Final Straw

[BJRumph]

You know, all of the high-minded talk of certain local LDS about eternal families, personal deification, and restored gospels is absolutely meaningless when the Officials in Salt Lake are just as ready to trample upon a person’s God given dignity as the supposedly “abberant” local authorities who are more honest i expressing the actual teachings of the church.

No matter how “nice” TOm or Mormon Fool is, it has become clear, thanks to the official actions of Salt Lake, that it is they, TOm and MFool, who are the abberations, the exceptions to the rule. The Church, institutionally, has no respect for a person’s dignity, and does not encourage its appointed local leaders to have any such respect either.

I was willing to accept that our local bishop was an “abberation”, and was acting outside the direction and expectation of the Church when he ignored our explicit and unmistakable instruction of “DO NOT CONTACT” in our formal reignation from the church, as all of the local board lds would like to insist.

However, we just got another letter, this time from Membership records, further denying our request to resign and have no further contact from them, despite clear and explicit instructions that answered, point for point, every question raised in their responsorial letter. Obvioulsy, it is not the local bishop who is “wrong”, but the INSTITUTION.

The CoJCoLDS institutionally teaches, and positively INSTRUCTS its appointed leaders, to trample on the personal dignity of its members in order to preserve its unholy “kingdom”. It can only be described as “Malicious” how they are toying with the emotions of my family as they deny our personal rights and dignity while they play games with their uninspired bureaucratic system and ill intent, deceiving themselves that they are doing God’s work through such destructive tactics.

I am no longer content to merely be an “exmo”, willing to believe that lds are “basically good” people being merely conned by a human-created religion. Thanks to the evil done by Salt Lake, on official business, I can no longer believe that all the evil I have seen perpetuated here, locally, is merely the mis-implementation of a few “weak” or “mistaken” leaders; but instead is the intentional work of the Institution itself.

May the Lord rebuke them all.

 

[PaulDupre]

Would you please post the text of the letter?
Thanks,
Paul

 

[majick275]

They are trolling for ex grounds. They prefer to ex people who are bound and determined to leave. That way they can claim that anything they say is just sour grapes from being exed and they left because of their sins not because the church isn’t true.

 

[Demosthenes]

BJRumph,

While reading the prideful rantings of Zak and Amgid, I too have been requesting the removal of my name from LDS membership. I explicitly requested that the preceding be handled with “respect and with full confidentiality” and that “after today (the first letter) the only contact I want from the church is a single letter of confirmation”. The first response I recieved informed me that both the bishop and stake president had been notified of my request and that they would be contacting me. (So much for confidentiality). Next an older couple from our neighborhood innocently strolled by one evening and struck up a conversation. After chatting they informed us (my wife, daughter and me), that the bishop had asked them to stop by. To make things even better, they then requested we say Hi to my parents with whom they were friends.

I completely agree that the church has no respect for individual rights. I honostly believe that this lack of respect comes from an inherent acceptance of secrecy and dishonesty learned from an organization that changes and hides its history and teaches blind acceptance of belief.

D

 

[tkdnick]

In Isaiah Bennett’s book, he says that you may have to send them a letter threatening legal recourse if your name is not removed. He even said it may actually come to legal recourse if you’re serious about it.

 

[Tmaque]

I have never asked for my name to be removed from LDS records simply because I believe it is not the authentic Church. It’s an imposter, a fake. My membership in the LDS Church is a membership in a non-entity. It’s like finding out you were married to a robot and then trying to get a divorce.

That said, I don’t begrudge LDS for trying any way they can to keep you, in what they regard, as the true Church of Jesus Christ. They really do have good intentions, no matter how irritating they may be.

 

[BJRumph]

Later I’ll post the letter they sent us. As it is their standard fare form letter (by all appearances) you shouldn’t actually expect anything too obviously crass. What makes it really irritating, and effectively a form of harrasment, is that it totally ignores every request made in our original letter, which was essentially the letter provided at Mormon No More, (the only changes made were to add a “CC” to our local bishop, so they especially had no reason to forward our request to someone who visibly already has a copy).

Further, not only does the letter (as well as our bishop, who also violated the “no contact” clause) violate our request for no contact, it goes further by providing a pamphlet entitled “An Invitation” which goes on to assume that our request was prompted by not being socially supported by the church, and that if we reconsider, the church will welcome us with open arms, and we will get the social support that we supposedly didn’t get before.

