I have been interested in the few threads going on right now about people talking to church leaders (SPs and GAs) about their disaffection from the church.

The tone of the threads has included advice to be very prepared with your issues and arguments against the church. That got me wondering.

Is US raising issues and concerns to faithful leaders really the right approach? In any negotiations, the first person to put an offer on the table is usually the one who gets less than what they ask for. That is the beginning point of negotiations.

Why isn't it a better approach to make the leader clearly stake out one of the church's truth claims? Why shouldn't the leader clearly stake out what it means for the book of mormon to be true. Once they have done that, then they should also clearly spell out what they would not expect to see for this truth claim to continue to be true. If they are unwilling to do this, they really don't want to have a real conversation, so why proceed?

Once they have laid out the ground rules of what they mean by "true", then you are in a much better position to start laying out your concerns and the "evidence" that contradicts their now clearly stated claims.

Otherwise, we are in the position of having to defend our state of disbeleif. They really need to be the ones defending their outlandish truth claims.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/29/2013 02:52PM by 8thgeneration.

I think you have a good point.

So far I have simply not engaged with any TBMs in discussion of the issues. Who knows how long I'll be able to keep that up.

I figure that since I am completely disaffected from TSCC, I don't want to even discuss issues with them. I don't see anything to be gained by that. If they wanted audience with me, I'd decline. I see nothing positive about talking to deluded persons who pretend to have authority over me, or preach to me on how I have turned toward ruin. I know better.

I like this approach.

A good way to phrase it: "What three claims MUST be true for the church to be what it claims?"

That's a very good point. We really don't have anything to prove. We have nothing to gain from continuing to be members of the church. The church stands to gain 10% of a person's income if they can get them back to church, but they have no evidence to offer for the book of Mormon, no explanations for the myriads of other issues.

The idiots at the top of the Mormon food chain made it very clear to me that I had nothing to gain by being a mormon. Probably one of many reasons it was so easy for me to leave.

I couldn't, and still can't think of one single thing that I would get out of being a mormon.

That's pretty much the reason why my resignation letter was so short. I didn't see any reason to go into all the things that are BS. That only gives the bishop or SP ammunition to argue over with you. When you just say "I want out, NOW," that's pretty straightforward.

They don't want or need to hear any of our arguments or reasoning. Just leave. Simple, straightforward.

Church leaders do NOT want to listen to your reasons for leaving
for any other reason than to judge you and refute you. An
additional reason may be to misrepresent you to others.

I totally agree with all here who are posting about talking to leaders about concerns/doctrine. I have been out a month now, and have not been this happy or free since conversion 15 years ago. I have our resignation letter written and ready to send, I just have to ride out the weekend as my wife has an exam tomorrow.

My wife says my dark cloud has lifted, and my personality is changing back to what it used to be (Yes this is a good thing).

Of course, the "one true church" where only they can bestow the gift of the HG to be a "constant companion" would see my liberation and happiness as nothing more than the easy promises of satan, and the false security he has tricked the rest of the world into feeling.

Speaking truth to power, bucking the system, just plain old telling the truth about your reasons for doubt or for leaving, has certain purposes, I'd guess.

For some, it might be necessary for them to hold onto their integrity, to tell the truth, be authentic, move forward with dignity. To heal.

For others, it might be so that no one they tell or explain these things to can truthfully tell others that they left because of sin or being offended, instead, or for being unworthy, not wanting to live the commandments, etc.

Anyone who does those things after you personally have set the record straight with them directly, is lying. Compromising their own principles, sinning, being unworthy, causing offense, creating the spirit of contention, inviting the devil in, whatever it would be called if you knowingly did these sorts of things to them.

It can separate the wheat from the chaff, if others who know you are telling the truth see what is being done to you behind your back; help them see how petty most of this church worthiness business is, or even lead them to question some leaders or members and their behavior, as well as question some church teachings those same people espouse.

Telling the whole truth is never easy; it can hurt us, our loved ones, and people we respect and care about. Some people will not want to know or hear the truth, even when evidence of it is staring them in the face, and even when they have the same doubts themselves. They may blame the messenger, you, for telling it out loud, making it real and making them face it.

But sometimes, there is a need for being truthful. And if we do it rationally, calmly and with respect, there is no need for it to be contentious, anger-filled, blaming, aggressive, or anything other than honest. Perhaps the other will make it seem so or twist your words to make it be so, to others, but if you have tried to be honest and not critical or hurtful, helpful versus passive-aggressive, and you are doing it to help yourself and perhaps help free someone else, then the question isn't why would you, but why would you not?

I dunno. I think it's good to give feedback. We sometimes have a chance to give feedback, so I think we should. I know not to be nice about it anymore, though, and refuse to respect the various positions of magical authority.

Why? I think there are two kinds of people: those who view authority with suspicion and those who view authority as above reproach.

It never once occurred to me to go over the bishop's head about anything. Or even go over my dad's head to the bishop about something. I learned early on that trusting and counting on an authority figure to have your back or your best interests in mind is naive at best, and could be quite dangerous.

So I think the people who write letters to GAs or whatever, well, there's a couple things going on.

1. They believe in and trust the authority. These people have apparently not had the experience of an authority figure slamming a knife in their back. My major exit experience WAS about a bishop not having my back -- and I'd already come from a family of origin where I was sent back and forth between parents who clearly demonstrated they didn't have my best interests at heart. I would never trust a GA, a CEO, a cop, a politician, a governor, a president, my parents, or ANY authority figure to be honest with me. Naive, sheltered mormons? Yep. Many will because so many have not had the hateful experiences I have. And many other people have had those experiences, and like me, scratch their heads in confusion whenever someone mentions writing a letter into the Wizard of Oz in his Ivory/Emerald tower. Why would you think that would help?

2. They are still studying and learning; however, they've been trained to think that the authority figure has the final word and knows more than you do. Some part of them wants the GA to admit he knows the church is a scammy scam cult. They are looking to someone who professes to have more knowledge than they do and I think that is a function of being taught not to trust yourself --the Brethren have done all the thinking. Except people are smart. We figure things out. But if you were taught to respect authority without question, you will appeal to this authority before finally trusting youreslf, your own research, your own body of knowledge, and abandoning the whole mess.

I don't know why either. I've read many threads like these over the years, and there doesn't seem to be any talking them out of it. I think it's a really bad idea to discuss issues with Mormon leaders. What good does it do if you're leaving? They aren't going to change, because they are benefited by things the way they are, and it's going to be a very demoralizing experience sitting in the lion's den and being hit with 180 years of slick scripted answers for everything. They are so sure it's what they need to do though. Very often they come back angry and frustrated and start another thread about it. I think it's best just to leave and never look back.

Your generation spans are short: I'm nine generations from the Mayflower.

They don't negotiate. They claim 100% of the truth. Anything less requires total capitulation on the part of the "apostate". I think it does no good to send them letters. At all. They are always going to belittle your concerns. They don't have answers because there are no good answers.