Wednesday, January 29, 2014

Meeting with Bishop

Last night I met with my bishop and gave him a run down of where I am with regard to the Church.  I knew this conversation was coming.  My temple recommend expired at the end of October and since then his counselors have each tried to meet with me to do their part of the interview.  What should have been a simple thing for them to check off their list was complicated when I told them that I needed to talk to Bishop.  Bishop told me he would set aside some time to talk with me, and yesterday he emailed me to see if I could meet last night.  Might as well get it over with.

Our Bishop has been in place for about 7 years, so he's been our Bishop for the entire 6 years we've lived here.  I worked really closely with him when I was the Young Women's President for 3 years.  He's a very good man who cares so much about our ward, which has a lot of struggles.  I knew he would be kind in our discussion, but I didn't know what the end result would be.  Like I said, our ward struggles and we barely have people to staff the leadership callings.  Would I no longer be the 1st Counselor in Relief Society despite the need?  That seemed likely.

We wound up having a good conversation and I left feeling relieved that I had finally done it.  I got a bit emotional at times.  I didn't go into a lot of detail, but I gave a brief list of some of my issues.  When we first sat down he asked me what was going on and I told him I've been having issues with the Church for a couple of years and it's to the point where I don't feel I can answer a couple of the temple recommend questions the way they're supposed to be answered.  He asked if it was about gay marriage and I said that was part of it.  I said, "I'm having issues with gay marriage, with some of the historical issues of the Church, with the historicity of the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham, and with women's place in the Church."  (Despite both of them being politically conservative, I know that women's issues in the Church really chafe the Bishop's wife, so that at least isn't anything he hasn't heard before.)

I told him, I'm sure it's all things you've heard before..., and he responded, I don't know if I've heard ALL of it.  I said that I think generally the Church does a lot of good, the people are good, and I love our ward and the opportunities I've had to serve.  But there are these problems. 

Interestingly, he told me that he thought I was coming in to talk with him about gay marriage.  I said, "I wish that was all it was.  If it was, I'm sure I could tuck that away on my shelf and go along with things.  The problem is, it's everything on top of everything.  It's the historical problems, it's the political problems, it's everything."

He had obviously prepped for the gay marriage discussion, however.  About a year ago, Elder Ballard came to our region and had a meeting with all of the Bishops in the area.  My Bishop took copious notes and every so often when he feels it's appropriate he'll share some of what Ballard taught in Ward Council or in Sacrament Meeting.  Last night he told me that in that meeting someone asked Ballard about gay marriage.  Ballard responded that unlike blacks in the Priesthood, marriage between a man and a woman is our theology and will never change.

(I didn't mention the many, MANY prophets and apostles who taught in the past that it is our theology that blacks not have the Priesthood...)

Then he pulled out a copy of the Family Proclamation, folded it up, put it in an envelope and gave it to me to read.  I assured him that I have read it many times.  He emphasized the "this is our theology" line again.

I was reflecting on this after the fact and it occurred to me how I am so far beyond the point where quoting a General Authority at me will make me jump back in line.  GA's don't have the authority they once did for me.  I honestly think overall they're good men, doing what they think is right, but to me they're just that - men doing what they think is right.  And I don't happen to agree with them on a lot of issues.

Bishop tried to convince me that the issues I'm concerned about are just the small things that don't really matter in the big picture.  I don't think he really understood that my issues are with the foundation of the Church itself.  When you doubt Joseph Smith, the Restoration, and the Book of Mormon as fact, where does that leave you in Mormonism?

We had a discussion specifically about the temple recommend interview and he said as far as he's concerned, it's really only the first 2 questions that matter.  Do you believe in God, Jesus and the Holy Ghost?  Yes to that means you're on par with most Christians.  I said yes to that one.  The second question is about believing in the Restoration through Joseph Smith.  He said, If you've got those two, you're fine as far as I'm concerned.  I said, Yeah, I don't think I can say yes to the second question anymore.

We talked a little about Joseph Smith and he sort of backed off from the idea of the First Vision as correlated and said something like, "As long as you believe Joseph Smith had an experience, a vision, an experience of some sort, no matter what other weird things he did later in life."  Yeah, I can't even give him that.  I don't know what happened to Joseph Smith, but I definitely don't think the beginnings of the Church, and the inspiration for the Church, are as clear cut as we think. 

