An old guy at church told me he only reads the scriptures and the words of the prophets. He steers clear of all other reading material – because it’s too worldly for him. OK, I’ll try to respect his decision.
However…that idea is so far against my religion, I’m surprised we go to the same church.
I have a PhD and work in academia – meaning I spend a lot of my time reading and writing and learning from people outside of the church. Aside from work, I like reading fiction and the news and nonfiction secular writing. I enjoy writing on this blog for other people to read. I love reading and discussing books and magazines and articles with my family. I learn a lot and feel closer to God through all of these endeavors. Am I the outlier here in a church full of people who agree with this guy?
I shouldn’t be.
I mean, I attend a church where as a child I was encouraged to memorize the Articles of Faith – one of which said, “If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things” (presumably including reading material outside the church). I attend a church where I was told repeatedly as a teenager by the prophet to get as much education as I can (presumably while reading books and articles outside the church writings). I attend a church where I pay tithing that subsidizes higher education institutions (that happen to assign reading material from all kinds of authors).
So why did this guy say what he said? I’d like to think this guy is the outlier, not me. I could brush him off as a bit wacky and go on with life. But, this man is a prominent leader in my area and I know he’s not the only prominent leader with these feelings – I know because I’ve heard other people express similarly anti-academic rhetoric.
The anti-intellectualism is killing personal enlightenment. Why is this view so prominent?
I’ve sat through too many gross Sunday School discussions where someone reads the scripture in the Book of Mormon that says, “But to be learned is good if they hearken unto the counsels of God.” In these conversations, the “if” statement is focused on so heavily, that it almost seems like people think you may as well skip the education because it’s too hard to still believe in God. I’ve heard derailed Sunday School classes where class members start telling everyone about the person they knew who was super educated and left God behind. Come on, folks – that conversation is so unhelpful and teaches us to miss out on so much good in the world!
I want to read the scripture like this: “It’s great to be educated! Especially when you’re also seeking personal revelation for your life.” Perhaps if Nephi had worded it like that, we wouldn’t have church leaders denying themselves the opportunity to “anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy.” And we’d have more willingness to seek truth everywhere we can.
Does the anti-intellectualism sentiment hit your congregation? How do you combat it?
THIS!
I can’t tell you how many times in my 65 years I’ve heard the scriptures-and-words-of-the-prophets-only sentiment expressed. I find it an odd way of thinking for a member of a church which was advised in 1833 to “[ ] seek ye diligently and teach one another words of wisdom; yea, seek ye out of the best books words of wisdom; seek learning, even by study and also by faith.” (D&C 88:118). When the Lord gave that advice the only “scriptures” available were the Bible and the Book of Mormon and there were no Conference Reports. Surely He didn’t mean for us to limit our study to only those two books.
I like to think had He given that advice today, He would have said “seek ye out of the best books, periodicals, blog posts, podcasts, documentaries, words of wisdom.” There is SO MUCH wisdom and truth to be had out there and all truth can be circumscribed into one great whole. And the internet is helping in the circumscribing like nothing before.
The scripture “The glory of God is intelligence.” which is emblazoned at the entrance to BYU-P ought to tattooed on the foreheads of all of these Know Nothing folks including members of the Religion faculty.
I actually live in Utah County which is home base for MLMs such as Nu Skin, Doterra, and Nature’s Sunshine and many others. The county is #1 in affinity fraud in the US. Gee, I’m so proud-NOT. This has also been one of the worst places for noncompliance for Covid. Even though my SP nearly died twice during his 6 weeks in the ICU courtesy of Covid he still refused to make the stake and ward members safe by insisting that masks be warn at all meetings. We Covid Longhaulers, other immunocompromised individuals, the very young and the very elderly weren’t and still aren’t important enough to protect. As a result my ward and the others in my stake look like ghost towns. (Of course many other factors have also caused this to happen too.) My ministers who are also my neighbors have shared that tidbit with me. They only occasionally attend. I refuse to take my life in my own hands just to attend church. It’s physically not safe to go to church. My own bishop is a health fanatic who believes that all illnesses are a result of some sort of unrighteousness in the individual-germs, viruses, bacteria, accidents and old age, etc. be damned. Any of us with chronic health challenges are considered to already be far along on the path to apostasy according to his beliefs. He refuses to reach out to the sick in the ward for this reason. I’m not joking. I wish that I was.
