By which I mean still active in the LDS Church and attending their local unit? And the answer is: a few. Less than there used to be. Fewer than last year, and there will be fewer still next year. There is nothing to suggest the Church as an institution will reverse its course of retrenchment and moral regression. Nor is the leadership doing much to counter the infiltration of radicalized conservatism into the thinking, practice, and behavior of the average Trump-loving Mormon in the pews. So the few progressive Mormons that are left don’t really have much hope that things might get better. If they are still active in the Church it is because of family ties or because they are just stubborn. It’s like watching your favorite sports team get worse every year. At some point, most fans lose hope and lose interest.
Politics isn’t my favorite topic to post on. But with US presidential election campaigning (which now largely consists of name-calling and insults) dominating the news, and with political ideology now so intertwined with conservative religion, including the LDS Church, it just has to be addressed from time to time.
The biggest mystery of the current political alignment is how Donald Trump has continued to retain the political allegiance of so many conservative Evangelicals and Mormons. Nothing highlights the puzzle quite as starkly as the recent Atlantic piece, “Trump’s Evangelical Supporters Just Lost Their Best Excuse,” by Peter Wehner. In the context of the article, everything that is said about Evangelicals applies directly to Mormons.
The central issue discussed is abortion policy, in particular Trump’s predictable pivot from opposing abortion to now either wanting to leave it to the states to decide or, as noted in the article, more or less supporting it. It’s not just Evangelicals who have used the conservative position on abortion to justify supporting Trump — Mormons do it, too. I have had members of my own ward use that exact rationale in conversations with me.
Here’s a short paragraph from the article:
But the pro-life justification for supporting Trump has just collapsed. Trump, who described himself as “strongly pro-choice” in the 1990s … has returned to his socially liberal ways. “My Administration will be great for women and their reproductive rights,” he recently declared on Truth Social. Kamala Harris couldn’t have stated it any more emphatically.
This should not be a surprise. Trump does not maintain a fixed heading; he follows a path of least resistance or maximum short-term personal gain. Or, as the article puts it, “This is not a surprise. Betrayal is a core character trait of Trump’s.”
About 75% of White Protestant Evangelicals voted for Trump in 2020. You can check the Mormon percentages by looking at a 2021 Jana Reiss article at RNS: 80% of Mormons over 40 voted for Trump, while 42% of Mormons under 40 voted for Trump. Other sources put overall Mormon support for Trump above 70%, roughly equivalent to Evangelical support. The puzzle for us, of course, is not why most Mormons vote for Trump. It’s why *any* Mormon votes for Trump. Here’s the article’s damning summary:
And how can those who profess to be followers of Jesus cast a ballot for this candidate [Trump], once the excuse of casting a pro-life vote is gone? For a convicted felon and a pathological liar, a man who has peddled racist conspiracy theories, cozied up to the world’s worst dictators, blackmailed an American ally, invited a hostile foreign power to interfere in American elections, defamed POWs and the war dead, mocked people with handicaps, and encouraged political violence? How can they continue to stand in solidarity with a person who has threatened prosecutors, judges, and the families of judges; who attempted to overthrow an election; who assembled a violent mob and directed it to march on the Capitol; and who encouraged the mob to hang his vice president?
While that’s the big puzzle of the article — why so many Evangelicals (and, by analogy, Mormons) stick with Trump despite his disgusting track record — it’s not really the focus of this post. I’m looking at the effect on the membership of the LDS Church, namely that more and more progressive Mormons (those who reject Trump and everything he stands for) have quietly or noisily exited. At some point there won’t be any left. This is not a reversible process. Even in the unlikely event that (1) LDS leadership emphatically changes course; and (2) they somehow manage to change the thinking and behavior of the mainstream LDS membership, those Mormon progressives are not coming back. I think they have given up on the Church.
Two simple points for discussion.
- First, am I right that progressive Mormons have largely given up on the Church, most having already left?
- Second, am I right that this leaves the Church stuck in a radicalized conservative Trumpian rut with little hope of moving in a different direction?
Wheat & Tares 
I’m a progressive Mormon who hasn’t left yet. I’m happily finding that there are more of us than I once thought, even in my ward. Judging by the last 100 years or so, there will be some periods of relief from the current retrenchment and regression when hard-liners die or public pressure/objective reality breaks through enough to force compromise. Overall, the tension will be maintained at an uncomfortable level as the rest of the world progresses and the Church digs in its heels and dragged forward.
Are there progressives left who attend their wards? Well, I guess I meet that definition, so there’s at least one of us. Actually, I come from a large family with very conservative parents, but I’d say nearly half of my siblings are now centrists who lean Democratic, and only one has left the church. However, I’m well aware of the cultural currents going on in the church, including those who think the church is becoming too liberal.
On your specific questions, I think you’re probably right that progressives are more likely to leave (as appears to be the case in other American denominations), but there’s also a simultaneous steady flow of members who used to be conservative who are questioning and becoming more progressive, so I don’t think the decline of progressives in church is irreversible. In fact, I think things may get slightly better over time because younger members are more likely to be more progressive. I’m under no illusions that we’re soon going to have an even balance between political views in the church, but I still hope for a day when being more progressive is at least respected as a valid point of view.
There has long been an alienation of progressive Mormons in the LDS church – I think a lot of it started with party-line views on abortion and everything else along party lines has slowly crept in over time.
I think there are fewer Progressive (or at least nuanced) Mormons that there used to be, but I also think a lot of them are keeping quiet and try to believe the leadership when they say that the church itself is apolitical. They’re hoping that church leadership start to moderate when some of the old hardliners die off.
It’s going to entirely depend on whether or not the more moderate leaders can outlive and out maneuver Oaks and friends, but it’s going to be a real fight. They’ll need to give women a meaningful role, accept that Jesus loves LGBTQ people, and drop the authoritarian micromanagement.
There will also need to be a major crack down on bringing politics into church gatherings. Nobody wants to sit in Sunday School or Sacrament meeting and listen to the populist rants of a MAGA bro who compensates for falling biologically short by driving a giant truck to commute three miles to his job selling solar panels from a cubicle.
I don’t think that you will ever get more Progressive Mormons in the pews, mostly since it seems that younger Mormons are much more likely to just leave the Church than older Mormons. The difference is probably due to weaker social ties/obligations for younger Mormons, and is just the general trend we are seeing with most other religions in the US. The Church was lucky enough to avoid those trends for awhile, but it seems like the general move away from religion is finally catching up with them
In its original form Mormonism was radically liberal, but it has become gentrified and conservative. Metaphorically it has “aged out”. It is no longer open to experimentation.
Most organizations want to increase its membership, not decline. And to an extent the COJCOLDS is no exception. But I don’t think growth is the primary objective. I think adherence is more important than growth to the Brethren (a.k.a. quality over quantity). So what’s my point? I think that the Church has moved into an era in which it is acknowledged that it isn’t going to grow in absolute numbers so it might as well grow in terms of commitment. And I think they (leadership) are happy to see the less committed drop off. We just cause trouble and division.
Doubling down on garments? Telling us green tea is against the WoW? Look at the new trans policies. Let’s be real about it. They would like the trans folks to quit and I think they’d like the rest of us troublemakers just quit too. Progressives not needed and not desired.
I just watched an interview with McKay Coppins, who has long covered Mormons in politics. His impression is that Mormons are generally more off-put by Trump’s immoral behavior than other conservatives and tend more libertarian and old-school conservative. They have a good amount of suspicion towards both parties, now, although they generally consider the Republican Party preferable. There are many Mormons who do vote Democrat, even if they may not be fully on board the party’s policy platform.
As for progressive Mormons, a widespread belief among progressives is that we should fully accept LGBTQs and that includes same-sex marriage and sex changes for trans people. They are strongly pro-choice. Progressives generally accept and promote evolution and that religions are human constructs. Although they also advocate multiculturalism and acceptance and inclusion of people from different faiths. It’s hard to square those progressive ideals and beliefs with traditional Mormon belief. I’m progressive and I simply can’t. I attend church with my wife and family but do not take callings, give talks, teach lessons, make comments in Sunday School, and will identify myself as not a believer if asked by someone to participate beyond attendance of church, activities, and service projects.
