What happens to members that LEAVE the church

[Dravin]

They sound terribly evil. How convenient for this thread that they've turned to the dark side. You don't have cameras set up watching them, do you?

M.

I'll say, I see a complete lack of any mention of Jello consumption in the description of them.

[KitCarson]

They sound terribly evil. How convenient for this thread that they've turned to the dark side. You don't have cameras set up watching them, do you?

M.

Jeepers, that is inappropriate.

I said they were DEAR FRIENDS of mine and they STILL ARE. When I joined the church, they were the family that fellowshipped and cared about me. They had me over for family home evenings especially when they had the missionaries over for dinner. The oldest son asked me to talk at his baptism less than a year ago. We do not live anywhere near "Mormon Territory" so the wards (and mostly branches) are small and families are mostly transplants from Utah.

My friends were the ones that told me they hadn't been to Sunday services for seven months when I mentioned I didn't see the kids singing on father's day with the primary. We have not discussed what the doctrinal issues are that made them decide the leave the church as those do not matter to me. I do not consider them EVIL. There's nothing inherently EVIL about wanting nice things and living a comfortable life (many faithful Mormons have those things). They are good, kind people. I shared my observations of how they are NOW as it is such as sharp contrast to what they were just a few months ago. Yes, I was a bit embarrassed to be in the mall with the wife the way she was dressed because it was age-inappropriate, but I respect everyone's free agency.

We are still good friends. They have me over to barbeque, ask me for favors (drive to car dealer to get car after servicing, pick up son at day camp, pick 'em up at the airport)--the things any friend would do for another. They brought me a piece of the 3-year-old's birthday cake last month.

I love them and that is why I asked "What happens when a member leaves the church?" I'm too new to know how these things work in the LDS church. Maybe I should be more concerned about how the "faithful" treat members that leave the church. If they are anything like you, I'm worried.

[prophetofdoom]

Less active members of the Church may be visited by Home Teachers or other members of the Ward on occasion. I was less active for a few years and never felt pressured by the members of the ward. The only pressure I felt was from my own family, but, that is to be expected.

The Church does not actively seek out those who disbelieve and try to excommunicate. The Church tries to extend the hand of fellowship and prays that those who are lost may come back.

[Maureen]

I suspect my friends will live a SECULAR life for a while, not seeking affiliation with any church. Their closest nonLDS friends are ISLAMIC neighbors.

They feel their TITHE money is better spent on themselves. They can buy better cars, upgrade to a bigger, more expensive house. They purchased HDTVs and Video games for each child's room (didn't even have a TV before). The kids spend hours watching TV or playing games, essentially unsupervised. They are trying to sell their food storage cans. The wife is also looking for a career job (husband makes a good living). She doesn't want to be a "stay-at-home" mom anymore and is happy to leave her 3-year-old in daycare. She's dressing age-inappropriately with VERY short shorts and spaghetti-strap tank top with revealing midriff to the mall (like a teenie-bopper instead of 34-year-old woman).

This looks like REBELLION to me, not "doctrinal issues." Either way, everyone has FREE AGENCY. Just hope they'll be willing to reachout for help when the storms of life come--those come whether you're active or inactive in the church. They'll soon find out that money and the secular life doesn't bring much happiness or peace.

…I said they were DEAR FRIENDS of mine and they STILL ARE….

We have not discussed what the doctrinal issues are that made them decide the leave the church as those do not matter to me.

Kit, you say they are dear friends of yours but your previous post had a tone of being judgmental of the choices they have made. I’m assuming your capitalization of words was to show emphasis on how they do not appear to live good Mormon lives anymore but as you say secular, as if to hint how sinful they have become. You judge them as rebellious because you don’t care to listen to the real reasons for them leaving. Maybe take the time to listen to them first before you decide that their outer appearance is the real them.

M.

[Vort]

Kit, you say they are dear friends of yours but your previous post had a tone of being judgmental of the choices they have made.

