Back to you, Dieter

Dear Dieter,

Two years ago I started this blog because you recycled a mind-numbingly stupid slogan about how we needed to be aggressively critical towards our doubts instead of towards our faith. It's a slogan that suggests we should engage in self-censorship by turning a blind eye to unfavorable information. You suggest that ignorance is better than honesty. The fact is it's not.

In one of your talks earlier this month, you repackage the story of Daniel ("and other young students in Israel") in Babylon like it's the story of a young, enthusiastic Mormon headed off to a liberal university where he must resist the peer pressure to adopt the philosophies of man. "But Daniel believed. Daniel did not doubt." It's a clever move. It's also a very misleading juxtaposition. To suggest that today's higher education systems throughout the world are comparable to the vicious theocracy of King Nebuchadnezzar in which nonconformists are burned alive is, in a word, bizarre. Seriously, the Babylonian "team of scholars" (the Bible says "magicians and astrologers") has nothing to do with thousands upon thousands of highly trained researchers across the world who endlessly critique each other's work. Daniel, the Israelite captive carried off to be indoctrinated probably has more in common with young LDS missionaries than college students being pressured to binge drink with their fraternities and sororities.

Just think about it. I am, Dieter, and I think your analogy sucks. How much easier would it have been for Daniel to simply go along with the ways of Babylon? I don't know. I imagine he would have faced some pressure from his fellow Isrealites in captivity and I can't imagine how attractive the Babylonian belief system would have been, if at all. Please don't think that replacing one's belief system is easy. When a belief system is not yours, you're mostly likely going to think it's obviously ridiculous. He could have set aside the restrictive code of conduct God had given the children of Israel. He could have feasted on the rich foods provided by the king and indulged in the worldly pleasures of the natural man. Think of all the vile bacon he could have been eating! He would have avoided ridicule. I didn't see where in the book of Daniel it mentions ridicule. Can I get a verse on that?

He would have been popular. WTF? He was the prince of the eunuch's favorite and one of Nebuchadnezzar's top four councilors.

He would have fit in. Poor kid. At least the totalitarian king loved him. :S

His path might have been much less complicated. Had he just drank the Kool-aid, er... wine...

As silly as your talk is up to this point, it's outdone in the next section where you blame it all on Satan and shame people who are skeptical or have doubts.

Satan, our adversary, wants us to fail. Satan is an early Christian invention, not an actual spirit being. He spreads lies as part of his effort to destroy our belief. What lies? That Joseph Smith had a history of making shit up to get money out of people starting from his early teens? That he plagiarized and falsified rather than actually translate? That he cheated on his wife many, many times and tried to exonerate himself with a fabricated revelation? He slyly suggests that the doubter, the skeptic, the cynic is sophisticated and intelligent, while those who have faith in God and His miracles are naive, blind, or brainwashed. No, that's not Satan, that's logic. Satan will advocate that it is cool to doubt spiritual gifts and the teachings of true prophets. No one's doubting because it's "cool", you asshole! People doubt because they see various inconsistencies in the theory of spiritual gifts and the teachings of those claiming to be prophets. Most of us don't go hunting for them; they arise naturally throughout the years of indoctrination. Right now you sound like the type of person who would claim fossils were put on earth by Satan to deceive us.

And now for the token quote from this train wreck of a prophetic message - the part where you call doubters ignoble, unimpressive, lazy, morally weak, disloyal and cowardly.

Brethren, let me be clear: there is nothing noble or impressive about being cynical. Skepticism is easy—anyone can do it. It is the faithful life that requires moral strength, dedication, and courage. Those who hold fast to faith are far more impressive than those who give in to doubt when mysterious questions or concerns arise.

Who the fuck do you think you're fooling? First off, don't conflated cynicism for skepticism. Now let me show you the other side:
  
Following your family, your friends and your community in their beliefs is easy. It's great having everyone around you be in constant agreement because they think like you do. It's very hard when you don't share the beliefs of your community and you live your life as an outsider. Your kids might even have a hard time finding friends whose parents will let them come over to play. But it is the sincere life of inquiry and careful judgement that requires moral strength, dedication and courage! Those who hold fast to integrity of thought and open-mindedness are far more impressive than those who allow their family or the geographical location in which they were born to provide a prepared set of default answers to questions or concerns about your worldview.