With regards to the first question, the answer is it depends. For my family, yes, and I have seen other families leave too, but some choose to stay. I with them all the best and I appreciate their efforts to still be there since I needed to opt out for my well being.
With regards to the second question, while I have rolled my eyes at a few Trump hats at our FHE in the park events in the past, I really don’t care if Mormons vote for Trump. That’s their business and I’m not really interested in understanding their perspective because it’s just never going to make sense to me. I have family and friends that support him and I love them and I am not interested in it affecting our relationship. Instead I will do everything I can if he wins to let my marginalized friends and neighbors know I’m there for them when his policies cause them harm. So perhaps I’m unique in this regard but my choosing to leave my faith community have everything to do with church leadership’s inability to be honest and nothing to do with local member politics. But I live in a very purple community so maybe it’s easier for me to overlook.
It’s my n of one experience of course, but I’ve been pleasantly surprised at how many Mormons I know who have quietly (or even openly) expressed disdain for Trump. Of course that’s not quite as far as being progressive, but it’s encouraging that they aren’t GOP-or-nothing.
Hmmmmm….I once considered myself to be proud Progressive in my Mormon Ward; and within my “circle”. However, the definition of “Progressivism” has (and IS changing) dramatically in the World we find ourselves in. With this perspective, I would probably agree that there are very, very few (and in some Wards, no) “Progressives” left.
Candidly, this reality has brought me back to just a wee bit more association with “the Church” – and I still plan to attend to support my wife; and family . Currently, I’m finding that it is more palatable to put up with (and often set aside) the idiosyncracies and negative by-products of cultural Mormonism…..than it is to blindly embrace the absolute lunacy of “the Progressive Far Left”. This group is now embracing insanity – which I want no part of.
So, while it certainly isn’t popular around these parts, I’ll probably “stand with the Mormons” when things go to shit; which seems to be right around the corner – starting with a recession and financial collapse after this election cycle.
Geoff, Dave, Janey et all: here’s your daily dose of “red meat”……enjoy your feast.
Brad D: You mentioned evolution, which is definitely taught at BYU. This is a problem area for the church as the science that is taught, that must be taught in order to have any credibility, is fairly settled (as settled as science gets), and therefore, BYU biology departments teach based on science, not the under-educated preferences of Packer, Joseph F Smith, and the religion department. That’s one reason I do not understand how these views make it into the pews with such confidence. My oldest went, in one year, from hearing a seminary teacher declare in disgust that she was not descended from a monkey to hearing a BYU professor state unequivocally that they would be learning about evolution and that anyone who wanted to argue against it was in the wrong BYU class because she wasn’t going to brook that discussion; there was too much coursework to waste time on nonsense.
I can’t really say how many “progressives” there are left in the pews, but my guess is that every year that number is going down. It’s 100% clear that Oaks and Nelson desire that. I think another question relates to women’s participation which (I think?) is continuing to decline, although it’s not that leaders think women count anyway. They only count insofar as they have male children or husbands. Like, they literally are not statistically viewed as important, and none of the callings women do are “necessary” to run the church. Unfortunately for church leaders, women aren’t stupid.
Most of the people I know who lean left are no longer in the church, and the last I’ve heard there were pretty open conservative dog whistles from the pulpits and plenty of conspiracy theorists in all the meetings, gobbling up utter nonsense talking points and regurgitating them wide-eyed to similarly gullible folks. It’s hard not to make the connection between that level of credibility and the baseline belief in some of the church’s teachings including its dubious origins.
