious doubts counseling with ones Bishop is probably the way to go.

2
Mars Experienced

Mars

Posted
Posted

HappyJackWagon: I find myself having to continually clarify supposed instances where my opinions might hurt or scare away someone.  It makes me feel like you're trying to paint me into a corner.

 

If you want to convince others of your doubt, *I* think you need to find a different place to be on Sunday.  If you want to express your doubt in a respectful manner, please, come and join me.  There is no theme of "don't voice opposition."  That's putting words in our mouths, dude.  How something is said can impute a sense of motivation to what is said.  Do you agree?  Or do you think any variation of expressing doubt is equal?

 

I think Priesthood ordinances should be done in faith.  Doubt and faith are antonyms for the purpose of Priesthood ordinances, imo.  Uncertainty and faith are not.

 

Do you have a position you'd like to assert on the matter?  Complete with reasons and suppositions?  I really feel like you're setting a trap.

Duncan Grand Master

Duncan

Posted
Posted

So doubters are welcome to sit in church as long as they don't voice opposition. That seems to be a common theme to the comments. But should a worthy priesthood holder, who has serious doubts about the power of the priesthood, be able to participate in priesthood ordinances. For example, should a worthy man be disinvited from standing in on a loved one's baby blessing based solely on his doubts about priesthood power?

 

welcome but don't be disruptive or annoying with it. It's up to the person and his Bishop if need be if he wants to be involved or not in a blessing

1
stemelbow Grand Master

stemelbow

Posted
Posted

So doubters are welcome to sit in church as long as they don't voice opposition. That seems to be a common theme to the comments. But should a worthy priesthood holder, who has serious doubts about the power of the priesthood, be able to participate in priesthood ordinances. For example, should a worthy man be disinvited from standing in on a loved one's baby blessing based solely on his doubts about priesthood power?

I think that's certainly dependent on individual circumstances, wholly determined by people who aren't me.

4
Ahab Grand Master

Ahab

Posted
Posted

We'd rather that doubters stop doubting unless they are wrong, and then we want the doubters to be sure about what is right.

In the mean time, we'll usually tolerate a doubter who isn't sure about what is right while hoping his doubts won't be contagious.

1
DBMormon Grand Master

DBMormon

Posted
Posted

doubters welcome.  Trouble makers not so much.

I like this definition better than the others above.  But now we are into motives which are impossible to judge

2
DBMormon Grand Master

DBMormon

Posted
Posted

Not what was said. Doubts may be expressed but for Serious doubts Gospel Doctrine class is probably not the best venue.  For serious doubts counseling with ones Bishop is probably the way to go.

what if the Bishop knows less about the the issues than you do?  What if the SP knows less about the issues then you do?  In the end we avoid the issues this way and place all answers on the spiritual type, though the claims we testify of are all historical facts. Seems one needs both spiritual answers and mentors to walk them through the complexities.

Duncan Grand Master

Duncan

Posted
Posted

what if the Bishop knows less about the the issues than you do?  What if the SP knows less about the issues then you do?  In the end we avoid the issues this way and place all answers on the spiritual type, though the claims we testify of are all historical facts. Seems one needs both spiritual answers and mentors to walk them through the complexities.

 

i have had that too, I'd just go to a friend or family or someone else that you trust

Calm Grand Master

Calm

Posted
Posted

I like this definition better than the others above.  But now we are into motives which are impossible to judge

Not really.  If someone is creating trouble (a behavior), they are a trouble maker.  You don't have to wonder about what the motive is, just decide whether or not they are causing actual trouble.

 

Whether something is actually trouble or not may be subjective though.

3
DBMormon Grand Master

DBMormon

Posted
Posted

HappyJackWagon: I find myself having to continually clarify supposed instances where my opinions might hurt or scare away someone.  It makes me feel like you're trying to paint me into a corner.

 

If you want to convince others of your doubt, *I* think you need to find a different place to be on Sunday.  If you want to express your doubt in a respectful manner, please, come and join me.  There is no theme of "don't voice opposition."  That's putting words in our mouths, dude.  How something is said can impute a sense of motivation to what is said.  Do you agree?  Or do you think any variation of expressing doubt is equal?

 

I think Priesthood ordinances should be done in faith.  Doubt and faith are antonyms for the purpose of Priesthood ordinances, imo.  Uncertainty and faith are not.

 

Do you have a position you'd like to assert on the matter?  Complete with reasons and suppositions?  I really feel like you're setting a trap.

 

You seem to be playing the idea that Faith and doubt are opposites and one with doubts can not act in faith

 

Elder Ballard said ""doubts are not incongruent with dedicated discipleship"  hence while we have taught in the past they are opposites and where doubt is faith can't be.... but I think we have to reevaluate this and come to grips that for many Doubt and faith coexist and in fact faith is about moving forward in spite of the doubts one has

1
ttribe Grand Master

ttribe

Posted
Posted

HappyJackWagon: I find myself having to continually clarify supposed instances where my opinions might hurt or scare away someone.  It makes me feel like you're trying to paint me into a corner.

