Doctrine vs Culture?

[Backroads]

I realize this could be a potential can o' worms and understand if it gets shut down, but moderators please note I ask this in the best of intentions...

The other day I heard something that has stuck with me: a good chuck of LDS population has no strong caring of why/how their doctrine works, but primarily sticks with the Church because of heritage, community, culture, etc.

The idea shocked me because I'm a believer that if you're going to be part of some idealogy you can at least have the decency to believe it, but I also have strong pride in my LDS heritage.

Thoughts?

[bytebear]

That may be true in Utah for some, but the church is a lot bigger than that.

[PrinceofLight2000]

This happens in every religion. It's just going through the motions.

[NeuroTypical]

a good chuck of LDS population has no strong caring of why/how their doctrine works, but primarily sticks with the Church because of heritage, community, culture, etc.

Oh, I don't know how big a chunk it is, but absolutely it applies to some of us.

I went on splits once with a missionary who flat out told me that he was there because it was part of his parent's life plan for him - it was just something expected of him. I asked him if he actually believed in what he was doing, and he said he had never given it much thought.

Yeah, this is not an LDS-only phenomenon. I always used to vote according to my dad's political beliefs, until my mid-20's when I woke up.

[beefche]

That may be true in Utah for some, but the church is a lot bigger than that.

Really? You mean only some in Utah believe this? No one in Iowa, or England, or Argentina or any other place? It's just those crazy Utah Mormons that this affects?

[Backroads]

Really? You mean only some in Utah believe this? No one in Iowa, or England, or Argentina or any other place? It's just those crazy Utah Mormons that this affects?

I had a seminary teacher who served his mission in Asia. Apparently years before some elders had given their daughter a priesthood blessing to heal her, but had been transferred before any real teaching had been done. My teacher and his companion had these people demand to be baptized.

At the time it was a cool story, but now I think about it and wonder if these people merely joined the church because of a single miracle and really knew what they believed.

[Just_A_Guy]

Really? You mean only some in Utah believe this? No one in Iowa, or England, or Argentina or any other place? It's just those crazy Utah Mormons that this affects?

I think it's reasonable to assume that when deciding whether to stay LDS, LDS culture is more of a factor in LDS-majority places (like Utah) than in places where we're a minority.

[Guest gopecon]

"Large chunk" of people is pretty vague - not that I doubt that there's some truth in it. Some people go to firesides for the refreshments, some for the spiritual food. I would think that with committed members who devote a lot of time and energy in their callings that most of them are there for better reasons that the recipes.

[Guest mormonmusic]

I'm a convert. I found that in my single years, it would have been relatively easy to bail on my LDS experience. I had non-member family support, and no real committed relationships that were LDS, except one good friend.

Then, when I got married, things got deeper, as I had this eternal covenant I had made, as well as the stigma of being temple divorced in the Church. I also had in-laws who were committed. And then, we all know that many wives will divorce their husbands if the are not fully active, because of their faith that they need a righteous priesthood holder to achieve full exhaltation.

Then things got even deeper when I had children in the Church. Now, their upbringing and moral safety adds another item to the mix that helps me stay active. Also, the sheer amount of time and money I've invested, as well as the fact that all my family friendships are LDS now, makes the relationship I have with the Church go well beyond testimony.

So, as you get further and further into your life, making deeper and deeper commitments, the dislocation of leaving the Church to the DNA of your life gets more and more extreme.

I think that's why we have so many 'cultural mormons'. It's partly a result of how the LDS experience is deeply entwined in defining relationships with friends and family, and in some areas of the world, I hear, even your job.

Therefore, I don't blame people who stay for cultural reasons even though they no longer belief it all. They have too much to lose by leaving -- not just their religion and salvation -- there can be immediate consequences in this life.

I started a thread a while ago about a man who felt disillusioned about how much the Church feels like a business to some people, introducing concerns. He shared them with me, and then I shared them here to get people's reactions. Some people were compassionate and wanted to help the man with empathy as well as reasoned support. Others were very harsh on the guy:

http://www.lds.net/forums/lds-gospel-discussion/39137-church-business.html#post588853

as a case in point.

So, when someone has doctrinal or even cultural issues, they have to put up with attitudes like the post above that come across as very intolerant. That prevents them from working through the issues so they can harmonize their involvement in the Church with traditional beliefs again.

Edited November 16, 2011 by mormonmusic

[Backroads]

I think it's reasonable to assume that when deciding whether to stay LDS, LDS culture is more of a factor in LDS-majority places (like Utah) than in places where we're a minority.

