Honoring Belief

[Brent]

If Church history isn’t true doesn’t mean your belief isn’t true. This an important concept, the idea that the entire corporate mass isn’t worthy of your trust or respect, but you are. This idea first came to me wandering the streets of Nauvoo with my belief filled wife. She thought I was doing it to sneak a sneer at the pioneers. Not so! I still have tremendous respect for anyone who’s willing to ACT on their beliefs. Not just enough habit to go to church on Sundays and Wednesday nights but those that tore their own roots out of the ground and said, “That’s true. That’s the Lord calling. We’re leaving it all behind.” Woof. So what if Joseph wasn’t truthful, people still committed themselves to something, they went all in.

Metaphor time: Does the revelation of the Pentagon Papers negate a 19 year-old’s sacrifice in South-east Asia?

Do the revelations about Joseph’s “translation” technique negate the honor of your deceased relatives?

I don’t think so. I don’t even hold those who so tightly cling to their LDS faith in any sort of contempt, just because the Church is functionally false doesn’t negate the honor in their beliefs. I will submit that seeing someone wake up and leave the church shows the equal amount of respectable honor. True story: my spouse and I were in the visitor’s center in Independence Mo., and there was a young sister missionary there who shared with us how proud she was of her “steamship pioneer” Great-great-something Grandmother who had taken her 7 children, left her husband and travelled from London to SLC. That woman was committed, just as committed as the woman who takes her children and LEAVES the church today. In both cases they did what they felt was right. They proved their beliefs.
Staying in London would have been easy, just like staying in the church can be. I feel we should honor those who act so passionately on their beliefs—not the zealot but the simple believer who’s willing to chase after the place they see good.

Just sayin’….

[achilles]

I think the recognition that there is something honorable about the dedication many have shown to the Work is the next step for me in my spiritual journey. I face a soul-splitting contradiction as I try to do this, since I am gay and have had both soaring spiritual experiences in the Church as well as the near destruction of my personhood by the same organization.

Separating the believer from the organization, separating the personal sacrifice and dedication from the fracturing belief system, even separating the good intentions from the terrible results is nuanced and paradoxical, and...necessary. I hold my ability to see past the black-and-white in high regard, and yet I struggle with seeing the Church (which is mostly just the people...) in a black-and-white way. Cannot the Church be both one of the best things about my life and also something self-destructive that I must reject to save my soul?

I think there is a population who is well-served by the Church. And I say "good for them." But as I look around I see many whose very nature makes it highly likely that they will eventually find themselves victims of the system. Many of those have found their way here. And is it not important to fight for those who are damaged? To identify the things about the system that are so damaging? I don't know.

I know that my father is probably best served by the Church. And that I am tragically better off without it. Can both things be true? Probably.

[Dravin]

While I can find something to respect for convictions and the actions that flow from them even if I don't necessarily share them, if I actually do is situational. To go ahead and Godwinize the thread already, someone who mistakenly thinks a prophet walks the Earth and in trial and tribulation crosses continents? Okay, sure, I can see something to respect there. A Nazi 'scientist' torturing Jews out of a mistaken ideas of racial superiority? Not so much. Both are acting on their convictions, one I'm willing to classify as misguided but admirable, the other is vile and gets no respect by virtue of their conviction and volition.

To bring it back into the day to day. I can see something to respect, even if I feel it is misguided, in a Mormon giving up a potential career because they'd have to work on Sunday. I see less to respect in a Bishop asking a child about the details of their masturbation habits or pressuring an abused wife to stay with her abuser.

[achilles]

To bring it back into the day to day. I can see something to respect, even if I feel it is misguided, in a Mormon giving up a potential career because they'd have to work on Sunday. I see less to respect in a Bishop asking a child about the details of their masturbation habits or pressuring an abused wife to stay with her abuser.

This is where I see the absolute necessity of every person developing an internal moral compass, and to put it first when it conflicts with perceived duty or authority.

Does this Church help people develop personal moral compasses? Does it encourage people to follow their own moral compass with conviction? I don't know.

[LucyHoneychurch]

My family has adjusted to accept the new me, even if it did take a few years. In return, I have learned to support them in the positive aspects of their faith. I want them to be happy, and I want to minimize unproductive conflict. Lately, I have even been approached for advice, which had completely gone by the wayside. They now trust me to give advice tailored to their lifestyle. They know I don't go to any church, but consider me a fellow Christian (though I am only one culturally, not a literal believer). It is best to stay silent when I disagree, and I use my personal life to express what I really value, such as science and social causes. The tension is slowly releasing as we gain mutual respect - with open-mindedness and a willingness to be objective being key. I can add that I know progressive Christians who would find a new church before they accepted the rejection of a family member, or of any LGBTQ person. So, I can respect by degree. I have a hard time respecting hard-line dogma that asks you to check your conscience. We all have a line where our ability to respect naked belief ends.

