Leaked 2013 Uchtdorf Faith Crisis Report

[Not Buying It]

Sometimes I think I’m living under a rock. How did I not know about this leaked Personal Faith Crisis Report?

https://faenrandir.github.io/a_careful ... s_R28e.pdf

https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comm ... tation_on/

President Uchtdorf’s name is on the front. Haven’t had time to digest it all, but it proves without a shadow of a doubt the Brethren are aware of the problems causing faith crises and have chosen to mostly ignore them. Check out the profiles in the back, lots of people who say pretty much the same things we say - with their income and education level, because, you know, apparently that’s pretty important to the Brethren, and Christ was all about those kinds of things.

Kind of pisses me off. Rather than confront these issues directly in General Conference or the dozens of talks they give each year, they instead try to demonize us and de-legitimize our issues. Freakin’ cowards.

[Red Ryder]

We hashed this one out for awhile back in October 2018.

Here’s the link. Jfro did a great write up on his LDS discussions blog.

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3629&p=48617

[1smartdodog]

Kind of pisses me off. Rather than confront these issues directly in General Conference or the dozens of talks they give each year, they instead try to demonize us and de-legitimize our issues. Freakin’ cowards.

Most large corporations suffer from the same thing. Those in charge never get into the weeds and try to understand the issues of the worker bees. They are insulated from the chatter of the masses. The farther you are rremoved from the consequences of your decisions the easier it is for you to ignore them.

If member retention affected them personally, more than just mild concern they would act differently. Suppose they lost income as numbers fell, what would they do differently. Or what if they had the chance of getting replaced? As it is there is no mechanism in place that promotes much more than the status quo.

[Red Ryder]

If member retention affected them personally, more than just mild concern they would act differently. Suppose they lost income as numbers fell, what would they do differently. Or what if they had the chance of getting replaced? As it is there is no mechanism in place that promotes much more than the status quo.

This is an excellent point. If I’m in a position to never be replaced other than my death, while access to unlimited resources and fans, I would be towing the company message with little passion and divergence. Think Elder Bednar’s conference level excitement and narcissism.

No wonder we get the same boring drivel week after week. Just keep those tithing checks coming and those temples appearing busy and all is well in Zion!

Call Mr. Mac, daddy needs a new suit!

[alas]

Kind of pisses me off. Rather than confront these issues directly in General Conference or the dozens of talks they give each year, they instead try to demonize us and de-legitimize our issues. Freakin’ cowards.

Most large corporations suffer from the same thing. Those in charge never get into the weeds and try to understand the issues of the worker bees. They are insulated from the chatter of the masses. The farther you are rremoved from the consequences of your decisions the easier it is for you to ignore them.

If member retention affected them personally, more than just mild concern they would act differently. Suppose they lost income as numbers fell, what would they do differently. Or what if they had the chance of getting replaced? As it is there is no mechanism in place that promotes much more than the status quo.

That was my thought. What incentive do they have to come clean? With 100 billion in the bank, another 100 billion or more in land holdings, and who know what other wealth stashed away, the corporation will be around for generations, no matter what happens with the membership. So, they are set for life, and they can pass the wealth on to their children who pretend to believe who can pass it on to their children. And eventually there will be no need to pretend to even be a religion any more. It will just be several very wealthy families who keep the corporation in their families. As disgusting as it is to use people to get rich off of by telling them they have to pay into your wealthy corporation before feeding their kids, that is what it has become. It is priest craft at its finest. Getting rich in the name of God. It all started with the idea that Joseph had to make money off of his peep stone, and since real treasure was hard to find, fake religion would do. I console myself with the idea about how much their own book condemns what they are doing, and that they are the great and abominable.

[Reuben]

I think they really believe the bullsh*t they say in order to stay in power. I think they're actually motivated partly by keeping the members' fragile testimonies burning bright.

I think all the stuff alas said is true, too. I'll bet most of them don't know they're also motivated by keeping their families and lifestyles secure.

When a bully is pounding your face in to "humble you" or an abuser takes absolute control of your life because "you're too stupid to do it right," they're not lying. They're stating a belief they accept partly because it's convenient for them: it gets them something they want.

[blazerb]

I think they really believe the bullsh*t they say in order to stay in power. I think they're actually motivated partly by keeping the members' fragile testimonies burning bright.

I think all the stuff alas said is true, too. I'll bet most of them don't know they're also motivated by keeping their families and lifestyles secure.

When a bully is pounding your face in to "humble you" or an abuser takes absolute control of your life because "you're too stupid to do it right," they're not lying. They're stating a belief they accept partly because it's convenient for them: it gets them something they want.

