Some questions and thoughts about why people leave the Church.

[Tacenda]

c/p from a post elsewhere:

The adage,* “They can leave the church . . . but they just can’t leave the church alone,” *is growing old, but it’s still mouthed by active Latter-day Saints who would paint a portrait of those who leave as angry, hateful people who are obsessed with tearing down the church.

Is it true? Well, yes and no.

In her research, Jana Riess found that when asked to make a binary choice describing their feelings after leaving Mormonism, between 1. Freedom, possibility, and relief, or 2. Loss, anger, or grief, 93% of former Mormons chose the former.

Jana’s Statistics show that contrary to the conventional Mormon wisdom, most former Latter-day Saints do leave the church alone. The majority of those who leave are in their late adolescence or early adulthood, similar to other religions in America. Many weren’t fully committed in the first place. Clearly, college-age people exercising their independence for the first time are more likely to jettison religious beliefs, behaviors, and other values instilled by their parents.

However, some ex-Mormons are frustrated with the findings; they question whether the median age for leaving is really 19. How is it possible that 93% of former Mormons report feeling greater “freedom, possibility, and relief” after leaving the church, or who indicate they were not 100% committed in the first place when their experience has been so different?

Many of those in this group left the church in their 30s or beyond, often after serving a mission, marrying in a Latter-day Saint temple and paying thousands of dollars in tithing. For many of them, leaving the church cost them relationships, even marriages. Their road out the door was fraught with pain and brokenness. They speak of a ‘faith crisis’ and the difficulty they had reconstructing their identity outside of Mormonism.

This group has driven the proliferation of ex-Mormon podcasts, Reddit communities, retreats, and Facebook groups, and the argument that they are angry has some truth.

But as members of this community, we must acknowledge that most ex-Mormons are not involved in highly visible Facebook discussions and support groups, nor will they. Most did not serve a mission or were married and sealed in the temple (13% and 7%, respectively. according to Riess)

It is important to realize that those of us within this small community who have sacrificed greatly, who may still have deeply committed Latter-day Saint family members, that leaving the church was likely far more painful than it was for those who did not. We have invested much more in the institution. It will take time to build a life outside of a church that we were told should be the foundation of our lives. Are we angry? Of course,* *we’re angry!

[Scott Lloyd]

5 hours ago, Chum said:

I agree that people are seeds in this parable - and that landing on different types of ground yields different outcomes.

Actually, that interpretation is incorrect. The different types of ground represent different categories of people with their varying propensities for receptiveness. The seed represents the gospel message. The seed is always good, but whether it sprouts, grows and flourishes depends on the ground on which it is sown. 

Edited March 4, 2022 by Scott Lloyd

[JLHPROF]

3 hours ago, Teancum said:

Seriously?  The Church uses all sorts of marketing techniques.  My MP had us listen to Zig Zigler.  Missionaries are sales people. Totally.  You have to spark some interest to get people to listen to you.

That may be the method, but it isn't (or shouldn't be) the goal.

You can never, eternities without end, convert another soul.  You can never build a testimony using marketing.

To belabor the marketing analogy you can convince them to visit your business but the decision to patronize the establishment is theirs, as is the decision to give repeat business.

There was a time missionaries shook the dust off when rejected.  It wasn't about selling the Church.  It's about leading people to Christ.  They have to want to follow and choose to stay on the path.  If they reject it then at some point it's dust shaking time.

[Tacenda]

13 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

That may be the method, but it isn't (or shouldn't be) the goal.

You can never, eternities without end, convert another soul.  You can never build a testimony using marketing.

To belabor the marketing analogy you can convince them to visit your business but the decision to patronize the establishment is theirs, as is the decision to give repeat business.

There was a time missionaries shook the dust off when rejected.  It wasn't about selling the Church.  It's about leading people to Christ.  They have to want to follow and choose to stay on the path.  If they reject it then at some point it's dust shaking time.

The end of your post said, "it's dust shaking time". It made me think of the movie, "Cool Runnings", when one of the bobsled racers said, "it's butt whipping time". I guess that would be the opposite or would it? 

When I've read about dusting your feet of someone, it was not a nice thing to do, like they'll be cursed or something, I'll take another look though, maybe I'm wrong.

Added: found this..https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaking_the_dust_from_the_feet#:~:text=New Testament,-In Biblical times&text=If

And in whatsoever place ye shall enter, and they receive you not, in my name ye shall leave a cursing instead of a blessing, by casting off the dust of your feet against them as a testimony, and cleansing your feet by the wayside.

Edited March 4, 2022 by Tacenda

[Bernard Gui]

47 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

c/p from a post elsewhere:

The adage,* “They can leave the church . . . but they just can’t leave the church alone,” *is growing old, but it’s still mouthed by active Latter-day Saints who would paint a portrait of those who leave as angry, hateful people who are obsessed with tearing down the church.

Is it true? Well, yes and no.

In her research, Jana Riess found that when asked to make a binary choice describing their feelings after leaving Mormonism, between 1. Freedom, possibility, and relief, or 2. Loss, anger, or grief, 93% of former Mormons chose the former.

Jana’s Statistics show that contrary to the conventional Mormon wisdom, most former Latter-day Saints do leave the church alone. The majority of those who leave are in their late adolescence or early adulthood, similar to other religions in America. Many weren’t fully committed in the first place. Clearly, college-age people exercising their independence for the first time are more likely to jettison religious beliefs, behaviors, and other values instilled by their parents.

However, some ex-Mormons are frustrated with the findings; they question whether the median age for leaving is really 19. How is it possible that 93% of former Mormons report feeling greater “freedom, possibility, and relief” after leaving the church, or who indicate they were not 100% committed in the first place when their experience has been so different?

Many of those in this group left the church in their 30s or beyond, often after serving a mission, marrying in a Latter-day Saint temple and paying thousands of dollars in tithing. For many of them, leaving the church cost them relationships, even marriages. Their road out the door was fraught with pain and brokenness. They speak of a ‘faith crisis’ and the difficulty they had reconstructing their identity outside of Mormonism.

This group has driven the proliferation of ex-Mormon podcasts, Reddit communities, retreats, and Facebook groups, and the argument that they are angry has some truth.

But as members of this community, we must acknowledge that most ex-Mormons are not involved in highly visible Facebook discussions and support groups, nor will they. Most did not serve a mission or were married and sealed in the temple (13% and 7%, respectively. according to Riess)

It is important to realize that those of us within this small community who have sacrificed greatly, who may still have deeply committed Latter-day Saint family members, that leaving the church was likely far more painful than it was for those who did not. We have invested much more in the institution. It will take time to build a life outside of a church that we were told should be the foundation of our lives. Are we angry? Of course,* *we’re angry!

It would be interesting to have a poll of  all the disciples who walked away from Jesus during his ministry. Why did you turn away? Did you feel happy or relieved after walking away? What’s your take on his miracles now?

Edited March 4, 2022 by Bernard Gui

[let’s roll]

2 hours ago, Lazarus 61 said:

Sharing good news with other people need not involve any selling.  I try to share the gospel I know with other people because I know that the gospel that I know is good.  It is good news about Jesus Christ and involves a lot of good news about living.

If other people don't want to hear the good news I know about the gospel then I will usually try to find someone else who wants to listen.  I don't hold myself responsible for not generating any sparks within others. Others are interested or they are not.

Well said.  Welcome to the board.

[CV75]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

That may be the method, but it isn't (or shouldn't be) the goal.

You can never, eternities without end, convert another soul.  You can never build a testimony using marketing.

To belabor the marketing analogy you can convince them to visit your business but the decision to patronize the establishment is theirs, as is the decision to give repeat business.

There was a time missionaries shook the dust off when rejected.  It wasn't about selling the Church.  It's about leading people to Christ.  They have to want to follow and choose to stay on the path.  If they reject it then at some point it's dust shaking time.

Yes, you have to keep your feet in good shape!

Isaiah 52:7 ¶ How ^abeautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that ^bbringeth ^cgood ^dtidings, that ^epublisheth ^fpeace; that bringeth good tidings of good, that publisheth salvation; that saith unto ^gZion, Thy God reigneth!

