Bishops Warned Of Mass Exodus?

[mercyngrace]

Background: Skimming several different LDS forums over the weekend, I noticed that an obscure blog was referenced twice. Referenced once on a pro-LDS site and once on an anti-LDS site, the fledgling blog seems to attracted attention only because a member of the church posted a letter explaining why he asked to be released as bishop. Leading up to this public declaration of disaffection, the blog author gave a talk to his ward pleading for compassion for those who leave the church.

In the talk he makes the following statement:

"The General Authorities have warned the Bishops, through the Stake Presidents, to “Prepare for a mass exodus from the church, even from the leadership.”

*** I'm not interested in discussing this brother's loss of faith or the impact of his resignation on his membership in the church or the congregation he served. Those are issues into which we have relatively little insight though he explains his viewpoint on his blog and it is relatively unremarkable compared to other exit stories.

My interest is solely in the accuracy of the statement quoted above. Have any of you heard or read similar statements? If so, is there a letter, leadership meeting, or other verifiable source?

Thanks in advance.

[Hamba Tuhan]

In addition to my calling working with the Young Men in my ward, I also serve as the executive secretary to our stake presidency. In that role, I receive and archive every single message sent to the stake president from both area and general authorities. For what it's worth, I can personally verify that there's been no letter in these parts. Neither has such a statement been made in any training meetings. For these reasons alone, I'm inclined to call shenanigans on this man's claim.

[mercyngrace]

In addition to my calling working with the Young Men in my ward, I also serve as the executive secretary to our stake presidency. In that role, I receive and archive every single message sent to the stake president from both area and general authorities. For what it's worth, I can personally verify that there's been no letter in these parts. Neither has such a statement been made in any training meetings. For these reasons alone, I'm inclined to call shenanigans on this man's claim.

Thanks, HT. I was inclined to think this statement was a misunderstanding or mischaracterization but since he put the statement in quotes, I wanted to ask around for verification.

[frankenstein]

he seems receptive to comments on his blog. though "general authority" is a pretty loose term.

[mercyngrace]

he seems receptive to comments on his blog. though "general authority" is a pretty loose term.

Funny you posted this - As soon as I submitted the new thread the thought occurred to me "Why don't I just ask him on his blog where he heard this?!" Some of my best ideas come right after I needed them. LOL.

[MorningStar]

I've seen Ex-Mormons comment many times that people are "leaving the church in droves", so who knows.

[Duncan]

Isn't 2/3 of the Church inactive or something?

[bookofmormontruth]

Quote is untrue, but I feel the "parable of the Ten Virgins" will happen one day.

In addition, sometime in the future, a "day of pentecost" when countless will flock into the Church - i.e.. "Prophecy of the South" by Vaughn J. Featherstone. (can anyone find a reference for this?). I think it was a dedicatory prayer of one of the Temples.

When this will all happen is unknown.

[Hamba Tuhan]

Isn't 2/3 of the Church inactive or something?

About that, more or less depending on where one lives. But inactivity is far, far removed from apostasy or a 'mass exodus.' We have some pretty rough girls who belong to our ward who, if we're lucky, show up to church once or twice a year if one of their class advisors can succeed in tracking them down and getting them to agree to come. They smoke and drink openly, and some break more serious commandments. Yet some of my Young Men have told me that these same girls have got in fights at school when someone has dissed 'their religion.'

When I was a fulltime missionary, we managed to track down an elderly member who hadn't been to church in over 20 years. We asked him if he'd like to come back to church. He said no. We asked him if he'd like to be visited by home teachers. He said no. We asked him if he'd like a visit from the bishop or a quorum leader. He said no. We asked if we could come back. He said no. In frustration, I asked him if he even wanted to be a member of the Church. In response, his eyes filled with tears, and he motioned us to walk into his home. In his tiny, cluttered lounge room was a recliner where he spent most of his days, and on the end table next to the recliner was a nearly-worn-out copy of the Book of Mormon. He picked it up, clutched it to his chest, and said, 'This is the most precious thing I have in the entire world. Why would you want to take it away from me?'