Is there something wrong with making judgments about other people's actions? I don't understand. Do you think we are to embrace any choice anyone makes as perfectly acceptable, or at worst of unknown effect?

Kit's friends, whom he did not identify in any way, have made a choice to leave their faith. Kit disagrees with their choice and thinks it's foolish. Exactly what part of this do you find offensive?

[Maureen]

Is there something wrong with making judgments about other people's actions? I don't understand. Do you think we are to embrace any choice anyone makes as perfectly acceptable, or at worst of unknown effect?

Kit's friends, whom he did not identify in any way, have made a choice to leave their faith. Kit disagrees with their choice and thinks it's foolish. Exactly what part of this do you find offensive?

The part where Kit says they are dear friends but is more than happy to paint them with the "sinful" brush, without even talking to them about how they think or feel.

M.

[Javajot]

They burn in he!!.

Hope that helps.

(don't take me seriously please)

[Vort]

The part where Kit says they are dear friends but is more than happy to paint them with the "sinful" brush, without even talking to them about how they think or feel.

"Sinful" is your word, not his. He never called them sinful; rather, he identified their actions and opined that those actions were wrong. I still am not seeing the awful judgmentalism of which you accuse Kit. Not from Kit, at any rate.

[Maureen]

Well, for whatever reason, Kit will not be providing more input.

M.

[LDSJewess]

There are different reasons people "leave the Church" and the outcome is largely based on those reasons.

I agree. When I was reading this several of the reasons listed was why my husband and I became inactive for a considerable time.

Some people get offended by a person and they redirect their resentment towards the institution. Some of them fall into the traps mentioned in Matthew 13--persecution, worldliness, etc. Some people drift away because they're spiritually lazy. Some people just can't make the transition from belief to faith.

I could honestly say for me it was perhaps all of the above in this paragraph. 1. A number of years ago there was a bad situation that occurred (not to me but a good friend and sister) and the offender was in a leadership position that I just couldn't sustain or condone at the time. 2. From there I think it became so much not spiritually lazy rather than physically lazy. One week led to another and it was just easier to sleep in. 3. Belief and faith were always there but a strong testimony was not at the time. I think in the beginning we were cauht up in the stong friendships, the srong sense of family, and the strong sense of morality that we were in agreement with and wanted to be a part of. But the testimony was not quite there, and as I said once there was a situation that made it easier to just stay home, the testimony (or lack thereof) was just not strong enough to deal with at the time.

Some people have a secret sin that they are unwilling to confess and forsake and they just wear themselves out going through the motions. In many cases, rather than admit that they are at fault, it becomes the Church's fault in their eyes.

The secret sin issue did not apply to us, however; one thing not mentioned was the money issue. For several years of being active we had tithed ourselves into literal bankruptcy since we were living from one check to the other with nothing left over. So taking ten percen out of that already strained budget meant getting seriously delinquent in bills and financial obligations, leading to guilt, but also thinking that had we not been members of the church the bankruptcy would not happened. We didn't blame the church but connected the financial obligations to the church as an addition to the financial problems we were suffering at the time.

Some people apostatize, lose faith, or adopt teachings that are contrary to or oppose those of the Church.

We didn't lose faith, but we did visit other churches but never sopke against the LDS church and never denied the truth of the LDS church and our personal faith. We did observe Jewish Holidays but none of these things were contrary to the teachings of the church and the Gospel.

There are a lot of different reasons a person leaves. The end result of all of them is the same: the influence of the Holy Ghost diminishes in their life. The Spirit strives with them for a time, but eventually the Lord will respect their agency and the Holy Ghost will depart. When they break their covenants, they lose the protection and blessings of those covenants. They just become "natural" men and women.

I agree with the above. For us we just became Natural men and women. Life was ok. We lost the fellowship and the reaffirming of our faith on a continual weekly basis. I don't think the Holy Ghost ever depart either of though because we always felt guided and protected.