I blame leaders like Benson and most especially Packer for stating over the bully pulpit at GC and other settings that along with feminists and the LGBTQ+ community intellectuals (read this as anyone who actually reads semi-intelligent books, tries to expand their mind and absolutely REFUSES to let the Q15 and other church leaders do their thinking for them) constitute the biggest danger to the church. What a load of rot! Our church is regularly shooting itself in the foot precisely because folks like the man in the OP refuse to learn real proven truth as opposed to whatever a leader says is Capital T truth or what Fox News talking heads say which is why we’re still dealing with serious racism, misogyny, homophobia, affinity frauds and MLMs that swindle gullible people out of their life savings and retirement funds. Now a church member in Colorado (albeit an inactive one) has slaughtered innocents at an LGBTQ+ club in Colorado because of the untrue and unscientific rhetoric accepted and spread by leaders, so-called experts and teachers in a variety of settings about homosexuality.
If this sounds like an angry post that’s because it is. I’m exhausted from suffering from the poor decisions of leaders who don’t know what they’re talking about because they refuse to read anything but the Liahona, old church books and the 411 year old KJV Bible which is riddled with so many translation errors that more modern translations are not. I wonder what Joseph Smith would think if he could see what the church he founded is like 192 years later. Hmmmmmm.
Yes to all of this.
I see the anti-intellectualism brewing in the church in 2022 – soon to be 2023 – and it’s exhausting. It’s painful to behold. So much for President Gordon B. Hinckley telling the youth (but the young women ESPECIALLY), “It is incumbent upon every member of the Church, as a mandate from the Lord, to get all the education you can get.”
Now we have DezNat, The Transformed Wife, Wife with a Purpose, the Duggar family, and influencers like Jenna Wright and several more like her who don’t think women should be allowed to attend college, have careers, serve missions, vote, use the internet or social media, or be informed about current events. At this rate, they’ll decide that girls and women shouldn’t know how to read and write.
They also think girls and women should get married young, have large families, and stay in the kitchen 24/7/365. Remember Stephanie Nielsen? She’s another influencer who seems hellbent on depriving her daughters of an education, a way to provide for themselves, or the means to have a life outside her and her husband’s house. It’s heartbreaking and awful what she’s doing to her daughters. It’s horrible that this is still happening today and in defiance of church leaders who’ve encouraged us to “Seek ye out of the best books words of wisdom; seek learning, even by study” (Doctrine & Covenants 88:118).
Also, do you notice how these people went to college, had/have careers, and use the internet and social media – the very tools they want to deprive girls and women of – to spread their hateful and ignorant rhetoric? Pot, meet kettle.
I honestly wonder what these people expect girls and women to do with their lives. Just sit at home and twiddle their thumbs all day? It’s interesting to me how they don’t have anything to say to the girls and women who don’t have opportunities for marriage and motherhood in this life or who end up experiencing catastrophic life events (early death of husband, health problems, husband loses career/job/income, natural disasters, terminal illness, unexpected death). They want girls and women to perpetuate the cycle of ignorance and have their children raised the same way as well.
Where are the general authorities? Why don’t they have the spine to call these people out? I’m fearful of the inevitable pendulum swing to the right (and it will happen because there are a lot of angry people out there) and of us ending up under the despotic fingers of the very people the general authorities won’t call out or hold accountable. I hope it doesn’t get to that point.
I’m not sure it’s a “Church” thing as much as it is a personal thing. Some folks just aren’t intellectuals in the sense that they like to read a lot and read widely. That same person, or others like him, may be (or may not be) exceptionally bright or gifted in other non-intellectual areas such as mechanics, farming, crafts carpentry, cooking, children-care, listening, etc. The Church gathers all kinds of folks and we are thereby better able to learn tolerance and patience as we rub shoulders with views and actions very different from our own.
