What if there was an organization whose main purpose was to go out into the world and draw people away from the faith of their fathers, or in other words, create a faith crisis in them? Well guess what? There is, and it is the Mormon Church (LDS). The stated purpose of missionary work is to bring people unto Christ. But not just any Christ, it must be the LDS-approved Christ. So whether you are Muslim, Hindu, Christian, or any other religion, you must go through a faith crisis, reject the faith you grew up with,, and then join the LDS Church in order to be saved. [1] It appears that a faith crisis is only bad if the faith in crisis is LDS. If you are a Mormon missionary and cause a faith crisis in a 20-year-old guy that is still living with his family, and as a result he leaves his Catholic faith and is baptized in the LDS church, becoming estranged from his family, that is considered a great story of faith to share at your missionary homecoming. You get bonus points if he eventually marries in the temple, excluding his extended family from the ceremony. That would be General Conference-level story material about faith and commitment!
If you share the gospel with your elderly neighbors and they leave their Baptist church due to a faith crises, good news! , The fact that it worries their grown children and grandchildren that their parents have been brainwashed is not your concern.
Why is a faith crisis only a concern if it is your faith, but is the desired outcome of our missionary program, and the sole purpose of sharing the gospel? Every one of my 38 baptisms in Chile were Catholic, at various stages of activity. My whole job as a missionary in a Catholic country was to induce a faith crisis in these people, and then provide the answer to that crisis. We had lessons that caused doubt about the authority of the Priest to do a baptism. Was their baptism valid? If not, were they destined to hell? Should they doubt their doubts as Mormons are taught to do? No! We as missionaries encouraged these doubts, and then rushed in with all the answers.
It appears that a faith crisis is only bad for .02% of the world population (Mormons of record), but for the 99.98% of the world a faith crisis is the stated goal of the Church, which is to convert everybody, or at least give them the chance.
Putting on my TBM hat, I would say that since they did not have faith in the true God/Christ (which Mormons have the corner on), then the faith was false, and there was no real crisis, just a redirection of misplaced faith.
What are your thoughts on the Church purposely causing a faith crisis in other people?
[1] the one exception I can think of is for an atheist. Since they don’t believe an any type of God, there would be no “faith crisis” per se if they converted
Wheat & Tares 
If a “faith crisis” is followed by transformation through Holy Ghost–then I’d say that’s a good faith crisis.
@BBill As I grow older and spent more time outside of Mormonism, I have more and more come to see why so many view Mormonism with such contempt. And this is certainly one of the reasons. We are not the only church with a program to convert others to our faith, but we and the Jehovah’s Witnesses are by far the most aggressive and unlike mainline Protestant churches, the few that don’t respect the baptisms of other denominations. That wasn’t always the case, I think that alliance came about in the 60s and of course, some Baptist churches had a pretty aggressive Mormon conversion campaign back about 35 years ago, but that seemed to have died out. So the LDS church seems more and more like an anomaly.
There are ways of “selling” faith that don’t involve tearing down others. And some church presidents like Hinckley were much better and trying to take the tact that missionaries should “add” to a non-members faith, not attack it, but that seemed the exception more than the rule.
Actually, it looks like the National Council of Churches in Christ was established in 1950. I think from that point forward, the denominations that belonged to the NCCC stopped proselytizing against other sister denominations within the NCCC (United Methodist, Baptist, Episcopalians, etc..) and started to work together more and more. So you stopped having the kind of tension and bad blood that develops when Mormons are always trying to induce faith crises in others. I suspect the LDS church will probably never join the NCCC, but I could see sometime in the future that it might stop being so aggressive at tearing down the faith of others with “playing church” type of comments.
Some of the selling points we used as missionaries:
We have unpaid clergy.
Our tithes go to help the poor.
We have scripture that has not been unadulterated by scribes and by “man”
We are pro-Women with oldest and largest women organization
We do not have the sex abuse cases like the Catholics
We are the only ones that truly understand the nature of the Godhead.