This makes a lot of sense, though Utah would be the major place for heritage and "Mormon" culture... that would not change the fact that people outside of Utah could have strong attachment to the sense of community.

[sister_in_faith]

When I started taking missionary discussions I had just gotten Sunday off, and I wanted to go to a church. I wanted to be baptized. I had no idea about Joseph Smith or prophets or any of that. They started talking about it, and it just clicked for me. They asked me if I believed it, and I said sure. I didn't really. I didn't know for sure. It wasn't until I started really getting serious about studying doctrine that I developed a testimony of these things.

I joined for the culture, and fell in love with the doctrine. Worked out okay for me!

And yes, I am SURE that there are a lot of members (not just those crazy Utah mormons) who stay because there is a lot of safety in our culture.

[Traveler]

I once heard a really cool story that may not be true – even if it never happened it is still a good parable we can all use. The story goes like this.

There was this fun loving fellow that was called to serve a mission. While at the mission training center he made sure that everyone understood that the only reason he had accepted his mission call is because his father put pressure on him to go and serve. He was only serving because his father commanded him to do so. Of course this Elder was not as happy as he should be as a missionary.

After a few weeks his faithful companion found the fun loving Elder one night in tears looking at his scriptures. When asked why he was so emotional the Elder responded that he just discovered that Jesus did not want to serve his mission and suffer the pains of death – but that he only did so because it was the will of his Father.

The Traveler

[rameumptom]

I think most active members stay for their testimonies. I do know that there are social Mormons, but then there are also social Catholics, Baptists, and many others, as well.

[Backroads]

Is it worth encouraging the more social members who aren't too aware of LDS doctrine to study it? I always here of stories who someone who liked being LDS well enough, decided to study it, and then went into shock and left the church. Is it better for people to be social Mormons living good lives or to encourage everyone to study their faith?

[Just_A_Guy]

Is it worth encouraging the more social members who aren't too aware of LDS doctrine to study it? I always here of stories who someone who liked being LDS well enough, decided to study it, and then went into shock and left the church. Is it better for people to be social Mormons living good lives or to encourage everyone to study their faith?

Within limits, I think. On the one hand, man cannot be saved in ignorance and knowledge is always a good thing. On the other hand, if they at least have the core beliefs discussed in the TR interview, I'm not sure anyone has any business trying to force them to accept more than that.

[Dravin]

Is it worth encouraging the more social members who aren't too aware of LDS doctrine to study it? I always here of stories who someone who liked being LDS well enough, decided to study it, and then went into shock and left the church. Is it better for people to be social Mormons living good lives or to encourage everyone to study their faith?

Are not all members encouraged to study the doctrines of the kingdom? So the social members are already being encouraged. Did you have some sort of selective "that goes double for you!" treatment in mind?

Edited November 16, 2011 by Dravin

[NeuroTypical]

Is it worth encouraging the more social members who aren't too aware of LDS doctrine to study it?

Oh, absolutely! Anyone who doesn't know what they believe, or why they believe it, is in danger of several things - being made a fool of, losing what faith they do have, waking up one morning in total crisis of faith, etc.

That said, I believe there are good ways to study and less good ways. It is true that you can learn a lot about a person or group from their enemies, but I wouldn't say you should automatically take an enemy's word as final or even accurate.

The Gospel Principles book and class is a wonderful way to learn church doctrine. Godhead, priesthood, prophets, missionaries, importance of families, word of wisdom, exhaltation, a ton of stuff is there that would be new to someone who had never encountered it before.

I was born LDS, my mom sent me until I turned 18 and could get away with staying home. When I finally actually gained a testimony and returned at 26, probably the best thing that happened to me after that, was getting called to teach the Gospel Principles class. I remember reading every chapter, basically for the first time, and realizing "Hey - I really do believe that! How cool is that!?!"

Then I went to FARMS, to learn about criticisms of our faith, and how we answered them. After a few years at that, I sought out critics and criticisms on my own. My 'apologetic career' peaked when I got the folks at a countercult outreach forum to admit the possibility that I was actually a saved christian, despite my being Mormon.

I think my experience would have been very different if I had started with the countercult people, before even knowing what I believed or why.

I'd recommend that path for most anyone who (like me) has a couple of brain cells to rub together.

Edited November 16, 2011 by Loudmouth_Mormon

[Guest]

I would say there are a lot of Mormons who stay just because their parents or grandparents were raised that way, and maybe they don't want to disappoint them? I'm sure on the other hand as well that the majority believe everything the church teaches.

