Since it is a new year I want to make a bit of a confession. I have really struggled with activity in my LDS ward for a couple of years now. It’s a great ward made of great people, but a couple of years ago I felt like I needed to step back and re-evaluate where I was at on my spiritual journey.
My inactivity isn’t due to strictly historical problems or even solely modern issues such as the treatment of homosexual members (though those are both issues), but after years of struggling (I lost belief in a lot of the Church’s truth claims about 10 years ago) I realized that an important aspect of spirituality to me is a community open to diverse spiritual paths, affording the freedom to develop a mature faith. I believe such a community will be critical to spiritual development in the face of secular headwinds in the West, and a conservative tradition alone doesn’t provide the spiritual tools to develop such a meaningful (to me) faith in such an environment.
With that said, it was the November 2015 policy that really shocked me into re-evaluating the LDS Church’s role in my spirituality. It was the impetus for me to say, “I’m not sure this spiritual tradition speaks to me any longer,” step back, and evaluate my spiritual path. Perhaps my age had something to do with it (I’m a bit over 40 now), or a desire for my children to have a spiritual environment where they have the freedom to walk their own path rather than the path specified for them by Church leaders, but the November 2015 policy affected me; something broke and, as a result, I don’t feel particularly spiritually drawn to the Church anymore, even going so far as to seriously explore other options (I’m especially drawn to the Anglican tradition). I do love the LDS Church deeply, though, and have really struggled with how to move forward.
As I’ve considered all of this I enjoyed a discussion on the Mormon Discussions forum where someone going by the handle of Kishkumen described his “Fantasy Mormon Church”. I thought that was a neat exercise, so below I’d like to explore what my Fantasy Mormon Church would look like.
Jesus Christ
In my Fantasy Mormon Church there would be no doubt what the focus would be: Jesus Christ and his Gospel; and I’m not talking about stuff like temples, family history, home teaching, priesthood, Word of Wisdom, etc., etc. That stuff’s not the gospel; it’s cruft we’ve added on. I’m talking about the good news of Jesus and his resurrection – The Gospel. My Fantasy Mormon Church would make Jesus and his direct teachings the focus of almost all talks, lessons, etc. There is so much to contemplate just within the New Testament that I feel we would never run out of material. We’d dive in and drink deeply from the waters of the New Testament and 3 Nephi 11-30 (this is a fantasy Mormon church, after all). We’d worship Jesus Christ and recognize his place at the right hand of God: as he who was given the holy name. He wouldn’t be relegated to a reference at the end of each prayer but would truly be the heart of all worship in my Fantasy Mormon Church.
Spirituality, Community, and Service
Speaking of worship, my Fantasy Mormon Church would not have bland, boring, three hour meetings. We’d cut services to an hour and hold two in the day, similar to how many Anglican parishes do. One would be more low church, similar to what we do now, while another would be a bit more high church, with more music, a liturgy, etc. People could choose to attend whichever service they’d like.
Regardless, all services would focus on building spirituality and a connection to God both individually and, most importantly, as a community. Organizing as a community is a big part of Mormonism and something we do really well. Our theology even includes the concept of Zion, or the sacralizing of community. Our worship services would be constructed in such a way as to push us toward vulnerability within the community, where the community takes a greater role in the support of one another’s spiritual journeys. Of course, not everyone would have the same spiritual journey, so room for diverse paths and a more open tent would be required.
We’d integrate real, meaningful service as part of our community building. We’d focus on service that impacts the community at large rather than just the LDS community – things such as running a women’s shelter, food pantry, building affordable housing, etc. We could identify as a religious community by what we’ve done rather than what we believe.
Joseph Smith
My view of Joseph Smith as a prophet is much more limited than that which is understood in the LDS Church. Joseph did some amazing things and some really disgusting, spiritually abusive things (e.g., polygamy). In my Fantasy Mormon Church both Joseph’s achievements and errors would be up for discussion. Rather than deify him we’d treat him as a human who sought to bring a community closer to God. Joseph had a unique religious perspective born of his culture and worldview. We would make room for people who affirm the limits of Joseph’s worldview and who still consider some of what he taught to be prophetic. There would no longer be a need to defend the indefensible and people would be free to disagree with elements of Joseph’s worldview.
In addition, the story of the Restoration would not be dominated by Joseph Smith. Many others contributed to the success of the Restoration and their stories would be more fully included as part of that narrative.
Prophets, Apostles, and Church Structure
Speaking of prophets, my Fantasy Mormon Church would severely curtail the rhetoric of prophets. In fact, we wouldn’t refer to our leaders as prophets altogether unless they actually demonstrated the gift of prophecy. We wouldn’t hang on their every word but would instead view them as potentially wise, but fallible leaders. They would operate according to D&C 121 and would not require obedience by virtue of their authority, but would have to persuade within the religious community’s marketplace of ideas.
Church structure would reflect a more ecumenical model similar to the early LDS Church, where stakes would be more autonomous and the Twelve Apostles a traveling high council. Decisions would be made through the model of ecumenical councils consisting of the First Presidency, President of the Quorum of the Twelve, and various stake presidents. Stakes would be free to incorporate more of their local customs, songs, etc. into the religious community. We most certainly wouldn’t provide a religious model consisting of franchises of the Utah church throughout the world, but would instead allow local communities to develop their own traditions and celebrate their own contributions to the Restoration.
Priesthood
In my Fantasy Mormon Church the priesthood consists of all adults. There is no need to maintain a group of male priesthood and women non-priesthood because all who are baptized are part of the royal priesthood. Temple ordinances already make this obvious and my Fantasy Mormon Church would simply recognize it.
There would obviously need to be a pool from whom bishops, stake presidents, etc. could be called, but in my Fantasy Mormon Church, that pool consists of both women and men, so those opportunities become available for women. In addition, since worship services and programs are simplified in my Fantasy Mormon Church, the responsibilities devolving upon bishops and other leaders would require much less time, greatly reducing their impact upon family life.
There would be no worthiness interviews of children or young adults, and nobody would be ordained to the priesthood until they are 18 (as part of their visit to the temple). Even the very concept of “worthiness” interviews would be jettisoned in favor of “preparedness” interviews, for that is what they are for: assessing one’s preparedness for the next stage of spiritual responsibility within the community, and a chance for mentors to learn what spiritual education is needed.
My Fantasy Mormon Church will also steal an idea from Kishkumen of the Mormon Discussion’s forum:
In my Fantasy Mormon Church there are two important priesthoods: one belongs to the family, and one belongs to the community. In the family, the parents co-preside and do whatever they feel they need to do for the family within the family. They can bless as they like, dedicate as they like, bless and pass the sacrament as they like, etc. The congregational priesthood involves rituals that impact or occur within the community as a whole. Parents prepare their children to be baptized, and then baptism and confirmation are witnessed in the congregation, for the child to join the congregation.
Scripture
Scripture in my Fantasy Mormon Church would be free to be taken metaphorically. We would not push literalness upon those who do not view scripture through a metaphorical lens, nor would we force a metaphorical perspective upon a literalist. Instead, scriptures would take a sacramental role where they are used as an expression of the community’s relationship to God. What makes them scripture is how the community views and uses them, not whether they are the literal word of God. They become the word of God through their spiritual use within the community.
Temples
In my Fantasy Mormon Church temple recommend interviews would focus on spiritual preparedness rather than as a litmus test for correct belief.
The secretive nature of the temple is a relic of its ties to Masonry and Joseph’s use of it to introduce polygamy to his closest followers. We no longer need to treat it as a secret society and aren’t trying to lie or obfuscate polygamy, thus we are free to treat what goes on there more honestly and openly. As a result, preparedness classes would discuss completely what goes on in the temple
Any vestiges of gender inequality will be removed from the temple narrative and ordinances.