Grizzerbear55, I do think we need new ways to label political positions. The left/right nomenclature stems, I think from the 18th c. when one faction sat on the left of the assembly and the other faction sat on the right. Moreover, when one thinks back to the recent past it was the Republican Party that led the environmental movement, OSHA, and, I think, reproductive choice. Therefore, one would label the Republican Party progressive. Granted, the Democratic Party was saddled with Southern Democrats, who almost always side with their capitalist overlords, nevertheless it led the movement for Labor rights, veterans rights, and farm subsidies. It was the growing advocacy for Civil Rights which was fought for by Republicans, Eisenhower leading the Federal movement, and which Democrats joined, as well as the Vietnam war, that led to the current nomenclature. I suppose we just need this shorthand, but “one mans’s ceiling, is another man’s floor.”
As I wrote this, I found it very difficult to refrain from using conservative or progressive, it’s so baked into our discussion.
I consider myself progressive, but I do not consider myself leftist–may it depends how we define terms. I am progressive in that I oppose legislation banning abortions (but I think there needs to be a reasonable cut-off, and 6 weeks is not reasonable), I support a woman’s right to work outside the home, I think we need a workable guest worker program for farm and other laborers (but I would send social security dollars back to the home country, to be paid by the home country’s retirement system to their residents in local currency), I support a graduated tax scale, I support social programs that provide temporary relief to the poor, I think it is ludicrous to criminally or civil pursue people who get abortions in other states (this also violates full faith and credit clause), etc. I have almost always split my voting ticket and will likely do so again in November, and I am bound to no party–I see crazies in both camps. I have no problems with the state allowing marriages between (and extending tax advantages to) consenting adults. I also have positions that some consider conservative. I don’t approve of people born as men competing against people born as women in women’s sports, and I don’t think that parents should be able to medically change a minor child’s gender except in the most limited circumstances. My wife thinks a lot like I do, but with some differences, and we haven’t left the church. Are we progressive? Is there a checklist, where one must score 85% or higher to be a bona fide progressive? We don’t seek or claim that label. We’re in the church for the long haul because of faith. My ward has a decent number of people who will probably vote Democratic in November, or who like me might split their votes between the two parties, as well as some who will vote a straight Republican ticket. There’s not a soul in my ward, except for wife wife, who will know how I vote in November; if I “win” I won’t gloat, and if I “lose” I won’t complain. I keep my politics to myself at church.
The church may be “stuck in a radicalized conservative Trumpian rut” in some parts of Zion, but not in my city and surrounding countryside in the mission field. We don’t see MAGA hats at ward activities, but we almost never have activities, and when we do it is a meal in the cultural hall, so gentlemen don’t wear hats. I don’t look at every car, but I’ve not seen a single Trump bumper sticker in our parking lot on Sundays. Our Sunday lessons (EQ and SS, and per my wife RS) do not move into political discussions about elections. I’m hoping that there are more wards like mine than one might conclude from reading some of the posts here, which suggest that almost all wards in Zion have almost nothing but Trumpists of the most deranged variety. I don’t think that all people who voted for Trump in 2016 or who will vote for Trump in 2024 are deluded, ignorant conspiracy theorists, baskets of deplorables. I think that many sincere and decent people will vote for Trump, and many sincere people will vote for Harris, and I afford good motives to both groups.
Are there progressives left? Yep. John the Beloved and the Three Nephites are the top four. The rest of us have taken cover. We expect reinforcements when the City of Enoch returns.
I’ve been hoping that the church would comment on a recent move by President Biden to keep part-immigrant families together. If President Biden is successful, hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants will be able to remain in the U.S. with their U.S. citizen spouses and children. If he’s not successful, they face a real risk of having to leave the U.S. (and their spouses and children) for ten years before being eligible to return again.
Given the church’s focus on families, and the precise language in the Family Proclamation warning about the disintegration of the family, one would hope the church would be supportive of this plan. Instead, Texas, Idaho, and some other states are suing to stop this, and in Idaho the people leading the attack are members of the church (all three names from Idaho on the complaint are BYU grads, and one of them writes fairly regularly for the Deseret News). The church has not issued any kind of statement. It certainly feels like both the members of the church and the church itself are intent on becoming more conservative, even if it means becoming significantly less Christ-like.
I didn’t leave. I was driven to the curb via the POX, and I shan’t ever return. The church now merely fascinates me as institutional puzzle whose behaviour I try to understand, predict, and explain through secular scientific means.
