Are we really in a new era of doubt as Stack claims?

[canard78]

Peggy Fletcher Stack claims that "today's crisis of faith among Information Age believers somehow seems new... (and) vast... Their numbers appear staggering."

Stack uses the useful columnists' words: "seems" and "appears." She offers no solid evidence that I can find other than anecdotal. Are we really in an era of doubt, or does the advent of the internet simply mean that those who doubt have more situations to discuss that doubt, making it feel more prevalent? I'm sure that Stack spends plenty of time in the non-representative "bloggernacle."

When I was actively involved in both "chapel Mormonism*" (the day to day life of meetings, activities, home teaching etc) and "bloggernacle Mormonism" (groups like bycommonconsent, this forum, Mormon stories etc) it was like two different churches. The "chapel mormons" had generally never heard of John Dehlin, CESLetter, puremormonism etc. They enjoyed their church experience, got on with life and while certainly having personal challenges, weaknesses and, yes of course, doubts, they didn't get drawn into the navel gazing and angst of the bloggernacle.

So are we really in a new era of doubt? If we are, will Mormonism (or the faith of Mormons) become stronger in this new era of doubt?
http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/3527240-155/in-this-new-era-of-doubt?fullpage=1

*I don't use the term in a derogatory way, I was just looking for a term to describe the day-to-day Mormon experience.

[Tacenda]

I realized something was happening when someone in my former ward, became disaffected.  He and his wife were our HT'rs for a short while, and she and I worked in a RS presidency together.  I thought he thought himself a little more knowledgeable about the church then most, when he'd give talks and how serious he took it.  Back in my TBM days, he was off the charts TBM.  I may have mentioned them before, but this couple's idea of an anniversary was to visit a temple each year, and see how many they could visit.  This couple named one of their sons Porter, after Porter Rockwell.  This was my first inclination, that the chapel Mormons may have a few that are out.  In my current ward I don't know of many, just one that has told me they don't really believe.  I only knew this because a long time ago I had John Dehlin as a FB friend, no longer do.  And she was one also, so she approached me via FB PM. 

Also, when a 1st Counselor was assigned to call me to teach Primary early in my FC, he told me he at once struggled with belief over several of the things I struggled with.  But he said his wife had a spiritual experience in the temple, don't want to get into it because it was private, and that it renewed his faith.

So I believe there are some out there, but it's well hidden.  But do agree Canard, there are two strikingly different worlds.

Edited February 14, 2016 by Tacenda

[Glenn101]

Canard,

   I do believe that we may indeed be in a new era of doubt because of the advent of the internet and the misinformation age. There are indeed a lot of people who go to church and are fine until something or someone seriously challenges their beliefs. If their testimonies are not based upon the Holy Ghost, it just may be fairly easy to shake it with some before unknown "revelations" about church history, polygamy, or new policies that go against something that they currently believe. It really has nothing to do with intelligence. There are intelligent, educated men and women who are standing on both sides of the aisle.

In my opinion, Tacenda's recounting of a person who struggled with doubts who resolved those doubts via a spiritual experience in the temple is the only effective way to find peace and renewed or continued faith. Spiritual truths, to me, have to be discerned spiritually.

In most wards and branches where I have lived, most of those who attended church regularly have a pretty good testimony. The rolls are filled with people who we very seldom see whose testimony is mostly weak or non-existent.

Then there are people like me who are just so stubborn.........

Glenn

Edited February 15, 2016 by Glenn101
spelling

[canard78]

17 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I realized something was happening when someone in my former ward, became disaffected.  He and his wife were our HT'rs for a short while, and she and I worked in a RS presidency together.  I thought he thought himself a little more knowledgeable about the church then most, when he'd give talks and how serious he took it.  Back in my TBM days, he was off the charts TBM.  I may have mentioned them before, but this couple's idea of an anniversary was to visit a temple each year, and see how many they could visit.  This couple named one of their sons Porter, after Porter Rockwell.  This was my first inclination, that the chapel Mormons may have a few that are out.  In my current ward I don't know of many, just one that has told me they don't really believe.  I only knew this because a long time ago I had John Dehlin as a FB friend, no longer do.  And she was one also, so she approached me via FB PM. 