 

If you want to convince others of your doubt, *I* think you need to find a different place to be on Sunday.  If you want to express your doubt in a respectful manner, please, come and join me.  There is no theme of "don't voice opposition."  That's putting words in our mouths, dude.  How something is said can impute a sense of motivation to what is said.  Do you agree?  Or do you think any variation of expressing doubt is equal?

 

I think Priesthood ordinances should be done in faith.  Doubt and faith are antonyms for the purpose of Priesthood ordinances, imo.  Uncertainty and faith are not.

 

Do you have a position you'd like to assert on the matter?  Complete with reasons and suppositions?  I really feel like you're setting a trap.

 

Why the skepticism?  Take what he's asking at face value; these things do happen.

 

doubters welcome.  Trouble makers not so much.

 

There are plenty of fully believing "trouble makers"; make no mistake.

1
Mars Experienced

Mars

Posted
Posted (edited)

You seem to be playing the idea that Faith and doubt are opposites and one with doubts can not act in faith

 

Elder Ballard said ""doubts are not incongruent with dedicated discipleship"  hence while we have taught in the past they are opposites and where doubt is faith can't be.... but I think we have to reevaluate this and come to grips that for many Doubt and faith coexist and in fact faith is about moving forward in spite of the doubts one has

 

I didn't mean to come across that way.

 

In your own spiritual journey, you can exercise your faith in spite of your doubt, i.e - Lord, I believe - help thou mine unbelief.  You can keep going even though not everything is 100% squared away to your own personal satisfaction.  In that respect, I completely agree with you.  Elder Ballard implies later on in that quote - as he himself quotes a statement by the Quorum of the 12 - that doubts shouldn't make you stop seeking greater understanding in earnest.

 

 

 

Others may focus on the questions and doubts they experience. Of course, having questions and experiencing doubts are not incongruent with dedicated discipleship. Recently, the Council of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles stated: “We understand that from time to time Church members will have questions about Church doctrine, history, or practice. Members are always free to ask such questions and earnestly seek greater understanding.”

 

It's not such a black and white issue as I think I led on.  In general, doubt and faith fight against each other, imo.  The battle probably won't be won in a day, and during that prolonged engagement it's probably wise to not cast aside everything that's brought you to where you are today - which is what I think was the message Elder Ballard had in mind.  (Even the title of his talk and his anecdote at the beginning conjure up the idea that it's gonna be a long and bumpy ride, but well worth it if you hold on.)

 

So insomuch as one requires to have faith to participate in certain Priesthood ordinances - I think there is space to say that it's wise to refrain from exercising the Priesthood.  Not every ordinance or instance requires the utter faith and nothing wavering of the participants, so I think going to the Temple - as an example - while carrying your doubts would be a fantastic place to think things through and 'work out your fear and salvation before the Lord,' as it were.

 

* * * * * *

 

I also think that on a separate note, the connotations implied by 'doubt' have are very different from you to me, as shaped by our experiences.  Human beings, myself included, have layered emotions and thinking that we don't always meta-think out.  In other words, sometimes I'm pissed at my wife when in reality my ego's bruised and I'm just taking it out on her.  In the moment, though, I'll be damned if I admit she was right.  I think this human reaction has its echoes in other areas of our lives.  If you'll forgive the long-winded personal story, maybe the following will help clarify why I may be reluctant to admit with open arms all forms of doubt:

 

When I was in seminary, I had a strong suspicion that the Book of Mormon was a fabrication.  My questions I asked of the seminary teacher were always with the air of "what's behind the curtain?!"  I wanted to know about horses, about how Lamanite populations swelled faster than Nephite, about geography, and so forth.  Bless her heart, she had to put up with my very pointed and thinly veiled questions.  These weren't private questions, either.  I would interrupt her and very brusquely and probably rudely ask, point blank.  Not only was I wasn't sure it was true, I was kinda sure it wasn't.  Still, though, there was a part of me that really very sincerely wanted to know, and I kept asking questions, reading, and praying.  Eventually, I began to relax.  Spiritually and emotionally.  I stopped looking for ways that Joseph Smith had duped me, or that the Book of Mormon was a fabrication.  I let go of my suspicions.  And I was greatly supported by the Holy Ghost.  An experience that made it so that for the last 20 years, I've been shaped and fed by my faith and trust that the Book of Mormon is authentic, from God, and that Joseph Smith translated.  I'm lucky that she exercised patience with me.

 

Yes - doubters do indeed need a place to come, and be accepted.  I don't think it's fair to expect everyone to have perfect love and patience.  If I had gotten to the point in my seminary years where I was past the point of wanting to know, if I had lost that earnest desire, and was only asking questions as a matter of wanting to prove a point by asking a question that I didn't intend to hear or entertain the answer for, then I think she might have been right to ask me to please table the questions so that I didn't interrupt her lessons or try to sow discord.

 

I am not as patient a person as I ought, and unless I have secured the confidence that the doubter is coming from a place of difficulty, pain, and earnest desire to resolve the doubts and replace them with faith, I make judgements and assumptions about their motivations and while I won't crusade - at all - to have them cast out, and I still can be earnest in seeking their friendship, I probably won't want to spend time discussing what I find sacred just to have them try and convince me it's all a sham.  Does that make sense?

 

I appreciate the quote by Elder Ballard - I would do well to remember that.

Edited by Mars
2
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...