One Matt Thurston’s comments on my “Out of Mormonism” post was far too insightful and articulate to leave buried, so I’m excerpting a paragraph and including it here. Many closet doubters find themselves in a catch-22: they are often chastised for questioning in church settings, but after revealing themselves, their past integrity is then questioned. Here are a few of the many reasons why someone might choose not to broadcast their doubts:
Finally, with regards to hiding one’s doubts, what is the model for doing otherwise? A person hides his doubts for a variety of reasons: 1.) he doesn’t want others to worry; 2.) he doesn’t want others to think ill of him (i.e. the common LDS refrain that doubts are often the result of sin or other personal shortcomings); 3.) he doesn’t want to disrupt Sunday School or Priesthood Meeting (or whatever); 4.) he doesn’t want to potentially lead others to doubt; 5.) he doesn’t think anyone will really care or ‘get’ it; 6.) he already knows what the advice or answers will be; 7.) he changes his mind daily and doesn’t want to commit to changing his public persona until he is sure; 8.) its his own darn business (i.e. between him and God); and so on.
I can relate every single one of the examples Matt shared. And within Mormonism, the church fosters an environment that works on all of these concerns. For example, we are told to cater to the needs of the lowest common denominator (“You don’t want to damage the faith of the new converts with your questions!”). In the LDS situation, this situation is exacerbated by faith requirements for temple attendance (i.e, you can keep every possible commandment, but if you reveal that you don’t believe that Joseph Smith was God’s chosen prophet, you are prohibited from your attending your sister’s wedding in the temple). Even in casual settings (with devout friends and family members), such discussion is often discouraged, especially when it precipitates embarrassment, angry lectures or defensive argument.
I know this phenomenon is not limited to Mormonism. I believe that the bulk (but certainly not all) of faith-based religious groups discourage the expression of doubt through formal institutional means and informal social pressures. The visible dissenters represent only the tiny visible tip of suppressed doubt and disaffection in these religions. Most suffer in silence. When they do leave, it is when the pressure is unbearable, when they’ve endured all that they can. The suppressed emotion explodes; they leave suddenly, full of venom.
I think that one reason why Jana and I are relatively free of anger at the LDS Church (remember, criticism does not equal anger) is because we’ve had so long to ease out it. We’ve had many opportunities to express ourselves at Sunstone and with our close Mormon friends. For me, this blog has helped a lot. And we have new communities to transition into.
I feel that if I have a calling or vocation, it is in part to minister to the marginalized ones I described above–to be a preacher of doubt, to embrace the rejected, to heal the hearts of the wounded, to help the silenced find their voices and to sing and shout aloud with them.
