Church Record Weirdness

[Irenaeus]

I have a random question for anybody who has knowledge of how the LDS church keeps track of inactive folks (i.e. me).

As my religious preference may have tipped you off, I haven't exactly been an active member of LDS church for a few years. Specifically, I last attended sometime in 2011. Somewhat recently, I was mindlessly following links around the interwebs and found myself on LDS.org. I was curious to see if I could remember my old log-in, and by virtue of the fact that I don't use nearly enough usernames/passwords, I could.

When I left Mormonism, I lived in the same town that I do now. I have moved a couple times since then, but I have remained within the boundaries of my old ward. I was somewhat surprised to note, however, that my records had been moved to a different ward across the state.

I have no particular desire at this point to go back to Mormonism, or to correct the error that seems to have emerged about where I live. Truth be told, I kind of like that they're "off my scent." That being said, I can't help but be a bit curious about how it is that they managed to think I moved to some town I've never actually been to. Is there some department in the church that hunts down missing inactives? What criteria do they use to determine where somebody has gone?

Anyway, thanks for any insight that you might have.

[Palerider]

You say that you left the church......did you ask them or write a letter to request your name be removed???

[NeuroTypical]

Hi Iraneus,

I've been an executive secretary and a clerk before, I know a little about it. When a member moves (whether they're active or inactive), their bishop makes a good-faith effort to find out where they moved to, and transfer their records to the ward that covers that address.

If they don't have a forwarding address, they send it to church HQ as a lost record. Church HQ makes another effort (yes, there are people in a membership department that does this, it's for missing members, not missing inactives). I don't know what that effort entails, but sometimes it results in records being sent to places where the person does not live.

Finally, sometimes well-meaning family members (usually moms) will give the church an address for a 'wayward child'.

Hope that helps.

[pam]

There actually is a department within the church staffed by full time service missionaries whose function is to track down people to determine where their records should be. It's possible they talked to someone who thought you had moved to that area.

You wouldn't believe how many times I've been contacted by them regarding my ex husband and we haven't been married in almost 15 years.

[Irenaeus]

You say that you left the church......did you ask them or write a letter to request your name be removed???

I left the church in the "I just stopped going" sense, not the "official name removal" sense. I never quite understood why people are so gung-ho to get their names removed. As far as I can tell, when people leave other churches, they just stop going and that's about it. I suppose I would understand doing it if the missionaries are showing up at your place every other day trying to win you back, but seeing as they can't ever get my city right, I'm not too worried about that :)

I guess I'll assume my records got sent to church headquarters when they didn't see me for a fairly long time, at which point somebody "located" me in the wrong town. I suppose I would be hard to find, seeing as nobody from my Mormon days knows where I am now. Still, I am kind of curious about what made them think I'd be in that particular town, seeing as its really just some random place in the middle of an Indian reservation (I am in no way of Native American descent). I suppose that part will have to remain a mystery.

Thanks for the insight everybody!

[Palerider]

I left the church in the "I just stopped going" sense, not the "official name removal" sense. I never quite understood why people are so gung-ho to get their names removed. As far as I can tell, when people leave other churches, they just stop going and that's about it. I suppose I would understand doing it if the missionaries are showing up at your place every other day trying to win you back, but seeing as they can't ever get my city right, I'm not too worried about that :)

I guess I'll assume my records got sent to church headquarters when they didn't see me for a fairly long time, at which point somebody "located" me in the wrong town. I suppose I would be hard to find, seeing as nobody from my Mormon days knows where I am now. Still, I am kind of curious about what made them think I'd be in that particular town, seeing as its really just some random place in the middle of an Indian reservation (I am in no way of Native American descent). I suppose that part will have to remain a mystery.

Thanks for the insight everybody!

For what it's worth some people I know that have left other denominations have sent letters of resignation.

[Wingnut]

Finally, sometimes well-meaning family members (usually moms) will give the church an address for a 'wayward child'.

I have a friend who is going through this right now. She left the Church 6-7 years ago, and has pretty much become the epitome of "ex-Mormon." Her mom came to visit her recently, and attended Sunday services in the local unit. She gave them her daughter's (my friend's) information, and the ward sent missionaries to visit, despite the fact that my friend has specifically requested no contact multiple times before. She laughed in their faces and the next day sent a letter requesting name removal.

