Not going back

[Nonny]

I'm feeling strongly that it is time to tell dh that I will never be returning to belief in the LDS church. I thought I'd run my ideas past more objective eyes here before I take that plunge.

"I don't see myself ever coming back to a belief in the church. After 18 years of studying and thinking about this, I think I am done. I have been listening to podcasts, faithful, nuanced, middle way and antagonistic. I have read multitudes of books and articles from those different approaches on both doctrine history, and culture. There are too many practices and attitudes I disagree with and too many doctrines I don't have faith in. I can't picture that changing for me at this point. "

"As an example, our ward is having a Martins Cove adventure and this is something I don't agree with. We hold the handcart pioneers up as exemplary heroes of their faith and fortitude to be praised. I see them as victims. They chose faith and fervency over common sense and good judgement. Their sacrifices, deaths, starvation, loss of limbs, does not prove the church is true. We keep celebrating their sacrifice. If there were any members of Jim Jones' cult still alive, would they set up a monument and have annual celebrations of their sacrifice? Would their sacrifice prove their church is true?"

Ok, I suppose the Jim Jones reference might be a bit over the top, but this handcart thing is really eating at me. I read every book and article I could get in preparation for this trip, so I would be able to know these pioneers as people with stories and feelings and lives, rather than as symbols and testimonies. This was a tragedy not a theme park adventure.

But this is not the final straw, it is just the most recent. The final straw was probably the Nov policy. But as I said, I have been noticing these dissonances for a very long time.

[Red Ryder]

"I don't see myself ever coming back to a belief in the church. After 18 years of studying and thinking about this, I think I am done. I have been listening to podcasts, faithful, nuanced, middle way and antagonistic. I have read multitudes of books and articles from those different approaches on both doctrine history, and culture. There are too many practices and attitudes I disagree with and too many doctrines I don't have faith in. I can't picture that changing for me at this point. "

Sounds reasonable enough. You could simply say "I don't believe, it no longer works for me, and I'd like to find better things to do with my time." Then give him a nice loooooong kiss to divert his mind from the mormon panic mode that will inevitably set in. Every time he opens his mouth, extend your index finger and gently press it to his lips, then gently whisper in his ear "shhhhhh, this isn't up for debate!!" Then another loooong kiss on the lips to again divert his mind. Repeat as necessary.

Is he TBM? I guess a Marten's Cove Cosplay Adventure answers that question.

[Corsair]

Sounds reasonable enough. You could simply say "I don't believe, it no longer works for me, and I'd like to find better things to do with my time." Then give him a nice loooooong kiss to divert his mind from the mormon panic mode that will inevitably set in. Every time he opens his mouth, extend your index finger and gently press it to his lips, then gently whisper in his ear "shhhhhh, this isn't up for debate!!" Then another loooong kiss on the lips to again divert his mind. Repeat as necessary.

The reassurance of your continued love and support is critical. You are set against all the poor cliches of what happens to apostates. Showing a continuous effort at being an excellent spouse and obviously not falling into the "meth and hookers" scenario will help your spouse to adjust. But there will still be pain in the adjustment.

[Stig]

I'm feeling strongly that it is time to tell dh that I will never be returning to belief in the LDS church. I thought I'd run my ideas past more objective eyes here before I take that plunge.

"I don't see myself ever coming back to a belief in the church. After 18 years of studying and thinking about this, I think I am done. I have been listening to podcasts, faithful, nuanced, middle way and antagonistic. I have read multitudes of books and articles from those different approaches on both doctrine history, and culture. There are too many practices and attitudes I disagree with and too many doctrines I don't have faith in. I can't picture that changing for me at this point. "

"As an example, our ward is having a Martins Cove adventure and this is something I don't agree with. We hold the handcart pioneers up as exemplary heroes of their faith and fortitude to be praised. I see them as victims. They chose faith and fervency over common sense and good judgement. Their sacrifices, deaths, starvation, loss of limbs, does not prove the church is true. We keep celebrating their sacrifice. If there were any members of Jim Jones' cult still alive, would they set up a monument and have annual celebrations of their sacrifice? Would their sacrifice prove their church is true?"

Ok, I suppose the Jim Jones reference might be a bit over the top, but this handcart thing is really eating at me. I read every book and article I could get in preparation for this trip, so I would be able to know these pioneers as people with stories and feelings and lives, rather than as symbols and testimonies. This was a tragedy not a theme park adventure.

