Mass Apostasy Under Way? Lawyer Claims to Have Processed 6,500 Resignations

[JulieM]

1 minute ago, CountryBoy said:

I never said I was not ex'd.  I resigned on November 12, 1989.  I received the letter I was ex'd in March 1990.  In those months, I never attended, did not tithe, and was attending a different Church. 

It sounds like your letter of resignation never reached Salt Lake?  Otherwise, you wouldn't have even been a member of a ward and local leaders wouldn't have been able to call you in for a court (they would have no record or membership # for you).

Another reason for using an attorney to send the letter to SLC (to make sure it's actually sent and processed).  

[UtahTexan]

9 minutes ago, JulieM said:

It sounds like your letter of resignation never reached Salt Lake?  Otherwise, you wouldn't have even been a member of a ward and local leaders wouldn't have been able to call you in for a court (they would have no record or membership # for you).

Another reason for using an attorney to send the letter to SLC (to make sure it's actually sent and processed).  

Nope.....I had quit.  Once I quit I could care less what the other side does.  What they were doing for those months had zero affect on me.  I was happily finishing law school, studying for the bar  (not so happily....the bar was horrible :)), and attending Church in a different church.  I never gave it a second thought other than sadness that it did not work out.  

Edited February 28, 2016 by CountryBoy

[Scott Lloyd]

11 hours ago, JulieM said:

You have to know that many members desire to resign rather than to be excommunicated and why that is. There's a huge stigma and assumption of committing a sin (that is reason to warrant a church court and excommunication), when that's not true (in most cases I would think).

Members should be given the respect and consideration to be in control of how they exit the church.

As a practical matter, ex communications are not normally disclosed by the Church these days, and ordinarily, there will be no publicity at all, much less a public stigma, unless the individual himself, for whatever self-serving reason, chooses to go public with it. 

Regarding members being entitled to be in total control of the terms and conditions applying to their exit, I don't entirely agree. Where there has been a serious infraction that materially affects one's eligibility for Church membership -- such as child sexual abuse, embezzlement of Church funds, prominent efforts to undermine the Church or its mission, among numerous examples that could be named -- the Church is entitled to keep an internal record reflecting the termination and the reasons thereof and to perform whatever reasonable administrative procedures are  in place pursuant to that end.

I'm inclined to think of it as a contract. If I am in a contract with someone who does not conform to the terms of the contract, I am entitled to invoke the terms in place for termination of the contract and to keep my own personal record of the imposition of those terms. 

[Thinking]

53 minutes ago, CountryBoy said:

And like I said....When I returned to the LDS Church last year.....I quit the Catholic Church.  My Priest is very aware of it.  However, I am clearly still on their records....I get offering envelopes, I get correspondence...I get bulletins, I get calendars of events.

Whatever should I do?  Gasp!  They still control me!  I need help!  I cannot quit on my own.  They still...horror of all horrors...send me MAIL!!!!!!  OH NO!!!!!!

Am I still a member because THEY say so?  Or am I not because I say so?  Is my baptism back into the LDS invalid because Catholics still send me mail?

You have your reasons for your opinions on the "resign or not resign"  issue. Please don't make light of those for whom this issue causes conflict. You Texans may have a way of approaching life, but that approach may not be for everybody.

[flameburns623]

Ok.

I resigned from the Mormon Church.

Twice. (Off topic & off-limits on this sie, I think. Won't go into that here: but it was not a "protest" either time. I joined, I resigned & left in about a year. Then I rejoined about a decade later and then formally resigned again two decades later).

Never needed a lawyer.

Never got a whole lot of flack, apart from a gently worded tract from the First Presidency asking me to reconsider.

And an attempted visit by Missionaries, which I declined.

I left remaining friends with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, episodically a mite nostalgic and/or wistful; and wishing the faithful, believing members who remain nothing but the best.

I am left wondering:

One needs an attorney for this process WHY?

 

Edited February 29, 2016 by flameburns623

[Scott Lloyd]

9 minutes ago, Thinking said:

You have your reasons for your opinions on the "resign or not resign"  issue. Please don't make light of those for whom this issue causes conflict. You Texans may have a way of approaching life, but that approach may not be for everybody.

I don't agree he is making light. He is making perfect sense. Common sense. 

Edited February 28, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[ALarson]

5 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I don't agree he is making light. He is making perfect sense. Common sense. 

In your opinion.  You're entitled to that.  But others can have their own feelings and opinions on this topic too that are just as valid.

And, do you really think CountryBoy is making "perfect sense" when he keeps insisting he resigned from the church when he was actually excommunicated?  