Also, when a 1st Counselor was assigned to call me to teach Primary early in my FC, he told me he at once struggled with belief over several of the things I struggled with.  But he said his wife had a spiritual experience in the temple, don't want to get into it because it was private, and that it renewed his faith.

So I believe there are some out there, but it's well hidden.  But do agree Canard, there are two strikingly different worlds.

But this is more anecdotal evidence Tacenda. You've said "you knew something was happening" - what is happening? People have come and gone as members of the church since its earliest days. I can remember a member leaving the church 20+ years ago after finding out about treasure seeking. I was barely aware of the details but remember the conversation he had with my mum and, in hindsight have pieced the details together.

What is the evidence that this doubting is more prolific than 20 years ago? What evidence is there that this is a new era of doubt and that the number of people doubting is "vast" or "staggering."

I'm willing to be corrected and to accept that it is. But I'm yet to see the evidence. 

[Johnnie Cake]

1 hour ago, canard78 said:

Peggy Fletcher Stack claims that "today's crisis of faith among Information Age believers somehow seems new... (and) vast... Their numbers appear staggering."

Stack uses the useful columnists' words: "seems" and "appears." She offers no solid evidence that I can find other than anecdotal. Are we really in an era of doubt, or does the advent of the internet simply mean that those who doubt have more situations to discuss that doubt, making it feel more prevalent? I'm sure that Stack spends plenty of time in the non-representative "bloggernacle."

When I was actively involved in both "chapel Mormonism*" (the day to day life of meetings, activities, home teaching etc) and "bloggernacle Mormonism" (groups like bycommonconsent, this forum, Mormon stories etc) it was like two different churches. The "chapel mormons" had generally never heard of John Dehlin, CESLetter, puremormonism etc. They enjoyed their church experience, got on with life and while certainly having personal challenges, weaknesses and, yes of course, doubts, they didn't get drawn into the navel gazing and angst of the bloggernacle.

So are we really in a new era of doubt? If we are, will Mormonism (or the faith of Mormons) become stronger in this new era of doubt?
http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/3527240-155/in-this-new-era-of-doubt?fullpage=1

*I don't use the term in a derogatory way, I was just looking for a term to describe the day-to-day Mormon experience.

The church used to have active members and jack Mormons, those born into the church but never fully assimilated, we now have an entirely different breed. Ex mormon's made up of former temple attending, tithe paying, calling holding people. In my former Wasatch front Ward I know of 2 former bishopric members, several high council members, a tab choir member, a relief society president, YM President and some of their families along with many formerly active members who have all left the church within the last year...I'm also aware of a temple president who left....so while my experience is anecdotal, it's also reflective of "something" happening that didn't happen in the past. At least not to this level.  These are people who served missions were married in the temple come from active pioneer stock...and have now left the church...I think Elder Jensen said it best. That it's the greatest period of apostasy in the church since the days of Kirtland

Edited February 14, 2016 by Johnnie Cake

[carbon dioxide]

I believe the internet has a way of magnifying some things more than it actually is.  We hear about things more than we did 30 years ago and the total membership is higher than it ever has been.  So if the same percentage of members who leave is the same as it has always been,  it seems like there are more because the number of examples of individual members is more.  I can't think of too many members that have left that I know personally.  But I imagine every ward is a little different. Also what is happening in the US may not be happening in other parts of the world.  Members in other parts of the world do not have as much idle time spending online and are probably less affected than members in the states. 

If it is happening more, that may be fine in the long term.  To get healthy, sometimes one has to lose some excess pounds. Perhaps the Church membership needs to be thinned down a bit to have a greater percentage of committed members.

[Tacenda]

43 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

I believe the internet has a way of magnifying some things more than it actually is.  We hear about things more than we did 30 years ago and the total membership is higher than it ever has been.  So if the same percentage of members who leave is the same as it has always been,  it seems like there are more because the number of examples of individual members is more.  I can't think of too many members that have left that I know personally.  But I imagine every ward is a little different. Also what is happening in the US may not be happening in other parts of the world.  Members in other parts of the world do not have as much idle time spending online and are probably less affected than members in the states. 

If it is happening more, that may be fine in the long term.  To get healthy, sometimes one has to lose some excess pounds. Perhaps the Church membership needs to be thinned down a bit to have a greater percentage of committed members.

http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/3527240-155/in-this-new-era-of-doubt Maybe this is the new church, and a healthier one.  

