I’ve listened to a few podcasts with Terryl and Fiona Givens and right now I’m reading Crucible of Doubt. Several times they have talked about unorthodox members of the church speaking up in their home wards and being more honest and authentic about their testimonies:
“The pressure to conform to what we see as a dominant cultural orthodoxy is often more imagined than real. A silent majority may be more receptive than we realize to our own yearnings for greater authenticity, honesty, originality, and individualism….
Such pressures to fit in, to keep silent in the face of dominant perspectives and attitudes and understandings, can seem a daunting specter. This is especially true in the case of those who, harboring doubts or uncertainties, feel marginalized by Mormonism’s pervasive rhetoric of certainty. Yet, some have ventured to test the perceived cultural norms–and found the experiment rewarding.” (Crucible of Doubt, p 104).
Yesterday was fast Sunday in my ward and I decided to try the Givens test. I stood up and gave a pretty messy version of my testimony [As I rewrote it for this post I added extra detail and explanation I skipped over the pulpit. I’ll try to set those parts in brackets]:
I spent my whole life doing exactly what the church told me to do, checking all of my boxes. The box for woman = motherhood. So after ten years of marriage [I had to work full time and we took a break from trying to foster/adopt/medically have a child.] I was filled with so much peace when working FT and not trying to have kids I was confused. I decided to pray about it and when I was in the temple the answer to my prayer came: “I didn’t send you here to fill a role, I sent you here to build my kingdom. As a unique, individual daughter of God.”
I felt like I’d spent so long listening to the church I had never been open to personal revelation of what God wanted ME to do. I learned that “I will follow God’s plan for me” means listening to answers to my prayers even if they are different than what I hear over the pulpit. I felt like He was telling me, “You are finally ready to listen.”
[I went home and read the Teachings of the Living Prophets manual about motherhood and and how mothers aren’t supposed to work outside the home. For the first time ever I questioned that what I’d been told by prophets; that it might not be right, or might not be for everyone. God wanted me to be working full time and not having more kids.]
This led me to start to research other parts of the church. [I dove in and had questions about infallibility of prophets, church history, and how things that were taught as unchanging doctrines were now seen as policies that were changed in the past.] I feel like the more I studied the more I realized how little I knew and my certainty evaporated. My whole outlook went from black and white to complex gray.
I never doubted the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the doctrines of the Gospel. [But all of this human, church stuff? Polygamy? Priesthood ban? Correlation? The history of women in the church? This was messy. And I had to rebuild the foundation of my testimony from “the church” onto “the gospel.” If I’d left the foundation on the church and the prophets I would have crumbled, because it’s so obvious errors have been made as humans have done their best. I call this my “faith transition.” I don’t think I was in “faith crisis” mode because] I never questioned God or the Gospel. Since then I’ve only had certain things I can KNOW. I know God lives & Loves me. I Jesus is my Savior and I can be saved through the atonement.
I choose to believe in everything else. I choose to believe in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. When I come to church and read my scriptures I’m choosing to believe and I feel my faith strengthened. I’m not sure if I’ll ever know anything more than I know now; but I do know how to love, and I think that’s the most important part of discipleship anyways.
Warning: after doing this you will feel emotionally wiped out, so be prepared. The response from others was interesting. Many people got up and contradicted what I said, they testified that it’s okay to believe but easy to know – all you have to do is pray about it. A common theme for the rest of the meeting was “how to know.”
The topics yesterday in SS and RS were the priesthood and Joseph Smith. During the rest of the classes a lot of the comments would start with, “Well it’s not like I’ve never had doubts and questions, but this is how I know…..” To me it seemed a little borderline condescending while thinking they were being helpful. A lot of people awkwardly said they liked my testimony. I couldn’t tell if it was pity because I was such a hot mess or not. A handful of people were genuine in their appreciation. I received some emails and notes today. All in all I’d say the Givens were right – my ward was more open than I gave them credit for, even though it was a mixed response. Whether I’m relegated to nursery and music callings for the rest of my life remains to be seen, though.
As much as I love Sis. Wixom’s talk from Sunday Conference and hope that all wards would respond to doubters in a loving manner – I think it’s a fine line between condescension and help. People don’t need your solutions, they need your love and appreciation. Anyways, If you are someone that operates outside of certainty, have you ever given an honest/authentic testimony? Have you expressed doubt, questions, or said, “I don’t know” over the pulpit? Have you heard one from someone else? Could you tell what the results were amongst ward members? After hearing conference talks being more open to questioning and doubting members, would you consider the Givens test in your own ward? Why or why not?
You are very brave, and probably it will all be for the best. I have a skeptical attitude towards authenticity and have worn a mask at church for a very long time now. Partly, it’s because I don’t know if I even have an authentic “self” as it is always in flux and I don’t know if who I am in private is any more real than who I am in public. I admire the church’s culture of certainty for what it is, and would not want to disturb that. But “self” is very important to most people and our inability to express it drives many people out of the church. I’m glad that you have not let that happen to you.
I once gave a talk on testimony and unintentionally plowed passed my planned conclusion into floundering with nothing to wrap it all up. “I guess I should bear my testimony,” I said, and after a huge pause, I admitted I believed but didn’t know.
I sat down and asked my husband if he wanted to change wards. (He said yes.) I figured they would let me teach Primary that day because it was too late for a sub, and then they’d release me. But no.
I was told my talk was discussed (and not in a bad way) in Sunday School and Relief Society. Several people made appreciative comments to me, and my bishop told me I had no idea how many people I had helped. The only condescending reaction came from someone in F&T meeting saying, “You might think you don’t know, but you KNOW.” But I decided it was kind of vain to assume he was responding to me.
If I heard a testimony that spoke to some uncertainty but a desire to believe I would be THRILLED because it would be so REFRESHING. Too many testimonies are “I know…..” followed by a bunch of things. To hear an honest explanation of how you feel or what you believe or what you are struggling with is preferable to a list of things you “know” in my opinion.
I have recently started teaching at a Catholic high school, and have loved attending Mass each week. I have felt my faith in God renewed, and felt like I was no longer alone in trying to believe in God (having come from academic work in astronomy at the University level where religion was mocked rather than even ignored). Since starting this past school year, I have felt like I could bear a testimony again, even though it mostly was about lessons I’ve gained from Mass. In my testimony, rather than saying what I am unsure of, I just say what I do believe and know. I doubt anyone has noticed what common statements I have not said in my testimony.
Laurel: I had a similar experience. My response that, as the world-leading expert on what I knew and what I believed, he was wrong. In a caring way, of course.
Some believe say they believe. Some people say they know. All of these can be honest.
everything is condescending.
Wow! Very brave. And the beginning of a chapel wave of truth.
Nate,
Sorry to hear you’re unfamiliar with your authentic self.
Nate: crossing fingers this doesn’t blow up in my face, seriously.
Laurel: I had some of the same reaction, after my testimony I was feeling emotionally raw and sensitive. A lot of people -normally- bear their testimonies about how they know things . . . so I was taking it with a grain of salt on whether it was all about me; I was the second person up though, and after 6 straight in a row after me I did see a pattern.
Dexter: I agree. I think it’s refreshing to hear something different once in a while.
ajd_ender: I think you have a great strategy; it’s what I usually do. Only bear testimony of the things I know, that I’m confident in. Perfect.
JI: I totally get that people’s expression of knowing is an honest statement. I’ve totally been there; in fact (ducks head in embarassment) I’ve even born my testimony before that I was like Joseph Smith. “I knew it, I knew that God knew it, and I could not deny it.” Looking back now I don’t think I knew a lot – but it was a very honest expression.
Stephen what do you mean by “everything is condescending”?
What I think you’re getting at is that One of the hardest parts of my faith transition is expressing it in a way to not make it seem like I’m “holier than thou” of those who are still in certainty and orthodoxy. Am I better person and disciple than I was before? Yes. Do I think God led me to where I am? Yes. But God could just as easily want the orthodox to stay orthodox. That’s the path that He wants for them.
Is that what you’re referring to?
If you had given this talk in my ward, you would have been embraced by a warm community of “doubters” or “reformers”. In fact we are numerous enough that sometimes the “conventional crowd feels little bit nervous. My wife gave a notable talk several years ago that was a response to the famous “Women who know” talk from conference. She said that she didn’t know. Many people liked it. But a couple of weeks ago a man in the ward told us that at the time of the talk he thought it was strange. But then later when he went through his own faith crisis he never felt alone, because he always knew there were weirdos like us in the ward. He warmly thanked us for our example and it was touching.
We have many people in their early 20’s in the ward and I believe that for many their time of transition and change of faith is bound to come. When it does I hope they can talk with us, or at least think of us as proof that if you aren’t conventional you can still have faith and you can still stick around. I think that example can mean a lot to people, I know that any such examples would have been, or were, very helpful when we needed them. That’s what it means to be a pioneer!
I’m in favor of increasing the authenticity and variety of testimonies borne. I’m in awe of your courage and vulnerability. As to Laurel’s (#2) experience, it may be an attempt to recreate what happened to H.J. Grant when he attempted to bear a “too authentic” testimony shortly after being called as Stake President at age 23. From the institute (Rel 345) manual:
[Joseph F.] Smith said: ‘Heber, you said you believe the gospel with all your heart, and propose to live it, but you did not bear your testimony that you know it is true. Don’t you know absolutely that this gospel is true?’
