Chapter 5

Why People Leave

There are perhaps as many reasons why individuals choose to leave The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as there are individuals who leave. Someone I know who has chosen to leave the Church wrote: “There is no smoking gun—no one thing that pushes people out of the Church.” But some do leave, and by “leave the Church” I refer to (1) those who formally request that their names be removed from the records of the Church; (2) those who through the action of a disciplinary council are severed from the Church; and (3) those who drift from activity.

President Dieter F. Uchtdorf explained that “the search for truth has led millions of people to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. However, there are some who leave the Church they once loved.

“One might ask, ‘If the gospel is so wonderful, why would anyone leave?’

“Sometimes we assume it is because they have been offended or lazy or sinful. Actually, it is not that simple. In fact, there is not just one reason that applies to the variety of situations. Some of our dear members struggle for years with the question whether they should separate themselves from the Church.

“In this Church that honors personal agency so strongly, that was restored by a young man who asked questions and sought answers, we respect those who honestly search for truth. It may break our hearts when their journey takes them away from the Church we love and the truth we have found, but we honor their right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own conscience, just as we claim that privilege for ourselves.”1

During the years I served as a bishop and then as a stake president and also, for four decades, as a religious educator, I observed the following as some of the reasons why individuals choose to leave:

1. They were not fellowshipped properly. Almost always the full-time missionaries do their job well—they teach investigators the principles of the gospel, baptize the people, and deliver the new converts into the hands of members in the local branch or ward. Too often, though, that is the point where the proverbial ball is dropped—the members and priesthood leaders do not rush in, do all they can to maintain the convert’s enthusiasm for the gospel, introduce them to their new Church family, and socialize them properly.

President Gordon B. Hinckley taught: “Having found and baptized a new convert, we have the challenge of fellowshipping him and strengthening his testimony of the truth of this work. We cannot have him walking in the front door and out the back. Joining the Church is a very serious thing. Each convert takes upon himself or herself the name of Christ with an implied promise to keep His commandments. But coming into the Church can be a perilous experience. Unless there are warm and strong hands to greet the convert, unless there is an outreach of love and concern, he will begin to wonder about the step he has taken. Unless there are friendly hands and welcome hearts to greet him and lead him along the way, he may drop by the side.” President Hinckley summarized the matter like this: “There is absolutely no point in doing missionary work unless we hold on to the fruits of that effort. The two must be inseparable.” Drawing upon Moroni 6:4, President Hinckley taught that every new convert is entitled to three things: a friend; an assignment or Church calling; and nourishing by the good word of God.2

Unfortunately, some members who become troubled by doctrinal or historical matters are marginalized by believers, whether consciously or unconsciously. At a crisis point in their lives, when they most need love and attention and time, sometimes they are treated as though they are radioactive. One member of the Church very close to me commented that as she began attending “post-Mormon” meetings, she first noticed how friendly the members of this new group were to her. She described them as “nice, normal, respectable people just trying to do the right thing and standing up for what they believed. . . . I . . . felt more fellowshipped in this community than I ever did at church.” That is tragic. Surely we can do better than that.

2. They do not feel that they fit in. Sometimes those who are unmarried do not feel a part of their ward because of the strong emphasis on families. As one friend who stopped coming to Church painfully expressed it, “I’m sure that the leaders of the Church agonize over what to do for the exponentially growing number of single members, but as a whole the Church has no place for single people. . . . As a single person in the Church, it is physically, emotionally, and spiritually excruciating to be alone, and it is in your face at all times.” Some married couples who have not yet had children or who are unable to do so often do not feel a part of their ward. Occasionally brothers and sisters who find their social or political views different from those of their congregation wonder whether they can ever be accepted for who and what they are. Some whose testimony is weak, whose conviction of the faith is quite small, may feel overwhelmed in a testimony meeting by the powerful and solid testimonies of other members who speak with certitude.

One of the most significant spiritual gifts that a member of the Church of Jesus Christ can possess is the gift to perceive or sense when a friend or acquaintance or ward member is in need, is hurting, needs a friend right now. That help may come in a smile, a kind greeting, in moving from your accustomed place in the chapel to sit with this person. Small acts of kindness and sensitivity can go a long way in securing and solidifying another member of the Church. The small effort to reach out is more than compensated for by the potentially eternal rewards.

3. They don’t want to be members any longer. Some persons who have just come into the Church, and even some who have been a part of the Church for many years, suddenly or gradually make the difficult decision to leave the Church for any number of reasons: they simply don’t want to attend three hours of Church meetings on Sunday, pay tithing and other offerings, live the Word of Wisdom, serve as a visiting or home teacher, and so forth. They are not bad people, not rebellious, and they may have no unkind feelings toward anyone or anything in the Church. They may well appreciate all that they have learned, all within the Church who have meant so much to them, or what the Church stands for. They just want to discontinue affiliation.

