Last week Jeff Spector over at Mormon Matters wrote about an interesting phenomenon. In “Hedging Your Bets: Refusing to Leave the Church” Mr. Spector talked about inactive Mormons and the negative reactions from some of them when they are visited by their Home Teachers. Mr. Spector wrote:
“I have been yelled at, cursed at, threatened with the police, etc. just for showing up at a member’s door and asking about them. And yet, most do not want their name removed from the Church rolls.
“Either, they have family concerns, are just too lazy to write the letter, or don’t care enough to do anything about their Church membership other than request no contact from the Church….
“So, it has always intrigued me as to why these folks seem unable to completely divorce themselves from the Church. Even though they want no contact.”
Many of the comments left in response to Mr. Spector’s blog center on whether people who have requested no contact from the Church should be left alone. But I’m more interested in the original question. Why don’t people who want nothing to do with the LDS Church have their names removed from membership?
LDS leaders have been fond of saying that people might “leave the Church, but they cannot leave the Church alone” (e.g., Neal A. Maxwell, “‘Becometh As a Child’,” Ensign, May 1996). This is usually applied to vocal ex-Mormon critics, but the saying has equal relevancy for Latter-day Saints who drift into inactivity. It carries with it an implication that these people know the Church is true, and they just can’t shake the conviction. Happily, I didn’t see this kind of rhetoric at Mormon Matters.
I think Mr. Spector’s short list of reasons is a good one, though it’s certainly not exhaustive. The last two suggestions are really just one: being too lazy to write a resignation letter has its root in not caring about Church membership at all. Why bother to write a letter and endure the possible fallout (i.e., efforts to convince the person to change his or her mind) if there is no real reason to go to the trouble?
Family concerns are another matter. One commenter at Mormon Matters wrote,
“I think a lot of people don’t want to take hope away from their family! It could devastate parents or a sibling to think they won’t make it into the celestial kingdom with them.”
Another commenter told this story:
“My parents provided my brother’s contact information to the Church’s Lost Sheep program when they called asking his whereabouts. He’s been inactive for 15 years at least.
“My brother was livid. He wanted no contact at all with the Church and told my parents never to do that again.
“Yet I doubt he would bother with forms and letters to avoid the possibility of contact entirely. His name’s mere presence on the rolls performs some minimal comforting function for my parents, who think his testimony is just weak, or that he is going through a phase.”
According to the LDS Church Handbook of Instructions, the removal of a person’s name from Church membership “cancels the effects of baptism and confirmation, withdraws the priesthood held by a male member, and revokes temple blessings” (Book 1, page 129, 1999 edition), while mere Church inactivity does not carry with it these consequences. For some inactive Mormons, then, remaining on the Church role is done out of consideration for their LDS loved ones.
Another possible reason for people remaining on the Church membership list was suggested by Mr. Spector’s article title: Hedging Your Bets. People who don’t know what to believe sometimes look at church membership or completed ordinances as a sort of fire insurance. This isn’t unique to Mormonism; people from many faith backgrounds have told me they’ve been baptized, said a prayer, or given money to a church “just in case.” They are hedging their bets.
For Mormons, though, there is another level of insecurity that might enter into a person’s reasons for remaining a Church member, even if it is in name only. According to one of the commenters at Mormon Matters,
“Also of note is the relatively recent church policy of only one re-baptism per person. If you request name removal, are re-baptized, and then are excommunicated for any reason, or request name-removal again, you cannot get re-baptized in mortality. You’ll have to hope someone does it in the temple for you.”
Add to that another LDS Church policy which states, “First Presidency approval is required to perform temple ordinances for deceased persons who…had their names removed from Church membership records” (Church Handbook of Instructions, Book 1, page 75, 1999 edition), and it’s easy to see why some people may be hesitant to “divorce themselves completely” from the LDS Church.
I’m thinking that Mormon Coffee readers may have some interesting insight into the question posed by Jeff Spector: Why don’t people who want nothing to do with the LDS Church have their names removed from membership?
What has been your experience, and what do you think?
A couple of thoughts. Before I left mormonism I was the membership clerk in the bishopric, and the number of people on the rolls who were not only not attending but outright hostile is staggering (maybe as high as 50% or more never attended). Many people never removed their names because they don’t know how or because they don’t realize their names are still on the rolls. The very first thing we did when we left was request in writing to have our names removed and receive written confirmation.
The bigger reason is fear mongering. The church is pretty specific about the fate of those who leave mormonism. When we announced we were leaving, we received an anonymous package containing a book “Take heed that ye be not deceived” written by Richard Winwood. The book does not list a publisher, which is odd. In it are all manner of warnings. Those who reject Smith are referred to it as “lesser beings” and those like the members of ministries like MRM are comapared to Judas who sold out Christ for thirty pieces of silver. The awful penalties of hell are reserved for those who become apostates from mormonism. Mormonism is largely about control, and if you doubt that mormonism is a cult, just try leaving and see what happens. Anonymous letters, phone calls from leaders to your wife when you are not around, former “friends” shunning you, assumptions of some hidden sin that made you leave.
It is just easier for people who have left mormonism to fade quietly away and just in case apostates do go to outer darkness, why not hedge your bets and keep your name on the rolls? For me, I couldn’t in good faith leave our names on the rolls of a church that was clearly a false church that slandered the name of Christ. It was liberating for us to receive the letters saying that our names had been removed in the same way that first cup of coffee was liberating.
When looking at the reasons I guess I’m thinking it’s probably an “all of the above” answer. What interests me is where Mormons think they end-up in Mormon heaven when they die if their name is still on the membership rolls. I love to get into the convoluted ways of thinking within religous groups.
Having been raised Catholic and the only nonpracticing Catholic in my family, I’m lost for having left the Chruch, I guess, at least under the old rules. Since my wife and I just celebrated our 40th wedding anniversary last Sunday, rememberances tend to flood back. I was still in college when we got married and I had been a heathen for a couple of years so I didn’t care where my wife and I got married. So her being Lutheran and me being a nonpracticing Catholic we split the difference and were married by an Episcopal priest. Anyway I was getting ready for football practice one day and the guy next to me says, “Your going to hell.” He says this half laughing. And I said “What are you talking about?” He says, “You got married outside of the Church. You’re going to hell.” We both broke out laughing. Heathens don’t take this stuff very seriously.
