What To Do When Loved Ones Leave the Church

[Stargazer]

27 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

The context may help a little to get better why this was inappropriate. The person was obviously not interested in hearing our message. They were being polite in letting us talk but was giving several indications that they were content in their current beliefs and was not interested in our message. The “suspend the beliefs” was asking them to do something the person didn’t voluntarily want to do. That’s not okay. 

Also to me, voluntarily experimenting upon the word/teachings you’ve heard is different than insisting someone try ro suspend their beliefs. I also preferred to build from where the person was at, find common ground and beliefs and add to them or show how they tie into our message. When there were moments that beliefs diverged, i would share my perspective, why i believed it, etc. I would ask them to study that aspect for themselves. To me this is not “suspending” belief structures. That’s an artificial  experience to me. This is helping  to facilitate their own organic growth/change in beliefs. Something only they and God can really do. 

 

With luv, 

BD 

OK, very good, and makes perfect sense now that you explain it.  I kind of thought that was where you were coming from, but was unclear.

[HappyJackWagon]

19 hours ago, Stargazer said:

No, they don't know, because they live on the other side of the planet, I don't name them, they don't attend church of any kind whatsoever, and will likely never visit me where I now live.  Should I tell them that I use their misadventures as cautionary tales?  There doesn't seem to be a good reason for it.  

It might not help, but then again it might.  One of my sons was convicted of felony drug possession, spent some time in the county hoosegow, and then went straight as an arrow.  He got married, had a couple of lovely daughters, drives big rig trucks locally, and just recently got his civil rights (voting and firearms rights) back.  If I were to tell him that I use him as an example of someone who got off the path, but later found his way back (message being "you can turn yourself around") do you think he would get bent out of shape about it?  Or might he feel good that he was providing a good example for others?

I agree that telling one's children that one is disappointed with who they've become is not a loving message.  So I don't tell them that.  I praise their good behavior, and am mostly quiet on the rest of it.  They know what they were taught, so I don't really need to tell them where I think they are coming up short.

And not all of them have disappointed me, by the way.

Stargazer- you acknowledge it wouldn't be loving to tell them of your disappointment in them, but do you feel it is loving to publicly tell others of your disappointment in your kids? I'm struggling to see how that would be any better.

I mean, even though you haven't told them that you use them as a cautionary tale and are extremely disappointed in them, they probably know, right?

[MustardSeed]

I always cringe when I hear people refer to their children as wayward, from the pulpit. 

I don’t hear it as much as I did 20+ years ago, thankfully. 

This is my opinion and I know others see it differently. 

[Calm]

23 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

I always cringe when I hear people refer to their children as wayward, from the pulpit. 

I don’t hear it as much as I did 20+ years ago, thankfully. 

This is my opinion and I know others see it differently. 

My dad used us as examples as kids and not for anything more than minor stuff ( how not to give testimonies in one case iirc).  I hated it just because it drew attention to me.

I cleared it with my daughter about what she is okay with me being public about her.

I can see maybe using them as part of your stories of how you approach life, but as examples in and of themselves...I used vague terms like relatives so that no one knowing me would know who I am talking about unless they know the situation and I think of how would they react if they read it for my phrasing.

Edited June 18, 2019 by Calm

[stemelbow]

Quote

It’s important to realize that when someone has experienced this loss of trust, it is usually unhelpful to try to reassure them using resources produced by the system they feel has betrayed them (e.g General Conference talks, seminary manuals, “Sunday-School-type” exhortations to “pray, read the scriptures, go to church,” etc.).

There are some important exceptions to this, however. In recent years, some essays, books, and online resources produced by the Church History Department have addressed some of the thorny issues that often trigger faith crises in a way that is not propaganda, but sound history.

That feels a little awkward.  

