Thursday, January 18, 2007

"How can I answer questions from Mormons about leaving the church?

Click on the title to go to the original site...

One of the most difficult aspects of leaving Mormonism is facing the accusatory questioning of Mormon friends and relatives. Many people who have just left Mormonism are at a loss as to how to deal with such questions. Usually the questions are not really requests for information, but rather attempts at emotional manipulation. Mormons usually prefer to pre-judge the cause of someone's change of belief and assume that they already know the "real" answer to these questions. Here are some of the questions and comments often faced by those who have just left the church, with suggestions as to how one might respond. Many other responses are possible, of course, and an appropriate response would depend on the prior relationship with the questioner and the sincerity of the question.

Q: Why did you leave the church?
A: If you sincerely want to know, I will be glad to tell you. But it will take at least half an hour. And before I start I want your commitment to listen until I am finished, without arguing with me. Shall I continue?

Q: I really would like to hear about what made you leave the church, but can you tell me about it without saying bad things about the church or our leaders?
A: Not very well, because those are the very things that made me leave the church. You will have to take off your rose-colored glasses.


Q: Which commandments weren't you keeping, that Satan was able to tempt you?
A: Two, actually: "Thou shalt not ask questions" and "Thou shalt not think."


Q: Have you been reading "anti-Mormon" literature?
A: Yes: the Bible, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Book of Commandments, the Journal of Discourses... stuff like that. It would destroy anybody's testimony.

Q: You know what I mean: have you been reading material written by anti-Mormons?
A: Yes, and I have found that most of it is very accurate, and I have learned a great deal about Mormonism and the history of the church. You should check it yourself.


Q: Why would I want to read "anti-Mormon" material?
A: The missionaries tell investigators that they should actually read the Book of Mormon before passing judgment on it. Shouldn't it be the same way with other books?


Q: I guess living the Gospel was just too hard for you, eh?
A: I "lived the gospel" as well as any other Mormon. The only thing that became too hard for me was having to believe things that were not true.


Q: Being a good Mormon is not easy - all of us struggle sometimes. You've simply taken the easy way out!
A: No, admitting that the church is false and deciding to leave it has been one of the most difficult decisions of my life. Acting honestly on one's convictions takes a lot of courage. It would have been much easier simply to "bow my head and say 'yes'."


Q: How can you violate the sacred covenants you made in the temple?
A: Whatever oaths I made in the temple were obtained from me dishonestly, through fraud and coercion. No one is obligated to respect any oath obtained that way.


Q: Why are you so disrespectful of things that we hold sacred?
A: Why are you so disrespectful of things that I hold sacred?


Q: What then do you consider sacred?
A: Truth, integrity, honesty, love for one's fellow creatures, and trying one's best to act justly and do good. (Micah 6:8) Especially truth and integrity. I agree with Emerson, who said: "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind."


Q: You are tearing down rather than building up!
A: I think it is a good thing to uncover lies and to open people's eyes. I am saying to you the same thing that Mormon missionaries say to investigators: Your present religion is false.


Q: What will you say to God on the Day of Judgment?
A: Thank you, Lord, for showing me that the Mormon church is false!


Q: I mean, when you find out in Heaven that the Gospel is true?
A: In that very unlikely circumstance, I would say, "Lord, that was a really stupid church you set up down there. Only the gullible would believe it! But I'm sure I'll be happy in the Telestial Kingdom - I know a lot of nice people who will be there. And I never did think the CK would be all that interesting, having spirit babies for all eternity."


Q: Without the priesthood, what will you do for extra help when you are seriously ill?
A: I'll get a second opinion from another doctor.


Q: Have you prayed and asked God to give you a witness to the truth of the Gospel?
A: Yes, and that's one of my big reasons for leaving.


Q: Why don't you go back and read the Book of Mormon again?
A: I have done that, and each time it gets dumber and dumber. In fact, reading the Book of Mormon carefully was one of the things that made me realize it was phoney.


Q: Your testimony was so strong! You had a witness from the Spirit!
A: I realized that it was the very same feeling I got from watching "Lord of the Rings". You mean that movie was TRUE?


Q: You should listen to what the Spirit tells you!
A: The Spirit is telling me to get out of the Mormon church.


Q: It's sad that you have lost your testimony.
A: Actually I have GAINED a testimony: I know, with every fiber of my being, and beyond any shadow of doubt, that Joseph Smith was a fraud, a womanizer and a liar, and that the church he founded is a man-made organization, and that the Book of Mormon is a 19th century work of imaginary fiction. I have gained this testimony through careful prayer and study, and the Spirit of Truth has confirmed it to me. This knowledge has brought me great joy and peace of mind. Would you like to know more?


Q: Obviously you never really had a testimony of the Gospel.
A: If I didn't, it wasn't for lack of trying. Actually I really did believe it all. Otherwise I would never have paid all that tithing or busted my butt trying to fulfill all those callings.


Q: It's your pride, isn't it! Do you think you are so much smarter than everybody else?
A: Not necessarily. But I think God gave us a brain so that we would use it. I have just dusted it off and started using it, after all that time as a Mormon when it didn't have to do any work. As Galileo said: "I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use." I'll cast my lot with the likes of Galileo any day. He was persecuted by his church, too. But he was right.

Q: You can't prove that the church isn't true!
A: I think it would be easier for me to prove that it isn't true than for you to prove that it is. Shall we try it?

Q: Do you feel a difference now that you lost the Spirit?
A: Yes. Whatever "spirit" that was had me terribly depressed. I feel much better now, thank you.

Q: Have you committed adultery?
A: No, but why would that affect my testimony? It didn't seem to affect Joseph Smith's testimony.

Q: Are you going to start to drink and indulge in other unhealthy practices?
A: I don't know yet - I would sure like to be able to try some of that great wine that Jesus made at Cana.

Q: You know deep in your heart that the church is true, don't you! You are just saying you don't believe it so that you can sin!
A: If I really believed it I would be scared to death to sin. And I really don't want to start "sinning." Do you think I am so stupid that I would give up my eternal salvation just so I could have a cup of coffee or watch an R-rated movie?

Q: What if you're wrong? Have you considered that possibility?
A: What if YOU'RE wrong? Have you considered that possibility?

Q: Don't you feel bad about what you are doing?
A: No. I have never felt so wonderful.

Q: Why do you have to go around telling everybody bad things about the church?
A: Why do you have to bear your testimony in public every month?

Q: Why are you doing this to your family?
A: Would my family rather see me dead of suicide, or insane? Because that is what the church was driving me toward.

Q: So you would rather be happy in this life than in the next?
A: I intend to be happy in both. And if there is no next life, at least I will have been happy in this one. I do not want to die realizing that I have not really lived.

Q: Well, if Mormonism isn't the true church, then which one IS?
A: I'll accept the answer to that question that God supposedly gave Joseph Smith: "They are all wrong - their creeds are an abomination - their teachers are all corrupt - they teach for doctrines the commandments of men..." I checked out AMWAY, but it was too much like Mormonism.