[Dravin]

Does it encourage people to follow their own moral compass with conviction? I don't know.

The church excels at teaching the following moral compass, "That which leadership says is right." And I'd say they most certainly want you to follow it with conviction. That said, I don't think the church, because of the rhetoric of 'Follow the prophet, he can't lead you astray!" teaches ownership of your moral compass. They most certainly don't want you developing your own, they want you to copy paste theirs (and edit it when they do).

Note, there are plenty of organizations that want you to just borrow their compass and leave it at that. The church isn't unique in that aspect, I'm just uniquely aware of it given my background as a former Mormon.

[Corsair]

If Church history isn’t true doesn’t mean your belief isn’t true. This an important concept, the idea that the entire corporate mass isn’t worthy of your trust or respect, but you are. This idea first came to me wandering the streets of Nauvoo with my belief filled wife. She thought I was doing it to sneak a sneer at the pioneers. Not so! I still have tremendous respect for anyone who’s willing to ACT on their beliefs. Not just enough habit to go to church on Sundays and Wednesday nights but those that tore their own roots out of the ground and said, “That’s true. That’s the Lord calling. We’re leaving it all behind.” Woof. So what if Joseph wasn’t truthful, people still committed themselves to something, they went all in.

This is quite relevant in my life because I will be on the streets of Nauvoo this summer with my dear, believing wife. I don't want to ruin the trip for my wife and her faithful family so I will politely go on all of the tours and not bring up certain historical facts. I do expect to enjoy the trip in general.

I certainly agree with Brent that I can honor early Mormon pioneers who had the commitment and determination to follow their testimony and move to Illinois and Utah. I equally honor men and women who have done many other difficult tasks throughout history. The problem is that Mormon pioneers are not placed higher in esteem than early Christians who stood with their testimony. Early Mormons are also not preferred over many Roman leaders, some of whom might have been annoyed with those Christians. It will be an interesting summer.

[Not Buying It]

If Church history isn’t true doesn’t mean your belief isn’t true. This an important concept, the idea that the entire corporate mass isn’t worthy of your trust or respect, but you are. This idea first came to me wandering the streets of Nauvoo with my belief filled wife. She thought I was doing it to sneak a sneer at the pioneers. Not so! I still have tremendous respect for anyone who’s willing to ACT on their beliefs. Not just enough habit to go to church on Sundays and Wednesday nights but those that tore their own roots out of the ground and said, “That’s true. That’s the Lord calling. We’re leaving it all behind.” Woof. So what if Joseph wasn’t truthful, people still committed themselves to something, they went all in.

This is quite relevant in my life because I will be on the streets of Nauvoo this summer with my dear, believing wife. I don't want to ruin the trip for my wife and her faithful family so I will politely go on all of the tours and not bring up certain historical facts. I do expect to enjoy the trip in general.

I certainly agree with Brent that I can honor early Mormon pioneers who had the commitment and determination to follow their testimony and move to Illinois and Utah. I equally honor men and women who have done many other difficult tasks throughout history. The problem is that Mormon pioneers are not placed higher in esteem than early Christians who stood with their testimony. Early Mormons are also not preferred over many Roman leaders, some of whom might have been annoyed with those Christians. It will be an interesting summer.

You know, it isn't like Mormons were the only people who ever crossed the plains and settled the wilderness. There are plenty of cities out West that aren't in Utah and weren't started by Mormon pioneers. Members act like the Mormon pioneers are the only people who ever came West and tamed the wilderness, but that isn't the case. Sure, they got kicked out of their homes for their religious beliefs, which is unjustifiable, but geez people, if Mormons were the only ones who tamed the west how did all the other cities in all the other western states ever happen?

I personally don't honor their faith. They were a bunch of suckers and gullible fools who followed a madman into the wilderness where he could rule them with an iron fist and oppress their women in a miserable mockery of what marriage should be. I don't admire their faith - I disdain their stupidity. Most of them were converts who should have had the brains to see they had joined a freaky weird cult. If you are going to honor the early Mormons, you need to bestow that same honor and admiration on the loyal, faithful souls who followed Jim Jones to Guyana and died drinking cyanide-laced Kool Aid, or the Branch Davidians who died at Waco with David Koresh.

