Why do people leave the Church?

[David13]

10 minutes ago, Godless said:

I can assure you that that's not true. Interestingly though, you're not the first person on this site to say that.

I wonder why?

dc

[Sunday21]

On July 2, 2016 at 11:33 PM, Godless said:

Not true (though I suppose sometimes it can be). I fought it for quite some time. I desperately wanted to believe. The thought of abandoning everything I grew up with was terrifying. I fought back against my better judgement because I didn't want to let my family down. Because I didn't want to let my friends down. Because if there was a god, I didn't want to let him down. It took time for me to come to terms with what I truly believed about the church, and it was one of the hardest things I've ever done. 

Every apostate has a different story. In some cases, you're right, the person in question just wanted out, was looking for an excuse, and found one in something fairly trivial. For many of us though, the road out was far more difficult and involved many sleepless nights, soul-searching, and (believe it or not) relentless prayer. Experiences like that shouldn't be trivialized.

I agree. Many people put in a strong effort, fulfill callings that stretch them, and things do not go well. Paying tithing can be tough.

Edited July 3, 2016 by Sunday21

[Guest MormonGator]

3 hours ago, Sunday21 said:

I agree. Many people put in a strong effort, fulfill callings that stretch them, and things do not go well. Paying tithing can be tough.

So true Sunday. People think that leaving the church is "easy" because for them personally, it would be. They don't know (and sadly, don't care) about the inner turmoil, questioning etc that those who leave the church go through. No one wakes up one morning and decides to leave the church. It's a process. 

[Budget]

55 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

So true Sunday. People think that leaving the church is "easy" because for them personally, it would be. They don't know (and sadly, don't care) about the inner turmoil, questioning etc that those who leave the church go through. No one wakes up one morning and decides to leave the church. It's a process. 

... and for SO many different reasons it's silly to try to say "why" people leave the church.  There are a thousand.  Just like there are thousands of reason people don't.  It's so personal for everyone and involves so many things.

[flameburns623]

I think predisposition, temperament, and paradigm all shape "why" people leave, and each of those have varying degrees of internal personal control. If one's temperament  requires a high level of intellectual reasoning and evidence, it may be difficult to find much satisfaction in LDS wards where few others have that same need.

If one is presented with the Gospel from kinds of paradigms, that Gospel may never make much sense--just as those presented with one variant of the wife/mother-in-law illusion may NEVER be able to see the other image. 

One whose upbringing and personal culture demand a high degree of peesonal integrity may never be able to resolve some of the messier aspects of Mormon theology or history in quite the same way that another person--with perhaps equal commitment to personal integrity--can comfortably resolve thrm.

These are not fully free choices which people can make arbitrarily. I think the emphasis on absolute free will gets overdone in the minds of some Saints. Many factors go into creating our personal lenses on reality, and those lenses both reveal and distort and colour what we can see. 

We are free MORAL AGENTS, insofar as we can freely choose the right as we know the right; but that does not always guarantee that we can KNOW the right from the wrong.

Our choices are constrained, limited, and funneled to some extent. After all, mental illness is also a distortion of how one sees the world, but that does not imply that the mentally ill can choose to see the world differently. The color-blind cannot choose how they see color.

There is also the paradox of choosing between two perceived great goods: to be LDS is to elect NOT to be a Christian Scientist, a Roman Catholic, a Buddhist, or  Muslim, and any of those may possess attractions which Mormonism lacks or underemphasizes.

We are familiar with this paradox from the LDS understanding of the Fall. Adam and Eve chose to be embodied that they might bear children into the world rather than to remain in Paradise.

It should be remembered that those who do not choose to remain in the  Church are often chosing some other perceived good instead.

[The Folk Prophet]

On 7/2/2016 at 9:22 AM, yjacket said:

.http://waitbutwhy.com/2013/09/why-generation-y-yuppies-are-unhappy.html

I don't think this has anything to do with happiness.