Edited March 22, 2014 by Wingnut
fix quote

[Suzie]

I have a friend who is going through this right now. She left the Church 6-7 years ago, and has pretty much become the epitome of "ex-Mormon." Her mom came to visit her recently, and attended Sunday services in the local unit. She gave them her daughter's (my friend's) information, and the ward sent missionaries to visit, despite the fact that my friend has specifically requested no contact multiple times before. She laughed in their faces and the next day sent a letter requesting name removal.

I have a problem when people do not respect the wishes of another adult. I empathize with the mother but that approach will actually make things worse. If your child told you they do not wish to be visited by the Church, why pushing the missionaries to them?

[carlimac]

One time about two years after we moved to Idaho our records mysteriously left our ward and showed up in New Mexico. We have been in the same ward our whole time here. I guess someone with the same name lives there and our records got moved by mistake. We never found out who did it or why but we got them back to the right place quickly. So maybe something similar happened to your records. Someone with your same name lives on an Indian reservation.

[Guest]

I have a problem when people do not respect the wishes of another adult. I empathize with the mother but that approach will actually make things worse. If your child told you they do not wish to be visited by the Church, why pushing the missionaries to them?

Because a lot of Mothers - mine included - do not quit mothering after their kids turn adult. My mother is in her 70's and she still tells me to do my chores when she comes over to visit me - in my house!

Every week for the past 10 years, she's been sending gifts to the Catholic Nuns to pray for my salvation. And she talked to my Parish Priest about my salvation. She desperately wishes for me to be saved from my sinfulness (having left the church that she believes with all her heart to be true and the only way to God's Kingdom).

I love that about her. It makes me feel special to be loved that much. But yes, I can see how other people would resent that as "busy-bodying".

[Connie]

There actually is a department within the church staffed by full time service missionaries whose function is to track down people to determine where their records should be. It's possible they talked to someone who thought you had moved to that area.

You wouldn't believe how many times I've been contacted by them regarding my ex husband and we haven't been married in almost 15 years.

As of recently, this mission has been dismantled. My parents worked in that mission for a couple of years. But now my mom is saying that the entire mission has been disbanded and things are being turned over more to the local level clerks.

[Irenaeus]

I have a problem when people do not respect the wishes of another adult. I empathize with the mother but that approach will actually make things worse. If your child told you they do not wish to be visited by the Church, why pushing the missionaries to them?

To be honest, I don't entirely agree with this. As a society, we have no issue intervening in the lives of other adults if they're physically harming themselves (alcoholism, suicidal behavior, drug abuse, ect), but we shy away from it when it comes to matters of spiritual harm. I recognize that much of the reason for this is that the multitude of faiths makes a lot of people view the causes or existence of spiritual harm something of an open question, but the individual who believes who has an absolute conviction in their faith won't share that opinion. If somebody knows that I'm going to hell, and knows how to save me, then I have no problem with them trying to do so. Ultimately I may disagree with their reasoning, but I certainly appreciate the sentiment.

The fact of the matter is that, based on the multitude of different faiths, many of us are very likely wrong on very important topics. If we never engage those who differ in beliefs, we'll never figure out who's right and who's wrong. This means that an individual is either wrong, and then very likely damned, or they're right, and letting their fellow man go off to their damnation. Neither is a particularly appealing scenario.

I agree that many people are in a place where attempting to overtly evangelize them may serve only to alienate them, and that prudentially it may be wise to hold off for a time. Never-the-less, we should never stop working toward their salvation. Simply being a kind and charitable friend helps, since it may make the person more open to future discussions. If every Baptist you ever met was a great person, you may be more inclined to hear what the Baptists as a whole have to say.

Anyway, just my thought on the matter.

[Lakumi]

Just because someone is nice to me, doesn't mean I would change my belief system because of it.

And if they were only nice to me because they wanted to "save me" (especially if i was an athiest) I'd be fumming, and would never speak to them again.

Even now, I understand where people are coming from in matters like that, but if I wanted religion I would seek it out, its not hard, the internet is right at my fingertips.

I don't appreciate people trying to make me afraid to join a religion.

And I refuse to listen to those sorts.

[Irenaeus]

I would agree that being nice isn't enough to convert somebody. My point there was rather that you're more likely to listen to people who are friendly vice people who aren't. Ultimately, if the arguments for a religion aren't convincing based on their own merits, they won't convince you. That being said, people are much more likely to listen to the arguments in the first place if they like the people who are making them. The most convincing argument in the world won't do you any good if the other person isn't receptive in the first place.