[Monster]

I think history full of instances where doubt became more prevalent. It is the nature of  humans when they get new information many will adjust their thinking and incorporate the information into their lives. Currently the internet is providing that source of information. Many learn things about the church that they never knew before. Many feel the church hid those things from them. Some even feel the church made up much of its own history to present itself in the best light. 

So yes it is my opinion the church has an increase in doubting members due to the internet.

[Guest]

There is no more doubt today than at any other time, just different issues and different times. Jesus Christ the Saviour of all and creator of all things, could not perform miracles in his own hometown because of a lack of faith and doubt. Sometimes that doubt came from among his own disciples. Moses exposed all of Israel to miracle after miracle, even Manna from heaven and they murrmered, wanted to return to captivity and worshiped the golden calf. It was their constant doubt that caused none over the age of 18 who left Egypt, with the exception of Joshua and Caled to never see the promised land. It is the same sort of doubts that will keep so many from every seeing the promised land of exaltation. This is why "many are called and few are chosen". Nine weeks ago, I was on life support and my wife was being told to call in my kids, two members of my Bishopric (as she called them as well) came and gave me a blessing...two hours later I was awake, alert and talking to my wife and children. So I am not going to look back to Egypt and try to rationalize it as consequence, and doubt the power of the Priesthood and the power of prayer. I have chosen this day whom I shall worship. So those who wish to doubt and instead of feasting on the word of God, while heaping for seconds of the steady diet of the Internet. I refuse to wonder in the wilderness because of disobiedance and doubt. 

[Hamba Tuhan]

2 hours ago, canard78 said:

What is the evidence that this doubting is more prolific than 20 years ago? What evidence is there that this is a new era of doubt and that the number of people doubting is "vast" or "staggering."

I'm willing to be corrected and to accept that it is. But I'm yet to see the evidence. 

Same. In fact, I see virtually no evidence in these parts -- again, anecdotal. Like you, when I read things like this, it sounds/feels like a different 'church' altogether, one that has no resonance in my life or the lives of the Saints that I know best.

[BlueDreams]

3 hours ago, canard78 said:

So are we really in a new era of doubt? If we are, will Mormonism (or the faith of Mormons) become stronger in this new era of doubt?
http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/3527240-155/in-this-new-era-of-doubt?fullpage=1

*I don't use the term in a derogatory way, I was just looking for a term to describe the day-to-day Mormon experience.

Even for my self, this feels at times 2 split worlds. There's me online and then there's me in my day to day. I would dissect and debate and question things online. And then in my usual daily life, most of my questions weren't surrounded by intellectual pursuits, but personal concerns and desires (how can I feel more happy, how do I learn about God/Christ, where do I find peace, how do I recognize the spirit, where does God want me to go/do, etc). Here and there the worlds might have intermingled, but most the time the internet BD stayed in the periphery of TB (my actual initials).

In "real life" I see some mention of the things mentioned here, particularly big LDS changes. Part that is probably partially due to demographics (young, single, mormon corridor, and college educated wards for the most part). And the way it was discussed was more faith centered. I don't see this phenomenon much beyond really really specific circles and even then opinions and focus are likely to vary, with only a couple having struggles with doubt (of course, equally anecdotal).  

 

With luv,

BD

Edited February 14, 2016 by BlueDreams

[juliann]

My ward tends toward middle age/older people. (Housing is expensive.) I don't see it in my ward at all, really. But some of their grown children that I watched growing up are dropping out.  My daughter has several BYU friends who have thrown in the towel. And they do have potential to proselyte other family members out.

[Jeanne]

2 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

The church used to have active members and jack Mormons, those born into the church but never fully assimilated, we now have an entirely different breed. Ex mormon's made up of former temple attending, tithe paying, calling holding people. In my former Wasatch front Ward I know of 2 former bishopric members, several high council members, a tab choir member, a relief society president, YM President and some of their families along with many formerly active members who have all left the church within the last year...I'm also aware of a temple president who left....so while my experience is anecdotal, it's also reflective of "something" happening that didn't happen in the past. At least not to this level.  These are people who served missions were married in the temple come from active pioneer stock...and have now left the church...I think Elder Jensen said it best. That it's the greatest period of apostasy in the church since the days of Kirtland

Wow..that is a lot of people in one year.

