http://fromdctobc.blogspot.com/2013/07/how-i-confront-doubt-responding-to-some.html

I find this blogger intriguing because she openly is practicing Mormon duality.

What do you think?

She expresses awareness of conflicts and yet affirms the PR while putting the violations on the shelf.

It is watching some one determined to stay Mormon and rationalize why she chooses to do so, while at the same time advertising herself as an intellectual.

This link is to a follow-up of an earlier post doubt and Hans Mattsson. Ultimately she falls in line, happy to be Mormon. She was born Mormon, it's working out fine, so the Mormon legacy goes on in spite of supposed unresolved doubts and the desire to label herself intellectual.

I especially enjoyed her response to a poster that provided her all the links to the sources around the Hans Mattsson story in the NY Times she blogs about earlier.

She read some of the transcript and sees the difficulties, but wants to be Mormon, so it will all work out in the end. The past is the past (was that a prophecy from Gordn B. Hinckley?) maybe someone should provide that in a worthiness interview, the past is the past.

Here is the post and her reply in case she removes them.


FemaleAugust 20, 2013 at 5:12 PM
This is an important Blog--I hope you and your readers will read the source materials and complimentary media available. I have provided links for the audio for the fireside meeting in Sweden, the transcript from the meeting, and an interview done by John Dehlin with the Mattsons (it is especially touching to hear Birgitta discuss her decision to choose her husband during his work to reconcile the realities of Mormonism with the stories he was told). I hope those who read your blog, will drill down to enhance their understanding of dealing with doubt and not dismiss it as something for only the weak and wicked.

Here is the transcript from the Swedish fireside (there is only one part not included where a soft spoken and upset member cannot be clearly heard, I think she is discussing her lesbian sister and Mormonism)

http://www.roadkilldelight.com/NOM/SFMJRT.pdf

Here are the audio recordings from the Swedish fireside where General Authorities Jensen and Turley were sent by SLC to answer questions from approximately 25 Swedish church leaders. The first two minutes are in Swedish and then the remainder of the meeting in English as a courtesy to those who do not speak Swedish.

http://www.mediafire.com/download/ot7rh9xj9m9898m/fireside-in-sweden-part1.mp3

http://www.mediafire.com/download/xif11bvjmjtq22i/fireside-in-sweden-part2.mp3

Mormon Stories interview with Hans and Birgitta Mattson by John Dehlin, doctoral candidate at USU and expressed devout Mormon.

http://mormonstories.org/hans-mattsson/


Sarah ShumwayAugust 21, 2013 at 7:32 PM
Hi, and thank you for these links. I certainly don't think that doubt is necessarily a bad thing--rather, if we choose faith, the propensity for doubt is always present. And I agree with Terryl Givens that our doubts and uncertainties can help us increase our faith. I think that many members of the church will experience periods of anxiety surrounding their testimony at times (I certainly have). This was meant to be my personal response as to how I try to deal with my personal uncertainties when they occur.

That said, I read a good portion of the transcript from the fireside. I think it is pretty clear, however, from Brother Turley and Elder Jensen's remarks that there is a lot that we don't know. I certainly don't understand polygamy, nor many of the other testy historical events, and I have experienced times when I felt frustrated at my lack of understanding. So, I am very sympathetic to members of the church that are struggling intensely with these issues.

I know, however, that if I left this church based on these issues, I would be eliminating an institution that I believe contains the gospel of Jesus Christ in its fullness. I believe that Jesus Christ himself leads this church by a modern, living prophet. When Christ asks his disciples, "Will ye also go away?" I want to echo what his disciples said: "To whom should we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life." Whatever historical problems we have, I don't think that anything is worth compromising our standing in Christ's church.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/22/2013 05:12PM by gentlestrength.

When it comes to certain aspects of Mormonism, is the concept of "doubt" or "uncertainty" even the proper conceptual framework?

As my journey in studying Mormonism progressed, I developed a conviction that certain aspects of my participation in the LDS Church were simply wrong. It was wrong to continue promoting (through my participation, sustaining of leaders, etc.) the whitewashed history the organization promotes. This went beyond having doubts on the periphery, or confronting uncertainties.

We can't just sit on the sideline claiming not to understand polygamy. What is not to know? Ok...we don't know what sex positions Joseph Smith used (at least I don't). But we clearly know he married women far younger than he was, used his position of spiritual authority to win over women/girls, and he married women, who were married to other men. What's more we know that this is not part of the CES/Sunday School curriculum--so the LDS Church makes an effort to hide it. What more does it take to be at least a little testy about all this? Especially, when you grow up on a steady diet of how great Joseph Smith was.

I still have to face doubt and uncertainty, but many aspects of Mormonism did not fit that. It was simply wrong. Joseph Smith did not translate the Egyptian papyrus scrolls as he claimed. Once you look at the evidence, what is to doubt?

These are matters that are within our capacity as human beings to understand--despite what Messrs. Jensen and Turley have to say.

Why waste your capacity for faith, on things that are demonstrably false? There are far too many real uncertainties that human beings need to confront with faith or hope to waste our time on having faith that 2+2=5.

Very nicely expressed. At what point do they insist on Faith that compliments their transgender atonal position and acknowledge the unease of Truth and Knowledge.

Many here express being the first in their family of hundreds to take this position of Knowledge over Faith. There is difficulty for most all that reject Mormonism, but it can be especially difficult to leave the Faith of a transgeneratonal family, pioneer stock, back to Joseph and Brigham.

I don't see how this stops, the biochemsistry, the mix, the formula exist in that blood and the Mormon oven is set at the right temperature to make Mormons. Wen the conflict of Faith and Knowledge develops, clearly the struggle begins.

What we see here, in Sarah Shumway, is someone who claims to see the conflict, but prefers to be baked Mormon and I imagine make more Mormons. The least she could do if she prefers not to challenge the faith of her ancestry, is not pass it along by making more babies with the buochemistry to turn into a nicely baked Mormon.

To be honest when I hear follow the prophet, we thank thee oh god for a prophet, or praise to the man. It is extremely painful. I still attend church, but I can't pay attention, it's painful to hear the lies and know that if I raise my hand I will be outed. So I just surf on my ipad and wonder the halls when I can.

That sounds familiar.

Joseph Smith was a charlatan.
The Book of Mormon and Book of Abraham are poor 19th century fabrications which can not withstand any scientific scrutiny. There is no mystery, there is not set of facts we can not understand, there is only lies and deceptions from the beginning of the LDS church and brainwashing of children and members.

It's funny because when you investigate and come to the realization that all of it is a con,
then all the things that did not make sense and that you struggled with and put on the shelf, etc, are suddenly understood. And most of it becomes so obvious you wonder why you did not see it before.

It's like figuring out the magicians trick. If you want to believe in magic then the need to understand the trick is non-existent.

Basically this woman is saying “I don’t want to know the trick because it will destroy my belief in magic and I’m intellectual enough to know that”.