posted
KoM has a valid point, in this case. Even though I disagree with him, I can see how his conclusion is the only one he can come to. To believe anything else about Joseph Smith requires a type of evidence that is by its very nature unmeasurable, and therefore unprovable.
Enochville, you've already gotten some sound advice from people on this thread. I'd like to reiterate some of it, and add some of my own. First of all, you should definitely talk to you bishop. Even if you decide never to set foot inside a church building again he deserves to know , but if you decide to continue attending church, then he especially deserves to know your feelings. I don't think you should bless your baby if you don't feel that you have any authority to do so. To do so will make you feel cheaper, and it will only make things worse if when your family and friends realize you didn't believe in it. I do recommend that you continue attending church, at least as long as you continue feel that their are benefits to it.
Personally, when I'm feeling most cynical, I feel that being a member helps push me to become a better person. Traits and qualities that I value are valued by the people I go to church with, and I have a structure to base friendships off of. Furthermore I have an opportunity to help others, and the structure and culture of the church encourages me to do so. It's not that I can't, or others don't, do these things outside of church, but I find that I'm more likely to do it when there are others involved. So when I'm at my most cynical I can admit that the most likely explanation is that Joseph Smith is not a prophet, and that I regularly condition myself to feel 'happy' when I pray or read scriptures, but I always ask myself what difference it makes. Would I be a better person if I didn't go to church? Would I be a happier person if I didn't go to church? The answer to both is no.
The point I'm trying to get across is that an absence of faith does not negate your ability to go church. I don't want to give the idea that I am a social mormon myself. I do have a strong personal testimony, and have other personal, much more spiritual reasons for belonging to the church, but in arguments with people who refuse to accept a form of knowledge outside of the quantifiable forms, I feel there is still an argument to be made for the benefit of religion. I allow for the possibility that I am deluded. I don't think I am, but the possibility does exist. I could also be wrong about the existence of a God altogether, I don't think so, but it's possible. My point is that I'm happier being deluded than I ever could be as a cynic. This might not be true for you, but before you renounce the church all together I ask you to consider what you gain from it, and what you lose from it. It's possible to lead a healthy life without the LDS church, billions of people do it everyday. Perhaps you'll find a spiritual home in another church. I hope whatever you decide to do, you find what makes you and your wife happiest. Good luck.
Posts: 349 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK, I will asked to be released immediately, talk with my Stake President and Bishop and have my name removed from the Church. That also means that I will not bless my baby in Church.
Contrary to what one poster thought, I did not start this thread because I had some lingering hope that the church might be true. No, I can't help but be certain; I can't knowingly be in denial to myself. And all of you have helped me realize that I should not mislead others into thinking I still believe something I don't. I guess I just needed others to help me get the courage to do what I need to do. It has helped to tell strangers first.
Sm34rZ: I have had no trouble feeling what I previously called the Spirit. I can feel it right now, but it does nothing to resolve my concern because I don't believe that feeling can be relied on as a witness of truth. I now believe that thinking of it as communication from the Spirit was just an interpretation. I had no way of knowing that it was not reliable until within the past two weeks.
I did attend conference this past weekend. It was during conference that I told my wife that I no longer believe that the book of Abraham is scripture, nor that Joseph Smith was a prophet or seer.
I was about to write more, but realized that would be going into my evidence, and I don't want to do that here, but I have and will discuss it through email.
Posts: 264 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Sm34rZ: I have had no trouble feeling what I previously called the Spirit. I can feel it right now, but it does nothing to resolve my concern because I don't believe that feeling can be relied on as a witness of truth. I now believe that thinking of it as communication from the Spirit was just an interpretation. I had no way of knowing that it was not reliable until within the past two weeks.
I know this experience, enochville. Please check your email and respond to me. I'm very interested in a private discussion with you.
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
enochville, I hope that whatever you eventually decide, it works out as well as possible for you and your family. With all you've gone through recently and continue to go through now I'm sure you don't remember me -- I was the one who took offence in a previous thread you started when you said that anyone who hadn't experienced testimony in the way that LDS use the term had not been looking earnestly enough. As an atheist (former agnostic, former theist) who spent a great deal of time and effort exploring such questions, I obviously had some difficulty with the notion that if only I'd looked harder I would have found god.