“I answered: ‘I do not.’
“‘What, you! a president of a stake?’
“‘That is what I said.’
“‘President [John] Taylor, I am in favor of undoing this afternoon what we did this morning. I do not think any man should preside over a stake who has not a perfect and abiding knowledge of the divinity of this work.’
“I said: ‘I am not going to complain.’
“Brother Taylor had a habit, when something pleased him excessively, of shaking his body and laughing. He said, ‘Joseph, Joseph, Joseph, he knows it just as well as you do. The only thing that he does not know is that he does know it. It will be but a short time until he does know it. He leans over backwards. You do not need to worry.’ “
I did something like this in my ward. I prefaced my remarks with a quote from the scriptures about “for some it is given to know and other to believe on them”, then quoting elder Holland’s talk about a boy saying he believes and Jeff hugging him till his eyeballs popped out, and then the Silver Fox’s quote of “your testimony does not need to be ‘this’ tall”.
I mentioned how we generally hear “I know” during testimony meeting. I said I know (or was it believe? 🙂 there are those in the congregation that can’t say they “know”, but they do believe. I told them I would like to hear from them. And I gave my testimony of what I believe. Only 1 person got up and said, “well I can’t say I know, but I do believe”. Still lots of “I know”
I did hear just a few honest remarks that they liked what I said and a few that even said they felt it was one of the most genuine testimonies they had heard in a while.
My fully TBM wife said she thought it was not good for me to say what I did.
That was a beautiful testimony, and I hope it was received in the spirit it was given. I gave a testimony like that, and got generally positive responses. I think people were supportive as long as they felt I was trying and at least pointed in the right direction.
I can’t help but think that putting yourself out as unorthodox will shut you off from certain callings, and you lose some of the respect and trust that comes from being safe and orthodox. But as others have commented, it makes you safe to another group of people who know that you won’t judge them, that you understand what they’re going through. Ministering to that group can be very rewarding and is sorely needed.
Here is where I hang my hopes:
When we read about Christ’s visit to the Nephites in 3 Nephi – he taught the people profound things. He changed their lives. They KNEW Christ first-hand. And, as he said, they were blessed for believing in his words.
But then he told them to tell others what they saw. And he told them that those who BELIEVED what they said without actually seeing Christ were even MORE blessed. So, those who believed or hoped or had faith were even more blessed than those who knew.
We all KNEW in the premortal life. But knowing isn’t enough. The true purpose of life is to see what we will do when we DON’T KNOW. Are we going to be good people even without knowing? That is the key to life – faith. So, I don’t know. And I don’t care that I don’t know. I still have faith, and that’s all that matters.
I think it’s great that you and any others share your honest testimonies from the pulpit. For myself, I have never done it. I don’t even remember hearing it done. In a former, much more liberal ward, I remember hearing a a little about people’s struggles, questions, and doubts in Sunday School, but never from the pulpit. Even that seemed risky.
I don’t know what church manuals and instructions say on the subject, but for myself I have considered doubts to be off-limits at the pulpit: if I can’t say something faithful, I say nothing. Hence, I haven’t born a testimony in sacrament meeting for many, many years.
I’ve been very open with my bishop in private. While I have never brought up anything specific regarding doctrine or history I’ve made it clear that am uncorrelated and don’t feel particularly accepted. He has been great and kind and has accepted where I am at and realizes that the standard approach to rescuing would only push me away. I told him that I couldn’t home teach without being fake and i was choosing to live authentically so I was opting out. Still have a fairly high profile calling, assigned home teachers to our family that isn’t gung ho, in fact they don’t ever come. Was asked to speak in church and was asked what I would like to talk on. I gave a fairly uncorrelated talk that made it clear I wasn’t a black and white thinker. It was received pretty well, but wasn’t anything as open as what Kristine has done. Recently I’ve gotten much better about not being apologetic about issues with the church even with own devout parents. Speaking confidently, accurately, without agenda about tough things is fairly well received on many topics. Hopefully there gets to be a critical mass of people who have thought deeply about the tough stuff that the culture reflects the reality of our history. I mourn that loss of a sense of community at the ward level and don’t think I will ever get that back, at least not in the way it used to be. Thanks your courage Krisine – You daring greatly creates more room for others in the church and that is very christlike of you!
Recently I was at our over 31+ singles FHE. The topic of polygamy came up. I expressed my opinion that I don’t agree with it and that Joseph Smith may have misinterpreted the impressions he received. Several of the women said they didn’t want any part of it didn’t like it but thought that Joseph Smith was commanded to do it. I tried to bring up the Jacob 2 reference but one of the FHE brothers became hostile towards me. He told me I should keep my opinions to myself and that if I had an opinion that contradicted with someone who had faith in that doctrine that I should just shut my mouth. He was quite angry towards me to the point that I was concerned. My son stood up for me and told him to back down. I was really hoping for a genuine discussion on it as it was something that was very much on my mind. I suppose for me I should have kept my opinions and concerns to myself.
I haven’t stood up in a testimony meeting for a very, very long time. I have spoken in sacrament meeting a fair number of times in that time, and speak what I believe then. I also have asked difficult questions in RS and Sunday School, over the years. But currently I can’t attend either, since we have a junior and senior primary, and I am playing piano both sessions.
We visited my brothers ward (where he is Bishop), a while back, and I found his testimony very thoughtful. It was all believe and feel, and think and find. He never once used the word know.
If you don’t bear authentic testimony, you rob yourself of the chance to be welcomed into the fold. We’re all uncertain about something. That is kind of the point.
It’s a risk, being real. And there will probably be some whiplash and consequence. But that is why we worship together: to bear each other up. The Spirit only testifies to truth.
Is bearing doubt the same thing as bearing testimony?
“Is bearing doubt the same thing as bearing testimony?”
That is a great question. I am always cautious about saying anything that might cast doubt, especially around new converts or youth. The Savior spoke pretty harshly on those that cast doubt.
“But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea” Matthew 18:6
I think it is slippery slope to cast doubt over the pulpit, at least as dangerous as listening to Givens.
Thanks for opening my eyes to how other people live in different corners of the vineyard…
I never thought that lack of “knowing” was a problem in the church. D&C 46 seems to say that we don’t all get to know. In vs. 11 “For all have not every gift given unto them…”
And in D&C 46:12, that comes off as a good thing, that we can all bring our gifts together in a complementary way: “To some is given one, and to some is given another, that all may be profited thereby.”
And in vs. 13, it makes it clear that “to know” of the divinity and mission of Jesus Christ is a gift that is only given “To some.”
So a lot of us are gonna go through life on belief or faith or hope. But only children throw temper tantrums because they don’t get the birthday present they wanted.
Because of my age, we are friends with bishops and found that at least two bishops of the largest wards in our area did not know. They did not make a big deal of their lack of knowledge; like HH’s brother, they simply bore testimony with precise words like believe and feel. They didn’t try to pass themselves off as knowing, but neither did they publicize their particular spiritual journey. So it could be easy for casual listeners to miss.
I thought this was pretty common in the church, having known such leaders and heard talks like Elder Andersen’s fall 2008 “You Know Enough” address which fully appreciates that not all members “know.”
Also, I knew returned missionaries at BYU who had not felt worthy to serve a mission because of their lack of “knowing” but in the early 1970s apparently President Kimball gave a talk at General Conference in which he invited all worthy to serve, irregardless of testimony–so that’s when they went.
This is why General Authorities are so special. They DO have the responsibility to know and witness. But many “knowers” who I have met express humble awe of those who devote so much time and effort to the church on less sure data.
@Ken
You mentioned:
I think it is slippery slope to cast doubt over the pulpit, at least as dangerous as listening to Givens.
That strikes me odd. I tend to think “listening to Givens” isn’t done till someone is sliding down the slope and grasping for something that can keep them from sliding all the way down into the abyss of full disbelief.
Re. #15: I can’t help but think that putting yourself out as unorthodox will shut you off from certain callings
Not knowing is not being unorthodox. Full stop, end of sentence.
There. That covered, I had what was either a prompting or an ego push to testify myself this Sunday of the importance of the principle of common consent and the freedom to dissent in the Church. For better or for worse, I kept my mouth shut – in retrospect, I think I was probably not supposed to speak.
In Gospel Doctrine, our instructor spent the last 5 or 10 minutes (and how this tied to the Miracle of the Loaves and Fishes, I know not) talking and asking about how people felt about the dissenting votes in this past Conference. The consensus was “Sad,” in that Mormon passive-aggressive way that we would all recognize as “Sad for those poor benighted souls who lack our light and knowledge and don’t sustain God’s prophet; heaven help them but don’t stand too close.”
Aaarrggh. Kristine, you are my hero.
Thank you Naismith – you articulated my point better than my pithy comment. I don’t think it does anyone — including the speaker — any good to get up at a testimony meeting and go on and on about their “faith transition.” You could take all the junk and controversy and spend hours at the pulpit rehashing all the issues. Instead, testimony meeting is about bearing testimony. Sure, you might rehearse some short experience, but it simply isn’t the place to express doubt (which most likely is a result of ignorance) of church history. People give testimony in court all the time. That testimony can be personal knowledge, but it can also be based on experience and circumstantial evidence. If you don’t “know,” don’t say you know. If you just believe or hope, then use those words.
