I've been thinking about this a lot lately and had a moment of personal "harmony" in a Gospel Doctrine class discussion when I could see the simplicity stage teacher discussion, and a perplexity comment, and see where everyone was coming from. It's tricky when the leadership is so rigid in their simplicity and so many members are struggling in perplexity...
Thank you for helping us see examples of faith stages in this discussion. Practicing seeing others stage is much more useful than dismissing or getting angry with their perspective! I need more practice!
I was familiar with these faith stages and have even used the terms, but I really appreciate this in-depth tackle and explication. This section in particular stood out to me:
“In my experience in the Church, there is a cultural expectation that we are all at Simplicity, the first stage of faith. Most talks and lessons present topics in a Simplicity way—we treat questions as settled, and the gospel as completely restored. When someone gives a talk they often talk about how they’ve mastered that topic in their own life; if they had an issue or a struggle with it, that’s certainly all in the past.”
It can be difficult, disorienting and quite lonely to attend and participate in a church where this impression is strong, particularly where I live. It can be easy to question myself and my convictions, to come away feeling "wrong" or heretical. But I am an active and vocal participant--in part to help myself feel less invisible, to carve out a space for myself and stay true to my integrity, and, perhaps, in part to be a voice for a certain POV, from a certain depth (stage?) that often goes unspoken and unexplored. My goal has been to create bridges in every little comment, interaction, and shared space with people of a "shared" faith I can easily feel so different from. To phrase things in a way that communicates as well as connects & invites-- not simply taking a stand, alone. It's really difficult. I do not want to be a poster-child for dissent which I may have a reputation of. But the articulation from this article will be helpful for me, I know it. Thanks again.
I found Fowler years ago and in general like the stages, I think human complexity isn't completely accounted for in them, but in general they are pretty good. I have come to understand that a person is never in a 'stage' of their life, but often in categories they'll be in different stages. I may treat the WOW as Stage 1 while challenging something like Polygamy in Stage 3/4, etc.. So as long as we're allowing for this complexity I really like it as a template.
Regarding the post on empowered women, equality is not a feeling. It's measurable and the church does not have it. As far as existing in harmony with your own values and not struggling with cognitive dissonance, that stops when you stop trying to force false things to be true and good when they are just not. ❤️
I’m curious as to what metric you’re using to measure equality? Most times when I see equality being measured in the Church, it is through some human-created metric. I suppose that’s reasonable, considering that God’s metric is only understood by those in the stage of Harmony, and even then, it is an incomplete understanding.
The Church is God’s tool to bring about His Mission. It is administered by ridiculously imperfect human beings. Reconciling the perfection of God with human fallibility is all part of the process of sanctification. That process is messy and difficult and fraught with paradox. But I have yet to experience a philosophy, perspective, or particularly an organization that does a better job of providing opportunities to navigate that process than the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.
I won't pretend to know what Michelle was referring to, but equality can be measured by how many women speak in general conference vs men and how many are in leadership positions compared to men. It's not rocket science. Yes, that is a human perspective, but we are human, and we live in a human world, albeit trying to touch heaven here and there as best we can. It's good to see the church leaders as imperfect beings; it's also good not to see them as the best imperfect beings available to teach us how to get to heaven or experience heaven on Earth. That's essentially the same thing; we're just lowering the bar and still setting up expectations.
I've personally found that an amalgam of philosophies and ideas has helped me connect with the divine more than any LDS Sunday school, or general conference talk, or group of teachings in the LDS faith has. I think that's how we approach harmony (not claiming I'm there, but I get glimpses of it on occasion). If we think that all of the spiritual knowledge God wishes for their children is in a tiny fraction of a percent of the world's knowledge and experience (that of the LDS tradition), that's too limiting. I love Patrick Mason's analogy of the body of Christ and all the philosophies and religious traditions as the members of that body. We need them all and can benefit from them all.