Of course a couple of years later I got saved and came to realize that faith in Christ, not Church membership was the pathway to eternal life. I don’t know if these membership/inactive Mormons are thinking that as long as they have their names on the membership list of the Mormon church they’re assured at least entry into one of the lower levels of Mormon heaven or what the deal is. All I know is that it’s faith in the Biblical Jesus that assures us of our salvation. Not Jesus, the off spring of a mother/father god combo off somewhere on Kolob, but the eternal God-who became a man-and gave His life as payment for our sins. God extends His grace to us so that through faith we may have eternal life. I’d rather have my name in the Lambs Book of Life than on the rolls of some church.
Sharon and others: again, interesting topic Ms.Sharon, the ‘idea springs’ have not run dry, praise GOD.
I’m wondering how Mr.Spector knows that these inactive ones still WANT there names left on the books?? I highlight ‘WANT’, because when I left the Catholic church many years ago, I suppose my name was (and perhaps still is) still on a roster somewhere. I didn’t care then, and don’t care much now (granted, the Catholic church didn’t care much either, there was/is no follow up call, letter, etc.. which was OK with me). I just let it go because it ceased to matter to me what the bishop and his home-boys were all about. I’m wondering if this is analogous to some of these LDS situations. My point being: just because you leave your name on some roster, doesn’t necessarily mean you still give that group or cause credence. Now if the Catholic church started baptizing for the dead, using my PAST association as a ‘wedge’ for that, the bishop would get a very LARGE dose of vocal, and I would even say HOSTILE Germit in a big fat hurry, but I’m mixing topics here a little bit.
Looking forward to hearing from the LDS faithful out there (this is a ‘magic free’ thread…..)
Sharon has a related post, Mormons Don’t Necessarily Believe in Christ?
As Kevin Barney of FAIR wrote recently, “I know lots of good Mormons who don’t believe in the BoM, that in my view that is an acceptable position as long as one doesn’t try to proselytize others to that point of view…” (>>) I’ve known atheists and agnostics who, having privately admitted their beliefs to their bishop, not only remain in the church, but remain in their teaching positions.
I think that any church’s criteria for having someone’s name taken off the roles should be identical to the criteria for joining. Mormons are asked if they believe in Christ and the BofM, and if they sustain the current prophet in order to become baptized into the LDS Church. Those who no longer believe in Christ or the BofM or in Monson as a prophet should be lovingly dismissed. Keeping them on the rolls as a member cheapens the meaning of church membership and makes Mormonism look like a fraternity or a social club that centers around their church more than it centers around belief in Christ and his true gospel as a core basis of unity.
I don’t buy the Pascal’s Wager argument. Look at the way it’s framed: “And yet, most do not want their name removed from the Church rolls.” That suggests the bishop popped by and said, “Hey, you haven’t showed up at church for a decade. How about we bring up your records and press the ol’ delete key?”
But here’s the above sentence adjusted for reality: “And yet, most would rather not cause themselves tons more purposeless grief.” Having disentangled oneself from that tar pit, even Skinner’s rats would know better than to wade back in.
The fact is, the vast majority of us who go inactive are left alone for years at a time, and when contact is initiated, usually a simple, “No, thanks,” solves the problem for another couple of years. The rule of thumb instead is Occam’s Razor: the simplest solution sufficeth.
Besides, the church never actually deletes these records, so why contribute to the sham?
I am currently in the process of having my name removed. Surprisingly thus far the bishop has been very cordial, and so far there hasn’t been any pressure, threats, accusations, etc. I had a very good discussion with him regarding my faith in the Jesus Christ of the bible, and my decision to become a fully devoted follower of Christ alone. I’ve invited my bishop to dinner (although I’m not sure he will take me up on the offer).
I discussed with my bishop that I genuinely love my LDS friends and neighbors, and out of this love I will need to talk to them if they come to my home. I told him I can no longer accept their love offerings, home teaching, etc. without speaking to them about my deep faith in Jesus Christ. My bishop promised that my decision to leave will not hinder my current relationships with my LDS neighbors.
I believe the process of name removal has become more streamlined because of the large numbers leaving the LDS establishment. Also, because of recent lawsuits against the LDS they are very reluctant to overstep their authority.
I chose to have my name removed so that I could witness Jesus Christ to my bishop and neighbors. Maybe this is why they are avoiding me and remaining cordial. My letter spoke about the real Jesus as presented in the bible. I warned them that they are welcome to talk to me, but if they do I will tell them about the true gospel. Maybe they are avoiding me because they don’t want to hear it?
Perhaps I should give them the benefit of the doubt, and compliment them for leaving me alone. At this point I wish they would talk to me more, so that I can tell them the “Good News”!
I have a fair amount of experience with people who are “less-active.” These people constitute an extremely diverse group. Some of these folks are going through spiritual “lows” or depression, or laziness- there are many reason a person may slacken in his religious practices. Many of these reasons have nothing to do with belief, or testimony. I think we can all recognize this no matter what church of religion we belong to. Of all “less-active” members of the LDS church, very few want their names removed.
I cannot count the number of “less-active” members who have told me they fully believe in the Church and its teachings. They were just having a hard time in their personal life or living their faith for a wide variety of reasons. We all have ups and downs.
I also cannot count the number of people whom I have seen return to full activity after some period of inactivity. They often express deep gratitude for home teachers or bishops who have extended love to them and never gave up.
Yes- there are some individuals who want their names removed, and I think the church has a straight forward process for having that done. The church does not in any degree condone guilt-trips or systematic intimidation with these people. Claims of “fear mongering” are quite unsubstantiated, falcon. The church is not “specific” about what happens to these people. I have no idea who dropped the book off at your step, but I can guarantee it wasn’t an official representative of the church. Maybe a friend or family member, but not a bishop, quorum president, etc.
