I am a twenty-year-old student at the University of Washington. This will be the story of why I left the Mormon Church.

Let me explain my position at the beginning: I am a former member who decided to stop going to church and have my records removed, simply because I didn't believe. I don't have animosity toward the religion. As a matter of fact, I have recently gained more respect for the religion as a result of life events. I don't like the thought of convincing somebody to leave the church. People should leave as a result of their own free agency and desire. I will criticize the church, simply because it is necessary to tell my story.

I was raised in the church. Being active in the church meant going to church for three hours, having family home evening Monday nights with my family, and going to Wednesday night activities, usually Boy Scout meetings. I was baptized at age eight. This is the age of accountability. Some religions baptize infants, so I suppose the age of eight is better, since it allows more input from the individual. But in my case, age eight was still too early for such a choice, as I suspect it is for everybody. I honestly didn't know what I was getting into. I remember answering interview questions with the bishop and my parents at age eight, and telling them what I know they wanted to hear. Baptism marks membership in the church, so I consider my membership to originally have been decided for me.

However, I would have eventually decided to be baptized, since I consider myself to have been a true believer at one time. Being a true believer means that I thought that when I died, I would go to the spirit world to wait for judgement day and the celestial kingdom. The height of my belief was around age thirteen or fourteen, when I can remember going to Especially for Youth, a BYU summer camp. I remember being captivated by the idea of Jesus Christ taking the weight of my sins on his shoulders, if only I would repent. I was relying on the testimonies of my parents, everybody around me at church, and the desire to believe. At this point, I had simply never questioned what I was told.

Anybody raised in the church knows how certain things work. For instance, older teenagers who have closely followed the counsel of the church are dressed well, get good grades in school, smile, are pleasant to be around, and are free from drugs, alcohol, and sex. Other folks who have not been devout in the faith are less guaranteed to turn out so well. This is a very powerful social proof in support of the church. But a real testimony can never be gained through social proof. This would be as absurd as the existence of a bad church member proving the church to be false. The church will never be proved true or false. It has it's own logic system, complete with axioms and elaborate theories independent of our present reality. We have to wait until after death to find out.

The church suggests that we pray with a sincere desire to know, and we will receive a confirmation in the form of a burning in the bosom, from the Holy Ghost. If we don't receive an answer, it is because we are too sinful, we didn't have enough faith, or something to that effect. We should try again after more preparation. What is the answer supposed to be if the church is not true? The problem that scientists have been struggling with for so long is true objectivity. If you bring biases to the table, those biases will fundamentally shape the thing you are trying to measure. It seems to me like the church is saying, "If you didn't get the answer you wanted, you need to bring more bias to the table."

At age fifteen I made a good friend that was raised in no religion. Previously, all of my friends had either been Mormon, or we didn't discuss religion, so I didn't know what they were. But here was somebody who was intelligent, talented, fun, and didn't trip on all the common stumbling blocks so many teenagers do. This was very significant; it didn't fit into the worldview I had grown up with. It was undeniable fact; so I changed my worldview. It is possible to live a good life without religion. I think it's important to note that this friend never said or implied anything negative about the church. She taught by being a good example. I would like to think that now I'm a good example of living a good life without religion.

At age sixteen, I had to say goodbye to this friend, because my family moved from Seattle to Spokane. I was disappointed that I had to move in the middle of high school, but Spokane turned out to be a great place to live. At age sixteen, Mormon boys are interviewed to be ordained as priests in the Mormon Church. I went into this interview with a new bishop I had never met before. I told interviewers back in Seattle what they wanted to hear. But since this interview was with a new bishop I had never met, I was less ashamed and answered his questions with total honesty. When he asked me if I believed in God, I said, "No, I don't." That was the truth. No real life experience had ever suggested the existence of God. During this interview, the bishop suggested that I wasn't ready to be ordained a priest, and that I we should give it some time (with hope that I would come around.) I never came around, so Teacher is the farthest I advanced in the church.

I continued to attend church throughout high school. They let me meet with the Priests, since I was in that age group. For the next two years, I entertained each principle and lesson taught in meetings. But what made me different from the other boys was that I would also consciously consider the opposite of what was taught, for sake of argument. I think the normal church talk or presentation is geared toward people who will basically accept what is presented without challenge. I found much of the doctrine logically flawed and incompatible with the worldview I had developed through adolescence. I had developed my worldview through personal experience and thought alone. In fact, this brings up one major criticism I have of the church. Its members don't critically examine what is presented. They simply assume it is true. According to my mother (and to the church's credit) the church actually asks its members to pray about each bit of doctrine and examine it critically. (Don't judge the church by it's weak members.) Still, the church asks to be judged by its fruits, and one of those fruits is its membership.