I too am doubtful on the church’s retention rates for progressives moving forward, but we probably won’t see the starkest impact of this until at least another 10-30 years. Many Millennials and Gen X’ers I suspect are waiting for their parents to die (and their earthly inheritance doled out) before they make any serious moves to disavow the church. Mormons typically hate engaging in social conflict with in-group authority figures, and it takes a bit of gumption to tell your folks to console themselves to ‘sad heaven’.
Hawkgrrrl, you are right that evolution is taught at BYU. In just a couple of departments I believe. But it seems to be only there where the possible reality of evolution is discussed. Outside that environment it almost seems taboo to talk about evolution let alone acknowledge that it is highly likely. The leadership will never openly talk of human history as if it existed before 6,000 years ago. It wouldn’t dream of acknowledging that humans evolved from earlier life forms. By and large when it comes to evolution, I hear the common responses of “we don’t know, we’ll find out so much in the millennium” and “it’s just a theory” all the while proclaiming “the gospel” with its accompanying Mormon-specific historical truth claims to be beyond theory and absolute truth.
Dave B, this is an interesting post. If I understand you right, you are defining progressive mormons as those who oppose Trump and everything he stands for. You might have more specifics to add but perhaps you left it open to progressives to self identify which isn’t a bad idea. We could also philosophize on if we can distinguish politically progressive individuals from religiously progressive individuals but that might be a topic that merits its own post.
If I’m not misunderstanding you, your questions are really regarding if progressive Mormons are leaving due to conflicted political beliefs in contrast with the Trump-supporting majority of members.
Personally, I absolutely oppose Trump and everything he stands for, but politics were about the last reason I decided to stop attending church. I am an elder millennial and most of the time when pro-Trump politics were mentioned in church, it elicited an eye roll, sometimes a chuckle and usually a snarky text to a friend. I think most of us Utah natives have come to expect those who are passionately right wing to admix religion and politics with wild abandon. On the one hand it can be frustrating at times, but on the other hand, it is what we are used to. I have plenty of pro-Trump friends and while I don’t understand why, they have other redeeming qualities that I love and admire so I keep their company. I would suspect that those sentiments might be similar to the motivations for active progressive Mormons.
I’m not sure it is ever as simple as leaving over the prevalence of Trump politics alone as others have mentioned other issues such as perceived institutional objectives and behaviors that are disconcerting. I would hypothesize that people who fit your definition of “progressive Mormon” likely have additional issues with the church that may outweigh the church’s redeeming qualities. That seems to be a recurring sentiment in the discussion thread and one I agree with.
Waterbear,
I agree that it’s more complex than what our attitude is towards Trump. I don’t love Trump–and at this point at least I don’t think I’ll be able to give him my vote. But I’m an orthodox latter-day saint–and I think that has a lot more to do with my loyalty to the apostles and my socially conservative values than with how I feel about Trump.
I consider myself both progressive and liberal, as is my wife. We both still attend every week. For us it’s been a 15 year slow walk from moderate, mainstream, republican Mormons to where we are today with our democrat political signs, and rainbow flags. I think there are more progressive members than most people think, we’ve just all been conditioned to believe we’re in the minority. My ward leadership is full of people who I would call progressive. I suppose they are, like I am, trying to move forward with love, and treat the hurtful language and policy coming from SLC with the same eyerolls and snarky texts that I use for the ridiculous comments in gospel doctrine. (Apparently Waterbear and I have the same coping mechanisms.)
Of course, I’m expecting on Sunday we will be told that our son is no longer invited to attend YM anymore. It really does increasingly feel like serving two masters, and I really don’t know if I can keep doing this.
I consider myself both progressive and liberal, as is my wife. We both still attend every week. For us it’s been a 15 year slow walk from moderate, mainstream, republican Mormons to where we are today with our democrat political signs, and rainbow flags. I think there are more progressive members than most people think, we’ve just all been conditioned to believe we’re in the minority. My ward leadership is full of people who I would call progressive. I suppose they are, like I am, trying to move forward with love, and treat the hurtful language and policy coming from SLC with the same eyerolls and snarky texts that I use for the ridiculous comments in gospel doctrine. (Apparently Waterbear and I have the same coping mechanisms.)