Author- sorry people treated you poorly when you left. Friends and family members take our religious beliefs very seriously because they love us, no matter what religion we are talking about. But I do not think you can say that the church “is all about control.” Such a statement is simply not true.
Germit…from my understanding the inactive member notifies the ward that they wish NOT to be contacted altho remaining a member. Actually, I have been quite interested in an entire community of Mormons who have varying degrees of “belief” in the teachings of the church but yet have remained members for whatever reason. Interesting discussion board there as well…
http://www.newordermormon.org/
Mr. FOF:
I think you must have the “falcon” mixed up with someone else with your “fear mongering and leaving a book off” reference. I reread my post and I didn’t say anything remotely about either. In fact, my interest in the topic gets to the motivation of “some” Mormons who might leave their names on the rolls thinking that qualifies them for one of the levels of Mormon heaven? Salvation is based on complete trust in Jesus and what He did in redeeming us on the Cross. It has nothing to do with church membership or any rite of a church or paying a tithe or any work we could perform thinking we could then merit eternal life.
So the “member” leaving his/her name on the roll to avoid the Mormon outer darkness is the market niche I’m interested in. I wonder if any of those folks could be lurking out there. Hay, if one of you is reading this, jump in here. Cults do have a way of motivating by fear. Once people lose that the cult can’t control them any more.
Jesus can get it done for you. You don’t need your name on the rolls of the Mormon church.
Here’s my 2 cents:
I’m an inactive mormon…..I can’t stand a lot of things about church and mormon culture and don’t want to be bothered by anyone in the church. I don’t have my name removed from the records because I am a believer…….and there are many others just like me.
I know that when Christ comes again, He will make everything right, and that’s what I’m waiting for!
Dear shiva,
Hi. Thanks for your posting. Part of it really caught my attention: “He will make everything right.”
That is very true. In fact, the Good News about Jesus Christ reveals how God makes us right in His sight. One of the books in the Bible that has most influenced me is Romans. What is so wonderful about the Good News is that while it very much includes our future, it also includes our present. Today can be the day of salvation for anyone who believes. One can stand forgiven of all one’s sins today, and clothed in the white robes of Jesus’ perfect righteousness.
May God bless you, shiva.
Amen Brian. Jesus is the answer. The “Good News” is awesome. Hallelujah! Praise God!
shiva,
Thank you so much for participating in the discussion. You’re about the only one of your classification to show-up here. Would you please do me a favor, and I mean this sincerely, no trick question: Here goes: Would you please answer for me what you mean specifically when you say about yourself “I am a believer”? Could you tell me what it is that you believe.
We need more like you here on Mormon Coffee. Go recruit your friends. You get $50 in merchandise and a free one month subscription to this site for each person you get to sign on to Mormon Coffee. The steak knives are really nice as is the special blend of coffee.
Hi everyone. First time poster here.
I left the LDS church about a year ago and for me, getting my name removed turned out to be much more trouble and pain than it was worth. My long time visiting teacher’s husband is our steak president. And she has made my leaving the church very difficult on me to say the least. She used her power of being married to the steak pres. to keep me from getting my name removed. I just couldn’t take the stressful guilt trip and mind games from her anymore and gave up. I don’t care anymore. I just needed to be left alone and that was much more important than my name being removed from the church membership.
Another great, thought provoking article. Much better than the last one Sharon.
I have been on the recieving end, attempting to find and home teach those who don’t want activity in the church. The comments above are quite accurate. I have my own theory on the matter.
I like the Lord’s parable of the sower to illuminate these issues, if you can indulge a Mormon’s examination of Christ’s teaching.
Matt 13:18
Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower.
19 When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side.
No problem taking your name off here. You didn’t have a testimony in the first place.
20 But he that received the seed into stony places, the same is he that heareth the word, and anon with joy receiveth it;
21 Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while: for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended.
These are the ones you speak of. They know the Church is true, but can’t cope. We remind them the Church is true, then they get angry. Their anger is a bit misplaced. They are transferring their fear and animosity about their own weakness to us. We threaten them. They are still comfortable with their weakened state. Why is the smallest dog always the most agressive?
22 He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.
These are the ones that don’t leave the Church on their own but are excommunicated. They don’t get bothered at all.
It is our OBLIGATION to “visit the house of each member, be with an stregnthen them”. To paraprase D&C 20. Who need stregnth the most? The weak of course.
It is another cruel irony that those who need the most reject the medicine they need.
I find myself in the odd position of agreeing wih cluff. If someone remains in the mormon church they should fully expect to receive the home teachers. If they don’t want to get visits from their assigned friends, they should have their names removed.
Of course on the flip side, once someone realizes that mormonism is a false religion and depicts a false Christ, they should feel obliged to remove their name from the rolls of that church.
I must disagree though with some of what Cluff said. It isn’t an inability to “cope”, it is a recognition of the lies that causes people to leave mormonism. Despite your smarmy depiction of the weakness, fear and Napoleon complex of thosr who leave mormonism, it isn’t fear that inspires us, it is love. Love for others and a realization that those who we love are caught in a lie. It is because we love that we speak out against the lies of mormonism. We even love you cluff, despite your best efforts to be unlovable!
I don’t have any direct experience or knowledge. But the topic is fascinating to me. Why does leaving the Mormon church get so much attention? Seems like this gets more of a fuss than any other member leaving a different church.
I might not post much, but I look forward to reading the ensuing discussion.
I took a class called “Witnessing to Mormons” at a local evangelical church. The teacher had been raised Mormon, but came to an understanding of the true gospel of grace by reading the NT, especially Galatians.
He told our class that he had been unofficially out of Mormonism for 17 years and had been teaching the class on how to witness to Mormons when he received a call from the bishop at his local ward asking him about the class he was teaching. Apparently he was still on the books as a member of the LDS church and the bishop wanted to have him in for a meeting regarding his “@nti-mormon” activities. This was before they had the current process where people can simply write a letter to resign. They wanted to ex-communicate him. He refused. I don’t remember all the details but he researched his constitutional rights and was able to have his name removed from the books without having to be publicly shamed.
