Mormon Mentality - Thoughts and Asides by Peculiar People

By Dan Ellsworth

Sep. 18th, 2007 at 5:28 pm

A few years ago, I read Degenerate Moderns, by E. Michael Jones,Â Catholic theologian and editor of Culture Wars.Â The book is, in essence, an elaborate and eloquentÂ ad hominem argument that the modernist thinking of Margaret Mead, John Maynard Keynes, Alfred Kinsey, and other thinkers — asÂ well as liberals in general — is rooted in sexual guilt.Â To quote from the book’s introduction,

The crucical intellectual event occurs…when vices are transmuted into theories, when the “intellectual” sets up shop in rebellion against the moral law and, therefore, in rebellion against the truth.Â All the modern “isms” follow as a direct result of this rebellion.Â All of them entail rationalization.Â All of them can be best understood in light of the moral disorder of their founders, proponents, and adherents.
…modernity was rationalized sexual misbehavior. All the intellectual and cultural breakthroughs of modernity were in some way or other linked to the sexual desires their progenitors knew to be illicit but which they chose nonetheless. Their theories were ultimately rationalizations of the choices they knew to be wrong.

I have heardÂ many timesÂ times, both at Church and on the blogs,Â that apostasy is rooted in sexual misbehavior. I usually push back at these suggestions, not because I believe they are wrong, but 1) because I think it’s bad form to go there unless the causal relationship is very apparent (not very often), and 2) I believe there are plenty of instances where chasteÂ people come by their questioning and crises of faith honestly.
Where Michael Jones feels comfortable speaking categorically about this causal relationship between a people’s sexual morality and their intellectual life and approach to authority, I am more hesitant- I see a lot of instances where honest departure from faith can allow people to redefine their sexuality more liberally, not the other way around.Â There is an old saying that nothing destroys faith like sin, and nothing builds faith like obedience. Â So what is it about sexual sin in particularÂ that makes us single itÂ out asÂ a cause of apostasy?

1. Dan

Tue, Sep 18, 2007 @ 7:45pm

I think it has to do with a number of factors, the biggest of which is envy. “Bob Smith is getting away with adultery and I’m stuck with my old woman,” one thinks.

2. Seth R.

Tue, Sep 18, 2007 @ 8:22pm

Sex? Why… that’s the same reason all those people leave the Church!!! Sexual transgression!

It’s all starting to fit together….

3. Seth R.

Tue, Sep 18, 2007 @ 8:25pm

Sorry for being master of the obvious. I swear, I thought I read the whole post before commenting….

I think this two-week cold is messing with my head.

4. Jamie Trwth

Tue, Sep 18, 2007 @ 9:49pm

I thought the old saying was “Nothing destroys faith like being called as the Gospel Doctrine Teacher” and “Nothing builds faith like truthfulness.”

People usually think it is Sexual Freedom or the want of alcohol that leads one to leave the Church. In America it is legal (in most states) to have sex at age 16. In the church it is legal only with your one legally wedded spouse. Not just for life but in the afterlife also. With some, the more you tighten your grip on someone elseâ€™s freedom to chose the more they want to make a choice on their own.

The majority of the people Iâ€™ve heard of leaving the church, live just the way they did before, excluding the Sunday meetings and tithing. Food storage? Yes! Clean living? Yes. Sex only with their spouse? Yes! And I said majority. Some leave because of sexually reasons. Itâ€™s said that 90% of homosexuals leave the church. That is a sexual reason. But then again there is only about 1% of America is homosexual. That wouldnâ€™t be a majority (no offence to my Gay friends out their).

The top reason people leave the church is Trwthfullness (sorry) Truthfulness (with a capital T) or the lack there of with regards to history, past, present, and the future of the Church.

5. z

Tue, Sep 18, 2007 @ 10:41pm

It’s kind of funny– I’ve always thought sexual guilt and fear of sexuality are things that drive people towards belief systems that restrict sexual activity, which is to say, into church.

