"Why They Leave" Inquiries

[smac97]

Saw these yesterday and today (YouTube videos on the "A Thoughtful Faith" channel) :

Why People Leave The Church - Part 1: The REAL Problem

Why People Leave The Church - Part 2: The REAL Solution

Grok summary of Part 1:

Quote

Summary of the YouTube Transcript:

The speaker addresses why people leave the LDS Church (and Christianity more broadly), arguing that surface-level reasons often mask a deeper issue: loss of belief. Drawing on Jeff Strong’s survey data, the main reported reasons for leaving are:

• Church history (42%)
• Social issues / doctrines (e.g., sexual identity, gender equality, financial transparency — 33%)
• Negative church experiences (18%)
• Lifestyle (6%)

The speaker contends these are often symptoms rather than root causes. He distinguishes two main groups of leavers:

1. Inactive members — Still believe in the Restoration but step away due to institutional issues, disillusionment, or lifestyle.
2. Those who fully deconvert — Often formerly faithful members who don’t just leave the Church but abandon Christianity itself.

Core Thesis: Secularism as the Underlying Force

The speaker identifies secularism (specifically secular humanism) as the dominant cultural force driving this shift, affecting many faiths, not just Mormonism. It manifests in two key ways:

• Secularization of the mind: Prioritizing material/scientific truth as the only real knowledge. This makes miracles, revelation, and divine intervention seem impossible or irrational, turning church history and doctrines into insurmountable problems.
• Secularization of the heart: Replacing God-centered living with self as the highest value. The highest good becomes personal authenticity, self-expression, and “what works for me” rather than submission, repentance, obedience, or taking up one’s cross (quoting Matthew 16:24-25). Traditional Christian teachings become offensive under this worldview, where the only real sin is hindering someone else’s self-expression.

Christianity places God and external truth at the center. Secular humanism places the “authentic self” at the center. Behavior (including lifestyle changes after leaving) flows from these underlying beliefs.

Examples

• John Dehlin: Believes in a higher power/spiritual realm but prioritizes internal authority and protecting people’s ability to express their authentic selves (especially in sexuality and identity). The speaker sees this as heart-secularized therapeutic spiritualism rather than traditional Christianity.
• Alyssa Grenfell: Fully secularized mind (no evidence for God, embraces life’s meaninglessness) and heart (celebrates self-guided living, including sexual exploration post-church).

The speaker notes that not all ex-members are vocal online activists; many quietly mourn the loss of faith without hostility. He references scripture (e.g., 1 Corinthians 2 on spiritual discernment) to underscore that a “natural” (secular) mindset cannot fully grasp spiritual things.

The video ends by teasing Part 2 on potential solutions to counter creeping secularization.

Overall Tone: Faithful but empathetic and analytical. It pushes back against overly simplistic “they just wanted to sin” explanations while urging a focus on belief formation, worldview, and what people adopt after leaving. It frames the trend as part of a broader Western cultural shift toward self-centered spirituality.

Grok summary of Part 2:

Quote

Summary of the YouTube Transcript (Part 2):

This episode builds on Part 1 by focusing on solutions to the root cause of disaffection: creeping secularization in the modern West, where people lose belief in God-centered Christianity and replace it with self-centered secular humanism (often with spiritual or Jesus-flavored language).

Key Observations

• Many Latter-day Saints live in a “Mormon bubble” and fail to recognize that the Church operates within a broader secularizing Western culture. Secularization typically accelerates in college years when members encounter this culture unprepared.
• Missionary success historically thrived in deeply religious societies (e.g., 1800s England/Scandinavia, today’s Africa and Philippines) where people seek Jesus. It struggles in secularizing Western nations where belief in Christ as the path to fulfillment has eroded.
• Surface-level fixes like “being nicer/more welcoming” or lowering standards are insufficient. The Church already ranks among the kindest and most accepting groups, yet people still leave. Emulating declining liberal denominations (e.g., the United Methodist Church) or focusing on self-expression and “belonging” over transformation is critiqued as adopting secular priorities.