Unless a person formally requests that his name be removed, the Church will maintain contact at whatever level they're comfortable with. There is a member of our branch that I work with, who has no intentions of ever coming to the Church. However, we're cordial with each other and I inquire periodically about the individual's welfare to see if they have any needs. That person can remain indefinitely in that state and we'll simply hope that one day, he/she will feel the Lord's Spirit calling. Maybe some event will make the individual desire the contact of home teachers, visiting teachers, etc. People can and do change their minds and come back after years of inactivity. One fellow I knew was inactive for over 20 years and, after he had a heart attack, he became fully active and totally enthusiastic. He had some kind of near-death experience that changed him dramatically.

We never formally or informally made a request to be removed from church records. We just more or less fell off the radar for a time, (a decade almost). When we returned, it had nothing to do with any big revelation, no particular occurances, and no near death experiences or anything dramatic. My husband one day just took out his scriptures and dusted them off and began to read, I decided to download the scriptures in my new e-reader and try it out. And then one evening while we were just home watching TV, the missionaries showed up at the door to just say hello. A visit from our new Bishop who we had never met beofe followed. He simply invited us to return and prayed with us and after a nice long talk we committed to return. Before you know it time goes by and we are back active full time with calings, and appointments to renew our recommends. We wonder now what took us so long to return or why we left in the first place. We allowed a lot of time to go by, but there is no time like the present to return.

As long as a person maintains fellowship with the Church, it is our duty to provide a watch-care for them. That's our part of the baptismal covenant. If an individual bristles at that and asks for his/her name to be removed, then the spiritual effects are no different upon him--he's already lost the companionship of the Spirit through disobedience. However, it does end our responsibility to watch over and care for the individual.

I agree. It is our responsibility as members and no one elses to maintain the fellowship and the connection. Over the years I would receive a card from my Visiting teacher whom I had never actually met in person. The members gave us a lot of space, but we knew they were there and we never felt abandoned by them. If anything we were the ones who abandoned them.

In most cases, we still feel a desire to do this. We don't "shun" people or turn them away from attending Church. However, our level of obligation is different. We're no longer under covenant to provide that same watch-care. We might continue to do so, inasmuch as the person will permit it, but it's done out of a general sense of Christian kindness at this point.

I agree. And I think this is important because although ther are sonme that do want to cut themselves off entirely from the church, many others may have just become lazy like us and just drifted away. For those that feel they need to take a break, I would highly suggest not asking for your name to be removed. People change and you never know how long down the road that could be. For us it was almost 10 years but it seems now that we had never left, and we were welcomed back with no judgements and open arms.

If a person is hostile or makes threats, we'll avoid contact altogether. We don't send home teachers. Missionaries might accidentally knock on their door when tracting, but they don't expressly seek them out.

For those that are hostile and threatening, there is not much to do other than to let them know the church is there for them and perhaps they will have to initiate the contact next time if and when they are ever ready to do so. Ultimately it will be the inactive persons responsibility to use their free agency to return or not. It is important for them to know that Heavenly Father does not force the Gospel or the gift and blessings of the Savior Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost upon anyone. It is there for us for the taking, but it is us that have to reach out to be receiving of it.

[blackestate]

I think that if you are their friend, and can live the standards as an example, You may be the way for them to come back, if they ever decide to. It is sad to see it happen. But someone once said we are all 2 weeks from inactivity. 2 weeks of no church, no scriptures, and no prayer....

Stay strong, and love them.

[Jamie123]

For purposes of excommunication, I believe that apostacy means people who begin to actively preach against the Church or its doctrines (as the quote says, "teaching false doctrines, or openly criticizing LDS leaders". These are the fruits of apostacy). Quietly leaving due to disbelief is not the type of apostacy that would warrant excommunication. Requesting to leave or have your records removed is not excommunication, although some of the consequences are similar if you ever want to return.

If so there would be no reason to mention apostasy separately, but then again Wikipedia isn't always the most reliable source of information.