I didn't get it then, and I don't really get it now, but I've come to understand that, contrary to the crowing of some of our critics when they trot out inactivity rates, there is no necessary correlation between a person's self identification and his/her attendance at church. I have no doubt that there are inactives who have basically left the Church behind. I've met of few of these personally as well. But there are also many who still maintain Latter-day Saint as their primary religious identification.

In addition, it's helpful to remember that large numbers of Church members will experience one of more inactive phases in their lives. This means that we need to see inactivity rates in many cases as a fluid figure, not always comprised of the same people. Many of the very active, committed posters on this board have been inactive at some point in their past.

I have home taught the same family in my ward for more than six years. When I started, the sister was marginally active, but her husband was completely inactive and antagonistic. For the first two years or so, home teaching visits often turned ugly, with this brother attempting to argue against the gospel and local Church leaders. He also grew marijuana in his back garden and drank to excess. Since early last year, he's been active again, though, and he obtained his temple recommend in September. He and his wife spent the three weekends before General Conference in the temple, a 300km drive from here, and they're going back either this weekend or next. Two days ago in church, we sustained his wife as a member of the Young Women presidency, and we sustained him as a ward missionary. At their request, they get two home teaching visits a month, and we love going because their home now is filled with so much love and peace and light.

As recently as two years ago, though, this brother would have been counted as totally inactive, and it would have been both silly and tragic to write him off as someone who'd basically left the Church. He pretty much had, but his absence was not to last.

[Nathair/|\]

About that, more or less depending on where one lives. But inactivity is far, far removed from apostasy or a 'mass exodus.' We have some pretty rough girls who belong to our ward who, if we're lucky, show up to church once or twice a year if one of their class advisors can succeed in tracking them down and getting them to agree to come. They smoke and drink openly, and some break more serious commandments. Yet some of my Young Men have told me that these same girls have got in fights at school when someone has dissed 'their religion.'

When I was a fulltime missionary, we managed to track down an elderly member who hadn't been to church in over 20 years. We asked him if he'd like to come back to church. He said no. We asked him if he'd like to be visited by home teachers. He said no. We asked him if he'd like a visit from the bishop or a quorum leader. He said no. We asked if we could come back. He said no. In frustration, I asked him if he even wanted to be a member of the Church. In response, his eyes filled with tears, and he motioned us to walk into his home. In his tiny, cluttered lounge room was a recliner where he spent most of his days, and on the end table next to the recliner was a nearly-worn-out copy of the Book of Mormon. He picked it up, clutched it to his chest, and said, 'This is the most precious thing I have in the entire world. Why would you want to take it away from me?'

I didn't get it then, and I don't really get it now, but I've come to understand that, contrary to the crowing of some of our critics when they trot out inactivity rates, there is no necessary correlation between a person's self identification and his/her attendance at church.

My mother-in-law is like that. She has no interest in attending church (except family obligations like baby blessings) or keeping any of the commandments but she is proud of calling herself Mormon.

[BCSpace]

As soon as I submitted the new thread the thought occurred to me "Why don't I just ask him on his blog where he heard this?!"

I'll hazard he's just making it all up based on rumor and innuendo. He's one of the new breed of antiMormons who are verbally charismatic and able to draw a lot of sympathy for that which does not exist or never happened.

Matthew 7:15

[William Schryver]

About that, more or less depending on where one lives. But inactivity is far, far removed from apostasy or a 'mass exodus.' We have some pretty rough girls who belong to our ward who, if we're lucky, show up to church once or twice a year if one of their class advisors can succeed in tracking them down and getting them to agree to come. They smoke and drink openly, and some break more serious commandments. Yet some of my Young Men have told me that these same girls have got in fights at school when someone has dissed 'their religion.'