Q: So what do you believe NOW?
A: I believe that life is a journey of exploration, a question to which there may be no final answer, but we continue to learn as we search. I believe that there may not even be answers, and in that case it is better to have unanswered questions than to have confidence in answers that are false. I believe that I can figure out how to live a decent life without someone dictating to me every detail.

Q: God has told me to help you regain your testimony.
A: Your imagination is working over-time. Actually, God has told me that you are a servant of Satan and I should not listen to you.

Q: What will you do when you need something or someone to turn to for spiritual guidance, comfort, and knowledge?
A: First, I have real friends who are not imaginary. Also I have acquired a lucky rabbit's foot, a good luck amulet and a horse shoe over my door. They are all working very effectively, even better than my Mormon garments did.

Q: Well, I suppose we all have free agency, and you have a right to believe whatever you want.
A: Yes, and it is only since I have left the church that I really feel like I have that free agency that Mormons talk so much about. When I was a Mormon I never really felt like I was free. Because I really wasn't.

Immediate Positive Results from Leaving
link

* The most common feeling is the combination of the loss of arrogance and the closer feeling one has toward mankind. This is a great feeling. I no longer feel like I am superior to other people because of the special knowledge that I thought I had possessed.

* I now realize, like above, I am just like the rest of mankind. My disposition is kinder.

* I found there is a whole new world to discover. I no longer have to measure everything to how it compares to the teachings of Mormonism. It is exciting to begin learning so many new things with an open mind.

* It is wonderful to be free of the burden of constantly imposed guilt.

* I begin to understand that my own knowledge and skills are sufficient without the need for a "superior" authority telling me what to think or what to do. I can learn on my own.

* I begin learn to trust my own intuition, though this takes time to trust my own abilities fully. I no longer have to endure the conflict between my own feelings and what I was being told I should be feeling.

* I find I have worth outside of an organization. My worth is not measured by statistics.

link

"Why are you breaking the covenants you made in the temple? Even though you may have left the Church, you made sacred promises to God in the temple not to reveal the sacred content of the Endowment! And yet that is what you are doing! Isn't that immoral? Why should I respect a 'covenant-breaker'?"

"I don't understand how you could ever write about the things that you have. If I ever leave the Church I could never talk about the things in the Temple. Even if I were not to believe them, I still have sworn before God not to reveal them. I would be breaking an oath."

A covenant is a contract, based on mutual promises and on the existence of certain facts understood and accepted by both parties. I promise to do this if you promise to do that. Both legally and morally, if one party doesn't keep his part of the bargain, or if it should turn out that the basic facts are not as both parties assumed, the other party is not required to perform. To claim otherwise would be absurd.

The covenants made in the Mormon temple are similar. The Mormon covenants to do certain things (obey, sacrifice, be chaste, give everything to the church if asked, etc.) and to refrain from doing certain things (revealing the secret handshakes, names, and other details of the ritual). The Mormon makes these covenants after having been told that the underlying facts are:

1. the "other party" to the covenants is God;
2. God wants the Mormon to make these covenants;
3. God will bless the Mormon in many wonderful ways if the Mormon makes the covenants and keeps his part of the bargain;
4. there is no other way to obtain those blessings from God, other than making those covenants.

Suppose I tell you that I have a million dollars to give away, and I promise to give you that million if you promise to be my servant for a year. And I want our little bargain to be our secret (I don't want to have to pay Social Security and workers' comp insurance.) You agree, and we shake hands, and call it a "solemn covenant." But after just a week, you learn that I don't have any money at all, let alone a million dollars. Do you feel obligated to continue working for me for the rest of the year? And do you feel obligated (remember: you promised not to tell!) to keep the secret? Or would you feel justified in going to the authorities?

Oaths are also made during a marriage ceremony. If the couple later divorces, would you feel that the wife was still morally bound to love, honor and obey, especially if it was acts of the husband that caused the divorce?

If I had been initiated into a voodoo cult, during which I made an oath to the voodoo god Bukuluku, would you feel I had acted immorally if you found I had not kept the oath I made to Bukuluku? Would you feel that it would have been wrong if one of the Gadianton robbers (Helaman 6) decided that he was going to leave the band because it was evil, and violated the oath of secrecy he had made to the robber band?

The covenants made by Mormons in the temple are obtained under false pretenses. God has nothing to do with them. They are no more binding, either legally or morally, than the mumbo-jumbo of fraternity initiation rituals.

And it would certainly be absurd to expect someone who no longer believes in Mormonism, who is convinced that the temple covenants are not from God and that God is not going to do what the Mormons promised he would do, to feel bound by those covenants in any way. (The one exception might be the covenant of chastity, if made at the same time to a spouse.)

It is usually Mormons who are indignant that ex-Mormons have "broken their solemn covenants," usually the covenant of secrecy. Nobody else should care. How absurd it would be to assert that the ex-Mormon was still bound, because of his "solemn covenant," to continue to wear the garments, to obey the church leaders, to devote all his time and assets to the church, after he no longer believes (all of these are "covenants" made by Mormons in the temple). And yet the covenant of secrecy is no different.

Nobody but the Mormons considers the Mormon temple ritual to be so sacred that nobody should talk about it or tell what they know about it. The irony is that it is not secret, and it has not been secret since Nauvoo days. Anybody who wants to find out what goes on in a Mormon temple has been able to get that information for a hundred and fifty years, with just a little digging in libraries (and now, by using the Internet). It is only those faithful Mormons who have not yet been through the temple who are in the dark. That being the case, why should any non-Mormon feel that the subject of Mormon temples is off-limits, just because it is "sacred to Mormons"? Should we feel any obligation not to eat beef, since the Hindus consider the cow to be sacred? Or should we feel it is immoral for an anthropologist's in Africa to reveal to the world the sacred rites of an African tribe? Should we feel that a member of the Mafia was being immoral by telling the police the secrets of his famiglia and his capo, because he took an oath not to tell?

And Joseph Smith was certainly a covenant-breaker:

He seduced Fanny Alger after marrying Emma and promising to be faithful to her;

He joined the Masons (taking their oath of secrecy) and a few weeks later used their secret grips, symbols and oaths to produce the first version of the Mormon endowment ceremony (it is likely that some of the men in the mob that killed him were angry at him because of his breaking of that oath of secrecy).

[By the way,] aren't such oaths of secrecy condemned in the Book of Mormon? (Look up "Secret Combinations" in the index.) In fact, the Book of Mormon prophesies that in the last days "secret things" will be revealed (2 Nephi 30:17), and implies that that is to be desired.

My thoughts:

I would like to just state one more time, that if what I am saying here in my personal blog is boring, uninformative, and not worth the time of day, why did you make it all the way to the bottom to read my thoughts?

Is that all that is happening here, skipping the meat of the posts, and going for the personal attack?

