Not of this fold?
By John Remy on Sep 4, 2006
Arriving at my first symposium several years ago, I was pleasantly surprised to see people I admired wearing sleeveless dresses and carrying Starbucks cups (I did pass judgment that they were not patronizing one of the fine independent coffee shops in downtown SLC). It is clear that you don’t have to be a practicing Mormon to fit in and be welcomed in Sunstone circles. In fact, some attendees seem to play deliberately with the visible elements of standard Church criteria for social acceptance at the symposia. I could show up in a sleeveless dress sipping from a hip flask, and I think that I would still be warmly welcomed in a Sunstone setting.
For this reason and others, I love Sunstone. You might say that I have a testimony of it. I feel freer to be myself in a Sunstone session than I do in Priesthood or Sacrament meetings. One of the great ironies of my life is that the Church puts more social pressure on me to compromise my beliefs and integrity than work, school or social life. At Sunstone, I can speak with integrity. In church, I can choose between silence, lying, crafting my comments so that they are full of double meanings, or speaking my mind all the way to irrelevance and dismissal. Sunstone, for me, is a place where I can speak openly about my experience of Mormonism and make connections with others who can relate.
I wonder, however, what defines the Sunstone community in belief terms? Where do its cognitive and discursive boundaries lie?
Many Sunstoners feel that the main reason they cannot leave the Church is because they would betray their heritage. However, many of us are not “DNA-Mormons.” Many of us are new to the Church or are married to non-members. I, for one, am a convert–the first in my family. I am descended from French Huguenots on one side, and my ancestors on my mother’s side were Buddhist going back to when Moroni was still a hunted man.
I know that some of my good friends in Sunstone are driven by a desire to keep people in the Church. I’m curious how many Sunstone supporters share this motivation. Are there those who focus more on the individual’s journey (which may lead out of or back into the Church fold) and less on the institution and community?
My impression is that most Sunstone attendees believe in God and Christ. But I had the delightful experience of meeting a couple of LDS agnostics/atheists at the SLC symposium this year. I myself am a self-described “weak” atheist. I suspect that there are other Sunstone supporters who do not believe in other fundamental Church principles, like the Atonement and the Priesthood.
This post is not meant to be critical of Sunstone; instead, it is an opportunity to explore the margins of a a community that is characterized in part by its ability to redefine and to test boundaries. Who sits securely within the Sunstone fold? Who might feel less welcome? Are there some fundamental principles that we assume are shared by the majority of Sunstone participants? Is there a disconnect between our assumptions and the reality?
Excellent thoughts. Sorry that I have nothing to add or criticize. I just really enjoyed it. Is that sufficient for a comment?
Keep it up!
Comment # 1 by Ryan | Sep 5, 2006 | Reply
Yes, I am eagerly awaiting the day that John arrives at Sunstone in a sleeveless dress with an accompanying coffee cup (will you be carrying or wearing that cup??)
Seriously, I have found Sunstone to be all-inclusive, where every stripe of Mormon or religious seeker is welcome. However, I have heard from many people that they feel alienated if they are too conservative politically or if their views are too orthodox. Rarely have I heard someone say that Sunstone wasn’t a good fit because they were too heterodox. Sunstone seems to have a pretty wide net for the outliers.
I am curious about those whose level of activity in the church waxes and wanes, yet they still attend Sunstone. Do they feel more accepted at the Symposium in the sleeveless dresses or when their clothes evidence garement lines? I would suspect the former rather than the latter, but that’s only a hunch.
Comment # 2 by jana | Sep 5, 2006 | Reply
I composed a nice response earlier this evening and then lost it with an errant key stroke. Hate it when that happens… Following is a quick, off-the-cuff recap:
Loved this comment: One of the great ironies of my life is that the Church puts more social pressure on me to compromise my beliefs and integrity than work, school or social life. At Sunstone, I can speak with integrity. In church, I can choose between silence, lying, crafting my comments so that they are full of double meanings, or speaking my mind all the way to irrelevance and dismissal. Sunstone, for me, is a place where I can speak openly about my experience of Mormonism and make connections with others who can relate. So true!
John asked: I know that some of my good friends in Sunstone are driven by a desire to keep people in the Church. I’m not motivated by a desire to keep people in the Church, but I am motivated by a desire to widen the boundaries of the Church for those that want to stay, for those that don’t feel comfortable or spiritually fulfilled. However, I’m ultimately interested in the personal faith journey. If a person’s journey takes him/her out of the Church, despite widened boundaries, then I’m happy for their self-discovery. In other words, I find the stories coming out of the “Why We Stay?” contingent as spiritually fulfilling as those coming out of the “Why We Leave?” camp.
