In the Q & A period of Greg Prince’s talk at Sunstone a couple weeks ago, LDS scholar Robert Rees asked a question that seems to be weighing heavily on LDS church leadership. In the talk, Dr. Prince shared an expansive view of Mormonism that withstands the more shallow problems that are exposed from a literal-fundamentalistic mindset.
Rees shared his observation that the millennial generation is dropping out of LDS church activity. They are experiencing a break of trust with church leadership and bailing out. “How do we save this generation and keep them in the fold long enough for them to see the beauties and the glories of the restoration and that wonderful transcendent and radical theology?
Greg Prince’s answer:
That’s not only relevant for Mormonism, but for all, at least of American Christianity and even American Judaism. The Wesley Seminary last year was awarded a million and a half dollar grant from the Lilly Foundation to study this issue because every religious tradition across the spectrum is having difficulty hanging onto the youth, particularly the millennial generation. And nobody has the answer yet. And Mormons, as you say, are not at all, immune from this. We are seeing attrition amongst our seed corn at levels that I think are not only alarming but are flashing red lights at us. We’ve got to be able to figure out how do we retain these youth and given where they are in life and in the world, the only way we’re going to retain them is to make this religion vital to them. They will not do it out of a sense of duty. We did. The times have changed. And so as I work with the Wesley, people were all in the same boat, struggling, trying to figure out how do we re rejuvenate the essence of Christianity without cheapening it.
Earlier in his presentation he said the following on the same subject:
Institutional religion has only three cards to play. And for millennials, one of them, truth claims, is off the table. That leaves only two: moral authority and community. People, and particularly younger people want a church that walks the walk, that takes a stand for values and that tries to make the entire world better. They don’t want empty talk and neither do I.
Everybody seems to be trying to answer this question. How do we make Mormonism relevant to millennials. I’ve got three college age millennial children, and they are awesome, but confuse the heck out of me. So I have no idea.
But two things that are on my mind this week seem to be giving a clue into this.
First was the BYU devotional talk this week by Eric Hunstman. In it, he gave a rousing call for Latter-day Saints to follow Christ by creating spaces for the marginalized and to love better in ways like:
- be aware of all forms of racism and stamp them all out
- end sexism and gender inequality
- show empathy and love for doubters or Exmormons
- love more LOUDLY and be more understanding of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters
- be more aware and understanding of those with mental health issues
Watch the video, please, if you haven’t. It’s a beautiful and inspiring message.
https://www.byutv.org/player/54f7f31a-23b5-4899-a732-26426effd2a5
After closing, like BYU devotionals usually do, “in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen”, the BYU audience comprising of exactly all those millennials we’re trying to retain affirmed “Amen”. And then CLAPPED and APPLAUDED. This doesn’t happen at BYU devotionals. This might be something that could give insight to LDS Church leaders what millennials are looking for from a religion.
This is what Dr. Prince meant when he says that millennials want a church that walks the walk and stands for values.
The next idea is from the thought leader that might be most responsible for recommitting myself to Mormonism in every bit of a serious and consecrated way as I was prior to faith crisis and deconstruction: Jordan Peterson.
He is attracting thousands (millions?) of mostly young, mostly male, mostly non-religious to “get religion”. He is teaching Old Testament and Christian metaphor in a way that is intellectually bullet proof, but also surprisingly inspiring.
He’s telling them to clean up their room. Be better. Tell the truth. Serve others. Create heaven on Earth. Get off addictive substances. Seek family relationships for manifestion of deeper meaning in life. Avoid materialism and hedonism.
Some comments from his fans:
Nietzsche announced God is dead. Dr. Peterson announced God is resurrected.
Did we all become collectively disenchanted with religion a few years ago, maybe lash out it a bit in anger. And in the past year we once again all collectively come to a more mature, comprehensive, and interesting understanding of religion? Because I seriously feel like the internet is moving side by side with my own personal experience.
This man is resurrecting religion for me, even as an atheist.
Me five years ago: religion is for the sheep, it’s just an opiate for the masses. Me now: finally a two and a half hour lecture on God.
Watch Dr. Peterson’s answer to the question: why don’t you just be direct and answer the question, do you believe in God?
I also believe that the West is grounded on the metaphysical presupposition that human beings have a spark of the divine in them, and I don’t think there’s a truer way of saying that.
Jordan Peterson has thousands of young atheists singing I am a Child of God. And meaning it.
Millennials don’t want you to bullshiz them. They believe in evolution. They probably already know the BOM is not historical or on their way to figuring it out. They’re twitching subconsciously with cognitive dissonance at the 1838 account of the First Vision.
But it’s OK. Just like Jordan Peterson illustrates, there is extreme power in religion story and metaphor, and we can teach the Restoration in the same, powerful way he teaches Genesis. Salt Lake would do well to figure out what Jordan Peterson is doing and try to mimic it. It’s the way out of our “truth crisis”.
Greg Prince says the truth claims are already off the table for millennials, and he doesn’t think it matters. The Jordan Peterson phenomonon is solid proof of that.
If truth claims are off the table, then I don’t really care if Millennials leave the church. If it’s just another club, regardless what values are taught, they can jettison it and move on (like the church is doing with the BSA). To me, truth claims are vital.
Embracing Jordan Peterson isn’t going to attract the millennials who believe that women and LGBT+ people are people.
As opposed to, you know, the dragon of chaos, or whatever.
Jewelfox. Fair point. You’ll notice I didn’t include any of those views from JP. We’ll take the progressivism of Eric Huntsman and non-literalness and inspired call to action of Jordan Peterson and go with that.