[Blueskye2]

On May 4, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Eve1991 said:

Why do so many people leave the Church? Some people say its because what a past prophet said about black people over 100 years ago and some people say its because they read things in the book of mormon ect and some people let over the new policy back in November. Why do people decide now they are leaving the Church because of something that was said 100 years ago? Also did the people ever read the bible where it says homosexuality is a sin and that marriage is only between a man and a woman?

Eh, I was primary age when I was taught that African and Native Americans had dark skin because of curses. I was taught this in primary, at Sunday school and at home. It was taught in General Conference, I read it in the Friend magazine. The church spoke out publicly, against mixed race marriages. 

Then at school I was taught about melanin and that was the first time, I remember very clearly, I had any idea that what I was being taught at church just wasn't up to par, as far as facts go. I was about 10 years old at the time. I didn't accept anything I was taught at church, after that, at face value. By the time I was in my mid teens I didn't believe anything that was being taught at church. When I moved out of my parents house, I stopped going to anything church related. It was, I found, the best time to make a break from "the ward", as no one knew me.

By the time I was in my early 20s, I was an atheist  I didn't remain an atheist. Some 20+ years later I was baptized Roman Catholic. But overall the reason I left Mormonism is I don't believe its teachings.

[NeedleinA]

11 hours ago, Blueskye2 said:

But overall the reason I left Mormonism is I don't believe its teachings.

Just curious... what brings you to a LDS forum now days? I'm interested since as a member of the LDS faith I don't post on Catholic forums. You are obviously welcome here, just curious "why"?

[Maureen]

On 7/2/2016 at 9:22 AM, yjacket said:

Part of the problem with modern society, every child has to be "special" or "important". It's not just your daughter but an entire generation who has been quite frankly raised to be spoiled brats (I am not saying your daughter is, just that the her generation is like that) with twitter, facebook, etc.  Everyone's life must be "amazing!!" . . .idiots.  They will learn eventually.  I like this article. . . .http://waitbutwhy.com/2013/09/why-generation-y-yuppies-are-unhappy.html

Let me guess yjacket.....

You were one of those children that walked 30 miles to school, in barefeet, uphill both ways - and you think because you did it all children should.

You were called a brat and idiot and not special, so therefore all children should.

If you are fortunate enough to live to old age, pray that your children find you a nice nursing home, because if they don't you will know why.

I am of course just kidding, but your tone towards children on this thread and another one leads me to believe you don't like children. I hope you like your own.

M.

[mrmarklin]

....The real question is not so much why do Mormons leave the Church, but why after leaving, they can't leave it alone.

 

There are a lot of antis and ex Mormons out there that continue to post on LDS fora.

Why?

I have no desire to post on the fora of other religions.

[Blueskye2]

2 hours ago, NeedleinA said:

Just curious... what brings you to a LDS forum now days? I'm interested since as a member of the LDS faith I don't post on Catholic forums. You are obviously welcome here, just curious "why"?

I read the forums of other religions because I enjoy reading about people's faith, no matter what religion they are. 

Particular to Mormonism I like to keep up with what is going on because all of my family are LDS. I read at this forum, once a week or so, usually peruse the topic titles in general, current events and Christian beliefs.  I rarely post mainly because I am not LDS and don't have an opinion on LDS topics...and people here are generally untrusting of former Mormons. I'm not interested in stirring things up or freaking people out, so I lurk 99.9 percent of the time I spend here, reading.

There are LDS members actively posting on Catholic forums. Which is good, I think.

 

 

Edited July 5, 2016 by Blueskye2

[NeedleinA]

1 hour ago, Blueskye2 said:

I read the forums of other religions because I enjoy reading about people's faith, no matter what religion they are. 

Particular to Mormonism I like to keep up with what is going on because all of my family are LDS. I read at this forum, once a week or so, usually peruse the topic titles in general, current events and Christian beliefs.  I rarely post mainly because I am not LDS and don't have an opinion on LDS topics...and people here are generally untrusting of former Mormons. I'm not interested in stirring things up or freaking people out, so I lurk 99.9 percent of the time I spend here, reading.