As you said, the official teachings of the Church encourage and even command us to seek after learning—to be both readers and writers, to learn languages and explore literature, to study things a above and below the earth, etc. (D&C 88:79-79).
The First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve are made up of individuals who hold PhDs, MDs, JDs, MBAs, etc. The same can be said of the the quorums of the Seventy and General Organizational leaders. They not only encourage us to seek learning by “study and faith,” they model it. So, worst case scenario, if your old friend only sticks to the scriptures and the words of the prophets and other Church leaders, we can hope that he at least gets exposed to some of this other material via the same leaders’ copious quotations of these other materials.
Wow, this is not ok. Not sure if you realize how elitist this comment is. Here a couple items that are not ok:
1- Labeling people gifted mechanics, farming, etc. basically professions where people use their hands, as non-intellectuals is horrifying. I have a high school student who wants to own a welding business and is already on his way to becoming an amazing welder. At the same time, he also has a high intellectual capacity. I used primary sources and Socratic seminar in the history classes I teach, and he devours primary source texts and makes incredibly thoughtful contributions in seminar. I have wondered if when he goes out in the world if he will be labeled or viewed in a certain way, as having a “less-than” intellectual capacity because of what will be considered a blue-collar profession. Your comment confirms that this is sadly true.
As for people who work in childcare not being academic? My children’s preschool teachers had degrees in either early childhood education or human development and were required to take annual PD for their licensure. I learned amazing information from them that made me a better parent. As for people good at listening? You do know that therapists and psychologists are required to have graduate degrees to do their work
Your comments come across as quite demeaning. The attitude that some people are interested in reading or don’t need to read widely is an attitude that has contributed to people, typically people of color or low-income, receiving a ‘less-than’ education because teachers don’t have as high expectations for these students and think that they don’t need an intellectual education. Please consider if you want your grandkids encountering your attitude in the classroom.
2-If someone reads only words of church leaders, they may get some poetry if they read Monson. They may even occasionally encounter a C.S. Lewis quote. They aren’t going to encounter Richard Rohr, Buddha, Islamic writings, Tolkien, Poe, Whitman, Chesterton, Campbell, McCullough, and so much rich literature.
3- Until the church accepts the Gospel of Mary Magdalene into the cannon, if someone reads only scriptures and church leaders, their exposure to female voices will be extremely limited. No Chodron, Held Evans, Bessey, Oxenreider, Lerner, Barr. No Bronte, Dickinson, Christie, Rowling, Penny, Perkins, Morrison, von Bingen, de Gouges, Wollenstonecraft, Shelley, Snow, Grimke, Perkins Gilman, Howard Shaw, Wilson, Woolf, Lourde or Harrow.
Before writing a response, please consider what your comment communicates about the non-value of women. Learn about what we all miss when we ignore female voices.
One place to start learning tolerance you say you value for views that are different from your own: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/episode-9-how-does-ignoring-the-divine-feminine-hurt-us/id1612326898?i=1000556645366
Hi Miriam, I feel like your comments to me require a response on my part, and in doing so I’d like to interject a little humor using a paraphrase of Pahoran’s words to Captain Moroni in Alma 61:
I, James, who am a old, white guy, whose views may appear at times a bit whacky to some, do send these words unto Miriam, the young, academic gal who enjoys reading and writing. Behold, I say unto you, Miriam, that I do not joy in your great frustrations over my words, yea, it grieves my soul (v. 2).
And now, in your epistle you have censured me, but it mattereth not; I am not angry, but do rejoice in the greatness of your heart (v. 9).
I’ll stop there with the paraphrasing and try to better explain myself, hoping that what I write may be more pleasing to your soul.
I meant no malice nor disrespect toward any when I wrote my first comment, nor do I intend any malice as I write to you now.
I sincerely do trust in “the greatness of your heart.” That is to say, that I believe that both you and I want to be kind and equitable toward all and that we, from our own unique perspectives and backgrounds, are trying to bless, respect, and serve those around us.
I enter these discussions realizing that the opportunity to dialogue with others, particularly women, is sacred space, and I don’t lightly tread that ground. I am sorry that the weakness of my expression caused you to think otherwise about me.