I think Peterson either has a more platonic conception about God (due to his Jungianism aspects) or else following the popular trend in the 70’s and 80’s adopts a pseud0-religion. Sort of like Derrida’s religion without religion. I’ll confess I just don’t get Peterson. He seems to just take old psychological ideas and dress them up in this archetypal language often using archetypes apt to offend current audiences. (The traditional male/female dichotomy) But lots of people like him. I don’t understand.
That said, I’m really, really skeptical any of these approaches will work. If, as some claim, truth just isn’t relevant to those leaving religion I’m not sure other things are either. It seems making demands just is inherently problematic to them. They might respect you more but I don’t see any reason they’d join you. Or, put an other way, they might think, “why join when I can just do the things I like – what’s the point of paying tithing, doing formal ministering, wasting time in church meetings I find boring, etc.” There’s really not a good response.
While it’s dangerous to look to Europe because I think the American phenomena is different from European secularism, it is worth noting that those who go to church there frequently do so just out of aesthetics. They might like the choir or organ or what not. It’s more akin to going to an art gallery or the like. Frankly Mormons aren’t going to do well there compared to churches with professional speakers and musicians.
Jewelfox, same: you gotta leave a LOT of JP at the door if you think millennials are following. The only millennial women he’s got are already extremists in gender roles. (feminism is ruining everything!) He’s picking up gamergaters/4chan guys tho and getting them to clean their rooms so there’s that.
The Book of Mormon provides insight into what we’re experiencing in our day. Nothing new is happening, it has all happened before. Students of the Book of Mormon have been anticipating this day. I am sorry to see it arrive. The results will be the same for us as it was for the people in the Book of Mormon. We will eventually be cut off from the presence of the Lord and will suffer for it.
…there was peace also, save it were the pride which began to enter into the church—not into the church of God, but into the hearts of the people who professed to belong to the church of God—
…exceedingly great pride which had gotten into the hearts of the people; and it was because of their exceedingly great riches and their prosperity in the land; and it did grow upon them from day to day.
(Book of Mormon | Helaman 3:33, 36)
…there could be no atonement made for the sins of men, but every man fared in this life according to the management of the creature; therefore every man prospered according to his genius, and that every man conquered according to his strength; and whatsoever a man did was no crime.
18 And thus he did preach unto them, leading away the hearts of many, causing them to lift up their heads in their wickedness, yea, leading away many women, and also men, to commit whoredoms—telling them that when a man was dead, that was the end thereof.
(Book of Mormon | Alma 30:17 – 18)
1 NOW it came to pass that there were many of the rising generation that could not understand the words of king Benjamin, being little children at the time he spake unto his people; and they did not believe the tradition of their fathers.
2 They did not believe what had been said concerning the resurrection of the dead, neither did they believe concerning the coming of Christ.
3 And now because of their unbelief they could not understand the word of God; and their hearts were hardened.
4 And they would not be baptized; neither would they join the church. And they were a separate people as to their faith, and remained so ever after, even in their carnal and sinful state; for they would not call upon the Lord their God.
5 And now in the reign of Mosiah they were not half so numerous as the people of God; but because of the dissensions among the brethren they became more numerous.
(Book of Mormon | Mosiah 26:1 – 5)
29 And there was also a cause of much sorrow among the Lamanites; for behold, they had many children who did grow up and began to wax strong in years, that they became for themselves, and were led away by some who were Zoramites, by their lyings and their flattering words, to join those Gadianton robbers.
30 And thus were the Lamanites afflicted also, and began to decrease as to their faith and righteousness, because of the wickedness of the rising generation.
(Book of Mormon | 3 Nephi 1:29 – 30)
The real power of the gospel is in the doctrine . The message of salvation. Even Greg Prince has said the same thing.While I agree that we are losing a whole generation we can correctly blame Aposles who fail to bear authentic witness of their personal experience in the actual presence of the Savior and prophets who don’t prophise. If one follows the path you suggest why bother.If there is no redeeming power to be had ,noexaltation to be realized we might as well as stay home on Sundays and drink beer. Oh that rwhat has already happened to 2/3 ofthe church .Look what happens when men testify the Savior has spoken to them .Look at Denver Snuffer and his disciples. The man the so called church of Christ considers one of its greatest threats..If the institutional church isn’t going to fad to nothingness we need real revelation. We need the power of the Holy Ghost. We need the things we claim but fail to deliver.
No honestly I’ll come back and actually engage w the idea bc I didn’t before bc it was so absurd to me.
The tenents EH espouses:
“be aware of all forms of racism and stamp them all out
end sexism and gender inequality
show empathy and love for doubters or Exmormons
love more LOUDLY and be more understanding of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters
be more aware and understanding of those with mental health issues”
Are all social justice issues in gospel context. There is no question that JP excoriates liberalism and SJWs and his very teachings are antithetical to Bro Huntsman’s thesis.
Are you just not aware of this? Or do you suggest these are all accomplished in heavy handed hierarchical fashion?? Honestly I know lobsterism appeals to conservatives who find the problems with the world in liberalism so yeah, it would match Mormon worldview. It’s just those potential lobsters weren’t the ones clapping at the end of devotional. My fellow SJWs were.
If the church morphed and suddenly became a person and was interviewed by its bishop for a temple recommend it would not be granted one.
The church as an organisation needs to behave the way it tells us to behave. Millennial and others see through organisational dishonesty from a mile away. Seeing bull crap from a mile away is a lot easier with the internet.
Kristine. Yes, JP is a polarizing figure. Almost too much to even bring up in this conversation, but what he’s doing in terms of energizing religion for millennials through a non-literal paradigm seems extremely important and relevant to the LDS faith crisis situation. I hate what he’s doing with the anti-SJW stuff. But for me, that’s completely different, and I can separate that out, while identifying what is very helpful that relates to Mormonism. For me, there’s absolutely a way to combine what EH is teaching and how JP is viewing religious metaphor. And I was one of the ones clapping at my computer at the end EH’s talk.
