Deseret News: "‘Make keeping covenants cool again’: Exploring the stories of ex-ex-Latter-day Saints"

[smac97]

‘Make keeping covenants cool again’: Exploring the stories of ex-ex-Latter-day Saints

Quote

Ashly Stone never imagined how her life was about to change when she tried heroin. “I was sick without it,” she remembers — “totally emotionally unstable.”

“Needing a substance to be able to function is a really rough way to live,” she remembers. This was a long journey from her happy upbringing as a “good kid” in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. As Ashly recounted on the “All In Podcast,” she was eventually estranged from most people in her life — with the exception of her father.

“I don’t know how he didn’t give up on me, to be honest. … But he just didn’t. He always took my calls.”

Toward the end of her 15th rehab, a text message arrived from a friend at a previous treatment center. “Ashly,” he wrote, “if you read the Book of Mormon every single day, I promise you will never go back to your old life.” 

“I couldn’t even imagine a life where I could live sober,” she recalled thinking. “That was so far from the realm of possibility.” But, she concluded, “I have nothing to lose.”

Ashly is now married and a mother of two young children. Eleven years later, she hasn’t missed a day reading the Book of Mormon, and she hasn’t touched drugs or alcohol either. 

Very cool.

Quote

Today, she runs with Lauren Rose the “Come Back Podcast,” which shares stories of people coming back to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Although it isn’t even two years old, the podcast already has 1.2 million downloads across podcast platforms, and thousands of subscribers on YouTube. 

Has anyone listened to this podcast?  If so, any thoughts about it?

Quote

Among the total episodes are 80 different stories of people coming back to faith, including 21 stories of people who came back to the faith after grappling with substance abuse or other addictions. There are also stories of people who once embraced critical narratives about the church or its history, and others who worked through significant health and emotional challenges.

"{Coming} back to the faith after grappling with substance abuse or other addictions" and "{People returning after having} worked through significant health and emotional challenges" are, for me, understandable narratives.  

I am a bit more intrigued by the "people who once embraced critical narratives about the church or its history" narratives.  I have many loved ones in this category.

Quote

Several years after returning, Ashly and Lauren began to notice online stories of people stepping away from their faith. “I need to stand up and say something about my story,” Ashly remembers thinking at the time. 

“If it wasn’t for the church and the gospel of Jesus Christ, my life would still be in shambles today. Coming back to Christ and the church saved my life.”

“But now there are all these people that are bashing the church and saying all these things,” Ashly said, reflecting on how different her own experience had been. “Being in the gospel adds this depth to life … adding spiritual experiences in your life is such a beautiful thing.”

“It’s actually really cool to come back to church, and jump in with both feet,” she said. 

In an interview with the Deseret News, Ashly and Lauren joked about their hopes that their podcast will amplify the message: “Let’s make keeping covenants cool again.”
...
Ashly and Lauren aren’t alone in their work. Fiona Givens, who has co-authored “The God Who Weeps” and the “Christ Who Heals” with her husband Terryl, confirmed she is preparing an anthology of stories from people who have returned to the faith. Brigham Young University-Idaho professors Sarah and Eric D’Evegnee have also reviewed a number of “return narratives” now aggregated on the Faith is Not Blind website. 

I am glad there is a clearinghouse for these narratives.

Quote

Challenging departure stereotypes

Contrary to the presumption that “once you leave, you don’t come back,” professor Sam Hardy at Brigham Young University points to three different datasets that suggest a significant subset of people who leave do come back. 

In Hardy’s own 2023 nationally representative survey of 12,030 U.S. adults, he estimates that of the 35% of the sample who reported stepping away from religion, 22% had reconverted. And in the National Study of Youth and Religion, professors at the University of Notre Dame and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill followed a nationally representative sample of thousands of American teenagers across a decade starting in 2002. Out of 2,207 teenagers who first identified as committed to their faith, 11% reported stepping away three years later. But after another three years 36% had come back. 

A similar longitudinal study by professors at Brigham Young University, The Family Foundations of Youth Development, followed 1,600 families from Utah, Arizona and California starting in 2016 (61% identifying as Latter-day Saint). Of those teenagers who reported being religious at first, 10% stepped away two years later. Of that subgroup, 19% came back within another two years. (These shorter-term studies don’t account for people who return to faith after longer spans of time, or who leave again after coming back).