Of course, I’m expecting on Sunday we will be told that our son is no longer invited to attend YM anymore. It really does increasingly feel like serving two masters, and I really don’t know if I can keep doing this.
Progressive, Liberal, Socialist, Communist, Fascist, Conservative, National Christian, MAGA, Mormon, or Christian are all terms whose meanings have changed and evolved to mean anything but what they are. They are hurled as insults and worn as badges of honor. They are used to invoke fear or show group unity but they don’t define anything. It makes it hard to talk about things because we can’t even agree on the vocabulary. For instance, liberal used to be a good word but now it’s not. Kind of like how the word Google changed from a noun to a verb, liberal has been used in derision for so long that it is now a negative word. When you meet God at the judgment bar do you want Him/Her to judge you liberally or conservatively?
Granted things change all the time. We need to remember that maybe words change but concepts don’t. Liberty is still liberty even if it’s been cooped to mean freedom for conservatives to do what they want while condemning liberals for wanting the same thing.
Real progressive Mormons have figured this out. Those who haven’t figured it out use these words to put down those who don’t think like them.
I share others’ bafflement about the appeal of Trump and Trumpism etc… but to be honest, for me that’s the least interesting implication of Dave’s OP here. Although: plenty of great thoughts on that in the comments. And Old Man’s comment about John and the Three Nephites made me spit out my drink; well done! And i fully get the notion that D’s/libs/progressives have long been a church minority, sure. (I was at BYU in the 90s and yep, so-called progressives seemed a bit counterculture and we loved reading the Student Review etc – – but we also learned in those trenches how to ‘navigate’ mainstream church meetings and hierarchies.) All of that is relevant.
But….. for me the more pressing aspect of the question being asked is: what does the future hold? Yes lefties were a bit of a minority back in my BYU days, but it still seemed somewhat acceptable. And I myself continue in a major-calling-holding, active attending role that i deeply believe in – – and have a strong handful of knowing/similar allies in the pews with me locally. But now we have the retrenchment efforts (as pointed out here; garments, green tea, trans policies, flavor of the day clampdown) that certainly SEEM like they’re driving the more progressive among us out of the congregations. Or the youngsters. Or the women. Or those who lean egalitarian vs purity. Etc.
But: is it? What’s actually happening? (And what are the implications of whatever vectors are discernible for, say, the next generation, which includes my own progressive-and-active children?)
I’m mostly a data guy, and this is literally an empirical question.
I commented/linked these in a comment elsewhere, but seems particularly relevant here:
Women/YW in particular are leaving church. (and not just ours…)
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/08/13/gen-z-women-less-religious/74673083007/
Also this:
https://www.graphsaboutreligion.com/p/there-is-almost-no-liberalizing-religion
Data like this is sobering in its implications for future congregations.
Vajra2, I believe your correct. There is only one defined spectrum that truly matters: freedom and tyranny. We must each choose where we fit on that spectrum, and then decide where each party’s platform falls, and use this as a gauge to select our leaders. Sadly, the election process is blatantly corrupted, likely beyond redemption, and we’re all just along for the ride. I will vote, but I won’t hold my breath that it will matter.
As for the church, recall that Uchtdorf donated to the dem party, so I’m not convinced that the Q15 are all that conservative. I believe many of the most recent handbook updates were imposed by Oaks, and that it appears that Nelson may have been sidelined, since he hasn’t been seen in public since April. It will be interesting to see just how many surprises we will get in October.