Hmm I guess I just don’t see the majority of his followers able to separate it out. I’m not sure how much is left of JP if you take out all of the liberal/SJW bashing. In many ways I think JP is just selling conservative religious culture without the God part, and that works for many many people. (In fact I believe more mainstream mormons would readily accept him if they knew about him bc culturally they already believe the world is a mess because of liberals.)
I guess if you’re taking your approach; all your blog post is advocating is for mainstream Mormonism, which is firmly entrenched in conservative culture to be more SJW-y in these areas. Which is what many of my liberal mormons are advocating for, I mean we know 4 million right wing LDS aren’t giving up their viewpointa any time soon but for the love of all things holy we’d like some baby steps here.
It’s just whenever you talk about JP I don’t think you do enough to explain how you separate his philosophies and why. And I don’t think you can blame me for pushing back on a guy who thinks the principles I stand for are absurd and also suggest combining him w the principles I stand for. 🙂
If you’re coming onto JP recently, and your exposure is the huge media attention he gets over his liberal/SJW bashing, then I think it would be a natural position to assume there’s nothing left of him after you remove this aspect. I’m not a Jordan Peterson apologist, so I’m not trying to win you over here. But to understand what I mean, this hour long talk on Christian redemption is a great summary of what I (and so many others) find revolutionary wrt his approach to the Bible and Christian religion. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtiRzQMgBDM This came before he got famous and there’s no liberal/SJW bashing here. Additionally, he did an 11 episode podcast series on the Old Testament, each one about two hours long, where he said very little about that stuff. Though, I admit, during this series is when he blew up on the scene, and his rants on free speech, etc, did seep in here and there in that podcast. But for most of the 20+ hours, he is focused on recontextualizing OT and Christian myths: creation, garden of Eden, Cain and Abel, Noah’s flood, sacrifice of Isaac, Joseph in Egypt, etc. He’s giving relevance and a modern (ie scientific/intellectual) point of view to concepts of God, spirit, revelation, sacrifice, covenant, redemption, repentance, Heaven, Hell, Zion. One interesting little tidbit that would appeal to a feminist is that he says he thinks Eve is the one to “become aware” first (metaphor of eating the fruit) is because his theory is that women’s brains evolved before men’s, due to the evolutionary need to protect their babies, thus the need to be more aware of their surroundings in order to protect their babies. Anyway, I’m pretty clear what I mean what I like from JP when I talk about him. But I also am apologetic to those that are offended by him and acknowledge he does have that other side of him. If you pay attention in social media or LDS fb groups where he is being discussed, there are the brain dead alt right guys championing his anti-liberal-SJW stuff but there are also the very thoughtful moderates that are talking about his religious metaphor stuff. That’s what I’m doing.
Here how I see things:
1. Jesus Christ is at the head of the church he restored through the prophet Joseph Smith
2. The church in Joseph’s day failed to establish Zion (D&C 105:9). This decreased the manifestations of the Spirit for all including apostles and prophets (D&C 70:14)
3. All the prophets since Joseph Smith are Christ chosen prophets
4. Prophets are fallible (D&C 1:24-28)
5. When prophets err, Christ owns it and will use the outcome for his own purposes
6. When prophets err it is because of benevolence, not malevolence. (D&C 121:16-17, 19-21)
7. The church is under condemnation (D&C 84:57).
8. Heavenly Father tries the faith and patience of his people (Mosiah 23:21-22).
9. The day of the gentiles is coming to an end (3 Nephi 16:10)
10. The judgment of the last days will begin on his own house (D&C 112:24-26)
ChurchisTrue:
Seems like what you are saying is that JP is presenting religion/spirituality in a way that is relatable to millennial and thus there is something for us to learn there. I’m willing to take a look and see if I can see what you are talking about in his OT video. However, I’m hesitant about lumping all millennial into one group with one way of seeing the world. I tend to be with Kristine. Are the kids at the BYU devotional going to be the same kids who JP appeals to? Or are they two different demographics within the same age group?
( Going to be honest and admit that JP sends up all kinds of red flags for me. My dad is a huge fan, so out of curiosity I watched a bunch of his interviews and came away with a dirty taste in my mouth.)
ReTx, I’m not saying that the way to retain millennials is to subject them all to JP youtube videos with 2M views where he is warring with liberals and SJW’s. Not saying that all. I am saying that the principles and logic that JP is using to make religion relevant to millennials can be used within Mormonism. And yes, the people they could appeal are the same that would love EH’s talk. For example, me. If you’re stuck on JP, then toss it all out and only keep this part. “Teaching religious scripture (BOM, etc), metaphor, and foundational stories (like First Vision) in a meaningful way without sacrificing science and intellectualism.” That’s the aspect that I think ,Mormonism could learn from.
“Greg Prince says the truth claims are already off the table for millennials, and he doesn’t think it matters.”
If the first part of that statement is true, it’s hard for me to to see how it doesn’t matter for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. It’s truth claims are what distinguishes it from other Christian denominations. It’s the reason for it’s past successful growth. I think “The Church is True” is a difficult mantra for those who no longer think so.
There is an unprecedented amount of scrutiny on the Church’s faith claims now. It might not just be millennials who have doubts about the those claims, but it may be millennials who are less established in the culture and finding it easier to leave.
According to Dr. Prince, the truth claims card is off the table, and I agree. I would argue that the moral authority card is also gone for Millennials, or at least hanging by a thread. The Nov 2015 PoX did a lot to undermine the previously ironclad institutional authority of the Church, especially among the younger generations. A lot of other recent missteps by church leaders continue to erode what’s left of any moral authority faster than they can rebuild it.