Very cool.  Heartening.

Quote

Becoming new

Not everyone celebrates these decisions to return. Lauren described a variety of emotions from some nonreligious friends and family. That included some who weren’t sure how to act around her, telling her at one point, “you aren’t you.”

“But I was,” she said. “I was just a happy version of me ... I was finally starting to heal.”

Lauren spoke of moments early on where she felt scared about returning to church, “I can’t believe I’m going to do this,” with thoughts like, “You can’t be a nice Latter-day Saint girl. That’s not who you are.”

But she outgrew those worries, eventually concluding: “I can choose whoever I want to be ... every person can … that’s how they become who they are.”

I am curious how often this happens, where some in the "community" of former (and often estranged, and hostile) Latter-day Saints become unhappy at one of their number returning to the Church.

Anyway, the whole article is worth a read.

Thoughts?

Thanks,

-Smac

[CV75]

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

‘Make keeping covenants cool again’: Exploring the stories of ex-ex-Latter-day Saints

Very cool.

Has anyone listened to this podcast?  If so, any thoughts about it?

"{Coming} back to the faith after grappling with substance abuse or other addictions" and "{People returning after having} worked through significant health and emotional challenges" are, for me, understandable narratives.  

I am a bit more intrigued by the "people who once embraced critical narratives about the church or its history" narratives.  I have many loved ones in this category.

I am glad there is a clearinghouse for these narratives.

Very cool.  Heartening.

I am curious how often this happens, where some in the "community" of former (and often estranged, and hostile) Latter-day Saints become unhappy at one of their number returning to the Church.

Anyway, the whole article is worth a read.

Thoughts?

Thanks,

-Smac

There is an article in the March Liahona with several similar stories.

[Daniel2]

On 2/28/2024 at 3:21 AM, smac97 said:

I am curious how often this happens, where some in the "community" of former (and often estranged, and hostile) Latter-day Saints become unhappy at one of their number returning to the Church.

Anyway, the whole article is worth a read.

Thoughts?

Thanks,

-Smac

Speaking for myself as a born-in-the-covenant, previously dyed-in-the-wool, true-blue-through-and-through devoted RM, temple-married, BYU-Provo graduate, now post-LDS man for ~21 years, residing in Salt Lake City, identifying as culturally-Mormon and religiously as a contentedly-agnostic Unitarian Universalist, and who's family and friends come from a variety of actively religious/non-religious/former religious backgrounds, I'm happy and supportive of any of my friends, family, and acquaintances that find a path leading to inner peace, fulfillment, and joy, regardless of whether that path mirrors or differs from my own.

My husband and I celebrate our family and close friends' LDS activities, be it attending baptisms, Mission call letter-openings/farewells/returns, talks, ordinations, and temple sealing celebrations, and they in turn support my husband’s and my relationship as family and recognize, respect, and celebrate our place in the family as fathers, grandfathers, great-grandfathers, and the step-versions of all of the above. 

In my experience, anger and hostility may be and often are steps of grief on the path away from lifestyles and life identities that any of us ultimately may have found to be personally unhealthy/destructive (especially when said life styles or identities were particularly consuming/committed… whether they be in a religious Faith or out of one; or a life governed by addiction or in a life where alcohol can be employed in life-enhancing/non-destructive ways). However, given time and experience, anger and hostility fade and new awareness unfolds allowing us to see that what we may personally have found to be unhealthy can be a path of positivity and personal growth for others, and vice versa (pun very much intended... one individual's vice may exemplify another's virtue).  Even Elsa vocalized this realization; “It's funny how some distance makes everything seem small, and the fears that once controlled me can't get to me at all”—a truth that applies regardless of which metaphorical ‘side of the coin’ we’re on. 

Kudos to those who discover renewed joy and meaning in returning to Mormonism who, after having left, found their life wanting.  And thank goodness we all live in a country that allows agency, autonomy, and personal freedom in pursuit of happiness as we each see fit.

Edited February 29 by Daniel2

[The Nehor]

22 hours ago, smac97 said:

I am curious how often this happens, where some in the "community" of former (and often estranged, and hostile) Latter-day Saints become unhappy at one of their number returning to the Church.

Probably roughly proportional to those members who are often estranged and hostile to the “world” end up being happy when one of their number decides they would be happier outside the church.

Edited February 28 by The Nehor

[Daniel2]

6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Probably roughly proportional to those members who are often estranged and hostile to the “world” end up being when one of their number decides they would be happier outside the church.

There's probably a lot of truth to this. 

[Rain]

I wonder if the percentages of those who come back vary on why they left. For example do those who come back come in greater numbers for those who have alcohol addiction verses those that are gay? What about those who have left for historical reasons verses those who have just left just because of testimony reasons (history causing them to question testimony verses just plain finding out what is true or not). 

Overall, does the reason you left make a difference on your likelihood to return. My assumption is that it does. 

[BlueDreams]

18 minutes ago, Rain said:

I wonder if the percentages of those who come back vary on why they left. For example do those who come back come in greater numbers for those who have alcohol addiction verses those that are gay? What about those who have left for historical reasons verses those who have just left just because of testimony reasons (history causing them to question testimony verses just plain finding out what is true or not). 

Overall, does the reason you left make a difference on your likelihood to return. My assumption is that it does. 

I would assume something similar. I was curious to see the podcast lineup (it's hardly representational....which is common for podcasts considering they usually recruit via word of mouth and who they know) and it showed a range....but the early episodes absolutely showed more that were addiction based. 

Why and how a person leaves would also likely effect that. Some "leave" in the sense that they stop practicing their faith or going to church, but still hold many lds-centric beliefs or concepts. Some LEAVE repudiating just about everything they once knew as they do so. And some leave(?) as in their reasons aren't solid one way or another...they just kinda drifted away from an active LDS identity. I would assume how one leaves and why would reduce or increase your chances of returning.

With luv,

BD

 

[MustardSeed]

We leave things all the time and later return.  Never say never to leaving or returning.  It’s also smart not to burn bridges.  It’s easier to allow one’s self to have options if one doesn’t insist out loud that the other guys are idiots- 

politicz, religion, seeks, football teams, fashion, friendships, - I find life to be much more fulfilling when I remain open to what life is teaching me.  

Edited February 28 by MustardSeed

[SeekingUnderstanding]

20 hours ago, smac97 said:

In Hardy’s own 2023 nationally representative survey of 12,030 U.S. adults, he estimates that of the 35% of the sample who reported stepping away from religion, 22% had reconverted.

First, I’m ecstatic that Ms Stone was able to turn her life around and that she found meaning in her life. 
 

But, second, wow! Secularism has a 78% convert retention rate? I wonder how that compares to your church?

[smac97]

49 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

First, I’m ecstatic that Ms Stone was able to turn her life around and that she found meaning in her life. 

But, second, wow! Secularism has a 78% convert retention rate?

Secularism is a religion?

Is Atheism a religion as well?

49 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

I wonder how that compares to your church?

I'm not sure the comparison works very well.  "Secularism" has two primary definitions/meanings:

Quote

1. secular spirit or tendency, especially a system of political or social philosophy that rejects all forms of religious faith and worship.

2. the view that public education and other matters of civil policy should be conducted without the introduction of a religious element.

If you are intending to compare being a Latter-day Saint to the first definition, I think that doesn't work very well because "secularism" in that sense is a "system of political or social philosophy that rejects all forms of religious faith and worship," and so is not aptly compared to an ideological/philosophical community or system that is, by definition, "religious."  This "secularism" is not a "community" in any meaningful sense.  It has no leadership, no set of doctrines (other than to reject religious ones), no mechanism for joining or leaving it, no organized proselytizing or "retention" efforts, no property, etc.

Alternatively, if you are applying the second definition, then that also does not compare well.  "Secularism" in that sense is, in many ways, endorsed by the Church.  The Constitution's Establishment Clause is rooted in this sort of secularism, and it is that clause - and the broader notions of religious liberty embedded in the Constitution - that facilitated the Restoration.  But this definition also doesn't work in a secularism-v-Mormonism context.  Neither definition really allows for an apples-to-apples comparison.

Thanks,

-Smac

[LoudmouthMormon]

22 hours ago, smac97 said:

I am curious how often this happens, where some in the "community" of former (and often estranged, and hostile) Latter-day Saints become unhappy at one of their number returning to the Church.

I did ~6 years as a happily inactive dude in Utah.  I had a friend group comprised of non-LDS and former-LDS folks, and we hung out and were cool.   When I returned to activity, there was no expressed unhappiness.  I invited everyone to the reception after my temple sealing, and everyone came and saw me (of all people) in my all-white tuxedo.

In tangentially related news, those 6 years left me with the current ability to quote about 30% of The Rocky Horror Picture Show dialogue from memory, and sing all the songs.  What a weird skill for an active latter-day saint to have.  (Further along the tangent, I actually contributed something to the fan participation script of that movie, which I found out actually jumped state lines and was being performed years after I turned away from such sinful activities.)

[Stargazer]

On 2/27/2024 at 7:21 PM, smac97 said:

I am curious how often this happens, where some in the "community" of former (and often estranged, and hostile) Latter-day Saints become unhappy at one of their number returning to the Church.

I saw an instance of that occur on this very board many years ago. I can't remember both screen names, but I think one might have been Don Bradley. Don't remember the other one at all, but when Don (or whoever it was) confessed he was coming back, the response from the other person had a very distressed and betrayed sounding tone. 

Some crabs do truly feel betrayed when another one escapes the bucket. Others are glad if the escapee is truly happy over it. 

[MustardSeed]

4 hours ago, Stargazer said:

I saw an instance of that occur on this very board many years ago. I can't remember both screen names, but I think one might have been Don Bradley. Don't remember the other one at all, but when Don (or whoever it was) confessed he was coming back, the response from the other person had a very distressed and betrayed sounding tone. 

Some crabs do truly feel betrayed when another one escapes the bucket. Others are glad if the escapee is truly happy over it. 

Works both ways as I’ve seen it. 

[teddyaware]

On 2/28/2024 at 11:03 AM, SeekingUnderstanding said:

First, I’m ecstatic that Ms Stone was able to turn her life around and that she found meaning in her life. 
 

But, second, wow! Secularism has a 78% convert retention rate? I wonder how that compares to your church?

In a strange way, the church has most certainly “retained” many of its former members who think they’ve moved on, because it’s obsessively lodged in their brains 24/7. It would be interesting to learn if there are any psychologists who believe this vicious cycle inability to move on can in any way be conducive to emotional healing and mental wellbeing? But I must say that at least from my untrained perspective it seems reasonable to believe that incessantly scratching at the scabs of unhealed wounds is a bad idea.

But could there be something else going on? Could it be that the spirits of those who’ve outwardly abandoned the faith still yearn so deeply to be connected to the living God and his saints that the unconscious mind realizes playing the role of a message board antagonist is better than being cutoff from the Lord and his people altogether? I’m reminded of Korihor who with supreme confidence adamantly insisted that he knew there was no God, only to later frankly confess that in his heart of hearts he always knew that God did indeed exist, even as his lips were denying him. This demonstrates one of the most important insights from the scriptures, that the fleshy mind of fallen man and the spirit child of God that resides within are, more often than not, at odds.

Edited March 2 by teddyaware

[SeekingUnderstanding]

45 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

In a strange way, the church has most certainly “retained” many of its former members who think they’ve moved on, because it’s obsessively lodged in their brains 24/7. It would be interesting to learn if there are any psychologists who believe this vicious cycle inability to move on can in any way be conducive to emotional healing and mental wellbeing? But I must say that at least from my untrained perspective it seems reasonable to believe that incessantly scratching at the scabs of unhealed wounds is a bad idea.