This leaving your name on the Mormon church rolls in order to gain a place in one of the levels of Mormon heaven sounds like the Mormon version of eternal security. Who knows how many Mormon inactives would actually think this way, but if you instill enough fear in someone, I could see where they might think it. As far as religious dogma is concerned it it an interesting proposition. The inactive would not have to have any faith in the five points of Mormonism (JS is a prophet, BoM is true, Mormon church is the one real, true deal, current prophet speaks from and for god, and lastly-of course-belief in the Mormon Jesus) and still be safe at home. Now granted, “salvation by name on the roll” won’t get the inactive into the Celestial kingdom and domain over their own planetary system, but then they don’t have to put up with the daily grind of Mormonism either. The inactive Mormon can actual have a life free of control of the Mormon church. That, in and of itself, I would think, would encourage someone to seek minisalvation by name on the roll.
FoF and others: you wrote,
“the church does not in any degree condone guilt trips or systematic intimidation with these people…claims of “fear-mongering” are quite unsubstantiated..”
I’m going to agree to disagree on this one, my friend. Not based on personal experience, of course, but the testimonies are too many and too consistent to ignore. When I hear the same kind of complaints over and over, the word ‘SYSTEMATIC’ or ‘INSTITUTIONAL’ come to mind. I don’t want to highjack the thot of this thread, so I won’t say too much, but your view of your church seems very rose-lensed , to me. What I hear from Chzhead I’ve heard numerous times (and worse), not that the LDS is alone in this kind of harsh treatment of anyone daring to leave the ‘one true church’. Kudos for those like Chzhead, Jesusfreak, and others who would not be bullied into a faith that is long on organization and AUTHORITY, and short on the true JESUS.
JesusFreak brings up the ‘large numbers leaving the church’…this would be worth looking into.
GERMIT
I “wrote my letter” long before becoming a Christian. I was told it was a requirement for me to visit with my local bishop and explain what I wanted. This was no problem for me because I had never been a ward member in that neighborhood. The process was painless and in a few weeks, I was out!
I have regrets now, not about leaving, but for the way I handled it. I wanted name removal for one reason: I did NOT want to be viewed as being sealed to my former spouse, who was/is still an active member. The regret is that, since I was not yet a follower of Jesus Christ, I missed a precious opportunity to witness to whoever reads those letters about the truth of the good news of Jesus and God’s real plan for the salvation of His children.
One amusing thing I’d like to share: all my children (5) are out of the church, but the youngest two, ages 16 and 13, are also followers of Jesus Christ despite their LDS dad’s efforts to the contrary. They were baptized in a river this summer, with their dad reluctantly present. We have discussed letter writing as an opportunity to witness, one that I regret missing out on. My youngest, however, is not satisfied with that. He has expressed a desire to be excommunicated so that he can take a really public stand for Christ in our area! Wow! We are trying to think of a way to get him a court without him being disrespectful—challenging! The best way we’ve thought of so far is to go to a Young Men’s meeting and start to preach the real God. We also wonder: can a minor be ex’d? Does anyone here know the answer to that?
Finally, the saddest words I hear from the LDS are these: “Oh well, when we are dead we’ll know the answers.” That breaks my heart! Don’t you want to know NOW??? Especially since it is given once for man to die and then the judgment? I suppose this is just another mormon outclause, but the seeming nonchalance about eternal matters is a wonder to me.
I’m always puzzled why some ex-Mormons wouldn’t want to have their names removed such as in the case of the gentleman that JessicaJoy talks about. Here is a person actively out preaching against the LDS Church and teaching Christians how to bring them out, but yet refuses to have his name removed…weird. There is a family in our church that left the Mormon Church about a year ago. They were temple Mormons. He likes ridiculing and playing games with LDS missionaries which I have scolded him for. His favorite game is to go up to them and tell them that he is a son of perdition/apostate and then watch them turn and run the other way as if he has leprosy. I reminded him this past week that he is not telling the truth because his name is still officially on the LDS Church rolls. He has not been excommunicated. He is an inactive member – a “jack” Mormon by some defintions. That bothered him and he walked away with a troubled look.
I’m also confused on why an ex-Mormon who has been radically redeemed and converted by the Savior wouldn’t actively pursue to having their name removed because of shame. If I was an ex-Mormon who fell into that category, then I would be in the camp with Arthur Sido. I wouldn’t rest until my name was off the rolls of this non-Christian cultic religion.
Shame? One can’t bear the shame publicly from current LDS members for leaving the church and making a stand for Christ after what the Savior has just done for that person? I would have doubts as to their radical conversion. All one needs to do is look at what the followers of Christ went through in the New Testament to get a clear picture of what serving and standing for Christ will bring forth. I had one “jack” Mormon tell me that he couldn’t leave the LDS Church because of the family scorn that would take place. I took him to Matthew 10:37-38. If an ex-Mormon is not willing to “take up his cross” and follow the Savior, Jesus says he “is not worthy of me.”
Mormonism view of the three kingdoms:
1. Celestial – divided into three levels
2. Terrestrial – For honorable & good people; those that died without law; not valiant in their testimony of Jesus.
3. Telestial – Reserved for the dishonest, liars, whoremongers, adulterers and eventually murderers.
Level 1 of the celestial are those that will become gods. In level 2 the LDS Church says “it hasn’t been revealed who is there”. Level 3 are for those that weren’t married for time and eternity but were temple Mormons. They become as angels and are the servants of those in level 1 (the gods) [D&C 132:15-16]
Mormons are told that the worst sin they can commit is leaving the church (offically excommunicated). This places them in a unique category that only applies to another group: Satan and his angels. They will be in outer darkness with him. Apostates are worse than murderers (which is the second worse sin in Mormonism).
The vast majority of the LDS membership are inactive Mormons. By simply walking away and going inactive they are not considered apostates. They have given up trying to live the Mormon law and trying to become a god – they have settled. Where do they end up? The Terrestrial kingdom with the Christians.
