The Living Church

As a missionary I have a strong belief in the truthfulness of the LDS movement and the tenets to which it adheres. They are inspired and bless many lives, including my family and my own. But I do not like the dogmatic shift into absolutist territory that befalls many others churches. If we turn into the kind of church that is so infallible, so sure, so unconditional; we begin to mirror other faiths in their lack of progression and refusal to acknowledge reason and truth. Believing that we are the ‘one true church’ without consideration and constant self-evaluation, borders on the conditions that precede apostasy. Letting tradition blind us and allowing for a system where there is an absence of doubt, blurs the lines of the differences between us and the rest of the world’s religions. The reason Mormonism is so beautiful is because of that line; because it began and continued to be progressive. The more tradition and culture drag us toward stagnation, the more uncomfortable I feel.

The movement started with a boy who was willing to accept and progress in any way show to him as being right. He did not hold to any cultural tradition; in fact he defied most of all them. It’s what made the church stand out. The book of Mormon proves to the church that nothing is done or sure, but that God will continue to reveal and we must be ready to adapt to the changing world and embrace true and progressive doctrinal shifts.

The true victims of the Mormon culture phenomenon are those who are the strongest members of the church. They can become a part of a guilt motivated system. They are not it’s source by any means, but rather the result of the bureaucracy that can take advantage of the best intentioned. The outcome of such a system is not unpleasant; the ends of this process are what we celebrate and take pride in. The church does so much for so many, and gives a filter of love and hope to the religious world. But for those—such as myself—who struggle with a Machiavellian justification for a system that may border on violating the principles of the religion it operates in, it can be disheartening and discouraging.

I guess it comes down to what’s more important to you; the ends or the means by which they are produced. This pseudo-business style of running a religion that is largely pure and loving may be effective in increasing numbers (tithing, members, retention); but this mixture is not necessarily morally permissible to me.  It’s a good thing that the church continues to progress and evolve with living apostles and prophets or else the traditionalist members might have stagnated the ‘living church’. And if it's a living church, it will adapt and change for the better; and thankfully it continues to do so.