The Second Naivete

A close friend told me that he had so many doubts about the church he didn’t know where to start. This ranged from things such as prayers being answered, religious brain washing, unnecessary rules, etc. For others this may take the form of a sketchy church history, the irrationality of certain practices, a lack of compassion for those of different sexual orientations, clashes with political ideologies, unnecessarily harsh culture of passing judgement, etc. When he tried to talk about some of his concerns with his roommate, the roommate hurriedly, with good intentions, tried to assure him that he needed to pray, read the scriptures, and go to church. While other roommates would give him a look of shock that he was voicing such concerns. Sometimes these responses may be initially satisfactory, but it does nothing to answer the specific concerns of many with faith crises or religious doubts.

In Provo 88% of people are members and 98% of BYU students are members.

Mostly homogeneous religious societies have many benefits, but it also has some downsides.
The main one that comes to mind is religious dogmatism. When a religious culture becomes to rigid, questioning or skepticism is viewed as very dangerous and against the status-quo. It is imperative in a heavily homogenous religious society that this sort of dogmatism is countered with healthy skepticism and questions. This cultivates a healthy rationale behind belief systems, so it doesn’t degrade into religious authoritarianism.

Today I want to briefly outline the path of those who may choose to internalize their religious concerns and the process of refining one’s faith. And I want to emphasize the importance of facing your religious doubts and concerns when they come instead of brushing them off.

The path of a religious believer is often a roller coaster ride. The inevitable suffering of yourself and those around you cause you to question the framework of your belief. The very maps (that seemed at one point) to give you meaning are shaken at its core and the path to diverge seems all too tempting. We are all at one point or another plagued with religious concerns that receive no satisfactory answer. For many this leads to a disinterest in religion, but for others it leads to a refinement in belief and sophistication in articulating their beliefs. Paul Riceour, a French Philosopher held that religious person whose beliefs are challenged occur in different stages.

1. The First Naivete (pre-critical)
2. The critical stage
3. The Second Naivete (post-critical)

From anecdotal experience I can give a brief outline of these stages in my own life.
The First Naivete is typically the state of the religious believer who has limited sophistication in their religious thought. All text and teachings are taken at face value and any inconsistencies, irrationalities, and/or seemingly contradictions are pushed to the back of the mind. This is no criticism of those who are in the First Naivete, but an observation. I found myself in this stage before and all throughout my church missionary service. I found these religious beliefs shaken on many accounts when I was encountered with religious paradoxes, questions of the LDS church’s history, and doctrinal things that didn’t seem to add up. I recall on one particular account talking with a devout Catholic about the Godhead. He asked me why is it that our Church can believe in the God head as three separate personages when it is a commonly accepted doctrine in the classical Christian world that Christians only believe in one God. This thought had obviously occurred to me before, but I was never pushed on it. I felt an immense amount of discomfort for a couple of days, and would constantly pray and read the scriptures but I didn’t seem to receive and satisfactory answer. Common with most people in the First Naivete, I soothed these cognitive discomforts by assuring myself that if I had faith it doesn’t matter, and I should just continue to believe. The believer in the First Naivete often feels that questioning of authority or teachings is a sign of disobedience and/or pride.

After completing my church missionary service, I knew I had learned some valuable habits and had gained some elements of faith in the religion I professed to be true. A common theme that is drilled into you as a church missionary is that if you read the scriptures and pray every day you’ll be fine. My mission president powerfully instructed us as missionaries that if we read one chapter of the Book of Mormon everyday we would never lose our faith. It is good council, but to some with many concerns it can sound like brain washing. As I cultivated my habit of reading and praying it eventually became mundane and dull. I felt no stimulation intellectually, emotionally, or spiritually. I would constantly think that I was doing something wrong. Why is it that when I’m reading these verses I can’t seem to remember what I read? It seemed to me that I was promised that reading and praying would bring me the joy and satisfaction I needed in life, but it wasn’t so. Following this, things in life will inevitably go wrong (i.e. breakups, family arguments, bad school grades, etc.) and it will cause you to wonder if it is because of your lack of devotion to scripture study, prayer and church/temple attendance. Becoming disenchanted with some religious beliefs can often lead to questioning the entire framework of one’s belief i.e. the critical stage. The very questions as a church missionary that we seemed to answer so confidently soon become some of our central concerns. What was I to do? Bring these concerns up to friends and feel ostracized? They would probably tell me out of genuine concern I just needed to read and pray harder. (Friends that I have who struggle with maintaining a religious belief have told me that it is difficult for them to voice their concerns in Provo because of the seemingly knee-jerk response of well-meaning friends to save them from the “depths of hell”). All of my previously held concerns began to resurface, and I sought answers to these questions. As I struggled between the tension of religious and secular thought I found answers from friends, philosophy, religious, and theological texts. I will not detail the many concerns that I had in this talk, but it is sufficient to say that I have found many philosophical and religious answers in the critical stage that have helped me to ease my concerns.

And lastly, the Second Naivete is one that some people will enter, and some will choose not to. Many who are in the critical stage can find no satisfactory answer to their religious concerns and here they diverge. In many cases, leaving the religious path is something very difficult, but meaningful. But for those who continue to the Second Naivete, can now approach the scriptures and practices that they once found meaningful in a more sophisticated manner. At this point they are no longer plagued by certain concerns and doubt is minimalized. We can approach the scriptures in a more sophisticated manner and derive meaning from it that we could not find before.
people here feel stifled in questioning certain aspects of religion and the path to entering the second naivete is stifled.

I can only speak from anecdotal experience, but for me healthy skepticism and refraining from attitudes of resentment and bitterness alleviated many of my religious concerns and helped me approach religion from a healthier perspective. I would like to posit here that the most powerful persuader for me to believe in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is the holy spirit, but this is not to say that we shouldn’t seek for further enlightenment through questions, concerns and doubts. The holy spirit is what has allowed me to want to stay in this church and seek for more answers. No amount of worldly philosophy or persuasive answers could be the catalyst for my faith and I recognize the hand of God in my life guiding me to find answers to elevate me to a healthier plane of belief.
Thirst for answers, and maybe you’ll find some.