>===== Original Message From "Eric R. Samuelsen" <ersamuel@byugate.byu.edu>
>In part, the gospel is a never-ending search for truth, and of course we'll
>read stuff that challenges previously held assumptions on a whole variety of
>matters.  But will it destroy a testimony, this constant process of
>discovery and growth and challenge and change, this constant search for
>knowledge and understanding?  Will a life long engagement with the world of
>ideas ultimately destroy a firmly held, spiritually based testimony?  I'll
>go to my grave insisting that testimony can only be enhanced by a search for
>truth, and that a testimony that says 'this book disturbs me, these ideas
>challenge what I believe, I will therefore read no more" is not, in fact, a
>testimony at all, but only an opinion.

My response:

I just read a fascinating book, which I highly recommend, called The Different Drum: Community Making and Peace. It is written by Christian psychologist M. Scott Peck (of Road Less Traveled fame).

He presents a pattern of transformation that I think relates to the discussion here. He says there are four basic steps in the development of one's spiritual life. I can only write this from memory, as I don't have the book with me.

1. Chaos, egotism (meaning when someone is completely wrapped up in themselves, i.e. children)
2. Institutional, form (meaning that the person has found an institution or narrative that dictates life to them in a black and white way, giving them the direction they need to live a descent life, i.e. church, prison)
3. Skepticism, doubt (meaning the person has found that the world is not so black and white, and that their previous, simplistic view of the world seems woefully inadequate now to the point of superstitious)
4. Mystical (meaning that the person has doubted so deeply that he/she has even doubted his/her own doubting, and has found a wholeness that looks similar to what their religion was telling them during stage 2. But now those ideas have a new, and fluid meaning).

He adds after describing stage 4 that this stage is only the beginning.

Peck points out that few (if any) churches are equipped to help a person through the essential stage 3 of this process. He considers this lack of help to be a real flaw in institutional churches. He thinks many of the more vibrant spirits we have stay in stage three because their churches push them out.

So the way this hooks up with Eric's thoughts is that many people probably perceive writings that challenge their deeply held beliefs as threatening to their testimonies. According to Peck's model, the doubt that these writings may cause is essential to the formation of a person who is really seeking for truth.

I think one cultural element that makes it hard for Mormons in particular to handle constructive doubt is our penchant for quick answers. The stories, articles, sermons, etc. that come out of the more official channels of Mormondom are a lot like television shows, they introduce a problem, work with it for a moment or two and then solve it. There's a real emphasis on conclusion. It is hard to tell a story in Mormondom about a challenge (especially if it involves one's testimony) unless some conclusion can be tacked on at the end that lets the audience know that they don't have to worry about anything. It's all been taken care of.

To me, if something is concluded, then it's dead. In order for something to be alive, it has to be changing. So doubt, to me, is a good thing. It means you're looking for something; you're changing. Non-doubt is the equivalent of "all is well in Zion."

Of course, I have to look at this model with a bit of skepticism, as it made me feel a lot better about all the doubt that goes through my head. According to what I had learned from the Mormon culture, I am often slipping down into apostasy. I like Peck's idea that maybe I'm on my way to something higher. I hope that's what is going on. But I have learned to be suspicious of ideas that make my ways of thinking look too good.

Stephen Carter
Fairbanks, Alaska