The Real Problem and Antidote

The Church grows strongest when it is confident in its mission, instills a bold vision of Zion, and produces saints — people who consecrate themselves to Christ and His kingdom rather than centering their “authentic self.”

Secularism’s weakness: It initially feels liberating (autonomy, self-expression) but ultimately leads to emptiness, nihilism, anxiety, isolation, and meaninglessness because humans are wired for purpose beyond themselves.

• A notable counter-trend: Young men in the West are rebelling against secular nihilism, drawn to voices like Jordan Peterson who take the Bible, suffering, responsibility, sacrifice, and transcendence seriously. Many young LDS creators are part of this shift.
• Danger: Spiritually hungry people can be pulled into resentment, tribalism, or shallow reactionary movements.

Proposed Solutions

• Offer the restored gospel as the true antidote: Radical honesty about a fallen world + the good news of Christ’s resurrection, which gives cosmic meaning to suffering, sacrifice, and life.
• Stop treating retention as a PR, marketing, or inclusivity issue. The core challenge is cultural loss of faith in any divine plan beyond self-created meaning.
• Practical advice:
  • With loved ones who have secularized: Prioritize genuine love, listening, and relationship-building (not as a conversion tactic).
  • With seekers (especially youth): Teach worldview contrasts — show where secularism leads (broken world with no real redemption) versus the hope, purpose, and eternal foundation offered by placing faith in Christ.

Overall Tone: Faithful, urgent, and culturally aware. It calls for confidence and doctrinal clarity over accommodation, while remaining compassionate. The speaker urges Latter-day Saints to engage the deeper battle of worldviews rather than symptoms, positioning the restored gospel as uniquely powerful in a secular age starved for meaning.

Also saw these this morning (Deseret News) :

Opinion: Moving from a deficit-oriented to a data-driven perspective on Latter-day Saints

Latter-day Saints continue to demonstrate uniquely high religiosity, according to a new BYU report

Very interesting reads, both of these,

Here is a consolidated Grok summary of all four of the above items:

Quote

Article Summaries

1. "Latter-day Saints continue to demonstrate uniquely high religiosity, according to a new BYU report" (Deseret News, June 5, 2026) This article highlights a comprehensive BYU Studies report analyzing high-quality U.S. data sources (e.g., Pew, General Social Survey, longitudinal youth studies). Key findings:

• Latter-day Saints have the highest active retention rate among U.S. religions (42% attend services monthly as adults; 50% continue to identify with the faith). While retention has declined over decades (from 82% in the 1980s), it remains stronger than most other Christian groups.
• LDS members show exceptionally high religiosity (top church attendance, scripture study, prayer with children, importance of religion) and well-being (high life satisfaction, family happiness, spiritual peace).
• Younger generations (Millennials/Gen Z) remain robustly engaged, though young women show lower retention linked to cultural perceptions of marriage/religion as a "loss of autonomy."
• Top predictors of de-identification: Not feeling God’s presence daily, perceived conflicts on social/political issues (e.g., same-sex marriage), and heavy digital/social media use (smartphone ownership tripled risk). The report acknowledges secularization challenges but emphasizes that the gospel "works" for those who stay, countering overly negative narratives.

2. "Opinion: Moving from a deficit-oriented to a data-driven Latter-day Saint public discourse" (Deseret News, June 5, 2026) Written by BYU professor Justin Dyer (lead author of the report), this piece advocates shifting from a "deficit perspective" (focusing on problems like retention losses or mental health struggles, often amplified by social media) to a data-driven perspective.

• High-quality comparative data reveals LDS strengths (e.g., top retention, lowest depressive symptoms among college students, high happiness) alongside real challenges.
• A deficit lens obscures the Church’s benefits and can deter engagement; balanced data helps contextualize experiences, support those struggling, and recognize religion’s broad benefits.
• Calls for nuanced public discourse that values individual stories while grounding discussions in representative evidence rather than anecdotes or incomplete stats.