We believe in the steps of repentance, especially saying “I am sorry”
JS being a polygamist is an anti-Mormon lie.
We have a temple ceremony that never changes.
We have a prophet and apostles that would never make up or exaggerate a story.
Our doctrine is unchangeable and eternal.
We have the the whole un-whitewashed truth !
Once you are on “our” side and you not have a faith crisis.
Some would say that the covenant path is paved with good intentions.
I recall the exact moment the observation of the OP hit me a few years ago. My 2nd oldest child’s missionary farewell had ended earlier in the day, and my non-practicing Muslim son in law said quietly to me “how arrogant to assume that other people have to join your particular religion to find God.” He also pointed out that the doctrine of happy eternal families – the headline doctrine for Mormons that they claim to have a monopoly on – is in fact a fairly universal belief.
My single biggest regret as a post mormon is my mission. I baptized something like 45 people in Guatemala in the early 90s. I remember causing marital strife and conflict between parents and children. And taking 10% of income from those impoverished people (just wrapping up a crushing civil war)! Not to mention spending two entire years of my life doing it.
The older I get, the more annoyed I am with missionary work. That might be a symptom of advertising fatigue. Everyone wants to change your mind and create a demand so they can sell you something. Missionary work has a lot in common with advertising. Create a need so you can fill it!
I had a mission companion who had a story like in the OP. She met the missionaries and joined the Church, which caused huge angst in her family, which had been Catholic for well over a thousand years (she’s European). It resulted in estrangement, and yes, she shut her parents out of her wedding. Though they did have a ring ceremony outside the temple. The whole family eventually reconciled, but there were so many years of pain and angst for all of them.
I’ve heard that if a person wants to convert to Judaism, he has to be discouraged from converting three times. Three times, the Jews try to talk a potential convert out of joining them. If he/she insists, then he can join. Imagine if the LDS church did that. Instead, we rush them to baptism as soon as we can schedule it.
10ac – those were interesting comments about the NCCC. I didn’t know any of that.
The church and church culture can deal it but they can’t take it. I remember the Southern Baptist Convention coming through Utah to find converts for their religion. Some Mormons did indeed convert and suffered ostracism and shame from their families for so doing.
I never considered this concept, probably because I have physically out of the church since shortly after returning from my mission and had my name removed from the records about five years ago. But you raise an excellent point. Thanks for the perspective Bishop Bill and all of you that commented. You are so correct.
What LDS commonly refer to as faith crisis, is really a belief crisis, but most folks are unable to differentiate between faith and belief.
Most folks I know who have distanced themselves from the Restored Church tend to move towards agnosticism, atheism, nihilism. Very few post-Latter-Day Saints migrate to an alternative Christianity. So the analogy of interfaith transition isn’t really valid.
The greatest difference between faith and belief is that belief is propositional: it relies on a kind of syllogistic logic—whereas, faith doesn’t. Faith relies on hope. Belief does not hope, it thinks it knows. Discern.
Unfortunately, the institution that administers the Restored Church seems to be fixated on loyalty to belief systems, so the error is sewn into the fabric of the LDS experience. It’s a form of institutional corruption.
We can move from faith, to ordinance, to covenant, without a single belief system.
Either you believe the following or you don’t, and if you do you can justify positive feelings about non-Mormons converting to Mormonism and negative about Mormons converting to non-Mormon religion:
1. The COJCOLDS is the Lord’s one true Church
2. The authority to act in God’s name is via the M Priesthood restored by Peter, James, and John and continues to this day (RMN holds all the keys).
It’s not that complicated. I once believed #1 and #2 above and that’s how I justified my thoughts about non-LDS Christians. I now don’t believe those things and I totally understand how the rest of the Christian world holds Mormons in contempt. I don’t blame either side…it all depends on whether or not you believe #1 and #2 above.