[RescueMom]

The shifting of the wheat and tares is beginning to happen. Those who are just there for the culture will be shifted out....soon. It will be easy to tell, they will have no real testimony of the Atonement of Christ. It will be only in that testimony that the wheat will make it, all other foundations that members have built their church going on will be destroyed. Some will gain a testimony, others will fall away.

Hence many are called, but few are chosen.

IMHO, the shifting is going to happen, and we will see many who have come from long pioneer stock who are in the church for social reasons fall away....probably due to a doctrinal change or something the GA proclaim. I already see it happening.

It has been foretold that many will fall away.

[Backroads]

Are not all members encouraged to study the doctrines of the kingdom? So the social members are already being encouraged. Did you have some sort of selective "that goes double for you!" treatment in mind?

No. Just wondering that if those who arent' really studying anything are perhaps better off that way--at least they are going to Church.

[Windseeker]

I'm sure many have seen this before. In truth it seems that us LDS folks are doing pretty well in understanding Christian Doctrine. A little better on average than our Christian brothers.

U.S. Religious Knowledge Survey - Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life

Atheists and agnostics, Jews and Mormons are among the highest-scoring groups on a new survey of religious knowledge, outperforming evangelical Protestants, mainline Protestants and Catholics on questions about the core teachings, history and leading figures of major world religions.

Mormons, black Protestants and white evangelicals are the most frequent readers of materials about religion. Fully half of all Mormons (51%) and roughly three-in-ten white evangelicals (30%) and black Protestants (29%) report that they read books or go online to learn about their own religion at least once a week. Only a small fraction of all religiously affiliated Americans – 6% of the general public and no more than 8% of any religious group – say they read books (other than Scripture) or visit websites to learn about religions other than their own at least once a week.

[Dravin]

No. Just wondering that if those who arent' really studying anything are perhaps better off that way--at least they are going to Church.

Are we talking about people who aren't studying? Or people who don't believe? I'm seeing some conflation between the two in how social members are being discussed. The main difference is being neglectful in studying the gospel versus falsely bearing witness of beliefs and entering covenants falsely.

In the case of those who are neglectful of studying the doctrines (which BTW, isn't the same thing as not being studied in Church history or not having some blow your mind understanding of doctrines) are better off going to Church than not, their problem is ignorance of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, church is a wonderful place to remedy that ignorance. Ultimately they should be remedying that ignorance but we can only do so much, you can't force feed people knowledge and understanding, and if remedying that ignorance means there are doctrines and precepts they will find hard and have to learn to overcome, they should do so.

In the case of those who don't believe, while they are welcome at Church I believe someone who does not have a testimony who lies about such in worthiness interviews or participates in ordinances aware of there meaning but without sincerity mock God. And that is never a good thing. However, we don't prevent people from attending Church because they don't have a testimony, and is Church not a good place to provide an opportunity for such to develop? So they are best off attending Church under true pretenses.

[Backroads]

Are we talking about people who aren't studying? Or people who don't believe? I'm seeing some conflation between the two in how social members are being discussed. The main difference is being neglectful in studying the gospel versus falsely bearing witness of beliefs and entering covenants falsely.

I'm referring to those who go to church because it makes them feel good, don't really bother to study (which could be with "neglectful"), and, beyond that, haven't the foggiest idea of what they believe. They aren't intentionally mocking God, but have little testimony-driven desire to study or even find out what they believe. They're okay with the basics taught in Sunday school but fail to really attach themselves to it. They are truly in the Church for social reasons.

I do think I gleaned a good answer from your post. :) I'm taking it that we can offer the best Church experience we can but in the end just can't be fully responsible for others' testimonies.

[sister_in_faith]

I don't think that the atonement is a difficult part of mormon doctrine to grasp. I think that there are other things that ARE more difficult, and I think that Heavenly Father will have to decide when they are ready for those things, if they don't already have a testimony of them. As members they have the resources available to them to study when prompted to. I think it is unwise to try to and 'force' it. But then again, missionaries do it every day, so I may be wrong.

[annewandering]

A person may have a testimony and know very little. There is no way for us to judge that. Certainly we cannot say what their testimony is based on anymore than they can tell what anyone elses is based on.

If I believe in what I have been taught and feel a strong testimony but find that living the gospel, raising my kids and living a good live is what I need in my life then anyone else is wrong to say I need more and should study more. And they can not know my motives.

I am not saying I am that person, completely anyway, but I have no right to make any judgement on them.