For an inactive Mormon they can walk away and “not be valiant” and still go to the Terrestrial. If that inactive Mormon is excommunicated and becomes a “son of perdition” or “apostate”, then they are now in outer darkness. Just simply leaving one’s name on the rolls guarantees one of the three heavens. Taking your name off and becoming an apostate changes the whole program. Inactive Mormons also know that they have a second chance in the spirit world to get things right in the Mormon view.
Mormons bash Christians for our liberty and falsely accuse of wilfully sinning because of salvation by grace alone. This apparent “game playing” by inactive Mormons is the epitomy of spiritual liberty and abuse. “After all we can do” (2 Nephi 25:23)?
Well put, Berean! Thanks for helping keep us focused on the gravity of our LDS friends’ situation and our responsibility to Christ to proclaim His salvation, especially after we’ve partaken freely of it.
With my status in the neighborhood as an apostate/daughter of perdition, I’m often the recipient of the leprosy-look, especially when I passionately preach the truth of Jesus Christ. Its okay, though: I thank God every day for that status! I just pray He will make me a more effective instrument for Him in this area (Utah County), where every home I see from my door is LDS. This is one reason I lurk/post quasi-regularly here at MC–to improve my technique!
Couple of thoughts:
First, Berean, where do you get the idea that if someone leaves the church or is excommunicated they are going to outer darkness? I have never been told, nor ever heard anybody else told that the worst sin I/they could commit was to leave the church. Where do you guys get this stuff? That doctrine does not exist in the church. If someone has a testimony of the truth and actively fights against it, yes we believe there will be a just wage. Imagine somebody knowing Jesus is the Savior, but actively traveling around to preach against Him. This would be somebody receiving such a punishment. This is probably very rare.
The claim that inactive members only leave their name on the church because it will benefit them after this life is bizarre. And I don’t think I have ever encountered this in home teaching hundreds of people.
Germit- Jesusfreak said having his name removed was fairly easy. His experience doesn’t support your point as you said. My point was that there is not systematic persecution from official church officers who actually represent the church. Yes- there are others- friends and families- who do not demonstrate as much restraint. And my guess is that if somebody in your church openly, and in a very critical manner, left the church, you and others might try to reason with them or testify to them.
I have read several statements here that “people are leaving the church in large numbers.” There are obvious reasons this would be the supported perception at a site like this. But such is simply not the case. The church continues to grow at a relatively steady rate. There have always been people who leave any church. Nothing new my friends.
Berean: Mormons are told that the worst sin they can commit is leaving the church (offically excommunicated).
GB: LOL!!! You guys make up the funniest stuff!!
And you say it, like it really is true!
Thanks B, I now have something to laugh about the rest of the day.
Cheers!!!
FaithofFathers said, “I have read several statements here that “people are leaving the church in large numbers.” There are obvious reasons this would be the supported perception at a site like this. But such is simply not the case. The church continues to grow at a relatively steady rate. There have always been people who leave any church. Nothing new my friends.”
Many things in the LDS faith are secret. The truth is we will never know if people are leaving in droves. I suspect they are and I have heard, unconfirmed, that the Membership Records Office in SLC is having trouble keeping up with the requests and continually adding new staff.
Most other church bodies will gladly tell you their membership numbers, tithing amounts, where every tithed dollar goes, etc. I never understood why God would intend for these things to be kept secret. Shouldn’t parishioners know the actual membership numbers (including the numbers of those leaving)?
Shouldn’t members know exactly what their tithing dollar is paying for? The christian chuch I attend sends a budget breakdown to every person doing a tithe. We are welcome to scrutinize the budget and make suggestions. Is there a reason that the LDS establishment will not release their budget? What could they be hiding? We will never know.
Knowing my friend BEREAN, if he writes something here he has a reliable source for it. But since we are dealing with Mormonism, we know that it’s pretty difficult to get a handle on and to get them to committ to certain beliefs that have been taught by their apostles and prophets and expounded upon by Mormon apologists. Goofy stuff gets dropped by subsequent generations as “new revelation” comes forth and the dead guys get dissed. That’s why Walter Martin called Mormonism a Maze.
I don’t have a citation for this, but my understanding is that two-thirds of those on the Mormon rolls are inactive “members”. I’ve also come to understand that half of those serving missions go inactive. Mormons are pretty heavily committed to the numbers game, but I’ve heard that they are at zero or negative growth. Someone more familiar with the numbers out there could give me a little help on this. One last thing, I’ve also heard that the number of people handling resignations at the Mormon corporate offece has gone from something like 2 to 12 in the last several years. Doesn’t look like the picture our Mormon posters would like to paint. My guess is that the Mormon church is having a pretty tough time replacing inactive members or those jumpping ship and resigning with new talent. Let’s face it, who’d want to become a Mormon? The Mormon narrative has more holes than swiss cheese and the stifling, life style isn’t really all that appealing to modern day folks.
As an active member of the LDS church for 29 years, I too have never been taught that you are sent to Outer Darkness or become a Son of Perdition for leaving the church. I have only been told by Sunday School teachers that Outer Darkness is for those that have a SURE KNOWLEDGE of God who then choose to turn their back on Him despite that knowledge. I am under the understanding that this is very rare and is basically reserved for prophets and those who have personally seen and spoken with God who then choose to reject Him. I may be mistaken though.
Dear Berean,
According to the scriptures the sons of perdition must have a complete and solid understanding of the truth. They must “know the power”.
Matthew 12:31
Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.
32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.
D&C 78:31
Thus saith the Lord concerning all those who know my power, and have been made partakers thereof, and suffered themselves through the power of the devil to be overcome, and to deny the truth and defy my power—
32 They are they who are the SONS OF PERDITION, of whom I say that it had been better for them never to have been born;
33 For they are vessels of wrath, doomed to suffer the wrath of God, with the devil and his angels in eternity;
34 Concerning whom I have said there is ano forgiveness in this world nor in the world to come—
35 Having denied the Holy Spirit after having received it, and having denied the Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves and put him to an open shame.