Community is really all we have left, and that seems to be in jeopardy as long as Millennials don’t feel welcome in church, or don’t feel like it’s relevant to them.
I haven’t yet made up my mind about JP; some of his ideas are interesting, while others I find repugnant.
“Community is really all we have left, and that seems to be in jeopardy as long as Millennials don’t feel welcome in church, or don’t feel like it’s relevant to them.”
Sadly, this is pretty much true. And then the community is too often comprised of folks whose society amounts to the-church-is-true-shut-up-pay-y0ur-tithe-and-dress-the-way-you’re-told what’s the attraction in that?
Interesting post. Having worked with both millennial and the latest generation of young people, I think the truth claim is problematic for a couple of reasons:
1. Millennials know lots of people and institutions who claimed to be telling them the truth and then turned out to be lying (George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Trump, U.S. Government, Catholic Church, etc. ad nauseam). So this whole truth claim thing ends up working exactly the opposite for millennials that the church supposes it does. It makes them more skeptical, not more likely to believe. The church has never figured out that simply insisting louder or more forcefully that something is true doesn’t make it so. Millennials, more than any other group, as the OP notes, are highly attuned to B.S. And one nearly universal characteristic of people who are full of it is an insistence that their worldview is the true and correct one without presenting a shred of actual evidence. And the shaming of non-believers is just another nail in the coffin of the institution doing the shaming, as far as millennials are concerned.
2. Millennials also know that truth claims and moral authority have nothing to do with one another and they are not only skeptical of truth claims, but also don’t buy into moral authority so easily, even if they assume an institution might be telling the truth. E.g. say the church is true, Christ is at its head, all top leaders are inspired, etc. If that’s the case, it’s a kind of double blow to millennials. The church is true but it treats women as second class citizens? The church is true but it actively discriminates against LGBT people? The church is true but it held on to its racist doctrine for 150 years? So the church has really put itself in a double bind here and as a result, is hemorrhaging its moral authority, as Jack Hughes notes.
I’m not a huge fan of JP, but some of what he says about political correctness strikes a chord for me, though I don’t like his thoughts on gender and masculinity.
So I watched the first 15 minutes of the OT video (avoiding a huge work project…) and ended up surprising myself by absolutely agreeing with you on JP’s teaching methodology (if not all his conclusions) in this presentation. I’m a teacher, so I took notes on what he was specifically doing. Here’s what I came up with:
He’s appealing to intellectual curiosity about the biological/psychological brain and social dynamics. He used a wide variety of scholarship and experts unrelated to religion (Aristotle, modern understanding of brain dynamics, etc.). He deconstructed symbolism in terms of these modern/ancient scholars and understanding creating a wide variety of possible meanings. He seemed to be working toward religion being one aspect of a larger human ontology.
I can totally see why this appeals to millennials. It also appeals to GenX, Boomers, etc., which I happen to know because this is exactly how I teach at church and was a very popular/high-demand teacher. (So not so surprising really that I ended up agreeing with you.) It’s also why I am not allowed to have a teaching calling in my ward. The institutional church sees scholarship, experts, modern understanding as ‘secular’ and deeply threatening going toward apostasy. If it isn’t in the manual or taught at GC, it isn’t supposed to be in a lesson. My guess is that because scholars actually know more about these topics than the GAs, which creates a crisis of ‘obedience to authority.’ I was told that scholarship/outside experts confuse people and hurt testimonies.
So while yes, I’d love to see us move toward a teaching model that includes these elements, I can’t see it actually happening for a very, very long time. Right now we are going with the discussion model of course, which in my ward has become so predictable I can guess at what class members are going to say before they do (and am almost always right).
What good is Mormonism if the truth claims (Joseph Smith was a prophet, the Book of Mormon is a historical record, Jesus is the Savior, etc.) are untrue? The church becomes a social club.
I am not so sure that millennials can enter or remain within Mormonism unless they change their worldviews.
ReTx: “The institutional church sees scholarship, experts, modern understanding as ‘secular’ and deeply threatening going toward apostasy. If it isn’t in the manual or taught at GC, it isn’t supposed to be in a lesson.”
I cannot speak to the generalization in the first sentence, but the second quoted sentence has simply not been true in my ward when I was teaching the GD class for years. On the other hand, based on what I’ve heard second hand, it may have been true of a 16-year-old SS class in my ward. My guess from visiting a variety of wards, is that the Church just isn’t the same everywhere, despite claims and warm feelings to the contrary.
“I am not so sure that millennials can enter or remain within Mormonism unless they change their worldviews.”
This OldMan view is a good part of the reason millenials (and even some middle agers like me) don’t feel welcome in the church.