What are the boundaries of Sunstone? I think as long as people show a modicum of tolerance and respect for another’s point of view, they are accepted within the fold. (Respect and tolerance need not be nicey-nice — I enjoy healthy contention now and then — but it rules out the zealous belittling or disparaging of another’s beliefs.) The other group probably not welcome within Sunstone’s boundaries are the overt proselytizers. Regarding Jana’s comment on the discomfort of the politically conservative or orthodox… I wonder, do they feel uncomfortable because Sunstoners don’t make them feel welcome, or because they feel the kind of natural alienation that comes from holding a minority position? In other words, not unlike how Borderlanders feel at Church?
Comment # 3 by Matt Thurston | Sep 5, 2006 | Reply
John,
I think I’d compare the Church to a marching band and Sunstone to an improv jazz band. The metphor is probably pretty obvious. The marching band practices and practices and practices so that they can march perfectly in step and make cool formations all the while playing music that demands a great deal of crispness, precision and volume.
Meanwhile the improv jazz band also practices and practices and practices, but the reason for the practice is so that they can play with the structures they know so well. So they can take a certain progression or theme and explore its ramifications and possibilities.
A similar metaphor might be classical music (church) and jazz (Sunstone, etc). Jazz would not be here without classical music. In the same way, Sunstone is a subset of the Church. Sunstone would not be here, we would not have the structure to play on if the Church was not what it is. In a way we’re dependent on the Church.
Most people I know like classical music, even if its only the standard Looney Toons pieces. But many many fewer are into jazz.
Comment # 4 by Stephen Carter | Sep 6, 2006 | Reply
I attended Sunstone for the first time in SLC a few weeks ago. For me I felt very much at home. I have spent a lot of my life wondering if I would ever meet LDS people who on the one hand appreciated religion yet on the other hand were willing to (and did so naturally) ask critical questions of their own faith. However, I did witness a few incidents that seemed to draw some lines over who was welcome at Sunstone.
In one session I witnessed a lady turn to a gentleman behind her (after the session ended) and ask him about his religious background. Although the question seemed to suggest some genuine interest in diversity. I was a bit surprised by the interactios. The man appeared to be new to Sunstone (though that’s just my sense) and said he wasn’t raised with any religion and had never become affiliated with any. I was instantly interested in what would draw him to Sunstone, but the woman speaking to him seem baffled by his response and essentially smiled said, “Oh” and turned around to chat with some of the people who were coming down from the panel discussion. While I doubt this is how this kind of conversation would regularly take place at Sunstone, I have to ask–does Sunstone have a place for non-religious outsiders who don’t have strong links to Mormonism, but are drawn in for various other reasons (i.e. a critical look at religion)? Should it?
The second “incident” I witnesses was the overall experience of my younger sister at Sunstone. I invited her to attend (her first time also) and she was pretty excited to go. She felt at various times that presenters or people she talked with expected her to hold more liberal beliefs than she did. (I am not too familiar or comfortable with the terminology used on LDS blogs, but I guess she could be called a Iron Rod member or a TBM). She felt she had to be on her guard so as to not reveal a belief that might be seen as less progressive or too conservative. Still I think she felt that generally she was welcome and would come back. I was personally surprised during Van Hale’s presentation when he asked if anyone would dare admitting at Sunstone to not believing in evolution that about 5 people actually raised their hands. Yet even though myself and others were a bit shocked, no one seemed to care and the session just went on. From my perception Sunstone does a good job at being inclusive of those with more conservative feelings, but I still wonder if their are certain ideological positions that are quietly expected of attendees.
I have already written too much, but I have a third musing. Does Sunstone appeal to international members of the church? (It may, I don’t have information on this) Should it? If so, how does it take up issues that would be of more use to the faith struggles and doubts of this community. This question only comes up (and perhaps it doesn’t fit in this topic) because my wife, who is Chinese, shows little interest in Sunstone or its issues(and its not because she sees it as threatening). I have ideas why she or other international friends I have don’t show interest in Sunstone, but I’ll see if anyone else likes this line of thought first.
Comment # 5 by Sterling S. | Sep 6, 2006 | Reply
I apologize for my spelling and grammar errors in the above piece, I didn’t check it thoroughly.
Comment # 6 by Sterling S. | Sep 6, 2006 | Reply
Who sits securely within the Sunstone fold?
Who might feel less welcome?
I applaud your query. Having attended a Sunstone Symposium in San Jose, CA sometime back, I left wondering the same things. I was surprised to look around and see that of 200+ participants, I was the only visible minority. On any given Sunday I am surrounded by far more ethnic diversity than at the symposium. It left me scratching my head, that a pre-eminent advocate for diverse voices within the church was far more lacking in ethnic diversity than any local LDS ward I had ever been attended.