I think that mr_porterio_head, katharnia, ElJay, Icarus, and others on this thread are now making essentially the same point that I made back then, only inverted because now you're addressing them in the same way that you previously addressed me. As far as I can tell, they don't like it for exactly the same reasons that I didn't like it. I notice you addressed this near the end of the previous page by suggesting that the reader insert an implied "I believe" to qualify any of your statements that he or she might feel need qualification. I don't think this is a good solution; I think it's important to qualify your own (the "royal" you, here) statements. You certainly aren't the only one who doesn't do this, so don't feel like I'm singling you out.
This doesn't even necessarily mean that you have to explicitly admit the possibility of error: I think there's a difference between saying "Joseph Smith was not a prophet" and saying "I'm certain that Joseph Smith was not a prophet."
Added: I meant to say this and forgot -- your last post, just above Karl's, is the latter and not the former. I didn't want you to feel dogpiled, particularly when you're making a visible effort to take the advice and suggestions of others to heart.
(Also, I wish I could be a fly on the wall for the discussion with Karl, but it isn't any of my business.)
Again, I wish you nothing but the best. Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have nothing to really add except to further endorse TomD's remarks and say that staying out of church is the route I have personally taken for the time being over merely disagreeing with a particular, albeit important, church doctrine, not the whole foundation of my belief. Oh, and I'll add a small practical reason-- you can always come back later and do things with a pure and full heart, but you cannot undo a half-hearted, for-show-only ceremony.
Enochville, I feel rather shallow asking this after being so little help, but I'd like to see your evidence out of strict academic interest. My e-mail is in my profile.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would, as well. I tried emailing you through the site and it failed.
Different religions have a different take on this idea, though. Some definitely fall into the "fake it 'til you make it" camp (I think the Jewish faith has a better word for it... I just read about it... like remaining faithful even in doubt) others, not so much.
I have, I think, heard advice to you along both lines from LDS members. It's a thorny issue. For me, I decided I couldn't "play church" while honestly thinking the people around me were well-meaning but deluded.
Tough place to be. Posts: 9293 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let me know if you don't get an email from me. I tried through the Hatrack interface and I don't know if it went through or not.
For what it's worth, I also felt, upon deciding the LDS church was not "true", that neither was The Bible, or anything else related to Christianity, and (later) religion in general. Even so, I toyed with the idea of joining a different church if only to replace the "social" aspect, which up to that point had been almost completely connected with the LDS church. I couldn't ever bring myself to go to another one, for the same reason Olivet states above.
I went through a tough time because suddenly it was like I was a stranger to my friends and family. The ones who loved me the most quietly accepted this "new" me, but even they avoided discussing the issues around my apostasy. Most of the rest of them simply stopped contacting me and just faded away. I went through a period of loneliness and disconnectedness, but eventually I made new friends.
One thing I'd advise you to do in this time of transition is to immediately replace a significant portion of the time you devoted to the church to some other uplifting endeavor, be it charity or self-improvement, and to do it as a family. Do not let the loss of religious faith kill your impulse to do good and to enjoy goodness. Set up your own "church time" and use it to do something uplifting on a regular (weekly) basis as a family. If you can't find a charity to help, or if that isn't fulfilling to you, then you might check out different interests groups (www.meetup.org can give you some ideas and even contacts, though the meetings there tend to be monthly). Or use the time to visit museums, galleries, gardens, anyplace that gives you that feeling you no longer attribute to the Holy Ghost (you know what I mean). If you don't do this, you will quickly find mundane things to eat up the time and it will be infinitely harder to start the habit later. Trust me, I know this.
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the only advice I can say is to give yourself some time, don't go seeking anything else immediately.
I get what KarlEd is saying, but I don't think it's a good idea to immediately jump into something just for the purpose of filling a void. If you do decide to investigate other faiths (and I admit I personally hope you do) then do it slowly, with the same amount of care and attention with which you examined the Mormon faith and then found it lacking. You may find that other faiths are not lacking, and be able to join a different faith and be fulfilled. But that decision certainly needs to be a family one, and before you try to make it you need to give yourself time to reflect and heal. You've been through a traumatic experience, and lost something that used to be very important to you. Set aside time to heal from that trauma.
Best of luck to you and your family.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I recommend that you give it some more time before having your name removed from the church.