I do find it interesting that you would link the thoughts of Greg Prince, Eric Huntsman, and Jordan Peterson. I have a difficult time with Jordan Peterson, and it is definitely because of the appropriation of his thought that has gone on over the last two or three years by certain groups (Rise Above Movement (white supremacist) and incel and A Voice For Men (organizations that I would characterize as male chauvinist). Let me make something clear, I do not think that Jordan Peterson has “given rise” to any alt-right movement. However, he has definitely benefited from it. He has been an academic and a professor for over twenty-five years at oth Harvard and U of Toronto. His writings and thoughts are not new, and he has been publishing along the same lines in largely academic circles since he was a grad student. And yet, he has only risen to prominence–to the the level of a “public intellectual” since his positions on academic freedom were exploited by culture warriors. There is a reason he is now a best-selling author, and touring the world, selling tickets for his appearances at hundreds of dollars a piece–and filling civic centers. It isn’t because his thoughts are new, or any better developed than they were five years ago. [Caveat: I’m wary of anybody that writes and sells a book entitled “12 Rules for Life”; this smacks of Stephen Covey, et al. You aren’t going to get sophisticated thinking when it has to be dumbed down and reduced to people looking for Chicken Soup for the Soul. I’m being a bit harsh to make my point.] So if his thinking isn’t new, and his insights largely haven’t changed over the years, the question I have is whether his thinking is somehow prescient or timely because he is speaking in a very specific moment in time. Much of his cultural criticism, as opposed to his religious approach (which I believe is not particularly novel and may have been expressed better by other predecessors), taps into a certain ressentiment that is being felt by those who are wishing or reaching for “times past,” which I find remarkable to the extent that such a fundamental conservativism is appealing to Millennials generally, precisely because they are not old enough to have personal familiarity with a world that is any different from the only one they know. Doesn’t this suggest that a large segment of those who have brought him to prominence are simply looking for something more comforting, more soothing, more solid; and are rejecting any notions of pluralism as pure “moral relativism” and whatever he calls “cultural marxism.” His scapegoats are the academic humanities–literary criticism, cultural studies, critical theory, etc–which he believes are so perverted that they ought to be obliterated from campuses. And this coming from a free speech advocate? He’s too much to take for me, and the fact that he is building a following based on more “traditional values” and gender roles, with a kind of “deal with it” attitude, seems to go against what we understand of the Millennial generation. Likewise, his dismissive approach when he is engaged in confrontational dialogue (as opposed to friendly interviews) evinces less of a willingness to entertain the type of thoughtful approach that I believe either Greg Prince or Eric Huntsman would advocate.
As nearly as I can tell from the age-range Wikipedia claims is often included in the term “millennials,” I’ve observed a lot of them who do value truth claims and do feel welcome in the Church — many seem to feel more welcome than this old baby boomer. Many don’t. The generalizations are flying around here entirely too fast for me.
It may matter greatly which truth claims you’re talking about. It may also matter whatever you think “the church is true” means. Hint: it means a number of different things to different people and sometimes a number of different things to the same person.
Acknowledging, some “moral authority” need not include wholesale outsourcing of one’s own conscience. I wonder how much of the discontent with truth claims or moral authority is a function of all or nothing thinking and a lingering belief that any authority less than infallible is no authority at all.
Incidentally, even our “community” is not what it was in the days of working together to raise ward budget or building funds, or the days of wards and budgets large enough to both staff basic programs and have activities that brought members together in contexts in which they could get to know each other — the 3-hour block cannot serve that function at least until we turn at least one of those hours into a social hour! Maybe we don’t even want the kind of community we once had, so maybe its loss or abandonment is not a bad thing.
Back to the generalization problem — How much of this talk about what “millenials” think and care about amounts to telling them what they should think or care about? I think ReTx and Kristine have it right that there is no accuracy in lumping all millenials together in a group and purporting that you know what they think or care about simply because of their age — now ranging by some definitions from about 18 to nearly 40.
JR. You are correct. My comment paints with too broad a stroke. I have never experienced a ward like you describe, but I have heard they are out there.
I watched most of the JP Old Testament video at the link Churchistrue provided. I thought it was worth the time. I can see the appeal Churchistrue mentions.
Peterson’s comment at 21:35 jumped out at me: “One of the problems with the Soviet Union for example was their inability to correct errors. You see when you start out with an a priori hypothesis about what constitutes the truth, and that structures your life, it’s very difficult to make the kind of micro corrections that a state has to make on a continual basis in order to remain dynamic and fluid”
Interesting to see a criticism I’ve applied to the LDS church used to describe a significant problem in authoritarian regimes.
Peterson discusses an alternate view of the Bible – from taking it literally to reading it as a shorthand repository where mankind (particularly those of the Western tradition) used it to capture truths explaining our purpose – and then changed it over time to accommodate changes to their worldview. It is a pattern he advocates we should keep.
I suppose it would be a possible way for people to have their Bible and keep their atheism too. That seems to be the appeal Churchistrue thinks could help resolve LDS faith claims for doubters. I don’t know. I’d say why bother worrying about faith claims then. Seems science does a good job capturing a world view and accommodating changes. JP would probably point out that science doesn’t answer the “Why” part of mankind’s existence. But if we are making up the purpose it seems pointless in maintaining a belief in God.
MTodd’s comment kind of set me on a tangent. First, I don’t think Old Man’s comment was meant to chasten Millennials but simply and observation, so I don’t think MTodd’s response should have been directed at him (but I could be wrong — Old Man would know). But I’ve heard a lot about people not feeling comfortable in the church because of other member’s attitudes, and in particular with respect to truth claims.
I’ve got a friend I think highly of but who has filled his world with enough John Dehlin that he’s pretty much concluded the church is bunk. He’s commented in the past that he feels uncomfortable coming to church, but I get the impression that’s because he’s become somewhat bent on correcting everybody’s false beliefs. I see him sitting there with sort of an incredulous smirk after a teacher or a member of the class says something he finds ridiculous, and when he’s strained against his self-imposed leash enough, he’ll go ahead and let people know the things he simply can’t accept. People try to be accepting, but the problem is that he’s more bent on tearing down falsehoods than he is in sustaining any truths (ie., he has no faith to share), and it’s really hard to have any remaining common ground. He left a mini “Letter to a CES director” in the comments of Elder Cooks’ Face2face announcement. I’ve been out of town, so I don’t know if he’s still attending or if he’s quit, but I can’t imagine either of us seeing a point in that continuing. Did the ward’s small-mindedness drive him away?