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

 When I've read about dusting your feet of someone, it was not a nice thing to do, like they'll be cursed or something, I'll take another look though, maybe I'm wrong.

Added: found this..https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaking_the_dust_from_the_feet#:~:text=New Testament,-In Biblical times&text=If

And in whatsoever place ye shall enter, and they receive you not, in my name ye shall leave a cursing instead of a blessing, by casting off the dust of your feet against them as a testimony, and cleansing your feet by the wayside.

Exactly.  The Church has an obligation to teach the gospel the best they can.  They have an obligation to spread the gospel to every kindred, nation, etc.

But there is absolutely no obligation to make people accept it.  That's an individual decision.  And if God's servants are rejected, well, you provided the reference.

The same with those walking away.  I've provided the Heber C. Kimball quote before concerning not worrying ourselves about people determined to leave.

Antis want us to despair that a group of indeterminate size are leaving the Church.  I don't think there's any need whatsoever.  It's just normal.

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Bernard Gui said:

It would be interesting to have a poll of  all the disciples who walked away from Jesus during his ministry. Why did you turn away? Did you feel happy or relieved after walking away? What’s your take on his miracles now?

My take away is that I miss the community in the church of yesteryear, in the 70's, 80's, 90's. Not so much now. Everyone is too busy for doing community, and they have social media, and so much to keep them from attending activities. Part of the problem with all faiths, I believe. 

I believe in miracles for sure, in fact I read a quote today that we think all the ordinary things that happen is just that, but they may be miracles that we have no idea about. 

I haven't turned away from the Lord, or God yet. I hope to never do that. And I don't think I ever will.

ADDED: I'm embarrassed, you weren't asking me this, you meant the disciples, lol. Oh, well... 

Edited March 4, 2022 by Tacenda

[CV75]

1 hour ago, Bernard Gui said:

It would be interesting to have a poll of  all the disciples who walked away from Jesus during his ministry. Why did you turn away? Did you feel happy or relieved after walking away? What’s your take on his miracles now?

John 6:

28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?

29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye ^abelieve on him whom he hath sent.

...

45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all ^ataught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the ^bFather, cometh unto me.

Even those with good intentions must choose who their "father" is (the one in v 45 & 65 or the ones in v. 49 & 58?), who is sent of their father, and who their "prophets" are.

Edited March 4, 2022 by CV75

[Hamba Tuhan]

3 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I haven't turned away from the Lord, or God yet.

A genuinely potential outcome that will be determined in large part by the little choices we make each day.

[CV75]

6 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Exactly.  The Church has an obligation to teach the gospel the best they can.  They have an obligation to spread the gospel to every kindred, nation, etc.

But there is absolutely no obligation to make people accept it.  That's an individual decision.  And if God's servants are rejected, well, you provided the reference.

The same with those walking away.  I've provided the Heber C. Kimball quote before concerning not worrying ourselves about people determined to leave.

Antis want us to despair that a group of indeterminate size are leaving the Church.  I don't think there's any need whatsoever.  It's just normal.

I think John 6 is all about that individual decision, and whether they learn of the Father (v. 45, 46, 65) or of other sources.

[let’s roll]

18 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

My take away is that I miss the community in the church of yesteryear, in the 70's, 80's, 90's. Not so much now. Everyone is too busy for doing community, and they have social media, and so much to keep them from attending activities. Part of the problem with all faiths, I believe. 

I believe in miracles for sure, in fact I read a quote today that we think all the ordinary things that happen is just that, but they may be miracles that we have no idea about. 

I haven't turned away from the Lord, or God yet. I hope to never do that. And I don't think I ever will.

ADDED: I'm embarrassed, you weren't asking me this, you meant the disciples, lol. Oh, well... 

No need to be embarrassed.  I always appreciate how open and genuine you are as you both share and receive.

[carbon dioxide]

3 hours ago, Tacenda said:

c/p from a post elsewhere:

The adage,* “They can leave the church . . . but they just can’t leave the church alone,” *is growing old, but it’s still mouthed by active Latter-day Saints who would paint a portrait of those who leave as angry, hateful people who are obsessed with tearing down the church.