BlueRidgeMormon: I believe the Church has been well aware of the decline in mainline liberal protestant churches for decades now, and you are right that in general, each successive generation is more secular than the last (Europe has led the way on this trend). Friends of mine in these more liberal protestant churches say that there are basically no kids, and they can see that their congregations are dying out. The only ones with kids still at church seem to be the conservative sects like Mormons, Evangelicals and Catholics, where parents kind of force their kids to go with the family every Sunday. And honestly, until all the anti-LGBTQ stuff went insane in 2015, there was a lot to be said for the fun youth programs where kids could hang out with other church kids. It was a nice alternative to the partying F-boys and fight clubs at the school. As to how to reverse these trends, I don’t think it’s possible. Homo and transphobia have broken the churches, and I suppose that’s God’s fault for sending queer kids to these conservative families while “telling” their church leaders to preach against their kids and try to destroy those kids (as parents, that’s sure what it looks like).
hnorth1: While Uchtdorf (or someone in his family, using his CC) donated to the Biden campaign, remember that he was forced to apologize for it and disavow it. That’s 100% a Nelson/Oaks move. Funny how Oaks talks about “religious freedom,” but what he really means is for them to be free to tell everyone else what to do.
Jack,
Amazing things happen when you split conservative political ideology from Christian teachings. You’ll find that they are not the soul mates you thought they were.
I strongly agree with what Instereo has said about labels being insufficient to capture the nuance and complexity of political leanings. I have eclectic political ideas that don’t neatly arrange with anyone political party or label. I started my political journey as a market-oriented libertarian. I was elected state and county delegate several times to the Utah GOP. Jason Chaffetz came to my office soliciting political donations. Over time, my views on many issues have evolved. A big part of that had to do with my career change into healthcare when I went back to school to become a registered nurse. Working on the front lines in the US health system and delving into many issues has completely changed my views on lots of issues, especially as I served my mission in Canada and saw a vastly superior system in many ways. In a lot of ways, it was my mission experience to Montreal that opened my eyes to so many of the positions I hold to day on transportation, energy, healthcare, immigration, etc.
Today, I identify much more strongly with the Democratic party and I am very excited to vote for Harris/Walz. The church membership embracing Trumpism is a huge reason why we have not attended for several years. The surprising thing to me was that Trump increased his share of the LDS vote in 2020. I don’t have any qualms about sitting side by side in the pews with conservatives, but I do have major problems when a strong majority of the congregation supports a man like Trump. There is a plethora of issues as to why we don’t attend now and it is mostly LGBTQ and the lack of authority and power for women in the church. At a certain point when our son was getting to the age of being eligible for baptism, we basically came to the sad conclusion that participation in the church was more likely to make him a worse person, not a better person.
Religion is fundamentally political. What topics are emphasized from the pulpit and the collective action that is taken on certain stances is a reflection of the beliefs, belonging, and behavior that comprise organized religion. We haven’t closed the door on re-engaging, but the church would need to look fundamentally different from how it does now. I am trying to find civic and service organizations that I can give my time and talents to that I otherwise would have used for church service. We read the scriptures to my son and we pray. We do service for those in need and we volunteer. But we don’t attend and have no plans on attending in the future. We call ourselves “home-churchers” (e.g., home schoolers).
There are thousands of progressive/nuanced church members who follow the Faith Matters podcast and will be at the Restore conference next weekend. They haven’t all been chased out yet! https://faithmatters.org/restore-2024/?gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAjwlbu2BhA3EiwA3yXyu8xC4dk3SfoQEpyvpgLwpowlAh5E4jrta8eaEr9rJMRTVsjO9GJvHBoC3K0QAvD_BwE
@BlueRidgeMormon – I hope you got a chance to read Ryan Burge’s poignant piece for Deseret News:
My church is closing, and I don’t know what comes next — for me, or America
In my view, the reason why churches are losing the younger generation is because they have not evolved. They are not meeting the temporal or spiritual needs of the moment. I can easily envision a church community I would love to participate in. It would build community by running a low-cost/subsidized (safe) daycare, afterschool programs, or health clinics. Such a church would have full equality and the members would have actual say in policies and who leads (more democratic). A church I am imagining would focus on creating housing and providing shelter for the homeless, widows, and orphans and it it would run and organize communal meals for members and non-members alike in a spirit of fellowship. In short, a church community should focus on making people better disciples of Christ by putting into action the things He taught. It probably would not be overly concerned about culture war issues, garment adherence, or a lot of the stuff that seem to preoccupy the current LDS community.