My point is this: the premise of the church is its truth claims, and it’s lifeblood. Yes, you can find beauty in the church while having concluded it’s premise is false, but for the majority of the members, it’s the common faith that bonds them together. To suggest that the church members are simply naive and that the only way for the church to continue to grow is to make it a more exciting book club (or whatever) is a direct threat to what the most committed church members cherish most. Most of us come to church to strengthen our faith. Sure, there are a lot of things that can be corrected and alternative perspectives to share, and a lot of wards are open to that, but when you come to church saying Joseph wasn’t really a prophet, or that the Book of Mormon is simply inspired fiction, you’ve got to expect that the reaction of the average church member is going to be “so, what faith do we share?” Is there some common foundation? Do you have any faith to share? If not, and you’re simply critical of the church (coming from the perspective that it’s foundation is false), then yeah, you might not feel particularly welcome or accepted.
You can’t expected the average church member to accept you when all you want is to correct the annoyances in your book club or social society.
ugh. too many “it’s” when it should be “its”. apologies to the purists
Excellent article churchistrue. I’m a millenial and much of what you post resonates with me.
I’ve been working through a difficult faith crisis for a few years now . For me JP’s lectures have been very useful in helping me form a framework that allows me to find value in my religious experience even though I personally hold a more non literal view.
Martin,
I understand what you are saying. To some extent it makes sense. But being Mormon – particularly in Utah, with an extended and multigenerational Mormon family, isn’t just a matter of attending church when you believe and not going anymore when you don’t. In the ward I lived in till last year, I could count the number of non-member families in the ward boundaries on one hand. The kids schools- dominated by Mormons. Downtown shut down on Sundays. Everyone constantly sees you as Mormon or non-Mormon – regardless of your church attendance.
How should people who are part of the Mormon culture cope when they come to not believe but are still part of the culture?
I’m not saying the guy you described in your ward is doing it right, but it seems he has a need to be understood that is not being met. I have a family member who has recently gone through this and it’s been quite a traumatic process – especially when for a while I was the only one who would just listen and hear her out.
Dave C, yeah, traumatic process. I’m not claiming the guy in my ward is even doing it wrong, ’cause I don’t know how you do it right. As I say, I love the guy. But there really is a disconnect between believers and non-believers that’s going to be there. It’s not necessarily anybody’s fault. But to say “this is what’s wrong with the church and this is what you’ve got to do to get people to stay, starting with acknowledging the truth claims are bogus” is pretty much a non-starter. You cannot have a unity of the faith if you don’t share at least some common faith.
Martin. The idea that there has to be a common faith. I agree. But I think it’s there. Your rhetorical question what faith could we possibly share? If your faith is that Joseph was told by God to start his exclusively true church and translate an actual ancient record as scripture, and someone else doesn’t have that faith, you wonder how could you possibly share a worship experience? I consider that faith you’re expressing more of a microbelief. The bigger, broader belief might be something like “I’m a child of God. I should treat myself like I have divinity in me, and I should treat you like you have divinity in you. We should work together to create a heaven on Earth. The restoration through Joseph Smith gave us a structured system that I believe is the best way for us to do that.” That’s a pretty meaty, tangible faith that we could share. No? This is intellectually bullet proof, and I think if we add in the moral goodness Eric Huntsman is calling us to, then we have something viable that will appeal to the doubter. Can the doubter engage that way? Can the orthodox give the doubter the space to do that, without constantly shoving his face in the microbelief literal stuff?
ReTx. I’m not a Jordan Peterson apologist. I believe he’s saying things to piss off certain segments (why? for controversy which drives clicks and $$). I don’ deny that. But thanks for giving him a chance with that video. Keep watching. It gets even better. 🙂 When he defines Christian redemption and the meaning that comes with committing yourself to a Zion type community effort is what is super inspiring to me. That’s about the 36-44 minute range.
I have an alternative list of 3 things a church ought to provide: 1) Worship (this is different from moral authority, it is more about praise, awe, reverence, and transformation) 2) Education (this is different from truth claims) 3) Service opportunities (similar to community, but also looks outward to wider community). I get all three of these from my adopted Methodist church.
Phil, I really appreciate your list. I often find Worship when I substitute as organist in various Catholic and Protestant churches. I sometimes, but rarely, find it fully in regular LDS church meetings or temple “worship”, but the reverence and transformation part of it is there when I can shut out the distractions. (Some have asked me how I deal with the “false doctrine” I hear at other churches. I respond that I can ignore it there quite as well as I can ignore it in the LDS church. 🙂 ) I have found Education in some LDS sacrament meetings and Sunday School classes (never in priesthood meeting that I can recall); it depends very greatly on the speakers/teacher and what local leaders will allow them to do. There are many LDS service opportunities including opportunities to serve a wider community, though in my limited experience, such wider service is significantly hampered by habit and by exhaustion from too many demands as a result of too small congregations. Yours is a great list — well worth keeping in mind whether fostered by others in my ward or not.
Phil, I like your list. In the way of education, I’ve been wondering about itinerant TED-type speakers for Sacrament Meetings? These would be high-quality talks about important contemporary ecclesiastical issues, not your standard High-Councilman talk. They would be presented by good speakers on a subject he or she is knowledgeable about.
Also, I would like to have the Church place a much higher priority on service. To do this, they would have to free up member time, by abolishing some non-service programs and doing away with make work positions. A greater emphasis on the living, and a reduced emphasis on work for the dead, would encourage younger members to be more engaged with their religion, and give them an excellent reason to stay. We need to give younger members better reasons to stay, and service certainly has that potential.
@Martin, why should I not find OldMan’s comment that I need “to change my views” unwelcoming?