When I wrote what I wrote, I had no disrespect or denigration toward any. In fact, as I listed each of those areas of expertise, I envisioned specific people that I know who, while not being heavy readers or writers, are nevertheless very intelligent people who pursue their life’s work in remarkable ways. I have often watched them ply their crafts with great amazement and even envy for their keen minds and skillful hands.
You seemed to miss my specific statement “some folks just aren’t intellectuals in the sense that they like to read a lot and read widely.” My intent in writing those words was to say that one can be highly intelligent and yet not be a reader or a writer. I love to read and I love to write and I try to encourage others to enjoy these two aspects of our human gifts, but I don’t want to disparage in any way those who might not be so inclined. I hope my clarification helps you better understand my intent.
As I noted in my paraphrase above, I am not angry at your words, but I do wonder what message you are trying to convey. Your words seemed to say to me, “Stop! No, old, white guys, who may be a little wacky, wanted here!” Was that your intention?
As noted above, I come to this sacred space of human dialogue to learn, grow, and share ideas. Our words are often misunderstood, but cannot we have the Pahoran approach and give the other person “compassionate curiosity” as we attempt to puzzle out their words and, if necessary, come back with a sincere desire for clarification rather than condemnation?
Such is the case in Rachel Conrad Wahlberg’s treatment of Jesus’ interaction with the Canaanite woman as described by Arnfrídur Gudmundsdóttir in her marvelous book “Meeting God on the Cross: Christ, the Cross, and the Feminist Critique.” Let me share part of Wahlberg’s interesting perspective on this account, which I believe has significant relevance to our discussion:
A second important aspect of Wahlberg‘s work — besides uncovering the important role women played in Jesus‘ ministry and the early Christian community — is her focus on the true humanity of Jesus and the way he himself was influenced by his interaction with women. Wahlberg argues that, despite being confessed as “truly human,“ Jesus’ human qualities have frequently been downplayed within the Christian tradition. Wahlberg uses the story of Jesus and the Canaanite woman to prove her point (Mark 7:24-30; Matthew 15:21-28). The way the story has been interpreted in the past reflects, according to Wahlberg, the tendency to play down the humanity of Jesus. While Wahlberg believes that traditionally Jesus has been excused from “the human necessity to make choices, to define himself, to mature in his own self-understanding, to interact with another person,” the Canaanite woman was somebody who influenced Jesus, who made him reflect on his self-understanding and even change his mind. Wahlberg writes:
[I]t seems that this woman influenced Jesus. Was he a limited Jew-healer, as he said, or one for all who needed healing? She prodded him to make a choice. Scripture says “Jesus grew in wisdom.” How? Perhaps he grew in his self-understanding because of people like this woman. He matured in his concept of messiahship as she challenged him to recognize her need (p. 29).
Wow, that’s one of those “taste good” concepts to me! If Jesus could be enlarged or “grow in wisdom” via His interaction with this woman, then how much more can I mature and grow in wisdom through my blessed interaction with the women who surround me and allow me into their lives?
Please allow me to enter this space (Exponent II) in my attempt to “increase in wisdom.” Such space, and such willing women, will change the world one heart at a time, just as Abigail of old changed David’s warring heart as taught recently by Sister Kristin M. Yee in her powerful general conference address “Beauty for Ashes: The Healing Path of Forgiveness” (October 2022).
Again, I “rejoice in the greatness of your heart” in your sincere efforts to change hearts for good and “[m]y soul standeth fast [with yours] in that liberty in the which God hath made us free” (v. 9).
I think this is for Bailey, right? (You said “Hi Miriam” so when I got the email notification with the comment in it, I was trying to remember what comments I’d made directed to you. Coming back here, I see that I think these comments are within the conversation with Bailey. But regardless, I’m glad to see that my opening post is sparking so much discussion in the comments section here!)
Yes, sorry Miriam. Please see my additional note I just posted. You are fast!