I like the article overall but there are some parts that I question and this is one.  Each of the items she mentions should stand on their own.  Everything the Church produces has a goal of making the Church at least possible.  That unfortunately brings this dogmatic statement into question, even if perhaps I'm being a little picky on this.  That is say, for instance, if someone has an issue with the DNA issue related to the book fo Mormon.  That one likely  is not fond of the seemingly dismissive and maybe incomplete handling of it in the Church essay on the topic.  It may even be a little propaganda-ish.  So it's not very helpful to say that this essay is an exception to the lack of trust in Church sources.  It feels like this paragraph of mentioning exceptions was thrown in after the fact, as if it was needed in some other person's view.  It honestly doesn't even really fit.  It's saying to members who are trying to communicate with their family or friends who are leaving or have left to try and give these members or ex-members these exceptional resources as if they each are pristine in their handling of the issues.  I'm not sure that's a helpful approach.  

Ah well.  The article is ok.  I like some of what is said.  I'm not sure it'll resonate with most active members, as when I deal with members they hardly treat me anywhere near what this suggests for the most part.  But it's an important topic, I think , and will likely be a topic for forever.  

[HappyJackWagon]

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

That feels a little awkward.  

I like the article overall but there are some parts that I question and this is one.  Each of the items she mentions should stand on their own.  Everything the Church produces has a goal of making the Church at least possible.  That unfortunately brings this dogmatic statement into question, even if perhaps I'm being a little picky on this.  That is say, for instance, if someone has an issue with the DNA issue related to the book fo Mormon.  That one likely  is not fond of the seemingly dismissive and maybe incomplete handling of it in the Church essay on the topic.  It may even be a little propaganda-ish.  So it's not very helpful to say that this essay is an exception to the lack of trust in Church sources.  It feels like this paragraph of mentioning exceptions was thrown in after the fact, as if it was needed in some other person's view.  It honestly doesn't even really fit.  It's saying to members who are trying to communicate with their family or friends who are leaving or have left to try and give these members or ex-members these exceptional resources as if they each are pristine in their handling of the issues.  I'm not sure that's a helpful approach.  

Ah well.  The article is ok.  I like some of what is said.  I'm not sure it'll resonate with most active members, as when I deal with members they hardly treat me anywhere near what this suggests for the most part.  But it's an important topic, I think , and will likely be a topic for forever.  

Fair point, but I read it a little differently than you.

I read it as saying that if someone has lost trust in the organization of the church and its leaders, using their words as trump cards to prove an issue won't work. I agree with that sentiment. But then it refers to other types of church produced writings that may be better, not as the trump card but at least in trying to address the issue and provide sources for further review. I imagine reading the essays or books or even conference talks helps some people but I see the overall statement suggesting that a family member should NOT expect to drop the mic after sending a link to someone who has lost trust in the church.

[stemelbow]

3 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Fair point, but I read it a little differently than you.

I read it as saying that if someone has lost trust in the organization of the church and its leaders, using their words as trump cards to prove an issue won't work. I agree with that sentiment. But then it refers to other types of church produced writings that may be better, not as the trump card but at least in trying to address the issue and provide sources for further review. I imagine reading the essays or books or even conference talks helps some people but I see the overall statement suggesting that a family member should NOT expect to drop the mic after sending a link to someone who has lost trust in the church.

Thanks HappyJack.  Good input.  I see what you're saying and find it encouraging for sure. 

[Stargazer]

On 6/18/2019 at 5:03 PM, HappyJackWagon said:

Stargazer- you acknowledge it wouldn't be loving to tell them of your disappointment in them, but do you feel it is loving to publicly tell others of your disappointment in your kids? I'm struggling to see how that would be any better.

Does anyone here know my kids?  Does anyone here know me?  I've personally met Morningstar and Bernard Gui, but they don't know them either.  What are you worried about, anyway?  That someone here will report to my kids that I am disappointed that most of them have gone the way of the world?  That they will be shocked, SHOCKED! to discover this?  

Are you worried about the fallout that would occur if my kids found out I use them as examples?  I'm touched at your concern.

On 6/18/2019 at 5:03 PM, HappyJackWagon said:

I mean, even though you haven't told them that you use them as a cautionary tale and are extremely disappointed in them, they probably know, right?

Oh, for crying out loud! They don't NEED to be told that I'm disappointed that they have "gone gentile", as it were, because they definitely know it.  I don't need to have told them, but they've told me in one way or another that they know that their mother and I were and are disappointed that they prefer the way of the world over the way of God.  I'm proud of them in other ways, and they do know that, because I've told them, where appropriate.

I have a suggestion, bishop: why don't you worry about your own failings in respect of your family and stop trying to chide me about things you think are my failings in respect of my family?  

[Tacenda]

4 hours ago, Stargazer said:

Does anyone here know my kids?  Does anyone here know me?  I've personally met Morningstar and Bernard Gui, but they don't know them either.  What are you worried about, anyway?  That someone here will report to my kids that I am disappointed that most of them have gone the way of the world?  That they will be shocked, SHOCKED! to discover this?  

Are you worried about the fallout that would occur if my kids found out I use them as examples?  I'm touched at your concern.

Oh, for crying out loud! They don't NEED to be told that I'm disappointed that they have "gone gentile", as it were, because they definitely know it.  I don't need to have told them, but they've told me in one way or another that they know that their mother and I were and are disappointed that they prefer the way of the world over the way of God.  I'm proud of them in other ways, and they do know that, because I've told them, where appropriate.

I have a suggestion, bishop: why don't you worry about your own failings in respect of your family and stop trying to chide me about things you think are my failings in respect of my family?  

No failings at all Stargazer, maybe HappyJack reads as many posts from the exLDS world as I do. Many of them have a huge disconnect with their believing folks and are really hurting out there when they feel the wide gulf between them when the parents think of them as wayward. Many on there go onto say how their parents won't acknowledge the good they have done because they left the church but are still good people, you of course don't do that. But maybe that's where HJ was going at first, but I should just stick to shutting up maybe.

Edited June 23, 2019 by Tacenda

[Stargazer]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

No failings at all Stargazer, maybe HappyJack reads as many posts from the exLDS world as I do. Many of them have a huge disconnect with their believing folks and are really hurting out there when they feel the wide gulf between them when the parents think of them as wayward. Many on there go onto say how their parents won't acknowledge the good they have done because they left the church but are still good people, you of course don't do that. But maybe that's where HJ was going at first, but I should just stick to shutting up maybe.

Don't worry, T!  We all write things we think better of later.  Including me.  But you've written nothing here you shouldn't have!

My kids aren't exLDS, just "less active" (except maybe one who went evangelical Christian but he probably never resigned his membership).  And of the 12 ("yours mine and ours") two are active and believing.  The less active ones have generally made poor decisions in other respects besides being less active.  Their religious status isn't generally what I worry most about.  I just happen to feel that if they had stayed closer to the gospel they would have been spared broken marriages, financial disasters, and horrifying relationship experiences.  I have one who is a recovering alcoholic, another couple who are borderline alcoholic, another who barely survives financially even though he has many talents and could be doing a lot better, and so on.  

They all have sterling qualities, and I don't dwell on the negatives with them, as that is counterproductive.  I try to make sure they know I love them and appreciate their good qualities.  But when I need a good example of how not to do certain things, for a lesson or a talk, I don't need to go very far afield.  If HJW is concerned over whether they might be offended about this, fine.  He's made his concern available to me now, so thanks for the input, bishop Wagon.

Edited June 23, 2019 by Stargazer

[let’s roll]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

No failings at all Stargazer, maybe HappyJack reads as many posts from the exLDS world as I do. Many of them have a huge disconnect with their believing folks and are really hurting out there when they feel the wide gulf between them when the parents think of them as wayward. Many on there go onto say how their parents won't acknowledge the good they have done because they left the church but are still good people, you of course don't do that. But maybe that's where HJ was going at first, but I should just stick to shutting up maybe.

