Main resons for faith crisis

[california boy]

The Salt Lake Tribune recently asked it's readers what the main concerns were that was causing their faith crisis.   The results were interesting.  

Quote

 

Within 24 hours, the newspaper received more than 1,000 responses. Eventually, that number topped 1,700.

• Of the respondents who provided their relationship with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints:

• 538 no longer are members.

• 637 are officially LDS but are not active.

• 532 are active Mormons.

 

These were some of the main reasons they voiced as the cause of their faith crisis

 

Quote

 

• Joseph Smith is mentioned 327 times, for various reasons, including his plural marriages to the wives of other husbands, his differing "First Vision" accounts, his character, and translation questions about Mormon scripture.

• Polygamy and/or polyandry are noted 322 times, mostly as related to LDS history. Few said they were struggling with it in modern days or as a women's issue

 

 

With all of the recent discussion about the CES letter and excommunication of it's author, this is what surprised me.  The most often sighted reason for the faith crisis?  How the church has dealt with it's gay members.

 

Quote

• LGBT policies and practices were raised 373 times.

 

With little hope in those policies changing in the future, and probably a more realistic future of even more antagonism against the LGBT community both within and without the church, does anyone really doubt that this issue will only become bigger for members of the church to reconcile with?

 

 

 

[carbon dioxide]

10 minutes ago, california boy said:

The Salt Lake Tribune recently asked it's readers what the main concerns were that was causing their faith crisis.   The results were interesting.  

These were some of the main reasons they voiced as the cause of their faith crisis

 

 

With all of the recent discussion about the CES letter and excommunication of it's author, this is what surprised me.  The most often sighted reason for the faith crisis?  How the church has dealt with it's gay members.

 

 

With little hope in those policies changing in the future, and probably a more realistic future of even more antagonism against the LGBT community both within and without the church, does anyone really doubt that this issue will only become bigger for members of the church to reconcile with?

 

 

 

I post a lot on the Trib message board.  It does not surprise me of those responses.  It seems that the trib appeals to more of the liberal and non-LDS crowd then the active LDS crowd based on the normal conversations I have there.  So the total responses are going to be skewed a bit.

[BCSpace]

I believe all these reasons are just excuses to cover for an inability to parse real life with an incomplete understanding of the Gospel.  Possibly the understanding of real life is incomplete in these cases as well.  I freely admit my own understanding of the Gospel is incomplete, but obviously not so incomplete I can't parse it with real life. 

Edited February 14, 2016 by BCSpace
Typo

[Senator]

19 minutes ago, BCSpace said:

I believe all these reasons are just excuses to cover for an inability to parse real life with an incomplete understanding of the Gospel.  Possibly the understanding of real life is incomplete in these cases as well.  I freely admit my own understanding of the Gospel is incomplete, but obviously not so incomplete I can't parse it with real life. 

Cue,  mfbukowski.

[ttribe]

27 minutes ago, BCSpace said:

I believe all these reasons are just excuses to cover for an inability to parse real life with an incomplete understanding of the Gospel.  Possibly the understanding of real life is incomplete in these cases as well.  I freely admit my own understanding of the Gospel is incomplete, but obviously not so incomplete I can't parse it with real life. 

And I believe you aren't qualified to judge someone else's stated reasons for their spiritual struggles.

[carbon dioxide]

I can see how people who are raised in the Church and do not ever look at anything critical to the Church might get shaken a little bit by seeing something they have not seen before. That is only natural.  The question is what does one do with it.  Do they cast out everything they know to be true over issues they can't explain or are not getting the answer in a timely manner?  For some the answer appears to be yes.  We live in a society where people want answers NOW.  Many people have little patience and they want answers NOW.  If one can't "google" an answer in 10 minutes, the answer does not exist.  Though we live in a time where so much information is at our fingertips,  our society is getting more lazy. 

For me, I have been exposed to a lot of this stuff since my mission days.  I have read anti-mormon stuff off and on since then.  I actually can say that I grow more in the gospel by reading that stuff than say the Ensign because I personally learn more by being challenged.  So I use anti-mormon arguments as a catalyst to learn things that I would have never learned otherwise.  I have come to not take any anti-mormon arguments seriously and none of them bother me personally.  Its almost like this stuff is to me what an antibiotic is to a bacteria.  It will either kill you or make you stronger and resistant.  I also am a person with much patience.  If I can't answer a question today, I can wait 5 or 10 years.  It will come at some point and that has happened in my life.   Even though I have had my testimony of the Church made far stronger from this negative stuff, there have been times when I thought to myself "why bother."  Well I think I know some of the answer to that.  My soon to be 14 year old son has been starting to get exposed to some of this stuff and is having problems.  A faith crisis of sorts I guess.  He is more confused or asking questions.  Anyway my wife and I have been slackers for a long time and have ignored teaching the gospel in the home.  We have decided start having FHE of sorts in the home and we will cover many of the things he is confronted. For example, he knows about the multiple first vision accounts.  So we will go over those accounts.  My son and I have a pretty good relationship even though I do annoy him from time to time but its out of fun.  Where this will go I don't know but I feel good that it will come out well over the next 4 years we have before he turns 18 and considers a mission.  I do feel that the time I have spent with anti-mormon material will have a far more important effect than I realized.  I can use what I have learned to help my son grow to a strong member who is also resistant to this stuff.