You end your talk with the horrible idea that we simply choose to believe because somehow that will make all the absurdities of the LDS history and doctrine magically disappear. You're asking us to shut off our brains, to stop thinking. Most people can't do this. Most people will struggle silently with cognitive dissonance, will wear out their knees praying for answers, will hate themselves for not understanding and not getting any divine enlightenment. Others will have the courage and good sense to accept the reality of life on earth and walk away from the Church.

Dieter, you should be ashamed of yourself. Your talk will hurt thousands of people who are struggling to make Mormonism work somehow. My only consolation is that the only reason you gave this talk in the first place is because so many people are leaving the Church. You're desperate. You can't defend the Church with facts, so you attack the people who have seen the facts. How cowardly of you.

All testimonies great and small

Conference is a wonderful time of contradictions, like this one.

Easy, Dieter! You might want to review major Church headlines from the past six months. I'm pretty sure I can direct you to a few kinds of testimonies the LDS Church apparently doesn't have room for. And it's not hard to think of others.

So what are you talking about? Are you trying to tell Russy B. something?

Maybe what you mean is that the Church doesn't care as much about members' testimonies as member behavior. "Believe what you want, brothers and sisters, but keep it to yourself if We don't like it."

JAA to Dieter

Here's another winner from Just Another Apostate (worth a like and a follow over on Facebook).

"[T]o be perfectly frank, there have been times when members or leaders in the Church have simply made mistakes. ... [M]y dear brothers and sisters—my dear friends—please, first doubt your doubts before you doubt your faith." -Dieter F. Uchtdorf, in General Conference, October 2013. 

If it's not okay to doubt your doubts in things having to do with mortal life, I don't think we should be expected to doubt our doubts in things having to do with eternal life. But what do I know? I'm just another apostate.

Johnny "Gone Rotten" Dehlin & Kate "Machine Gun" Kelly

Well members of the LDS Church can now officially hate John Dehlin and Kate Kelly, two horrible people advocating for the fair treatment of gays and women in the Church, because just a few days ago they were both informed via post that their heads are going to roll! That's right! Excommunication, that most glorious of loving practices!

Sorry, John and Kate, but we will not tolerate your evil liberal ways. We hope you have fun getting shit on by your family and community from here on out because you now wear the sign of the Beast on your brow. Or maybe try repenting or something. Show us how sorry you are. We love that shit!

And for all you assholes out there who actually like what John and Kate have done, REPENT YE MOTHERFUCKERS, FOR THE CHURCH OF GOD IS PISSED! You have now been given a fair warning with the examples of John and Kate that love and compassion are not enough. The same goes for you followers of brother Waterman, too! (Sister Colvin, you might be next!) Mend your ways or you might be next! (Unless you don't have enough people listening to you, in that case let all your crazy out whenever you feel like it.)

In efforts to clarify the situation the Church has released an explanation of sorts. I just have a few questions about this press release. Did John and Kate really do this to themselves or isn't it really the Church doing the excommunicating? When can we expect our leaders to clarify John and Kate's false teachings? What exactly have they said that is so horribly incongruous with LDS doctrine? And is the "door" really and truly "always open" to people who are excommunicated? I thought there was policy that getting excommunicated twice locks that door for the rest of your mortal existence. Dieter, can you help us with any of these questions and doubts? 

Truly this is God's work, I solemnly declare, in the name of Greasy J, amen.

Uchtdorf vs. Russell

Could Bertrand be right? Do wiser people doubt?

More than a question of wisdom, I think it's an issue of honesty.

A bishop's blues

Here's another great response to Dieter's "doubt your doubts" talk, this time focusing more on the concept of there being room in the Church for everyone. How is a bishop to react when he learns that what he's been teaching has just been disavowed? How is he to sleep at night when he's held his congregation's standard of belief to the heights of pure fiction and disciplined members according to that standard? Former bishop and current high councilman Ganesh Cherian of New Zealand spells out some very real issues that are developing in the wake of recently revealed light and knowledge.

I don't always doubt

They judge me, they judge me not, they judge me, they judge me not...

Mormons teach each other not to judge. Dieter's recent Conference talk is proof.

The avalanche of "Stop it" memes that followed bore witness to the fact that Dieter had won the People's Choice Award for Best Conference Talk.

