Where we fail: Mormon pedagogy and Fowler’s Stages of Faith, Part Three

Last updated on: September 26, 2008 at 10:37 pm by dwclark

Where we fail: Mormon pedagogy and Fowler’s Stages of Faith, Part Three 2008-09-26T22:37:36-05:00 dwclark

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

The main distinguishing feature of Stage 4, Individuative-Reflective faith, is the capacity and need for critical reflection. The critical reflection is directed both at the self and at a faith tradition. Religious symbols are no longer taken to be ontological realities, but are transformed into conceptual meanings. It is a stage of demythologizing. Finally it is a stage of tension between one’s subjective feelings and the pursuit of objectivity.

What usually brings on Stage 4? I quote from Fowler:

Factors contributing to the breakdown of Stage 3 and to readiness for transition may include: serious clashes or contradictions between valued authority sources; marked changes, by officially sanctioned leaders, or policies or practices previously deemed sacred and unbreachable (for example, in the Catholic church changing the mass from Latin to the vernacular, or no longer requiring abstinence from meat on Friday); the encounter with experiences or perspectives that lead to critical reflection on how one’s beliefs and values have formed and changed, and on how “relative” they are to one’s particular group or background. Frequently the experience of “leaving home”–emotionally or physically, or both–precipitates the kind of examination of self, background, and lifeguiding values that gives rise to stage transition at this point.

To paint with a very broad brush, I have at one time or another heard every aspect of the Fowler quote above, except for the leaving home part, as describing “apostacy.” That’s like telling someone going through puberty that what they are going through makes them evil, filthy, and dirty.

In my experience the only universal program/idea for helping out with Stage 4 is the mission. And there, it’s not so much helping those in Stage 4, it’s preventing it or delaying it. I am not accusing anyone of collusion to inhibit development. It’s just a fact that people in that age bracket are leaving home and are likely to transition to Stage 4. Pedagogy in the MTC and what missionaries teach on a mission is nothing but Stage 3 friendly stuff. Mission rules and the missionary life are Stage 3 on steroids.

I did want to point out some specific aspects of Mormon leadership structures, theology, and pedagogy that make the church a difficult place for Stage 4 folks. I have found every one of the following to be universal in the church or near universal. By near universal I mean it’s the case more than 90-95% of the time in the U.S.

Leadership Structures

Untrained clergy Let’s face it, almost no one in the church knows how to deal with the messiness of our texts and history. For the most part it is ignored and labelled anti-Mormon.
Lay clergy Our lay clergy has a limited amount of time to deal with things, and dealing with Brother and Sister Smith’s marital problems trumps your concerns about polyandry
Everyone is clergy Since everyone is clergy, everyone is expected to do something. If you don’t feel like participating because you are sorting a few things out you become dead weight which leads to marginalization.

Theology

Prophetic Infallibility Yes, I know that in theory the prophet is not infallible, but in practice he is. Serious critical public reflection on church leadership is still the quickest way to land yourself in a church court. This simply does not mix well with someone who has a need to engage in critical reflection on their faith tradition
Fundamentalist/Literalist scripture interpretation People in Stage 4 tend to know about the messiness of texts, and even a minimal acquaintance with Biblical Studies or Mormon History is likely to make you question how scripture is to be interpreted. The conflict comes because the dominant mode of scripture interpretation in CES, at BYU, among the leadership, and among the members is fundamentalist/literalist. I do make an exception for the first 11 chapters of Genesis, there does seem to be some movement towards allegorical/metaphorical interpretation for those chapters. I also make another exception for books which have traditionally been seen to be non-historical such as Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Job.
Absolute/Universal claims about doctrine This does not encourage or allow critical reflection. While the claim may be true, it’s not helpful for Stage 4 folks:) There just isn’t much room for trying out new ideas or interpretations, at least not in any public way.
“Read your scriptures. Say your prayers. Go to church. Have Family Home Evening. Pay your tithing.” So often in lessons any foray into complicated matters is headed off by a well meaning teacher or participant saying if you just focus on the basics it all works out. Again this is not helpful to Stage 4 persons

Pedagogy

The last shall be first and the first shall be last Most of the things that make for a strong pedagogy for Stage 2 and 3, which I laid in out in my last post, become weaknesses in dealing with Stage 4 persons.
Where’s the beef? By beef I mean things like detailed exegesis, non-whitewashed history, dealing with tough issues etc. There just isn’t much on offer by faithful Mormons for faithful Mormons that provides satisfying answers for Stage 4 members of the church. If you look real hard you can find some, but the ratio of dross to silver is pretty high.

In my opinion Stage 4 is very difficult for any faith tradition to handle. First, persons in Stage 3 just make better members of any church (with the exception perhaps of Unitarians). Second, arriving at Stage 4 is not a universal phenomenon so there is just not as much experience in dealing with Stage 4. Finally, pedagogical techniques that work well with Stage 3 fail miserably with Stage 4. As I said in my previous post, hiding the messiness of scripture is just fine and probably desirable for those in Stage 3. Stage 4 people want all the messiness they can get, they want it in one fell swoop so they can critically analyze all at once. Teaching Stage 3 persons like that would not be productive.

But does our church provide the worse experience possible for Stage 4 members if everyone has this same problem? Unfortunately, I think it does. In most churches a trained clergy will have at least some knowledge of the messiness of scripture. Prophetic infallibility doesn’t exist. Biblical inerrancy does exist, but you can find a different interpretation on offer in other denominations or groups, which they can usually take advantage of because of toned down absolute/universal claims. All churches have some absolutist universal/claims, but Presbyterians don’t think Methodists are going to hell. Same for Conservative and Reformed Jews. Also, there is beef on offer, and it is held in much higher esteem than it is on our church.

Finally, I don’t think it has to be this way. I am not looking to indict anyone. I don’t think anyone is malicious here. I just would like a better experience for Stage 4 Mormons.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

September 26, 2008

Sunday dining- how do you respond?

Next Post

September 28, 2008 Guest post- Ugaritic and the LDS temple

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2013 Scriptures Administrative Apologetics Atonement Bible Book of Mormon Book Review BYU Doctrine Extra-Biblical Literature Family Feminism Guests History LDS Church History Leadership Marginalia Metaphysics Mormon Culture Mormon Studies Personal Issues Political Philosophy Politics Scripture Sexuality Speculation Spotlights Studying Religion Ten Tidbits The Tenure Track Theology Tips on Applying Series Tips on Being an Independent Scholar Uncategorized

Select a Month June 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 July 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz