"Why some people leave the Church"

[JulieM]

18 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

As a rank-and-file member of the Church, I will say here and now that I would not be OK with someone holding a prominent stake or ward calling while harboring unbelief in the Church of Jesus Christ.

You may be surprised how many in leadership positions feel about the church right now.  I serve in the YW’s presidency and we’ve discussed our issues and doubts. They have shared their husband’s feelings too.  Lots of doubts and issues right now.  Most of them serve in ward leadership (or in the stake).  Many are struggling right now but are still very good, honorable people.  But no, they don’t all believe as perfectly or fully as you seem to believe all leaders do.  

Everyone is striving to do what is right though.  At least those struggling members I know.

Edited February 7, 2019 by JulieM

[Hamba Tuhan]

3 hours ago, ALarson said:

(By the way....I'm serving in a leadership position and there are many things I no longer believe about the church.  But I am worthy to serve and I've found there are many who agree with my opinions who also serve in ward and stake leadership positions.)

Ah, so this is personal then. Do your leaders and the people you serve all know what things you 'no longer believe about the Church'? Do you believe the Church is a fraud and that Joseph just made it all up?

[Hamba Tuhan]

1 hour ago, JulieM said:

However,  if I knew he was in a position to cause harm, I would step back and reevaluate my position.

Would you find it problematic if you found out that the nurse at your paediatrician's office were anti-vaccination but keeping it a secret? The receptionist?

Edited February 7, 2019 by Hamba Tuhan

[JulieM]

15 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Would you find it problematic if you found out that the nurse at your paediatrician's office were anti-vaccination but keeping it a secret? The receptionist?

No, not at all.  I’d still do what I believed in and I would imagine they’d put their feelings aside and do their job.  Or do you think they’d refuse to give an immunization?  

I have a friend who is a nurse for the school district who is anti immunizations, but still enforces them being done in our state for enrollment.

This is really kind of an odd comparison, to be honest.

All that aside, you are making all of these judgements without even knowing what this poster’s calling is.  Maybe he will give more info.

Edited February 7, 2019 by JulieM

[MustardSeed]

I’m sure this man, who is a real person, has feelings.  

This feels wrong. 

 

 

[Hamba Tuhan]

3 minutes ago, JulieM said:

No, not at all.

Interesting. I would. At minimum, I'd be deeply bothered by the fraud. Thanks. 

[Hamba Tuhan]

2 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

I’m sure this man, who is a real person ...

How do you know this?

[MustardSeed]

12 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

How do you know this?

Lol .  Touché. 

[JulieM]

25 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

How do you know this?

How do we know you’re a real person who’s honest with what you post?  That could be asked about most on here!

[Kenngo1969]

27 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

I’m sure this man, who is a real person, has feelings.  

This feels wrong. 

 

 

 

24 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

How do you know this?

 

12 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

Lol .  Touché. 

Hey!!!  Sock puppets have feelings, too, you know!  

 

[Hamba Tuhan]

1 minute ago, JulieM said:

How do we know you’re a real person who’s honest with what you post?  That could be asked about most on here!

Exactly!

Hopefully I come across as a real person who's honest in what I post. But that's all you have to go on.

[JulieM]

8 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

 

 

Hey!!!  Sock puppets have feelings, too, you know!  

 

He’s been a poster here for years.  I think we shouldn’t make accusations with nothing really to support them.

[Stargazer]

10 hours ago, ALarson said:

And, if he's answered the questions regarding being worthy to serve in the calling honestly....he's worthy to serve.  So yes, it is between him, his leaders and God.

He says that he keeps all the commandments, and that's quite noble in his situation.  But "worthiness" is not solely a matter of keeping all the commandments.  In this context, "worthiness" shouldn't be taken as a measure of morality, for example.  "Worthy" has subdefinitions which apply differently depending upon the situation.  One such definition is "fit for a purpose".  I might look at a item of furniture and say "That is a worthy chair".  Meaning that it is fit for the purpose for which it is intended.  Not that it is a moral chair.  It's a somewhat antiquated usage, but that is closest to the intent of a T/R.  One's worth as a human being is not what is meant in terms of a temple recommend.

Most prominent church positions require holding a valid temple recommend.  Which of the TR questions can he answer in such a way as to be eligible to hold a recommend?  Almost all of them.  Two of them are problematic:

3. Do you have a testimony of the restoration of the gospel in these the latter days?
4. Do you sustain the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as the Prophet, Seer, and Revelator and as the only person on the earth who possesses and is authorized to exercise all priesthood keys? Do you sustain members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators? Do you sustain the other General Authorities and local authorities of the Church?

Based on his admission in this thread, if he answered the T/R questions honestly, he would have had to give a NO to both of these.  He believes Joseph Smith was a fraud, which means that the Restoration is likewise a fraud.  According to him, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is likewise a fraud, because how could someone believe that men perpetuating a fraud be rationally called "prophets, seers and revelators"?  Whether it functions credibly or creditably as a religious organization, or is a beneficial organization, is immaterial with respect to worthiness for a temple recommend.  If he holds a temple recommend, then he holds it fraudulently.  

There are certainly positions in the Church that a non-believing member could honestly hold.  Prominent positions should certainly not be among them.  In my humble opinion.

And I am not judging him.  That's between him and God, as you justly point out.  

 

 

Edited February 7, 2019 by Stargazer

[Calm]

8 hours ago, JulieM said:

I agree, calm.  But let’s error on the side of giving him the benefit of the doubt.  Why are we judging him when we don’t have complete information?   He’s not under our stewardship and if he’s telling the truth, he is someone who is living the standards of the church.   However,  if I knew he was in a position to cause harm, I would step back and reevaluate my position.

I am not speaking specifically, but generally. He should clarify what he means by a “prominent” position though imo  

———

I think being an appropriate leader or teacher is a lot more than just living a good life.  If that is all that matters than we could be inviting Catholics and Protestants, Muslims, atheists, and any others who have chosen to live moral, upstanding lives to be our teachers in church and telling them to just teach us what they think a LDS wants to hear.  It would be fantastic for them to be our actual teachers in our lives, but only imo if they are able to be openly teaching the beliefs that touch their souls.

Being a teacher or leader also includes openly sharing ideas and guiding minds and just as I think it is important for scholars and scientists to be open about biases in their teaching, I think anyone in a teaching or influential position of any kind needs to be open as well....biases will bleed through in words, tone, facial impression, willingness to support.  The result will be mixed messages and confusion in students and feeling betrayed  if they find out the reality.

I see people who are holding back significant real feelings when they are emotionally capable of being open but choose not to be to avoid unpleasantness or loss as essentially cheating the other person of the choice and chance to relate to them as a human being and not as a mask.

For those who have felt betrayed because they see the Church as not having been open about crucial history or other aspects...not being authentic to its beginnings or in its commitments, how can they see it as then appropriate to turn around and play the “faith promoting”, “all is well” role themselves?  I don’t understand the reasoning that makes anyone okay with such a role if they truly believe the church is a fraud in terms of its claims  

I fully admit I don’t understand how one can feel comfortable behaving in such a way when you know people will perceive you as something you are not and you choose to do this intentionally. I don’t see how that can not be deception. 

Now I don’t believe that all deception is wrong, for example I intentionally downplay my mom’s dementia to her. Since nothing can be done by her with more accurate info, increasing her fear and confusion sounds cruel. OTOH, I am fully open about my concerns and my own limitations with my siblings because they are functioning adults and such things affect them and even if it would make them feel better if I always painted a rosy picture, they would be robbed of the choice of preparing themselves for the reality when they get a chance to visit or when the time comes that they need to be involved more. 

If the Church is a fraud then who are you actually protecting by completely burying any concern and pretending one is part of the family working as one to create God’s kingdom on earth?

[Calm]

7 hours ago, JulieM said:

I have a friend who is a nurse for the school district who is anti immunizations, but still enforces them being done in our state for enrollment..

Is she open about her disbelief as well as her commitment to the job?  Does she promote the immunization as a good thing, essentially lying about her personal belief?

Ifyou don’t like that analogy, then what about it being important to know the bias of scholars and scientists or a company wanting to know how potential employees view their products?  If these employees actually thought the products were idiotic, surely this would affect their attitude to their jobs and their attitude could affect others. 

Our ideas affect our behaviors. If we hold a strong negative view about something, it can not help but change our behaviour. If we have been chosen for a job/calling because a certain type of behavior is anticipated based on how we have presented ourselves as committed and we know we can only really pretended to act that way and never be fully committed or invested....that seems like deception to me if we don’t inform others of the type of depth of our feelings/beliefs/values. 

Edited February 7, 2019 by Calm

[Calm]

I get the frustration or even anger when someone or an organization has not been upfront with one as it cuts into our agency because options may not be there that we were promised, paths of progression may get blocked, we may think people care about us and it is an act and there isn’t the relationship that we thought was there. 

But if this is wrong for someone to do it to us, how is it right for us to do anything similar to someone else?  Wouldn’t it be better to try and break the cycle of deception if you believed that others’ Behaviour was deception rather than perpetuate it?

Edited February 7, 2019 by Calm

[Tacenda]

9 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

How do you know this?

Hamba, you can't be that naive that you don't believe some have high up callings and don't believe. When I participated on the New Order Mormon discussion board, there were several, a Stake President, RS President, Stake Counselor and even a bishop. 

[ALarson]

11 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

As a rank-and-file member of the Church, I will say here and now that I would not be OK with someone holding a prominent stake or ward calling while harboring unbelief in the Church of Jesus Christ. I would be worried about the potential impact said person might have on members of my family or others I cared about in the ward or stake. For the sake of his personal integrity if nothing else, such a person should resign his calling forthwith. 

Once again, it's not up to you to judge this man.  But, having read a lot of your posts on here, I understand why you would feel the way you do.

However, gone are the days where all members believe that the church is the only true church on the face of the earth.  Members testimonies are evolving and changing as they learn more of the truth regarding details from church history, past doctrines and also current new policies, etc.  I personally know of no one who learns about these details whose testimony is not altered (at least some) and their feelings changed (some regarding Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon being historically accurate and so on).  Many disagree with the policy regarding gay parents and the children in their home and SSM.

But I've seen many who have still been able to love the church enough and have such a deep love for the teachings of Christ they they stay active and continue serving (yes, some in leadership positions).  The church is their family and they have close friends and loved ones in the church.  It's where they still want to be, even though they may not have the 100% true testimony anymore.

I am even seeing some former very staunch members who are not at all happy with all of the current changes (temple and otherwise) who have expressed that they now believe the church is not the only true church and that it's now becoming more mainstream Christian in order to hold onto it's members and youth.....and the leaders are making changes to make it easier to be a member.

Like it or not, testimonies are changing.  Take a peek over at the NOM forum to see that there are many members who are active and serving just like this man we're discussing who is serving in his stake.  And their numbers are growing from what I see.  I know of high counselmen and counselors who could be this man.  They are in teaching positions and even some serving as Bishops.  I've had conversation with my own Stake President about his changing testimony.   You may not like that, but it's the truth.

Maybe he will return and answer some of your questions (and others who have chimed in).  But I don't see how he is not a good man who wants to remain active and serve.  And someone who continues to keep the moral standards and live the commandments.

Edited February 7, 2019 by ALarson

[jpv]

On 1/28/2019 at 9:01 PM, Gray said:

I think it's probably a lot simpler. People leave because it's not working for them. People stay because it is working for them.

Cite Prince if you're gonna quote him.

[ALarson]

3 hours ago, Stargazer said:

He says that he keeps all the commandments, and that's quite noble in his situation.  But "worthiness" is not solely a matter of keeping all the commandments.  In this context, "worthiness" shouldn't be taken as a measure of morality, for example.  "Worthy" has subdefinitions which apply differently depending upon the situation.  One such definition is "fit for a purpose".  I might look at a item of furniture and say "That is a worthy chair".  Meaning that it is fit for the purpose for which it is intended.  Not that it is a moral chair.  It's a somewhat antiquated usage, but that is closest to the intent of a T/R.  One's worth as a human being is not what is meant in terms of a temple recommend.

Most prominent church positions require holding a valid temple recommend.  Which of the TR questions can he answer in such a way as to be eligible to hold a recommend?  Almost all of them.  Two of them are problematic:

3. Do you have a testimony of the restoration of the gospel in these the latter days?
4. Do you sustain the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as the Prophet, Seer, and Revelator and as the only person on the earth who possesses and is authorized to exercise all priesthood keys? Do you sustain members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators? Do you sustain the other General Authorities and local authorities of the Church?

We've been told on here that we are not to judge whether someone is temple worthy or not.  I agree that is not right to do.  You have no idea what conversations this man has had with his stake president.  Many have temple recommends who no longer believe as they used to or believe that the church is the only true church, etc.  I have had open discussions with my Stake President about my evolving beliefs and he actually agrees with me on some of them.  

Once again, that is between him and his leaders and God.

[jpv]

On 1/29/2019 at 8:12 AM, ALarson said:

I doubt they want (or need) to have the Law of Chastity altered (going by what is stated in the temple), just interpreted to cover those in same sex marriages too (they have husbands and wives).  The law does not need to be altered as currently written.

However, it would not be the first time it was altered.

The Temple was was only ambiguous on this from 1990 to 2018, now it's very clear.

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Hamba, you can't be that naive that you don't believe some have high up callings and don't believe. When I participated on the New Order Mormon discussion board, there were several, a Stake President, RS President, Stake Counselor and even a bishop. 

I would have doubts about them as well. The naïveté may well be on the part of those who unquestioningly accept their veracity. 

[ALarson]

10 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Ah, so this is personal then. Do your leaders and the people you serve all know what things you 'no longer believe about the Church'? Do you believe the Church is a fraud and that Joseph just made it all up?

More judging I see.  You seem angry too.

As I posted above, I have been honest regarding my feelings and beliefs (with my Bishop who I serve as his counselor and with my Stake President).

As to your last question.  You and others here seem to want to make this very black and white.  In real life, that's not how member's testimonies are.  I won't derail this thread by posting what I believe, but I have expressed many of them on other threads here and you can PM me if you're really that interested in my personal testimony. 

Edited February 7, 2019 by ALarson

[ALarson]

3 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I would have doubts about them as well. The naïveté may well be on the part of those who unquestioningly accept their veracity. 

I know many who are serving in leadership positions.  You do too but you just don't know it 😛

[Scott Lloyd]

20 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Once again, it's not up to you to judge this man.  But, having read a lot of your posts on here, I understand why you would feel the way you do.

However, gone are the days where all members believe that the church is the only true church on the face of the earth.  Members testimonies are evolving and changing as they learn more of the truth regarding details from church history, past doctrines and also current new policies, etc.  I personally know of no one who learns about these details whose testimony is not altered (at least some) and their feelings changed (some regarding Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon being historically accurate and so on).  Many disagree with the policy regarding gay parents and the children in their home and SSM.

But I've seen many who have still been able to love the church enough and have such a deep love for the teachings of Christ they they stay active and continue serving (yes, some in leadership positions).  The church is their family and they have close friends and loved ones in the church.  It's where they still want to be, even though they may not have the 100% true testimony anymore.

I am even seeing some former very staunch members who are not at all happy with all of the current changes (temple and otherwise) who have expressed that they now believe the church is not the only true church and that it's now becoming more mainstream Christian in order to hold onto it's members and youth.....and the leaders are making changes to make it easier to be a member.

Like it or not, testimonies are changing.  Take a peek over at the NOM forum to see that there are many members who are active and serving just like this man we're discussing who is serving in his stake.  And their numbers are growing from what I see.  I know of high counselmen and counselors who could be this man.  They are in teaching positions and even some serving as Bishops.  I've had conversation with my own Stake President about his changing testimony.   You may not like that, but it's the truth.

Maybe he will return and answer some of your questions (and others who have chimed in).  But I don't see how he is not a good man who wants to remain active and serve.  And someone who continues to keep the moral standards and live the commandments.

You say, “Gone are the days when <all> members” accept Church teachings. I don’t think there ever were such days. The parable of the sower and the dream/vision of Lehi and Nephi have timeless application. But that does not make it acceptable or right for one to carry on a charade of fidelity while occupying positions in the Church where others regard him with trust. Members are entitled to our patience as they work through doubts and uncertainty. But as has been pointed out here, there are certain positions they ought not occupy while they do so, especially if they are not being forthright.