I personally find this pamphlet disturbing, even beyond its egregious disregard for our wishes. Either the First Presidency is so ARROGANT to think that no one could possibly believe that anyone would leave the church for RELIGIOUS or DOCTRINAL reasons, and therefore are assuming it is “social”; or is so CYNICAL that they do not believe that religion or doctrine actually counts for anything, and theirs is simply a social organization, which the “statistics” say people leave due to failed social integration.

Ironincally, my wife was very socially integrated into the ward (far moreso than I), and it is precisely because of her lifetime membership (being a “born in the covenant” mormon) and total social connection to the church that we chose to handle the resignations in the way it was done. She absolutely denies its doctrinal validity and truth; but she is a human being, and fears the social pressure that she, herself, knows is forthcoming.

The final issue, that actually bugs me the most, is that they did not make such waves when *I * resigned; they are doing this specifically to my wife. This tells me that they are selective in this treatment, and therefore are intentionally harassing my wife.

Were their actions at least consistent, then they could simply cry “procedure”; however, even within a single family, they are not applying consistent “rules”, which provides far more evidence of harassment and undue pressure than they can counter with arguments of bureaucratic policy (not that such is not already addressed in the original resignations).

As to trying to “ex” her, before she can “resign”, it will be interesting for them to try, as they have absolutely no grounds to do so. As “faithfull” mormons cannot conceive of the idea that someone would actually leave the church over doctrine, they will *wish to believe * that it is about “discipline”, but their ostrich tactics don’t concern us, as the Reality that God created vindicates us. If they make a deal of it, yes, Lawyers will get involved, even given my own personal distaste for ligitiousness. Hopefully (for them) they will discuss things with our bishop first, as he knows how connected she is in local and state politics, and therefore knows the legal connections she possesses and can weild beyond what our actual fiscal capacity is.

Additionally, as the followup letter at mormon no more mentions, further infractions will go to the lawyers and the press. Ours will be in the mail tomorrow.

And all this, simply because they refuse to aknowledge the basic inherent human dignity of my wife. So much for their high teachings regarding being the “literal” (as opposed to “adopted”) Sons and Daughters of God, and divinely mandated Free Agency. Empty words compared to their pragmatic faith; their Theory denied by their own Praxis.

 

[BJRumph]

I originally had no intention of bothering with formally resigning for much the same reason; I didn’t feel they (as an institution) were worth the effort; their “rolls” have no effect (positive or negative) on my eternal status, so who cares? I was happy enough to turn in my recommend (which is what kicked off the whole affair), and leave it at that.

It was my wife who insisted that I needed to do it, if for no other reason that they would never leave me alone until I did (and as she initially was still faithful to the church, it was to prove to her that I was serious about the whole thing). But, as I continue to convert to Catholicism, and began to see the Gospel in truer eyes than I ever have, especially as it related to the basic worth and value of human life, I have to recognize that as mislead as they are, they too are given a fundamental inalienable dignity that must be recognized, and the best way I could address that at the time was to “respect” their beliefs enough to unequivocably and honestly separate myself from them

Anyway, “good intentions” are not enough; the ends do not justify the means. It is not mere “irritation”, but an actual affront. While I can recognize they are “sincere”, their pragmatic worldveiw is wholly at odds with what they want to believe they are representing. That they are blinded to the pain they are causing my wife (or for some who do see it, think they are doing a “good” thing, and that God desires such a thing) is just another evidence that there is something seriously wrong in mormonland. They have unconciously inverted basic moral values, and pat themselves on the back for it; yet if you point it out to them, they are completely oblivious to your point, and blindly insist that they are doing “good” things.

Understand Tmaque, I don’t have a problem with them as a seprate “religion” such as Islam, Buddhism, or even Wiccan; but I do have serious doctrinal problems with “recognizing” them as “Christians” as though they are a real continuation or even substantially similar to what is otherwise defined as being a part of Christendom. Mormons are “Christian” in the same sense that Buddhists say “you can be a Christian Buddhist, but not a Buddhist Christian”; that is, semantically and partially philosophically, but not in a real sense that is consistent (and arguably, compatible) with the ends and recognized beliefs recognized by the world as being called “Christianity”.