Not feeling safe, or “less welcomed” as diplomatically stated, I left the conference early and the Sunstone community shortly thereafter.
It seems that while clear that you don’t have to be a practicing Mormon to fit in and be welcomed in Sunstone circles, it helps if you’re white.
Comment # 7 by Minerva | Sep 6, 2006 | Reply
Minerva - I’m a bit puzzled, did something happen to make you feel “less safe” or unwelcome? Or is it as you wrote, you looked around at the ethnic makeup and left midway through? As the church continues to become more ethnically diverse, Sunstone will reflect that growing diversity in its attendees. While the church has certainly expanded its efforts, Sunstone is still in its relative infancy, having been around for only 30 some odd years, and most of those years it has been (and the major symposium still is) an event based in Utah. With the further push for regional symposia, this will also help to expand the diversity. Perhaps you could give us another try?
With respect to John’s post:
In some (many?) cases I see the playing “deliberately with the visible elements of standard Church criteria for social acceptance” as an adolescence, a testing of the boundaries. Not everyone, granted, but I do see a difference between subtle integrity and flaunting. Even though one need not be a practicing Mormon to feel welcome, it is Mormonism that is our common tie. Thus, Sunstone is a good place to allow the exploration and growth, still within a Mormon context.
I see the diversity in social practice, and I see the occasional angry or struggling or indignant commenter, but I also see a great deal of attendees who love Mormonism dearly, who value their place in it, and who are anxiously engaged.
Interesting comment from Holly, Matt, and I think that she touches on a clear boundary when she says that the “goal is to explore the role Mormonism plays in people’s lives, not end that role.” In other words, if you are engaged with a spiritual journey, if you can celebrate the vibrancy of Mormon thought and culture even while acknowledging some of the challenges, and if you can respect others and give them space for their own journey, welcome!
Comment # 8 by RorySwensen | Sep 7, 2006 | Reply
Just wanted to get a couple of quick random thoughts in before I am away from a computer for a few days. I attended the SLC symposium for the first time last month and enjoyed it thoroughly.
In the same vein as Minerva, I was struck by the lack of racial diversity in attendence. It was particularly ironic to be in sessions where there was discussion of the gravity of the 1978 revelation and to look around and see only white faces. I don’t concur that this need be viewed as less welcoming to non-whites, but I can see why some might see it this way. I would be shocked if the average Sunstoner were any less welcoming of racial diversity than the average person in an LDS ward.
On Sunstone’s appeal to international members, I’d hazard a guess that it is virtually nil for most. (Then again, it is virtually nil for most U.S. members too.) My personal observation is that many international members in particular, but anyone without “Mormon DNA” in general has a different set of potential “hot” issues than the average Sunstoner. This means that when most such members consider participation in Sunstone, the interest level just won’t be that high. Moreover, those without Mormon DNA likely have different social/intellectial support structures to fall back on (perhaps outside the church entirely) if they find that the Iron Rod model isn’t a perfect fit for them than do those with Mormon DNA.
John, I like your term “weak atheist,” though I’m not sure exactly how you define it. As for myself, on at least some days I’d consider myself a weak agnostic. My motivation for being in the Church is in large part one of personal betterment — I am one of those “weak” people who does better with some sort of structure. I enjoy Sunstone because I can’t always swallow everything I get in more orthodox settings. The freedom to question openly is most welcome.
By the way, Sterling, are you the person that confused me for my twin brother at the Symposium? If not, my apologies.
Comment # 9 by Dan Y. | Sep 7, 2006 | Reply
Dan-Yes I am the Sterling who confused you with your twin brother.
As a native of Utah and a DNA Mormon I wasn’t surprised to see a conference full of white faces at the symposium. However, I also found it ironic that in most of the sessions (and specifically one showing clips from the film about the struggles of black latter day saints) there were only white folks. I concur that part of this is simply due to the location of the symposium and the age of Sunstone. In time, I believe it will appeal to some members from diverse groups (but as Dan mentions it will likely only ever appeal to a minority of those members). When I read about Minerva’s experience in the San Jose Symposium (San Jose to my knowledge is a lot more diverse than Utah) I think something more could be done to invite more ethnically diverse voices.
I’d personally like to see a section of Sunstone devoted to someone non-white or non-american discussing their intellectual struggles within the church. I know that these stories are out there. At the very least it would be incredibly informative for DNA Mormons and potentially it could draw new people into the discussion. On the other hand, I could foresee some problems. I have some friends who feel that they already stand out too much in LDS groups that they don’t want to add one more thing to distinguish themselves. Sunstone could be viewed as association with yet another group/ethnicity that the main body of Mormons do not completely understand or appreciate.
Comment # 10 by Sterling S. | Sep 7, 2006 | Reply