There are LDS members actively posting on Catholic forums. Which is good, I think.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts Blueskye2.

On a different note, it would be very interesting to see how many of "us" (myself) included would/could have been susceptible to some form of racism had we lived in different times, places and circumstances. It can be easy for "us" (myself included) in "modern times" to pass judgement on those living in previous eras, and say "how could they do X" or "how could they say Y". Using modern lenses to view the past often creates a blurred vision of what should have occurred according to our modern standards. What we accept today, expect today, tolerate today is not necessarily what past generations and those in history understood to be correct or acceptable. Racism is part of America's past. Members of the church (being in America) were not immune to the downfall of having racism enter their doors. Imperfections effect us all. No past or current member of any faith is perfect. Follow the history of many churches in America and racial short comings were not unique to only LDS history. 

Edited July 5, 2016 by NeedleinA

[Blueskye2]

1 hour ago, NeedleinA said:

Thanks for sharing your thoughts Blueskye2.

On a different note, it would be very interesting to see how many of "us" (myself) included would/could have been susceptible to some form of racism had we lived in different times, places and circumstances. It can be easy for "us" (myself included) in "modern times" to pass judgement on those living in previous eras, and say "how could they do X" or "how could they say Y". Using modern lenses to view the past often creates a blurred vision of what should have occurred according to our modern standards. What we accept today, expect today, tolerate today is not necessarily what past generations and those in history understood to be correct or acceptable. Racism is part of America's past. Members of the church (being in America) were not immune to the downfall of having racism enter their doors. Imperfections effect us all. No past or current member of any faith is perfect. Follow the history of many churches in America and racial short comings were not unique to only LDS history. 

I agree. But my point was, when I was LDS decades ago, we weren't following the teachings of some prophet from 100 years prior. We were following the teachings in our time. I understand that to some, pre-1978 seems like 100 years ago. ? But I'm not THAT old. 

[yjacket]

6 hours ago, Maureen said:

Let me guess yjacket.....

You were one of those children that walked 30 miles to school, in barefeet, uphill both ways - and you think because you did it all children should.

You were called a brat and idiot and not special, so therefore all children should.

If you are fortunate enough to live to old age, pray that your children find you a nice nursing home, because if they don't you will know why.

I am of course just kidding, but your tone towards children on this thread and another one leads me to believe you don't like children. I hope you like your own.

M.

Lol, "I am of course just kidding" . . .right . . .is that one of those veiled, I'm kidding, but not really kidding comments?

Quite frankly though, what an absolutely horrible thing to say about someone on the internet.  You aught to be ashamed of yourself.  Maybe if your parents had taught you better manners, you wouldn't say things like the above behind an anonymous face to a fellow member of Christ. 

I'm also quite frankly surprised Eowyn liked your post.  I'll call her out too, that was not a Christlike thing to do.

I have not insulted you, called you names, personally attacked either, nor insinuated things about your feelings about children or your family. Shame on you.

Edited July 6, 2016 by yjacket

[Guest MormonGator]

3 hours ago, NeedleinA said:

Thanks for sharing your thoughts Blueskye2.

On a different note, it would be very interesting to see how many of "us" (myself) included would/could have been susceptible to some form of racism had we lived in different times, places and circumstances. It can be easy for "us" (myself included) in "modern times" to pass judgement on those living in previous eras, and say "how could they do X" or "how could they say Y". Using modern lenses to view the past often creates a blurred vision of what should have occurred according to our modern standards. What we accept today, expect today, tolerate today is not necessarily what past generations and those in history understood to be correct or acceptable. Racism is part of America's past. Members of the church (being in America) were not immune to the downfall of having racism enter their doors. Imperfections effect us all. No past or current member of any faith is perfect. Follow the history of many churches in America and racial short comings were not unique to only LDS history. 

I love this post. Very well said Needle. 

[Guest]

I was shocked to see you say that children are "inferior beings", or whatever term you used. What are people supposed to think when you talk about children that way? It's offensive to me to hear children spoken of that way. Shocked is not an exaggeration; that's what I was.