But this is not the final straw, it is just the most recent. The final straw was probably the Nov policy. But as I said, I have been noticing these dissonances for a very long time.

Actually, several people of his cult did survive...and I'm pretty sure they don't hold any celebratory vigils for their fellow cult-members who didn't make it out of Jonestown.

[Thoughtful]

I'm feeling strongly that it is time to tell dh that I will never be returning to belief in the LDS church. I thought I'd run my ideas past more objective eyes here before I take that plunge.

"I don't see myself ever coming back to a belief in the church. After 18 years of studying and thinking about this, I think I am done. I have been listening to podcasts, faithful, nuanced, middle way and antagonistic. I have read multitudes of books and articles from those different approaches on both doctrine history, and culture. There are too many practices and attitudes I disagree with and too many doctrines I don't have faith in. I can't picture that changing for me at this point. "

"As an example, our ward is having a Martins Cove adventure and this is something I don't agree with. We hold the handcart pioneers up as exemplary heroes of their faith and fortitude to be praised. I see them as victims. They chose faith and fervency over common sense and good judgement. Their sacrifices, deaths, starvation, loss of limbs, does not prove the church is true. We keep celebrating their sacrifice. If there were any members of Jim Jones' cult still alive, would they set up a monument and have annual celebrations of their sacrifice? Would their sacrifice prove their church is true?"

Ok, I suppose the Jim Jones reference might be a bit over the top, but this handcart thing is really eating at me. I read every book and article I could get in preparation for this trip, so I would be able to know these pioneers as people with stories and feelings and lives, rather than as symbols and testimonies. This was a tragedy not a theme park adventure.

But this is not the final straw, it is just the most recent. The final straw was probably the Nov policy. But as I said, I have been noticing these dissonances for a very long time.

I feel the same way about Martin's Cove and trek in general.

[Nonny]

Thanks to you all for you supportive comments. It takes a long time for me to get the strength to bring up sensitive subjects. But I am getting better at it with practice. I hardly think anything on my end will change at all, since this is how I have been living internally for a really long time. Writing always helps me think through my crazy impulsive ideas. I appreciate having my NOM brothers and sisters to get some feedback.

[Red Ryder]

Writing always helps me think through my crazy impulsive ideas. I appreciate having my NOM brothers and sisters to get some feedback.

What does authenticity look like to you? What are your top five changes you would make?

Here are mine:
1. Sunday - a day without any expectations. Let's decide together and enjoy whatever we decide.
2. Freedom of speech - no worries I'll upset anyone with my comments.
3. No fear - no fear that I'm damaging my kids by not living the mormon prescription.
4. Feel normal - no strange religious induced thoughts, fears, anxiety, spiritual trauma, etc. To not feel like I'm in the twighlight zone of Mormonism. This would probably need to be some sort of mormon amnesia. Like not knowing what food storage is or what Kolob means.
5. Have all my tithing back.

[FiveFingerMnemonic]

"One long funeral march"

[RubinHighlander]

As I came to a knowledge of the truth and it set me free, I also came to see the pioneer sacrifices as a needless death march. I can't imagine the mental gymnastics those poor souls went through. Delirious, starving, sick, exhausted, what else could they hope for but a better life on the other side as a reward for their sacrifice? It makes me feel sick inside thinking about it. In some ways, the TBMs of the modern world are in a death march as well, just a much slower paced one of guilt and fear.

I am very respectful of those early saints and the strength they had to forge cities and farms out of the sagebrush soil. I do not judge them for their faith in a false cult and giving their lives for it because I was in it for 40+ years. I think the Jim Jones comparison is fair.

As far as your TBM spouse, my suggestion is to be very sincere and honest and try to convey the amount of mental anguish and pain you have gone through to get to where you are. Offer to go into the details of your conclusions but don't dump them all on the table at once. It really depends on where you DH is with all this right now. Maybe wait for a moment where he also expresses some frustration with the church. Through all of this, emphasize that your love for him transcends it all (if it does). Crossroads eventually have a way of inevitably coming up, in spite of our avoidance of them; this might be one for you. Good luck!