Bearing doubt is more of a testimony than atheism.
“Sure, you might rehearse some short experience, but it simply isn’t the place to express doubt (which most likely is a result of ignorance) of church history.”
lol
Our GD class talked about the dissenting votes, too. Overall, I think it was good, although the first comment was pretty dumb, IMO, about how touching it was to hear people supporting the prophet online (this person was touting how online savvy they are for reading said comments). I was thinking that the people who were defending Pres. Monson basically just didn’t get it. This isn’t a direct attack on a person. It’s a (kind of pointless IMO) disagreement with the direction the Q12 are taking things and perhaps the mixing of Fox News with scripture, but it’s not like someone took a swing at somebody’s grandfather, which is how some members took it. I roll my eyes at those people.
But a good friend of mine spoke up after that and said their son attended in the conference center and had a very different impression of the dissenting vote, that it was their right to disagree (we ask “any opposed?”), and that they handled it properly. He said it caused his son to be more thoughtful about his own vote, and that level of thoughtfulness is a good outcome.
I definitely made sure I bore testimony of what I know. I know God lives. I know he loves me. I know my Savior died for me and I can be saved through the atonement of Christ. I then testified exactly what Elder Clayton spoke about = choosing to believe. That talk is seriously underrated in post-conference discourse. It was one of the best all weekend with the girl from the plane crash that chose to follow the light. I like what the earlier commenter pointed out, I certainly know enough.
I know I probably made some people uncomfortable and thought it was inappropriate. Those were probably people who spoke to give course correction after me. But I did have a woman with a daughter my age email me and said her daughter is going through some of the same things I am and it really helped her to hear my perspective and she’s trying to figure out what to do. We were able to exchange some emails and I gave her some ideas of what I wish my parents had done with me. I did have all members of the bishopric thank me for bearing an honest testimony. I received a few other emails and notes. At the very least I guess I have families something to talk about over the dinner table. If they combined it with talks from general conference I don’t see how it could be anything but faith building.
But, your mileage may vary.
Also, I do have to point out my testimony above is not word for word what I said over the pulpit. I didn’t specifically say the things that caused my questions. The person who emailed me asked me to repeat some of the things I said in my testimony. Best as I could remember I wrote what I said, providing a bit more insight or information in parts that didn’t make sense. I’m pretty sure I was rambling and a bit confusing on Sunday. Oh well. I did my best, what can I say?
“Not knowing is not being unorthodox. Full stop, end of sentence.”
I agree, but this shows how different people have different definitions for that word, making it pretty useless. And since it is so often used to describe others, as a bludgeon to separate groups of people (whether they want to be or not) I would prefer people not use it within the context of Mormondom.
Just say what you can, with as faithful a spin as possible, and smile. Let those who have ears to hear percieve the telling absence of certainty.
For instance: “I appreciate the hope which the gospel gives me. I sure want to live again. I love my family. The idea of being without them saddens me. If the Church is true, it means death is not the end and I can be with my family forever. So, I genuinely hope the Church is true. In the name….”
I bore that testimony. I’m in a relatively conservative ward. No one seemed uncomfortable. Five people said my honesty encouraged them. My bishop thanked me, saying there were a few people who were struggling and needed to that message.
Other people got up afterwards and said they knew it. Two even looked at me while saying it. But I just chose to interpret that as them encouraging to keep up my testimony building–‘you’ll get there, buddy.’ It was condescending, but well intentioned. I just smiled back.
I know within my family,as I have expressed any doubt or uncertainty it has been met poorly. I’ve had my wife tell me she is concerned I’ve said I think polygamy was of man, even though she dislikes it. I’ve had my dad insist thinking a prophet is wrong is apostacy, even though he agrees with racial equality, or most of what BY had to say is rubbish. Sunday I mentioned the first vision essay in priesthood (as that was the lesson!) and how I think it is a beautiful story, regardless of how factual it is. Now I have a meeting with the bishopric scheduled because people are concerned I’m sharing antimormon ideas. Basically, if I said I doubt or I don’t believe x,y, or z even if I point out good and what I hope is true, the fact it doesn’t have “I know” in front makes me an apostate antimormon unless I’m ting the line that everything lds is awesome And true. I’d say in Davis country Utah, this approach doesn’t fly.
flyingratman,
I’m also living in Davis County and I have to agree, while I think there are a few people here and there who may appreciate this sort of testimony (I’m definitely one of them – LOVED this post), the vast majority of members would be horrified if I got up and shared a genuine testimony of what I actually believe, and I’m an active member. Although, maybe if I do, they’ll finally release me from primary.
I think expressing doubt is fine, but there are some lines I would not cross either. Church isn’t a place to sow seeds of doubt. But the real problem is that the church has been set up as a place to find the answers, not a place to ask great questions. Those who seek the former don’t always appreciate the latter, and honestly, there are plenty who don’t really doubt so much as disbelieve. They also are looking for answers rather than to ask great questions.
Nate’s response in #1 resonated for me very well. Sometimes what we think is our “authentic” self is fleeting. We have moods, emotions, life experiences. We are all works in progress speaking at a specific time and place in our journey. And I’m not sure there is a destination. It’s one reason I don’t love testimony bearing. It feels so final, and yet it’s just a point in time. Black & white thinking is the opposite of wisdom, and spiritual knowledge should be wisdom. I think Pres. Uchtdorf gets this, but many others don’t seem to comprehend that perspective.
Kristine, looking over what you said in your post, there are few things I might have said differently. I have the benefit of editing. Saying things the way you mean them in the moment is much harder. Here are my thoughts.
“I spent my whole life doing exactly what the church told me to do, checking all of my boxes.” I’m not really disputing the accuracy of this, but it’s more diplomatic to say “doing exactly what I thought I should do, what I felt my leaders had told me to do.” When you say “the church” as if it’s a person, a person who is our boss, I think that is off-putting to members who haven’t questioned. Some people have never distinguished between God / Leaders / Church.
“For the first time ever I questioned that what I’d been told by prophets; that it might not be right, or might not be for everyone.” This was also my experience, but I would add that for those in the congregation who have done as they were told, there are just some there who made great sacrifices, assuming they would be blessed, and there are some who are resentful of the fact that they don’t have any choices left because of where they are in their lives. I’m saying this based on what some women said when I said something very similar to you in RS. Two other sisters (also career women) said the same thing I did about personal revelation, and there were sisters in the room who were very upset. One said she didn’t know we were allowed to ask for anything contrary to what leaders told us. She was sad. She felt like her own choices hadn’t worked out for her. Her life wasn’t what she wanted. But it was pretty much too late to change it now. These are hard things for some women to deal with, to see someone who didn’t make the sacrifices they did who is happy with their choices and basically saying that God was OK with it (which I can attest, he is). It’s just going to hurt some people. I am careful the settings in which I share that.
In general, talking about the church vs. God or Jesus I think the key is to show that the church is a vehicle, but it’s not the destination. It has a role, not that it’s possible to cast it aside or do without exactly. Again, you’re at church. Church’s ball, church’s rules. To some extent.
When was teaching in SS a couple months back I posed a question to the class of what to say to help and support a loved one who was struggling with a testimony. The lesson related to testimonies in church leadership. When I saw a girl sitting in that class who was in that category, I thought that maybe she was the reason I felt very strongly to broach the subject. A leader immediately shut down the conversation and told me to move along. Anyone with concerns could talk with the bishop, he said. Later I was privately instructed to focus the lessons on Christ, that those who were struggling needed to just feel the spirit at church. In his opinion, the Spirit had left the room when I had brought up the topic. I found that odd, as I thought I had received a prompting to bring up the subject in the first place. In his view, bringing up doubts, or the fact that members have doubts, is not building faith and does not belong in Sunday meetings. I don’t mind keeping the focus of the lessons on Christ (that’s always a good thing), but I do feel that I’m being watched more carefully which is not comforting. The worst part was my friend being frustrated with the leader shutting down the conversation as it confirmed in her mind that admitting doubt in this ward just isn’t safe.
I’m not sure that Kristine’s testimony would have been generally well-received here, but I know some members who really need to hear it.
“I think expressing doubt is fine, but there are some lines I would not cross either.”
Totally agree, weather it is Davis County Utah (where I live), or Jefferson County Idaho like Kristine, or San Francisco County the
pulpit is not the right place in my opinion.
I’ve always been open about what I’m thinking or feeling when giving assigned talks or lessons in church. As a teen in rural Utah, I think people put up with my eccentricities because they knew and loved my parents, and we really were a ward family. When I became an adult, people would always tell me that they appreciated my honesty and wished they could express their feelings so well too etc.
I was released as a Relief Society teacher because (as the RS Pres put it) “people come to church not to be challenged, but to be comforted,” which of course is fine, just not my schtick. For the past 3+ years I’ve been behind the piano in Primary, where I roll my eyes at the gender essentialism and write birthday cards to my large extended family during sharing time. Favorite church job ever, but no adult interaction ever, either.