The “disconnect,” “hurting” and “wide gulf” you describe, I believe, foreshadow the eternal experience for those of God’s children who choose to not join Him in His work.

Our premortal experience with Him will no longer be veiled from us, our love for Him which motivated our decision to come to Earth will be restored, we will feel of His perfect love for us.

We will see clearly our mortal decisions to ignore His promptings and invitations, the “huge gulf” we decided to build between Him and us will be evident.

We will also recognize that our mortal decisions to choose our own path prevented us from allowing Him to refine our souls in such a way that our soul would desire, and be capable of, joining Him in His work.  We will realize we have “disconnected” ourselves from Him.

He will love us always, in His perfect way, including honoring (i.e. not changing) our agency and the consequences thereof.  We will recognize and feel of that perfect love and will “hurt” as a result of our inability to reciprocate that love in the way we once intended...that hurt will forever burn.

 

[alter idem]

On 6/16/2019 at 12:02 AM, cherryTreez said:

We aren't going to change things for him. He changed not us. He needs to learn to deal with the consequences of his actions. 

CherryTreez, I think you put this in a perspective that is very important.  When someone makes the choice to no longer believe and leave the church, they are the one who has changed.  They've made a choice and with that choice come consequences.  I'm afraid that some who make the decision to break with the church may not think through what that is going to mean to their life and to their relationships.  While we should accept that they have the right to make the choice to leave, and we should have compassion for them and their difficulties, we can't shield them from many of the consequences of their choices.  They won't be able to attend temple sealings, for example and it's not fair to ask those who still believe, to ignore their own desires and forget what's important to them.  The person who's left will likely feel sadness and loss when other family members are celebrating a baptism, a mission call etc.  That's going to happen--and we can pray for them and show an outpouring of love, letting them know they are welcome still, but it's simply not right to ask believing family members to lessen their commitment in order to protect the feelings of those who've left.

[alter idem]

On 6/18/2019 at 10:48 AM, MustardSeed said:

I always cringe when I hear people refer to their children as wayward, from the pulpit. 

I don’t hear it as much as I did 20+ years ago, thankfully. 

This is my opinion and I know others see it differently. 

Just today in Relief Society a teacher told about her daughter's struggles with alcoholism and that she worries constantly about her and what it's doing to her children and the answer to her prayers was to continue to pray for her daughter every day and to love her. To this, another woman shared her struggles with her children and how she also had to learn to just love them and stop preaching to them when they got involved with drugs and left the church.

You're right, we didn't hear it as much 20 years ago, because as the one sister who told about her children said that she felt alone and despondent when she couldn't confide in others because as she put it;  'My mother always told us you don't air your dirty laundry in public'. 

It was considered shameful to have problems in a family--'airing dirty laundry', but that taboo is going away as members feel safer to share the problems and concerns they have--I've seen this grow with the new council direction in Relief Society especially.  I think it's because they feel a loving spirit of non-judgment.  It's hard for a parent to deal with what they feel are 'wayward' children--children who have rejected the beliefs and teachings they were raised with and to which their parents still believe.  I've seen it help these parents deal with the stress and worry they feel and they often will receive good advice and feel strengthened to know that other parents are going through similar trials.

[alter idem]

On 6/18/2019 at 10:03 AM, HappyJackWagon said:

Stargazer- you acknowledge it wouldn't be loving to tell them of your disappointment in them, but do you feel it is loving to publicly tell others of your disappointment in your kids? I'm struggling to see how that would be any better.

I mean, even though you haven't told them that you use them as a cautionary tale and are extremely disappointed in them, they probably know, right?

It can be very therapeutic to talk about one's worries and problems they are going through with their children--and sometimes it can even be emotionally negative to keep these problems bottled up and hidden from others.

Do you think you could have some compassion for the parents of those who've left the church in addition to the compassion you feel for those who've left?  Both sides are hurting when a loved one makes the choice to leave the church--it's not one-sided.