Bishop's biggest arguments about why the Church is true are its amazing growth and the fact that it works as well as it does.  He said something about how the Church is growing and I couldn't let that pass.  I said, "Is it?"  He said, "Well, when I joined 40 years ago there were, what, 2 or 3 million.  Now there's..."  I supplied, "15 million."  He said, "Right."  To which I said, "Yes, but that's who has been baptized.  It's not taking into account how many are actually active."  He said that was true.  I said that's still an extremely small percentage of the world's population.

To him the sheer numbers of people who believe that this is the One True Church is a strong argument.  I replied, Yes, but there are lots of people in other religions who are also extremely dedicated to their faith and believe it's true.

The ultimate argument for him is that the Church works so well, provides for so many through the welfare system, and is based mostly on volunteer service.  The fact that so many are willing to volunteer their time to the Church is a miracle to him.  Several times he reiterated his point about the Church working so well and still existing.  At one point he asked, "How did the Church last so long if it's not true?"  I said (yes, I actually said this), "Well, early on they isolated themselves and were in a situation where you either go along with everyone, or you're an outcast and you don't survive."  (Husband pointed out when I was discussing with him later, "How did other groups founded around the same time survive?  Like the Seventh Day Adventists?")

What I didn't say, but thought, is that there are lots of huge corporations in the world that work very well (or, at least on par with the Church.  I don't know if the Church works "very well".  Different discussion.) and manage in a bureaucratic fashion a huge workforce.  The difference, of course, being that we don't get paid.  But it's amazing how well guilt and indoctrination and loyalty will work to inspire people to do what they're told.

I told him that when we were in Utah for Christmas, I thought a couple of times about how much more simple it would be if I could just believe, if I could just go back to thinking it was true.  Part of me wishes I could turn my brain off, but I can't.  There are some really beautiful ideas in Mormon theology, and part of me wishes I could just proceed with the status quo.

The meeting ended with him saying that he hopes I'll still come, to which I said of course, and that he hopes I'll still serve, to which I said, that's up to you.  I'm happy to keep my callings if he wants me.  He said he does.  Maybe once he reflects on that a bit, he won't want someone who doesn't believe to be the 1st Counselor in the Relief Society Presidency, but we'll see.  Like I said, he was prepped for a gay marriage discussion, not an "I'm pretty sure I don't believe in Joseph Smith" discussion.

He said a very nice prayer, asking for me to have peace and to find my path (which I know means he hopes I'll see the light re: the Church, but his phrasing was very generous and non-specific).  Then he gave me a hug and asked if it would be okay to have future discussions with me.  I said that's fine.

I felt kind of sad last night when I thought about not going to the temple again.  For all of its problems, the temple is a place where I have felt peace.  I worked in the temple for 2 years at a time when I was really struggling in other areas of my life.  School was going terribly, and I had been unceremoniously dumped by my boyfriend of 2 1/2 years.  The temple was a refuge for me at that time.  The endowment has been giving me more and more angst over the last couple of years, but I will always love initiatories, where women administer to women.

Surprisingly, my husband seemed a little sad as I told him how the meeting went.  I thought it went about the best it could and afterward I felt some relief at finally being out in the open, at least to Bishop.  Husband kept telling me he was proud of me, but it was tinged with sadness.  His family heritage is very Mormon.  Old school, polygamous Mormon pioneers.  If we were to ever leave the Church outright, it would be a huge stumbling block in our relationship with his family.  He's a cultural Mormon much more than I am, despite his liberal politics and ability to see the institutional Church with perfectly clear eyes.  I am a little distressed that I made him sad, but I'm glad I was so open with Bishop. 

I know that less understanding men might have immediately released me from my callings and labeled me as "trouble."  Bishop just requested that I not preach my doubts and I said he doesn't need to worry about that.  As I said to him, I have no desire to disrupt other people's happiness.  I don't feel the need to be evangelical about the things I have learned.  I'm more concerned with just coming to some sort of peace within myself.