[The Nehor]

Self-selected polls amongst the readership of a single newspaper. Yeah.....you will forgive me if I do not see this as representative.

[california boy]

8 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

I can see how people who are raised in the Church and do not ever look at anything critical to the Church might get shaken a little bit by seeing something they have not seen before. That is only natural.  The question is what does one do with it.  Do they cast out everything they know to be true over issues they can't explain or are not getting the answer in a timely manner?  For some the answer appears to be yes.  We live in a society where people want answers NOW.  Many people have little patience and they want answers NOW.  If one can't "google" an answer in 10 minutes, the answer does not exist.  Though we live in a time where so much information is at our fingertips,  our society is getting more lazy. 

For me, I have been exposed to a lot of this stuff since my mission days.  I have read anti-mormon stuff off and on since then.  I actually can say that I grow more in the gospel by reading that stuff than say the Ensign because I personally learn more by being challenged.  So I use anti-mormon arguments as a catalyst to learn things that I would have never learned otherwise.  I have come to not take any anti-mormon arguments seriously and none of them bother me personally.  Its almost like this stuff is to me what an antibiotic is to a bacteria.  It will either kill you or make you stronger and resistant.  I also am a person with much patience.  If I can't answer a question today, I can wait 5 or 10 years.  It will come at some point and that has happened in my life.   Even though I have had my testimony of the Church made far stronger from this negative stuff, there have been times when I thought to myself "why bother."  Well I think I know some of the answer to that.  My soon to be 14 year old son has been starting to get exposed to some of this stuff and is having problems.  A faith crisis of sorts I guess.  He is more confused or asking questions.  Anyway my wife and I have been slackers for a long time and have ignored teaching the gospel in the home.  We have decided start having FHE of sorts in the home and we will cover many of the things he is confronted. For example, he knows about the multiple first vision accounts.  So we will go over those accounts.  My son and I have a pretty good relationship even though I do annoy him from time to time but its out of fun.  Where this will go I don't know but I feel good that it will come out well over the next 4 years we have before he turns 18 and considers a mission.  I do feel that the time I have spent with anti-mormon material will have a far more important effect than I realized.  I can use what I have learned to help my son grow to a strong member who is also resistant to this stuff.

I think that is what surprised me about the article. The number one reason for a faith crisis was not coming from Anti-Mormons talking points but from how the church itself deals with gays.   When members know gay couples, see that their lives are as rich and happy as any married couple and then knowing that their church vilifies their relationship by calling them apostates,not allowing their children to be baptized seems to be a bigger issue in trusting that the church is the church of Christ. They want the gospel to be for everyone even if you are gay. And they understand the very human desire for companionship and marriage.  They understand that desire because it is the same desire they have. They too want to find someone to love and spend the rest of their lives with. That is not an anti-mormon issue, that is a fundamental church belief issue. 

[Sky]

All the more reason why we need to follow the approach set in our own website regarding this matter!  It won't be enough for some, but it is something. 

http://mormonsandgays.org

I agree that the LGBT issue is not going away any time soon, and is a primary source for a loss of faith for a lot of people.

 

  

[rpn]

Or picture this, as widely as the survey opportunity was circulated, including in multiple not-so-LDS-friendly forums, there were only 1700 respondents, and only just over a third gave up their membership.  

 

[Thinking]

What some call a faith crisis, others call a faith resolution.

[Thinking]

38 minutes ago, rpn said:

Or picture this, as widely as the survey opportunity was circulated, including in multiple not-so-LDS-friendly forums, there were only 1700 respondents, and only just over a third gave up their membership.  

How do you classify 1700 respondents as only?

If I had known about the survey and responded, I would have been in the officially LDS but not active group.

This was a voluntary response survey. Although the results may have value, we should not draw definite conclusions from it.

[Monster]

13 hours ago, BCSpace said:

I believe all these reasons are just excuses to cover for an inability to parse real life with an incomplete understanding of the Gospel.  Possibly the understanding of real life is incomplete in these cases as well.  I freely admit my own understanding of the Gospel is incomplete, but obviously not so incomplete I can't parse it with real life. 