6. Doc

Tue, Sep 18, 2007 @ 11:09pm

Actually, in Dostoevsky’s
‘Crime and Punishment” and “Brothers Karamazov” It’s more about murder, well, and sex and general mistreatment of others and lack of empathy that the nihilist viewpoint ultimately leads to.

I agree, it is more correct to state that sexual misbehavior is rooted in apostasy rather than the other way around. Might I suggest that feelings of pain, betrayal, and an inability to forgive or to see our own rushes to judgement lie behind most every “apostatising” with which I am familiar. Not sexual, but not exactly the meat of the gospel either.

7. Dan Ellsworth

Wed, Sep 19, 2007 @ 7:46am

Itâ€™s kind of funnyâ€“ Iâ€™ve always thought sexual guilt and fear of sexuality are things that drive people towards belief systems that restrict sexual activity, which is to say, into church.

I’m sure that’s often true. Jones’ argument is that sexual sin triggers an emotional and mental mechanism that makes the person’s sexual desire an authoritative voice that challenges the authority of God as expressed in the Church’s teachings on sexuality.
I’ve seen enough of this that for a long time I really believed sex was the primary reason people left the Church, but in my current wisdom, I don’t necessarily see the causality I assumed before.

8. Dan

Wed, Sep 19, 2007 @ 9:06am

I’d be interested in seeing a comparison or study of those leaving the church in America and those leaving the church in, say, Europe, where the tolerance of things sexual is a little higher, where sexual escapades are not as taboo as they are here in America. I’d be curious to see just how much it has to do with cultural issues and not really that sexual sins leads to apostasy.

9. Dan Ellsworth

Wed, Sep 19, 2007 @ 9:26am

Maybe the sexual tolerance in European culture is the reason not many Europeans are interested in joining an organization that asserts authoritative, binding restrictions on sex. They are very relcutant to join us in the first place.

10. Bookslinger

Wed, Sep 19, 2007 @ 11:04am

All intentionally unrepented sin leads to apostasy. However the converse (that apostasy necessarily comes from intentionally unrepented sin) is not true.

There are also proximate causes and root causes.

This sequence is often in effect too:

1. Person sins and doesn’t repent.
2. Therefore, person loses the companionship of the Holy Ghost.

Then two things can happen:

1. Without the Holy Ghost, testimony can fade, and not withstand challenges.

2. Without the Holy Ghost as a shield of protection or insulation, the offenses of others in the church can become intolerable.

Therefore some, or even many, people who cite loss-of-testimony, or offenses-by-others as reasons for leaving, may have as a root cause unrepented sin which led to loss of companionship of the Holy Ghost.

Of course it’s more complicated than that.

There is the issue of conversion versus testimony. Most people who obtain a testimony aren’t truely converted in the same moment. Conversion is a longer process. And it should also be an ongoing process of growth throughout one’s life.

Conversion means change. And we should constantly be changing ourselves, hopefully in the direction of our goal, to be like Jesus Christ.

President Hinckley has talked about “deep roots of conversion.” Some of us only have a surface level conversion. We need to convert at a deep level, to our core. Or sink deep roots of conversion that will anchor us to the gospel when the winds of adversity and challenge blow.

11. Nick Literski

Wed, Sep 19, 2007 @ 12:10pm

I see a lot of instances where honest departure from faith can allow people to redefine their sexuality more liberally, not the other way around.

In my own experience, this is correct. Those who know me well are aware that for many years, I was almost fanatically Mormon–if anything, I was so convinced of Joseph Smith’s revelations I bordered on being a Mormon fundamentalist. Throughout that time, it was my firm belief in the truth of Mormonism that kept me not only in the LDS church, but in my marriage. Meanwhile, I was utterly miserable, because I was gay. I knew what my innermost feelings were. I knew what I wanted, but I suppressed those things because I was convinced deity insisted on it.

I was never really one to fall for the writings, etc., of “professional” anti-Mormons. I knew the history and doctrine too well to fall for their tactics–most of which involved either misquoting Mormon sources or taking them entirely out of context. A personal project, however, led me to a great deal of first-hand research, travelling the country to inspect original documents, etc. I found a great deal of information which had never been published or discussed. For me, certain parts of this information ultimately led to a sudden, gut-wrenching conclusion.