I realize that you disagree to some extent with me on such a position, and I recognize that. I differ in that I see the subtle perversions of Christianity that the lds offers its adherents are intrinsically dangerous, not only to its consituent members, but to those Christians outside the church who are not prepared adequately to understand those differences, and especially thier actual implications. For instance, a Protestant does not find the Great Apostacy theory of mormons to be *that far off * from their own understanding of such; and the missionaries are more than happy to allow the “investigator” to draw their own analogies and conclusions regarding it. Such is how I was led to believe that my Trinitarian belief was not substantially incompatible with what the church teaches or believes regarding such a fundamental aspect of God. Their “Anything goes” and “ends justify the means” approach to gaining converts is objectively wrong, as it is deceptive, and has the sole intention of causing people to accept somthing that if they were aware of its actual position, they would revile with their whole being. Funny, I seem to recall a quote on war that is very similar to that… Anyway, even TOm says that religious education is the best “defense” against the mormon church.

At anyrate, such is why I, personally, cannot even conversationally, allow the misrepresentative “fact” that mormons are Christian, even though there are certainly plenty of individual mormons who sincerily (if mistakenly) believe they are. Merely wearing the “name” of “Christ” on a lapel is not sufficient, nor is it condusive to objective fact or discussion to allow them to simpy ‘define themselves’ as such, and disregard their own express teachings which are non-christian upon analysis. Afterall, by the standard certain lds demand, I can “legitimately” define myself as being an honest-to-God Martian, based upon my word and claim alone, despite there being no objective evidence to support such a claim that I am anything other than what everyone else says (an agrees) I am. Were such a claim made by myself, the veracity and intensity of my sincerity only proves the veracity and intensity of my delusion, not that I am a Martian. The LDS are fundamentally no different in regards to their claimed “Christianity”, imho. But, such is beside the point, as it isn’t really too germaine to the discussion at hand. I’ve derailed my own thread

 

[Tmaque]

BJRumph:

I originally had no intention of bothering with formally resigning for much the same reason; I didn’t feel they (as an institution) were worth the effort; their “rolls” have no effect (positive or negative) on my eternal status, so who cares? I was happy enough to turn in my recommend (which is what kicked off the whole affair), and leave it at that.

It was my wife who insisted that I needed to do it, if for no other reason that they would never leave me alone until I did (and as she initially was still faithful to the church, it was to prove to her that I was serious about the whole thing). But, as I continue to convert to Catholicism, and began to see the Gospel in truer eyes than I ever have, especially as it related to the basic worth and value of human life, I have to recognize that as mislead as they are, they too are given a fundamental inalienable dignity that must be recognized, and the best way I could address that at the time was to “respect” their beliefs enough to unequivocably and honestly separate myself from them

Understand Tmaque, I don’t have a problem with them as a seprate “religion” such as Islam, Buddhism, or even Wiccan; but I do have serious doctrinal problems with “recognizing” them as “Christians” as though they are a real continuation or even substantially similar to what is otherwise defined as being a part of Christendom. Mormons are “Christian” in the same sense that Buddhists say “you can be a Christian Buddhist, but not a Buddhist Christian”; that is, semantically and partially philosophically, but not in a real sense that is consistent (and arguably, compatible) with the ends and recognized beliefs recognized by the world as being called “Christianity”.

I realize that you disagree to some extent with me on such a position, and I recognize that. I differ in that I see the subtle perversions of Christianity that the lds offers its adherents are intrinsically dangerous, not only to its consituent members, but to those Christians outside the church who are not prepared adequately to understand those differences, and especially thier actual implications. For instance, a Protestant does not find the Great Apostacy theory of mormons to be *that far off * from their own understanding of such; and the missionaries are more than happy to allow the “investigator” to draw their own analogies and conclusions regarding it. Such is how I was led to believe that my Trinitarian belief was not substantially incompatible with what the church teaches or believes regarding such a fundamental aspect of God. Their “Anything goes” and “ends justify the means” approach to gaining converts is objectively wrong, as it is deceptive, and has the sole intention of causing people to accept somthing that if they were aware of its actual position, they would revile with their whole being. Funny, I seem to recall a quote on war that is very similar to that… Anyway, even TOm says that religious education is the best “defense” against the mormon church.

At anyrate, such is why I, personally, cannot even conversationally, allow the misrepresentative “fact” that mormons are Christian, even though there are certainly plenty of individual mormons who sincerily (if mistakenly) believe they are. Merely wearing the “name” of “Christ” on a lapel is not sufficient, nor is it condusive to objective fact or discussion to allow them to simpy ‘define themselves’ as such, and disregard their own express teachings which are non-christian upon analysis. Afterall, by the standard certain lds demand, I can “legitimately” define myself as being an honest-to-God Martian, based upon my word and claim alone, despite there being no objective evidence to support such a claim that I am anything other than what everyone else says (an agrees) I am. Were such a claim made by myself, the veracity and intensity of my sincerity only proves the veracity and intensity of my delusion, not that I am a Martian. The LDS are fundamentally no different in regards to their claimed “Christianity”, imho. But, such is beside the point, as it isn’t really too germaine to the discussion at hand. I’ve derailed my own thread