Before you accuse me of spoiling them or putting them before my marriage, I certainly do not. I am a pretty authoritarian parent, but I also recognize that children are deserving of our tenderness and yes, respect. They are spirits on loan, children from Heavenly Father, and yes they are special for that reason. You can impress upon a child that they are special because of their divine nature without making them think they're more special than anyone else. You can raise pleasant, responsible, wonderful people without being hard and cold, and possibly even crossing the line into unrighteous dominion. In fact, I'd venture that there are more scriptures about how precious and loved children are and how to treat them than about sparing rods and such. 

[NeedleinA]

8 minutes ago, Eowyn said:

I was shocked to see you say that children are "inferior beings", or whatever term you used. What are people supposed to think when you talk about children that way? It's offensive to me to hear children spoken of that way. Shocked is not an exaggeration; that's what I was.

Before you accuse me of spoiling them or putting them before my marriage, I certainly do not. I am a pretty authoritarian parent, but I also recognize that children are deserving of our tenderness and yes, respect. They are spirits on loan, children from Heavenly Father, and yes they are special for that reason. You can impress upon a child that they are special because of their divine nature without making them think they're more special than anyone else. You can raise pleasant, responsible, wonderful people without being hard and cold, and possibly even crossing the line into unrighteous dominion. In fact, I'd venture that there are more scriptures about how precious and loved children are and how to treat them than about sparing rods and such. 

I liked your post Eowyn for a variety of reasons, especially for the triple post intensity you shared.

[Guest]

Freaking laptop.

[NeedleinA]

17 minutes ago, Eowyn said:

I was shocked to see you say that children are "inferior beings", or whatever term you used. What are people supposed to think when you talk about children that way? It's offensive to me to hear children spoken of that way. Shocked is not an exaggeration; that's what I was.

Before you accuse me of spoiling them or putting them before my marriage, I certainly do not. I am a pretty authoritarian parent, but I also recognize that children are deserving of our tenderness and yes, respect. They are spirits on loan, children from Heavenly Father, and yes they are special for that reason. You can impress upon a child that they are special because of their divine nature without making them think they're more special than anyone else. You can raise pleasant, responsible, wonderful people without being hard and cold, and possibly even crossing the line into unrighteous dominion. In fact, I'd venture that there are more scriptures about how precious and loved children are and how to treat them than about sparing rods and such. 

I liked your post Eowyn for a variety of reasons, especially for the triple post intensity you shared.

I wish there was a moderator around here who could delete my dup post

Edited July 6, 2016 by NeedleinA

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, NeedleinA said:

I wish there was a moderator around here who could delete my dup post

Yeah, where in the heck are the mods when you need one?

[Maureen]

1 hour ago, yjacket said:

Lol, "I am of course just kidding" . . .right . . .is that one of those veiled, I'm kidding, but not really kidding comments?

Quite frankly though, what an absolutely horrible thing to say about someone on the internet.  You aught to be ashamed of yourself.  Maybe if your parents had taught you better manners, you wouldn't say things like the above behind an anonymous face to a fellow member of Christ. 

I'm also quite frankly surprised Eowyn liked your post.  I'll call her out too, that was not a Christlike thing to do.

I have not insulted you, called you names, personally attacked either, nor insinuated things about your feelings about children or your family. Shame on you.

My comments were meant somewhat jokingly because seriously, you think that someone can walk to school uphill both ways?

I don't know you from Adam yjacket, I can only try to figure you out by what you write. From what I can deduce you give me the impression that your job as a parent is to command your children and their job is to obey your every command. I hope you occasionally show that you love them, care about them, and maybe even worry about them. Teaching children is important as a parent but that can be done in a kind and caring way. Discipling children is important but in my opinion, it is a small part of parenting. Children learn best by example. If you can be a good example to your children, while also letting them know you love them, you can't go wrong.

M.

[Maureen]

1 hour ago, yjacket said:

 

Duplicate of course.