Churches are failing at a rapid rate for a very simple reason: THE JIG IS UP! They are trying to defend the indefensible. The myth of religion has held control of the masses from the pulpit for centuries, but now parishioners can fact check the clergy and the doctrine from the pews, thanks to the internet and cell towers. Let it go the way of Greek mythology—to it’s grave. There is no need for a religious backdrop, or fairy tale, to live a moral life.
Phil – I really, really like your three items. It is exactly how I feel, but have never quite managed to articulate quite so well, and I am totally going to steal for personal use. I’ve never been in a ward that did 1 & 2 well (or at all). My ward is pretty great at 3 already, both within the ward and getting out into our community.
Churchistrue, your response is a perfect example of what I’m talking about. Why do you get to select which of my beliefs are micro-beliefs and which are essential? You may certainly do that with yourself, as your reconstruct your faith, but me? Your fellow Mormons? You decide that the idea that God re-opened the heavens, called a prophet, and restored priesthood authority is bogus, so you get to decide those things aren’t important to me, in the very church that claims those things as its foundation? That’s not to say we can’t worship together. I could worship with a Muslim as well. We have a lot of views in common — he’d even acknowledge Jesus as a prophet. But if I came into the mosque with the idea that Islam had a lot of value and good influence over a lot of people, if only they could recognize that Muhammed was a philosopher-conqueror rather than a prophet… well, I don’t think we’d really be worshipping together would we? Whose fault would it be that I didn’t feel welcome?
I realize a lot of people have concluded the church isn’t what it claims to be. But to suggest that consequently the church ought to change into something ecumenical so that everybody feels welcome seems presumptuous. And to say that doing so is “intellectually bullet-proof” sounds pretty arrogant.
From a practical perspective, if you convinced all the true believers that their belief in Joseph Smith and a historical BOM is bogus, I don’t think you’d have much of a church left to reform.
From reading Yana Riess I understand we have activity rates in the low 30%s now, so of 16m we have 5m active, the activity rate among millenials is in the low 20%s so of 16m we would have 3.5m active.
I think Huntsman is the most likely of those quoted to influence the bretheren. His list if implemented would go a long way.
be aware of all forms of racism and stamp them all out
end sexism and gender inequality priesthood for women.
show empathy and love for doubters or Exmormons
love more LOUDLY and be more understanding of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters
be more aware and understanding of those with mental health issues
I would just treat LGBTQ members equally, as I believe Christ would. The last conference emphasized Christlike love much more so could be moving us toward the above.
I think the encouragement, and recognition of outside service. I like spontaneous service v organised by church service.
From my perspective, which I readily acknowledge might be mine alone, there is a behavior and/or a tribal phenomena within the Mormon Church – and woven throughout it’s culture – which I think undermines the appeal of the organization and its’ beliefs; every bit as much as questions regarding it’s absolute truthfulness and what is more factual (and less mythological) about it’s founding history. For lack of a better term I’ve given this behavior the nickname of TAPM; “The Arrogant Presumption of Mormonism”. Now, before I express my feelings about TPAM – I feel it’s a must for me to declare that NOT ALL LDS MEMBERS display or exhibit this distasteful trait. In fact, many are “the salt of the earth” people – whom I love with all of my heart.
However, there clearly is more than enough TAPM to go around, both in public settings, as well as in private – causing many people like me (members and non-members alike) to run away as fast as humanly possible from wasting our God given time in feeding or responding to anyone using TAPM. To be concise, TABM can readily be identified when any of the following statements (or terms) are used:
The LDS Church is the ONLY……
We’ve FORESEEN the future and know precisely what is unfolding in our day…..
ONLY A SMALL portion of humanity will embrace Christ’s example and teachings…..AND IT IS US!
The ONLY WAY to achieve TRUE HAPPINESS is through the LDS Church…..
Because WE KNOW…..WE MUST…..
LDS Members ARE CHOSEN ABOVE OTHERS…..
The LDS Church HAS A GREATER ABUNDANCE OF THE SPIRIT…..
The LDS Church encompasses ALL TRUTH…..
LDS Church Doctrine and Teachings ARE BETTER THAN…..
LDS Church Members ARE MORE MORAL THAN….
Study ONLY LDS SOURCES OF RESEARCH…..
Feelings ARE GREATER THAN facts…..
And, on and on it goes……Oh, and generally when TAPM is deployed it’s accompanied by a hurricane of scriptural references and “walls of text” which CLEARLY shows the other person WHY THEIR POSITION IS SO WRONG! In my view, evidence of TAPM can be identified in a number of sentences and paragraphs which are integrated into our discussion today.
Arrogance, Condescension, Self-Righteousness, and “Holier than Thou” Attitudes are not (and have never been) very appealing; whether you’re a Millenial or a Legacy Member of the LDS Church. Millenials see through this kind of behaviour in a nano-second; and either clam up, walk away or through it right back in your face. I certainly – no longer- view Christ’s teachings and living example through this kind of lense………………..
Hmm. This is all actually really interesting. I left the church because I stopped believing literally in its truth claims, although I still find value in a metaphorical approach that seems to be similar to what you’re explaining with JP. I tried to make being a member with that perspective work, but, for me at least, the church is not set up to be a good social club for people who think that way. I’ve found that religions that de-emphasize literal truth claims (i.e. the kind of groups I’m comfortable in now) tend to suffer in terms of membership counts (think Episcopal church or C of C) because most people are drawn to religion exactly for its truth claims. If JP is managing to create a significant following, I would say it’s at least useful to look at what exactly he’s doing to achieve that success, even if some of his views aren’t that great.