Why? Is membership a one-shot deal? Say he changes his mind in five years and wants to re-join the church, will he not be allowed to?
Those aren't snarky questions, by the way, they're real ones. I mean, he seems pretty firm on what he wants to do and I think it would again be disingenuous for him to remain a member of the church if he didn't feel he should. So removing his name seems only proper. I would think the church would also prefer not to have people on their membership rolls just to fill up space or boost statistics.
Edit: I should add I'm speaking from frustration and experience - I've known churches who did just that - refused to remove people's names and I could see no reason to do so except to make their membership look larger than it really was. It took forever for me to convince the church I grew up in that no, I wasn't coming back there and no, I didn't want to be on the rolls because I was happily a member in another church.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Why? Is membership a one-shot deal? Say he changes his mind in five years and wants to re-join the church, will he not be allowed to?
Is it possible? Yes. But it is my understanding is that it is much more difficult for someone who has officially left the church.
I'm not recommending that he stay against his conscience. I'm just recommending that he give his ne beliefs some time to percolate through his system before making that decision.
quote:I would think the church would also prefer not to have people on their membership rolls just to fill up space or boost statistics.
That is not the reason for my recommendation.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, insulting would have been if she'd said, "Unless of course the church would prefer to keep non-believing people on the roles to fill up space or boost statistics."
She specifically said she didn't think that was the case.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Belle: I think the only advice I can say is to give yourself some time, don't go seeking anything else immediately.
I get what KarlEd is saying, but I don't think it's a good idea to immediately jump into something just for the purpose of filling a void. If you do decide to investigate other faiths (and I admit I personally hope you do) then do it slowly, with the same amount of care and attention with which you examined the Mormon faith and then found it lacking. You may find that other faiths are not lacking, and be able to join a different faith and be fulfilled. But that decision certainly needs to be a family one, and before you try to make it you need to give yourself time to reflect and heal. You've been through a traumatic experience, and lost something that used to be very important to you. Set aside time to heal from that trauma.
Best of luck to you and your family.
To clarify, I'm not suggesting you jump into another faith. I am suggesting that you take the opportunity to fill a void with something you find uplifting and constructive. Life despises voids. The void will be filled. This is the best chance you have to fill it with something constructive rather than have it filled passively with sleeping in, TV, or whatnot.
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would be happy to pass on email messages to enochville, if the site forwarder doesn't work. Just send an email with your email address to my address in my profile, title it "For enochville," and add any message you want included along with your address. I was able to reach enochville, so I can pass along the first message to him. After that, y'all are on your own.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
It seemed like she was saying that she was surprised that the church would encourage people to stay on the rolls, because she would think they wouldn't want people just to be filler. Implying that wanting people to stay on the rolls is for the purpose of creating filler. That's very cynical.
If it is because of an experience with her earlier church, my inclination is that she is judging her earlier church quite harshly. I doubt their reasons for wanting her to come back were for empty statistics either.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I did not say anything insulting. If I meant to be insulting, I certainly could have been. I was asking a question, and if you read my edit, you'll find out why I asked it. If I was insulting to anyone, it was to my former church, which is not the same as your faith. Quit reading hostility where there is none, kat.
quote:But it is my understanding is that it is much more difficult for someone who has officially left the church.
I also find it sad that you say it's difficult for people to get back into the church if they've left.
I know pesonally my church would welcome someone back with open arms and much rejoicing. It's sad to me that yours does not.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
mph, how is wouldn't think they would different from did think they wouldn't?
Specifically, I read Belle as saying that a church has as much interest in its members of record being actual adherents as do the members/nonmembers themselves.
I think this is a case where everyone assuming everyone else's good intentions would go a long way toward understanding one another.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Regarding having one's name removed from the records of the church: My name stayed on church records for several years after I no longer considered myself a Mormon. I never hid my sexuality, nor the fact that I was living in an unrepentant homosexual relationship, so by all accounts I should have been excommunicated. After 5 or 6 years, I was actually sent a letter asking me to schedule a meeting where I would stand before a church court to be considered for excommunication. I wrote back that if they wanted to excommunicate me, they should feel free to schedule a date convenient for them and I'd be there. They never did. I was still periodically visited by home teachers until one of them told me, essentially, that by keeping my name on the records of the church I was keeping them under the obligation to check up on me periodically (being one of the flock officially, after all) so it would save them the waste of time if I requested to have my name removed. I kind of saw his point, so I wrote and made it official.