Opps, I meant Bailey, not Miriam, and maybe I was mixing a bit of both the OP and Bailey’s subsequent response to my comment, but I think my plea to allow space comes through nevertheless. Please excuse this error as well as other errors in the above.
p.s. While the Bible is written from an cultural perspective of the ancient near east, a nice contrast to mostly western church leaders, church leaders are also all straight and skew almost all white and North American. God doesn’t dictate general conference talks, so please do not use their callings as an excuse for why a person reading only church materials doesn’t need to hear ideas from people of color, not North American, or who are LGBTQ+.
I have been in quite a few wards in my years – and so far, I’d say that is the corner case of each ward’s spectrum that I’ve been in. I would not generalize it to be a reflection of the “average” member (though there is no such thing). Stated another way, while you are likely to encounter that attitude in a few people wherever you go, in my experience that is not a widespread/common attitude and it would be unwise to assume it is.
And is it necessary to “combat” it? That seems suggestive, to me, of trying to set up who is right and who is wrong. As James points out, anyways, those same people are almost guaranteed to be seeking out learning in different ways. Not everyone has to aspire to advanced degrees to be seeking out learning. Is it unfortunate when such people say they only read the scriptures and words of prophets, with the implication being that this is the best approach that others should adopt as well? Of course. Does that mean that I, if I am more into learning from all sorts of sources (because I believe that all things, in their true form, denote there is a God), should fight against that person’s attitude? I don’t think so. It’s frustrating, and not my world view, but I think tolerance as was advocated above is a great attribute to strive towards.
And, perhaps just as important, perhaps I should strive to not look down on those who choose another path in life – one that appears “anti-intellectual.” It seems presumptuous to assume that everyone is as capable as I am at being “intellectual” (the OP does not actually define the term, but presumably is associated with obtaining advanced degree(s)), and therefore if they are not then they must be “anti-intellectual.” Perhaps it would be healthier to applaud the person(s) who express that they only read the words of scripture and prophets if the alternative is that they read nothing at all.
Are there going to be those who have the intelligence/ability/access to “intellectualism” that still choose to reject it and say self-righteous and borderline-pharisaical things as the OP seems to suggest? Of course. And it can be offensive. But if we were all like-minded at church, such as all pro-intellectual, I think we’d be a lot more progressed at being like the city of Enoch and be discussing different things right now.
I find myself wanting to look in the mirror and ask myself – if I feel threatened by someone being closed-minded about learning from the best sources, does that mean I am perhaps ironically being closed-minded myself, albeit in a different way, that causes me to struggle to accept that person’s pronouncement as their reality right now?
Pfew. This post is too long. I guess my basic reaction to this post was that it is going in the other direction in reaction to the triggering person’s alleged anti-intellectualism. Perhaps it is the lawyer in me, but when sunday school discussions appear to derail as the OP mentions, I often raise my hand to give the contrary viewpoint about being learned, and how it opens up the beauty of the world our God created, and by delving into the secrets of our craft, we have the opportunity to touch the divine (to paraphrase Beethoven). While I believe this puts some at odds with me emotionally afterwards, I get many others that occasionally tell me that they appreciated getting the counterpoint.
I think it’s much more of a humanity thing, ebbing and flowing throughout the years all over the world. You’d think a religion that started with the whole “A Bible, we’ve already got a Bible” would do better, but really it just shifts to a slightly larger shell. I thnk the worst is that it’s always the interpretation of whatever it is that they like and agree with, pulling themselves into a tighter more impregnable knot.
Heck, just spending a year on the AoF would do some real good. Something more than “we’re not like those in previous ages or of other sects, -we- have prophets” The rest became “of the world”. *eye roll*
People come in all types. For me reading is like breathing. I can’t NOT do it. I read really fast and just reading church authorized material would leave me really bored. I start to feel I am reading the same things over and over sometimes.
Since I began my faith transition I have found reading church stuff all the time can make me actually feel more rebellious. I seem to be more spiritual and connected with God when I ponder and study other religious sources that I don’t feel like they have authority over me to try to tell me how to think. It’s not like I haven’t read scriptures so often that they don’t come to mind over and over when I read other things. They are part of my brain already in all honesty.
I love many other kinds of books and magazines and news and social media. I like to know what’s going on in the world. I can feel God’s spirit through many great books.
There are people in the world that really struggle with reading. Without being encouraged to read scriptures in church they might not read at all. I choose to give them the benefit of the doubt. Let them be them and I will still be me. God made us both.
