Since leaving the Church, I have been puzzled that my many Mormon friends have not shown interest in engaging with me over the reasons for my disaffection. Arguing such points does not interest them nor me, but the elephant in the room is hard to ignore. There seems to be a great communication chasm that separates us. For the believer, the Church is “true” by definition, and therefore any other possibility simply does not exist, so dialog on that topic is a non-starter. There seems to be no interest in “suspending disbelief” in order to examine other possibilities. Perhaps such a suspension would be too threatening to the believer. Perhaps the believer is uncomfortable facing someone whose mere presence is a repudiation of their faith. Unfortunately, even in science, it is very difficult for those with a major personal investment in a belief system to dispassionately examine whatever is outside that belief.
Institutionally, the Church does not attempt to bridge the communication chasm. Its authorities do not field questions in public forums; they avoid discussions of Church doctrine and history, and even discourage participation in open forums of examination of Mormon thought, such as are sponsored by unofficial Mormon-interest publications, Sunstone and Dialog. Though I am disappointed by this lack of fearless engagement, I take it as yet another evidence of an insecure position.
Ironically, the Church proclaims itself to embrace all truth. The believers may sing “Oh, say what is truth”” but truth for them is whatever fits their belief. What does not fit is spun or ignored. Belief trumps evidence. Obviously, “truth” is LDS new-speak. To my mind, Mormon preoccupation with its truthfulness belies an underlying insecurity with its truthfulness.
Robert Bushman
Read his full story here.
For more information, see The Mormon Mirage 3rd Edition: A Former Member Looks at the Mormon Church Today (Zondervan, 2009). Also available as an audiobook and as an expanded-text E-book for Nook, Kindle and other reading devices.