36 These are they who shall go away into the lake of fire and brimstone, with the devil and his angels—
37 And the only ones on whom the second death shall have any power;
38 Yea, verily, the only ones who shall not be redeemed in the due time of the Lord, after the sufferings of his wrath.
2 Pet. 2:20
For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
Alma 39:6
For behold, if ye deny the Holy Ghost when it once has had place in you, and ye know that ye deny it, behold, this is a sin which is unpardonable;
All sins shall be forgiven
Previous comment over 2000 words, quote is completed below:
All sins shall be forgiven, except the sin against the Holy Ghost; for Jesus will save all except the sons of perdition. What must a man do to commit the unpardonable sin? He must receive the Holy Ghost, have the heavens opened unto him, and know God, and then sin against him. After a man has sinned against the Holy Ghost, there is no repentance for him. He has got to say that the sun does not shine while he sees it; he has got to deny Jesus Christ when the heavens have been opened unto him, and to deny the plan of salvation with his eyes open to the truth of it.
Joseph Smith,
Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith
So the determining factor in the punishment is the level of knowledge. Based on the level of understanding that I see in many of these posts by those who are former members, the good news is they probably don’t have enough knowledge to qualify.
Mike Bennion
A quick question on a portion of Mike B’s post. He says that “the good news is they PROBABLY [emphasis mine] don’t have enough knowledge to qualify. Probably, huh? So you are not sure…
Also, lets go up to the D&C 78:35-36. “Having denied the Holy Spirit after having received it… These are they who shall go away into the lake of fire and brimstone, with the devil and his angels”
Joseph Smith says: “he has got to deny Jesus Christ when the heavens have been opened unto him, and to deny the plan of salvation with his eyes open to the truth of it”
I thought the burning of the bosom was recieving the Holy Ghost? When do the heavens open up?
Are you saying that the lay Mormon has not met Jesus or received the Spirit?
Surely, there’s more to your view…
Michael,
How convenient that you left a very important part out. You know the “AND having denied the Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves AND put him to an open shame.” part. (emphasis mine)
Oh what a difference the COMPLETE quote makes!!
Cheers!!
Whoa, Whoa, Whoa Mormon friends. I think you’re doing the Mormon two step or the duck and weave or whatever regarding the trip to outer darkness. If someone gets baptized into the Mormon church, gets hands laid on to receive the Holy Ghost and agree and testify to the five points of Mormonism, you’re in the program…..name on the rolls, a member. So if the person then says, I don’t believe this any more, get my name off of the membership list, in Mormon speak the next step is outer darkness. The problem, again is Mormons don’t know Mormomism. So to a legalistic thinking Mormon, who doesn’t like the grind of Mormonism, keep your name on the list. You at least get the second level of Mormon heaven.
Now the Mormons that I think get cheated are the unmarried temple Mormons who get to the Celestial kingdom but get stuck out on the third rim. They get to serve their buddies who became Mormon gods who are in the first rim. The second rim is a mystery. Mormonism still hasn’t figured out who’s in the second rim.
But in Mormondom, keeping your name on the membership list has it’s advantages. Terrestrial kingdom I guess would be a pretty good deal for those Mormon folks.
You know whats sad? The fact that staying on the roles to hopefully obtain partial salvation even comes into the minds of some LDS inactives.
Don’t you see something seriously wrong with that? If you don’t, I will tell you whats wrong. The idea that you need something/someone OTHER than Christ Jesus to “come unto the father.”
Even though the LDS church authority doesn’t support that “salvation loophole”, in my view it is THEIR fault for even breeding an environment in which that thought would come across the minds of “members”.
I thank God for the wonderful group of Christian teachers in my life for breeding an environment of complete faith in Jesus Christ, teaching me that he is the ONLY way unto father – not some of the way, not half the way, not most of the way, but THE way.
You want to know how I have a surety and belief that what they speak of is true? Is because it lines up with God’s word.
Show me where God, not a “supposed prophet”, says “Temple marriage, (polygamy if you follow D&C 132), complete abandonment of sin, secret handshakes, rituals, and oh yeah, Jesus Christ are the way unto the father.
As you can tell, I get frustrated when religions start making salvation exclusive unto only their church and put Jesus Christ in the back of the bus.
Oh yeah, I get a burning in my bosom as well when I give thanks to Christ for being my way unto the father as described in the Bible, so I know it is true.
To answer Sharon’s question: “Why don’t people who want nothing to do with the LDS Church have their names removed from membership?”
The answer is simple: For the same reason that lapsed Catholics, Lutherans, Episcopalians, Baptists, Presbyterians (or adherents of any other religion for that matter) don’t have their names removed from the membership roles of their respective churches –
Because it is not important enough for them to take such action. No great mystery here!
In response to the particularly inane comment that from Falcon that “The problem, again is Mormons don’t know Mormonism” What absolute malarky!
That comment is comparable to an anti-semite saying he knows more about Judaism than a devout rabbi who has devoted his life to studying and practicing his religion. The sheer arrogance of such a comment boggles the mind.
No Falcon, the REAL problem is that Mormon critics don’t bother to truly understand the LDS religion, its people, or its culture but rather prefer to create a grotesque caricature of the LDS Church and then attack that caricature.
I have heard from several sources that mormons have horns. No lie- several sincere people have told me that. Those mormons are just really good at hiding them under their hair.
Falcon, I think your statistics are quite suspect. Where are your sources? I don’t think I have ever been in a ward that was not growing in numbers (I have belonged to upwards of 20 wards). Look at the number of temples and church buildings- growing at a significant rate. Hard to build these structures, remaining debt free, without a growing number of committed people paying tithing. The number of members is over 13 million members, and when somebody has their name removed it is subtracted from this number.
I read an article a month ago about the Southern Baptist Church- their national counsel is meeting to determine if they should change their policies regarding woman holding office and marriage arrangements/counsel. They are struggling with recruits/converts as many churches are. I think this is a reflection of society and people drifting further from God and religion in general (which is very sad). But I find it humurous that the conversation here points to the LDS church as faltering in its progress when it is one of the few churches managing to generally buck this trend.