If you don't like what I am saying, or disagree with it, or think it's just a plain waste of time and effort, then your choice is simple. Just quit reading it. Consign it to the depths of the dung heap that is Anti-Mormonism, and just disregard it. Stay in the church, fine, whatever. But don't come around here trying to figure me out, or discover the "real" reason I left when I have posted over 50 REALLY GOOD reasons why I am no longer a Mormon, and yet some readers are still left wondering what the 'true' reason is, since I can't be believed because I am an apostate.

DUH! An apostate is someone who disagrees with the doctrine, and leaves because of it. Now suddenly I can't be trusted? I now don't have any morals or sense of duty to my fellow human being? Does the church make you become a decent citizen and a moral upright example, or would you be that way even without the church? Well, same for me. I don't need the Mormons to teach me how to be a decent person. To assume that I have turned into this carnal, bloodthirsty scavenger simply because I chose to side with reason and intellect, means that the rest of you who have stayed must be scared to trust yourselves without the moral authority that is the church. You obviously need it more than I do...

And if you're offended by what I just said......remember, your prophets told you that it's YOUR fault!



David A. Bednar, Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

176th Annual General Conference

Sun Oct 1, 2006



Offense does occur in our interactions with others; however, it is impossible for another can offend us. This is a fundamentally false. It is a choice we make. It is not a condition imposed on us by someone else.


There are things to act, and things to be acted upon in this life. We are endowed with agency. We are to act, not just be acted upon. To believe someone can offend us diminishes our moral agency.


Being offended is a symptom of a deeper spiritual malady.


Someone will offend us in word or deed, likely more than once. The saints can be insincere and tactless. Only we can determine how we react. We can choose not to be offended.


Alma 61:2, 9. A great indicator of our own spiritual maturity is how we react to others. We can choose not to be offended. “It mattereth not”.


Learn about and apply Christ’s teachings on interacting with others. Love them that hate you. Love your enemies. Matthew 5:44, 46-48. If someone offends us, our first obligation is not to take offense. Then we should communicate privately with that person.




Leaving the Mormon Church

HOW TO GET OUT

by Richard Packham (Link)

If you are a Mormon, once you realize that Mormonism is not what it claims to be, you are faced with the problem of what to do about this realization. What you do will depend on your own situation and your own needs, which may be very different from those of others in a similar situation. There are several possibilities:

1) Simply say nothing about your change of belief. Continue to go to church and do what others expect of you. This option is most attractive to those whose families (spouse, children, parents) are very devout Mormons. It avoids the possible (almost certain) disruption of those relationships. However, this requires you to live a double life, to keep your important feelings secret, and most people not only find this difficult, but also somewhat dishonest.

2) Tell those Mormons closest to you (spouse, family) how you really feel, but continue to do the minimum required of a church member. This option has many of the disadvantages of options 1) and 3), but allows you to feel somewhat more honest with yourself.

3) Become completely inactive (give up your church callings, stop attending meetings, etc.), but maintain your official membership. Many people choose this option, rather than option 4), because they dislike the finality of leaving the church, with its consequences of being labeled by friends and family as an "apostate." Or they simply feel that it doesn't really matter whether their names are still on the church records as "members," and they don't want to jump through the hoops to get their names removed. This option is also frequently chosen by those who want to avoid hurting Mormon family members but also want to be honest. It has three disadvantages. First, as an "inactive" member, you become the target for church efforts to "reactivate" you, with missionary visits, invitations to social events, and other "fellowshipping" efforts. Second, as a member you are subject to "discipline" by the church authorities, who may summon you to a church court. Third, by allowing your name to remain on the records as a member, you allow the church to include you in its total membership number (currently about eleven million) with which it wishes to impress the world. Many people choose option 4) rather than 3) for this reason alone.

4) Resign your membership and take your name off the church records. The price for selecting this option may be high, if, as a result, you alienate family and friends. Divorce by a Mormon spouse and/or disownment by Mormon parents is not at all uncommon. Loss of Mormon friends is almost certain. It also has the disadvantage that you may feel suddenly alone and alienated from your cultural roots. Many people are not prepared sufficiently to deal with this unexpected emotional void, and need a support group (see listings below).

This fourth option has the tremendous advantage, however, that you are free as you have never been free before, that you can be confident that those who remain close to you truly love you for yourself and not just because they are supposed to love you, and that nothing now is holding you back from determining your own destiny and finding your own path through life. Most people who have taken this option, even though it may have cost them dearly in lost relationships, would not wish for a moment that they had chosen something less.

Former Mormon Brian C. Madsen explained why he chose this ultimate option:

I can think of two really good reasons [for having my name officially removed from the church records].

One is emotional closure: by having my name removed, I've drawn a line in the sand and said, "At this point, it's over." There's a finality to it. There's no lingering thought (either in my mind or my family's) that maybe I might come around later and see the light and come back to church. With my name officially removed, it's over, done, finis, schluss jetzt, end of story, that's all she wrote.

Another is that it makes it a lot less likely that some home teachers or zealous elder's quorum presidencies are going to knock on my door and invite me back to church. I'm not on any ward lists, and so when zealous new EQP's decide to "reach out to their less active brethren", I don't get included in that effort in any way.

In other words, with my name removed, I'm free of them in a more concrete way than I would be otherwise.

A further argument for option 4 is well expressed by Sam Keen (although he was not writing specifically about Mormonism):

"To my mind, a kind of mild-to-severe schizophrenia results from trying to keep one foot in and one foot out of an authoritarian church or belief system. A person, like a nation, cannot long exist half-slave and half-free. If we nibble at the fruit of the tree of knowledge but still cling to the security of Authority, we are caught in the impossible position of trying to take a journey and stay home at the same time." - Hymns to an unknown God, p. 102, New York: Bantam Books

Occasionally someone chooses not to resign membership officially, even though no longer believing, saying: "In one sense resigning acknowledges authority that I don't believe the church actually has."

This kind of statement shows an ignorance of legal facts. Resigning does not grant any kind of authority, but rather recognize a legal fact: you are officially and legally enrolled as a member of that church, and legally the church does have authority over you to discipline you according to its rules.. That is a fact which (like all facts) remains a fact whether you personally acknowledge it or not. (See the cases cited below.)

Resigning has the effect of removing the church's authority, rather than acknowledging it. It is by NOT resigning that you are acknowledging the church's authority over you, its right to count you among its eleven-plus million members, and its legal right to discipline you.

Most of the remainder of this article is for those who decide to leave (i.e., those who select option 4), with a few suggestions added at the end for those who opt for one of the others.

HOW TO LEAVE

The church does not make it easy for members to leave. Its attitude is that it knows better than you do what you need to be saved, and it wants to protect you against yourself. Mormons believe that you are just going through a phase, that Satan is tempting you, that you are committing eternal suicide, and that they will have to answer to God at the Last Judgment if they allow you to do so.