Consolidated Synthesis (YouTube Transcripts + Two Articles)

Across the two YouTube videos and these timely BYU/Deseret analyses, a consistent, faithful-yet-realistic picture emerges of Latter-day Saint retention and resilience amid Western secularization.

The Challenge: Secularization as the Root Driver People primarily leave (or de-identify) because they no longer believe as strongly, often due to a broader cultural shift toward secular humanism. This dethrones God and elevates the "authentic self," self-expression, and personal fulfillment ("Is this working for me?"). It manifests as:

• Mind secularization: Scientific materialism making miracles, revelation, and church history seem implausible.
• Heart secularization: Prioritizing autonomy and identity over sacrifice, obedience, and consecration to Christ.

Reported exit reasons (e.g., church history ~42%, social issues like gender/sexuality ~33%, negative experiences ~18%) are often symptoms. Heavy digital media exposure amplifies dissonance by immersing youth in secular assumptions. This isn’t unique to the LDS Church—it affects all Western Christianity—but hits during vulnerable periods like college. Many leavers don’t become strict atheists but adopt therapeutic spiritualism centered on self (examples: John Dehlin, Alyssa Grenfell).

The Data-Driven Strengths Despite these pressures, the BYU report confirms Latter-day Saints retain uniquely high religiosity and well-being in the U.S.: highest church attendance (especially among youth), scripture engagement, family religious practices, and overall happiness/peace. Active retention leads other faiths, and most who step away remain open to returning or value spirituality. The Church grows globally where populations still seek transcendent meaning (e.g., Africa, Philippines), while Western struggles reflect cultural headwinds, not inherent institutional failure.

Critique of Common Responses

• Deficit-oriented narratives (common online) overstate crises, ignore comparative strengths, and can undermine faith.
• Over-focusing on "being nicer," lowering standards, or emulating declining liberal denominations misses the point. Kindness is already a strength; the deeper need is confidence in doctrine, a bold Zion vision, and producing saints who center Christ over self.
• Predictors like weak daily spiritual experiences or social/political disconnects highlight where targeted strengthening (e.g., fostering felt connection to God, healthy media habits) matters most.

The Antidote and Path Forward Secularism’s weakness is its emptiness—humans crave purpose, sacrifice, and transcendence beyond self. The restored gospel offers radical honesty about a fallen world plus good news of Christ’s resurrection, giving cosmic meaning to life’s struggles. Solutions include:

• Prioritizing genuine relationships with those who leave (love without immediate conversion pressure).
• Engaging seekers (especially youth) with clear worldview contrasts.
• Doubling down on practices that build belief (daily prayer/scripture, feeling God’s presence).
• A data-driven public discourse that acknowledges real challenges (e.g., young women’s cultural doubts) without despair, while celebrating protective benefits of faith and family.

Overall, the materials portray an optimistic realism: The Church faces secular headwinds and real losses, but it continues to produce remarkable outcomes for those who engage. Confidence in its mission, combined with love and high-quality evidence, positions it well to offer meaning in a nihilism-prone age. This aligns with historical patterns of growth where people actively seek Jesus.

I would be interested in your thoughts on these items.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Nofear]

I largely agree with his position. Secularization is definitely a problem, perhaps the problem. Jesus Christ is the answer. Though saying that is easier than realizing it. My perspective, as a physicist, will be different than others but I sometimes put it this way: the Gospel isn't just true it is real. God literally exists and is out there in the universe. Spirit matter is a material reality. The Atonement has real, extant change in our core being. And so much more. I do not understand all of the physics of the Gospel, but it is there. The Gospel is true. It is real.

That position is fundamentally incompatible with secularized religion. Secularization treats things symbolically, socially, legalistically, etc. But it does not typically treat God and the Gospel as an honest to goodness, fully extant, material reality in the universe.