It's a good message. I think Jesus even said something similar. It's hard to argue with a good message that comes from Jesus. I'm just not sure Dieter captured the essence of Mormon judging. The judgment he's speaking of refers to "hating, gossiping, ignoring, ridiculing, holding grudges, or wanting to cause harm", there is so much more to Mormon judging than that.

In my experience, Mormon judgment is almost entirely concerned with righteousness and worthiness, and hides behind the façade of helping others. Because "judging" carries such a negative connotation, Mormons prefer to approach the issue in the key of "discernment". We have to discern between Good and Evil, and whether or not something is worthy or unworthy, or clean and unclean all the time. Worthy is good. Unworthy is bad, and sometimes evil. If we can't tell what's good, how will we know what's worthy of us? If we can't tell what's evil, how can we reasonably seek after good things? If we can't tell what's unclean, how will we stay clean before God? We have to discern who's worthy to participate in the sacred rites of baptism, sacrament, and temple work. We have to discern who stands in need of fellowship. We have a lot of discerning to do and that requires a lot of judging.

We're always looking for signs of doubt, weak faith, idleness in upholding the Gospel and magnifying callings, heresy, and apostasy. These signs show up everywhere and we have to be ever observant. It could be a can of Coke. It could be chronic tardiness to Sacrament Meeting. It could be a reluctance to bless the sacrament. It could be a colored shirt or facial hair. It could be failure to bring your own scriptures to church. It could be watching sports on Sunday. It could be a low cut dress or a questionably short skirt. It could be wearing flip flops to church. It could be reluctance to accept a calling or speak in sacrament. It could be a bumper sticker endorsing a Democrat. It could be poorly behaved children or children who's hair has not been tidied up. It could be a mild swear word. It could be the slightest disagreement with something that was said in General Conference. It could be the mentioning of an inappropriate movie. It could be a slanderous remark against the Founding Fathers. It could be a look of boredom in class. It could be not singing along with the hymns. It could be never raising your hand in Sunday School. It could be an uncorrelated comment in class. It could be your gait and composure. It could be your lack of a smile. It could be your avoidance of someone in the ward, especially authority figures. It could be so many different things, so we exercise vigilance along with our discernment.

Just know that we can and will discern you. Be sure of that. We'll scrutinize your every word and your every move. We'll figure you out. We'll categorize you flawlessly. We'll put you in your place.

Tetris

Dear Dieter,

Thanks for reading my blog and considering my doubts. I hope I've made it clear that I made a lot of effort to doubt each and every one of my doubts as best I could for as long as I could. My years of living the Mormon life were perhaps not unlike a game of Tetris. It was so easy to keep the board clear of obstacles at first. I got really efficient at playing the game the way the Church had taught me to. I knew all the answers. I knew how the Gospel worked. I knew I was in the right place. Then things started speeding up. I was learning more and more interesting things about the world. Education and experience opened floodgates of sorts and before I knew what was going on I found myself with an avalanche of pieces to fit together. I worked really hard at it but I inevitably ended up at that point in the game where your only hope of staying in the game is to get a long piece so you can eliminate four full rows and gain a little breathing room. In that moment, when the game board is piled up to the top with pieces, all you have is prayer.

So I prayed. It was the last time in my life that I prayed sincerely (I prayed once more after that). I saw the end coming and wanted to avoid it if at all possible - "let this cup pass from me" and all that. I mentally prepared to ask Heavenly Father for a real witness, to ask God to reveal Himself even if He weren't Mormon at all. I was open to any god even though in my mind the Mormon one was clearly the most plausible. And when I prayed I stayed on my knees and listened. I prayed again and again. I told Heaven Father where I was at and what was going on, even though He already knew it all, and I asked for something real, something that would keep me in the game. At the very least I needed that long piece, but I would have loved to have seen the game board miraculously clear so I could start totally afresh. A loving, all-powerful father would, I assumed, do something like that.

I got nothing all night. Not a whisper, not a burning, not an epiphany, not a sign. Nothing. I realized what I had feared was true: I had been talking to the ceiling my whole life, to bare and earless walls, to the wind, to a Monster in the clouds, a complete fantasy. There was no personal god on the receiving end of my prayers.