My husband is very involved in High Priest service – he is a true Christian, heart and soul – and is employed by the church. I’m not saying anything to anyone about my disaffection until he retires, and probably not even then. I like to consider Sunday service as worshipping at my own little neighborhood church with no larger repercussions. I avoid thinking of or being aware of the SLC Church as much as possible. I love my neighbors and like visiting with them at church but no longer share the cosmology.
I don’t feel like my thoughts and comments would be helpful to anyone. Sometimes I resent the fact that I had to choose between my conscience and whole-hearted commitment to the Church. I would love to be whole-hearted again! I’m hoping that my (late) mid-life spiritual wanderings will lead me back to Jesus. But I doubt that it will happen in church.
Going back and rereading what I wrote I can see where people have concerns because of all the extra detail I added. I agree there is a line I wouldn’t cross in saying things over the pulpit, and I didn’t cross my own line. Sounds like everyone has a different line. And after reading everyone’s opinions I texted my pretty orthodox bishopric member husband just to vet what he thought, and he says in person it was great although he won’t vouch for what I wrote on the blog :).
This was basically what I said in real life:
I always obeyed everything and saw in black/white
I had an answer to prayer that caused me to question some things in the church
But I never doubted the gospel of Jesus Christ
I exercise my faith when I choose to believe by coming to church and read my scriptures
I’m not sure if I’ll ever know more, but I do know I can love more
Question: Do any of you think it would be bad form to analogize the offering of one’s testimony to the monetary offering of the widow’s mite?
“Faith comes difficult to me. I struggle with skepticism. So, unfortunately, my testimony is small and weak. So limited, in fact, that, on Fast Sundays, I am tempted to be embarrassed of it and believe it is of little value.
Today, I step to the pulpit, feeling like the widow whose testimony consists of two mites. That testimony is this: I hope to be resurrected and live again with my loved ones. I feel inspired to follow the Savior’s example, to love and serve. I am filled with joy when I do. I enjoy being a member of the Church, and sharing this ward with you, my brothers and sisters. Thank you for making me feel so welcome in the community of saints. In the name…”
#40 CWR: Your story is poignant. I think there are many people who feel similarly isolated. It reminds me a little bit of stories of gay people who have to choose between their individual identity and their community identity. People in this circumstance feel like they are being torn in half.
To some extent we believe in God, etc. because the people around us believe. When the people around us don’t believe it can make it harder to believe.
We have our individual testimonies in the church, but we also have a collective testimony. The collective testimony of the church is always changing little by little. AS a church we sin collectively, we repent collectively, we change collectively. This collective experience is very important to religion and Mormons have a rich collective experience, for better or worse.
I have a friend who is in his 40s and he is starting to come back to the LDS church after leaving as a teenager. His politics and beliefs probably align more closely with a mainstream protestant churches, but he likes Mormons because they share so much in common, they really do share a common faith background and understand each other rather well, even when they disagree. That’s what makes church special; it’s like being at a big family reunion. A lot of baggage, yes, but a lot of history and shared experience. Often people who leave the church find that they never truly fit in anywhere else. So I see them come back to their LDS church family as they get older, not necessarily to repent and change, but just to be in community with their extended family again.
I am one of those people who would have benefited from this sort of talk or testimony as a teenager. Everyone around me always talked about how they know, but I didn’t feel like I knew, and it was confusing, like there was something wrong with me for not Knowing even though I was about asking and trying to learn. At some point, I ran into an expression of faith that used less certain language, and suddenly I felt like I could breath. After that I did much better, although many would still consider me somewhat unorthodox if they got to know me. Perhaps I should be more open about what I believe. Maybe it would help others.
Kristine,
Thanks for this post, I’m just reading it now, and hope I’m not too late to comment.
I too bore my first testimony on Sunday April 13th since my faith transition started about 2 yrs ago. I was scared, but honestly I was feeling prompted to do it. Our stake asked that we have a fast for people in the stake, and one of the groups of people that they asked us to fast for, were those struggling with doubts. I guess I felt like I needed to represent that group. When I shared my testimony I started by identifying myself as someone who struggles with doubt. I also said that I can’t express my testimony in terms of knowledge about things, but that I do have faith and belief, and a love and desire to serve others, and that is what grounds me in the gospel.
I also expressed two pillars of positive blessings that have come from my faith transition, one is that I feel closer to my pioneer ancestors, as I’ve explored church history, I’ve felt a passion to also explore my family history, and this has brought me closer to my pioneer heritage.
Second is that I’ve struggled to take the scriptures seriously, with questions about historicity, myth, legend it has challenged my ability to value the scriptures. This year I made a commitment to study the NT seriously, and have purchased multiple books and spent hours each week learning about the NT in a way that I never did previously in my life. I told the congregation that I found something I was surprised and amazed by. That the scriptures could still speak to me, a person that does have serious doubts, that there is a depth in the scriptures that I had no idea existed before.
All this was part of my testimony on Sunday, and I’m sorry to hear that your experience wasn’t as positive, but I can tell you that I had people that I don’t know very well contact me during church and after church to express their appreciation, and in one case, someone shared the struggles of a family member with doubts like mine, and I was able to give comfort and empathy to them. I’ve been so nervous about being authentic for the past almost 2 years, and now I feel so much better, and grateful that I did share this testimony.
Thank you Kristine for your courage! We all need to be braver and realize that through sharing our authentic selves, we might risk some pain and alienation, but we also can bless and benefit our wards and stakes in ways we couldn’t have anticipated.
BTW, one of the stake president’s counselors was in our ward on Sunday and he took the time to come talk to me after sacrament meeting and tell me how much he appreciated my testimony. I was surprised.
Does anyone here really bear their testimonies in church anymore? Our testimony meetings seem to draw those that bear their testimony monthly–or close to it, and those that have an emotional need to have that ‘open mike’ for an outlet. It also seems now that every missionary assigned to every ward bears their testimony monthly—a companion cannot walk to the pulpit without the other, so you are not getting their testimony because they are spiritually prompted to bear it, but because it is a ‘rule’. I don’t feel like I have the energy to compete with these groups for the time. Has anyone else had to take a walk during testimony meeting when those with the emotional outlet testimony take as much time as would a speaker in Sacrament meeting?
I never felt compelled to walk to the pulpit with my companion. I was in the same room with him; that was enough.
I do see what you mean about fast and testimony meeting, though, and I have been in wards where that is definitely true. It did not feel like that in my new ward, but I have not been here long enough to know for sure.
I’ve definitely had those experiences before Rigel. Every week is the same old same old, but I’ve tried to live by the principle to be the change you wish to see in the world …. and I try to get up and bear a short, Christ-based testimony if I feel things are going off the rails. I’m not an every-monther . . . but I get up 4-6 times per year.
I guess this week I felt prompted to share just a little bit more of what I’ve been through.
I’d be interested to find out if anyone else really enjoys “open mic” sunday because their ward actually has productive testimonies . . . or is it same old travel-mony told over and over again?
I never felt that either Joe, but since the age for the missionaries was lowered and our ward was blessed with two sets of missionaries, that seems to be a consistent, though not absolute pattern
Everyone has doubts, whether they admit it or not and whether they express it or not. Even the Savior expressed doubts “Father, if it be thy will, let this cup pass….” And “Father why has thou forsaken me.”
Sometimes, it seems that those with doubts or who express them are as adamant about them as those who know beyond any shadow of a doubt.
They can be just as annoying.
Rigel: Interesting. I wonder if that is a mission culture thing, or just due to younger ages for some reason.
Kristine: I am currently in a student ward at BYU (again – going back to school), and the first (and only) fast Sunday we’ve been here, the testimonies were great. It was quite a change from our last (Utah) ward; I was pleasantly surprised. I actually got up too and talked about Palm Sunday and bore my testimony. I am really looking forward to this ward. So there’s one, maybe.
Jeff, I agree that evangelizing by unbelievers, doubters, and those in certainty are all annoying. I try to stay away from pushing my views and try to just share my voice and help others who are where I’m at. I’m probably not perfect at that. That’s a good reminder.
Kristine – Probably no one’s testimony would get said the same way twice, but thank you for taking a risk and being honest.
What gets me about this in general is how we are accepting some hierarchy of testimony – that somehow Kristen’s and others “gray” testimonies are “less than”, that they are in some way “doubters”, that there is something wrong with them. I think we need to reject that paradigm totally. In fact, I would suggest that if we are going to insist on a hierarchy of testimonies that those built on a “certainty”, black and white view of the church are actually the “less than” testimonies. Why? Because they are based in things that simply are not true. Faith is after all “is a hope in that which is not seen *which is true*” and black and white versions of the church are simply NOT TRUE. In this sense that makes testimonies in this vein of a questionable and weaker faith than those that emerge from a better, reality based understanding of what is actually true. Instead of accepting the condescension that you Kristen are a less fortunate soul testimony wise, maybe the correct response is to give a pat on the heads of those building their testimonies on the house of sand which is a largely fabricated, uncomplicated history, near infallibility of leaders, etc. For example, i have seen testimony born to the effect that the apostles meet with Christ most Thursday’s in the temple which is why the person knows the church is led by Christ. That simply isn’t true.
Better yet I say we drop the implied hierarchy of testimonies all together. Yours Kristen is neither deficient, less than, struggling, weak etc. Neither do we have to call our more orthodox or literal believing member’s testimony weaker, less than, deficient because it is less informed, based on wrong facts, or certain misconceptions. Why can’t we accept each as equally legitimate, powerful and valuable?
