PART 3 (final): The First Presidency's response to my letter

This is for encouragement, ideas, and support for people going through a faith transition no matter where you hope to end up. This is also the place to laugh, cry, and love together.
Post Reply
User avatar
NOWmormon
Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2017 10:53 am

PART 3 (final): The First Presidency's response to my letter

Post by NOWmormon » Sun May 07, 2017 9:39 am

This is Part 3-final
(please see Part 1--posted May 5; and Part 2—posted May 6 for more context)

--
Recap:
-I sent a letter to the Q15 requesting a written statement of remorse, of regret, for withholding the complete truth regarding Joseph’s plural marriages throughout church history
-The letter was pushed back to the Stake level.
-The Stake President stated that he was the response from the First Presidency.
-I responded that to move forward, I need to hear from the Q15 and asked him for recommendations to achieve this.


Here is the response I received from the Stake President
(out of respect, I paraphrase, since this was his personal communication to me):

-I reaffirm my commitment to meet with you as necessary to overcome doubts in your faith
-But there is nothing more we can do to solicit a response from Salt Lake


My response to him:

“I will continue to strive for my goal of receiving a direct response from Salt Lake, because it is only they that can demonstrate accountability for the actions of church leadership as a whole.

Do you have a contact you could share with me to get me started?”


His response.

-I don’t


My response:
“I'll start my due diligence....”


-When I read these words, that there was nothing more we could do, a flood of different thoughts came to my mind:

-Oh yeah, watch me
-and I thought isn’t the worth of souls great in the sight of God?
-The Shepherd does not send the ninety-and-nine to bring back “the one”; He does it Himself
-After decades of service and sacrifice, my response from the church begins with (I assume) a form letter?
-I can’t be the only one that is experiencing this

And it’s not right that the Church’s response to the public outcry caused by the plural marriage essay blames members like me for not knowing about it.

Their response included “Much of what you’ll find in the essay…-is- known among long-term members.”

These words refer to members like me and are personally offensive.
-Blaming me because I didn’t know these things and implying that it’s my own fault
-That reading from the “best books” throughout my life was not enough
-That being trained as a missionary and serving a full-time mission wasn’t enough
-That being ordained a High Priest was not enough
-That being sealed for eternity was not enough
And that I am having a less than stellar reaction due to my own lack of action.

The church must be the source of it’s own truth.
If it has not taught it, but has in fact concealed it, why is it my fault?

Church leadership has only themselves to blame, because the Culture of Concealment has been perpetuated by them for decades.

So there is nothing we can do?
--more to come

User avatar
alas
Posts: 2379
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:10 pm

Re: PART 3 (final): The First Presidency's response to my letter

Post by alas » Sun May 07, 2017 11:42 am

You used the analogy of the unfaithful wife who showed no remorse, and when you demanded she explain herself, she sent her sister. Well, seriously, what would you do in that situation? Continue to chase after your wife who clearly does not care about the relationship with you, or would you file for divorce to protect yourself from further deception?

Just as only you can answer what you would do with an unfaithful and unrepentant wife, only you can answer what you want to do about the church that betrayed you, then blamed your being shocked at their behavior right back onto you.

Me, I accepted that they don't give a crap about me, and I moved on. Why demand an acknowledgement of wrong doing from someone who does not see their lies as a problem. Why ask them to pretend they care about you? Sure it hurts to find out, not only that they do not have any concept of truth, but they also do not care at all about you as an individual. But, see it is their problem that they have no honor.

User avatar
2bizE
Posts: 2420
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 9:33 pm

Re: PART 3 (final): The First Presidency's response to my letter

Post by 2bizE » Sun May 07, 2017 12:04 pm

Sorry NOWMormon for lack of response from the church. It was expected as many from NOM have also found out. Ultimately it is your fault. You chose to join a religion that is less than honest with its members.
Perhaps renting a billboard along I-15 requesting a response from the church is your next option?
~2bizE

User avatar
The Beast
Posts: 152
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 10:32 am

Re: PART 3 (final): The First Presidency's response to my letter

Post by The Beast » Sun May 07, 2017 1:17 pm

Your experience is similar to many on here who have written the big cheeses for answers. Bottom line is they have none so they stir you around as if you are a turd in their oh-so-tasty truth stew and hope you will dissolve back into the mix no longer to be seen again. Their truth stew is more like poop soup and the people floating around in there that realize what it really is and point it out to them are just like the kid who pointed out that the emperor has no clothes.
Are you on the square? Are you on the level?