But could there be something else going on? Could it be that the spirits of those who’ve outwardly abandoned the faith still yearn so deeply to be connected to the living God and his saints that the unconscious mind realizes playing the role of a message board antagonist is better than being cutoff from the Lord and his people altogether? I’m reminded of Korihor who with supreme confidence adamantly insisted that he knew there was no God, only to later frankly confess that in his heart of hearts he always knew that God did indeed exist, even as his lips were denying him. This demonstrates one of the most important insights from the scriptures, that the fleshy mind of fallen man and the spirit child of God that resides within are, more often than not, at odds.

Indeed. I made a pact with Satan himself in a secret ritual to be a thorn in your side bwa ha ha!
 

Alternatively, maybe if Latter-day Saints and other Christians minde their own business instead of attempting to legislate their narrow view of morality, some of us could more easily leave Mormonism in the past. 
 

Either one could be true. Who knows 🤷‍♂️

[The Nehor]

5 hours ago, teddyaware said:

In a strange way, the church has most certainly “retained” many of its former members who think they’ve moved on, because it’s obsessively lodged in their brains 24/7. It would be interesting to learn if there are any psychologists who believe this vicious cycle inability to move on can in any way be conducive to emotional healing and mental wellbeing? But I must say that at least from my untrained perspective it seems reasonable to believe that incessantly scratching at the scabs of unhealed wounds is a bad idea.

But could there be something else going on? Could it be that the spirits of those who’ve outwardly abandoned the faith still yearn so deeply to be connected to the living God and his saints that the unconscious mind realizes playing the role of a message board antagonist is better than being cutoff from the Lord and his people altogether? I’m reminded of Korihor who with supreme confidence adamantly insisted that he knew there was no God, only to later frankly confess that in his heart of hearts he always knew that God did indeed exist, even as his lips were denying him. This demonstrates one of the most important insights from the scriptures, that the fleshy mind of fallen man and the spirit child of God that resides within are, more often than not, at odds.

I think the same thing when church converts drone on and on about how it was so much worse before they found the gospel. I mean……GET OVER IT ALREADY! Quit scratching at the scabs.

It is almost like the devil still has a foothold in them and they just can’t let go so they hurl blasphemies at their former lives and spend their time screaming about Egypt instead of moving on to the promised land.

I mean listen to this whiner constantly looking back:

“Yea, I say unto you, my son, that there could be nothing so exquisite and so bitter as were my pains. Yea, and again I say unto you, my son, that on the other hand, there can be nothing so exquisite and sweet as was my joy.”

GET OVER IT ALMA!

Edited March 2 by The Nehor

[Stargazer]

8 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

Works both ways as I’ve seen it. 

Yes, but we usually only hear about one of the ways - when there's a deconversion.

[carbon dioxide]

On 2/28/2024 at 9:03 AM, SeekingUnderstanding said:

First, I’m ecstatic that Ms Stone was able to turn her life around and that she found meaning in her life. 
 

But, second, wow! Secularism has a 78% convert retention rate? I wonder how that compares to your church?

Yes but secularism has an expiration date.  Once expired, it just gets worse and worse.

[Calm]

4 hours ago, Stargazer said:

Yes, but we usually only hear about one of the ways - when there's a deconversion.

My wards have always made a big deal over returns.

[The Nehor]

35 minutes ago, Calm said:

My wards have always made a big deal over returns.

Yeah, it is one way to get asked to speak at stake conference.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

15 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

Yes but secularism has an expiration date.  Once expired, it just gets worse and worse.

This kind of thinking and talking is why you’ve (collectively) lost 1/3 of those born and indoctrinated into religion (percentage per Hardy in OP). 

[ZealouslyStriving]

40 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

This kind of thinking and talking is why you’ve (collectively) lost 1/3 of those born and indoctrinated into religion (percentage per Hardy in OP). 

1/3 you say? Interesting....🧐

[cinepro]

While those stories probably have some value in boosting the spirits of existing members, I just enjoy how upset they make exMos.

[MrShorty]

On 3/2/2024 at 11:06 AM, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Alternatively, maybe if Latter-day Saints and other Christians minde their own business instead of attempting to legislate their narrow view of morality, some of us could more easily leave Mormonism in the past. 

threadjack alert:

This comment reminded me of something from a podcast I listened to months ago featuring Dr. Lisa Diamond (non-LDS U of U researcher who has taken a research interest in the intersection of LGBTQ+ issues and the LDS church). In this podcast, they talked about how common it is for LDS LGBTQ+ people to end up leaving the church (obviously not universal, as some stay affiliated). As they talked Dr. Diamond introduced the idea that, considering some of the difficulties the LDS LGBTQ+ people experience as they dissaffiliate, perhaps the church could come up with some pastoral strategies to help them disaffiliate so that the process was less difficult for them.