Is it true? Well, yes and no.

In her research, Jana Riess found that when asked to make a binary choice describing their feelings after leaving Mormonism, between 1. Freedom, possibility, and relief, or 2. Loss, anger, or grief, 93% of former Mormons chose the former.

Jana’s Statistics show that contrary to the conventional Mormon wisdom, most former Latter-day Saints do leave the church alone. The majority of those who leave are in their late adolescence or early adulthood, similar to other religions in America. Many weren’t fully committed in the first place. Clearly, college-age people exercising their independence for the first time are more likely to jettison religious beliefs, behaviors, and other values instilled by their parents.

However, some ex-Mormons are frustrated with the findings; they question whether the median age for leaving is really 19. How is it possible that 93% of former Mormons report feeling greater “freedom, possibility, and relief” after leaving the church, or who indicate they were not 100% committed in the first place when their experience has been so different?

Many of those in this group left the church in their 30s or beyond, often after serving a mission, marrying in a Latter-day Saint temple and paying thousands of dollars in tithing. For many of them, leaving the church cost them relationships, even marriages. Their road out the door was fraught with pain and brokenness. They speak of a ‘faith crisis’ and the difficulty they had reconstructing their identity outside of Mormonism.

This group has driven the proliferation of ex-Mormon podcasts, Reddit communities, retreats, and Facebook groups, and the argument that they are angry has some truth.

But as members of this community, we must acknowledge that most ex-Mormons are not involved in highly visible Facebook discussions and support groups, nor will they. Most did not serve a mission or were married and sealed in the temple (13% and 7%, respectively. according to Riess)

It is important to realize that those of us within this small community who have sacrificed greatly, who may still have deeply committed Latter-day Saint family members, that leaving the church was likely far more painful than it was for those who did not. We have invested much more in the institution. It will take time to build a life outside of a church that we were told should be the foundation of our lives. Are we angry? Of course,* *we’re angry!

Lehi dream is instructive.   Some join the great and spacious building and join in the mocking.  Others fall away and wander into strange areas but they don't join those in the mocking.  I would assume that most who are angry with the Church calm down over time.  It is really draining to be angry for a long period of time.  People finally figure out that they are wasting their lives attacking something that is not an important part of their life anymore.  Quite counterproductive.

[carbon dioxide]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

Exactly.  The Church has an obligation to teach the gospel the best they can.  They have an obligation to spread the gospel to every kindred, nation, etc.

But there is absolutely no obligation to make people accept it.  That's an individual decision.  And if God's servants are rejected, well, you provided the reference.

The same with those walking away.  I've provided the Heber C. Kimball quote before concerning not worrying ourselves about people determined to leave.

Antis want us to despair that a group of indeterminate size are leaving the Church.  I don't think there's any need whatsoever.  It's just normal.

Success is not measured in numbers when it comes to missionary work or the gospel.  Noah did a lot of preaching but few people took him seriously.  That does not mean Noah was a bad missionary.   He did his job, he got his eternal reward and those that did not listen or mocked him lost in the end.  It is true in our day.  Rejecting the church only harms those who reject it in the long run.  All people die at some point.  The real rewards and consequences of accepting or rejecting the restored gospel begins at death when the spirit and body separate.  The Book of Mormon speaks of the eventual end of those who reject the church.  Our day is just a rerun of what has happened previously and the results will be no different in the end.

[sunstoned]

3 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

It would be interesting to have a poll of  all the disciples who walked away from Jesus during his ministry. Why did you turn away? Did you feel happy or relieved after walking away? What’s your take on his miracles now?

Walking away from the church is a very different thing from walking away from Christ. 

[JLHPROF]

3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Actually, that interpretation is incorrect. The different types of ground represent different categories of people with their varying propensities for receptiveness. The seed represents the gospel message. The seed is always good, but whether it sprouts, grows and flourishes depends on the ground on which it is spread. 

Pretty sure every parable has multiple interpretations by design.

It's not really accurate to call interpretation incorrect unless there's a demonstrably false element.