When I was a fulltime missionary, we managed to track down an elderly member who hadn't been to church in over 20 years. We asked him if he'd like to come back to church. He said no. We asked him if he'd like to be visited by home teachers. He said no. We asked him if he'd like a visit from the bishop or a quorum leader. He said no. We asked if we could come back. He said no. In frustration, I asked him if he even wanted to be a member of the Church. In response, his eyes filled with tears, and he motioned us to walk into his home. In his tiny, cluttered lounge room was a recliner where he spent most of his days, and on the end table next to the recliner was a nearly-worn-out copy of the Book of Mormon. He picked it up, clutched it to his chest, and said, 'This is the most precious thing I have in the entire world. Why would you want to take it away from me?'

I didn't get it then, and I don't really get it now, but I've come to understand that, contrary to the crowing of some of our critics when they trot out inactivity rates, there is no necessary correlation between a person's self identification and his/her attendance at church. I have no doubt that there are inactives who have basically left the Church behind. I've met of few of these personally as well. But there are also many who still maintain Latter-day Saint as their primary religious identification.

In addition, it's helpful to remember that large numbers of Church members will experience one of more inactive phases in their lives. This means that we need to see inactivity rates in many cases as a fluid figure, not always comprised of the same people. Many of the very active, committed posters on this board have been inactive at some point in their past.

I have home taught the same family in my ward for more than six years. When I started, the sister was marginally active, but her husband was completely inactive and antagonistic. For the first two years or so, home teaching visits often turned ugly, with this brother attempting to argue against the gospel and local Church leaders. He also grew marijuana in his back garden and drank to excess. Since early last year, he's been active again, though, and he obtained his temple recommend in September. He and his wife spent the three weekends before General Conference in the temple, a 300km drive from here, and they're going back either this weekend or next. Two days ago in church, we sustained his wife as a member of the Young Women presidency, and we sustained him as a ward missionary. At their request, they get two home teaching visits a month, and we love going because their home now is filled with so much love and peace and light.

As recently as two years ago, though, this brother would have been counted as totally inactive, and it would have been both silly and tragic to write him off as someone who'd basically left the Church. He pretty much had, but his absence was not to last.

Quoted for truth. Very well said. This accords 100% with my lifetime of experience in the Church of Jesus Christ.

[Hamba Tuhan]

I'll hazard he's just making it all up based on rumor and innuendo. He's one of the new breed of antiMormons who are verbally charismatic and able to draw a lot of sympathy for that which does not exist or never happened.

For what it's worth--and since I'm my mum's son, and she never liked dog piles--I think it's possible that this former bishop's stake president did say something to him at one point, either along these lines or far enough along that he understood it this way.

[mercyngrace]

I'll hazard he's just making it all up based on rumor and innuendo. He's one of the new breed of antiMormons who are verbally charismatic and able to draw a lot of sympathy for that which does not exist or never happened.

Matthew 7:15

I don't know how much sympathy he's getting from the members he knows off-line but the lines are drawn in a fairly predictable pattern online. Those on the pro-LDS site couldn't understand how he could possibly have been faithful in the church without knowing all the details of church history while those on the anti-LDS site were sympathetic to his explanation.

[Avatar4321]

If there is ever a mass exodus, I would expect the Lord would still be bringing more into the Church.

Just a feeling I have:)

[BenMacKay]

I can verify HT's statement. I'm currently serving as the bishop of my ward and have never received such communication. I would agree that it's an exaggeration or misunderstanding.

[Messenger]

As far as a mass exudus, I doubt that. For the people in the exudus, one would probably make it mass since there is safety in numbers. Afterall, once they send in thier letter, they will quickly realize the exudus of the spirit from thier lives. We will welcome them back.

[Duncan]

I seem to recall "Mass resignation day" from some years ago and that was a flop

[Steadfast]

"For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if [it were] possible, they shall deceive the very elect." Matt. 24:24.

[Jeff K.]