I have many more issues with those who seem to proclaim a self-righteous tone to their “almost perfect” testimonies. They are either fooling us and/or fooling themselves.
Testimony is a struggle, an on-going struggle, as is living this mortal life. And frankly, some days are better than others.
I prefer folks who are honest. No one lives a perfect life. I prefer hearing people’s story of how they struggle to do what is right….
Frankly, I’ve not seen anyone translated from the pulpit yet…..
From “True to the Faith”: “A testimony is a spiritual witness given by the Holy Ghost. The foundation of a testimony is the knowledge that Heavenly Father lives and loves us; that Jesus Christ lives, that He is the Son of God, and that He carried out the infinite Atonement; that Joseph Smith is the prophet of God who was called to restore the gospel; that we are led by a living prophet today; and that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Savior’s true Church on the earth. With this foundation, a testimony grows to include all principles of the gospel.”
I wish I had seen this post earlier and been able to participate in the discussion. I thought Hawkgrrl’s comment was excellent. I too appreciate honest and candid testimonies, but I also come to church to be uplifted, motivated, and edified. I don’t know if there are lines that shouldn’t be crossed, but I have a couple thoughts:
1. Sometimes the self-declared unorthodox seem to glory in their differentness, rather than striving for a sense of unity with their fellow congregants. I don’t mean to suggest they need to believe the same things or in the same way, but they should strive to love, rather than fear or disdain, their ward family (which can be hard, but still)
2. A testimony should be exactly that — witnessing of what one can. It isn’t necessary to declare everything one doesn’t have a testimony of before sharing what one does. Personally, I’m interested in what witnesses a person does have of God in her life, not so much those she’s missing.
3. Bearing a testimony (in F&T mtg) should be done in the spirit of edifying and uplifting the congregation. Ideally, I don’t think it should be performance art or a means of self-discovery or self-definition. Sometimes people just throw themselves out there to see how people will react, and I don’t think it’s appropriate to do that from the pulpit. A person shouldn’t make herself the focus. A testimony should be shared because a person wants to edify, uplift, and bless others.
I’ve heard some fairly unorthodox testimonies that were very uplifting to me personally, and these from people who don’t necessarily feel or believe the same way I do.
Wheat & Tares 
You are very brave, and probably it will all be for the best. I have a skeptical attitude towards authenticity and have worn a mask at church for a very long time now. Partly, it’s because I don’t know if I even have an authentic “self” as it is always in flux and I don’t know if who I am in private is any more real than who I am in public. I admire the church’s culture of certainty for what it is, and would not want to disturb that. But “self” is very important to most people and our inability to express it drives many people out of the church. I’m glad that you have not let that happen to you.
I once gave a talk on testimony and unintentionally plowed passed my planned conclusion into floundering with nothing to wrap it all up. “I guess I should bear my testimony,” I said, and after a huge pause, I admitted I believed but didn’t know.
I sat down and asked my husband if he wanted to change wards. (He said yes.) I figured they would let me teach Primary that day because it was too late for a sub, and then they’d release me. But no.
I was told my talk was discussed (and not in a bad way) in Sunday School and Relief Society. Several people made appreciative comments to me, and my bishop told me I had no idea how many people I had helped. The only condescending reaction came from someone in F&T meeting saying, “You might think you don’t know, but you KNOW.” But I decided it was kind of vain to assume he was responding to me.
If I heard a testimony that spoke to some uncertainty but a desire to believe I would be THRILLED because it would be so REFRESHING. Too many testimonies are “I know…..” followed by a bunch of things. To hear an honest explanation of how you feel or what you believe or what you are struggling with is preferable to a list of things you “know” in my opinion.
I have recently started teaching at a Catholic high school, and have loved attending Mass each week. I have felt my faith in God renewed, and felt like I was no longer alone in trying to believe in God (having come from academic work in astronomy at the University level where religion was mocked rather than even ignored). Since starting this past school year, I have felt like I could bear a testimony again, even though it mostly was about lessons I’ve gained from Mass. In my testimony, rather than saying what I am unsure of, I just say what I do believe and know. I doubt anyone has noticed what common statements I have not said in my testimony.
Laurel: I had a similar experience. My response that, as the world-leading expert on what I knew and what I believed, he was wrong. In a caring way, of course.
Some believe say they believe. Some people say they know. All of these can be honest.
everything is condescending.
Wow! Very brave. And the beginning of a chapel wave of truth.
Nate,
Sorry to hear you’re unfamiliar with your authentic self.
Nate: crossing fingers this doesn’t blow up in my face, seriously.
Laurel: I had some of the same reaction, after my testimony I was feeling emotionally raw and sensitive. A lot of people -normally- bear their testimonies about how they know things . . . so I was taking it with a grain of salt on whether it was all about me; I was the second person up though, and after 6 straight in a row after me I did see a pattern.
Dexter: I agree. I think it’s refreshing to hear something different once in a while.
ajd_ender: I think you have a great strategy; it’s what I usually do. Only bear testimony of the things I know, that I’m confident in. Perfect.
JI: I totally get that people’s expression of knowing is an honest statement. I’ve totally been there; in fact (ducks head in embarassment) I’ve even born my testimony before that I was like Joseph Smith. “I knew it, I knew that God knew it, and I could not deny it.” Looking back now I don’t think I knew a lot – but it was a very honest expression.
Stephen what do you mean by “everything is condescending”?
What I think you’re getting at is that One of the hardest parts of my faith transition is expressing it in a way to not make it seem like I’m “holier than thou” of those who are still in certainty and orthodoxy. Am I better person and disciple than I was before? Yes. Do I think God led me to where I am? Yes. But God could just as easily want the orthodox to stay orthodox. That’s the path that He wants for them.
Is that what you’re referring to?
If you had given this talk in my ward, you would have been embraced by a warm community of “doubters” or “reformers”. In fact we are numerous enough that sometimes the “conventional crowd feels little bit nervous. My wife gave a notable talk several years ago that was a response to the famous “Women who know” talk from conference. She said that she didn’t know. Many people liked it. But a couple of weeks ago a man in the ward told us that at the time of the talk he thought it was strange. But then later when he went through his own faith crisis he never felt alone, because he always knew there were weirdos like us in the ward. He warmly thanked us for our example and it was touching.
We have many people in their early 20’s in the ward and I believe that for many their time of transition and change of faith is bound to come. When it does I hope they can talk with us, or at least think of us as proof that if you aren’t conventional you can still have faith and you can still stick around. I think that example can mean a lot to people, I know that any such examples would have been, or were, very helpful when we needed them. That’s what it means to be a pioneer!
I’m in favor of increasing the authenticity and variety of testimonies borne. I’m in awe of your courage and vulnerability. As to Laurel’s (#2) experience, it may be an attempt to recreate what happened to H.J. Grant when he attempted to bear a “too authentic” testimony shortly after being called as Stake President at age 23. From the institute (Rel 345) manual:
[Joseph F.] Smith said: ‘Heber, you said you believe the gospel with all your heart, and propose to live it, but you did not bear your testimony that you know it is true. Don’t you know absolutely that this gospel is true?’
“I answered: ‘I do not.’
“‘What, you! a president of a stake?’
“‘That is what I said.’
“‘President [John] Taylor, I am in favor of undoing this afternoon what we did this morning. I do not think any man should preside over a stake who has not a perfect and abiding knowledge of the divinity of this work.’
“I said: ‘I am not going to complain.’
“Brother Taylor had a habit, when something pleased him excessively, of shaking his body and laughing. He said, ‘Joseph, Joseph, Joseph, he knows it just as well as you do. The only thing that he does not know is that he does know it. It will be but a short time until he does know it. He leans over backwards. You do not need to worry.’ “
I did something like this in my ward. I prefaced my remarks with a quote from the scriptures about “for some it is given to know and other to believe on them”, then quoting elder Holland’s talk about a boy saying he believes and Jeff hugging him till his eyeballs popped out, and then the Silver Fox’s quote of “your testimony does not need to be ‘this’ tall”.
I mentioned how we generally hear “I know” during testimony meeting. I said I know (or was it believe? 🙂 there are those in the congregation that can’t say they “know”, but they do believe. I told them I would like to hear from them. And I gave my testimony of what I believe. Only 1 person got up and said, “well I can’t say I know, but I do believe”. Still lots of “I know”
I did hear just a few honest remarks that they liked what I said and a few that even said they felt it was one of the most genuine testimonies they had heard in a while.
My fully TBM wife said she thought it was not good for me to say what I did.
That was a beautiful testimony, and I hope it was received in the spirit it was given. I gave a testimony like that, and got generally positive responses. I think people were supportive as long as they felt I was trying and at least pointed in the right direction.
I can’t help but think that putting yourself out as unorthodox will shut you off from certain callings, and you lose some of the respect and trust that comes from being safe and orthodox. But as others have commented, it makes you safe to another group of people who know that you won’t judge them, that you understand what they’re going through. Ministering to that group can be very rewarding and is sorely needed.
Here is where I hang my hopes:
When we read about Christ’s visit to the Nephites in 3 Nephi – he taught the people profound things. He changed their lives. They KNEW Christ first-hand. And, as he said, they were blessed for believing in his words.