[2BizE]

There are a few great resources for why people leave the church in the manner you describe. Here is a link to a document that provides information and first hand accounts of why people left. This was developed in part by faithful Mormon scientist and historian Greg Prince. It was prepared for Elder Uchtdorf in 2013.   It was presented by Greg Prince and Travis Stratford (I believe) to Marlin K Jensen, who then presented it to Elder Uchtdorf.  It was also presented  at a symposium at BYU-Hawaii a few years later in 2016.  

This has a number of people telling their own story in their own words.

 

https://faenrandir.github.io/a_careful_examination/documents/faith_crisis_study/Faith_Crisis_R28e.pdf

 

[Scott Lloyd]

9 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Pretty sure every parable has multiple interpretations by design.

It's not really accurate to call interpretation incorrect unless there's a demonstrably false element.

In the case of this parable, it simply doesn’t work as a teaching tool if it’s interpreted incorrectly. 
 

Some people misunderstand the symbolism in this parable. They are not to blame, perhaps, if they have not been instructed in its meaning. But it’s incumbent on all of us to try to understand the teachings of Jesus properly, including His parables. 
 

Here is Dallin H. Oaks’s instruction about the parable of the sower. It’s consistent with what I’ve said here about the types of ground — not the seed — representing the way in which the word of God (the seed) is received. The emphasis in boldface type is mine. 
 

The Parable of the Sower
By Elder Dallin H. Oaks
Of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

It is up to each of us to set the priorities and to do the things that make our soil good and our harvest plentiful.

Subjects for general conference talks are assigned—not by mortal authority but by the impressions of the Spirit. Many subjects would address the mortal concerns we all share. But just as Jesus did not teach how to overcome the mortal challenges or political oppression of His day, He usually inspires His modern servants to speak about what we must do to reform our personal lives to prepare us to return to our heavenly home. On this Easter weekend I have felt impressed to talk about the precious and timeless teachings in one of the parables of Jesus.
The parable of the sower is one of a small number of parables reported in all three of the synoptic Gospels. It is also one of an even smaller group of parables Jesus explained to His disciples. The seed that was sown was “the word of the kingdom” (Matthew 13:19), “the word” (Mark 4:14), or “the word of God” (Luke 8:11)—the teachings of the Master and His servants.
The different soils on which the seeds fell represent different ways in which mortals receive and follow these teachings. Thus the seeds that “fell by the way side” (Mark 4:4) have not reached mortal soil where they might possibly grow. They are like teachings that fall upon a heart hardened or unprepared. I will say nothing more of these. My message concerns those of us who have committed to be followers of Christ. What do we do with the Savior’s teachings as we live our lives?
The parable of the sower warns us of circumstances and attitudes that can keep anyone who has received the seed of the gospel message from bringing forth a goodly harvest.

I. Stony Ground, No Root

Some seed “fell on stony ground, where it had not much earth; and immediately it sprang up, because it had no depth of earth: but when the sun was up, it was scorched; and because it had no root, it withered away” (Mark 4:5–6).
Jesus explained that this describes those “who, when they have heard the word, immediately receive it with gladness,” but because they “have no root in themselves, … when affliction or persecution ariseth for the word’s sake, immediately they are offended” (Mark 4:16–17).
What causes hearers to “have no root in themselves”? This is the circumstance of new members who are merely converted to the missionaries or to the many attractive characteristics of the Church or to the many great fruits of Church membership. Not being rooted in the word, they can be scorched and wither away when opposition arises. But even those raised in the Church—long-term members—can slip into a condition where they have no root in themselves. I have known some of these—members without firm and lasting conversion to the gospel of Jesus Christ. If we are not rooted in the teachings of the gospel and regular in its practices, any one of us can develop a stony heart, which is stony ground for spiritual seeds.
Spiritual food is necessary for spiritual survival, especially in a world that is moving away from belief in God and the absolutes of right and wrong. In an age dominated by the Internet, which magnifies messages that menace faith, we must increase our exposure to spiritual truth in order to strengthen our faith and stay rooted in the gospel.
Young people, if that teaching seems too general, here is a specific example. If the emblems of the sacrament are being passed and you are texting or whispering or playing video games or doing anything else to deny yourself essential spiritual food, you are severing your spiritual roots and moving yourself toward stony ground. You are making yourself vulnerable to withering away when you encounter tribulation like isolation, intimidation, or ridicule. And that applies to adults also.
Another potential destroyer of spiritual roots—accelerated by current technology but not unique to it—is the keyhole view of the gospel or the Church. This limited view focuses on a particular doctrine or practice or perceived deficiency in a leader and ignores the grand panorama of the gospel plan and the personal and communal fruits of its harvest. President Gordon B. Hinckley gave a vivid description of one aspect of this keyhole view. He told a BYU audience about political commentators “aflame with indignation” at a then-recent news event. “With studied art they poured out the sour vinegar of invective and anger. … Surely,” he concluded, “this is the age and place of the gifted pickle sucker.” In contrast, to be securely rooted in the gospel, we must be moderate and measured in criticism and seek always for the broader view of the majestic work of God.

