Leave It, But Can't Leave It Alone

[ERayR]

What are you talking about? And forgive me for horning in. The Methodists believe similarily to other non-LDS Christians, I see a big difference in how an ex Methodist would feel. They are still Christian so no problem there. But to a Mormon, an ex Mormon is a whole different ballgame for having left the one true church.

 

All churches are the one true church to the majority of its members. 

 

Those who can't leave it alone, IMO, are unable to find something to take the place of what they are leaving.

Edited September 14, 2013 by ERayR

[Senator]

After watching Dateline tonight, which featured a two hour special on the FLDS, it seems that the exFLDS have the same problem.

 

I was just going to mention this.  Some women that have come out of fundamentalist Mormonism are quite active in seeing that others do too.

 

.....and it's not even the true church

Edited September 14, 2013 by Senator

[Senator]

I've often considered the example of the pendulum.

 

I've known members who only seem to be a little 'in' (some might call them 'semi-active'). They swing, on a shallow arc, between activity and inactivity. It takes only a little for them to get out of the habit of attending. But equally only a little effort on behalf of friends or home teachers to get them attending again.

 

In contrast I recognise the description in the OP of people who are on a pendulum that has swung far further 'into' Mormonism. For them to leave the faith it often appears to need a stronger 'swing' in the other direction, the momentum of which has the ability to make them go further 'out' and as such against Mormonism.

 

But this is not inevitable. There are those who seem to have the maturity to be both deeply in, but in leaving, do so with dignity. Something is able to 'catch' their swing out so they leave quietly and without venom or antagonism. That 'something' might be their own spiritual/mental maturity. It might also be the reaction from a spouse or church leader. When a spouse who leaves is put under a lot of pressure by the still active spouse then it's probably more likely that this ads to the pressure that increases the momentum of the swing and the distance 'out.'

 

I've known several people who have been able to do this. They have left the church (after being 'deeply in') and yet are also very comfortable leaving it alone. I'm related to at least two.

 

It should be borne in mind by those who participate on these boards that the type of people you interact with, due to your apologetic interests, are more likely to be those who won't 'leave it alone.' Those who participate in, for example, the RfM message board are probably not representative of the people who leave the church. They are a minority group (a few 1000 at most) of a group that numbers in the multi-millions of people who have left Mormonism.

 

Those who leave and leave it alone do so quietly and are therefore not noticed. Those who leave and make a noise about it are those who are noticed. As a result we assume that this is the experience of all who leave. Confirmation bias is also a risk.

 

I think that is well said.  There are a far great number of member(apostates) who slowly over time slip out of the church without much apparent conflict.

[Damien the Leper]

There isn't a true church. There is only the living Church that is the believing body of Christ.

[Tacenda]

There isn't a true church. There is only the living Church that is the believing body of Christ.

 

 

"believing body", not a church, not a church.........

 

[mfbukowski]

There isn't a true church. There is only the living Church that is the believing body of Christ.

That makes you a heretic for everyone.  Pretty cool.  The Universal Apostate. 

 

Or maybe just a Unitarian. 

Edited September 14, 2013 by mfbukowski

[Damien the Leper]

That makes you a heretic for everyone.  Pretty cool.  The Universal Apostate. 

 

Or maybe just a Unitarian. 

Ugh! I could slap you for calling me a Unitarian, Mark. ;-)

What I mean is that the believing body should ideally be one in Christ and theologically conservative of course.

[omni]

The very last person I taught as a missionary was a woman who'd been reared in the Jehovah's Witnesses church. (She was baptised the Sunday after I left the mission.) Again, I never once heard her speak ill of her former faith.

It seems to me that those who are truly at peace with their current location have little need to disparage where they've been or the journeys they've taken to get there.

I think your friend took the healthy approach to her former faith and I hope she continues to find joy in the LDS church.

This personal anecdote aside, I still believe my previous observations have merit. Take a look at the number of ex Mormon or JW organizations as opposed to the number of ex Episcopalian (which has more adherents) organizations.

For clarification, my making this observation doesn't mean I agree with the actions of these individuals or organizations.