[Emower]

I also think the Jim Jones comparison is fair. But, I do have some conflicting feelings about the pioneers.
I dont like the cosplay, trek or any of that stuff. I think if the pioneers could see us doing that they would be dumbfounded. But, I still like singing those pioneer hymns that illustrate their faith. My ancestors were pioneers and I was raised on a diet of inspiring stories. I think I still respect them for their convictions though. Even if someones convictions were in a false hope, I think it is still valid.
That said, I dont know where the line is. Maybe if we knew someone from the Jim Jones debacle close, we would have a different opinion? Maybe not. I dont know. I dont revere them, but I am also not one of their descendants and they really dont mean anything to me. I think the line is social acceptance? The Mormons generally have been accepted into American mainstream culture. Accepted in that weird cousin way, but still somewhat accepted. That makes it OK to respect the people upon whose backs the acceptance was won?

[Dravin]

Personally I'd just lead with the first paragraph and reserve the second one in case he asks for an example. What you're doing here is probably a better tactic then I used to announce things weren't some phase my wife should hold her breath hoping for it to pass. My tactic? I announced my resignation.

[Not Buying It]

I also think the Jim Jones comparison is fair. But, I do have some conflicting feelings about the pioneers.
I dont like the cosplay, trek or any of that stuff. I think if the pioneers could see us doing that they would be dumbfounded. But, I still like singing those pioneer hymns that illustrate their faith. My ancestors were pioneers and I was raised on a diet of inspiring stories. I think I still respect them for their convictions though. Even if someones convictions were in a false hope, I think it is still valid.
That said, I dont know where the line is. Maybe if we knew someone from the Jim Jones debacle close, we would have a different opinion? Maybe not. I dont know. I dont revere them, but I am also not one of their descendants and they really dont mean anything to me. I think the line is social acceptance? The Mormons generally have been accepted into American mainstream culture. Accepted in that weird cousin way, but still somewhat accepted. That makes it OK to respect the people upon whose backs the acceptance was won?

I disagree - convictions in a false hope don't earn my respect. Think about Linus in the pumpkin patch waiting for the Great Pumpkin - is that admirable? Not really. He placed his faith in something that was false, and missed out on Halloween as a reward for his foolishness. We've been taught to revere our pioneer forefathers, but in some ways I curse them for being so darn gullible. Joseph and Brigham made outrageous claims - the early Saints should have had the good sense to demand sufficient evidence to back those farfetched claims up.

Actually, our pioneer ancestors were the gullible chumps who listened to religious con men. Their strength of conviction doesn't make up for their foolishness and naivete in following Joseph and Brigham. Their more sensible neighbors who dismissed Joseph and Brigham's claims outright are the ones we should be admiring and revering.

[Red Ryder]

Actually, our pioneer ancestors were the gullible chumps who listened to religious con men. Their strength of conviction doesn't make up for their foolishness and naivete in following Joseph and Brigham. Their more sensible neighbors who dismissed Joseph and Brigham's claims outright are the ones we should be admiring and revering.

I agree with this but don't think gullibility can take all of the blame. I think "opportunity" should also be tossed in. These were frontier folks who didn't have much and while some were naive and gullible, others were probably following along for the opportunities to be a part of the bigger community growth and movement.

In other words, the people who potentially could gain the most were believers. The people who potentially could lose the most were skeptics. This dynamic still holds out fairly strong today with new converts. People whose basic needs are met and have abundance find they don't need religion.

[Emower]

I also think the Jim Jones comparison is fair. But, I do have some conflicting feelings about the pioneers.
I dont like the cosplay, trek or any of that stuff. I think if the pioneers could see us doing that they would be dumbfounded. But, I still like singing those pioneer hymns that illustrate their faith. My ancestors were pioneers and I was raised on a diet of inspiring stories. I think I still respect them for their convictions though. Even if someones convictions were in a false hope, I think it is still valid.
That said, I dont know where the line is. Maybe if we knew someone from the Jim Jones debacle close, we would have a different opinion? Maybe not. I dont know. I dont revere them, but I am also not one of their descendants and they really dont mean anything to me. I think the line is social acceptance? The Mormons generally have been accepted into American mainstream culture. Accepted in that weird cousin way, but still somewhat accepted. That makes it OK to respect the people upon whose backs the acceptance was won?

I disagree - convictions in a false hope don't earn my respect. Think about Linus in the pumpkin patch waiting for the Great Pumpkin - is that admirable? Not really. He placed his faith in something that was false, and missed out on Halloween as a reward for his foolishness. We've been taught to revere our pioneer forefathers, but in some ways I curse them for being so darn gullible. Joseph and Brigham made outrageous claims - the early Saints should have had the good sense to demand sufficient evidence to back those farfetched claims up.