User avatar
Mormorrisey
Posts: 1425
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 6:54 pm

Re: PART 3 (final): The First Presidency's response to my letter

Post by Mormorrisey » Sun May 07, 2017 4:04 pm

I read your story with much interest. Unfortunately, being very cynical, an organization that "neither accepts apologies or gives them" (according to Oaks) gave you the only answer it would give. I salute your efforts in trying to begin a dialogue, but I must concur with the above sentiments, that it likely will produce only increasing angst as they continue to rebuff your requests for redress. They are not in that business. Unless you've given millions in tithing or can do great things for their image, they have little use for their unpaid labour force (regular members). Keep us posted, though.
"And I don't need you...or, your homespun philosophies."
"And when you try to break my spirit, it won't work, because there's nothing left to break."

User avatar
fh451
Posts: 136
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 4:28 pm

Re: PART 3 (final): The First Presidency's response to my letter

Post by fh451 » Sun May 07, 2017 4:12 pm

I'm not disparaging you in any way, NOWmormon, but you are yet another in a long line of those who would like answers from the leadership of the church and I daresay you are just not going to get one. Demand all you want, but they have the power and have shown repeatedly their ability to ignore you. As Alas said, my advice would be to figure out a way to move on with your life in peace rather than waste energy on this quixotic quest.
Good luck to you!

fh451

Korihor
Posts: 1239
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 10:37 am

Re: PART 3 (final): The First Presidency's response to my letter

Post by Korihor » Sun May 07, 2017 8:18 pm

For some reason, this keeps popping into my mind.
Image

I totally understand the desire and motivation for a response. I can't imagine a world in which they respond. It's obvious their response would be shared and further more "We don't give apologies and we don't ask for them. "This quote was actually a major crack in my shelf

Now, I'm going to read that 52 page letter.
Reading can severely damage your ignorance.

User avatar
oliver_denom
Posts: 464
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 4:09 pm

Re: PART 3 (final): The First Presidency's response to my letter

Post by oliver_denom » Mon May 08, 2017 3:48 am

Realistically, the only way to get a response from the brethren is to have a significant blood relation.
“You want to know something? We are still in the Dark Ages. The Dark Ages--they haven't ended yet.” - Vonnegut

L'enfer, c'est les autres - JP

User avatar
Give It Time
Posts: 1244
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2017 4:52 pm

Re: PART 3 (final): The First Presidency's response to my letter

Post by Give It Time » Mon May 08, 2017 5:14 am

oliver_denom wrote:
Mon May 08, 2017 3:48 am
Realistically, the only way to get a response from the brethren is to have a significant blood relation.
Actually, this it's true, but it may not go how you want.
At 70 years-old, my older self would tell my younger self to use the words, "f*ck off" much more frequently. --Helen Mirren

User avatar
MoPag
Posts: 3916
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 2:05 pm

Re: PART 3 (final): The First Presidency's response to my letter

Post by MoPag » Mon May 08, 2017 9:09 am

fh451 wrote:
Sun May 07, 2017 4:12 pm
I'm not disparaging you in any way, NOWmormon, but you are yet another in a long line of those who would like answers from the leadership of the church and I daresay you are just not going to get one. Demand all you want, but they have the power and have shown repeatedly their ability to ignore you. As Alas said, my advice would be to figure out a way to move on with your life in peace rather than waste energy on this quixotic quest.
Good luck to you!

fh451
yes to this^^^ If the act of pursuing this is cathartic to you, then keep doing it. But if the only way you will gain peace is if the Q15 respond, then I think you should reevaluate this.
...walked eye-deep in hell
believing in old men’s lies...--Ezra Pound

User avatar
Corsair
Posts: 3080
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:58 am
Location: Phoenix

Re: PART 3 (final): The First Presidency's response to my letter

Post by Corsair » Mon May 08, 2017 12:40 pm

Recently, Mormon Stories went through a string of interviews with people who did get the chance to speak to a GA. None of them really got the emotional validation you are looking for. Some did get their own confirmation that leaving the LDS church was a good decision, but nobody really got the acknowledgement that they had legitimate concerns backed up with good answers from the church. The church is just not going to give you that kind of resolution. You will be happier by moving on and leaving that desire as a steadily receding annoyance in your past.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 64 guests