[Rain]

1 hour ago, alter idem said:

Just today in Relief Society a teacher told about her daughter's struggles with alcoholism and that she worries constantly about her and what it's doing to her children and the answer to her prayers was to continue to pray for her daughter every day and to love her. To this, another woman shared her struggles with her children and how she also had to learn to just love them and stop preaching to them when they got involved with drugs and left the church.

You're right, we didn't hear it as much 20 years ago, because as the one sister who told about her children said that she felt alone and despondent when she couldn't confide in others because as she put it;  'My mother always told us you don't air your dirty laundry in public'. 

It was considered shameful to have problems in a family--'airing dirty laundry', but that taboo is going away as members feel safer to share the problems and concerns they have--I've seen this grow with the new council direction in Relief Society especially.  I think it's because they feel a loving spirit of non-judgment.  It's hard for a parent to deal with what they feel are 'wayward' children--children who have rejected the beliefs and teachings they were raised with and to which their parents still believe.  I've seen it help these parents deal with the stress and worry they feel and they often will receive good advice and feel strengthened to know that other parents are going through similar trials.

It's a tricky thing. I know  one sister who shared so much that her son wasn't comfortable coming back to the ward when he was ready. I know other parents who feel so alone or others who criticize the church because everyone acts like their family has no problems.

Usually when I talk about one of my loved ones I really try to weigh the good it can do against the heartache it could cause. Sometimes I have asked permission to share. More times than not I am zipping my mouth. Generally I don't share to make them an example of what not to do, but to help others understand something they are not getting. 

 

[Calm]

2 hours ago, alter idem said:

It can be very therapeutic to talk about one's worries and problems they are going through with their children--and sometimes it can even be emotionally negative to keep these problems bottled up and hidden from others.

Do you think you could have some compassion for the parents of those who've left the church in addition to the compassion you feel for those who've left?  Both sides are hurting when a loved one makes the choice to leave the church--it's not one-sided.

And it tends to mean more to others when you are sharing issues that touch you intimately and deeply instead being less directly involved. Seeing a relative have problems is different than seeing your child have problems, so if one is vague on relationships to protect anonymity, one may lose the profoundness of the experience to a great extent. 

One needs to weigh the value of sharing so others don’t feel alone or can learn hope from the positives in your experience with the potential costs of sharing of discomfort or shame that those in one’s example might feel if they were to know they were talked about. 

Edited June 23, 2019 by Calm

[gregory_underscore]

On 6/18/2019 at 6:38 AM, BlueDreams said:

Welp, that’s definitely not what the church teaches. It’s definitely not what the bishops  said or indicated as i’ve worked with them to help their members with problems they know need more than what they can give. I think you are right in that sometimes therapy can lead to a focus or direction that isn’t the right one for a person. Often depression or anxiety or other dysfunctions are more like “common sense”...you won’t feel good in a life that is dissonant with what you believe. You shouldn’t feel good in situations that are in someway harmful. 

I’m glad that you found the answer that worked for you. But you are not all humanity. Your experiences do no ascribe an edict from God as to the value of what therapists do for everyone else. You are not the prophet... so your opinion - that run counter to official church stances and practices - means very little to me. 

 

With luv and a bit of a shrug, 

BD 

Context... I was really abused by the mental health industry, shoved on pills after pills at a young age. hard to be honest with myself when your a zombie... There was one good professional who helped me get off the drugs but for the most part I think the world would be better off without the industry at all. Just look at the rates of mental healthcare access and suicide. 

[MustardSeed]

1 hour ago, gregory_underscore said:

Just look at the rates of mental healthcare access and suicide. 

Proof of correlation please. 

[pogi]

2 hours ago, gregory_underscore said:

Context... I was really abused by the mental health industry, shoved on pills after pills at a young age. hard to be honest with myself when your a zombie... There was one good professional who helped me get off the drugs but for the most part I think the world would be better off without the industry at all. Just look at the rates of mental healthcare access and suicide. 