Until a few years ago, the only way to leave the church was to be excommunicated. That changed when one man, Norman Hancock of Mesa, Arizona, brought an $18 million lawsuit against the church in 1985 for refusing to let him withdraw voluntarily. The next edition of the General Handbook of Instructions after the resolution of the Hancock case included provisions for voluntary withdrawal without the stigma of excommunication. But the authorities still make it difficult. The procedures are found officially only in the church's handbook of instructions for local church leaders, which is not generally available to members; only church leaders have copies, and those copies are carefully guarded. (For a detailed discussion of the Hancock case, see the long article in "Reports of the Mormon Alliance", which also discusses the importance of resigning rather than requesting "name removal.")

In 1999 Jerald and Sandra Tanner of Utah Lighthouse Ministry were sued by the church for posting on their website the passages from the Handbook telling Mormons how to remove their names from the church records, contending that such posting was a violation of the church's copyright. The suit has now been resolved with an out-of-court settlement and the Tanners removed their quotations from the secret handbook.

HOW TO END YOUR MEMBERSHIP OFFICIALLY

DISCLAIMER
The following should not be relied upon as a definitive statement of the law. Your situation may differ, and on legal questions you should obtain legal counsel only from your own attorney. Although I am a retired attorney, because of my retirement I am no longer authorized or licensed to give legal advice. I am speaking as a lay person only, and only in reference to the laws in the United States.

There are two parts to ending your membership in the Mormon church, and it is important that you do not confuse them, because they are not the same. They are:

1. Resigning your membership.
2. Getting your name removed from the church membership records.

1. RESIGNING YOUR MEMBERSHIP

In the United States, and in most democratic countries, you are guaranteed the freedom of association and freedom of religion. That is, you may associate with whom you wish, may join organizations or churches, and you may freely end those associations. To end such an association, such as your membership in a church, all you have to do is to notify them that you have resigned. Your resignation is effective to end your membership as of whatever date you indicate, such as the date of your letter. (You cannot, however, make your resignation retroactive.) It is like resigning from a job. The church has no legal right to determine when or whether or how you may resign.

Once you have resigned, the church has no more authority over you. It cannot summon you to a disciplinary council. It cannot excommunicate you. You have ended your relationship as soon as you notify them that you have resigned. The subsequent removal of your name from their membership records is merely a clerical action which changes their records to reflect what has already happened, namely, that you resigned.

However, your resignation, to be effective, must be by some positive, unambiguous act, such as writing a letter. You cannot claim to have resigned simply by becoming inactive. And until you resign, you are subject to the disciplinary procedures of the church. See Guinn v. Church of Christ, 775 P 2d 766 (1989) (click here to read this case) , Hadnot v. Shaw, 826 P 2d 978 (1992), and Serbian East Orthodox Church v. Milivojevich 426 US 696, 96 SCt 2372, 49 LEd 2d 151 (1976), as well as the discussion of the Hancock case cited above.

2. GETTING YOUR NAME REMOVED FROM THE MEMBERSHIP RECORDS

Since the membership records belong to the church, the church has the right to determine how it keeps those records and what information it has in those records. (European law is much stricter in this respect than American law, and limits how much personal information an organization may keep in its records without that person's permission.)

Even after your name is removed from the membership list, the church will still keep a record of your former membership and the fact that you resigned, so that in case you should ever decide to join the church again, the church would know that you should go through the "extensive interview" prior to rebaptism, and so that you may have your church blessings "restored" rather than having to go through each ordinance individually.

As long as the church provides a reasonable procedure to have your name removed from their membership records, and as long as they follow that procedure, you probably have no legal or moral basis for not following that procedure.

Many people view it as unreasonable that the church keeps the details of its procedure for name removal in the Church Handbook of Instructions, which is not available to the public or even to general members. There are only a handful of copies of this handbook in each ward, and in order to read it, a member must make an appointment to inspect it, and must do so in the presence of the custodian of the handbook (usually, the bishop). For quoting the pertinent passages from this handbook on their website, the Tanners were sued by the church, as mentioned above.

However, the steps are known, and are not difficult. They are contained in Chapter 14 of the Church Handbook, on page 129, and the following is a summary of them (direct quotes are not used, so as not to invite a lawsuit from the church):

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS FROM HANDBOOK, CHAPTER 14

The member, if adult, must write a letter to the bishop, requesting the name removal. The letter should not appear to be a form letter.

The bishop is then required to make sure that the member understands the consequences: cancellation of baptism, priesthood authority, temple blessings, and that, if the member should ever wish to return to membership, a thorough interview and a rebaptism would be required.

If the bishop is convinced that the member knows the consequences and is firm in the request, the bishop completes an administrative form and sends it to the stake president with the member's letter and membership record.

The stake presidency reviews the matter, and, if they concur (presumably that the member is sincere), they request the bishop to write a letter to the member, stating that the member's name is being removed and repeating the consequences. The letter must inform the member that the request may be rescinded if the member notifies the stake president within thirty days. That is, the stake president will hold the request, without forwarding it to Salt Lake City, for thirty days. If the member does not rescind the request, the stake president forwards the request to the church records department in Salt Lake City, where the name is removed from the membership records.

A minor over the age of eight must follow the same steps, and must also have the request countersigned by the parent or guardian having legal custody of the minor.

Only one letter is required for members of the same family.

A threat of legal action by a member requesting name removal is to be forwarded to the church legal department.

If the bishop or stake president already has evidence of a kind that would warrant church discipline, he should delay the request for name removal until the question of discipline is determined. If there is not enough evidence to discipline the member, then the request should be approved. On page 95, this delay is said to be only for "serious transgression." The following are not serious transgressions:

  • Non-observance of the Word of Wisdom
  • Inactivity
  • Sins of omission, such as failure to pay tithing, neglect of church duties, nonpayment of debts
  • Joining another church
  • Requesting name removal from membership records
  • Apostasy, unless it involves teaching other members false doctrine after having been warned.

Once the person is no longer a member, the bishop may inform those local church leaders who may need to know that the person is no longer a member. The bishop may not use the term "excommunication" and must state that the person voluntarily requested the action.

You will notice that these provisions leave many details unspecified, which leaves an individual bishop or stake president much leeway in complying with your request. You will also notice that the (false) impression is given that one is a member until one's name is removed.

YOUR LETTER

In preparing your letter (often called an "exit letter"), you may expedite compliance with your request by following these guidelines.

Send the letter to the bishop of the ward where you are now living, even though, if you have moved, this may not be the ward where your membership records presently are. (If you send the letter directly to the Confidential Records department in Salt Lake City, it will simply be returned to you with instructions to send it to the bishop.) If you don't know the bishop's name or address, you can telephone the church records office in Salt Lake City at 801-240-3500, or 800-453-3860, extension 23500, give your address, and ask for the name and address of the bishop in whose ward you are living. You may also be able to find his name and address in the telephone directory or by telephoning any ward in your town.

Sign the letter (with other family members also signing, as necessary). If the bishop does not know you personally, or if you think there may be a possibility that the bishop will doubt that the letter is actually authentic, you may have the letter acknowledged ("notarized") before a notary public. Your bank may provide this service at no charge.