In my Fantasy Mormon Church, the temple will also not be used as a wedge to separate families. The stupid one year prohibition for couples who marry outside the temple will not exist. Marriage outside the temple will be celebrated as legitimate and, if couples want to be sealed within the temple following a non-temple marriage, they may choose to do so.
Oh, and garments outside the temple will be completely optional. My Fantasy Mormon Church doesn’t require hair shirts or other forms of self-flagellation.
Tithing
In my Fantasy Mormon Church financial transparency is a given. External auditors would publish the full financial records to all members. There will be no lawyer-notice at the bottom of donation slips indicating that my Fantasy Mormon Church can use the funds in whatever way we choose. Instead, we will respect the wishes of members within my Fantasy Mormon Church.
Also, since services are simplified and we don’t have endless meetings on Sunday, church buildings can be smaller in my Fantasy Mormon Church. Temples, too, would be simplified and not be some sort of attempt at signaling our belief in the Prosperity Gospel. In fact, temples could simply be a part of a ward building set aside for such rituals. As a result, tithing funds can be put to use according to their scriptural mandate: to feed and clothe the poor.
The rhetoric surrounding tithing will also look different in my Fantasy Mormon Church. What you pay is strictly between you and God so there are no tithing settlement meetings.
Theology and Dogmatism
In my Fantasy Mormon Church theological speculation and discussion is encouraged. While there will be a shared theology determined by ecumenical councils, people will be free to have and express varying opinions. Nobody gets to theologically run roughshod over anyone else. We’re all just doing the best we can, trying to make sense of the ineffable. None of us can be precise or certain about any of this stuff so dogmatism isn’t part of my Fantasy Mormon Church.
Gender and LGBT
There is no way for us to know anything about pre- or post-mortal gender or sexual practices, so in my Fantasy Mormon Church we don’t give a crap what gender you espouse, and we welcome LGBT people in full fellowship.
What about you? What would your fantasy LDS Church look like?
Wheat & Tares 
So in other words.. your ideal is a mutiny against the revealed order…
Kjhgdd – I guess it would be against someone’s interpretation of “revealed order”. I am getting more and more convinced that for those that the church works well for (and that can fit in the “model”) it works REALLY well for. I am sure those people are just as puzzled as can be as to why all these complainers just can’t get with the program that is guaranteed to work.
For those that can’t fit in that model it sometimes can be less than great or even torture.
And if you go read the comments coming in on https://wheatandtares.org/2018/01/01/is-mormonism-irrelevant-to-millennials/ the church had better be worried as it isn’t “working” for the coming generation. If you look at the leaked videos and documents, I think they are very aware, but not so sure on how to course correct. If they move too much one way, they lose the Kjhgdd’s from the church. If they stay the current course, they lose a ton to faith crisis and other head off to follow the teachings of Denver Snuffer and the like. I would not like to have the job of the Q15.
Cody Hatch, I agree with many of your recommendations and would like to see that as well. I think we need to look to Catholicism as a model that may accommodate different levels of belief and orthodoxy. I would like to see a church where someone who is an atheist cultural Mormon could come and participate and would be welcome and could worship alongside the most devout TBM. Maybe that is a fantasy, but I think we need to make some form of it work or I fear the Church will simply be a very small group of mostly older orthodox members.
Kjhdd, it sounds as though your Fantasy Mormon Church precisely matches the LDS Church. You are one of the fortunate few.
Cody, I agree with you on many points. I especially like your point about Christ. There is more talk and reverence for prophets in the church than for Christ, in my opinion.
I no longer want to participate in organized religion of any kind, but I’d be a heck of a lot less resentful of my lingering ties to Mormonism if it were your Fantasy Mormon Church instead.
I’d attend your fantasy church although I second Happy Hubby’s point that changing would spiritually/materially/communally damage those for who the current system works. That’s a problem I don’t know how to balance.