People are very good at developing reasons to explain their self-interested actions. That includes me, by the way. We need people around us to point out our bullsh*t. The highest levels of leadership don't have anyone who is allowed to point out when their ideas or actions are inappropriate. They are so confident that God will tell them what to do, it appears, that they don't need the type of human feedback that the rest of us need. I am sure that Bednar has no awareness that his insistence that he stand up first at the end of the meeting is a power play. There's no one around who can tell him, "No." Same with the rest. They may pay lip service to not "inhaling" the adoration, like Uchtdorf, but it's impossible unless those surrounding them can tell them that they sometimes have bad ideas.

[RubinHighlander]

I sent a copy of this report to my former bishop. It was in response to a couple of "ministers" (former ward members) coming by the house one day. At first we talked about the weather, then I congratulated them on 2 hour church. One of them asked if I was ready to come back, to which I replied that zero hour church works the best for us. Then one of them made the mistake to use the most common assumption there is among TBMs: "Well, sometimes some people get offended." I immediately shut him down and told him that's the most overused and inaccurate statement there is in the church. I then told them about the Faith Crisis Report and gave them a few examples of the top reasons people leave.

Needless to say, they've never been back. It prompted me to send a copy of the report to my former bishop, that the information in that report is so important. I pointed out that when the report was given to Dieter, it wasn't long after he gave his infamous "Doubt our Doubts" talk in conference; wherein he also apologized for the mistakes of past leaders and told members that the reasons people leave are more complicated that we assume. I also told that bishop that if he wants ministers to go and visit former members or inactives, he should understand the misconceptions active members have about those inactives and go on the visit more prepared. I never heard back from him.

[Mormorrisey]

I sent a copy of this report to my former bishop. It was in response to a couple of "ministers" (former ward members) coming by the house one day. At first we talked about the weather, then I congratulated them on 2 hour church. One of them asked if I was ready to come back, to which I replied that zero hour church works the best for us. Then one of them made the mistake to use the most common assumption there is among TBMs: "Well, sometimes some people get offended." I immediately shut him down and told him that's the most overused and inaccurate statement there is in the church. I then told them about the Faith Crisis Report and gave them a few examples of the top reasons people leave.

Needless to say, they've never been back. It prompted me to send a copy of the report to my former bishop, that the information in that report is so important. I pointed out that when the report was given to Dieter, it wasn't long after he gave his infamous "Doubt our Doubts" talk in conference; wherein he also apologized for the mistakes of past leaders and told members that the reasons people leave are more complicated that we assume. I also told that bishop that if he wants ministers to go and visit former members or inactives, he should understand the misconceptions active members have about those inactives and go on the visit more prepared. I never heard back from him.

This is an excellent idea, and good for you for passing this on to your bishop. I'm going to send it to a friend of mine, who is one of the few TBM's who really knows what I think, but STILL has the idea that everyone who leaves the church is just secretly sinning. I confronted him about it, and basically said, well, do you think I'm secretly sinning? He stammered a bit, but clearly thinks there's an issue there. I'm not offended at it, but clearly the church's message is getting through to him. It's a bit crazy, but then again, it does keep him from knowing the things I know. Maybe if he sees this, it will help him change his mind about me and about people like me/us.

Thanks for the good idea, RH.

[Mormon 8]

Kind of pisses me off. Rather than confront these issues directly in General Conference or the dozens of talks they give each year, they instead try to demonize us and de-legitimize our issues. Freakin’ cowards.

Most large corporations suffer from the same thing. Those in charge never get into the weeds and try to understand the issues of the worker bees. They are insulated from the chatter of the masses. The farther you are rremoved from the consequences of your decisions the easier it is for you to ignore them.

If member retention affected them personally, more than just mild concern they would act differently. Suppose they lost income as numbers fell, what would they do differently. Or what if they had the chance of getting replaced? As it is there is no mechanism in place that promotes much more than the status quo.

That was my thought. What incentive do they have to come clean? With 100 billion in the bank, another 100 billion or more in land holdings, and who know what other wealth stashed away, the corporation will be around for generations, no matter what happens with the membership. So, they are set for life, and they can pass the wealth on to their children who pretend to believe who can pass it on to their children. And eventually there will be no need to pretend to even be a religion any more. It will just be several very wealthy families who keep the corporation in their families. As disgusting as it is to use people to get rich off of by telling them they have to pay into your wealthy corporation before feeding their kids, that is what it has become. It is priest craft at its finest. Getting rich in the name of God. It all started with the idea that Joseph had to make money off of his peep stone, and since real treasure was hard to find, fake religion would do. I console myself with the idea about how much their own book condemns what they are doing, and that they are the great and abominable.