[canard78]

Which is what we've been saying but those who are are very hostile and angry in many cases.

Therefore, if the vocal ex-Mormons are in a minority that means that the majority of ex-Mormons are not vocal and therefore demonstrating they can leave it well alone.

[Helen47]

I don't "leave the church alone" because I am interested in religions and how they deal with challenges to their beliefs. I was raised a in a "Missouri Synod" type of Lutheran church so  I often go and check out their site to see how they are going. They still refuse their leaders to pray with another person in public unless they are in doctrinal agreement. Mormonism like any other group is interesting to watch. I remember the first book i read about the LDS from outside was Thomas O'Dea's The Mormons.

[cinepro]

Based on the attendance and retention numbers, I suspect the Church has a far bigger problem with people leaving and leaving it alone. 

 

It's just easier to ignore those that do, and they're not as much fun to talk about.

Edited September 14, 2013 by cinepro

[juliann]

Would it be safe to say that there are different kinds of apostates? From a general standpoint, I would be considered an apostate, right? But I'm not seeking the destruction of the LDS church. I will agree that I can't leave the LDS church and Mormonism alone. Mormons mean a great deal to me. I like running interference on the antis that go to the temple to "witness". It's so much easier to defend Mormons and Mormonism than it is to fight against it. Defending Mormonism, to me, is like a natural love.

 

The church has made statements making it very clear that an apostate is someone who is in open opposition as opposed to those who have a difference of opinion.

 

Among the activities considered apostate to the Church include when members “(1) repeatedly act in clear, open, and deliberate public opposition to the Church or its leaders; (2) persist in teaching as Church doctrine information that is not Church doctrine after being corrected by their bishops or higher authority; or (3) continue to follow the teachings of apostate cults (such as those that advocate plural marriage) after being corrected by their bishops or higher authority” (General Handbook of Instructions, 1989, p. 10-3).

 

There is quite a body of research into New Religious Movements that supports the OP quote.   One critical piece of being a bona fide apostate is that they are part of an oppositional coalition.

 

The apostate is a defector who is aligned with an oppositional coalition in an effort to broaden a dispute, and embraces public claims making activities to attack his or her former group.  Unlike typical leave takers whose responses range from indifference to quiet disenchantment, the apostate assumes a vituperative or hostile posture and pursues a moral campaign to discredit the group.

  Stuart A. Wright, “Apostates Who Never Were: The Social Construction of Absque Facto Apostate Narratives,”  in The Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements, ed. David G. Bromley (Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 1998), 109.

 

 

The archetypal account that is negotiated is a “captivity narrative” in which apostates assert that they were innocently or naively operating in what they had every reason to believe was a normal, secure social site; were subjected to overpowering subversive techniques; endured a period of subjugation during which they experienced tribulation and humiliation; ultimately effected escape or rescue from the organization; and subsequently renounced their former loyalties and issued a public warning of the dangers of the former organization as a matter of civic responsibility. . . Emphasis on the irresistibility of subversive techniques is vital to apostates and their allies as a means of locating responsibility for participation on the organization rather than on the former members.   This account avoids attribution of calculated choices that would call for invoking the label of traitor.  Further, a broad allegation of subversion allows a diverse array of opponents to unite under a common banner and formulate a variety of claims in terms that will mobilize or neutralize a broad spectrum of interests.  Upon the rendering of an acceptable narrative, the oppositional coalition accepts pledges and tests of loyalty and professions of regret as the basis for reinteg into social networks to which it controls access. 

David G. Bromley, “The Social Construction of Contested Exit Roles: Defectors, Whistleblowers, and Apostates,”  in The Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements, ed. David G. Bromley (Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers), 37.

However, I have wondered if the stakes are so high in Mormonism because it is really the community they can't leave alone rather than the religion.

There is something else Joseph accomplished--something that is obliquely suggested by the very difficulty of knowing whether to define the people who now revere him as a church, a religion, a culture, an ethnicity, a global tribe, or something else.  Joseph succeeded in creating a community with no real parallel--and few precedents--in the history of the world.