During my senior year of high school, my parents suggested I apply to BYU. At this point, I had discussed my doubts about the Mormon religion only with my mother, and both of my parents still had hopes that I would somehow come around to accept the church. I went ahead and applied. I was accepted, and even got a scholarship. Now there was a solid reason to go, and since money was tight, that was the school I went to for my freshman year of college. At some point, I supposed that perhaps the weaknesses I found in the church were unique to the particular wards I had attended in my childhood. But attending BYU demonstrated that those weaknesses existed straight to the core of the church in Utah.

My year at BYU was very good in all respects. Intellectually, I enjoyed the higher academic standards, and learned quite a bit. Spiritually, I was able to finally come to a resolution to leave the church. The atmosphere at BYU was mostly okay, but very disturbing in a couple of respects. There is the all-pervading belief that the Mormon religion is the one true church. This alone, when held true by ninety-nine percent of the students, let what I would describe as a negative spirit of superiority reside unchecked, and unchallenged- probably even unnoticed by most students and faculty. Private religious schools can take liberties public schools should never be able to. One of these is the notorious Honor Code office, which has the power to remove a student from school if they are caught breaking the word of wisdom, (drinking alcohol, smoking) or even get people in trouble for not being clean shaven. Jesus wore a beard. I was surprised how nobody would question this office, even though hardly any students appreciated it. When this subject was brought up in my religion class, the instructor implied that we had a duty to appear as good as possible to outsiders, so that they would be more likely to join the church or attend the school. I can understand this, but the penalty for not conforming was as much as getting kicked out of the school! Nobody in the class brought up any objections to the Honor Code policy. I know for certain that at least some members didn't like the Honor Code. But they didn't object because if they did, they would appear blemished. Their conformity is like letting the police search your house without a warrant, because if you refuse, you look guilty. This is another example of Mormons conforming and not critically examining what is presented. For the record, I never touched alcohol or tobacco while at BYU.

Now I will talk about my actual decision to leave the church. I left because I didn't believe the church was true. In fact, I believe the church is not true. How did I come to the conclusion that the church is not true? For one thing, I regarded the method of confirming the truth as suspect. I have come to this conclusion after spending all my life thinking about it. This is really the best I can do. It doesn't make any sense to accept somebody else's opinion over my own. I am a very intelligent person. I am an extremely good abstract thinker. It has allowed me to do very well in Math and Computer Science. I find that when I assume the church to be true, I come to a large number of convenient explanations and pat answers. I find that when I assume the church to be false, any number of rational explanations can explain why the church is in existence. My decision is one that I am completely satisfied with, although I am disappointed with some of its results.

I stopped attending church after I came home from BYU. I made the decision to switch schools. I knew several people at BYU who also doubted the religion, but stayed there for various reasons, even though staying meant living in an atmosphere that condemned questioning. Some of their parents were less understanding than mine, and would not help finance any other school. At age nineteen, I wrote a letter to the bishop of my singles ward (where my records were) asking to have my name removed. That letter is attached. It's been a year and a half. When I read that letter it makes me feel good, that I made the right decision. Maybe a couple of things I wrote in the letter I don't quite agree with any more. (For instance, I don't really know whether I would be better off with no religion. I can see the church as such a powerful force in some people's lives. But I can't live a lie. I don't believe it at all. This leads me to a feeling of loneliness and depression. I have never seen a church that appealed to me. But frankly, I am suspicious of most churches.) But there is a principle similar to repentance that I do believe in. It's called changing your mind. Everybody should have the right to change their mind, and reject thoughts they once embraced.

After I left, I went through a period of anger toward the church. I basically felt that I had been lied to for nineteen years. I still hold that belief, but I no longer feel very much anger. Everybody in the church that tried to build my belief system for me did so because they thought they were helping me. I can't remain angry toward a church that most of my immediate and extended family find joy in. The church has had a profound effect on my life.

It may be apparent by now that I am basically agnostic. I have been reading and pondering many aspects of religion since my exit. It is better to leave the church out of critical thought than it is to stay in out of ignorance. I hold the truth as absolute, so if the church is true, hopefully I will see that and return. But I don't think the church is true, therefore I don't think I will end up returning.

My family has not been eager to bring up the topic of my leaving the church. I think this is because it doesn't make sense to them that I would leave the church unless there was some specific event that triggered me to leave. I am told there is a general feeling of disappointment and sadness. So far no family bonds have broken, thank goodness. The first family reunion since my exit is coming up. I don't know what to expect. Probably nobody will bring it up. But if they do, I suppose I'll answer their questions honestly. This has been a great source of difficulty, however. It is so hard to maintain good relations with people who are still in the church. Awkward situations always arise, usually by people assuming that I'm still in the church. People have no problem telling me, "The church is true." I have the belief that the church is not true, so it shouldn't be any different for me to say so. But if I do, I will undoubtedly offend people. On the bright side, I am a very good friend of a young man who is active, and is preparing to go on a mission. We avoid awkward situations by simply not discussing religion. And when it must come up, we respect each other's beliefs. It has meant a lot to me that he is still my good friend even though I have left the church, when many other people have avoided me. I hope to remain his good friend despite our differences.

In closing I would like to say that for me, this has been the correct decision. I can look at things more objectively than ever before. I am not afraid of being wrong, because I know that this was the only path with honesty and integrity. I still have a great love for my fellow human being. I think that I am still the same person I was before I left, capable of every emotion and responsibility as before. I hope that you find as much joy in life and the pursuit of happiness as I have. I have faith in the intelligence of my fellow human being. The unexamined life is not worth living. The unexamined church is not worth attending.

Joseph Hall joehall@u.washington.edu

-----------begin exit letter to bishop----------

June 2, 1998

Dear Bishop Winthrop and the church,

I am requesting to have my records removed from the church. In our meeting, you told me that it would be appreciated to have me explain why, and to put some thought into it. Religion is such a sore subject for many people, because people with different opinions are so convinced that they are right. Usually, I try to avoid the subject altogether. But since you specifically asked me to give a reason, I'll try to give you my point of view.

I was baptized when I was eight years old. Eight years old is still quite young, and the reason I went ahead with the baptism is that my parents, the bishop, and the other church leaders told me it was the right thing to do. I didn't think much about religion until I was about fourteen or fifteen. Until then, I answered what I thought was expected in interviews, in class, etc... But then after I started thinking on my own, I questioned what I had been told in Sunday school. Around age fifteen, I developed the opinion that the church is false, God doesn't exist, and religion is a consequence of mankind's overactive imagination. I wasn't very strong in this opinion, but through countless experiences since then which support this opinion, I've become surer. Now you may be thinking that the reason I've become surer is because I accept the evidence that supports my ideas and ignore the evidence to the contrary. Please know that I am aware of this bias, I have thought about it many times, and of course I realize that I could be wrong. But I also think this doesn't necessarily make me wrong, and I think it explains the enthusiasm and confidence of many believers. I doubt these people have thought about the natural human bias toward as much as I have.

The main idea in the church (and other Christian religions) is that Christ, the son of God, was crucified and suffered so that we imperfect men may repent, and through our own repentance and the grace of God, we may attain salvation, or go to heaven. This parallels the belief that sacrificing a virgin (innocent pain) will turn that which man does not control (good crops vs. famine) favorably for man. We see in all sorts of literature that man has a psychological need for sacrifice. In Greek plays the audience experiences a catharsis after the climax of the plot, usually where the hero gets killed one way or another. I think Christ was set up to be everybody's victim of sacrifice. This way, none of us have to get killed any more. This is my best explanation for why the church exists if it isn't true.

I also have a list of things I don't like about the church. 1. The church teaches the gospel to children as fact before they're old enough to think for themselves. 2. The church baptizes children before they're old enough to make an informed decision. 3. The church discourages questioning of the church. 4. Young people stay in the church more due to social pressure than religious conviction. 5. Even though the church advocates free agency, anybody who attends it is conditioned to live a certain way, etc...

Beyond the church, I have a list of things I don't like about religion in general. 1. Believers think that they're right and everyone else is wrong. 2. Religion causes wars, contention, and intolerance. 3. Religion can separate people and families. 4. It can be used to rationalize evils. 5. Each religion rejects other religions.

In my opinion, I would be better off with no religion at all. I don't need theology to be a good person.

Sincerely,

Joseph Hall