II. Thorns: The Cares of This World and the Deceitfulness of Riches

Jesus taught that “some fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up, and choked it, and it yielded no fruit” (Mark 4:7). He explained that these are “such as hear the word, and the cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful” (Mark 4:18–19). This is surely a warning to be heeded by all of us.
I will speak first of the deceitfulness of riches. Wherever we are in our spiritual journey—whatever our state of conversion—we are all tempted by this. When attitudes or priorities are fixed on the acquisition, use, or possession of property, we call that materialism. So much has been said and written about materialism that little needs to be added here. Those who believe in what has been called the theology of prosperity are suffering from the deceitfulness of riches. The possession of wealth or significant income is not a mark of heavenly favor, and their absence is not evidence of heavenly disfavor. When Jesus told a faithful follower that he could inherit eternal life if he would only give all that he had to the poor (see Mark 10:17–24), He was not identifying an evil in the possession of riches but an evil in that follower’s attitude toward them. As we are all aware, Jesus praised the good Samaritan, who used the same coinage to serve his fellowman that Judas used to betray his Savior. The root of all evil is not money but the love of money (see 1 Timothy 6:10).
The Book of Mormon tells of a time when the Church of God “began to fail in its progress” (Alma 4:10) because “the people of the church began to … set their hearts upon riches and upon the vain things of the world” (Alma 4:8). Whoever has an abundance of material things is in jeopardy of being spiritually “sedated” by riches and other things of the world. That is a suitable introduction to the next of the Savior’s teachings.
The most subtle thorns to choke out the effect of the gospel word in our lives are the worldly forces that Jesus called the “cares and riches and pleasures of this life” (Luke 8:14). These are too numerous to recite. Some examples will suffice.
On one occasion Jesus rebuked His chief Apostle, saying to Peter, “Thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men” (Matthew 16:23; see also D&C 3:6–7; 58:39). Savoring the things of men means putting the cares of this world ahead of the things of God in our actions, our priorities, and our thinking.
We surrender to the “pleasures of this life” (1) when we are addicted, which impairs God’s precious gift of agency; (2) when we are beguiled by trivial distractions, which draw us away from things of eternal importance; and (3) when we have an entitlement mentality, which impairs the personal growth necessary to qualify us for our eternal destiny.
We are overcome by the “cares … of this life” when we are paralyzed by fear of the future, which hinders our going forward in faith, trusting in God and His promises. Twenty-five years ago my esteemed BYU teacher Hugh W. Nibley spoke of the dangers of surrendering to the cares of the world. He was asked in an interview whether world conditions and our duty to spread the gospel made it desirable to seek some way to “be accommodating of the world in what we do in the Church.”
His reply: “That’s been the whole story of the Church, hasn’t it? You have to be willing to offend here, you have to be willing to take the risk. That’s where the faith comes in. … Our commitment is supposed to be a test, it’s supposed to be hard, it’s supposed to be impractical in the terms of this world.”
This gospel priority was affirmed on the BYU campus just a few months ago by an esteemed Catholic leader, Charles J. Chaput, the archbishop of Philadelphia. Speaking of “concerns that the LDS and Catholic communities share,” such as “about marriage and family, the nature of our sexuality, the sanctity of human life, and the urgency of religious liberty,” he said this:
“I want to stress again the importance of really living what we claim to believe. That needs to be a priority—not just in our personal and family lives but in our churches, our political choices, our business dealings, our treatment of the poor; in other words, in everything we do.”
“Here’s why that’s important,” he continued. “Learn from the Catholic experience. We Catholics believe that our vocation is to be leaven in society. But there’s a fine line between being leaven in society, and being digested by society.”
The Savior’s warning against having the cares of this world choke out the word of God in our lives surely challenges us to keep our priorities fixed—our hearts set—on the commandments of God and the leadership of His Church.
The Savior’s examples could cause us to think of this parable as the parable of the soils. The suitability of the soil depends upon the heart of each one of us who is exposed to the gospel seed. In susceptibility to spiritual teachings, some hearts are hardened and unprepared, some hearts are stony from disuse, and some hearts are set upon the things of the world.