Send the letter to the bishop's home address, not to the address of the ward.

Send the original letter to the bishop as certified mail with return receipt requested. This will be proof that you sent the letter, in case the bishop claims he never received it.

You may wish to send copies to the stake president and to the church headquarters, Members and Statistical Records Division, 50 East North Temple Street, Salt Lake City, UT 84150. However, this is not really necessary. (Overseas members may want to FAX the letter, to save time: 801-240-1565.)

The letter should include the full name, sex, address, and birth date for each person requesting removal. Dates of baptism, priesthood held, dates of endowment, etc., are not necessary.

The letter should also include the following statements, in your own words, and phrased so as to include other family members as appropriate:

  • You are writing this letter to notify the church that you have resigned your membership in the LDS church, effective immediately.
    Comment: This is legally the most important part of your letter. As soon as the bishop reads this notification, you are no longer a member of the church, no matter how long they may take to remove your name from their records. Be careful to word this statement unambiguously; i.e., do not say "I want to resign," or "I intend to resign" or "I am going to resign" or "I want my name removed."

  • You request the bishop to do the paperwork to have your name removed from the church membership records, that is, to change the records to show that you are no longer a member.

  • You have carefully considered this step, over a long period of time, and it is your own firm unalterable decision.
    Comment: The bishop is required to act only if he is convinced of your determination and that he cannot dissuade you. Word this paragraph strongly enough to convince him that you are firm in your decision.

  • You are aware that according to church doctrine this cancels all blessings, baptisms, ordinations, promises, covenants, and your hope of exaltation.
    Comment: The bishop is required to make certain that you understand these consequences. By stating it clearly in the letter you can avoid a visit from the bishop.

  • You request that no one representing the church contact you for any reason other than to confirm that your request is being processed.
    Comment: This prevents the bishop or others from attempting to dissuade you.

  • Because the bishop is required to put on his form your "reason for leaving," you should insist that the reason be "At member's request" or "Doctrinal reasons," and you should make clear to him that he should not put there any reason which may be derogatory to you.
    Comment: You may want to include a sentence (not more) to indicate your reason for your decision (like "After long study I have concluded that the LDS church is a not what it claims to be"), but a long dissertation or list of criticisms of the church or its doctrine will do no good, and may lead the bishop to believe that if these few minor things could be cleared up, you would change your mind.

    You may also want to emphasize that you are not leaving because of some personal slight or insult, or because you have "sinned" or are unable to "keep the commandments."

  • You insist that, in accordance with the Church Handbook of Instructions, your request be forwarded without delay to the stake president and you will follow up in one week if you have not been notified that your request has been forwarded to the stake president
    Comment: Some bishops have interpreted the Handbook to require the bishop to hold the request for thirty days. The Handbook clearly states, however, that once the bishop has determined that you are sincere and not to be dissuaded, he is to forward the request. This statement in your letter may help draw his attention to that fact.

  • You waive the thirty-day waiting period during which the stake president may hold the request, in order to give you the opportunity to rescind.
    Comment: Since the thirty-day period is obviously intended to be for your benefit, you have the legal right to waive it. It is unlikely, however, that the stake president will view it that way, and will probably hold it for thirty days anyway. You might ask the bishop to notify you when your request was forwarded to the stake president, and state that you will contact the stake president in thirty days to verify with him that he has forwarded it immediately at the end of thirty days.

  • You consider this matter to be confidential, and you insist that no church representative discuss your resignation with any persons other than those church officers who are processing your name removal or those who must be informed to carry out their church duties; that if any church official speaks of this matter outside of official channels, you will consider legal redress.

    Comment: Many people are concerned that the bishop or stake president will inform parents or other relatives of their request. To prevent this, you might remind them that the Handbook, at page 130, specifically directs them that these matters are confidential and that such information is not to be given to anyone other than other church officials who need it to process the request. You might emphasize that informing family members of your request is a violation of your privacy and a violation of church regulations, and would make them subject to church discipline and a civil lawsuit.

  • If children are included, state that the resignation and request includes them, include their full names and birth dates, and state that you have sole custody of them. If you are a divorced parent, attach a copy of that part of the divorce decree. The Handbook says that the letter should also be signed by each of the children, so have them sign it to avoid any hassle (although legally that is not necessary for minor children).

A SAMPLE EXIT LETTER The following is a letter for an individual resignation. Minor changes can adapt it for a couple or a family.


Bishop [Name]
[Bishop's home address]

CERTIFIED MAIL; RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

Re: Resignation from church membership of
[Full name, date of birth, present address]

Dear Bishop:

With this letter to you I officially notify you of my resignation from membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, effective immediately. With my resignation I voluntarily sever all my relationship to the church.

I therefore request you to make the necessary changes in the church membership records to indicate that I am no longer a member. I am familiar with the procedures as outlined in the Church Handbook of Instructions, and I request that you fill out and forward the necessary administrative forms as soon as possible.

I assure you that I do not take this step lightly. I have devoted a good deal of thought, prayer and study, over a considerable period of time, to this matter, and I am firm and unalterable in my decision to end my membership.

I am aware that according to church doctrine this cancels all blessings, baptisms, ordinations, promises, covenants, and my hope of exaltation in the Mormon celestial kingdom, and I have made my decision with that consideration well in mind.

I request that no one representing the church contact me for any reason other than to confirm that my request is being processed. In particular I will refuse to speak with anyone from the church who attempts to argue with me about the wisdom of my decision.

It is my understanding that you are required to indicate on your form my "reason for leaving." Please state the reason as "At member's request" or "Doctrinal reasons," since that is, in fact, the reason. I insist that you should not put there any reason which may be derogatory to me. I wish to assure you that I am not leaving the church because of some personal slight or insult, or because I have "sinned" or am unable to "keep the commandments." I have simply come to the very sad realization that the church is not what it claims to be, that its doctrine is false, and that the LDS church is not where I wish to be.

I request that my name removal request be forwarded without delay to the stake president in accordance with the Church Handbook of Instructions. I will check with you in one week if you have not already notified me by then that it has been forwarded to the stake president.

Please inform the stake president that I waive the thirty-day waiting period during which the stake president may hold the request in order to give me the opportunity to rescind. I have no intention of rescinding my resignation, as I have considered this step much longer than thirty days already. Since the thirty-day period is obviously intended to be for my benefit alone, I have the legal right to waive it, and I do so. Please ask the stake president to notify me when he has forwarded my request to church headquarters. If I do not hear from him, I will contact him to make sure that my request is being honored without delay.

I will consider any unnecessary delay to be a violation of my rights of free association and freedom of religion as guaranteed by the U.S. Consititution.

I consider this matter to be confidential, and I insist that no church representative discuss my resignation with any persons other than those church officers who are processing my name removal or those who must be informed to carry out their church duties; that if any church official speaks of this matter outside of official channels, I will consider it a violation of confidence, a violation of church regulations (CHI p. 130), and seek legal redress.

Thank you for your courtesy in honoring my request without delay.