For some time, I kept “going through the motions” of LDS church activity, for the sake of family, etc. The fact is, I didn’t find any of it satisfying. I felt like I was putting in a lot of effort for no “return on investment.” It was in this environment of “lost faith,” that I was finally able to come out of the closet. The LDS church had simply lost it’s control over my behavior.

I did not “sin” and thereby lose faith. I lost faith, and changed my choices.

12. Dan Ellsworth

Wed, Sep 19, 2007 @ 1:22pm

Nick,

You lost your faith in Church History (very easy to do); did you also lose your faith in the Church’s propositions about Christ? I know Grant Palmer rejects the former and retains the latter; has this been your experience as well?

13. Jamie Trwth

Wed, Sep 19, 2007 @ 2:46pm

Bookslinger,

Your hypothesis is flawed. To be an apostate all you have to be is in contrary to the teachings of the Church. Sexually sin or un repented sins may or may not have anything to do with it.

And does it have to be a huge issue you are in contrast with to be an apostate? Some non-LDS Mormons say The Brighamite branch is an apostasy. What was our unrepented sin (if any)?

No matter if you are unrepented of your sins or not you can still have the Holy Ghost as your guide. God wouldn’t never just leave us alone like that. We are still his children.

14. a random John

Wed, Sep 19, 2007 @ 2:55pm

I was so convinced of Joseph Smithâ€™s revelations I bordered on being a Mormon fundamentalist.

Nick, this might seem like I’m joking, but I’m not. I’d be really interested in knowing if at that time you considered polygamy. I would think that polygamy would be a special kind of hell for a gay man, what’s your perspective?

15. Nick Literski

Wed, Sep 19, 2007 @ 2:59pm

Dan, I would have to say I lost both, more or less simultaneously. Even as a nearly-militant Mormon, I freely shared my opinion that if Mormonism was not true, then christianity as a whole was false. I hold some strong objections to foundational aspects of christianity. Oddly enough, my views are closer to those of Hosea Ballou, the Universalist minister who taught the Smith family in Vermont, around the time of Joseph Smith Jr.’s birth. Reading some of his sermons from that time period went a long way in clarifying some of the issues I already had with atonement, etc.

16. Jamie Trwth

Wed, Sep 19, 2007 @ 3:03pm

a random John,

Being an avid “Big Love” addict that I am, there is a character on the show that is gay and is a Polygamist. He too has struggles with what his biology truly is, gay, versus what the Prophet deems worthy, Polygamy.

17. Nick Literski

Wed, Sep 19, 2007 @ 3:07pm

random john:
I was never able to reconcile the issue of priesthood authority, sufficient to cross over into fundamentalism. I could not see a convincing argument that anyone other than the president of the LDS church had the authority to authorize, let alone perform, a plural marriage. That being the case, I can’t say that I seriously considered entering into a plural marriage. On the other hand, I fully accepted it in principle. I saw plural marriage as something far beyond sex, or even reproduction. Therefore, my lack of sexual interest in women wasn’t necessarily a “deal breaker.”

I’m sure that all sounds very strange, but ultimately it’s the same thought process that leads many gay LDS men to marry in the first place. They want to do what they believe deity expects of them, plain and simple.

18. Nick Literski

Wed, Sep 19, 2007 @ 3:10pm

#16 Jamie:
Heh…yes, aside from the fact that dear Alby is a murderous sociopath, I have to admit I find his “little dillema” interesting!

19. a random John

Wed, Sep 19, 2007 @ 4:49pm

We tried to watch Big Love on DVD and found it incredibly boring. Didn’t make it through the first season and gave up.

20. Jamie Trwth

Wed, Sep 19, 2007 @ 7:24pm

I watched the Pilot for Big Love just last night. I forgot the first couple of episodes have a lot of sex in it. Which brings this comment full circle.

Bill, the lead character in Big Love, is labeled by the church as an apostate. This is because he is a polygamist. Is he an apostate because of his polygamy? Or is he an apostate because of the sex in his polygamist marriages?