I like this post, Cody, and pretty much all of your ideas, but I confess that I am a bit disappointed. When I saw the title, I thought you were going to write about a fantasy football analog, where you and your friends take turns drafting GAs and then you get points when the GAs you drafted give controversial talks or something. 🙂
There’s a trade off in religion when you go from the fundamentalistic side of things to the more liberal side. Generally speaking, people don’t take it as seriously the more modernized/liberalized it becomes. I don’t love everything about the Mormon Church, but I love that it means something to people. I love that people actually attend. They actually do the service they’re asked to, they pay the money to keep it afloat, they provide the resources to make it a force for good in the world. Mormons care about being Mormon. For the most part. Anyway. My fantasy Mormon Church would to take many of the things you mention here but somehow preserve that feeling that this is really important. Not easy.
My sincere compliments, Cody. Great thoughts and narrative.
At this stage of my life, I only want ONE THING from Mormonism and that is a spiritual, enjoyable and positive Sacrament Service. Period! I want to take the Sacrament, think of the creator (and Jesus Christ) and listen to some beautiful music; along with an uplifting, timely message FOR TODAY! In my fantasy world, I would beg “the Church” to please stop the mind numbing repetition of “the same old narrative”. More often than not, I’m so bored out of my mind, I sometimes feel we should simply start chanting – and dancing with snakes; just to break up the monotony!
What I no longer want any part of:
• Worship of Joseph Smith. Man oh man, have I ever had a belly-full of this.
• Worship of General Authorities. They’re people just like everyone else. They are not some kind of “higher beings”, deserving of adulation. The only difference between
“us and them” is that they are being paid (quite handsomely) through a stipend and other church provided – lifetime – benefits; which the common lay member will
never see.
• Either we’re a church of Christ or we’re the Church of Joseph Smith. Personally, I want no part of the latter.
• Home Teaching – both giving and receiving is a TOTAL WASTE OF TIME. This program is a relic from the past (long gone) and has become just another way to shame and
control people. The reporting requirements for Home Teaching alone are just like some used by the most onerous sales organizations in the country!
• Meetings, Meetings, Meetings. For the love of Heaven, if this is a mirror image of the Celestial Kingdom – I’d “rather be with the sinner’s than the saints”.
• I will never again clean buildings owned by the LDS Corporation. This practice DOES NOT represent service; but servitude. The LDS Corporation has plenty of money
and resources to have their buildings professionally cleaned. If necessary, they can certainly pull monies from their Real Estate division. I will simply focus on being a
good neighbor and friend!
• Any talk, lesson, article or commentary which attempts to cover up, whitewash, sweeten, or obfuscate the remarkably messy (and sometimes ugly and cruel) true
Mormon history – I’m walking away from; even if this kind of “pretty little lie” comes from our rock stars in SLC.
And lastly, in my Mormon fantasy world – I’m done with MBW (Mormon Busy Work)! If it doesn’t make sense and is respectful of my time – I’m not doing it!
The LDS Church is contracting and hundreds of people are walking away every day; we all know this and even Elder Oaks knows it; as per his declaration during the most recent Mission President’s Seminar at the MTC. The dike is breaking and the flow of information and truth is literally blowing the old church away. The tighter LDS Leadership squeeze, shame, preach down too and pound on the members – the smaller and less significant the church will become.
Personally, I pray for the day that some of our “fantasys” will come true!
My apologies for the formatting of my written summary above. I actually wrote my compliments in Microsoft Word and then copied and pasted it. The transfer didn’t work as well as I’d hoped. Thank you..
felixfabulous: I am with you…I’d like to see a spectrum of beliefs in the church (and in the temples) to accommodate serious thinkers and faith-seekers. Right now..it feels like it is considered “unworthy” if you don’t think ONE WAY. That can change if Leadership Training meetings start teaching the judges that are gate-keepers to rethink what “worthiness” means.
If they focus on behavior…I attend my weekly meetings even if I don’t believe in a literal God or some nuanced idea of God…and just let the ordinances happen and leave it up to God to sort out later…then they can start allowing more people to feel comfortable in the flock.