@Travis What research are you citing for your statement that most people transition out of Mormonism to atheism? In the people I know, I see it more like 50/50 going to other Christian faiths vs atheism. So curious for the basis for your statement.
@10ac,
I have no hard data on this. Only experience first-hand from personal friends and family members, and from my friends who are involved with some of the post-LDS spaces (Backyard Professor, Bill Reel, RFM, etc.). My experience is based outside of Utah and the mormon territorial corridor. It seems that the shelf-breaking issues are resolved by exiting organized religion altogether, rather than by finding an alternate Christianity.
So what does this mean then?
I guess Christ was anti-family.
Travis,
I think faith can start with belief. But then it must migrate to a certain degree of knowing. And from there it becomes a dance between belief and knowing which is where faith lives, IMO.
Chet,
“Some would say that the covenant path is paved with good intentions.”
It may look that way from a distance–but in reality it can only be traversed by keeping the covenants made along the way.
I’m with Janey re missionary work.
To wit, I saw two sister missionaries at the Acropolis in Athens on Friday. I felt like I should say hi but I chose not to. I really had nothing to say to them. Because I no longer agree with what they are doing.
This reminded me of an evangelical couple we taught in my first area in Wyoming. They were what we used to unflatteringly call ‘eternal investigators’. Missionaries loved going round there and they loved the missionaries visiting. They were genuinely lovely, Christian people. With their characteristic openness they enjoyed having us round to do “bible study”. We of course wanted to convert them, likely fuelled in part by a misguided love for them. I remember one evening where my trainer and I decided that this was the evening where we would break down their barriers and get them to commit. I literally had one of the most intensive and exhausting evenings of my mission, challenging, testifying, arguing…we threw the kitchen sink at it. I remember a particularly uncomfortable part when the wife was almost in tears, shaking her head and saying “No, no, no” when we were trying to commit her to baptism. It is a testament to their good grace that they still had us back after that evening for bible study, as they always regarded the missionaries as friends.
When my next companion came along he basically decided that they were not worth our time anymore because they were not “progressing”. So I had a bit of a difficult conversation telling them we were not coming round anymore and that was that. So much for friendship.
Looking back the whole thing makes my skin crawl. If I could get back in touch with anyone from my mission and apologise, it would be them.
Should be .2%, not .02%. With 16mm members worldwide, in a random group of 1,000 people, approximately 2 would be LDS.
Another thing that seems ugly to me is how we purposely exclude (non-member etc ) family from marriage ceremonies. The non-member parents of the bride and/ or groom have to sit outside while their sons or daughters get married.
The marriage ceremony itself isn’t much different than civil ceremonies. I’ve wondered, why not have a room inside the temple where both sides of the family— member and non member can gather to witness the marriage? It is far different than the endowment.
(And, just maybe it could be a useful tool for recruiting more members?)
Chadwick, that’s unfortunate. It’s possible to do some good things as a missionary that even you might agree with. Some are simply interested in helping people in their spiritual lives any way they can, without high pressure sales tactics and the like. That was my approach for the second half of my mission.
@Jack,
You are wrong about faith and belief. To conflate faith and belief is an error that pollutes New World Christian consciousness. It’s an intellectual immaturity. It infantilizes the congregation. Conflating faith and belief is error, and it harms folks inside and outside the Restored Church. Harvard Religion Professor W. Cantwell Smith wrote a text entitled “Faith and Belief” (Princeton, 1979), which tackles the topic in depth—linguistically, the English language conflation of faith and belief can be traced to a centuries-old historical context.
Beliefs derive from man, not from God. Belief systems are used by institutions to manipulate a given outcome, and they have no place in the Restored Church. We can move from faith to ordinance to covenant without a single contrived belief system.
Travis,
I think we might be talking past each other–and it’s probably because I didn’t read your previous comment carefully enough. I’m not talking about a belief system per se. I’m talking about believing the word — hearing it and believing it for its own sake as per Alma 32 — and then working toward knowledge through experience. And within the gap between belief and knowledge is where we exercise faith.