The TABM totally makes me laugh and I struggle with it too. The challenge is that while it is an egotistical turn-off to some of us, the certainty aspect is what attracts other people. Certainty is a powerful agent. In so many ways it is what our missionaries are selling. Its kind of the center of everything, especially the mormon testimony. And I have seen a lot of good done and lives change because of it.
At the same time, uncertainty is where I find God. Faith for me is in the seeking not the finding.
You say the church has three cards to play: truth, moral authority and community. And that truth is already off the table for millennials.
For most of us millenials, moral authority is off the table too. The church is so far behind the curve when it comes to morals that its never going to catch up. For the church to catch up, it would need to: 1) allow gay marriage in the temple, 2) give woman the priesthood and call woman into positions from bishop up to apostle, 3) do something environmental. And that’s just to catch up with us, not to get ahead.
Which leaves community as the only card that the church can play to hold onto millenials (or to get millenials back). Its an effective tool. I miss some of the community aspects. I have many friends who only go for the community aspects.
Community would be much more effective if the church ditched trying to do truth and moral authority.
Cody, I appreciate your candor.
This is not meant to be pedantic, I hope the simple example illustrates the gargantuan chasm between literal believers and those who don’t believe literally, but who simply want to find meaning and community in Mormonism. When drinking Red Bull does NOT disqualify you from attending one of life’s most unifying and joyous events, but drinking tea does…?? Young people are not that stupid. You either must believe in a jokester God who is in fact pedantic in the rules he sets forth… or you scratch your head and say the church needs a massive reboot culturally, and until then I’m not going to be a part of an organization that would disqualify me from attending weddings over something so trivial… and healthy.
If I’m expected to obey as if Mormon church leaders are infallible they jolly well better be infallible.
Nancy: I absolutely LOVE your comment. Very well done, my friend. Long, slow steady clapping!! (And laughing of course!!)
Jared getting no breaks from the peanut gallery here.
He’s contributed 2 posts in which he’s basically just quoted scripture, yet his posts have been down-voted 94-40.
Y’all hate the scriptures or what? Can someone explain?
Wonder boy.
Not quite sure regarding your reference to the peanut gallery.
In relation to Jared there is a long and interesting history regarding his use of scriptures.
I don’t hate them, but I take exception to how they are used sometimes. Scriptures can be used to justify nearly every type of human behaviour. Here are some examples I pulled from the internet just now.
1. God himself will kill tens of thousands if it pleases him: 1st Samuel 6:19 in the King James Version: “And he smote the men of Beth-shemesh, because they had looked into the ark of the LORD, even he smote of the people fifty thousand and threescore and ten men (50,070)”. Kill 50 000 men for looking at something?
2. You can kill a woman if she seizes a man’s private parts without his permission: Deuteronomy 25:11-1: If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.
3. Perversity and human trafficking condoned: “Slaves, be subject to your masters with all reverence, not only to those who are good and equitable but also to those who are perverse.” (1 Peter 2:18)
4. Sex slavery condoned: “When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again.”
Exodus 21: 7-8
5. Divorce akin to debauchery: “Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.” (Luke 16:18)
6. Cannibalism: “And the king said unto her, What aileth thee? And she answered, This woman said unto me, Give thy son, that we may eat him to day, and we will eat my son to morrow. So we boiled my son, and did eat him: and I said unto her on the next day, Give thy son, that we may eat him: and she hath hid her son….” (II Kings 6:28-29)
7. If your genitals have been damaged, stay out of church: “He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord.”(Deuteronomy 23:1)
8. Incest and getting drunk with dad is no problem if the world is running thin on suitable DNA donors: And the elder said to the younger Our father is old, and there is no man left on the earth, to come in unto us after the manner of the whole earth. Come, let us make him drunk with wine, and let us lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father. And they made their father drink wine that night: and the elder went in and lay with her father: but he perceived not neither when his daughter lay down, nor when she rose up. And the next day the elder said to the younger: Behold I lay last night with my father, let us make him drink wine also to night, and thou shalt lie with him, that we may save seed of our father. They made their father drink wine that night also, and the younger daughter went in, and lay with him: and neither then did he perceive when she lay down, nor when she rose up. So the two daughters of Lot were with child by their father. [Genesis 19:31-36]
9. Looking at a woman with desire is akin to adultery: “But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.” (Matthew 5:28)
10. But incestuous rape is cool: And when she had presented him the meat, he took hold of her, and said: Come lie with me, my sister. She answered him: Do not so, my brother, do not force me: for no such thing must be done in Israel. Do not thou this folly. [II Kings 13:8-12] But he would not hearken to her prayers, but being stronger overpowered her and lay with her. [II Kings 13:14]
11. Pray in private, and if you do so in church, do so quietly: Matt 6:5 “And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others.”
12. If you offend God he will kill you: “And Er, Judah’s firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him. And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother’s wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother. And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother’s wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother. And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also.” (Genesis 38:7-10)
13. God smites women, children and often animals with equal gusto, he seems to equal evil and wrong doing by association, rather than by being guilty of the personal, individual act: “Behold with a great plague will the LORD smite thy people and thy children, and thy wives, and all thy goods: And thou shalt have great sickness by disease of thy bowels, until thy bowels fall out by reason of the sickness day by day.” (II Chronicles 21:14-15)
14. Rev 21: 8 “liars–their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.” Eternal damnation for lying? In South Africa murderers and rapists often get released for good behaviur, lying is politics.
Gregory Prince is disingenuous. He is just like other modern day LDS scholars who think that their scholarship trumps revelation.. He states that the Book of Mormon is merely an allegory and the characters in it are fictitious. He obviously believes that the church is man made. He needs to do himself a favor and ask to have his name removed from the records of the church. What we are seeing is a separation of the wheat from the Tares. He and others like him malign the prophets.
Millennials are not a monolith.