Edited July 6, 2016 by Maureen

[NeedleinA]

3 hours ago, Blueskye2 said:

I agree. But my point was, when I was LDS decades ago, we weren't following the teachings of some prophet from 100 years prior. We were following the teachings in our time. I understand that to some, pre-1978 seems like 100 years ago. ? But I'm not THAT old. 

If you were alive and able to actually understand  pre-1978 teachings (minimum of age 10*), that puts you at least at age 50+. That was half a century ago... just saying 

I will add, those were some pretty deep thoughts for a 10 year old too, "I was about *10 years old at the time. I didn't accept anything I was taught at church". I think I was watching Transformers, catching snakes and part of the old Primary "Blazers/Valiant 11" program. 

20 hours ago, Blueskye2 said:

I was primary age when I was taught that African ... Americans had dark skin because of curses.

According to:
1. David M. Goldberg (2003) author of "The Curse of Ham: Race and Slavery in Early Judaism, Christianity, and Islam" (Princeton University Press)
2. Stephen R. Haynes, Noah’s Curse: The Biblical Justification of American Slavery (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002

The idea of skin curses in religion was taught as early as 1730, 100 years before the LDS church was established. It is easy to see where an idea that was 100 years old could have been easily been accepted and perpetuated in any religion including with LDS members too. Lets just say, we as church didn't invent the idea.

20 hours ago, Blueskye2 said:

The church spoke out publicly, against mixed race marriages. 

Prior to a US Supreme Court ruling in 1967, 16 states had still not repealed anti-miscegenation laws that forbid interracial marriages. States were still passing out prison time for violating these interracial marriage laws. Not a fun time in American history to have encouraged mixed race marriages either. 
p.s. I'm a faithful LDS member in a mixed race marriage

Again, 25 years, 50 years or 100 years... modern lenses fog the view of not just the past, but of our past recollections too.

Good chat by the way @Blueskye2

Edited July 6, 2016 by NeedleinA

[Guest MormonGator]

13 minutes ago, NeedleinA said:

I

Good chat by the way @Blueskye2

It's a great day here. A couple really good discussions going, for sure. This one is absolutely one of them.   

[Blueskye2]

23 minutes ago, NeedleinA said:

If you were alive and able to actually understand  pre-1978 teachings (minimum of age 10*), that puts you at least at age 50+. That was half a century ago... just saying 

I will add, those were some pretty deep thoughts for a 10 year old too, "I was about *10 years old at the time. I didn't accept anything I was taught at church". I think I was watching Transformers, catching snakes and part of the old Primary "Blazers/Valiant 11" program. 

According to:
1. David M. Goldberg (2003) author of "The Curse of Ham: Race and Slavery in Early Judaism, Christianity, and Islam" (Princeton University Press)
2. Stephen R. Haynes, Noah’s Curse: The Biblical Justification of American Slavery (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002

The idea of skin curses in religion was taught as early as 1730, 100 years before the LDS church was established. It is easy to see where an idea that was 100 years old could have been easily been accepted and perpetuated in any religion including with LDS members too. Lets just say, we as church didn't invent the idea.

Prior to a US Supreme Court ruling in 1967, 16 states had still not repealed anti-miscegenation laws that forbid interracial marriages. States were still passing out prison time for violating these interracial marriage laws. Not a fun time in American history to have encouraged mixed race marriages either. 
p.s. I'm a faithful LDS member in a mixed race marriage

Again, 25 years, 50 years or 100 years... modern lenses fog the view of not just the past, but of our past recollections too.

Good chat by the way @Blueskye2

Yes I know! Both I'm old and sociological norms. The shock was hearing a scientific explanation that didn't match to what I was being taught in religious settings. The thing is my best friend was Navajo, and I believed absolutely everything I was taught, including about her. I didn't believe absolutely and without question after that point! And I didn't believe at all what I was taught about "Lamanites".

Other than that, I was a quiet shy kid, barely spoke to anyone not family. I observed in my silence and kept what I observed to myself, because in my family....there was no questioning without stern reproach.  

Ha! The good ole days.