I recently read a blog entry about a guy who found out the church is made up, yet he persists in describing the church as "true." He relates it to an epiphany he had while watching the Lego movie. Read all about it here.
I don't agree with this author's approach. First of all, it doesn't make sense to describe a religion or church as "true." A religion is something that people believe in and practice. In that sense, it is real and exists. Calling it "true" is meaningless. However, when Mormons describe their church as "true," they mean that it is the sole religion that will enable people to reach the highest heaven. So when you say the words "The church is true", that is more or less the meaning that most church members will process.
This author is basically saying that even though the church is made up (not true), it's still true. The words he should be using, in my opinion, are "valuable" or "useful." Not "true." Perhaps the church is useful to him, or valuable to him in some respects. That is different than it being "true" in any objective sense, or in the sense that Mormons use that word.
Does this strike anyone else as eerily Orwellian? First, I can hardly think of a better example of double-think; essentially describing the church as both untrue (made up) and true. Second, in the book "1984," Big Brother is engaged in an effort to dilute the meaning of words, or eliminate certain words entirely, as a means of thought control. The theory is that if you can limit forms of expression, you can control what people think. Or, at least you can decrease the chances of them thinking certain undesirable thoughts.
So while this author apparently means well (he's psychologically grappling to somehow make the church "work" for him, even though he now realizes it's all made up), I think his approach is ultimately harmful and counterproductive. The resident cynic in my brain thinks that the church would love nothing more than to have this author, and others like him, continue using the words "The church is true," with the nuanced meaning advocated here, knowing full well that most church members will understand that phrase as it is traditionally understood in Mormonism: that people need the church to be saved.
Does this strike anyone else as eerily Orwellian? First, I can hardly think of a better example of double-think; essentially describing the church as both untrue (made up) and true. Second, in the book "1984," Big Brother is engaged in an effort to dilute the meaning of words, or eliminate certain words entirely, as a means of thought control. The theory is that if you can limit forms of expression, you can control what people think. Or, at least you can decrease the chances of them thinking certain undesirable thoughts.
So while this author apparently means well (he's psychologically grappling to somehow make the church "work" for him, even though he now realizes it's all made up), I think his approach is ultimately harmful and counterproductive. The resident cynic in my brain thinks that the church would love nothing more than to have this author, and others like him, continue using the words "The church is true," with the nuanced meaning advocated here, knowing full well that most church members will understand that phrase as it is traditionally understood in Mormonism: that people need the church to be saved.
