Thinking about those who leave – BCC post

I try to worry less about the state of their soul than I do about the fact that something in their experience made the church a non-viable option for them. Instead of measuring their ongoing adherence or deviation from LDS values, I grieve that I’ll miss out on their ongoing contributions to the body of Christ. I sorrow that the church can’t live up to the divine potential it seeks to achieve. I sorrow even more if the person who leaves experiences grief at their loss of a faith that formerly sustained them.

Oh, that we all understood and felt this. Thanks for sharing SBRed.

I think it is a good post. There must be some measure of “sorrow” or “grieving” for those that no longer follow one’s chosen path.

It struck me that Evengelicals that produce anti-Mormon literature might actually be doing so from a misguided sense of love for the poor decieved hell bound Mormons. Or more precisely, out of a deep personal conviction that their own path (evangelical Jesus) is the onlly right path and that all others are wrong in some degree.

In sorrowing, I impose my own standard on them even though I do it as an act of love. But my love is thereby revealed to be conditional. Instead of relating to a former member as still being a sister or brother in Christ, a dear friend or family member, I define myself over and against them.

I guess that can pass as love.

I “sorrow” to some extent over some old friends that no longer participate on StayLDS. My hope is that they stopped participating because they didn’t need it any more. That doesn’t mean that I don’t still miss them but it is sorrow tinged with hope and joy – as when children grow up and move away.

It struck me that Evengelicals that produce anti-Mormon literature might actually be doing so from a misguided sense of love.

Actually Roy…

The overwhelming majority of “anti” literature is simply a side by side comparison of church doctrine/historical records/D&Cs/First Presidency statements/etc. over the years. It may be articulated or written out in comparison by someone other than a LDS official, but the most damaging literature is Mormon written, and church approved sources itself. The most popular one, “Letter to CES director” is a pure Mormon-on-Mormon example. Catholics and Protestant Christians had NOTHING to with that document.

Very few Christian organizations focus solely on producing evangelical apologetics to Mormon religious positions, mostly because they don’t see a need too.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Great post. I want to cultivate a more caring attitude like one that the author displays. I would hope that all LDS members feel this way when one of the flock chooses another path.

I especially found myself relating to the author’s fear that his love was conditional upon someone’s faithfulness. I struggle with that all the time. There are people at church I have to pretend I like or care for when in reality I’d rather they just leave me alone.

Thanks for sharing…

I think that’s why the CES letter has such an impact – it is generated from within and is not mixed with half truths, untruths, and outright lies.

+1 for me. That was one of the most impactful things I have read. The rebuttals from apologists felt about as effective as blood-letting for common ailments.

I’ve read a ton of anti-Mormon stuff in my life. Seriously, the amount probably would shock most people here. It runs the gamut – including flat-out fabrications, distortions, misunderstandings, irreconcilable perspectives, honest mistakes, solid historical analyses, correct comparisons, etc. In every case that included the most negative examples, there was one commonality: an intense dislike (even hatred and loathing) of Mormonism driven by an assumption that the LDS Church is a dangerous, devilish cult; in every case that included purely the more neutral or “positive” examples, the commonality was an absolute certainty in the author’s own belief system. People who don’t fit those two categories, applied broadly and not just relative to the LDS Church, aren’t anti-anything, in practice.

What I find most interesting is that those who engage actively in true anti-Mormon efforts are every bit as myopic / blind to the possibility of anything Mormon being good, true, right, etc. as the most narrow-minded Mormons are about anything non-Mormon being good, true, right, etc. It’s the exact same mindset but opposite targets. They are the exact same people, which means they hate themselves without any inkling that they do so – and they would scream blasphemy if they heard me say that. The vast majority of Mormons and non-Mormons are not like the caricatures that consume the extremists’ time, which illustrates the absurdity of both extreme positions and people.

The overwhelming majority of “anti” literature is simply a side by side comparison of church doctrine/historical records/D&Cs/First Presidency statements/etc. over the years.

I can’t speak to the overwhelming majority portion, but the side by side comparison, etc isn’t totally accurate either. My husband is deeply agnostic bordering on atheistic, and he has spoken 2 or 3 times to a growing group of non-Mormon’s who meet 2 times a month to tell the real truth of Mormonism. None of them have been members, a few were proselyted by missionaries, but the rest have built a bedrock understanding based on their religions teachings of Mormonism.

Every meeting my husband gets to unwind the truth from the fiction, unchain the lies from the facts.

As a member of record, my husband loves to use the CES letter as a trump card for both camps. When (and rarely) a member gets over zealous on a point my husband asks if they have read the CES Letter. When he is at the meeting he uses it to sort out the gross misperceptions the others have about us.