Jacob L,
Sign me up
Old Man:
“Jack,
Amazing things happen when you split conservative political ideology from Christian teachings. You’ll find that they are not the soul mates you thought they were.”
As a not-too-fond-of-Trump social conservative I kinda feel like a man without a country these days. My loyalty is to the Kingdom.
“Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.”
That’s what I hope for.
Jacob L,
There’s no question that the church you envision is based on Christian principles–that’s a reflection of the goodness of your soul. Even so, my sense is that it will work–but only up to a certain point. And that point is when the “bread of life” sermon is preached. The Savior had garnered many followers after he provided them with temporal necessities. But when he shifted gears from giving them temporal bread to “the bread of life” there were many who walked away. And why did they walk away? Because to “eat” the bread of life requires the sacrifice of a broken heart and a contrite spirit–complete and total repentance. And unfortunately there are too many of us who would rather return to poverty — whether of material or of the soul — than turn to God.
Jacob L
I understand the journey you went through in healthcare and me through teaching in public education, to the realization that all is not well in Zion. For me, it’s profoundly sad. I miss the fellowship and what I thought was a shared vision but I don’t miss the passive-aggressive gaslighting or the anxiety on Saturday about what Bro So&So is going to say in Elders Quorum that you can’t let go unchallenged. I get saying you’re “home churched.” I’ve also found it both sad and interesting how the scriptures I read are not the scriptures read and taught in church. So many passages are skipped over that give added and deeper meaning and could apply to our lives. I guess HQ knows that many of the ET Bensonites would be offended and they are more ‘righteous’ in paying their tithing than us HB Brownites.
Perhaps some of us just choose to separate religion and politics. Isn’t that what we are constantly told to do? Despite “separation of church and state” not being that at all, but so many people don’t actually read caselaw or understand, so they just parrot what they hear? Some of us (and I think a lot of us) view politics and the government as something that impacts our lives outside of our faith and we have our personal opinions on certain topics and vote our conscience. I find it easy to separate the two.
Separation of church and state is in the Constitution, therefore it applies to government staying out of religion. I don’t know anywhere in the scriptures it says that religion should stay out of government. Christ did say to render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s. He also condemned the Sadducees, Pharisees, and Harold the government at the time he lived. He even chided Pilot and his position and power with the Roman Government.
The state has real power. Religion has the power of suggestion.
@Jack In my reading of the New Testament, I think it is significant that Christ attended to the temporal needs of hunger and thirst in his ministry. I don’t believe much, if any, spiritual enlightenment/conversion can occur unless basic human needs are first met. I think providing service and welfare in this way is an end in and of itself, regardless of whether it grows the size of the church. In a way, you could look at such activies as fellowship (Moroni 6:5). I there is room for a wide variety of activities/endeavors under “meet together oft.”
@Instereo- Respectfully, no, it isn’t. You can argue that through the Establishment clause its referenced, but it merely discusses the State’s establishment of a religion or direct endorsement of one. Which has not occurred. The tricky part involves those who claim one means the other. The Everson decision from the SC identifies what they think it means. But I agree, it certainly does not say anywhere that religion should not be part of government in some form. The question is, what form?
Legal Nonsense – was the United States established as a Christian Nation, no it wasn’t but there are a lot of people today that say is was. Has there been any states that have established or endorsed a particular religion? Well not directly but in the past few years many places including Utah have established school vouchers which allows state money to go to private schools including religious schools. It may not technically be an establishment of a religion but it is defiantly a support which I view as unconstitutional. So I don’t think it’s a yes or no question. I do agree that it does not say religion should not be a part of government but I think religion should be in the heart of a person in Government but not in government itself. I also don’t feel that government should support religion in anyway except to allow individuals access to and freedom to practice it or to not practice it.
@instereo “The state has real power. Religion has the power of suggestion.”
As churches get wealthier, and some do, that power of suggestion grows in ways that are evidenced through history. Ironically, as churches grow in wealth they seem to use their increased power of suggestion to serve their own purposes, far too often, rather than to help the vulnerable.
I enjoy reading your points!