I say we reserve our honor and praise for those who were smart enough to see the sham for what it was and shun it, not the fools who didn't and accepted it.

[Jeffret]

I personally don't honor their faith. They were a bunch of suckers and gullible fools who followed a madman into the wilderness where he could rule them with an iron fist and oppress their women in a miserable mockery of what marriage should be. I don't admire their faith - I disdain their stupidity. Most of them were converts who should have had the brains to see they had joined a freaky weird cult. If you are going to honor the early Mormons, you need to bestow that same honor and admiration on the loyal, faithful souls who followed Jim Jones to Guyana and died drinking cyanide-laced Kool Aid, or the Branch Davidians who died at Waco with David Koresh.

I think that's a little too harsh of a judgement. I think I can still honor the good things that my ancestors and accept the mistakes that they made. Whether Mormon or not, we all make mistakes, myself and my ancestors included. Some of them pretty big mistakes that have influenced lots of people or their future generations. But that doesn't mean I have to dishonor and judge everything they did.

Besides the situation was decidedly more nuanced than described in Church or often recognized by ex-Mormons. For many of the early converts, a significant part of the draw America, the land of new opportunity, and not necessarily the weird religion. Many of them lived in oppressed and constrained situations in Europe. This was a chance for them to leave their limited opportunities for the wide-open lands of frontier America. Some of them had some degree of wealth, but many of them were from relatively poor situations with little chance of improvement. In America they had the opportunity to own land and make of it what they could.

The rapidly growing frontier cities of Kirtland and Nauvoo would have been exciting places to live. The Mormon narrative of the pioneers crossing the plains was that the experience was a horrible situation full of suffering and woe. If you actually read their diaries or dig into the history, many of them found it a relatively pleasant and enjoyable experience. It was one big camping trip with a company of other travelers that you got to know well and socialize with. For many of them, just being out in the clear, open air, doing something of their own effort, was a dramatic improvement from the dirty cities or cramped conditions they had left behind.

[GoodBoy]

I spend a lot of time with Muslim students. I absolutely honor and respect their beliefs. They hold their faith very dear to themselves and it makes them feel like they are loved, part of a bigger team, and that God (Allah) has their back. I respect them for it, even if it makes them a pain in the butt during Ramadan because they are pretty much worthless because they are hungry and tired.

[Linked]

This is a fascinating topic. My initial emotional response was disgust at the idea of honoring something that has cost me so much.

I am trying to lean toward neither honor nor disdain for belief, and more toward understanding and accepting people's non-harmful beliefs. There is beauty in a life time of devotion, and there is ugliness in the murder of people for one's beliefs. That beauty can be found in devotion to anything that gives hope and doesn't hurt though; it doesn't have to be mormon god or any god. The ugliness as well.

I suppose I am trying to look at "belief" as a part of this world I was born into, neither inherently good nor bad, but with good and bad outcomes. Perhaps beliefs that lead to good outcomes should be honored, or at least more accepted. But who is defining good?

Is it good or misguided that my g-g-g-grandfather was part of a group that forged a trail to a new home for mormons in Utah?
Is it good that my parents sacrifice their retirement to the church as missionaries, temple workers and family history consultants? (Maybe, it gives them something to live for at least).
Is it good to do everything you can to encourage your kids to have the same beliefs you do?
Is it good that if your kids don't have your beliefs you think they can't get to heaven with you?
Is it good to take neighbors who just had a baby a meal?

I am proud of some things I did for my mormon beliefs and ashamed of other things. I want to keep doing the things I was proud of and stop doing the things I was ashamed of because of those beliefs. And I can. Maybe we should honor the good act and the good actor. But who is the good actor without her beliefs?

Sorry for rambling...

[didyoumythme]

I still have tremendous respect for anyone who’s willing to ACT on their beliefs. Not just enough habit to go to church on Sundays and Wednesday nights but those that tore their own roots out of the ground and said, “That’s true. That’s the Lord calling. We’re leaving it all behind.” Woof. So what if Joseph wasn’t truthful, people still committed themselves to something, they went all in.

Should we honor ISIS for staying true to their belief in Allah and waging Jihad against the innocent people of the world? They literally give up their lives for the cause. How honorable!

Should we honor Hitler for remaining committed to his plan to exterminate as many Jews as he could? How honorable!

There is something to be said about a stalwart human spirit working towards something good. However, people seem to let their favorite God define "good". They can justify any action based on the idea that God supports (and rewards) their actions.