[Avatar4321]

1 hour ago, Pa Pa said:

There is no more doubt today than at any other time, just different issues and different times. Jesus Christ the Saviour of all and creator of all things, could not perform miracles in his own hometown because of a lack of faith and doubt. Sometimes that doubt came from among his own disciples. Moses exposed all of Israel to miracle after miracle, even Manna from heaven and they murrmered, wanted to return to captivity and worshiped the golden calf. It was their constant doubt that caused none over the age of 18 who left Egypt, with the exception of Joshua and Caled to never see the promised land. It is the same sort of doubts that will keep so many from every seeing the promised land of exaltation. This is why "many are called and few are chosen". Nine weeks ago, I was on life support and my wife was being told to call in my kids, two members of my Bishopric (as she called them as well) came and gave me a blessing...two hours later I was awake, alert and talking to my wife and children. So I am not going to look back to Egypt and try to rationalize it as consequence, and doubt the power of the Priesthood and the power of prayer. I have chosen this day whom I shall worship. So those who wish to doubt and instead of feasting on the word of God, while heaping for seconds of the steady diet of the Internet. I refuse to wonder in the wilderness because of disobiedance and doubt. 

I'm glad you are still with us

[canard78]

54 minutes ago, juliann said:

My ward tends toward middle age/older people. (Housing is expensive.) I don't see it in my ward at all, really. But some of their grown children that I watched growing up are dropping out.  My daughter has several BYU friends who have thrown in the towel. And they do have potential to proselyte other family members out.

But young adults have been dropping out for years. Most of the youth I grew up with left the church before we all even had PCs or mobiles. Young adults and families have been leaving the church for decades. 

What is the evidence that it's happening any faster than in the 90s when at least half of my pre-Internet peer group left  the church?

[cinepro]

4 hours ago, canard78 said:

So are we really in a new era of doubt? If we are, will Mormonism (or the faith of Mormons) become stronger in this new era of doubt?

http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/3527240-155/in-this-new-era-of-doubt?fullpage=1

 

As I've said before, I think the history of the Church will be divided into two periods: BI and AI (Before Internet and After Internet).  Everything changed once the internet gained wide acceptance, and I suspect it is only the Church's desire to keep the stats private that keeps us from knowing just how bad things are.

Between pornography and the dissemination of faith-demoting Church history, I can't imagine the Church facing another technology with a greater negative impact.  I don't think it will "sink" the Church, but I would say that the internet is the closest thing to an iceberg that the "Titanic" of the Church could ever face. 

And when I hear people say how great the internet is for family history and looking up scriptures (and others of the "Lord's purposes"), to me that's like passengers on the Titanic being glad they hit the iceberg because now they have fresh ice for their drinks.

[CV75]

5 hours ago, canard78 said:

So are we really in a new era of doubt? If we are, will Mormonism (or the faith of Mormons) become stronger in this new era of doubt?
http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/3527240-155/in-this-new-era-of-doubt?fullpage=1

The way of the world in the ways of Gospel-based religion and spirituality has always been one of doubt. As the world and the ways of Gospel-based religion and spirituality move further apart (and they inevitably have, do and will, since faith and doubt have opposing trajectories), we will see that each era affords the world opportunity to create additional doubt on points of doubt and new points of doubt.

[Johnnie Cake]

2 hours ago, Jeanne said:

Wow..that is a lot of people in one year.

I know, it's even shocking to me...would have never predicted this a year ago as they were all active members

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Johnnie Cake said:

I know, it's even shocking to me...would have never predicted this a year ago as they were all active members

This is a pretty good indication to me.  

[carbon dioxide]

3 hours ago, cinepro said:

As I've said before, I think the history of the Church will be divided into two periods: BI and AI (Before Internet and After Internet).  Everything changed once the internet gained wide acceptance, and I suspect it is only the Church's desire to keep the stats private that keeps us from knowing just how bad things are.

Between pornography and the dissemination of faith-demoting Church history, I can't imagine the Church facing another technology with a greater negative impact.  I don't think it will "sink" the Church, but I would say that the internet is the closest thing to an iceberg that the "Titanic" of the Church could ever face. 