Terryl L. Givens, “Lightning Out of Heaven”: Joseph Smith and the Forging of Community,” BYU Studies  45, no. 1 (2006): 7.

[canard78]

Based on the attendance and retention numbers, I suspect the Church has a far bigger problem with people leaving and leaving it alone.

It's just easier to ignore those that do, and they're not as much fun to talk about.

Exactly. I appreciate these types of statements in a strange way. They are so demonstrably wrong that they become useful examples of our religious leaders "prophesying in part." This is simply another "prophecy" (or statement) that fails. Some leave the church and leave it alone. Some don't. The some that do invalidate the statement made given its absolutist and unequivocal nature.

[canard78]

On the other hand... His talk can be read to not be making a statement about all people who leave the church. He says: "some former members" when discussing those who are vocal oponents. The couplet he uses next is probably him wanting to use catchy/memorable phrases. Unfortunately, given people often hear in sound bites, some people will forget the specific context and may instead take away a broader criticism am of those who leave.

[Palerider]

 

I don't think that is what Br. Pace is saying at all. As has been pointed out many leave the church and do leave it alone. He is referring to those who can't leave it alone and having personally knowing some of those people their hostility cannot be explained by needing to deal with the cognitive dissonance or even seeking to protect others. I think of Shakespeare's line "The lady doth protest too much."

 

I really think the other quote given in the OP describes it quite well "Even after his conversion, the true ‘apostate’ is not primarily committed to the positive contents of his new belief and to the realization of its aims.  He is motivated by the struggle against the old belief and lives only for its negation." In other words the lady doth protest too much.

I think a little closer reading of my post would have helped you to have a more accurate response. But then again maybe it was just poorly written.......

First of all Bro pace is saying exactly what I stated: "One loses his testimony only by listening to the promptings of the evil one."

That's pretty absolute in my opinion. That is; listening to Satan becomes the only valid way that an individual leaves the church in the Mormon view.

Secondly, it isn't the leaving member who has the problem with cognitive dissonance. It is the member who learns the uncomfortable truth and decides to create pyschological constructs which allow them to stay and even believe more strongly in their present system.

Did you even bother to read Festinger's account of the prophet leading the "UFO believing" cult in the 1950's? It's very instructive.

[Palerider]

 

There isn't a true church. There is only the living Church that is the believing body of Christ.

You sir, in my opinion are absolutely correct.

[Deborah]

 

Secondly, it isn't the leaving member who has the problem with cognitive dissonance. It is the member who learns the uncomfortable truth and decides to create pyschological constructs which allow them to stay and even believe more strongly in their present system.

 

And what if the staying member doesn't find a particular truth uncomfortable but rather understands it in the context of history or understands that the history is incomplete. I find a lot of stuff apostates are uncomfortable with are misunderstandings or misinterpretations on their part.

[pogi]

Most of my friends who have left the church describe divorce like symptoms.  There is hurt, disillusionment, anxiety, social loss, confusion, but they also describe a sense of liberation and freedom, much like one would feel after divorcing from a troubled relationship.  

 

The varied responses to leaving the church are probably very similar to the varied responses to divorce.  Some remain friendly while others become vehement enemies. 

 

Being a member of this church really is just like living in a committed relationship.  I can completely understand why people would feel angry after becoming disillusioned.  They feel like they gave their heart and got hot air in return.  

Edited September 15, 2013 by pogi

[juliann]

 

Secondly, it isn't the leaving member who has the problem with cognitive dissonance. It is the member who learns the uncomfortable truth and decides to create pyschological constructs which allow them to stay and even believe more strongly in their present system.

Did you even bother to read Festinger's account of the prophet leading the "UFO believing" cult in the 1950's? It's very instructive.

But not necessarily in the way you think....   A belief that an exiting member of anything doesn't have "cognitive dissonance" is, well,  cognitive dissonance.  Exiters on their way to full blown apostatehood must have a receiving coalition.  It will function just like a so called cult because cult is merely a pejorative.  The UFO group is particularly apt because for the last decade there has been one "prophecy" after another about the imminent doom of the church,  this message board, FAIR, some apologist's job or church status,  and currently we have the "October surprise" prophecy.   After each failure, the group does what is pointed out.  They merely rally and join in the next prophecy of doom.   