But then he told them to tell others what they saw. And he told them that those who BELIEVED what they said without actually seeing Christ were even MORE blessed. So, those who believed or hoped or had faith were even more blessed than those who knew.
We all KNEW in the premortal life. But knowing isn’t enough. The true purpose of life is to see what we will do when we DON’T KNOW. Are we going to be good people even without knowing? That is the key to life – faith. So, I don’t know. And I don’t care that I don’t know. I still have faith, and that’s all that matters.
I think it’s great that you and any others share your honest testimonies from the pulpit. For myself, I have never done it. I don’t even remember hearing it done. In a former, much more liberal ward, I remember hearing a a little about people’s struggles, questions, and doubts in Sunday School, but never from the pulpit. Even that seemed risky.
I don’t know what church manuals and instructions say on the subject, but for myself I have considered doubts to be off-limits at the pulpit: if I can’t say something faithful, I say nothing. Hence, I haven’t born a testimony in sacrament meeting for many, many years.
I’ve been very open with my bishop in private. While I have never brought up anything specific regarding doctrine or history I’ve made it clear that am uncorrelated and don’t feel particularly accepted. He has been great and kind and has accepted where I am at and realizes that the standard approach to rescuing would only push me away. I told him that I couldn’t home teach without being fake and i was choosing to live authentically so I was opting out. Still have a fairly high profile calling, assigned home teachers to our family that isn’t gung ho, in fact they don’t ever come. Was asked to speak in church and was asked what I would like to talk on. I gave a fairly uncorrelated talk that made it clear I wasn’t a black and white thinker. It was received pretty well, but wasn’t anything as open as what Kristine has done. Recently I’ve gotten much better about not being apologetic about issues with the church even with own devout parents. Speaking confidently, accurately, without agenda about tough things is fairly well received on many topics. Hopefully there gets to be a critical mass of people who have thought deeply about the tough stuff that the culture reflects the reality of our history. I mourn that loss of a sense of community at the ward level and don’t think I will ever get that back, at least not in the way it used to be. Thanks your courage Krisine – You daring greatly creates more room for others in the church and that is very christlike of you!
Recently I was at our over 31+ singles FHE. The topic of polygamy came up. I expressed my opinion that I don’t agree with it and that Joseph Smith may have misinterpreted the impressions he received. Several of the women said they didn’t want any part of it didn’t like it but thought that Joseph Smith was commanded to do it. I tried to bring up the Jacob 2 reference but one of the FHE brothers became hostile towards me. He told me I should keep my opinions to myself and that if I had an opinion that contradicted with someone who had faith in that doctrine that I should just shut my mouth. He was quite angry towards me to the point that I was concerned. My son stood up for me and told him to back down. I was really hoping for a genuine discussion on it as it was something that was very much on my mind. I suppose for me I should have kept my opinions and concerns to myself.
I haven’t stood up in a testimony meeting for a very, very long time. I have spoken in sacrament meeting a fair number of times in that time, and speak what I believe then. I also have asked difficult questions in RS and Sunday School, over the years. But currently I can’t attend either, since we have a junior and senior primary, and I am playing piano both sessions.
We visited my brothers ward (where he is Bishop), a while back, and I found his testimony very thoughtful. It was all believe and feel, and think and find. He never once used the word know.
If you don’t bear authentic testimony, you rob yourself of the chance to be welcomed into the fold. We’re all uncertain about something. That is kind of the point.
It’s a risk, being real. And there will probably be some whiplash and consequence. But that is why we worship together: to bear each other up. The Spirit only testifies to truth.
Is bearing doubt the same thing as bearing testimony?
“Is bearing doubt the same thing as bearing testimony?”
That is a great question. I am always cautious about saying anything that might cast doubt, especially around new converts or youth. The Savior spoke pretty harshly on those that cast doubt.
“But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea” Matthew 18:6
I think it is slippery slope to cast doubt over the pulpit, at least as dangerous as listening to Givens.
Thanks for opening my eyes to how other people live in different corners of the vineyard…
I never thought that lack of “knowing” was a problem in the church. D&C 46 seems to say that we don’t all get to know. In vs. 11 “For all have not every gift given unto them…”
And in D&C 46:12, that comes off as a good thing, that we can all bring our gifts together in a complementary way: “To some is given one, and to some is given another, that all may be profited thereby.”
And in vs. 13, it makes it clear that “to know” of the divinity and mission of Jesus Christ is a gift that is only given “To some.”
So a lot of us are gonna go through life on belief or faith or hope. But only children throw temper tantrums because they don’t get the birthday present they wanted.
Because of my age, we are friends with bishops and found that at least two bishops of the largest wards in our area did not know. They did not make a big deal of their lack of knowledge; like HH’s brother, they simply bore testimony with precise words like believe and feel. They didn’t try to pass themselves off as knowing, but neither did they publicize their particular spiritual journey. So it could be easy for casual listeners to miss.
I thought this was pretty common in the church, having known such leaders and heard talks like Elder Andersen’s fall 2008 “You Know Enough” address which fully appreciates that not all members “know.”
Also, I knew returned missionaries at BYU who had not felt worthy to serve a mission because of their lack of “knowing” but in the early 1970s apparently President Kimball gave a talk at General Conference in which he invited all worthy to serve, irregardless of testimony–so that’s when they went.
This is why General Authorities are so special. They DO have the responsibility to know and witness. But many “knowers” who I have met express humble awe of those who devote so much time and effort to the church on less sure data.
@Ken
You mentioned:
I think it is slippery slope to cast doubt over the pulpit, at least as dangerous as listening to Givens.
That strikes me odd. I tend to think “listening to Givens” isn’t done till someone is sliding down the slope and grasping for something that can keep them from sliding all the way down into the abyss of full disbelief.
Re. #15: I can’t help but think that putting yourself out as unorthodox will shut you off from certain callings
Not knowing is not being unorthodox. Full stop, end of sentence.
There. That covered, I had what was either a prompting or an ego push to testify myself this Sunday of the importance of the principle of common consent and the freedom to dissent in the Church. For better or for worse, I kept my mouth shut – in retrospect, I think I was probably not supposed to speak.
In Gospel Doctrine, our instructor spent the last 5 or 10 minutes (and how this tied to the Miracle of the Loaves and Fishes, I know not) talking and asking about how people felt about the dissenting votes in this past Conference. The consensus was “Sad,” in that Mormon passive-aggressive way that we would all recognize as “Sad for those poor benighted souls who lack our light and knowledge and don’t sustain God’s prophet; heaven help them but don’t stand too close.”
Aaarrggh. Kristine, you are my hero.
Thank you Naismith – you articulated my point better than my pithy comment. I don’t think it does anyone — including the speaker — any good to get up at a testimony meeting and go on and on about their “faith transition.” You could take all the junk and controversy and spend hours at the pulpit rehashing all the issues. Instead, testimony meeting is about bearing testimony. Sure, you might rehearse some short experience, but it simply isn’t the place to express doubt (which most likely is a result of ignorance) of church history. People give testimony in court all the time. That testimony can be personal knowledge, but it can also be based on experience and circumstantial evidence. If you don’t “know,” don’t say you know. If you just believe or hope, then use those words.
Bearing doubt is more of a testimony than atheism.
“Sure, you might rehearse some short experience, but it simply isn’t the place to express doubt (which most likely is a result of ignorance) of church history.”
lol
Our GD class talked about the dissenting votes, too. Overall, I think it was good, although the first comment was pretty dumb, IMO, about how touching it was to hear people supporting the prophet online (this person was touting how online savvy they are for reading said comments). I was thinking that the people who were defending Pres. Monson basically just didn’t get it. This isn’t a direct attack on a person. It’s a (kind of pointless IMO) disagreement with the direction the Q12 are taking things and perhaps the mixing of Fox News with scripture, but it’s not like someone took a swing at somebody’s grandfather, which is how some members took it. I roll my eyes at those people.
But a good friend of mine spoke up after that and said their son attended in the conference center and had a very different impression of the dissenting vote, that it was their right to disagree (we ask “any opposed?”), and that they handled it properly. He said it caused his son to be more thoughtful about his own vote, and that level of thoughtfulness is a good outcome.
I definitely made sure I bore testimony of what I know. I know God lives. I know he loves me. I know my Savior died for me and I can be saved through the atonement of Christ. I then testified exactly what Elder Clayton spoke about = choosing to believe. That talk is seriously underrated in post-conference discourse. It was one of the best all weekend with the girl from the plane crash that chose to follow the light. I like what the earlier commenter pointed out, I certainly know enough.
I know I probably made some people uncomfortable and thought it was inappropriate. Those were probably people who spoke to give course correction after me. But I did have a woman with a daughter my age email me and said her daughter is going through some of the same things I am and it really helped her to hear my perspective and she’s trying to figure out what to do. We were able to exchange some emails and I gave her some ideas of what I wish my parents had done with me. I did have all members of the bishopric thank me for bearing an honest testimony. I received a few other emails and notes. At the very least I guess I have families something to talk about over the dinner table. If they combined it with talks from general conference I don’t see how it could be anything but faith building.
But, your mileage may vary.