I would argue that a person that is friendly and who wants to convert you is doing both because they sincerely care about you. One person wants to convert another because they are worried about the salvation of the other. From their perspective, you're in danger and they want to help. You may not think that you are in any real danger, but that doesn't affect the sincerity of their sentiment. I guess what I'm saying is that I don't think there are many people out there who are friendly only due to a desire to convert. Rather, I think both the friendliness and desire to convert stem from an underlying love for the other person.

The problem with leaving non-believers to their own devices is that salvation is always time sensitive. While this may vary from faith to faith, most religions will agree that you need to be converted before you die. Coupled with the fact that we never really know when we're going to go, there's always a certain sense of urgency with evangelization. I appreciate that people can go out and find information on religion easy enough, but if they die before they get the inclination to do so, then they are very possibly lost.

As far as fear goes, every world-view has something to fear in death. For Christianity its damnation. For atheism its oblivion. Ultimately, those fears are something that has to be a part of any dialogue on faith and the afterlife. They don't necessarily have to dominate the conversation, and the emphasis very much can (and often should) be shifted to focus on hope. A Christian may find that hope in salvation, while a atheist may find it in the legacy they leave behind. That being said, even a conversation that focuses on hope can result in fear. If a Christian is convinced that there is not salvation, or an atheist is convinced that their legacy is meaningless, this can (and often will) result in fear. Hopefully, then, the victorious worldview's source of hope will fill the void and assuage the fear.

Ultimately, my point here is that we should all care about each other. To the faithful, caring about somebody necessarily has to include wanting them to be saved. Its up to us to figure out the best way of going about "saving them" in any given situation, be it overt preaching or simply being a friend to the person.

As always, these are just my thoughts on the subject. Feel free to vociferously disagree :)

[Lakumi]

I've never heard athiests talk about the afterlife. To them, there is none.

As I have heard told to me, and said myself in the past, this is the life they (and I) know to exist, there is no need for fear. To them Heaven is a shallow reward for a life of service to other humans they deem unworthy.

And Hell is the thing to make them afraid and to join a church (all claiming to be the right one).

Donno how many religous people have come up to me and said "this is the right church, you're wrong!"

Gets a tad tiring after awhile...

[Irenaeus]

While everybody (with the exception of some left field philosophies) will agree that that life exists, we also have to face the fact that this life ends. Given that truth, we're left with two alternative views to take. We can either assume that our lives hold some meaning that transcends this life, or we can assume that they do not.

I'm not going to say that the latter view doesn't have merit. It does. That being said, if there is not transcendent meaning to our lives, then nothing in them matters. A hundred years from now when we're (probably) all dead, we won't care if we wasted our lives serving the unworthy or joining churches that were all wrong. We won't care about anything at all, because we won't exist anymore.

To me it seems more prudent to assume there is something else beyond this life, even if it is unlikely. If I'm wrong, then ultimately it won't really make any difference, as the same oblivion awaits me either way. If I'm correct, however, then I can align my actions to achieving the ultimate goal, whatever that may be.

Now I'll be the first to admit that none of that proves Christianity any more than it proves Hinduism, Islam, or any other religion/philosophy. My point is that, if there is an objective meaning to life out there, some group is closer to it than the others. As such, it behooves all of us to try to work out who's right and who's wrong, and we're only going to achieve that through frank discussion. This means we need to try to convince others of what we believe to be the truth, while listening when others try to convince us. Refusing to participate in those discussions hurts us if we don't have the truth and hurts everybody else if we do.

Again, all of this may be for naught if there is nothing beyond this life, but if that's the case then everything is for naught no matter what we do.

[Lakumi]

I don't need a reward for my life to have meaning. I don't need that, I want to simply enjoy my time I have on this earth and be happy.

My ultimate goal is happiness in this life, because it is the only life I know for a fact, to exist.

[Irenaeus]

Being happy is a good objective. I guess my only point there is that you need to exist to be happy, and if there's nothing after death you're going to not exist, and therefor you will not be happy. I'm also pretty sure everybody agrees that we spend a lot more time dead than alive. I appreciate that you're trying to maximize your happiness by ensuring you have as much of it as possible in this life, which you're sure exists, vice making sacrifices for the slim possibility of happiness in the next life. That being said, I can say with a good amount of certainly that, no matter which of us is right, you're not going to care if you were happy or not in life after you've died.