I don't see anything honorable in belief for the sake of belief. People who choose ignorance do not have my respect just because they believe.

I respect many members still, but not because they maintain belief. I respect those who try to be selfless, kind, and open-minded. Most religious people are conditioned to believe from childhood so I try not to hold their unsupported beliefs against them.

[Not Buying It]

I agree with the post just before this one.

I guess I feel like the reverence for pioneers many of us seem to feel is merely an artifact of our Mormon upbringing - again, followers of Jim Jones did pretty much the same thing, left their homes for a new land to found Jonestown in Guyana. No one in their right mind honors their faith and devotion. The Hale-Bopp cult was so committed to their beliefs they committed suicide believing thy would catch a ride on the comet - no one honors their faith and commitment to their beliefs.

Faith in, commitment to, and sacrifice for a belief is not in and of itself honorable, laudable, or praiseworthy. Our pioneer forefathers followed and supported a despot and his henchmen who made life utterly miserable for thousands of women trapped in polygamy. Whatever good came of the Church in that period, I have a hard time honoring people gullible enough to believe in a harmful sham that their more sensible neighbors didn’t fall for.

I say we honor the sensible neighbors.

[Not Buying It]

I don't see anything honorable in belief for the sake of belief. People who choose ignorance do not have my respect just because they believe.

Well said!

[Corsair]

Should we honor ISIS for staying true to their belief in Allah and waging Jihad against the innocent people of the world? They literally give up their lives for the cause. How honorable!

Yes, that's problem. Having a commitment to a personal belief means that Flat Earth believers think they are the oppressed holders of truth instead of deeply misguided rubes.

I say we reserve our honor and praise for those who were smart enough to see the sham for what it was and shun it, not the fools who didn't and accepted it.

Execllent point. It's going to be an interesting trip to Nauvoo this summer. I will test how many nice things I can say about William Law before someone tries to contradict me.

[Brent]

Here's a turnabout:

How do we deal with people who lose a belief/replace it with...something...and continue lying to believers about their own level of belief?

Analogy: You're a member of ISIS. You realize it's a bad, bad thing...but you keep going to the meetings and self identifying as well as allowing others to believe you're still in the fold. Should that be respected?

[Not Buying It]

Here's a turnabout:

How do we deal with people who lose a belief/replace it with...something...and continue lying to believers about their own level of belief?

Analogy: You're a member of ISIS. You realize it's a bad, bad thing...but you keep going to the meetings and self identifying as well as allowing others to believe you're still in the fold. Should that be respected?

I don’t know about the ISIS situation, but I respect the LDS Church member who realizes it is all a sham but has the good sense to take it slow and keep their head down until they sort out how best to handle the damage that their closest relationships will suffer once they make their lack of belief known. The Church takes cruel revenge on those who stop believing, barring them from temple weddings, baby blessings, etc., all the while convincing family members that their unbelieving parent or spouse is now deceived by Satan and less of a spouse or parent than they were. I have a lot of respect for someone who can keep their head in a situation like that.

[Linked]

How do we deal with people who lose a belief/replace it with...something...and continue lying to believers about their own level of belief?

How do we deal with them? That seems like the wrong question. There is no "we", and in many cases there is nothing to "deal" with.

I will answer the question of "How do I feel about them?"

It depends. Would they be hurt if they are open about their change in belief? Are they hurting or exploiting others by lying? I feel that those that are able to be open and help others are being heroic. I wish those who feel they can't be open didn't have the pressures that prevent it.

How do you feel about them?

[Brent]

How do I? Sympathy. Simple sympathy. They're in a tight spot and doing what they feel they need to do to survive. Is it honorable? Probably not, it's sustainable yet ultimately self-destructive.

I thought the ISIS analogy was probably just a red herring but now I think it's extremely valid. If you stay a member and keep wearing the patch I get it--survival is the ultimate goal BUT surviving isn't thriving. Can you thrive being in the church but not of the church? I can't. I bailed. In my associations with Millennials I find that most simply slip into inactivity and allow their parents to believe what they want to believe about their child's activity/commitment levels. Survival is the name of the game when you're twenty something and burning bridges isn't a good idea. Oddly these are probably the people who can readily pull out roots and look for new, more fertile ground to grow in. The older you are the more encrusted you are and the harder to break away. I get why the old barnacles don't want to be scrapped off and I don't blame them; change is tough, scary and difficult AND why it's easy to respect those who jump off the cliff.