III. Fell into Good Ground and Brought Forth Fruit

The parable of the sower ends with the Savior’s description of the seed that “fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit” in various measures (Matthew 13:8). How can we prepare ourselves to be that good ground and to have that good harvest?
Jesus explained that “the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience” (Luke 8:15). We have the seed of the gospel word. It is up to each of us to set the priorities and to do the things that make our soil good and our harvest plentiful. We must seek to be firmly rooted and converted to the gospel of Jesus Christ (see Colossians 2:6–7). We achieve this conversion by praying, by scripture reading, by serving, and by regularly partaking of the sacrament to always have His Spirit to be with us. We must also seek that mighty change of heart (see Alma 5:12–14) that replaces evil desires and selfish concerns with the love of God and the desire to serve Him and His children.
I testify of the truth of these things, and I testify of our Savior, Jesus Christ, whose teachings point the way and whose Atonement makes it all possible, in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Edited March 4, 2022 by Scott Lloyd

[InCognitus]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

Pretty sure every parable has multiple interpretations by design.

It's not really accurate to call interpretation incorrect unless there's a demonstrably false element.

Luke 8:11  "Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God."   People can't be the seed if the seed is the word of God.  The seed (the word of God) isn't the variable in the equation, only the type of soil makes a difference to the outcome of bearing fruit (and how much fruit), or if it withers away or is choked.

[JLHPROF]

9 hours ago, sunstoned said:

Walking away from the church is a very different thing from walking away from Christ. 

Not if it's actually Christ's Church.  If it really is then there's no difference.

[CA Steve]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

Not if it's actually Christ's Church.  If it really is then there's no difference.

I don't believe I have ever met anyone who believed they were actually walking away from Christ's Church, have you?

[JLHPROF]

51 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

I don't believe I have ever met anyone who believed they were actually walking away from Christ's Church, have you?

No.  Is ignorance of an error an excuse?

If the Church is indeed Christ's Church restored to the earth does their lack of that belief excuse the rejection of it?

[Bernard Gui]

On 3/3/2022 at 6:08 PM, Tacenda said:

My take away is that I miss the community in the church of yesteryear, in the 70's, 80's, 90's. Not so much now. Everyone is too busy for doing community, and they have social media, and so much to keep them from attending activities. Part of the problem with all faiths, I believe. 

I believe in miracles for sure, in fact I read a quote today that we think all the ordinary things that happen is just that, but they may be miracles that we have no idea about. 

I haven't turned away from the Lord, or God yet. I hope to never do that. And I don't think I ever will.

ADDED: I'm embarrassed, you weren't asking me this, you meant the disciples, lol. Oh, well... 

Yes, I would like to hear from those who saw his miracles or experienced them personally but then choose to leave him because of his “hard sayings.”

Edited March 5, 2022 by Bernard Gui

[CA Steve]

32 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

No.  Is ignorance of an error an excuse?

If the Church is indeed Christ's Church restored to the earth does their lack of that belief excuse the rejection of it?

Yes, unless you're claiming that people can be held accountable for that which they do not know.