If they feel it isn’t enough to just judge worthiness on behavior but on the intentions or thoughts or beliefs behind actions (as if there is a higher law to determine worthiness that judges think they can discern) then they will continue to deny recommends to people who can’t answer the recommend questions as expected. As in…perhaps I go to my meetings and don’t drink coffee…but I don’t have a testimony that these things are literally from God…then that could be not good enough according to some leaders.
While other religions have different flavors (like you mention Catholicism has accommodated various versions of belief…Judaism as well and many others…they seem to have “orthodox” vs other types) …it seems Mormonism isn’t positioned for that yet. We still cling to “one faith, one baptism” and things like that which make gate-keepers to the temple being the ones to deny recommends to unorthodox believers. Right? Seems like we are still a ways yet from that changing. At least for a while still.
Thanks for the many great comments. Several of you have identified the difficulty of holding both (for lack of a better term) conservative members and liberal members. When I use those terms I’m not strictly speaking of politics but of theology and religious praxis (though I understand that political affiliations often fall along those same lines). Indeed, you bring up a difficult situation and I’m not sure it can be done without marginalizing one or the other. We’ve certainly seen some of the fallout in the Community of Christ and Episcopal churches, where a movement to more liberal views pushed out conservative members; however, we are seeing a similar movement in the LDS and Evangelical churches, where more liberal folks are leaving. I’d argue societal pressure is forcing us into a position as it is, so if we don’t do anything we’re essentially choosing the Evangelical/conservative route. We don’t have the luxury of waiting to make the tough decisions, though perhaps they’ve already been made and we’re just seeing that play out.
@churchistrue: Have you read Marcus Borg’s “The Heart of Christianity”? If so, could one seriously make the argument that Borg, as a more liberal believer, isn’t taking his beliefs seriously? I am unconvinced that liberal believers take their faith less seriously than do conservative believers. It just looks different. They’re less certain and more aware of the lack of precision on these matters.
Cody, would you agree with the idea that the church is likely less concerned with pleasing the people and accommodating everyone’s views, as it is about being right and hoping people convert to agree with them? That plays into the positions they take, right? They may be more willing to allow liberals to leave rather than feel they are changing to bend to ideas popular in our day…and use scripture and belief in revelation by line of authority to strengthen their position.
@Ziff: That would be fun. There’s not enough turnover among the GAs to warrant mock drafts and all that, but perhaps it could be based on GC talks and the community’s response to the talks. I like it.
@Heber13: Yes, I agree with what you’ve stated, though I think the Church consists of the members within the body so, like Paul, I believe it is improper for one part of the body to state that it has no use for some of the others. Unless we’re admitting that the only ideas that matter – the only members of the Church – are the Q15.
@ Ziff – I thought the same thing at first!
@Cody – I feel like we could solve a good chunk of this by redefining “the church mission” entirely to focus on service. Real, outward-facing service and establishment of institutions that exist in our community for the building of the kingdom through the performance of Christian service. Not mission work or family history work (both of which can continue for their own sake, but not be the primary focus), not Activity Days or Courts of Honor: just frequent, lasting acts and institutions of service. By diverting resources and time (some freed up by canceling long meetings), we could realign our priorities with the Savior’s teachings and move forward as a church. We can hold on to all our esoteric mystery teachings, I love them too, but we’ll make a deeper and more important impact through service than through witnessing.
@Bro. Jones: I agree with reorienting the Church’s mission around real, outward-facing service; however, in my discussions with many people on this topic, most of them have simply pointed to temple work for the dead as the mission meeting that definition. I disagree, but there is no doubt that temple work consumes a great deal of disposable religious time.
Cody, this feels like bizarro world, because I’m usually quoting Heart of Christianity to people. That book is the most important to me in terms of defining my new faith reconstructed view of Mormonism. And I totally agree with you. *in theory* But I’m very concerned about it in practice. I think that’s the biggest challenge to what I regularly call my sacramental-metaphorical paradigm (taken from Borg) of Mormonism. How do you keep people just as committed?