Berean, the story I shared is kind of a unique situation – the teacher I referred to was raised in Mormonism and when he left he didn’t realize there was a formal process involved in requesting to have his name removed. When the bishop called him up about ex-communicating him he was totally shocked as he hadn’t been associated with the church for 17 years and had been actively teaching Christians how to witness to Mormons.
I’ve seen some mentioning that LDS growth rates are declining. I recently learned there is a website that tracks the growth statistics at Cumorah.com.
You have to kind of read between the lines in places. For example, I was reading a post about this on Runtu’s Rincon and he pointed out that if you look at the statistics for Chile, you can see that 300 wards closed between 2000 and 2004.
http://www.cumorah.com/?wid=46
By reviewing the numbers and comparing to previous years, it is quite readily apparent that growth rates are declining. This site also tracks the number of inactive vs. active Mormons giving a clearer picture. For example, there are 5,690,672 LDS members “on the books” in the US, but only 2,276,268 of these are active. Runtu pointed out some other observations on the statistics in his post at http://runtu.wordpress.com/2008/10/07
John Dehlin talks about this in his podcast “Why People Leave the LDS Church” and, according to his statistics, 2/3 of LDS members are currently inactive.
http://mormonstories.org/?p=390
Uh, GB, I don’t see the difference in the full quote. Denying the Holy Spirit and son, unless you mean the crucifying part. But isn’t that a natural occurance of rejecting him?
Please explain to me the difference, for I don’t see anything subsantive.
And it really doesn’t explain much of the rest of my question.
Heck, if anyone can add something of real differentiation, I’d love to hear it.
SteveH, that’s not the same thing at all. Mormonism is a religion. Lutheranism, however, is not a religion. It is one denomination of many that exists within the realm of Christianity. Let me give you an example with my convoluted denominational past: I grew up in the Christian and Missionary Alliance denomination. My dad grew up Wesleyan, and my mom methodist. They currently go to a congregational church. My husband and I attended a baptist church before moving to a different state, where we attend an Episcopal church. At each church I attended, there was no need to convert to that particular denomination. To become members we simply stated that we had accepted Christ as our Lord and savior. Some denominations do require a catechism class before membership, but not to convert to their “religion”. And there are also churches that are non-demoninational and affiliated with no specific branch. I hope this isn’t too off-topic, but I just wanted to respond, as this is a common mindset and argument among LDS. Although there are different denominations and “churches”, in that sense, the Church universal is made up of every member who follows the risen Lord.
Would our Mormon friends interpret, for the rest of us, the teachings of Joseph Fielding Smith regarding those who go to outer darkness? We are trying to understand the teachings of LDS leaders. Given the things they have taught, it seems that we have at least come to our conclusions honestly.
“I think I am safe in saying that no man can become a Son of Perdition until he has known the light. Those who have never received the light are not to become Sons of Perdition. They will be punished if they rebel against God They will have to pay the price of their sinning, but it is only those who have the light through the priesthood and through the power of God and through their membership in the Church who will be banished forever from his influence into outer darkness to dwell with the devil and his angels. That is a punishment that will not come to those who have never known the truth. Bad as they may suffer, and awful as their punishment may be, they are not among that group which is to suffer the eternal death and banishment from all influence concerning the power of God” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Conference Report, October 1958, p.21. Emphasis mine).
“A place where those who cannot be redeemed and who are called sons of Perdition will go into outer darkness. This is the real hell where those who once knew the truth and had the testimony of it and then turned away and blasphemed the name of Jesus Christ, will go. These are they who have sinned against the Holy Ghost. (See Matthew 12:31-32.) For them there is no forgiveness, and the Lord said he had prepared a place for them” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, 2:209-210).
First things First: FoF, I MUST know: how do YOU handle the horn situation, careful hair weave or hat?? I’m thinking hat, and this would be a very good year for a BYU hat or helmet.
Megan: if you can successfully get across the idea of the orthodox church UNIVERSAL, you get the golden apple teaching award, I’ve tried for months, but you might succeed where I’ve not done too well.
It’s been a while since I’ve looked at Heinerman and Anson Shupe’s “Mormon Empire”, but they would put the LDS number way below the 13 million number, but then again, that book is maybe 9 or 10 yrs old. Not that this affects their truth claims (because I don’t think it does), but it seems to me the active members can’t be much over 10 million, if that, but as it’s been pointed out by several, it’s very hard to know. It’s hard to know because, and this is the more important story here, the LDS church is just not that forthcoming with ALL the pertinent data, including inactives and numbers requesting their name removed. FoF , SteveH and others can disagree, and I’d expect they would, but it’s the cloak of secrecy around the whole thing that irks me. What’s the deal, if your message is true, it’s true, and we know the road is narrow anyway, so we should expect large numbers to say, ‘hey, this is too hard….’ regarding the true gospel anyway, why hide anything??? And the financial data as well, but that’s worth it’s own thread someday, no doubt.
Fof: I did not ignore the fact that JesusFreaks exit was fairly painless, I would just remark that this does not seem to be the norm that I see and hear from those leaving: granted, I don’t have a large cross section of these ‘exodus’ folk to choose from, so my sample is no doubt skewed. I would be happy to look at any GOOD data on that, if it were available. You are very right about MANY groups getting hit with large losses as we head toward post-modernism and relativism.
GERMIT
Now Sharon that is dirty pool, using a direct quote on the topic at hand from a “prophet”. Don’t you know that ongoing revelation means that the modern church can sweep under the rug any uncomfortable teachings of prior prophets? Mormon modern revelation is not written on tablets of stone, but rather on dry erase boards and is subject to revision whenever the prevailing winds change. Today’s mormon church is all about being ecumenical and just being one of the guys. No need to dredge up the crazy rantings of past Presidents.
Megan – In all your church hopping and denomination switching did you ever feel inclined to remove your church membership records? No. Why not? – Simply put – it was not an important matter to you – which is precisely my point.