I climbed in bed and contemplated what this meant for me. Was I now going to start smoking? No, of course not, smoking's idiotic, and besides the Word of Wisdom still made plenty of sense. Was I going to start stealing and taking as much advantage of others as possible? No, everyone hates those people. Was I going to start having sex with prostitutes? No, but the thought of having sex with someone I admired and cared for sounded pretty reasonable. Was I going to start taking the Lord's name in vain? No, I wouldn't want to offend those who believe, besides who's "the Lord" anyway? Why should I ever pay him lip service again in any form?

That was the end for me, Dieter. No more believing after that. I've never relapsed. Not believing has never been difficult probably because everything started fitting together without me turning it into a game of Tetris. No pile ups ever. Even before learning about Joseph Smith's scryer years, the evolution of his conversion story, the various sources he used in creating The Book of Mormon, the inconsistencies in his "restoration" of the Priesthood, his affairs, his schemes, his opportunism, his plagiarism of the Freemasons, his ambitions to military glory and world rule. My theory after that last prayer was that Joseph was both very intelligent and very delusional. I assumed he had had all of those visions but they were all born of fantasy. I still believed then that Joseph had wanted to do right by God and do good in the world. I didn't realize at the time that there were so many other doubts to doubt.

Dieter, don't think for a moment that I and others like me didn't doubt our doubts. The very first thing we do with doubts is doubt them.

Thanks again for reading.

Skepticism

Dieter, I know you would like everyone to be the nothing-doubting type, but there are some good reasons why many of us find greater security in doubt than in faith in certainty. Please sit back and let Mr. Deity & Co. try to show you where we're coming from.

I know you might not like this a whole lot. You're probably wondering what happens when this guy is made to stand before The Judge. Let's tap the power of the Deity to see how that might play out.

So we're cool now, right?
Good.

Doubting our dear Dieter

You won't regret taking the time to read Jen's critique of Dieter's punchline.

A couple of responses to Dieter Uchtdorf's "Doubt your doubts"

Take few minutes to read B. Very Chill's delightful post over at the Church of the Fridge and then skip on over to Infants on Thrones to give Uchtdorf's brief follow up talk a listen. Enjoy.

Name them one by one

In the first session of the 183rd Semiannual General Conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints held October 5, 2013, the beloved Second Counselor of the First Presidency, Dieter Uchtdorf (a.k.a. The Silver Fox), delivered an address entitled "Come, Join with Us," in which he encouraged members of the Church to "first doubt your doubts before you doubt your faith." The admonition was an instant hit among the faithful and internet memes sporting the Diete's words were soon popping up all over social media as status updates and adorable memes.

It's not particularly difficult to find reasonable criticisms with what Dieter's saying here. For starters, the concept of not doubting your faith applies exclusively to members of the Mormon Church and not to anyone considering joining Mormonism - which is odd considering most of the talk (including the title) is addressed to non-Mormons. Heaven forbid an outsider of some sort (like an investigator of the Church) actually decide to keep his original faith instead of converting to Mormonism! For those who are already Mormon, hearing that we should be doubting our doubts rather than our faith comes across as at least a little ignorant if not entirely insensitive. Dieter seems to suggest that members who doubt are uncritically embracing their doubts rather than resisting or analyzing them carefully over years and years of their life. How many doubts do believing Mormons store on their proverbial shelf in hopes that one day their understanding should be completed with "further light and knowledge"?

The years I spent as an active, believing Mormon were plagued with doubt-causing cognitive dissonance, but I hardly even noticed. Friends have since asked me what caused my disaffection from the Church, what happened, when did it happened, and what exactly I still believe with regards to Mormonism. When I sat down to think about it I couldn't help but notice that there were a number of issues that I had put on the shelf only to move on faithfully as I felt Heavenly Father would have wanted me to do. So after seeing all the Uchtdorf memes and listening to his talk I began compiling a personal list of doubts with the belief that I would be able to identify just a few key moments that had given me pause during my years of faithfulness, but within a matter of minutes I had a much longer list than I had anticipated and more moments of dissonance were coming to mind all the time. Of the items that made the list, some are fairly concrete events while others are more subtle realizations that sunk in over time. The thing is: I ALWAYS DOUBTED MY DOUBTS every time they came up and in the end IT WAS THE WRONG THING TO DO. I should have had the courage to be wrong and move on with my life, develop new beliefs, and worry less about the Church.

So this blog is about my wrestling with cognitive dissonance and doubt in the decades that I was an active believing Mormon; these are the doubts I doubted until all I had left was the fact that I could no longer believe.