Two thumbs up!

[Mackman]

My concern is that They know its Bullshit and I know its Bullshit but am forced by family to belong, will God hold me responsible ???? Or will he be understanding like I hope and pray for ????

[Hagoth]

What incentive do they have to come clean?

Aw, c'mon Alas, you know they suffer along on a modest stipend when each and every one of them, if they were just a little bit more worldly, could easily be billionaire CEOs of major corporations. And they sacrifice SO much for no reward, except the joy of a life selflessly served. A friend of mine said a friend of his has an uncle who knows the tax accountant for one of the recent prophets and he said it only through a series of miracles could he even could even make ends meet enough to put food on the table. You know, miracles like leaving multiple homes and handsome inheritances to his kids and grandkids who all have free educations and great jobs that just materialized out of nowhere.

[crossmyheart]

Kind of pisses me off. Rather than confront these issues directly in General Conference or the dozens of talks they give each year, they instead try to demonize us and de-legitimize our issues. Freakin’ cowards.

Most large corporations suffer from the same thing. Those in charge never get into the weeds and try to understand the issues of the worker bees. They are insulated from the chatter of the masses. The farther you are rremoved from the consequences of your decisions the easier it is for you to ignore them.

If member retention affected them personally, more than just mild concern they would act differently. Suppose they lost income as numbers fell, what would they do differently. Or what if they had the chance of getting replaced? As it is there is no mechanism in place that promotes much more than the status quo.

That was my thought. What incentive do they have to come clean? With 100 billion in the bank, another 100 billion or more in land holdings, and who know what other wealth stashed away, the corporation will be around for generations, no matter what happens with the membership. So, they are set for life, and they can pass the wealth on to their children who pretend to believe who can pass it on to their children. And eventually there will be no need to pretend to even be a religion any more. It will just be several very wealthy families who keep the corporation in their families. As disgusting as it is to use people to get rich off of by telling them they have to pay into your wealthy corporation before feeding their kids, that is what it has become. It is priest craft at its finest. Getting rich in the name of God. It all started with the idea that Joseph had to make money off of his peep stone, and since real treasure was hard to find, fake religion would do. I console myself with the idea about how much their own book condemns what they are doing, and that they are the great and abominable.

In the mean time, my TBM sibling lives in a cramped apartment because her family was never quite able to own a home, but they faithfully pay more than 10 percent and spent so much free time through their most viable years with primary callings, scouts, and then YM/YW, and now working at the temple, still spending all their extra income at Deseret book, and cant wait to serve a couples mission some day- when they plan to sell everything they own just to be able to go. And my widow mother cant afford a dental procedure but has paid a full tithe her whole life- and the bishop refuses to help her out...

Criminals- no different than any other televangelist who lives a luxurious lifestyle on the backs of their followers.

[Corsair]

Kind of pisses me off. Rather than confront these issues directly in General Conference or the dozens of talks they give each year, they instead try to demonize us and de-legitimize our issues. Freakin’ cowards.

After reading that report, I gained respect for Uchtdorf then gradually lost that respect as his focus in conference talks did not seem to change. As far as I can tell, his response was to present the idea of "grace" a bit more in his talks. This is a nice change, but the most vocal believers in my life continue to prioritize obedience.

Like many of you, I'm in a mixed-faith marriage. I have prayed for some apostle to address this in a general conference talk. Occasionally, the Ensign has a decent article. But those lack the gravitas of having Uchtodorf or Nelson address this topic directly and publicly.

[Hagoth]

It prompted me to send a copy of the report to my former bishop, that the information in that report is so important. I pointed out that when the report was given to Dieter, it wasn't long after he gave his infamous "Doubt our Doubts" talk in conference; wherein he also apologized for the mistakes of past leaders and told members that the reasons people leave are more complicated that we assume. I also told that bishop that if he wants ministers to go and visit former members or inactives, he should understand the misconceptions active members have about those inactives and go on the visit more prepared. I never heard back from him.

And he got back to you a week later with his dog-eared and highlighted copy of the report, eager to get your feedback as someone who has seen the situations from both sides and asking how he can help others like you feel more loved and understood, right?

[RubinHighlander]

It prompted me to send a copy of the report to my former bishop, that the information in that report is so important. I pointed out that when the report was given to Dieter, it wasn't long after he gave his infamous "Doubt our Doubts" talk in conference; wherein he also apologized for the mistakes of past leaders and told members that the reasons people leave are more complicated that we assume. I also told that bishop that if he wants ministers to go and visit former members or inactives, he should understand the misconceptions active members have about those inactives and go on the visit more prepared. I never heard back from him.