And when I hear people say how great the internet is for family history and looking up scriptures (and others of the "Lord's purposes"), to me that's like passengers on the Titanic being glad they hit the iceberg because now they have fresh ice for their drinks.

In some ways this was overdue.  The Church for years knew about much of this stuff but never addressed it. Never educated the members regarding it.  Took a view that if it ignored it then it would go away.  But it does not go away.  It is like a man who has an infected finger.  He chooses to ignore it and not its enter into the blood.  He is much worse off now than if he addressed it when the problem was smaller.  The Church now as to play catch up.  The Church in the longer term will be fine but it might have to have an arm chopped off.

It is hard to know exactly what scale it is.  I prefer to look at the number of new wards and buildings being put into service than total membership which is pretty meaningless to me.  I would not be surprised if Marco Rubio is still listed as a member. 

[Saint Sinner]

I'm curious and I do not mean to derail. Do LDS see a difference between a faith crisis and simply no longer believing without some kind of crisis?

[sjdawg]

I don't know if there are more doubts currently than at any time in the past but I do believe the internet allows doubters to realize they are not alone.  The internet has created a community that allows doubters or people with questions to easily communicate with others in the same position.  I think it facilitates the transition from casual doubter to ex-mormon.   

[Calm]

38 minutes ago, Saint Sinner said:

I'm curious and I do not mean to derail. Do LDS see a difference between a faith crisis and simply no longer believing without some kind of crisis?

Depends on what you are looking at.  A faith crisis may end up in someone with a stronger testimony (I know many like this).  Usually those who no longer believe without some kind of crisis never put much effort into either believing or disbelieving or figuring out which is best in my experience, but it wouldn't surprise me to find that there were many who studied and then just one day looked at things in a new way and shortly there after were no longer believing with no crisis attached.  With no drama they would probably have little reason to speak out which may be one reason why I haven't ever run into someone like that or at least knew this of them.

[Scott Lloyd]

11 hours ago, canard78 said:

Peggy Fletcher Stack claims that "today's crisis of faith among Information Age believers somehow seems new... (and) vast... Their numbers appear staggering."

Stack uses the useful columnists' words: "seems" and "appears." She offers no solid evidence that I can find other than anecdotal. Are we really in an era of doubt, or does the advent of the internet simply mean that those who doubt have more situations to discuss that doubt, making it feel more prevalent? I'm sure that Stack spends plenty of time in the non-representative "bloggernacle."

When I was actively involved in both "chapel Mormonism*" (the day to day life of meetings, activities, home teaching etc) and "bloggernacle Mormonism" (groups like bycommonconsent, this forum, Mormon stories etc) it was like two different churches. The "chapel mormons" had generally never heard of John Dehlin, CESLetter, puremormonism etc. They enjoyed their church experience, got on with life and while certainly having personal challenges, weaknesses and, yes of course, doubts, they didn't get drawn into the navel gazing and angst of the bloggernacle.

So are we really in a new era of doubt? If we are, will Mormonism (or the faith of Mormons) become stronger in this new era of doubt?
http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/3527240-155/in-this-new-era-of-doubt?fullpage=1

*I don't use the term in a derogatory way, I was just looking for a term to describe the day-to-day Mormon experience.

You are being generous in characterizing the terms she uses as "columnists' words." A more apt label for them, in my opinion, is weasel words.

Quote

A weasel word (also, anonymous authority) is an informal term for words and phrases aimed at creating an impression that a specific and/or meaningful statement has been made, when only a vague or ambiguous claim has been communicated, enabling the specific meaning to be denied if the statement is challenge

 

Edited February 15, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[canard78]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

You are being generous in characterizing the terms she uses as "columnists' words." A more apt label for them, in my opinion, is weasel words.

 

Yes, you're right. I'd considered it but was aware some people find the word quite inflammatory so wanted to try to be a bit more neutral to open the conversation. 

"Seems" and "appears" followed by several anecdotes and no quantitative data means her article  could be characterised as weasel words. Some might argue that she is simply sharing her impressions but if that was her intent then her article ought to have made that a lot clearer when, instead, people are sharing and discussing it online as if she had presented conclusive proof that doubt was "vast."