 

It is all similar group behavior.  You can't exempt one group because you don't find the common behavior flattering and want to only apply it to targeted groups you do not respect.  And Stark probably does a better job of explaining why high maintenance groups result in investments that people then want to protect.

[Robert F. Smith]

What are you talking about? And forgive me for horning in. The Methodists believe similarily to other non-LDS Christians, I see a big difference in how an ex Methodist would feel. They are still Christian so no problem there. But to a Mormon, an ex Mormon is a whole different ballgame for having left the one true church.

You can horn in any time you want, Tacenda.  I don't mind at all.

 

As to your comments, you make my point for me:  Who cares whether a Presbyterian becomes a Methodist, or vice-versa?  There are theological differences, but one sees very little of the vituperation and cat-calling which one must endure to convert to Mormonism, although it is true that some Baptist and Lutheran seminaries have suffered some very unchristian internal squabbles over the past 50 years or so, firing professors who refused to toe the party line (and some taking their students with them as at Seminex)..  Denominationalism continues apace, even if we see some mainstream ecumenism.

[Robert F. Smith]

......................................   

I did think though, that Luther started out attempting to be a loyal dissenter and was framed as an apostate rather than choosing to be one. Might be wrong there.

You are right on the money, Palerider, and your other points also well taken.  Thank you.

[Robert F. Smith]

Robert,

I would change 'have high moral values' to 'have high moral expectations'.  I could go into a list of members that have spent money in my business asking me to 'farm use' an item that was not allowable by law.  In rural America, where people have farms, this is a possibility on 'true' farm purchases - not for mama's Cadillac.  Yes, they do know the difference but, just like most individuals, willing to bend/break the law to get a little ahead.  

On your last statement, " but it seems that those that require the most commitment (LDS, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc) create the most critical exmembers.",  I wouldn't stop at saying they require the most commitment,(which I agree they do) but they state emphatically that theirs is the ONLY true way and straying is NOT acceptable.

Lest you get the wrong idea, sdc, that was omni you were replying to, not me.

Still, I agree with your comments here.

[Robert F. Smith]

All churches are the one true church to the majority of its members. 

 

Those who can't leave it alone, IMO, are unable to find something to take the place of what they are leaving.

You don't get out much, ERayR.  You might try attending some mainstream Protestant churches.  If you get acquainted, you'll find that it is more like Protestant religion is the way, the truth, and the life.  Billy Graham and his successor evangelists have cared little which mainstream Protestant church you join, but only that you find one and join it.  They are not very competitive.  The fundamentalist evangelicals are a little different, and you may find them warring against this or that "wrong" theology, and it is they who inveigh so harshly against Mormonism.

[Robert F. Smith]

Valentinus, on 14 Sept 2013 - 11:10 AM, said:

There isn't a true church. There is only the living Church that is the believing body of Christ.

 

 

"believing body", not a church, not a church.........
 

Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, used to distinguish between believing and unbelieving (faithful & unfaithful) communities by referring to the believers as the City of God, the unbelievers as the City of Man.  Since all live together and are often outwardly indistinguishable, only God can tell who is who.  In such a view, the Body of Christ is the City of God writ large.

 

However, the Body of Christ is the Church, and the Church is the Body of Christ.  It is the Sacred Congregation of the Faithful, the Saints of God.  Who are the members of that Sacred Congregation?  Only God knows.

[Tacenda]

Valentinus, on 14 Sept 2013 - 11:10 AM, said:

Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, used to distinguish between believing and unbelieving (faithful & unfaithful) communities by referring to the believers as the City of God, the unbelievers as the City of Man. Since all live together and are often outwardly indistinguishable, only God can tell who is who. In such a view, the Body of Christ is the City of God writ large.

However, the Body of Christ is the Church, and the Church is the Body of Christ. It is the Sacred Congregation of the Faithful, the Saints of God. Who are the members of that Sacred Congregation? Only God knows.

And, I think He will want to know who saught after Him and knew Him through His word, and loved Him and His children.