The medium isn’t near as important as the desire and effort to find more ways to learn and grow.
A couple clarifications as I’m reading through the comments:
~ This conversation took place during a temple recommend interview when he was in a position of authority and was definitely telling me it as if it is a really good thing to do. Though he stopped short of saying I should do it, I got the impression he was implying that. (I could be wrong though…?)
~ I recognize “combat” was a poor choice of words as I didn’t mean to imply I should fight this guy over his choice. I guess I really just want to make sure that new converts/younger people/anyone else who might want to take advice given during a temple recommend interview doesn’t feel pressure to do so.
Miriam,
Thank you for providing more context. I am very concerned with the misuse of authority and the attempt to control information and thought (and typically expression as well).
I feel strongly that such an approach is like brain washing. It’s very concerning that a leader who can choose whether you are considered worthy or not, would try to influence you to reduce your access to information. You are correct that many young members may be influenced by this.
In my area, some older members feel this attitude protects them from any anti Mormon thought. They think reading a variety of sources is very dangerous and “can ruin your life”. I will give them the benefit of the doubt. Maybe that’s true for them, but I don’t consider learning and growing beyond what they accept as conventional and “true” to be a ruined life.
While I don’t think this is the ‘average’ member, I have encountered this attitude a surprising number times given scriptures in our cannon that instruct us to seek out good ideas everywhere. I have wondered if the “us vs the world” comments found in church contribute to some people being so afraid that they can’t even enjoy a good novel for fun. The bit of psychology training I have leads to me wonder what is going on with this man that he feels so afraid that he limits his exposure to new ideas.
As a teacher, I know that some students develop a love of reading more easily than others. With students who are more reluctant to read, it can take time to model a love of reading, introduce students to a wide variety of literature until they find what clicks for them, use a variety of formats such as audio books, graphic novels, and picture books. Once it clicks, it clicks because humans are wired for stories.
I wonder if the staleness of church curriculum has, over time, contributed to a lack of intellectual curiosity. The OT is a fantastic story but we don’t read it like that in church. There are older ladies in my ward in their 70s and 80s who talk about what used to be in the Relief Society curriculum. Apparently there was an entire curriculum that focused on reading classic literature.
I would KILL for a RS curriculum about reading classic literature! That sounds amazing and like it would be a huge improvement over what we have now. It beats hearing the same old general conference talks and same old lessons from the same old manuals. We already do Come, Follow Me for our personal study. The lessons in the Gospel Principles and Teachings of the Presidents of the Church manuals have been done to DEATH.
I would love for church lessons to draw inspiration from other sources and stem more intellectual curiosity where everyone could discuss ideas and thoughts that they’ve never considered before. I hope we’ll get there someday.
This has caused quite a stir in the comments! I have encountered that idea from both men and women in the church, but I find it to be a minority opinion. I don’t know that I’ve heard it from anyone younger than the boomer generation, and I wonder what teachings they may have encountered that encouraged the isolationist perspective. I’ll have to think on that.
I heard this anti-intellectual attitude mostly when I attended BYU in the early 1990’s. I received the Presidential Scholarship and was invited to many events celebrating us smart students and introducing us to various leaders at BYU. EVERY SINGLE SPEAKER at these events spoke about how great it was to learn BUT NEVER FORGET THE SPIRIT. It was an endless drumbeat. I was like, MIT and Harvard invited me to apply, UMass offered me a scholarship if I would just apply, but I CHOSE BYU because of the religious environment. I was so frustrated. Who did they think I was? Did they think I would go down the wrong path just because I was intellectual?
Well, maybe. 🙂 I was protesting on the quad just a few years later when they fired Cecilia Konchar Farr.
Now I teach Gospel Doctrine and I am known as the teacher that gives some historical background and some students chose my class because of it. *shrug* The anti-intellectual strain is not common in the general church, but I could not escape it that first year at BYU, so I quit going to those events.