[Navidad]

41 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Saw these yesterday and today (YouTube videos on the "A Thoughtful Faith" channel) :

Why People Leave The Church - Part 1: The REAL Problem

Why People Leave The Church - Part 2: The REAL Solution

Grok summary of Part 1:

Grok summary of Part 2:

Also saw these this morning (Deseret News) :

Opinion: Moving from a deficit-oriented to a data-driven perspective on Latter-day Saints

Latter-day Saints continue to demonstrate uniquely high religiosity, according to a new BYU report

Very interesting reads, both of these,

Here is a consolidated Grok summary of all four of the above items:

I would be interested in your thoughts on these items.

Thanks,

-Smac

Excellent post. Lots to unpack. Oh, and what exactly is a "Grok summary?" Is Grok a being, kind of like Shrek? Please excuse my cultural ignorance.

I read this with lots of interest. I see movement in and out of 1) religiosity and 2) specific religious groups (including and beyond Christianity)  as "migration;" not loss, leaving, or languishing spiritually. People naturally migrate—I think that is a part of being human. They try new things, return to old things. They move on, move up, move over, and sometimes move against.

I am 77 years old. At 7 years of age I converted; all the rest of my life I have been migrating. I was baptized once, as a testimony when I became a Christian. I have lived in the USA, Dahomey (Benin), and Mexico. The best I can figure out I was conceived in Canada while my dad pastored there. I have lived in 11 different states. I have belonged to six different church affiliations over my life: Southern Baptist, American Baptist, Independent Baptist, Mennonite, Community (non-denominational), and IFCA. I left none of those mad. Differing circumstances led to differing affiliations. I find myself a bit confused and mildly entertained about all the fuss and introspection over "leaving." People come. People go. People arrive. People leave. People remain. If we (people) don't physically migrate, we often culturally migrate, intellectually migrate, or spiritually migrate in the same place. Perhaps there is more navel gazing in the LDS church than in any other church with which I am familiar. The Mennonites are probably a close second.

Oh, and just to muddy the water - if I had a way to do so right now at 77, I would most likely join the Moravian Church. Wonderful history, doctrine, people, fellowship, and they own John Amos Comenius, one of the greatest minds in historic Christianity. Not a prophet (he was a bishop), but one of the founders of the concept of public education in Bohemia, which led to its expansion everywhere else. He was a member of the Unity of the Brethren, which led to the Moravian church, a restorationist church at least 230 years before the founding of the LDS church. That would be another migration, not a conversion. Not a leaving - but an exploration of a new path on my life's journey. Best to all, Navidad. 

[smac97]

5 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Excellent post. Lots to unpack. Oh, and what exactly is a "Grok summary?" Is Grok a being, kind of like Shrek? Please excuse my cultural ignorance.

Grok is an AI platform.  I figured it would be easier/faster to have it summarize the content.

5 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I read this with lots of interest. I see movement in and out of 1) religiosity and 2) specific religious groups (including and beyond Christianity)  as "migration;" not loss, leaving, or languishing spiritually. People naturally migrate—I think that is a part of being human. They try new things, return to old things. They move on, move up, move over, and sometimes move against.

That's a very valid point of view.  

5 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I am 77 years old. At 7 years of age I converted; all the rest of my life I have been migrating. I was baptized once, as a testimony when I became a Christian. I have lived in the USA, Dahomey (Benin), and Mexico. The best I can figure out I was conceived in Canada while my dad pastored there. I have lived in 11 different states. I have belonged to six different church affiliations over my life: Southern Baptist, American Baptist, Independent Baptist, Mennonite, Community (non-denominational), and IFCA. I left none of those mad. Differing circumstances led to differing affiliations.

Thank you for sharing this.  I have seen a number of loved ones leave the Church under similar conditions.  Some others have left by way of vilifying the Church as corrupt and terrible.

5 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I find myself a bit confused and mildly entertained about all the fuss and introspection over "leaving." People come. People go. People arrive. People leave. People remain. If we (people) don't physically migrate, we often culturally migrate, intellectually migrate, or spiritually migrate in the same place. Perhaps there is more navel gazing in the LDS church than in any other church with which I am familiar. The Mennonites are probably a close second.