I went through an inactive phase and for the most part left the church alone. Easy to do if you think about it, and move without telling anyone. But for some reason I couldn't put my old missionary quad away and so I would read through it now and then. A while later I came to a strong realization that I had better fish or cut bait. I knew what was waiting for me if I left completely. I knew the lifestyle I would have leaving behind in the church and the alternative didn't seem that bad to me. I also knew the lifestyle I would have if I became active and carried out my responsibilities and realized that such a lifestyle itself would be much more occupied and very busy. The difference, the overwhelming difference for me was my old missionary quad. It showed me how empty my life could be, or how full it could be.

Inactivity is indeed fluid. Though there may be a time when the church calls upon resources, many resources and some of us will say no. That indeed might be the time when men and women are truly tested to the essence of their mettle.

[Deborah]

If there is ever a mass exodus, I would expect the Lord would still be bringing more into the Church.

As witnessed by the apostasy of those in Kirkland and the subsequent conversion of so many in England.

[Ceeboo]

*** I'm not interested in discussing this brother's loss of faith or the impact of his resignation on his membership in the church or the congregation he served. Those are issues into which we have relatively little insight though he explains his viewpoint on his blog and it is relatively unremarkable compared to other exit stories.

Hi MnG,

First, I wanted to make it clear that I have always ejoyed you, your perspective, and your wit that is displayed on this board.

Because I was involved (on another board) in a thread about this very topic, I wanted to offer a few thoughts (to the members of this board) for your consideration.

If I may.

I can't imagine anything being more important (on a Mormon Apologetic and Discussion board) then discussing a LDS Bishop's "loss of faith" and or his enormously sad and heart wrenchimg "resignation letter". (As a never-Mo, it brought tears to my eyes)

What was mind-bending to me (and almost as sad) were some of the LDS responses/reactions to this letter.

The thread on this (other board) was one of the saddest, troubling, telling, and bizarre threads I have ever engaged in.

I will leave it at that.

Sorry, I just had to share a few thoughts.

Peace,

Ceeboo

[mercyngrace]

Hi MnG,

If I may.

I can't imagine anything being more important (on a Mormon Apologetic and Discussion board) then discussing a LDS Bishop's "loss of faith" and or his enormously sad and heart wrenchimg "resignation letter". (As a never-Mo, it brought tears to my eyes)

What was mind-bending to me (and almost as sad) were some of the LDS responses/reactions to this letter.

The thread on this (other board) was one of the saddest, troubling, telling, and bizarre threads I have ever engaged in.

I will leave it at that.

Sorry, I just had to share a few thoughts.

Peace,

Ceeboo

Ceeboo,

The underlined portion is precisely why I wanted to avoid that aspect of the discussion. It's also why I pointed out in the opening post that in spite of the details available on his blog, we aren't privy to the intimate information we need in order to fairly discuss what is certainly a highly personal struggle.

I agree that discussing issues surrounding disaffection is important but I'm not sure, given my experience in such discussions online, that it's fruitful.

MnG

[Ceeboo]

Hey again MnG,

Ceeboo,

The underlined portion is precisely why I wanted to avoid that aspect of the discussion. It's also why I pointed out in the opening post that in spite of the details available on his blog, we aren't privy to the intimate information we need in order to fairly discuss what is certainly a highly personal struggle.

With great respect and understanding attempted, "that aspect" of the discussion is a highly significant part of the discussion (It can also have great impact on ALL who discuss it).

I agree that discussing issues surrounding disaffection is important but I'm not sure, given my experience in such discussions online, that it's fruitful.

MnG

Sadly IMO, my experience (at least in part) would lend support to your experience.

Peace,

Ceeboo

[mercyngrace]

Hey again MnG,

With great respect and understanding attempted, "that aspect" of the discussion is a highly significant part of the discussion (It can also have great impact on ALL who discuss it).

Peace,

Ceeboo

I wonder if that's true. *sigh*