Posted by:
Lot's Wife
(
)
Date: December 31, 2016 04:29AM
I always thought that there were three ways to justify a religion/religious community. They were truth, superior leadership, or the quality of the local believers.
The truth foundations crumbled for me over a long time. All the books we have discussed in the various threads were part of that, plus science. But I stitched those ideas and traditions into an over-arching religiosity that, in retrospect, was not really Mormon at all. If I had to choose one "book," it would be the standard works of the church because they do not describe a God that deserves to be worshiped.
The second pillar is superior leadership. That might have kept me in the church if there were prophets who prophesied or who espoused moral values I thought correct and that were subsequently vindicated by social evolution. Obviously the church has never met that criterion.
The third is the quality of the local congregations. I know many think Mormons are unusually good or sincere people, but I don't. I have seen them ostracize so many, reverse their personal ethics at the instruction of the priesthood, suck resources from the broader secular community without contributing in turn, and do things to outsiders that are simply unforgivable. If I had to venture a guess, I'd say that on average Mormons are somewhat worse citizens and neighbors than most. Going further, I think the herd mentality and abdication of individual moral responsibility makes Mormons unusually capable of following leaders into truly evil endeavors.
Over the years the edifice of my faith took serious blows to all three pillars but I managed to use duct tape and baling wire to hold them together. I guess I finally gave up when in the space of about two years I decided JS was a complete fraud (not even partially redeemable), observed some unspeakable actions by local leaders and then saw the Q15 refuse to intervene to protect the members harmed by those leaders. The human cost was immense and predictable, and the decision not to mitigate the damage was intentional. It was, in short, sin that would entail eternal consequences for anyone who had not received the Second Anointing. . . The Second Anointing, the ritual that frees the recipient to commit virtually any crime. . .
So in answer to your questions, Brian, I have read Varieties and found it profound. I did not see a contradiction between religious experiences generated by religion per se and by art or music--Bach, for me too, and Handel, in particular--or nature. What changed for me was the ability of the church to provide equal experiences given my increasing understanding of its moral corruption. In that sense, I lost my faith due to the book of personal experience.