Yours truly,

[Signature]


You may find that the bishop and stake president may sit on your request in spite of your insistence that they handle the matter expeditiously. This happens frequently. If so, contact the membership office in Salt Lake City directly at 801-240-3500 ext 1462, or 800-453-3860 extension 22053. Tell them that your bishop / stake president is not processing your request, and ask them to contact them and request that your papers be forwarded. They will do this. (Name removal requests for members in countries other than the United States are handled by the appropriate regional church authorities, not the Salt Lake City office, so foreign inquiries should be directed to them.)

There should be no need, in your initial letter, to threaten legal action. However, you should be aware that if a call to Salt Lake City does not get things moving, a strongly worded letter to the local church authorities may do so. Be careful, however, not to threaten more than you are prepared to undertake, and, if you cite the law or the Church Handbook of Instructions, that you are accurate in your citations and your interpretation.

Some delay may be caused simply by the backlog: so many people are leaving the church that there is sometimes a backlog. They can't keep up. The number of members leaving increased by over 50% between 1997 and 2000.

Other websites with suggestions for name removal, some with sample letters, are:

NOW WHAT?

Exmormons usually face two more unexpected problems, in addition to the ones discussed above:

1. What do I believe now? If Mormonism isn't the True Church, then what is?

2. Even though I am no longer officially a Mormon, I still carry a lot of Mormonism around with me. What do I do with that?

There are no single, easy answers, but - for what it's worth - here are some suggestions, based on the experience of many former Mormons.

WHAT DO I BELIEVE NOW?

Separating yourself from an organization to which you have devoted years of your life, and which, during that period, played a central role in shaping your goals, your standards, your lifestyle, and your entire world-view, often has the same emotional effect as a divorce from a spouse. All too often a newly divorced person will panic at the prospect of living life alone, and within a few months will remarry the first person who comes along. This is often a disaster. The best advice for most newly divorced people is usually to wait, not to become anxious, not to try to fill that empty space with whatever comes along.

The same advice is probably applicable to the loss of one's religion: don't rush. Don't feel that you must immediately replace one "true church" with another "true church." Take your time to explore, to sample other ways of viewing the world and other ways of shaping your life. Consider the possibility that there is no one true church, that there are many possible paths that all lead to where you want to go.

An interesting short self-quiz to suggest which spiritual or religious path might be attractive to you can be found at the Belief-Net website; click on the "Belief-o-Matic quiz".

As a Mormon you have been accustomed to having the answers given to you, and all that was required of you was to accept them and to obey. Now it is up to you. You are responsible for finding out the answers, and you have rightfully become skeptical of those who want to give you their answers and expect that you simply accept them without question. Of course it is more difficult to make all those moral and philosophical decisions yourself. But that is part of being a mature human being. You will grow immensely by accepting that responsibility, and in doing so you will find that joy that Mormonism always promised you but was never able to give you.

As a Mormon you were probably taught that apostates become bitter, disillusioned, dissolute, and that they end up as skid row bums. That is not true, of course. However, you may still believe that the only reason you were an honest, temperate, faithful, hardworking, family-loving citizen is primarily because the church told you that is what you should be. Some new exmormons do what the church expects of them, and discard all those virtues and qualities because they think of them as "Mormon." But just because the church is fundamentally false, it does not follow that all its teachings are also false. Honesty, temperance, hard work, marital fidelity, and strong families were held to be desirable qualities long before the Mormons began to teach them. Tobacco, alcohol, sexual promiscuity can be harmful.

If you have Mormon family members, you will find that you will best be able to justify your leaving the church if you demonstrate to them by your lifestyle choices that you are still the fine person you were as a Mormon. Especially Mormon spouses become very alarmed at rapid changes they think they see in their newly apostate mates, and this alarm often leads to unnecessary panic and divorce.

HOW DO I TELL MY MORMON FAMILY MEMBERS?

Unless you are the only one in the family who is Mormon, you will face the question of how, when, and even whether you should break the news to them that you have left the church. There is probably no easy answer to this question, and of course every situation will be somewhat different.

But, from what I have observed, and from comments that others have made based on their experience, the key thing in such a situation is the assurance that - no matter what religious beliefs you (or they) hold - the love and respect is still there. It seems that families break up more easily if it was only the glue of Mormonism that held them together. If it was genuine love and devotion, then differences in religion don't seem to matter as much.

Sometimes it helps to emphasize that it was your own honesty and integrity, your own devotion to truth and your dislike of lies that are at the base of your leaving. Mormons are trained to automatically think of leaving the church as bad, evil, etc. Their terms are emotionally charged: "losing faith," "losing your testimony," "breaking your covenants," "weakness," "opening yourself to Satan," etc. It is important that you use emotionally positively charged terms instead. If you say, for example, "I began to lose my testimony when...", then you are using their terminology. Better would be something like, "I began to realize that something was not right with the church when..."

If your loved ones are at all willing to discuss your reasons, then you are fortunate. Most Mormons don't want to discuss why anybody would leave the church. Unless they ask, then, it probably is not a good idea to try to tell them. If they suppose that you left because you were reading "anti-Mormon" books, at least you can say that it was your reading of Mormon materials, listening to statements by Mormon "prophets", studying the history of the church as written by Mormon historians and observing the operation of the church as led by Mormon leaders that led you to question its divinity.

The fear that family members (especially Mormon parents) will learn about the resignation is often a major reason why many Mormons remain on the membership rolls, for fear that the family will "find out" - even though resignation from the church is a confidential matter, and no one need find out about it unless you tell them. If some church official such as your bishop tells your family that you have resigned, that is a violation of your privacy and a violation of church regulations.

What method should you choose to tell your closest Mormon family members? In person? By telephone? In a letter?

How you break the news depends on how you think your family may react. Using a letter to break the news has the advantage that you get to say what you want to say, you can take time to phrase it carefully, and you don't have to be interrupted to field all kinds of questions and arguments that are really beside the point. By the time you are face-to-face, enough time may have elapsed for them to get used to the idea that you no longer believe.

If you do it by letter, you might want to resist the temptation to explain to them in great detail why you have come to this decision. That might be a mistake, because it gives them the idea that if they (or some apostle) could just explain all those things away, you'd change your mind. I think a general statement is enough, just emphasizing that you have been a long time in coming to this decision, that there are multiple reasons that have brought you to this point, that you are well aware of the official explanations for all of these problems and that they are not convincing.

It will not be easy, of course. Your parents and family will suffer just as much or even more than you, since they must believe that someone they love is going to be lost to them for eternity. They will shed many, many tears over you. But you must remember that that is their problem, and the fault of their own false beliefs. You are not responsible for that - it is not your responsibility to protect them from the consequences of their false religion.

Remember, too, that whatever guilt you may feel by leaving will be nothing compared to the guilt that you would have to feel by continuing to pretend. To stay in the church you would have to be continually lying to those you love, making them believe that you are something that you are not. Now that is a sure formula for inducing guilt feelings!