Yours is a very narrow view of the search for truth and finding faith. Truth-seekers are not fearful of truth. I have been handed all sorts of books and advice from people of other faiths and beliefs and can easily sift out truth from falsehood…and there is truth in just about everything, even evil. In fact, I was just asked the other day, “Do you believe the LDS Church is the sole repository of truth?” I said, of course not. Truth is found everywhere. But that wasn’t the real question, was it? I was being asked about my faith and the Gospel I know in my heart and mind to be “true.” The only faith crises that exist are the ones among people who really don’t want to know the truth.
Travis, I don’t understand, and you don’t illustrate, the difference you make between belief and faith. You write that beliefs derive from man, so perhaps believing is wrong or at least is insufficient. But–
(a) John the Baptist: “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and BELIEVE the gospel.” (Mark 1:15)
(b) Jesus to the ruler of the synagogue: “Be not afraid, only BELIEVE.” (Mark 5:36)
(c) Jesus to the father of the afflicted child: “If thou canst BELIEVE, all things are possible to him that believeth.” (Mark 9:23)
(d) Jesus to some people wondering what they needed to do: “This is the work of God, that ye BELIEVE on him whom he hath sent.” (John 6:29)
(e) Paul and Silas to the jailer who asked what he needed to do to be saved: “And they said, BELIEVE on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.” (Acts 16:31)
One can argue that it is belief that matters, even more than faith, as the Lord told Joseph Smith: “And they who have not faith to do these things [i.e., great miracles], but believe in me, have power to become my sons.” (D&C 42:52) Exercising the power to become the sons (and daughters) of God takes us back of John 1, and it takes us right back to belief: “But as many as received him [Christ], to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that BELIEVE on his name.” (John 1:12)
You write that “belief systems are used by institutions to manipulate a given outcome, and they have no place in the Restored Church.” I think that both the ancient and restored Church called for people to believe, so I don’t understand your point. You also write that “we can move from faith to ordinance to covenant without a single contrived belief system.” Does this mean that belief is unnecessary, and that faith is what matters? Well, that seems contrary to what the scriptures teach. I am not saying that the terms belief and faith are interchangeable–they are often used interchangeably, but there is a difference. But to trash belief and to champion faith seems error, when Jesus taught us to believe, and when He taught that not all would have faith to do great works, but those who believed could become sons of God, which we naturally mean to become joint heirs with Christ. As Jesus taught Nicodemus: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” Belief is what gets us to everlasting life, at least in Jesus’ parlance. Why should we reject belief today? I don’t understand the argument.
@Georgis,
As I earlier mentioned, the conflation of faith and belief is a consequence of English language use, which can traced to a historical intersection. See “Faith and Belief” by W. Cantwell Smith (Princeton, 1979) for a 200 page exposition on the subject. Any English-language scriptures will transpose both “faith” and “belief” at random intervals; this is a condition of the English language that careful readers are aware of. It means that we can read conflated and transposition of words, as when reading scriptures, and discern whether the linguistic cognition falls to the accurate typology of faith, or belief. Based on your response, I understand this may be a challenging concept to follow, so I encourage you to study it out, read Smith’s text, and approach it as meat rather than milk.
yourfoodallergy
Yes agreed. We absolutely have more in common than not. When I walked by them they also had their heads down looking at their phones. So I chose not to disturb them. That image was so jarring to me, serving a mission when cell phones were not much of a thing, had they made eye contact, I may have said hello.
I’ve seen the missionaries at the park where I ride by bike sometimes, and I’ve thought about saying hi, but I haven’t. I know by experience that they are probably bored to death, but some missionaries are really great to chat with and others are really not. I’m a little unsure what to do with them now that they are even younger with worse social skills. Plus, I’m busy. When they hit me up to come to the house and “give a message,” I would literally rather fight snakes in the alley (a real thing here) than endure that torture.