What does this even mean?

[Monster]

One persons faith crisis is another persons awaking, Just google Plato's Cave

[TheSkepticChristian]

13 hours ago, california boy said:

The Salt Lake Tribune recently asked it's readers what the main concerns were that was causing their faith crisis.   The results were interesting.  

Plural marriage and church history doesn't bother me at all. What bothers me is 

1. The intervention of the church in politics 

2. It's gay policy, which does not apply to cohabiting couples, and you don't have to get married in the Philippines. 

3. LDS church is not growing as expected by church leaders in the past. 

Still an active LDS, but I am kind of disappointed.   

[Johnnie Cake]

15 hours ago, BCSpace said:

I believe all these reasons are just excuses to cover for an inability to parse real life with an incomplete understanding of the Gospel.  Possibly the understanding of real life is incomplete in these cases as well.  I freely admit my own understanding of the Gospel is incomplete, but obviously not so incomplete I can't parse it with real life. 

I agree with BC...it's the doubters fault

[Sleeper Cell]

15 hours ago, ttribe said:

And I believe you aren't qualified to judge someone else's stated reasons for their spiritual struggles.

Neither am I.  And that is one more reason why I cannot take this poll seriously.  Putting aside the fact that this a poll of self-selected respondents, is there any way to verify that all (or any) of those who claimed they were LDS even were, in fact, LDS, let alone whether they were truthful about the reasons for their faith crisis?  

Absent compelling reasons to the contrary, I generally accept an individual’s stated reasons for his/her spiritual struggles -- if, for no other reason,  that doing otherwise would make for a fairly unproductive discussion.  Besides, on occasion, people  who lie  about their motives may still make a valid point.  But it is impossible to conclude from this poll how much impact  “LGBT policies and practices” are having on the faith of church members, in general.     

[carbon dioxide]

3 hours ago, california boy said:

I think that is what surprised me about the article. The number one reason for a faith crisis was not coming from Anti-Mormons talking points but from how the church itself deals with gays.   When members know gay couples, see that their lives are as rich and happy as any married couple and then knowing that their church vilifies their relationship by calling them apostates,not allowing their children to be baptized seems to be a bigger issue in trusting that the church is the church of Christ. They want the gospel to be for everyone even if you are gay. And they understand the very human desire for companionship and marriage.  They understand that desire because it is the same desire they have. They too want to find someone to love and spend the rest of their lives with. That is not an anti-mormon issue, that is a fundamental church belief issue. 

The gay issues are trumped up a lot in the Salt Lake Tribune.  I don't think as many LDS especially outside of Utah care about the gay issue as it suggests.  I think most members know that the Church and the Lord do not compromise eternal laws because gays want companionship.  There are porn stars that are married to each other in committed relationships.  There are married people who are on loving relationships but also have open marriages.  They don't expect the Church to change its stance on porn or open marriages because one can find people involved in meaningful relationships that are involved with it.    Some of the issues like the children part can be problematic but to blow up ones personal salvation and exaltation over an issue like that seems to be pretty insane.  Sure God wants as many of his children to return to him but I think God and everyone else in the Celestial kingdom will somehow manage not being with these people if they choose gay issues over important eternal issues.

[carbon dioxide]

4 hours ago, Thinking said:

How do you classify 1700 respondents as only?

If I had known about the survey and responded, I would have been in the officially LDS but not active group.

This was a voluntary response survey. Although the results may have value, we should not draw definite conclusions from it.

There is value but the readership of the Salt Lake Tribune probably does not reflect an accurate representation of the demographics in Utah.  I would not put too much weight on the percentages since it is going to have a larger ex-LDS, non-LDS readership than one would expect in the overall population.

Edited February 14, 2016 by carbon dioxide

[sheilauk]

19 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

There is value but the readership of the Salt Lake Tribune probably does reflect an accurate representation of the demographics in Utah.  I would not put too much weight on the percentages since it is going to have a larger ex-LDS, non-LDS readership than one would expect in the overall population.

Do you mean does NOT reflect?

[BlueDreams]

5 hours ago, california boy said:

I think that is what surprised me about the article. The number one reason for a faith crisis was not coming from Anti-Mormons talking points but from how the church itself deals with gays.   When members know gay couples, see that their lives are as rich and happy as any married couple and then knowing that their church vilifies their relationship by calling them apostates,not allowing their children to be baptized seems to be a bigger issue in trusting that the church is the church of Christ. They want the gospel to be for everyone even if you are gay. And they understand the very human desire for companionship and marriage.  They understand that desire because it is the same desire they have. They too want to find someone to love and spend the rest of their lives with. That is not an anti-mormon issue, that is a fundamental church belief issue. 