For a list of the kinds of questions and comments you might get from Mormon family and friends, and for suggestions as to how you might respond, click here.
PART OF ME IS STILL MORMON

Unless you were a member for only a short time, in a sense you will always be partly Mormon. You cannot change that, and you probably should not try.

If you were born in the church, and especially if your ancestors were Mormon, your family heritage is inextricably entwined with Mormonism. That is nothing that you should wish to deny or erase, even if you could. The Mormon achievement in settling the West and establishing a strong and vigorous people in the mountains is a heritage of which you can be proud. Of course it is not a history entirely free of blame, but neither is the history of any people. Your ancestors, even though they may have been deceived by Mormon teachings, were undoubtedly pious, sincere, honest and hardworking people of whom you can rightfully be proud. All in all, most Mormons were, and are, good people, and one can be proud to have had them as ancestors, family and friends.

The same thing is true, to a lesser extent perhaps, of those who were converts but spent much of their lives as Mormons. As a Mormon you undoubtedly did much good and touched many lives for the better.

One's fond memories often include memories of Mormon friends, Mormon celebrations, spiritually moving moments that you associate with Mormonism. Especially Mormon hymns and music seem to remain with the exmormons long after they leave the church. All this is quite natural, just as one still has fond memories of the happy days of a marriage, even though it may have ended in a bitter divorce. Cherish the happy memories. To suppress them would unnecessarily create a void in your life.

For a "Twelve Step" recovery program, based on the famous Alcoholics Anonymous program, click here.

SUPPORT


You are not alone. Since the earliest days of the church many of the best and brightest Mormons left in disillusionment, including many of those holding high positions in the early church: apostles, witnesses, even those closest to Joseph Smith. Today, with more information available, especially on the internet, many more are leaving. But it is still difficult, and a new exmormon sometimes needs reassurance from others.

Many find support simply in reading about others and their exodus from the church. The Recovery From Mormonism site has over two hundred such stories.

FOR THOSE WHO DO NOT LEAVE

For those who, for whatever reason, do not wish to resign completely, there are some other options.

NO CONTACT: Bishops and other church representatives are required by the Church Handbook to respect a request from a member to be left alone. The member's name on the ward membership list must be marked "No Contact" and must be honored. Most members are unaware of this option. It is probably a good idea to make the request in writing to the bishop, mailed to his home address (follow the instructions above for the resignation letter, except that no copies should be sent, and it need not be notarized or certified).

Here is a sample letter:

Dear Bishop [name]:

Although I am a member of record of the LDS church, I am writing to notify you that I do not wish to be contacted by representatives of the church at my home or work, either by telephoning me or by coming to my home or work, unless I specifically request it. Specifically, I do not want to be contacted by home teachers, visiting teachers, missionaries, persons collecting fast offerings, yourself, or anyone representing the church. My reasons for making this request are personal, and I do not wish to discuss those reasons with you or with any other person representating the church. It is my understanding that you can mark my membership records as "requests no contact" and that my request will be honored.

[Signature]

"NEW ORDER MORMONS": For those who have to or want to remain in the church, or are uncertain about how to remain in the church while still having some doubts, a support and discussion group is available at "New Order Mormons". One can participate there anonymously.

*My Thoughts*

This is basically an information page. I used this to resign from the Mormon church over 4 years ago, so I thought I would pass it on.

Wednesday, January 17, 2007

An Insider's View of Mormon Origins

From Amazon.com:

Book Description

Over the past thirty years, an enormous amount of research has been conducted into Mormon origins--Joseph Smith's early life, the Book of Mormon, the prophet's visions, and the restoration of priesthood authority. Longtime LDS educator Grant H. Palmer suggests that most Latter-day Saints remain unaware of the significance of these discoveries. He therefore gives a brief survey of the literature for all who have ever wanted to know more about the New Mormon History. He finds that what we take for granted as literal history has been tailored over the years for missionary purposes--slightly modified, added to, one aspect emphasized over another--to the point that the original narratives have been nearly lost. What was experienced as a spiritual event, something from an entirely different dimension, has been often refashioned as if it had been a physical, objective occurrence. This is not how the first Saints interpreted these events. Historians have reevaluated basic concepts surrounding these foundational stories and restored elements, including a nineteenth-century world view, that have been misunderstood, if not forgotten.

Reviewer:James I. Huston

...This book was carried on the bookshelves of Deseret Book, the Mormon owned book chain for more than two years. Any time an author writes something contrary to the Mormon apologist view, they are inundated with criticism. There are a number of points which the apologists have tried to refute, such as the Greek Psalter which Joseph Smith tried to translate. In doing further research, many of the apologist's refutations are unfounded. The author has tried to give some explanation for events, such as the similarity to the "Golden Pot" story, which is frankly much more plausible than an angel coming down from heaven and handing Joseph Smith golden plates. It is easy to read and has a wealth of information.The Mormon Church disfellowshipped Grant Palmer two years after the book release, telling him that he needed to repent. Palmer said simply; "I don't know how to repent for telling the truth."

Another reviewer's opinion:

Obviously Grant H. Palmer was short a Testimony
January 3, 2006
Reviewer: M. West


This book is a must for those who want to see how one sided facts give one sided opinions. Obviously Grant H. Palmer was short a Testimony when he claimed membership to the Church of Jesus Christ. He obviously lost himself to the fact that "Things aren't always as they appear." After reading his book and conclusions based on the material he presented, no wonder he was disfellowshipped. A thorough unbiased study of most issues presented in his book would lead you to see how fascinating church history is, and show how God accomplishes his work using imperfect human beings to perform his miracles.

...Palmer's testimony is based on knowledge alone, lacking the power that is given by the spirit of truth, who bears witness of all things. Obviously Palmer lacks all facts. I know that the older I get, the more facts are presented to me and those things which were born by the spirit of testimony, in fact remain true, of which I bear testimony.



My thoughts:

A testimony is what Mormons use to demonstrate how well they can maintain their beliefs in the face of all the facts and evidence opposing them. Getting up on the pulpit every Fast Sunday to proclaim the things you know to be true, even though they have been proven without merit or foundation, is like insisting that the world is flat and you have no interest in what science and history have proven.

History does not bow to "the Holy Spirit of Testimony". It is not bendable and moldable to the beliefs of man. Beliefs are changed when history and science prove the theories are false.

But go ahead and blame Palmer's "lack of testimony" for bringing out the true facts. That doesn't mean that they aren't true. It just means they are not useful to the church or its members for maintaining a set of beliefs that are long overdue for an overhaul....What are they afraid of?

Changing your beliefs in the wake of new evidence is not a sin!! Did it ever occur to anyone that God might be trying to expose the LDS church as a fraud by using "imperfect human beings" and a mountain of documented evidence?