Also, I do have to point out my testimony above is not word for word what I said over the pulpit. I didn’t specifically say the things that caused my questions. The person who emailed me asked me to repeat some of the things I said in my testimony. Best as I could remember I wrote what I said, providing a bit more insight or information in parts that didn’t make sense. I’m pretty sure I was rambling and a bit confusing on Sunday. Oh well. I did my best, what can I say?
“Not knowing is not being unorthodox. Full stop, end of sentence.”
I agree, but this shows how different people have different definitions for that word, making it pretty useless. And since it is so often used to describe others, as a bludgeon to separate groups of people (whether they want to be or not) I would prefer people not use it within the context of Mormondom.
Just say what you can, with as faithful a spin as possible, and smile. Let those who have ears to hear percieve the telling absence of certainty.
For instance: “I appreciate the hope which the gospel gives me. I sure want to live again. I love my family. The idea of being without them saddens me. If the Church is true, it means death is not the end and I can be with my family forever. So, I genuinely hope the Church is true. In the name….”
I bore that testimony. I’m in a relatively conservative ward. No one seemed uncomfortable. Five people said my honesty encouraged them. My bishop thanked me, saying there were a few people who were struggling and needed to that message.
Other people got up afterwards and said they knew it. Two even looked at me while saying it. But I just chose to interpret that as them encouraging to keep up my testimony building–‘you’ll get there, buddy.’ It was condescending, but well intentioned. I just smiled back.
I know within my family,as I have expressed any doubt or uncertainty it has been met poorly. I’ve had my wife tell me she is concerned I’ve said I think polygamy was of man, even though she dislikes it. I’ve had my dad insist thinking a prophet is wrong is apostacy, even though he agrees with racial equality, or most of what BY had to say is rubbish. Sunday I mentioned the first vision essay in priesthood (as that was the lesson!) and how I think it is a beautiful story, regardless of how factual it is. Now I have a meeting with the bishopric scheduled because people are concerned I’m sharing antimormon ideas. Basically, if I said I doubt or I don’t believe x,y, or z even if I point out good and what I hope is true, the fact it doesn’t have “I know” in front makes me an apostate antimormon unless I’m ting the line that everything lds is awesome And true. I’d say in Davis country Utah, this approach doesn’t fly.
flyingratman,
I’m also living in Davis County and I have to agree, while I think there are a few people here and there who may appreciate this sort of testimony (I’m definitely one of them – LOVED this post), the vast majority of members would be horrified if I got up and shared a genuine testimony of what I actually believe, and I’m an active member. Although, maybe if I do, they’ll finally release me from primary.
I think expressing doubt is fine, but there are some lines I would not cross either. Church isn’t a place to sow seeds of doubt. But the real problem is that the church has been set up as a place to find the answers, not a place to ask great questions. Those who seek the former don’t always appreciate the latter, and honestly, there are plenty who don’t really doubt so much as disbelieve. They also are looking for answers rather than to ask great questions.
Nate’s response in #1 resonated for me very well. Sometimes what we think is our “authentic” self is fleeting. We have moods, emotions, life experiences. We are all works in progress speaking at a specific time and place in our journey. And I’m not sure there is a destination. It’s one reason I don’t love testimony bearing. It feels so final, and yet it’s just a point in time. Black & white thinking is the opposite of wisdom, and spiritual knowledge should be wisdom. I think Pres. Uchtdorf gets this, but many others don’t seem to comprehend that perspective.
Kristine, looking over what you said in your post, there are few things I might have said differently. I have the benefit of editing. Saying things the way you mean them in the moment is much harder. Here are my thoughts.
“I spent my whole life doing exactly what the church told me to do, checking all of my boxes.” I’m not really disputing the accuracy of this, but it’s more diplomatic to say “doing exactly what I thought I should do, what I felt my leaders had told me to do.” When you say “the church” as if it’s a person, a person who is our boss, I think that is off-putting to members who haven’t questioned. Some people have never distinguished between God / Leaders / Church.
“For the first time ever I questioned that what I’d been told by prophets; that it might not be right, or might not be for everyone.” This was also my experience, but I would add that for those in the congregation who have done as they were told, there are just some there who made great sacrifices, assuming they would be blessed, and there are some who are resentful of the fact that they don’t have any choices left because of where they are in their lives. I’m saying this based on what some women said when I said something very similar to you in RS. Two other sisters (also career women) said the same thing I did about personal revelation, and there were sisters in the room who were very upset. One said she didn’t know we were allowed to ask for anything contrary to what leaders told us. She was sad. She felt like her own choices hadn’t worked out for her. Her life wasn’t what she wanted. But it was pretty much too late to change it now. These are hard things for some women to deal with, to see someone who didn’t make the sacrifices they did who is happy with their choices and basically saying that God was OK with it (which I can attest, he is). It’s just going to hurt some people. I am careful the settings in which I share that.
In general, talking about the church vs. God or Jesus I think the key is to show that the church is a vehicle, but it’s not the destination. It has a role, not that it’s possible to cast it aside or do without exactly. Again, you’re at church. Church’s ball, church’s rules. To some extent.
When was teaching in SS a couple months back I posed a question to the class of what to say to help and support a loved one who was struggling with a testimony. The lesson related to testimonies in church leadership. When I saw a girl sitting in that class who was in that category, I thought that maybe she was the reason I felt very strongly to broach the subject. A leader immediately shut down the conversation and told me to move along. Anyone with concerns could talk with the bishop, he said. Later I was privately instructed to focus the lessons on Christ, that those who were struggling needed to just feel the spirit at church. In his opinion, the Spirit had left the room when I had brought up the topic. I found that odd, as I thought I had received a prompting to bring up the subject in the first place. In his view, bringing up doubts, or the fact that members have doubts, is not building faith and does not belong in Sunday meetings. I don’t mind keeping the focus of the lessons on Christ (that’s always a good thing), but I do feel that I’m being watched more carefully which is not comforting. The worst part was my friend being frustrated with the leader shutting down the conversation as it confirmed in her mind that admitting doubt in this ward just isn’t safe.
I’m not sure that Kristine’s testimony would have been generally well-received here, but I know some members who really need to hear it.
“I think expressing doubt is fine, but there are some lines I would not cross either.”
Totally agree, weather it is Davis County Utah (where I live), or Jefferson County Idaho like Kristine, or San Francisco County the
pulpit is not the right place in my opinion.
I’ve always been open about what I’m thinking or feeling when giving assigned talks or lessons in church. As a teen in rural Utah, I think people put up with my eccentricities because they knew and loved my parents, and we really were a ward family. When I became an adult, people would always tell me that they appreciated my honesty and wished they could express their feelings so well too etc.
I was released as a Relief Society teacher because (as the RS Pres put it) “people come to church not to be challenged, but to be comforted,” which of course is fine, just not my schtick. For the past 3+ years I’ve been behind the piano in Primary, where I roll my eyes at the gender essentialism and write birthday cards to my large extended family during sharing time. Favorite church job ever, but no adult interaction ever, either.
My husband is very involved in High Priest service – he is a true Christian, heart and soul – and is employed by the church. I’m not saying anything to anyone about my disaffection until he retires, and probably not even then. I like to consider Sunday service as worshipping at my own little neighborhood church with no larger repercussions. I avoid thinking of or being aware of the SLC Church as much as possible. I love my neighbors and like visiting with them at church but no longer share the cosmology.
I don’t feel like my thoughts and comments would be helpful to anyone. Sometimes I resent the fact that I had to choose between my conscience and whole-hearted commitment to the Church. I would love to be whole-hearted again! I’m hoping that my (late) mid-life spiritual wanderings will lead me back to Jesus. But I doubt that it will happen in church.
Going back and rereading what I wrote I can see where people have concerns because of all the extra detail I added. I agree there is a line I wouldn’t cross in saying things over the pulpit, and I didn’t cross my own line. Sounds like everyone has a different line. And after reading everyone’s opinions I texted my pretty orthodox bishopric member husband just to vet what he thought, and he says in person it was great although he won’t vouch for what I wrote on the blog :).
This was basically what I said in real life:
I always obeyed everything and saw in black/white
I had an answer to prayer that caused me to question some things in the church
But I never doubted the gospel of Jesus Christ
I exercise my faith when I choose to believe by coming to church and read my scriptures
I’m not sure if I’ll ever know more, but I do know I can love more
Question: Do any of you think it would be bad form to analogize the offering of one’s testimony to the monetary offering of the widow’s mite?
“Faith comes difficult to me. I struggle with skepticism. So, unfortunately, my testimony is small and weak. So limited, in fact, that, on Fast Sundays, I am tempted to be embarrassed of it and believe it is of little value.
Today, I step to the pulpit, feeling like the widow whose testimony consists of two mites. That testimony is this: I hope to be resurrected and live again with my loved ones. I feel inspired to follow the Savior’s example, to love and serve. I am filled with joy when I do. I enjoy being a member of the Church, and sharing this ward with you, my brothers and sisters. Thank you for making me feel so welcome in the community of saints. In the name…”
#40 CWR: Your story is poignant. I think there are many people who feel similarly isolated. It reminds me a little bit of stories of gay people who have to choose between their individual identity and their community identity. People in this circumstance feel like they are being torn in half.
To some extent we believe in God, etc. because the people around us believe. When the people around us don’t believe it can make it harder to believe.