As others have mentioned your personal experience is not representative of mental healthcare in general.

Regarding suicide rates and mental health access - that is like saying that a higher percentage of people die in the ICU compared to the general population, therefore you should never go to an ICU.

[california boy]

15 hours ago, let’s roll said:

The “disconnect,” “hurting” and “wide gulf” you describe, I believe, foreshadow the eternal experience for those of God’s children who choose to not join Him in His work.

Our premortal experience with Him will no longer be veiled from us, our love for Him which motivated our decision to come to Earth will be restored, we will feel of His perfect love for us.

We will see clearly our mortal decisions to ignore His promptings and invitations, the “huge gulf” we decided to build between Him and us will be evident.

We will also recognize that our mortal decisions to choose our own path prevented us from allowing Him to refine our souls in such a way that our soul would desire, and be capable of, joining Him in His work.  We will realize we have “disconnected” ourselves from Him.

He will love us always, in His perfect way, including honoring (i.e. not changing) our agency and the consequences thereof.  We will recognize and feel of that perfect love and will “hurt” as a result of our inability to reciprocate that love in the way we once intended...that hurt will forever burn.

 

Sorry, but I think this is the core of the problem.  The idea that the Church is the only path back to God and if you are not on THAT path, then all is lost and you will move further away from God into a downward spiral that will never lead to a better relationship with God.  I am here to tell you that is not always true.  Sometimes a stronger relationship with Christ is more important and guiding than church attendance and following the Church's current policies.  There is NO greater teacher than the Holy Spirit.  And that teacher seems to care less what church you attend if you learn to trust God rather than men no matter who they claim to be.

Maybe I am reading the intent of your post wrong. But this attitude is definitely widespread among members of the Church.  It certainly was with my family for many years.  Their sole goal was for me to forsake my " lifestyle" and come back to where I belonged.  My father, who is quite elderly made it his mission to get me back in the Church before he died.  His solution to my " problem"?  Find another wife that I could love.  LOL.  Seriously.  Because the only way to happiness from his perspective is through the Church's Plan of Happiness which can only be accessed through the Church.  Their attitude was to love the sinner, hate the sin.  It is a false mantra that you hear a lot.  Trouble is, they don't love the sinner no matter how may times they say they do.  They love someone different.  Someone they have conjured up to be who they want them to be.  It wasn't until my family decided to love me and not this person I was never going to become, and leave the judgement of me to God that things began to change.  That only took 13 years.

I am no more closer to coming back to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints than I was all those years ago.  But my family does have a son back, a brother back, an uncle back.  And they have come to love my partner and see my happiness.  That love doesn't feel so hollow any longer. 

I hope this perspective is helpful to at least someone out there.

Edited June 24, 2019 by california boy

[california boy]

11 hours ago, alter idem said:

CherryTreez, I think you put this in a perspective that is very important.  When someone makes the choice to no longer believe and leave the church, they are the one who has changed.  They've made a choice and with that choice come consequences.  I'm afraid that some who make the decision to break with the church may not think through what that is going to mean to their life and to their relationships.  While we should accept that they have the right to make the choice to leave, and we should have compassion for them and their difficulties, we can't shield them from many of the consequences of their choices.  They won't be able to attend temple sealings, for example and it's not fair to ask those who still believe, to ignore their own desires and forget what's important to them.  The person who's left will likely feel sadness and loss when other family members are celebrating a baptism, a mission call etc.  That's going to happen--and we can pray for them and show an outpouring of love, letting them know they are welcome still, but it's simply not right to ask believing family members to lessen their commitment in order to protect the feelings of those who've left.