P.S. I have this book, and I have read it. I have also purchased a copy of each of the books cited in it, so I could do my own comparison. Another excellent book that I am reading is called, Joseph Smith, Rough Stone Rolling. Written by a Mormon author: Richard Lyman Bushman (who by the way has not been ex'd or disfellowshipped). It's almost as if the LDS church is waiting for the member response before deciding what to do with Bushman. They waited over two years to sanction Palmer, just to see what his work would do within the ranks of the faithful.

I suspect that the same will be happening to Bushman in due time. Although he claims to be a historian, he is also a defender of the faith, and his bias shines through on almost every page. The end story is: what will the common members think about Joseph Smith after reading it? Will they still buy into the notion that he was 'called of God' or will they come to see him as a man surrounded by a world of magical thinking and raised in a culture of peepstones and visionaries?

I hope that this marks the beginning of change within the LDS church and a move towards a more Christ-centered faith, instead of the edification of all the LDS prophets and the unlikelihood of gold plates of reformed Egyptian characters translated into an unsupported and unfounded doctrine.

One question for any LDS member:

Do you REALLY believe that an angel came to Joseph, showed him where the plates were hidden in a stone box (for 1400 years), along with the sword of Laban, the breastplate of Aaron, Urim and Thummim (two stones set in a bow, like spectacles) AND the Liahona, and then took them all away from the Earth by a magical heavenly power so they wouldn't be available to back up Joseph's claim, and then to top it off, even dissolve any trace of the stone box that they had been deposited in (and kept safe through 1400 years of wind, weather, and earthquake) so that not even the LOCATION could be determined?

Do you REALLY BELIEVE THAT? Wow...

Why then, did we find the Dead Sea Scrolls or the Nag Hammadi Texts? Why do places like the Red Sea, and Jerusalem exist? How is it that we can determine the archaelogy and the history of the Biblical teachings, but there is NO EVIDENCE to back up the Book of Mormon?

Lack of evidence means that the belief is unfounded. It is NOT up to non-believers to prove that it isn't true, it is up to the LDS church to back up what they teach, or they cannot claim to have the truth. We don't need to be chastised for our "lack of faith", it is the LDS church that should be scrutinized for proclaiming a false doctrine based on the appearance of an "angel of light" and the word of Joseph Smith. The mountains of evidence brought forth to discredit such an outrageous claim is not the result of any 'adversary' leading members astray.

The members of the LDS church who actively avoid information they know will damage their testimony are inherently acknowledging that their testimony is based on biased information. They cannot claim to "know" something is true while refusing to explore the possibility that it might not be true. Knowing means having the benefit of pro and con, not just a 'warm feeling'. How many folks do you suppose would be set free from the nation's prisons based on witnesses 'knowing' they were innocent of the charges, without having any demonstrable proof besides their feelings?

It is to their own detriment that they refuse to hear any opposing views especially since the early prophets actually encouraged self-discovery in the early days of the church:

[Text is from this site:]

President Joseph F. Smith said, "We talk of obedience, but do we require any man or woman to ignorantly obey the counsels that are given? Do the First Presidency require it? No, never." (Journal of Discources (JD) 16:248)

Apostle Charles W. Penrose, who would later serve as counselor to President Smith, declared: "President Wilford Woodruff is a man of wisdom and experience, and we respect him, but we do not believe his personal views or utterances are revelations from God; and when 'Thus saith the Lord', comes from him, the saints investigate it: they do not shut their eyes and take it down like a pill." (Millennial Star 54:191)

"And none are required to tamely and blindly submit to a man because he has a portion of the priesthood. We have heard men who hold the priesthood remark, that they would do anything they were told to do by those who presided over them, if they knew it was wrong; but such obedience as this is worse than folly to us; it is slavery in the extreme; and the man who would thus willingly degrade himself should not claim a rank among intelligent beings, until he turns from his folly. A man of God... would despise the idea. Others, in the extreme exercise of their almighty authority have taught that such obedience was necessary, and that no matter what the saints were told to do by their presidents, they should do it without asking any questions. When Elders of Israel will so far indulge in these extreme notions of obedience as to teach them to the people, it is generally because they have it in their minds to do wrong themselves." (Millennial Star, vol.14 #38, pp. 593-95)

Brigham Young said:

"What a pity it would be, if we were led by one man to utter destruction! Are you afraid of this? I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken the influence they could give to their leaders, did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way. Let every man and woman know, themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not. This has been my exhortation continually." (JD 9:150)

"How easy it would be for your leaders to lead you to destruction, unless you actually know the mind and will of the spirit yourselves." (JD 4:368)

"I do not wish any Latter-day Saint in this world, nor in heaven, to be satisfied with anything I do, unless the Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ, the spirit of revelation, makes them satisfied...Suppose that the people were heedless, that they manifested no concern with regard to the things of the kingdom of God, but threw the whole burden upon the leaders of the people, saying, 'If the brethren who take charge of matters are satisfied, we are,' this is not pleasing in the sight of the Lord." (JD 3:45)

"...Now those men, or those women, who know no more about the power of God, and the influences of the Holy Spirit, than to be led entirely by another person, suspending their own understanding, and pinning their faith upon another's sleeve, will never be capable of entering into the celestial glory, to be crowned as they anticipate; they will never be capable of becoming Gods. They cannot rule themselves, to say nothing of ruling others, but they must be dictated to in every trifle, like a child. They cannot control themselves in the least, but James, Peter, or somebody else must control them. They never can become Gods, nor be crowned as rulers with glory, immortality, and eternal lives. They never can hold sceptres of glory, majesty, and power in the celestial kingdom. Who will? Those who are valiant and inspired with the true independence of heaven, who will go forth boldly in the service of their God, leaving others to do as they please, determined to do right, though all mankind besides should take the opposite course. Will this apply to any of you? Your own hearts can answer." (JD 1:312)

"President Joseph Smith read the 14th chapter of Ezekiel [see, for example, verses 9-10: 'If the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing...the punishment of the prophet shall be even as the punishment of him that seeketh unto him.']...said the Lord had declared by the Prophet [Ezekiel], that the people should each one stand for himself, and depend on no man or men in that state of corruption of the Jewish church -- that righteous persons could only deliver their own souls -- applied it to the present state [1842] of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints -- said if the people departed from the Lord, they must fall -- that they were depending on the Prophet, hence were darkened in their minds, in consequence of neglecting the duties devolving upon themselves..." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith pp. 237-38)

George Q. Cannon, Counselor to three Church Presidents, expressed it thus: "Do not, brethren, put your trust in man though he be a bishop, an apostle, or a president. If you do, they will fail you at some time or place; they will do wrong or seem to, and your support be gone;" (Millennial Star 53:658-59, quoted in Gospel Truth, 1:319)

"Methodists have creeds which a man must believe or be asked out of their Church. I want the liberty of thinking and believing as I please. It feels so good not to be trammelled."
-- (Joseph Smith in History of the Church 5:340)

What would the LDS church have you do NOW? Should you take the advice of the early prophets, or the current ones who think too much investigation leads to "loss of testimony"?

What do YOU want to do? Save your testimony at any cost, or determine to follow the path of truth no matter WHERE it leads?