Also, as I mentioned before, I place a high amount of value on this sort of talk. Thanks for having it with me :)

[Lakumi]

Being happy is a good objective. I guess my only point there is that you need to exist to be happy, and if there's nothing after death you're going to not exist, and therefor you will not be happy. I'm also pretty sure everybody agrees that we spend a lot more time dead than alive. I appreciate that you're trying to maximize your happiness by ensuring you have as much of it as possible in this life, which you're sure exists, vice making sacrifices for the slim possibility of happiness in the next life. That being said, I can say with a good amount of certainly that, no matter which of us is right, you're not going to care if you were happy or not in life after you've died.

Also, as I mentioned before, I place a high amount of value on this sort of talk. Thanks for having it with me :)

me too!

I seek to be happy now, because I am alive now, and know I exist now. Sure I will exist longer dead then alive, but I don't feel -at the moment- to push myself to make sacrifices for a life I cannot be proven exists.

That doesn't mean I see religion as pointless, things like the Book of Mormon have things, wisdom to teach me. Which is why I still read it.

Regardless if I think it is actual history or even divine. But that's a completely different conversation.

[NeuroTypical]

Donno how many religous people have come up to me and said "this is the right church, you're wrong!"

Gets a tad tiring after awhile...

I can agree with that, and surely I've encountered such folks everywhere, in all the religions I've encountered (including my own).

The thing that got me with the mormons, is we figure we've got a way to 'cut out the middleman' and get your information directly from God.

Moroni 10:4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.

Now, I'm aware of how our desires and emotions often play tricks on us. I understand confirmation bias, group think, brainwashing, self-hypnosis, and lots of other big words that basically describe how humans convince themselves they're seeing what they want to see. But when I went through the process the mormons recommended, I received an unmistakable communication from deity, which basically told me God exists, He is who He claims to be, and He wanted me to be LDS.

I suppose that leaves God in the same class of people who will come up to you and say "this is the right church, you're wrong". So to me, it came down to whether I was willing to trust the author of my soul to direct me to the greatest amount of happiness. I figured He'd know better than me, and made my choice.

Good discussion you guys.

[Irenaeus]

My problem with relying on direct communique from God to make a decision about faith is that He very rarely seems to respond in a completely unambiguous way. For me, I got a similar response from God both when I joined the LDS church and when I left it. Both experiences seemed quite similar to me, but other members were quick to assume that the former was from God and the latter from either Satan or myself. Some may also argue that it was me both times, and I just happened to make the right decision once and the wrong decision once.

Ultimately, what I'm say that is that the Mormon philosophy towards prayer is that "if it agrees with us, its from God, and if it doesn't agree with us, then its not." This philosophy is perfectly fine if you know for a certainty that you're correct, but for those of us who struggle with these sorts of questions it doesn't provide much of a metric.

Personally, I think a greater deal of reason has to go into the decision of which faith to follow. We have to examine the evidence that each religion presents as to why their correct, and judge them on the merits of that evidence. Admittedly, the problem with this approach is that it leaves us open to human error. We don't always have all the necessary evidence. Sometimes we're biased or just can't draw forth the necessary conclusion.

Ultimately then I'd say the best approach is a combination of prayer and reason. If we pray to God for a feeling as to what's right and what's wrong, then at best we end up with only a feeling to justify our conclusion. A feeling can't be tested against the evidence or presented as proof to others. If we lose the feeling, then we lose with it the bedrock for your faith.

If we pray for God's help in discerning the truth for ourselves, however, then we are left with both the right choice and sound reasoning for that choice. I can share my rationale with others. If my faith is waning, I can recall the reasoning, and if the argument remains sound it offers some comfort. This path requires more effort, both for us and for God (I'd imagine it would be easier to just tell us the answer than to help us to work it out). That being said, the rewards to me seem to be worth it (though God may disagree, as I need a LOT of help).

As always, that remains my opinion on the matter. Wherever the truth lies, hopefully we all figure it out before it's too late.

[yjacket]

I hope you are well Irenaeus.

I can empathize with your most recent response. I think you are possibly leaving out a 3rd option, maybe both responses were from God and maybe you'll get another response down the road.