That's an interesting perspective, and perhaps involves some presuppositions about the Church that are understandable from an "on the outside looking in" perspective.  

"Navel gazing" is an interesting characterization.  It "refers to pointless, excessive self-contemplation or self-absorption. It describes a state of being so intensely focused on your own thoughts, feelings, or internal problems that you become oblivious to the outside world."

If the Church is what it claims to be, then joining it and leaving it are important, even momentous, decisions.  The frequency at which disaffiliation occurs is, in my view, not a particularly helpful metric relative to importance.  Lots of people get married and divorced, both of which are important decisions.

5 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Oh, and just to muddy the water - if I had a way to do so right now at 77, I would most likely join the Moravian Church. Wonderful history, doctrine, people, fellowship, and they own John Amos Comenius, one of the greatest minds in historic Christianity. Not a prophet (he was a bishop), but one of the founders of the concept of public education in Bohemia, which led to its expansion everywhere else. He was a member of the Unity of the Brethren, which led to the Moravian church, a restorationist church at least 230 years before the founding of the LDS church. That would be another migration, not a conversion. Not a leaving - but an exploration of a new path on my life's journey. Best to all, Navidad. 

Thanks for sharing!

-Smac

[Senator]

18 minutes ago, Navidad said:

 Differing circumstances led to differing affiliations. I find myself a bit confused and mildly entertained about all the fuss and introspection over "leaving." People come. People go. People arrive. People leave. People remain. If we (people) don't physically migrate, we often culturally migrate, intellectually migrate, or spiritually migrate in the same place. Perhaps there is more navel gazing in the LDS church than in any other church with which I am familiar.  

I envy your mental and spiritual aloofness.

I certainly wasn't raised to think that way.  But I'm getting there

[Calm]

I like the idea of migration.  We talk of life being a journey, but so often that gets phrased as a direct transit from point a to point b with any digression being wasted time or worse.  I see the purpose of mortality as more exploration. Migration fits that view pretty well. 

[let’s roll]

45 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Perhaps there is more navel gazing in the LDS church than in any other church with which I am familiar.

A pearl of wisdom from our friend Navidad.  Worthy of consideration, understanding that I might be inviting navel gazing with respect to our navel gazing.  😉

[Calm]

I approve of navel gazing as long as we also commit as much effort into looking around.  Not the self indulgent kind navel gazing has come to mean, but the serious contemplative version seeking connection with God or something more than ______.

I think LDS can be prone to both kinds.  

Some members see no value in learning of other faiths as if we have all truth and insight within our own community and they may even get caught up too deeply in gospel hobbies, so far in fact they lose faith in our actual doctrine.

[Navidad]

51 minutes ago, smac97 said:

"Navel gazing" is an interesting characterization.  It "refers to pointless, excessive self-contemplation or self-absorption. It describes a state of being so intensely focused on your own thoughts, feelings, or internal problems that you become oblivious to the outside world."

Hi SMAC - I didn't look up the meaning of the phrase "navel gazing" prior to using it. It was a common phrase in the culture I grew up in. It did not have the negative connotations implied by this dictionary or textbook definition. It was a moderately humorous observation about someone who was a bit self-absorbed, nothing else. I didn't mean it to carry all the negative baggage represented in the definition. I am sorry. I meant it to be humorous, not offensive. Good lesson - something in one culture can mean something completely different in another. 

[smac97]

18 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Hi SMAC - I didn't look up the meaning of the phrase "navel gazing" prior to using it. It was a common phrase in the culture I grew up in. It did not have the negative connotations implied by this dictionary or textbook definition. It was a moderately humorous observation about someone who was a bit self-absorbed, nothing else. I didn't mean it to carry all the negative baggage represented in the definition. I am sorry. I meant it to be humorous, not offensive. Good lesson - something in one culture can mean something completely different in another. 

No worries.  I took it as benign.

Thanks,

-Smac