Germit – Your comments on the sinister LDS “cloak of secrecy” once again belie your ignorance concerning the LDS Church. Every year the Church Accounting Office publishes detailed Church statistics concerning membership, number of church units (stakes and wards), convert baptisms, births of record etc. No secrecy here! The LDS are nothing if not good record keepers ( I am referring to the 21st century and not the 1830’s).
Arthur Sido – your vague ramblings are not worthy of a response.
Sharon – An interesting question regarding what are the qualifications of a “Son of Perdition” although this is completely off topic.
If I may be brief:
1. Please note that President Joseph Fielding Smith states that he is giving his opinion – considerable as it may be.
2. Final Judgment is the sole preserve and prerogative of our Heavenly Father. Jesus Christ is our Advocate before the Father.
3. It is my understanding that to become a “Son of Perdition” one must have a sure and absolute knowledge that one is in open rebellion against Heavenly Father, is fully cognizant of the eternal consequences of such rebellion, and when at the judgment bar of Heavenly Father the individual still persists in this rebellion (much like Lucifer).
4. Hence to become a “Son of Perdition” is a cognizant act of volition.
5. It is safe to say that mankind’s understanding of such matters is limited.
SteveH,
In terms of the discussion at hand, I see a couple things missing… Do you?
Also, do you see you are stating exactly what is criticized– the past leader gets a pass? In this case because (and its often this reason) his opinion…
Just curious.
My understanding of “outer darkness” is that it is a place reserved for those who, like Lucifer, have a complete knowledge of God and his love, but choose open rebellion instead of salvation.
That is a tall order in this life– to have a complete knowledge of God and his love means that you have met him. Not many of us get that opportunity because our faith is not that absolute.
To accomplish this nearly impossible feat, you would need to serve God in faith, build grace upon grace to absolute faith, then reject him altogether after having met him in person. Unlikely, but possible.
As expected, LDS “damage control police” is out in full force in denial to the teachings of the LDS Church. As to “Where do I get this stuff?” Here in these LDS manuals & book:
1. Mormon Doctrine: pp. 116-117, 259, 746, 778, 784, 816-817.
2. Doctrines of Salvation, 1:47-49; 2:218-225; 3:311-312.
3. Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 24, 128, 358.
4. Preparing For Exaltation: pp.39-41
5. Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual Religion 430 & 431: pp. 90-93
6. Doctrines and Covenants Student Manual Religion 324 & 325: pp. 161-166
7. D&C 41:1; 64:12-13; 76:39-37 (Mike Bennion – it’s not D&C 78); 132:15-16
Other sources would be from hearing the personal accounts of inactive Mormons that I know as friends, co-workers, visitors and regular parishioners at my church. To turn away from the truth, openly rebel against the church, teach against it and its leaders/prophets, deny the power thereof, commit the unpardonable sin, etc., makes one an apostate/son of perdition – excommunication. This is the worst sin in Mormonism because it is unforgivable. Your destiny is with Satan and his angels. How and where would Mormons clasify these two famous apostates: Sandra Tanner & Fawn Brodie? The terrestrial glory or with Satan and his angels? Be honest. Yeah, that’s what I thought.
How many inactive Mormons would have the courage to come forward on here and state why they don’t have their names removed the LDS roll? If they were truthful, they would admit to what I said earlier – family scorn and being able to be in the terrestrial glory instead of somewhere else if they were excommunicated.
Mormons need to learn their doctrine. If Mormons would spend as much time reading their manuals and scriptures as they do reading the books of BYU professors (Millet, Robinson, Nibley), they might learn some things that they don’t talk about in the wards or home teachings. Posting a comical zinger with laughs offers nothing. Quit being lazy and start studying.
Berean,
I suppose you never made a typo in your life. Since I referenced D&C 76 for the cut and paste it should be quite apparent that I knew where it was. A wee bit hyper sensitve are we?
Michael P,
I don’t know the posters personally so I don’t know whether they received the prerequisite knowledge to qualify as Sons of Perdition, but their basic knowledge seems to be lacking, thus the qualifier, “probably”.
Critics of Mormonism need to learn Mormon doctrine. If Critics of Mormonism would spend as much time reading the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine & Covenants and actually trying to dialogue with Mormons rather than proof texting LDS Manuals and Books critical of the Church, or planning the next snide remark they might learn some things that they don’t talk about in the Godmakers. Quit being lazy and start studying.
I am rather sure that I have read and studied and taught from more LDS manuals and the Scriptures than Berean has. I think I am fairly widely read in literature critical of the Church as well. At least as familiar with it as Berean is with the Book of Mormon.
Mike
I find this discussion of “who goes where” in Mormon heaven very relevent to the topic of why some exmos and inactives don’t have their names removed from the Mormon membership rolls. Mormonism is a works based religious system where the adherents are rewarded with a higher degree of exaltation depending on how many religious merit badges they earn. It’s kind of a complicated system where by the strivers are never really sure what level they are going to earn and in the case of the Celestial kingdom, which ring of glory they will inherit.
It really gets under the skin of our Mormon friends when we charge that Mormons don’t understand Mormonism. I would suggest they head on over to YouTube and watch/listen to Lyndon Lamborn’s presentation. He was a life long Mormon with all the bonafides with his family going way back. He was challenged to look more closely into the history of the church and what he found led to his excommunication. So I guess Lyndon, with his name now off the membership rolls, is headed for outer darkness. The point is, when he was an ignorant and happy Mormon, he was on a glide path to the Celestial kingdom. One of our regular poster here (JEFFREY) has shared how is life long Mormon wife and inlaws didn’t even know that Joseph Smith was a polygamist. John P. Dehlin (an active Mormon) has a presentation over at Mormon Stories titled “Why People Leave the LDS Church”. The whole thing deals with matters that Mormons are ignorant within their own religion and that when they find them out, leave the church. The link is: http://mormonstories.org/?page_id=102
The issues and topics that he discusses are all things that Christians who write here are more than familiar with. Now when it comes to Mormon doctrine, prophetic utterences, proclamations and teachings, good luck to the average Mormon trying to get a handle on that. What passes as Mormon apologetics at FAIR, FARMS and that great bastion on higher ed. BYU is, to be kind, is pretty shakey.