Actually, our pioneer ancestors were the gullible chumps who listened to religious con men. Their strength of conviction doesn't make up for their foolishness and naivete in following Joseph and Brigham. Their more sensible neighbors who dismissed Joseph and Brigham's claims outright are the ones we should be admiring and revering.

I will admit that this is still an area with strong cognitive dissonance for me. I want to acknowledge that their faith was in a false hope, they got duped and a lot of people died for it. I want to get on board with you comparison of the great pumpkin, but I am just not there. I do revere and admire those that didnt take the bait. I would love to shake Lucy Harris' hand and tell her thank you for trying.

I realize that those people gave their fleeting life for a false religion, and they passed on their choices to us down the line which saddles us with some pretty unique life challenges. But everybody does that. My decisions right now are going to affect my children, maybe good, maybe bad. All I can do is try to have some backbone and convictions in life. And whatever anyone says about the pioneers, they did not lack conviction.

I think "opportunity" should also be tossed in. These were frontier folks who didn't have much and while some were naive and gullible, others were probably following along for the opportunities to be a part of the bigger community growth and movement.

That is a really great point.

[TestimonyLost]

If you haven't yet shared this with your husband, I recommend nixing the Jim Jones reference entirely and consider leaving the whole pioneer reference out. I get that there's some recency to the issue for you but is it really among your biggest issues with the church? If it really is, maybe it deserves to stay. Otherwise, I recommend referencing one of your key issues or, like Red Ryder suggested, maybe just stick to the main point for now: "I don't believe anymore."

My wife is fully aware I have no faith/testimony left but she desparately wants to pretend that's not true so we just don't talk about it. Her being aware of it hasn't measurably changed or improved things. I don't say that just to be negative but to temper your expectations of outcomes.

Good luck!

[Nonny]

I don't know if I want to bump this thread up again, but I do want to acknowledge all the responses here. Some great points.

FiveFingerMneumonic: I read Bagley's article and it reflects the way I look at the trek now.

Red Ryder and others: What I would like to accomplish is to be able to just state a counter opinion in a conversation without him getting all defensive. I would like to stop going to church without getting the look. I would like to live my life without always wondering if he is getting his feelings hurt. And I'm not planning to do anything crazy. I would just like us to have equal respect for each other. I want us to remove the barriers that keep us from having intimate conversations.

If you haven't yet shared this with your husband, I recommend nixing the Jim Jones reference entirely and consider leaving the whole pioneer reference out. I get that there's some recency to the issue for you but is it really among your biggest issues with the church? If it really is, maybe it deserves to stay. Otherwise, I recommend referencing one of your key issues or, like Red Ryder suggested, maybe just stick to the main point for now: "I don't believe anymore."

My wife is fully aware I have no faith/testimony left but she desparately wants to pretend that's not true so we just don't talk about it. Her being aware of it hasn't measurably changed or improved things. I don't say that just to be negative but to temper your expectations of outcomes.

Good luck!

Testimony Lost: What you said here is so true to my experience. Thanks.

The outcome of the handcart trek.
That was hard, physically hard. I tried to think of it as a hike with an additional challenge, but that didn't help much. I couldn't get past, "why am I doing this again?" I mentioned that to dh, that I didn't enjoy it at all. He said something about he could understand why it wouldn't be enjoyable if one didn't get the spiritual benefits from it. A more assertive person would have asked, what are the spiritual benefits?, but I didn't. Neither did I tell him I doubt I can ever believe again. It didn't seem like a smart move, because except for the trek, the rest of the weekend was a good time spent together which I didn't want to spoil.

He was appointed to tell one of the emotionally triggering stories along the route and he asked me some advice (!). He said it was one of those stories where the standard narrative differs from the historical facts, and he had struggled with how to approach it. I said go with the truth. In the end he did a good job of explaining what is customarily told, but how these other facts are also true. That was progress I think. Perhaps he considers some of the things I think too.

[Emower]

I said go with the truth. In the end he did a good job of explaining what is customarily told, but how these other facts are also true. That was progress I think. Perhaps he considers some of the things I think too.

Small steps matter. If he gives you some respect for your beliefs that will carry a long way.