Why in the world would you not include them in celebrating a baptism, a mission call etc?  Seriously, I really want to know because my family did the same thing to me.  I was never invited to hear a mission talk, or attend a baptism of a niece or nephew or a blessing of a new born child.  I could never understand this kind of thinking.  I still can't.  THIS really reinforces the message that if you are not in the Church, you are no longer a member of the family.  You made your choice, now you have to live with the consequences.  You call this compassion?  What do you do that is compassionate?  Call them up and say, I feel really bad you can't participate in your nephew's farewell address?  But you made the choice to leave.  We haven't changed, you have.  Save your prayers.  Save your outpouring of love.  If the person is invited and encouraged to attend, they won't feel sadness for not being able to participate.  They should be allowed to participate.  We get that temple sealing are off limits.  But blessings? Baptisms?  Mission Calls?

People seem to be wondering why platitudes of "we love you" fall on deaf ears.  For many years, I was also not invited to any family gatherings.  At the same time, I would get these letters from my father that would start out something like "My dear beloved son, who I will love always."  Those expressions of love made me more angry and estranged than it did any feelings of caring for me.  So many of you have expressed how no matter what you do, your children push you away.  Believe me, sometimes it hurts much less to just distance yourself rather than feel the kind of anger some of these letters of "love" express.  

I am really not trying to just be negative here, but just giving my perspective from someone who has lived through these very scenarios you describe.  For anyone who is wondering why their children can't accept your love, maybe it is because so much of that love is conditional on how you think that person should be living their lives.  You aren't responsible for their salvation.  You are not even responsible for the way they choose to live their lives.  For the most part, these are adults we are talking about.  It is only between them and Christ.  As long as you hold on to the idea that if you can just get them to just do what you want them to do, they will be happier, you are never going to get closer to them.  You can't change them or the choices they make.  Is all you can do is change how you deal with those choices.  Drop the "love the sinner, hate the sin" mantra.  Replace it with "love the sinner, let God deal with the sin".  

Just my advice.  No one has to believe it or follow it.  But if what you are doing isn't working, well then I have given you an alternative.

 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

Why in the world would you not include them in celebrating a baptism, a mission call etc?  Seriously, I really want to know because my family did the same thing to me.

I didn't read alter idem as saying she wouldn't invite them especially since she said they are welcomed still, just that seeing others celebrate milestones in their faith will likely result in a sense of loss for someone who no longer has Gospel ordinances, etc milestones ( as understood by Saints) in their own lives due to their choices to put them aside.  They will probably celebrate with the family in their own way, but what they celebrate is different from what they once did and they will likely realize there is a dimension of community lost when something is no longer a shared purpose.  They have chosen to be an outsider in some ways, we cannot and should not try to either force them to be or pretend that they are otherwise.  It would be unhealthy for both.

But she can correct me if I misread her.

[california boy]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

I didn't read alter idem as saying she wouldn't invite them especially since she said they are welcomed still, just that seeing others celebrate milestones in their faith will likely result in a sense of loss for someone who no longer has Gospel ordinances, etc milestones ( as understood by Saints) in their own lives due to their choices to put them aside.  They will probably celebrate with the family in their own way, but what they celebrate is different from what they once did and they will likely realize there is a dimension of community lost when something is no longer a shared purpose.  They have chosen to be an outsider in some ways, we cannot and should not try to either force them to be or pretend that they are otherwise.  It would be unhealthy for both.

But she can correct me if I misread her.

A couple of things.  I am just giving my perspective from someone who was not invited to these types fo events. So it does happen.  I also think if they are invited to these events, how the person is invited matters. It can feel like an obligation or it can feel like they are sincerely wanted there to celebrate important milestones. 