[CA Steve]

I think that for most people using this website this isn't about needing an attorney to resign, more likely it is about the facility of the process. This is the age of the internet. If you are below a certain age your most important possession is probably your smart phone and you probably are used to spending a great amount of your life online shopping, paying bills, searching for loans for houses and cars, social media and so on. How often have we heard the phrase "Hey did you know there is an app for that?" Creating a website to walk people through the resignation process simply opens the door to those who want to resign and prefer to do things electronically online.

[flameburns623]

1 hour ago, CountryBoy said:

You miss the point.  I am not sure why. If I tell a store I am leaving, and walk out....I do not care if, after the fact, they have a meeting and tell people I was kicked out.  I simply do not care.  I had resigned.  I left.  I never went back.  I was gone.  I was Hasta La Vista.  I was Casper.  Me....gone.  I was out.  It over, done, fini, kaput.

What they did after that did not affect me.  I did not care.  I had quit.  If I no longer believe, and am no longer, in my mind, under their authority, why would I care even a little what they did to me AFTER I LEFT?  

If you work for a store and then voluntarily resign, it might matter very much if the store owner or manager puts a note in your personnel file indicating you were terminated for cause. 

If you tried to obtain employment from another branch or subsidiary of that retailer you might find yourself barred via a "Do-Not-Rehire" note on your employment file.

Another employer's background check might wrongly disclose that you were discharged for cause. Again interfering with your chances of employment.

Edited February 28, 2016 by flameburns623
Spelling

[JulieM]

41 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

As a practical matter, ex communications are not normally disclosed by the Church these days, and ordinarily, there will be no publicity at all, much less a public stigma, unless the individual himself, for whatever self-serving reason, chooses to go public with it. 

In a perfect world all confidential proceedings remain confidential.  You're bright enough to know this isn't a perfect world.   When someone is excommunicated, their family, friends, other ward members, etc. may learn of this.  

It doesn't take a genius to figure out why many members prefer to resign instead of going through a church court and getting excommunicated.   

If they want to go the route of using this attorney to even simplify the process further, why do you and others care so much?  Some will resign without an attorney (as some have posted).  That's fine too as this is a personal decision.

Edited February 28, 2016 by JulieM

[flameburns623]

Duplicate post. Sorry.

Edited February 28, 2016 by flameburns623
Duplicate post

[flameburns623]

22 hours ago, Analytics said:

Here's the thing.  If you send a letter to the Church asking for your name to be removed, they will refer the matter to the bishop.  Depending upon the bishop, he might expeditiously fill out the paperwork and get the process going.  Or he might ignore it.  Or he might call your mother.  It depends upon the whims of the bishop.

If an attorney sends the letter to the Church on your behalf, the Church processes your resignation.  That's more efficient for everybody concerned.

I'm glad you had a good experience with your resignation, but can you appreciate why somebody might not want to go through the process of justifying his decision to his bishop, begging the bishop to fill out the paperwork, and risk getting a call from his mother?  It's an easier, smoother process with the help of an attorney, your personal experience notwithstanding.  

 

This answers my question about why soneone would use this process. Thanks!

[Analytics]

3 hours ago, CountryBoy said:

That is nothing like this.  In your example, the company saying you owe money can hurt your credit.  Quitting a church is not like fraudulent collections.  Not even close.

Again.....fraudulent collections is nothing like quitting a church.

It can hurt your credit if you don't take care of it, but that only matters if you care about that.  And regardless, somebody can take care of it without an attorney.  I did that myself. I just wrote a quick letter explaining the debt was not legit, and the problem disappeared. 

The issue is that if something is easier with the help of an attorney, then it is a valuable service. Why fault an attorney for providing a service that is valuable?

Edited February 28, 2016 by Analytics

[Analytics]

1 hour ago, flameburns623 said:

If you work for a store and then voluntarily resign, it might matter very much if the store owner or manager puts a note in your personnel file indicating you were terminated for cause. 

If you tried to obtain employment from another branch or subsidiary of that retailer you might find yourself barred via a "Do-Not-Rehire" note on your employment file.

Another employer's background check might wrongly disclose that you were discharged for cause. Again interfering with your chances of employment.

This example he cited was so awful it makes me question he really is a lawyer. It is an well known fact that what employers say about former employees can do an incredible amount of harm. Hundreds of lawsuits are filed every week about this kind of thing.

[Analytics]

From another perspective, resigning from the church is a negotiation process.  The job of the bishop is to comvince the person resigning to stay, and then fill out and file the paperwork if he fails.  The bishop will often recruit help in trying to convince the member to stay--he'll get help from his counselors, the stake presidency, and on occasion, even the person's mother.

Hiring an attorney is a way to even the odds against this pressure and manipulation. The more adamant people on the bishop's team are that an attorney isn't necessary, the more convinced I am that in this situation,  attorneys are valuable.

