Believe what you like, but keep it to yourself

I read this quote today and initially I liked it. The more I consider it however, the less it seems to work.

A member, at any given time, may not understand one point of doctrine or another, may have a misconception, or even believe something is true that in fact is false. 

There is not much danger in that. That is an inevitable part of learning the gospel. No member of the Church should be embarrassed at the need to repent of a false notion he might have believed. Such ideas are corrected as one grows in light and knowledge. 

It is not the belief in a false notion that is the problem; it is the teaching of it to others. In the Church we have the agency to believe whatever we want to believe about whatever we want to believe. But we are not authorized to teach it to others as truth."

Boyd K. Packer
https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1985/04/from-such-turn-away?lang=eng&country=gb

I welcome the principle that an apostle is happy for members to "believe whatever we want to believe." But he seems to tell us to keep it to ourselves.

Tow the party line, keep silent, support the consensus.

I sat in testimony meeting today. I wanted to share my true beliefs about the nature of God, the nature of prophetic revelation and the role of the church within the great human family. I wanted to share the deep and meaningful experiences I'd had in coming to those conclusions. But I knew they would not be welcome. While other could teach things as principles of truth because they resonated with the attending majority, my minority perspective, that doesn't align with the correlated manuals and church teaching is not to be shared.

I still got up and made only vague references. I spoke of the positive experience of attending the temple, understanding the importance of developing a personal relationship with God and receiving answers in the temple to questions and concerns whose implications I had feared but afterwards felt complete peace about. I felt the love of God and the enrichment of the Saviour's atonement.

That message was welcome. People smiled and nodded and felt the affirmation of another person confirming what they were already convinced of. One or two people thanked me for my testimony after the meeting.

Had I given greater detail I wonder whether the same reaction would have happened? I could have said I was grateful for temple attendance and answered prayers because doing so had led me to, what I consider, a divinely guided conclusion that the church is not the "only true church." That when most prophets speak, they do not speak as if God were speaking. That they often, but not always, speak good and inspiring words influenced by their scriptures, their culture, their environment and the words of other leaders. That they are able to receive the same type of divine guidance anyone else does, but not an exclusive or special communication channel with the heavens. They see through the same glass darkly as we all do and that their teachings are coloured by that glass.

I could have said that I believe in a God cares how we treat each other and how we're trying to become more godlike, but does not care what we wear, what we eat and drink, what causes we give our time and money to or who we marry... as long as those chosen behaviours uplift us and others. I could have said that black or white, male or female, straight or gay are the same in God's eyes... God sees us all as equals and is happy for each to be treated as such. That there is truth found throughout cultures and philosophies and that our gospel "fullness" was only as full as our ability to be filled and that fulfillment (or full-filled-ment) could come from many sources.

All of that are things I believe and, apparently, Elder Packer is happy for me to believe that. He just doesn't want me to share it with others, even though I believe it to be true.

I tried to suggest to a Mormon friend recently that answers came to people in different ways. That some people, like my wife, could ask for Mormon answers for years and not receive a clear answer. That the Mormon description of God and life's purpose was not satisfying or useful for all of His children. That there are many answers that equally allow people to fulfill their purpose and potential. He was adamant I was wrong. He suggested that it was not the church that was lacking but that instead it was the person who was asking in the wrong way or was not living worthy to receive the answers. When I pointed out that he was describing my wife in that broad and condemning brush stroke he acknowledged he was.

My heart hurts and I continue to feel the gap between Mormonism and me to widen. Sitting in church today felt like an endurance, not an enlightenment. The hours I spent yesterday with family, followed by cycling through country lanes and nature's beauty was far more inspiring and uplifting than the hour of testimony meeting.

I've often talked of Mormonism being like a ship that needs gradual correction. That it's better to accept slow change, by degree in order to avoid the boat capsizing or people being people tipped over the side rails. Unfortunately the slow progress of church change, couple with the rapid pace of my shifting perspectives, means there might soon be another "man overboard." Not because of the jolt of hitting an iceberg, but voluntarily jumping to swim to another shore or passing vessel.