And he got back to you a week later with his dog-eared and highlighted copy of the report, eager to get your feedback as someone who has seen the situations from both sides and asking how he can help others like you feel more loved and understood, right?

Hahahahahahahahaha....good one Hagoth!

[Not Buying It]

Kind of pisses me off. Rather than confront these issues directly in General Conference or the dozens of talks they give each year, they instead try to demonize us and de-legitimize our issues. Freakin’ cowards.

After reading that report, I gained respect for Uchtdorf then gradually lost that respect as his focus in conference talks did not seem to change. As far as I can tell, his response was to present the idea of "grace" a bit more in his talks. This is a nice change, but the most vocal believers in my life continue to prioritize obedience.

Like many of you, I'm in a mixed-faith marriage. I have prayed for some apostle to address this in a general conference talk. Occasionally, the Ensign has a decent article. But those lack the gravitas of having Uchtodorf or Nelson address this topic directly and publicly.

It makes me angry at President Uchtdorf. His response in General Conference was pretty feeble - credit where credit is due, it was brave to even mention that the Church and its leaders had ever made mistakes, and I have to give him credit for specifically saying not all members leave because they wanted to sin or were offended. But he’s just being slick really when you follow all that with this quote:

It is unfortunate that some have stumbled because of mistakes made by men. But in spite of this, the eternal truth of the restored gospel found in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not tarnished, diminished, or destroyed.

As an Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ and as one who has seen firsthand the councils and workings of this Church, I bear solemn witness that no decision of significance affecting this Church or its members is ever made without earnestly seeking the inspiration, guidance, and approbation of our Eternal Father. This is the Church of Jesus Christ. God will not allow His Church to drift from its appointed course or fail to fulfill its divine destiny.

You’ve pretty much undone everything you just said and delegitimized those who doubt. And was the invitation to “Come, Join with Us” all that sincere? I don’t know, there’s a recording of John Dehlin’s disciplinary court making the rounds that casts some doubt on the sincerity of that invitation.

President Uchtdorf made a halfhearted attempt to show some understanding of those who leave the Church, but in the end supported the institution that supports him. And “Doubt your doubts” became the greatest inoculation slogan of all time.

And notice how he didn’t specify what any of the mistakes were, or address any of the specifics of things that cause members to doubt? I don’t feel like patting him on the back for an effort that falls so short of what is needed.

[Mackman]

You nailed it Not buying it !!!!! I liked Uchdorf until I felt he delegitimized all of the people who have gone through an f.c.

[RubinHighlander]

President Uchtdorf made a halfhearted attempt to show some understanding of those who leave the Church, but in the end supported the institution that supports him. And “Doubt your doubts” became the greatest inoculation slogan of all time.

And notice how he didn’t specify what any of the mistakes were, or address any of the specifics of things that cause members to doubt? I don’t feel like patting him on the back for an effort that falls so short of what is needed.

I agree that any praise for Dieter is not well deserved, he was definitely trying to have it both ways. It seemed to me he's the best the church has as far as any hope of admission or acknowledgement of the issues. And what did it get him for saying anything about it? He was forced to step down and take a backseat to the older more conservative Coblers. Part of of kicking Dieter out of the presidency was probably Russel's concern that he would be overshadowed by Dieter's popularity and RMN wasn't having any of that.

[Not Buying It]

President Uchtdorf made a halfhearted attempt to show some understanding of those who leave the Church, but in the end supported the institution that supports him. And “Doubt your doubts” became the greatest inoculation slogan of all time.

And notice how he didn’t specify what any of the mistakes were, or address any of the specifics of things that cause members to doubt? I don’t feel like patting him on the back for an effort that falls so short of what is needed.

I agree that any praise for Dieter is not well deserved, he was definitely trying to have it both ways. It seemed to me he's the best the church has as far as any hope of admission or acknowledgement of the issues. And what did it get him for saying anything about it? He was forced to step down and take a backseat to the older more conservative Coblers. Part of of kicking Dieter out of the presidency was probably Russel's concern that he would be overshadowed by Dieter's popularity and RMN wasn't having any of that.

I'm pretty sure most of the Brethren are jealous of President Uchtdorf's charisma. He's got more charisma than all of them combined. Most of the others, President Nelson included, aren't really worshiped for who they are, but for the position they hold. President Uchtdorf is the only one who gets genuine admiration that isn't just dutifully handed to him simply because he's an apostle.

That said, I've always felt he's a guilty as the rest of them when it comes to authoritarianism, deception, and coercion. He's just one of those guys who can make you feel all warm and fuzzy while he's screwing you.

But you are correct, he is as close as we are likely to get when it comes to acknowledging this issues.