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
mph says your church doesn't make it easy for former believers to come back. I find that incredibly sad. It's not the same as my church's view, which welcomes them back.
That is not insulting - that is my opinion. How is my finding that fact sad insulting to you? It's my opinion and my feelings on something that I do find sad. I feel for the people who want to come back and aren't welcomed. It must be difficult for them.
Are you intentionally trying to get a rise out of me? All I've wanted to do is offer my support and advice to enochville, and after that ask questions about your church, which I freely admit I don't know much about. I haven't seen my questions and comments as insulting. You apparently are upset about something else and reading into my comments something that is not there. Out of respect for enochville's thread, I'm going to make this my final post so as not to rise to your bait - I have much more productive things to do with my time than give you a fight that you seem geared up for.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Again, for what it's worth, my official letter from the church letting me know my name was no longer on the records did include something to the effect that the church was there if I ever wanted to repent and come back.
Though I'm sure no one is holding their breath for that one.
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Kat, she's perhaps ignorant of the true attitude of the church, but it's a little belligerant to call her "wrong". She hasn't stated anything as even a strong opinion on what the attitude of the church actually is. At the very worst, she's merely implied what she might suspect it is based on words of Mormons themselves. She's also made it very clear that she is open to be educated on this subject, and has so far gotten a lot of anger directed toward her, which I don't think is warranted.
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Folks, I'm considering giving this thread a time-out. As a moderator, I suppose my job is more than just locking or deleting threads (or people) once they go over the line -- it's also providing (or at least encouraging) a moderating influence.
Tensions are running high in this thread on several sides, from what I can see. I know some people get really irked when being told to calm down (or to "power down, space ranger"), and respond with "don't tell me to calm down, I am calm, you're the one who's taking this so serious, I'm all aloof and everything" sentiments. But when all we can see is words on the screen, it doesn't matter how internally calm you are if your words don't represent it.
Yes, it's easy to read intent into something that may or may not be there. I know I'm guilty of it. (I think I'm pretty decent at it, actually, but too often get things wrong, so I try to keep such things to myself most of the time now.)
When I first read this thread, I foresaw the possibility of trouble -- however, with the first few responses, it looked like it was going in a healthy direction, where people weren't using it as a place to discuss whether or not a particular belief was true. (Enochville, I appreciate your willingness to keep specifics off the board, as they're likely only to spark contention, and I gave this thread a bit more leniency because of that.) Between when I went to bed last night and when I got up this morning, that kinda changed.
Let's all try to stop reading intent into others' posts for a while, ok? Or at least don't assume we got the intent right (especially when the person denies that we did). I'm not locking this thread for now.
posted
Twinky: I do remember you. Actually, I thought of you when MPH voiced his opinion that I should qualify my statements with something like "I believe". And as you noticed, I have been trying to do just that ever since.
Thanks again for all the concern that has been shown me. I believe everyone who was trying to get ahold of me by email has now successfully done so. I will be careful and deliberate in deciding where to go from here.
[edited in light of papa janitor's remarks]
Posts: 264 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wish the best in what you decide. Thank you for not using this forum to argue against the church.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not being a member of any church (now or previously), I don't think that there's much I can sensibly contribute to this thread, except this:
This is, truly, one of the most amazing threads I've ever read on Hatrack. Except for a few minor (and self-correcting) blips here and there, it's stayed on track on a very difficult and sensitive subject. The support, understanding politeness, etc...somebody brought you guys up right, I must say!
Posts: 1862 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
Belle, FWIW, as a practicing Mormon I didn't find anything insulting in your posts or questions--I thought they were understandable.