We have our individual testimonies in the church, but we also have a collective testimony. The collective testimony of the church is always changing little by little. AS a church we sin collectively, we repent collectively, we change collectively. This collective experience is very important to religion and Mormons have a rich collective experience, for better or worse.
I have a friend who is in his 40s and he is starting to come back to the LDS church after leaving as a teenager. His politics and beliefs probably align more closely with a mainstream protestant churches, but he likes Mormons because they share so much in common, they really do share a common faith background and understand each other rather well, even when they disagree. That’s what makes church special; it’s like being at a big family reunion. A lot of baggage, yes, but a lot of history and shared experience. Often people who leave the church find that they never truly fit in anywhere else. So I see them come back to their LDS church family as they get older, not necessarily to repent and change, but just to be in community with their extended family again.
I am one of those people who would have benefited from this sort of talk or testimony as a teenager. Everyone around me always talked about how they know, but I didn’t feel like I knew, and it was confusing, like there was something wrong with me for not Knowing even though I was about asking and trying to learn. At some point, I ran into an expression of faith that used less certain language, and suddenly I felt like I could breath. After that I did much better, although many would still consider me somewhat unorthodox if they got to know me. Perhaps I should be more open about what I believe. Maybe it would help others.
Kristine,
Thanks for this post, I’m just reading it now, and hope I’m not too late to comment.
I too bore my first testimony on Sunday April 13th since my faith transition started about 2 yrs ago. I was scared, but honestly I was feeling prompted to do it. Our stake asked that we have a fast for people in the stake, and one of the groups of people that they asked us to fast for, were those struggling with doubts. I guess I felt like I needed to represent that group. When I shared my testimony I started by identifying myself as someone who struggles with doubt. I also said that I can’t express my testimony in terms of knowledge about things, but that I do have faith and belief, and a love and desire to serve others, and that is what grounds me in the gospel.
I also expressed two pillars of positive blessings that have come from my faith transition, one is that I feel closer to my pioneer ancestors, as I’ve explored church history, I’ve felt a passion to also explore my family history, and this has brought me closer to my pioneer heritage.
Second is that I’ve struggled to take the scriptures seriously, with questions about historicity, myth, legend it has challenged my ability to value the scriptures. This year I made a commitment to study the NT seriously, and have purchased multiple books and spent hours each week learning about the NT in a way that I never did previously in my life. I told the congregation that I found something I was surprised and amazed by. That the scriptures could still speak to me, a person that does have serious doubts, that there is a depth in the scriptures that I had no idea existed before.
All this was part of my testimony on Sunday, and I’m sorry to hear that your experience wasn’t as positive, but I can tell you that I had people that I don’t know very well contact me during church and after church to express their appreciation, and in one case, someone shared the struggles of a family member with doubts like mine, and I was able to give comfort and empathy to them. I’ve been so nervous about being authentic for the past almost 2 years, and now I feel so much better, and grateful that I did share this testimony.
Thank you Kristine for your courage! We all need to be braver and realize that through sharing our authentic selves, we might risk some pain and alienation, but we also can bless and benefit our wards and stakes in ways we couldn’t have anticipated.
BTW, one of the stake president’s counselors was in our ward on Sunday and he took the time to come talk to me after sacrament meeting and tell me how much he appreciated my testimony. I was surprised.
Does anyone here really bear their testimonies in church anymore? Our testimony meetings seem to draw those that bear their testimony monthly–or close to it, and those that have an emotional need to have that ‘open mike’ for an outlet. It also seems now that every missionary assigned to every ward bears their testimony monthly—a companion cannot walk to the pulpit without the other, so you are not getting their testimony because they are spiritually prompted to bear it, but because it is a ‘rule’. I don’t feel like I have the energy to compete with these groups for the time. Has anyone else had to take a walk during testimony meeting when those with the emotional outlet testimony take as much time as would a speaker in Sacrament meeting?
I never felt compelled to walk to the pulpit with my companion. I was in the same room with him; that was enough.
I do see what you mean about fast and testimony meeting, though, and I have been in wards where that is definitely true. It did not feel like that in my new ward, but I have not been here long enough to know for sure.
I’ve definitely had those experiences before Rigel. Every week is the same old same old, but I’ve tried to live by the principle to be the change you wish to see in the world …. and I try to get up and bear a short, Christ-based testimony if I feel things are going off the rails. I’m not an every-monther . . . but I get up 4-6 times per year.
I guess this week I felt prompted to share just a little bit more of what I’ve been through.
I’d be interested to find out if anyone else really enjoys “open mic” sunday because their ward actually has productive testimonies . . . or is it same old travel-mony told over and over again?
I never felt that either Joe, but since the age for the missionaries was lowered and our ward was blessed with two sets of missionaries, that seems to be a consistent, though not absolute pattern
Everyone has doubts, whether they admit it or not and whether they express it or not. Even the Savior expressed doubts “Father, if it be thy will, let this cup pass….” And “Father why has thou forsaken me.”
Sometimes, it seems that those with doubts or who express them are as adamant about them as those who know beyond any shadow of a doubt.
They can be just as annoying.
Rigel: Interesting. I wonder if that is a mission culture thing, or just due to younger ages for some reason.
Kristine: I am currently in a student ward at BYU (again – going back to school), and the first (and only) fast Sunday we’ve been here, the testimonies were great. It was quite a change from our last (Utah) ward; I was pleasantly surprised. I actually got up too and talked about Palm Sunday and bore my testimony. I am really looking forward to this ward. So there’s one, maybe.
Jeff, I agree that evangelizing by unbelievers, doubters, and those in certainty are all annoying. I try to stay away from pushing my views and try to just share my voice and help others who are where I’m at. I’m probably not perfect at that. That’s a good reminder.
Kristine – Probably no one’s testimony would get said the same way twice, but thank you for taking a risk and being honest.
What gets me about this in general is how we are accepting some hierarchy of testimony – that somehow Kristen’s and others “gray” testimonies are “less than”, that they are in some way “doubters”, that there is something wrong with them. I think we need to reject that paradigm totally. In fact, I would suggest that if we are going to insist on a hierarchy of testimonies that those built on a “certainty”, black and white view of the church are actually the “less than” testimonies. Why? Because they are based in things that simply are not true. Faith is after all “is a hope in that which is not seen *which is true*” and black and white versions of the church are simply NOT TRUE. In this sense that makes testimonies in this vein of a questionable and weaker faith than those that emerge from a better, reality based understanding of what is actually true. Instead of accepting the condescension that you Kristen are a less fortunate soul testimony wise, maybe the correct response is to give a pat on the heads of those building their testimonies on the house of sand which is a largely fabricated, uncomplicated history, near infallibility of leaders, etc. For example, i have seen testimony born to the effect that the apostles meet with Christ most Thursday’s in the temple which is why the person knows the church is led by Christ. That simply isn’t true.
Better yet I say we drop the implied hierarchy of testimonies all together. Yours Kristen is neither deficient, less than, struggling, weak etc. Neither do we have to call our more orthodox or literal believing member’s testimony weaker, less than, deficient because it is less informed, based on wrong facts, or certain misconceptions. Why can’t we accept each as equally legitimate, powerful and valuable?
I have many more issues with those who seem to proclaim a self-righteous tone to their “almost perfect” testimonies. They are either fooling us and/or fooling themselves.
Testimony is a struggle, an on-going struggle, as is living this mortal life. And frankly, some days are better than others.
I prefer folks who are honest. No one lives a perfect life. I prefer hearing people’s story of how they struggle to do what is right….
Frankly, I’ve not seen anyone translated from the pulpit yet…..
From “True to the Faith”: “A testimony is a spiritual witness given by the Holy Ghost. The foundation of a testimony is the knowledge that Heavenly Father lives and loves us; that Jesus Christ lives, that He is the Son of God, and that He carried out the infinite Atonement; that Joseph Smith is the prophet of God who was called to restore the gospel; that we are led by a living prophet today; and that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Savior’s true Church on the earth. With this foundation, a testimony grows to include all principles of the gospel.”
I wish I had seen this post earlier and been able to participate in the discussion. I thought Hawkgrrl’s comment was excellent. I too appreciate honest and candid testimonies, but I also come to church to be uplifted, motivated, and edified. I don’t know if there are lines that shouldn’t be crossed, but I have a couple thoughts:
1. Sometimes the self-declared unorthodox seem to glory in their differentness, rather than striving for a sense of unity with their fellow congregants. I don’t mean to suggest they need to believe the same things or in the same way, but they should strive to love, rather than fear or disdain, their ward family (which can be hard, but still)
2. A testimony should be exactly that — witnessing of what one can. It isn’t necessary to declare everything one doesn’t have a testimony of before sharing what one does. Personally, I’m interested in what witnesses a person does have of God in her life, not so much those she’s missing.
3. Bearing a testimony (in F&T mtg) should be done in the spirit of edifying and uplifting the congregation. Ideally, I don’t think it should be performance art or a means of self-discovery or self-definition. Sometimes people just throw themselves out there to see how people will react, and I don’t think it’s appropriate to do that from the pulpit. A person shouldn’t make herself the focus. A testimony should be shared because a person wants to edify, uplift, and bless others.
I’ve heard some fairly unorthodox testimonies that were very uplifting to me personally, and these from people who don’t necessarily feel or believe the same way I do.