Angela C’s comment resonates with me. Several months ago, we received the dreaded “Can we give you a message?” text from the missionaries in my area. Luckily, it was a text instead of a call, so I was able to intervene before my wife could respond with a yes. My wife really didn’t want to agree to “hear the message”, but felt like she had to (a common problem for her). My wife and I both served as missionaries, so we both knew what “a message” from the missionaries really means. My wife was easily persuaded to just not respond to the text after I reminded her that “hearing a message” was likely going to mean a hard push to get referrals out of us and that we really don’t know anyone who we’d be remotely comfortable referring to the missionaries right now. I’d honestly be fine with having missionaries over to introduce themselves and chat. I’m even totally fine with them *briefly and without pressure* asking if we know anyone they should contact. I’m not fine with sitting through an hour-long (or half-hour long) missionary presentation intended to make me “feel the Spirit” that will ultimately culminate in a high pressure “invitation” to ask X number of my friends within Y number of weeks to meet with the missionaries. No, thank you.
Also in the last few months, my wife and I decided to drive over to Temple Square one weekend to see the spring flowers. It’s a bit of a drive, so we don’t go there too often, and unfortunately I forgot all about the construction going on there to renovate the temple, so the views of the flowers weren’t as nice as we’d originally hoped. In any case, we ended up walking up to the roof garden on top of the Conference Center. And…the missionaries decided to approach us. It doesn’t seem like a middle aged man in good health should have anything to fear from two petite 19-year-old young women, but I was dreading being asked for referrals and having to find the right words to politely decline (and possible decline multiple times if the missionaries amped up the pressure and persisted with multiple “invitations”). The encounter actually turned out to be quite pleasant. We had a nice chat for 10-15 minutes, and I was very relieved that these missionaries never asked for a referral at all. I did volunteer very early on in the conversation that we had one child at BYU, and one on a mission, so maybe they figured that someone in that position would have already provided any referrals they might have?
Having a child currently serving a mission does make me feel somewhat guilty about my own feelings about missionary work. In reality, I think the only referral I could possibly offer today is if someone point blank asked me how they could learn more about the Church. Sure, if I had a request like that, I’d point them to various ways they could do that, including the missionaries. Other than that, though, I’m just too ashamed of a number of things about the Church to have any desire or willingness to make any attempt to introduce the Church to anyone else. Those things include: the Church’s stance on LGBTQ issues, the Church’s treatment of women, the Church’s refusal to acknowledge mistakes of Church leaders past and present (the Church’s current stance is, for all intents and purposes, prophetic infallibility/idolatry), the Church’s refusal to be more open about historical issues and truth claims (yes, there have been steps taken in this area, but not nearly enough) and to allow for the open expression of more nuanced beliefs, the Church’s focus on its prophets instead of Christ, etc. I am still able to make the Church work for me personally because I’m a “lifer”–I know the Church inside and out and can take the parts that are Christlike and uplift me while I ignore/reject the parts that I believe are false or evil, but I really can’t currently bring myself to recommend the Church to an outsider given all of these issues.
I had too much more to say on this topic, so I wrote an entire separate OP on it–or an expanded version of this topic–that will go up tomorrow.
So I’m now Angela’s Muse?
When I run into missionaries in an airport or train station, and I have the time, I will offer to buy them a meal. A couple of weeks ago I intersected with a large group on the Mall in DC; however, I was on my way back to my office and didn’t have time to offer lunch at the nearby food trucks so I kept walking.
I once saw a missionary alone in an airport and offered to buy him lunch. He had already eaten and was connecting to a mission somewhere in Africa. Instead, I offered my phone if he wanted to make some calls before he left America (this was before the phone change). He took my phone and walked over for some privacy for about 20 minutes. Later I got a very nice text from his mother thanking me profusely for providing him the chance to call home before his flight. Apparently he needed that reassurance from home.