OK, with the qualifier that the following is according to my own understanding and not "official doctrine": As KarlEd mentioned about the statement in his letter, and as mph reinforced, members who leave the church are encouraged to return. However, it is not necessarily an easy process--and not because the church is not welcoming or forgiving. It is difficult because baptism is regarded as a solemn covenant, making the individual responsible before God. Repentance is a part of that process--a broken heart and contrite spirit. Along the same lines, we also believe that sinning in ignorance is quite a different thing from having a full knowledge and departing from it. Thus, the repentance required from a convert for baptism is a different thing than it is for someone who has already made that covenant and then chose to set it aside. ("sinning in ignorance" above might be the wrong choice of words or interpreted as condescending; I don't mean it that way--simply put, in the case of a convert, someone who was not brought up in the Church would not be held accountable for living according to a covenant they'd never made.) Essentially, part of the reason that it is not easy to come back is because the Church does not want to make someone accountable before God unless they have demonstrated that they sincerely intend to remain faithful this time around. The process should be shepherded by loving leaders, and at all stages members should be loving and welcoming. Shunning in any form is not condoned; an excommunicated member is always welcome to attend church. [edited to say that I don't know if this is strictly true if the excommunication was due to abusive behavior that could put others, esp. family members, at risk; really have no idea what policy on that would be.]
I have known people who have been through the re-baptism process, and they felt it was worth it.
posted
I will be honest...based on comments earlier in this thread, I was under the same assumptions as Belle was, that the LDS church was not a particularly welcome place for people who wished to return.
I also realize that I know little about the LDS church, so I didn't think that I was unequivocly right about that.
I DO understand why the LDS have a different process for inclusion for those who have left the church...they don't want to be a "revolving door", and I can't blame them.
That you, Uprooted, for explaing your take on why, and explaining it a little more in detail.
Enoch, I hope you find the path that is right for you, and I think you are making the right decision....if you no longer believe, then take a break at the very least.
posted
fwiw, I never asked to have my name removed from church records. I figured it was irrelevant and unnecessary. Or maybe I was just lazy. I was done with church when I left, and didn't believe in God for a long time.
Personally, I wouldn't do anything irrevocable, largely because it's really not important that you do. Perhaps it feels urgent, but other than the immenent blessing, it really isn't.
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:By entering the temple and blessing your child under false pretenses,
:murmurs:
Children are blessed in a regular church building, not a temple.
Dude, I said that, like, a page ago.
As I understand it, the Church loves it when people come back after being excommunicated or removing themselves from the records, but the interviews before rebaptism will be a little more thorough to make sure that they are serious about it and that they have gone through any necessary repentance. However, I don't know the details, never having known anyone in that position.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I tried to think about my earlier post from the perspective of someone in another Christian denomination and realized I left something out. One reason why leaving the LDS church and/or re-joining it is such a big deal: when you are baptized in the LDS church, you are declaring a belief that it is the true church of Jesus Christ and committing to it. Having your name taken off the rolls is a bigger deal than, say, changing your membership from one Protestant denomination to another. You are basically annulling or cancelling the committments you made at baptism, so to speak. In order to re-join the church you would need to be re-baptized.
Enochville, sorry for the large derails here. I hope that you and your family find peace. I have some friends that went through the same thing a few years back, although they continued to have faith in God and Jesus and ended up joining another Christian church.
Posts: 3149 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: Two of our children were blessed at home and not at the church building.
Really? That's cool. I've never heard of that before, though I guess I don't see any reason why the ordinance would have to be performed in a church building. After all, I've administered the sacrament in people's homes before.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jon Boy: ...I don't see any reason why the ordinance would have to be performed in a church building. After all, I've administered the sacrament in people's homes before.
I was baptized in a backyard swimming pool. I think only temple ordinances have to be performed in a specific place. All other ordinances just need the proper authorization.
Posts: 2069 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
When Peach was born, our bishop had a strict rule that babies were to be blessed only on Fast Sunday. Our family wasn't in town on Fast Sunday, so he allowed us to do it at home.
We did it at my parent's home for Xerxes because there was just one afternoon when all grandparents were in town, so we did it then.
In both cases, the bishop came and was present for the blessing.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
When my older sister was baptised, they couldn't get the water to run in the baptismal font at the church building. They moved the whole procession across the street to the bishop's house and did the baptism in his swimming pool.
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote: I wish the Church were true; oh, how I wish it were true from the depths of my being.
I am so sorry that you are going through this experience. You have my empathy. I hope that you find peace in your life. I think that KarlEd's suggestion to find new, constructive groups to associate with is beautiful advice. I suspect that your life will become very lonely for a while and forming new relationships is the best thing you can do. I wish you the strength to find a new purpose and meaning for your life outside of the church. (((enochville)))
I would also appreciate an e-mail about what it was that you found so compelling.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