Ultimately, what I'm say that is that the Mormon philosophy towards prayer is that "if it agrees with us, its from God, and if it doesn't agree with us, then its not."

I think some members might have this philosophy, but IMO this is the wrong approach. Our interaction with God is very much personal and except for rare instances, it is not anyone's place to condemn another for an action that they truly believe comes from God.

In general, God has given us the scriptures to help guide us in determining if an action is in accordance with His will. Therefore, when we pray and receive an answer that is in accordance with the Scriptures we can most likely rest assured that it is a good thing; likewise if we pray and it is not in accordance with the Scriptures it is most likely not of God. Now not everything is as black and white, Abraham and Nephi come to mind.

However, the ultimate judge of whether we are in accordance with His will or not on this earth is us. It is our peace of mind. If we are at peace in our mind and our heart then we can have the confidence that we are in accordance with His will. And if we have that confidence, then it doesn't matter what the rest of the world thinks.

Now determing whether scripture is true, which church to join, etc are all difficult tasks. Some individuals are able to use solely feeling, others only reason, others a combination. I am an engineer and therefore I use more reason and logic with feeling smattered in :-).

The older I've gotten, the more I've been able to allow the Spirit to talk to both and have both my mind and heart in unison; where it feels right because the reason is there and the reason is there because it feels right.

We never know the path that we will trod in the future. We simply have to have faith that we are doing the best that we can and that the grace of God will make up for our lack.

I firmly believe the LDS Church is His church and it is where He wants me to be. At the same time, I have no right to condemn another for their honest belief in the same even if it is different than my belief.

[Irenaeus]

I hope you are well too yjacket.

The third option was actually left off intentionally, and that is generally how I feel about the topic. I omitted it because I'd yet to meet a Mormon who would acknowledge the possibility that God would advocate leaving the LDS church. Congratulations on breaking the mold!

My one critique of your position is that you still appear to put feelings at a bit higher of a premium than I would necessarily think is prudent. I recognize that you advocated using scripture and reason as a check to feelings one receives in prayer (which I agree with, assuming that some reason for using the scripture in question was previously devised).

My problem comes in when you said that "the ultimate judge of whether we are in accordance with His will or not on this earth is us." The problem with holding up the individual as the ultimate judge is that individual err, a lot. If you have two people that hold opposing positions, and they both testify to a sense of peace about that, then the sense of peace one of them is feeling is misplaced. It may be that the wrong person isn't liable for their position due to unavoidable ignorance caused by their circumstances, but that doesn't make them right, it only makes them not at fault for being wrong.

An interesting example of the problem of relying on contentment is Mother Theresa. Unsurprisingly, the Catholic Church has been processing her for canonization, and one interesting development is that apparently she was quite miserable for her last several decades. According to her journals, she felt as though God had abandoned her. Even though she lacked peace of mind, I'd dare say that she was probably doing God's will.

The Church has attributed Mother Theresa's sentiment to "the dark night of the soul," a term coined by Saint John of the Cross back in the sixteenth century. The concept is that sometimes God will withdraw from a person with the intention of drawing them deeper into communion with Him. The idea is that when God takes a step back into the shadows, the person has to reach out to God instead. When they find Him, they are closer to him than when they began.

I personally like this theory, because it seems to jive with what I've seen and experienced in life. No matter how certain I am of what's true, or how good I'm feeling about my current spiritual trajectory, dry spells will eventually pop up where I just don't feel at peace, or that God is present. I don't think I'm unique in this respect, since it seems everybody goes through these spells. I guess my concern is that, if I base what I hold to be true on peace of mind, and I lose that peace of mind, then that would mean the truth has changed. Because the things of God constitute eternal, immutable truths, that simply isn't possible.

I guess in the end I just put a very high value on reason, and a pretty low value on visceral feelings. I do feel I should make a distinction here between faith and feelings. I am of the opinion that both our ability to reason and the evidence we have to work with are flawed (both possibly as a consequence to the fall), so we do need some measure of divine intervention in order for our reason to function properly. That being said, even if for a time we have to function without divine assistance, the sound reason will remain sound, and at least mostly recognizable as such.

As evident by the fact that I've converted a couple times, I've been wrong before, and I may yet be wrong now, so I certainly don't have any grounds to judge anybody else for their beliefs. If they are in any error, it's likely an error I've been in before. That being said, I like to think that I'm at least getting righter in the whole process :)