I wasn't exactly surprised by the article....especially with the likely biases that were incorporated into those likely to answer. There weren't demographics mentioned, but I would take a guess that they are largely in the U.S., then canada, and largely english speaking. They're internet savvy populations who would have to either read the SLTrib frequently enough to see the oppurtunity or be tied to internet sources catering to those with faith crises/concerns. Considering that population limitations, I would assume such. 

I'm also not that optimistic as to the reasons for their disaffect due to LGBT issues. I'm doubtful because of the numbers game. LGBT are a small percentage of the population, those who actively ID as LGB are even smaller, and those in stable couple relationships/marriages (ie. longer than 6 months) even smaller still. The likelihood that all of the respondents know several gay couples isn't likely. 1 couple, sure... several not as likely. Several well enough to become disaffected from their faith assertions even less so. From what I've seen there is more influence in the realms of abstract ideals then real people experiences. That could be seen when it blew up here and elsewhere. The amount of actual stories of people who were actually effected was really small, especially after the clarification (I believe I read 1 or 2). What was altered was the sense of hope or expectations for where the church would go to those who were more liberal or expectant for more drastic changes. The love of their relationships and hopes aren't enough without a specific set of expectations and level of values. So Elder Christofferson having a gay brother who was in a healthy and happy partnership for years wasn't enough to change his belief structures. Likewise, me having several friends and family members who are LGBT or at least SSA (dependent on their decided labels, not mine) didn't mean that the policy took a lasting blow, because my beliefs/values led to a differing expectation for the church and what was best and true in a gospel context. 

That said, it's also only barely more than others. It would make sense to me that the big issue of today would be more pertinent than an issue that happened a century or more ago.

17 hours ago, california boy said:

With all of the recent discussion about the CES letter and excommunication of it's author, this is what surprised me.  The most often sighted reason for the faith crisis?  How the church has dealt with it's gay members...

With little hope in those policies changing in the future, and probably a more realistic future of even more antagonism against the LGBT community both within and without the church, does anyone really doubt that this issue will only become bigger for members of the church to reconcile with?

 I don't know where it's going to actually go...I think of the last several years surrounding this topic and the LDS dialogue about it has become more nuanced but remained effectively the same (with overall less condemnatory language about the character of a person who is LGBT). But I don't think there will be a perfect graft between LDS beliefs and LGBT community concerns. Ever. And because of that there will likely be friction between societal beliefs and philosophy and LDS. I remember sitting in a very well presented discourse on the case for promoting marriages between opposite sex pairs. It was good, went past the usual talking points that have some major holes in them, and it made sense. I also left realizing it would never fly and that SSmarriage would at some point be legalized. Not because the argument was inherently flawed, but because the underpinning philosophy/assumptions had long ago been removed/reduced/replaced in level of importance in our society. Several that the LDS church not only believes in but are integral to our belief structures. 

 So to me, I see the debate not only about the individualistic love desires of a couple....it's based in several underpinning values that may have already been looser for those who were disaffected by said policies. If I had to take a guess, it will be more important for LDS families to teach in a way that maintains a belief in specific values without necessarily demonizing those who don't. In my generation, I see that already happening. People aren't leaving, the dialogue is just becoming more nuanced.

 

With luv,

BD

[carbon dioxide]

1 hour ago, sheilauk said:

Do you mean does NOT reflect?

Yes...I will correct

[Jeanne]

5 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

Plural marriage and church history doesn't bother me at all. What bothers me is 

1. The intervention of the church in politics 

2. It's gay policy, which does not apply to cohabiting couples, and you don't have to get married in the Philippines. 

3. LDS church is not growing as expected by church leaders in the past. 

Still an active LDS, but I am kind of disappointed.   

I love your honesty.

[Avatar4321]

Faith is a choice. If we choose not to have faith, its our choice. 

Trust in Christ, choose to have faith in Him and then wait on Him 

[Sanpitch]

17 minutes ago, Avatar4321 said:

Faith is a choice. If we choose not to have faith, its our choice. 

Trust in Christ, choose to have faith in Him and then wait on Him 

Pardon me Avatar but I disagree completely.  First why choose to have faith in something?  Don't you have to have something to back up that faith?  I don't think anyone can decide, I think I'll believe in the Joseph Smith because he promises such a wonderful life after we die.  You have to have something to back it up.  As far as the feeling in the bosom, it also works for the followers of Warren Jeffs the prophet of the FLDS.  He still has a lot of followers.  What about some facts instead of feelings.  I can understand the feelings of those who are not impressed with the facts in the history of the LDS Church.