Thanks for your comment on Temple Work and meeting the definition of “service”. I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiment. Simply point to the Temple and saying “there’s our service” is a huge copout; in my opinion.
Cody, I’m with you! My most favorite quote ever:
“Methodists have creeds which a man must believe or be kicked out of their church. I want the liberty to believe as I please, it feels so good not to be tramelled. It does not prove that a man is not a good man because he errs in doctrine.” (Rough Stone Rolling, Bushman) (History of the Church, vol 5, pg 340)
Forgot to add, that’s from Joseph.
I nominate Ziff’s comment for funniest of 2018! Please make sure to add to your list next year!
The only issue will be that EVERYONE would want DFU and if we still had Sister Chieko Okazaki serving she would be in demand also. Not because they would say something controversial, but just because people like them because they are so different.
@HappyHubby, we’d have to hold a draft to ensure all had a fair chance at the gimmes such as Uchtdorf or Holland.
Cody, when are we starting your fantasy Mormon church? It sounds great to me!
I think we need some kind of men’s organization that is actually fun. This could be Elders Quorum or something else. Hometeaching would be replaced with a buddy/mentor system and there would be opportunities to learn things like auto repair, home improvement skills and BBQ. There could be social activities. I would do this on the stake level to have a bigger group. Male isolation is a real problem in the Church and outside. So many men don’t have male friends. Right now our Elders Quorums are poorly attended and people are disengaged mainly because they don’t get anything from them and are constantly asked if they did their hometeaching, if they can help someone move and to shovel the walks.
Fantasy will meet reality in the millennium. So, should the church change to meet everyone’s fantasy. Whose turn will it be next? There is Cody this week, Ziff, then MH, then felixfabulous. But then when Cody shows up for his turn, someone else may just try to muscle in. Sounds good for “professional” wrestling.
felixfabulous – so true about men needing ways to be friends. RS seems to do a MUCH better job with this which could be mainly women in general.
The cynic in me believes that the Church can swing as far left as it wants, because many on the right believe essentially in prophetic infallibility. They’ll accept changes made under proper authority, regardless of what those changes entail. So if we look at this as a pure numbers game, the Church doesn’t have much to lose by experimenting a little.
Actually, Dylan, it has a lot to lose by experimenting a little. It has to experiment a lot, aggressively, and unwaveringly, or it will lose social progressives (and I limit that term to the current understanding of social progressive). Incremental change is clearly not enough to satisfy a social progressive who wants to believe in prophetic infallibility. Why should it be? If accepting same-sex marriage in the Church is the right thing to do, it shouldn’t take fifty years. And giving the priesthood to black men shouldn’t have takes one hundred and fifty. Unless you get on the temporal relativism bandwagon or modify prophetic infallibility, I don’t think you can be a social progressive in the church for very long.
Sounds like the Community of Christ exist for this purpose. I have a lot more respect for the John Hamer’s of the world who do something about it instead of just complain.
Or any of the Snufferite fellowships for that matter.
You have many great ideas, some of which I’ve considered myself. Others are awful ideas. And many in between. What i would like is the ability and forum within the church to discuss these types of things. I think it’s obvious that some of the church structure and processes need to evolve and change in order to keep pace with larger cultural chances.
Because of the industrialized religion model (or franchise model as you call it) we’ve become lazy and complacent as a church. We simply take too many things for granted simply because “that’s the way it’s always been.” It’s time to take a look at some old bottles and see if we don’t need to swap in some new ones.
“theres no way for us to know about post mortal gender”?
really? so the ressurection doesn’t correct hormonal or dna disfunctions?
raw garlic: No, there is no way for us to *know*. You may speculate, as your rhetorical question suggests you have, but you do not *know*. We know next to nothing about the mechanics of resurrection. LDS views on resurrection are simply speculations of subsequent leaders built upon the speculations of the faith’s founder.