I've been thinking about this a lot lately and had a moment of personal "harmony" in a Gospel Doctrine class discussion when I could see the simplicity stage teacher discussion, and a perplexity comment, and see where everyone was coming from. It's tricky when the leadership is so rigid in their simplicity and so many members are struggling in perplexity...
Another good article. Thanks Roger. I think that you are right about drifting from one stage to another, depending on the topic.
Thank you for helping us see examples of faith stages in this discussion. Practicing seeing others stage is much more useful than dismissing or getting angry with their perspective! I need more practice!
I was familiar with these faith stages and have even used the terms, but I really appreciate this in-depth tackle and explication. This section in particular stood out to me:
“In my experience in the Church, there is a cultural expectation that we are all at Simplicity, the first stage of faith. Most talks and lessons present topics in a Simplicity way—we treat questions as settled, and the gospel as completely restored. When someone gives a talk they often talk about how they’ve mastered that topic in their own life; if they had an issue or a struggle with it, that’s certainly all in the past.”
It can be difficult, disorienting and quite lonely to attend and participate in a church where this impression is strong, particularly where I live. It can be easy to question myself and my convictions, to come away feeling "wrong" or heretical. But I am an active and vocal participant--in part to help myself feel less invisible, to carve out a space for myself and stay true to my integrity, and, perhaps, in part to be a voice for a certain POV, from a certain depth (stage?) that often goes unspoken and unexplored. My goal has been to create bridges in every little comment, interaction, and shared space with people of a "shared" faith I can easily feel so different from. To phrase things in a way that communicates as well as connects & invites-- not simply taking a stand, alone. It's really difficult. I do not want to be a poster-child for dissent which I may have a reputation of. But the articulation from this article will be helpful for me, I know it. Thanks again.
Thanks for sharing this—I can relate. Glad the article was helpful.
I found Fowler years ago and in general like the stages, I think human complexity isn't completely accounted for in them, but in general they are pretty good. I have come to understand that a person is never in a 'stage' of their life, but often in categories they'll be in different stages. I may treat the WOW as Stage 1 while challenging something like Polygamy in Stage 3/4, etc.. So as long as we're allowing for this complexity I really like it as a template.
Regarding the post on empowered women, equality is not a feeling. It's measurable and the church does not have it. As far as existing in harmony with your own values and not struggling with cognitive dissonance, that stops when you stop trying to force false things to be true and good when they are just not. ❤️
I’m curious as to what metric you’re using to measure equality? Most times when I see equality being measured in the Church, it is through some human-created metric. I suppose that’s reasonable, considering that God’s metric is only understood by those in the stage of Harmony, and even then, it is an incomplete understanding.
The Church is God’s tool to bring about His Mission. It is administered by ridiculously imperfect human beings. Reconciling the perfection of God with human fallibility is all part of the process of sanctification. That process is messy and difficult and fraught with paradox. But I have yet to experience a philosophy, perspective, or particularly an organization that does a better job of providing opportunities to navigate that process than the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.
I won't pretend to know what Michelle was referring to, but equality can be measured by how many women speak in general conference vs men and how many are in leadership positions compared to men. It's not rocket science. Yes, that is a human perspective, but we are human, and we live in a human world, albeit trying to touch heaven here and there as best we can. It's good to see the church leaders as imperfect beings; it's also good not to see them as the best imperfect beings available to teach us how to get to heaven or experience heaven on Earth. That's essentially the same thing; we're just lowering the bar and still setting up expectations.
I've personally found that an amalgam of philosophies and ideas has helped me connect with the divine more than any LDS Sunday school, or general conference talk, or group of teachings in the LDS faith has. I think that's how we approach harmony (not claiming I'm there, but I get glimpses of it on occasion). If we think that all of the spiritual knowledge God wishes for their children is in a tiny fraction of a percent of the world's knowledge and experience (that of the LDS tradition), that's too limiting. I love Patrick Mason's analogy of the body of Christ and all the philosophies and religious traditions as the members of that body. We need them all and can benefit from them all.