[UtahTexan]

2 hours ago, Thinking said:

You have your reasons for your opinions on the "resign or not resign"  issue. Please don't make light of those for whom this issue causes conflict. You Texans may have a way of approaching life, but that approach may not be for everybody.

I had no idea until now that being independent was just a Texas thing

[UtahTexan]

2 hours ago, flameburns623 said:

If you work for a store and then voluntarily resign, it might matter very much if the store owner or manager puts a note in your personnel file indicating you were terminated for cause. 

If you tried to obtain employment from another branch or subsidiary of that retailer you might find yourself barred via a "Do-Not-Rehire" note on your employment file.

Another employer's background check might wrongly disclose that you were discharged for cause. Again interfering with your chances of employment.

I did not say resign from a store.  I said walk out.  as a customer.  The LDS Church cannot put anything in your file that would affect future employment unless you wanted to work for the Church.  Heavens knows if they could, I would have never gotten employed by anyone.  Bad analogy.  Further, the church does not pay me to be a member....like a store pays you to work there.

[UtahTexan]

30 minutes ago, Analytics said:

This example he cited was so awful it makes me question he really is a lawyer. It is an well known fact that what employers say about former employees can do an incredible amount of harm. Hundreds of lawsuits are filed every week about this kind of thing.

it is because you assumed I was talking about employment.  I never said I worked there.  Again, if the LDS pays you to be a member.....your assumption might have been justified.  So, I was amazed to read that you took "walking out" as me being an employee instead of a customer.

 

oh...and the personal attack was unnecessary.  

Edited February 28, 2016 by CountryBoy

[ALarson]

7 minutes ago, CountryBoy said:

it is because you assumed I was talking about employment.  I never said I worked there. 

Um....you stated: "I had quit."   From that, it sounded like you'd been an employee of the store.

.

Edited February 28, 2016 by ALarson

[Calm]

3 hours ago, ALarson said:

How could your leaders have held a court for you and excommunicated you if you were no longer a member?  What is so difficult to understand about that?  Your leaders cannot excommunicate someone who is not a member of the church.

Again, this is why some members may choose to use an attorney.  Many (most) do not want to be treated as you were (a court held and an excommunication when they only want to quietly resign as efficiently as possible with little or no contact from their local leaders).

I'm not going to continue a back and forth with you on this.  If you truly do not understand, that's fine.

.

In the past a letter of resignation triggered a court which was how resignations were then processed by the Church. Sometimes in the 90s I believe the process was changed and the court was removed from the process.

[UtahTexan]

2 hours ago, ALarson said:

In your opinion.  You're entitled to that.  But others can have their own feelings and opinions on this topic too that are just as valid.

And, do you really think CountryBoy is making "perfect sense" when he keeps insisting he resigned from the church when he was actually excommunicated?  

Wrong.  I resigned.  What they did later was all them, but I had already been out and resigned for several months.  You keep acting like, after I leave an organization, I am still bound by them and controlled by them  What kind of world you do live in to believe that?

[ALarson]

3 minutes ago, Calm said:

In the past a letter of resignation triggered a court which was how resignations were then processed by the Church. Sometimes in the 90s I believe the process was changed and the court was removed from the process.

Thanks for the additional information, Calm.  So was no one allowed to resign prior to someone suing? (It seems I read this took place...a lawsuit.)

If so, I'll have to say that attorneys getting involved may be a good thing here.  Member should be allowed to resign without a church court being held on them and I'm glad that's the case now.

[UtahTexan]

7 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Um....you stated: "I had quit."   From that, it sounded like you'd been an employee of the store.

.

No...I didn't.  Maybe you read that.....

 

but what I said was " If I tell a store I am leaving, and walk out....I do not care if, after the fact, they have a meeting and tell people I was kicked out"  Since I do not get paid to be LDS...and since I said leaving instead of quitting...and since my point was holding someone against there will....your reading the word "quit" when I never said that is strange

[UtahTexan]

4 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Thanks for the additional information, Calm.  So was no one allowed to resign prior to someone suing? (It seems I read this took place...a lawsuit.)

If so, I'll have to say that attorneys getting involved may be a good thing here.  Member should be allowed to resign without a church court being held on them and I'm glad that's the case now.

I was told it was done that way for paper reasons...which is why they were in no hurry.  They considered me out of the Church and, back then, formalized it with a court.  I frankly did not care what they did...I had resigned...all by myself....no attorney (and again, back then, I was not one).  Oh...I forgot, your personal attack claims you are not sure I really am one

[Garden Girl]

8 minutes ago, Calm said:

In the past a letter of resignation triggered a court which was how resignations were then processed by the Church. Sometimes in the 90s I believe the process was changed and the court was removed from the process.

This was the way I remember it being done when I was first inactive...

GG