BJ,
Please forgive me. I did not intend in any way to say that you are wrong for wanting your name removed from the LDS rolls. I understand completely why a person would want that. Also, I can’t really speak to the frustration you feel in regards to the process because I haven’t gone through it. The local LDS bishop knows I’m a Catholic now and has stopped sending home teachers over, but I still get the Elder’s Quorum newsletter every month. He is probably holding out hope for me. One day, when I’m inclined to tie up life’s loose ends, perhaps I’ll make the effort to officially seperate myself from the LDS Church.

 

[Chris-WA]

BJRumph:

I personally find this pamphlet disturbing, even beyond its egregious disregard for our wishes. Either the First Presidency is so ARROGANT to think that no one could possibly believe that anyone would leave the church for RELIGIOUS or DOCTRINAL reasons, and therefore are assuming it is “social”; or is so CYNICAL that they do not believe that religion or doctrine actually counts for anything, and theirs is simply a social organization, which the “statistics” say people leave due to failed social integration.

It’s the first one. Mormons I’ve encountered rarely are capable of believing that anyone would leave for doctrinal reasons. When you’ve been taught all your life that you are the true church, that all others are apostate, and that anyone who criticizes the LDS church is doing so due to the influence of the adversary, it makes it really hard to step out of that worldview and see things for what they really are.

 

[BJRumph]

No need to apologize Tmaque; I was not arguing for the better of either position, just explaining why I did bother with the process, despite my own general inclination to just quit and ignore them. Sorry if I came accross as being confrontational about it.

Anyway, here is the letter they sent my wife. Again, nothing obviously “wrong” with its actual content, until you compare it to the letter that they are responding to:

Dear Sister Rumph:

I have been asked to acknowledge your recent letter in which you request that your family’s names be removed from the membership records of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

I have also been asked to inform you that the Church considers such a request to be an ecclesiastical matter that must be handled by local preisthood leaders before being processed by Church employees. Therefore, your letter and a copy of this reply are being sent to President XXX [the stake pres-ed.] of the Juneau Alaska Stake. He will have Bishop XXX [ed.] contact you concerning the fulfillment of your request.

In veiw of the eternal consequences of such an action, the Brethren urge you to reconsider your request and to prayerfully consider the enclosed statement of the First Presidency.

Sincerily,

XXX
Supervisor, Member and Statistical Records

(note, I removed all names, as I am unclear as to the appropriateness/legality of letting them remain in the forum; technically, the names involved are all “public domain”, but no need getting CA in trouble in case of some obscure hook somewhere-BJR)

Now, after reading the letter we sent (found at mormonnomore dot com, under “sample letter”.), wherein did they honor a single provision made? Also, if an “employee” of the Church has no business performing such “ecclesiastical” actions; then where does he get the authority to preach to us regarding the “eternal consequences” of the administrative action he is being employed to perform? It is interesting, that he tells us that the SP will, in all contrary instruction from us (which all parties now have a copy of), will instruct the Bishop to contact us anyway.

ARGGGG. Funny how much they support NCs in leaving their churches, all the while blasting their old religion and family for making it so difficult for the NC; while participating in an even more convoluted and drawn out process in regards to their members who want to convert somewhere else. The only thing they haven’t done (to our knowledge as of yet, anyway) is call my wife’s family to inform them of her descision (we aren’t holding our breaths however, as the SP is buddy-buddy with DW’s Father, and this is supposedly a “common” occurance, despite the language that should cause them to refrain from doing so), thereby denying her the ability to discuss it in an appropriate manner and according to her inspiration. We’ll just have to wait and see. .

Anyway, thanks for letting me vent; the raging fire has been controlled, and is now nice little burning briquettes, perfectly suitable for cooking dinner over, or at least allow the lawyers to cook over should it come to that.

 

[BJRumph]

Yes, Chris-WA, I am in total agreement with you, but only as it applies to local members, and low-level administrators, like Bishops. However, the actions I have seen in regards to Stake-level personnel, and the carefully measured and controlled statements and declarations of higher-level church personnel regarding anything substantive, suggests to me that there is a break point, where cynical pragmatism takes over for faith, making statistics and administration become the driving force behind actions and “doctrinal” policies, rather than religious faith, which simply becomes the “tool” used to cause the enactment of their new policies.