I also don't think you can assume the person would feel a sense of loss in these ordinances.  I recently attended the baptism of my grandson.  I didn't feel a sense of loss of those ordinances.  It was more a hope that the church serves him better than it did me. Just because a person is no longer a member, doesn't mean that they can't see value in the Church.  As you mentions, for me, there is a sense of loss of a community, and no longe being a part of that community.  But that is completely different than feeling like an outsider to the family.  I do think a lot of times those that leave the church do feel like an outsider to their own family.  While I don't really have deep feelings about no longer being a part of the Church community, feeling like you are an outsider to your family is much more difficult, especially when they make that pretty clear.  After my grandson's baptism, my son and his wife planned a picnic at a nearby park to both celebrate the baptism and his 8th birthday. They were very clear they wanted my partner there as well.  We spent the rest of the day eating, hiking trails together and getting to know the other grandparents who flew in from Utah for the event.  Yeah that was a little arkward at first.  I hadn't had much contact with them since my son's wedding.  But I think by the end of the day, they knew me more as a person rather than just the gay parent of their son in law.  

This thread is about what to do when loved ones leave the Church.  I am just trying to share my perspective.  There are several on this board that are saying they are having a difficult time with this issue.  I hope what I am saying will give them some insight that helps. My former mission president was a motivational speaker.  He gave great talks.  I still remember a talk he gave about confrontation and relationships.  He said something that I have never forgotten.  You can't change or control the other persons behavior.  The only person's behavior you can change or control is your own.  

[bluebell]

4 hours ago, california boy said:

Why in the world would you not include them in celebrating a baptism, a mission call etc?  Seriously, I really want to know because my family did the same thing to me.  I was never invited to hear a mission talk, or attend a baptism of a niece or nephew or a blessing of a new born child.  I could never understand this kind of thinking.  I still can't.  THIS really reinforces the message that if you are not in the Church, you are no longer a member of the family.  You made your choice, now you have to live with the consequences.  You call this compassion?  What do you do that is compassionate?  Call them up and say, I feel really bad you can't participate in your nephew's farewell address?  But you made the choice to leave.  We haven't changed, you have.  Save your prayers.  Save your outpouring of love.  If the person is invited and encouraged to attend, they won't feel sadness for not being able to participate.  They should be allowed to participate.  We get that temple sealing are off limits.  But blessings? Baptisms?  Mission Calls?

People seem to be wondering why platitudes of "we love you" fall on deaf ears.  For many years, I was also not invited to any family gatherings.  At the same time, I would get these letters from my father that would start out something like "My dear beloved son, who I will love always."  Those expressions of love made me more angry and estranged than it did any feelings of caring for me.  So many of you have expressed how no matter what you do, your children push you away.  Believe me, sometimes it hurts much less to just distance yourself rather than feel the kind of anger some of these letters of "love" express.  

I am really not trying to just be negative here, but just giving my perspective from someone who has lived through these very scenarios you describe.  For anyone who is wondering why their children can't accept your love, maybe it is because so much of that love is conditional on how you think that person should be living their lives.  You aren't responsible for their salvation.  You are not even responsible for the way they choose to live their lives.  For the most part, these are adults we are talking about.  It is only between them and Christ.  As long as you hold on to the idea that if you can just get them to just do what you want them to do, they will be happier, you are never going to get closer to them.  You can't change them or the choices they make.  Is all you can do is change how you deal with those choices.  Drop the "love the sinner, hate the sin" mantra.  Replace it with "love the sinner, let God deal with the sin".  

Just my advice.  No one has to believe it or follow it.  But if what you are doing isn't working, well then I have given you an alternative.

 

Maybe it helps to understand Alter’s point when you realize that she was responding to cherryz, who posted about how upset her relative got when they couldn’t attend a niece’s temple marriage after leaving the church and how angry they were about baptisms and mission call parties. 

[bsjkki]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

This thread is about what to do when loved ones leave the Church.  I am just trying to share my perspective.

I appreciate your perspective. The greatest gift from Heavenly Father that I have received was a clear lifting of feeling ‘responsible’ for my daughters path. That weight was taken from me and Heavenly Father basically told me that she was in ‘His’ hands. 

Since that very precise moment, all the church angst left our relationship. 

Edit: Should have said most of the church angst. 

Edited June 24, 2019 by bsjkki