Seems like the policing of others (e.g. -They- lost God with their pursuit of knowledge, don’t be like -them-!) being used to distract from the need for self (and communal) reflection and improvement. 😛
I’m getting to a weird place where part of me -wants- to teach in church. Probably means I really shouldn’t. 😉
One of the places I find this anti-intellectualism really hurts us in in our concepts of teaching. If I hear one more time that so-and-so served a mission and therefore will be a really good gospel doctrine teacher… The thing is proselytizing is not the same as teaching. A good teacher is not only going to be well versed in the topic, but have the dexterity and finesse to invite people toward challenging questions with complex answers in a space that is inclusive. The “Sunday School answers” and our resistance to discomfort along with the idea that missionary work is what teaching is are not helping with anti-intellectualism sentiment.
I’ve been in blue collar wards and felt the dearth of depth of experience and knowledge of our theology (no shade to skilled professions because they are vital jobs and require intelligence and expertise, but it was definitely a case of the room not knowing what they don’t know when learning from scriptures because all they know is what is in the manual and they had a deep distrust of anything not in the manual). I’ve been in wards where everyone had PhDs and potentially did walk the line of too intellectual because they would go off topic on esoteric paths and leave some of us in the room behind them. It sometimes did feel like a university roundtable panel instead of a gospel doctrine class. The two extremes sit with me because both are off in important, but different ways.
Ideally, we’re going to sit in the middle, where everyone has something to contribute, personal experience is valued, and we are achored in rich and substantive foundational knowledge built through expertise.
I’ve encountered this idea, though perhaps not that frequently because I live in a University town and the population of my ward skews toward people with advanced degrees. I read it as a form of defensiveness — the person assumes others are looking down on her for being less educated, and so preemptively goes on the attack to point out that formal education isn’t really what God endorses fully. I’ve noticed a fair amount of overlap with the political climate of the United States — the idea that there are “coastal elites” who sneer at “fly over states” and that there are “true patriots” who haven’t been indoctrinated by liberal universities. It’s all false nonsense that hardly serves the purpose of building unity or building Zion. It is frustrating to encounter it, especially because my own experience as a woman in the Church has been one where pursuing graduate level education made me an anomaly, and where I frequently felt like an outlier with no one to model myself on. I’ll never forget learning that Laurel Thatcher Ulrich is Mormon — I first encountered her in reading “Good Wives” and then “A Midwife’s Tale” – I was in love with her work and had no idea she was LDS. When I realized that an LDS woman won the Pulitzer, is a professor at Harvard and was the President of the American Historical Association when I was working on my PhD in History — mind blown. It made such a difference to see a model of what I wanted to become. The anti-intellectualism in the Church I think particularly tends to hurt women. To be learned is good, if it makes you a prosperous breadwinner who holds priesthood leadership positions.
Or, to be learned is good, if you’re a career woman that the general authorities plan on calling to be in the general RS/YW/Primary presidencies and on the general RS/YW/Primary boards. But if you’re a woman who actually followed the prophet’s counsel to give up your career, education, and identity to be a stay-at-home mother, then no being learned or leadership callings for you.
Does anyone else find that ironic?
It is unfortunate that in all walks of life there are those who express the extreme of views. My parents knew a man who would bathe in his garment, I have known others who would keep one leg in the garment they were removing whilst putting their other leg in the clean one they were putting on. Both are extreme views on the wearing of the garment that I do not believe make them any better at keeping the covenant to wear it.
People like the leader in the OP’s post are outliers, thankfully. I do understand where this comes from – a desire to not be swayed in their beliefs by accidentally stumbling on the thing that will shake their testimony. And, fair enough to them. Though I would begin to question my testimony if I thought such reading could sway it.
That this man sought to use his position to “tell you” this is a step too far, IMO.
And the scriptures contain ideas that I would not support in this day and age. I would hope that if my daughters and I ended up on a deserted island they would not seek to make be drunk so that I could father children for them.
I think there is enough in scripture and church leaders’ messages to suggest that we need to be educated in all things. But that isn’t to say that care should not be taken in that reading.
The reality is that the vast majority of human learning and understanding has come from those who were not members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Some were not even religious, of followed religions far from our own beliefs. Does that make their learning and understanding invalid for learning by those of our faith – of course not!