I keep meeting people who have never had Cottage Cheese (stay with me on this one). I thought everyone eat cottage cheese. But I was wrong. Just as if someone always meets people who are apostates because of a sexual reason. I will stand on this one message to be true; most people who are labeled apostates didnâ€™t do anything sexual to become so.

It is believed, by my humble opinion, that Bill lives the Principle for a higher purpose. He believes he and his family will be exalted in the Celestial Kingdom because of living The Principle. In contrast to the Churchâ€™s belief that he will be sent to outer darkness because of living in polygamy.

One persons Principle just might be another persons Perdition.

21. Bookslinger

Wed, Sep 19, 2007 @ 8:25pm

Jamie, in re your msg # 13,

You interpreted various words and phrases in my message #10 with meanings and contexts that I didn’t intend, and frankly in ways I didn’t expect, given the context of the thread up to that point. And I’ll admit that I didn’t scrupulously specify the exact meanings and contexts I was using, and therefore left the door open for others to ascribe meanings and contexts that I wasn’t addressing.

Since I don’t want to go onto those tangents, I’ll forbear responding to your #13.

22. Jota G

Fri, Sep 28, 2007 @ 3:47pm

Jamie,

Apostasy from a church is the abandonment of one’s adherence to the principals, doctrine or rules by which that church is governed. One does not become an apostate by participating in the act that is forbidden. One becomes an apostate by deciding not to live by a churchâ€™s core doctrine, principal, or rule. Apostasy begins with questioning and doubt and ends when oneâ€™s questioning and doubt results in a decision that makes one abandon oneâ€™s faith. (Iâ€™m not making any value judgments as to whether apostasy is good or bad, Iâ€™m just saying what it is.)

The fictional Big Love character did not become an apostate when he began to practice polygamy. He does not commit apostasy when he has sex in his polygamist marriage. Assuming he had previously been a member of a church that forbade polygamy, Bill began his Apostasy when he questioned and doubted the authority of that church to forbid polygamy, and he became an apostate the moment he decided that his church lacked that authority. His practice of polygamy and his sex with his polygamist wives are simply a byproduct if his preexisting apostasy.

23. Jamie Trwth

Fri, Sep 28, 2007 @ 4:30pm

Jota G,

Margaret Toscano was branded an Apostate for talking about Women in the Priesthood, and Mother God. Two subjects our Church (LDS) fully believes in. There were no questions of authority on her part. I understand the thoughtful and rational thought on your part. But there are other reasons someone is branded and Apostate. In the case of Emma Smith, she abandoned the LDS Church and banded with the RLDS Church. In one Church she is an Apostate. In the other Church she is a Saint.

Thank you for clearing thing up for me Jota G.

Jamie Trwth

24. Jota G

Fri, Sep 28, 2007 @ 5:29pm

Don’t confuse excommunication with apostasy.

25. Jota G

Fri, Sep 28, 2007 @ 5:45pm

To clarify –

One can be excommunicated without being an apostate and one can be an apostate without being excommunicated.

Excommunication is the formal removal of an individual from membership in an organization by that organization’s generally recognized authority.

Emma Smith started her apostasy when she questioned the succession of Brigham Young, she abandoned the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and became an apostate of that organization. To my knowledge, Emma Hale Smith Bidamon was never excommunicated from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and was never re-baptized into any other church.

From what you say Margaret Toscano was excommunicated, I don’t know enough about her situation to say whether she was an apostate.

26. Dan Ellsworth

Fri, Sep 28, 2007 @ 8:51pm

Jamie Trwth,

Margaret Toscano was branded an Apostate for talking about Women in the Priesthood, and Mother God.

I don’t think that’s an accurate statement; anyone can talk about those things, but I think hers was a situation where her advocacy grew more and more strident until it led to an adversarial stance towards the authority of the Church.
In the PBS documentary, Maragaret Toscano struck me as being a wonderful person who could not (or would not) accept the basic aspects of our faith that would allow her to be happy in the Church.