It's fairly well known that many who go through a faith crisis and end up disaffiliating go through a so-called "angry phase." Since hearing Dr. Diamond's suggestion, I've wondered if there was anything the church (either institutionally or we as believers, ministering brothers/sisters, home/visiting teachers, friends, neighbros, etc.) could do to make the process of disaffiliation easier and, hopefully, reduce the "angry phase." It should be obvious I don't believe it could be eliminated entirely, but could we reduce/mitigate some of the difficult outcomes for those who end up disaffiliating?

In my many years in the church, whenever we talk about ministering to doubters and those in faith crisis, we always assume that the end goal is to keep them affiliated "all-in" with the church. As such, it seems to me that we don't really know what to do with those who disaffiliate, or even those who end up on the "inside of the edge" (those who remain partially affiliated, but not "all-in."

For myself, as I go through my own process of deconstructing and possibly reconstructing my LDS affiliation, I find myself often thinking about the possibility of disaffiliation. If/when that happens, I really do not want to go through an "angry phase." Perhaps this question nags at me because, if I want to avoid an angry phase, I'm not sure I know how to avoid it, since there is no real support (from the church's perspective) for disaffiliation.

Anyway, just a random threadjack, if anyone wants to go down that tangent.

[CV75]

21 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

threadjack alert:

This comment reminded me of something from a podcast I listened to months ago featuring Dr. Lisa Diamond (non-LDS U of U researcher who has taken a research interest in the intersection of LGBTQ+ issues and the LDS church). In this podcast, they talked about how common it is for LDS LGBTQ+ people to end up leaving the church (obviously not universal, as some stay affiliated). As they talked Dr. Diamond introduced the idea that, considering some of the difficulties the LDS LGBTQ+ people experience as they dissaffiliate, perhaps the church could come up with some pastoral strategies to help them disaffiliate so that the process was less difficult for them.

It's fairly well known that many who go through a faith crisis and end up disaffiliating go through a so-called "angry phase." Since hearing Dr. Diamond's suggestion, I've wondered if there was anything the church (either institutionally or we as believers, ministering brothers/sisters, home/visiting teachers, friends, neighbros, etc.) could do to make the process of disaffiliation easier and, hopefully, reduce the "angry phase." It should be obvious I don't believe it could be eliminated entirely, but could we reduce/mitigate some of the difficult outcomes for those who end up disaffiliating?

In my many years in the church, whenever we talk about ministering to doubters and those in faith crisis, we always assume that the end goal is to keep them affiliated "all-in" with the church. As such, it seems to me that we don't really know what to do with those who disaffiliate, or even those who end up on the "inside of the edge" (those who remain partially affiliated, but not "all-in."

For myself, as I go through my own process of deconstructing and possibly reconstructing my LDS affiliation, I find myself often thinking about the possibility of disaffiliation. If/when that happens, I really do not want to go through an "angry phase." Perhaps this question nags at me because, if I want to avoid an angry phase, I'm not sure I know how to avoid it, since there is no real support (from the church's perspective) for disaffiliation.

Anyway, just a random threadjack, if anyone wants to go down that tangent.

I think the “angry phase,” along with the other phases of grief, loss, and other life adjustments are normal and should not be interfered with or disrupted unless they create some pathology. I believe the Church teaches members how to treat others and themselves (mostly by listening) under trying circumstances so they can pass through them without avoiding that which is normal and ultimately helpful in stabilizing the emotional impacts of struggle. The emotional resilience course consolidates these teachings. Discipleship helps us apply them.

Here's a good article addressing some of these questions from this month's Liahona: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/2024/03/digital-only-young-adults/can-i-belong-at-home-when-my-family-doesnt-accept-the-gospel?lang=eng

Edited March 3 by CV75