Some, of course, no longer believe in the restored gospel. One acquaintance explained: “When I talk about leaving the Church, I don’t mean those people who stop going for this or that reason and yet still believe. I’m talking about people who leave because they feel it is untrue. It is heartbreaking and offensive when members of the Church claim that we were offended, or we are too lazy to fulfill our callings, or that we don’t care enough. Those statements are deeply troubling because most of those I know who leave do so after intense study and thoughtful and prayerful attempts at making it work.” This person commented on a label that is often attached to one who leaves: “The term anti-Mormon is also incredibly offensive, as it creates the same feeling as the term anti-Semite. I am not an anti-Mormon, and although the Church caused a great deal of pain for me, its people are also my people. It is my culture and the only religious tradition I know. Leaving the Church was like losing a limb, and although I have considered removing my name from the records, I have not done so and most likely will not.”

We wish, obviously, that everyone would choose to stay, but, as President Uchtdorf pointed out, we believe in individuals’ moral agency, their right to determine how their life will be spent, what they will do and not do, who or what they will worship. Parting may prove painful, and so we as members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints should strive to be as sympathetic and loving as we can. The last thing in the world such persons need—and I suggest that the Lord would definitely not want this—is for members of his Church to turn their backs on those who were once their Church friends, to spurn or shun them in any way. Such painful situations call for true Christians to manifest genuine kindness and thoughtful understanding.

4. They have unresolved doctrinal or historical issues. The Internet has proven to be a phenomenal blessing to the world and to members of the Church. It is almost inconceivable how quickly one can acquire information on myriads of subjects in no time at all. The Internet has also, however, proven to be a challenge to us, because everything from strictly orthodox Latter-day Saint teachings to subtle or even blatant, vicious attacks on the faith may be found there. And to complicate matters, obviously not all of what is available is true or accurate. But it’s in writing, and, sadly, that’s all some folks need to assume that what they are reading is the way things really are and really were. In some cases what is available is true, but the author’s interpretation of the teaching or event may lack context or the requisite background for correct understanding.

When I have counseled with members of the Church who were deeply troubled by such matters as Brigham Young’s statements on Adam-God, the Mountain Meadows Massacre, the priesthood restriction, origins of the book of Abraham, or other areas of concern, I have often asked questions such as the following:

• Did you ever have a testimony of the truthfulness of the restored gospel?

• When did you first begin to sense that this work was true?

• Can you describe the occasion? What did it feel like? What thoughts accompanied the feelings you had at the time?

• What convinced you, for example, that the Book of Mormon was in fact another testament of Jesus Christ, a true scriptural record?

• How much of a factor in your spiritual conviction was your intellect?

• What part of your overall testimony was solely dependent on facts and propositions?

• When did you begin to feel that perhaps the restored gospel was not true? What led to that conclusion?

• Have you earnestly prayed about this matter? Has God revealed to you, by the power of the Holy Spirit, that all that you previously believed is not true?

• Where it applies, are you now persuaded that your marriage in the temple is meaningless and that you are not really sealed for eternity to your spouse and children? What will be the effect of that decision on your family?

• To what extent has your recent period of questioning and doubt required you to go back in time and reinterpret your past, reinterpret what you once felt and thought?

• Are you now prepared to conclude that the numerous occasions on which you felt the promptings and guidance of the Spirit, the ratifying approval of God upon a sermon, a testimony, or a priesthood ordinance were not genuine?

This kind of exercise is essentially a guided tour back through the past to the time when the person I was speaking with had received a testimony of the truthfulness of the restored gospel. Such an endeavor may well be an example of what President Uchtdorf described as “doubting your doubts” in his October 2013 general conference address. When something as serious as the eternal welfare of a soul is at stake, we must make certain that a decision of the magnitude required to leave the Church receives at least the same care and attention that the initial quest to know the truth required.

Am I suggesting that the questioner ignore troublesome issues or pretend that supposed contradictions do not exist? No, not at all. I am proposing, however, that to attend only to one’s rational processes, to make monumental decisions of the soul on the basis alone of one’s intellect—what we think we now understand—is at best unwise and at worst spiritually perilous. Early in this dispensation, the Saints were instructed by revelation to “give heed unto all his [Joseph Smith’s] words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me; for his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith” (D&C 21:4–5; emphasis added).

There’s the key: We are to receive—and, I suggest, evaluate—the Prophet’s words, and, for that matter, the whole of the Restoration, in patience and faith. We should be patient, because sometimes the answer, the clarification, the solution to the problem, may not come for a while. We are to receive the Prophet’s words in faith in the sense that there are some things that cannot be known through the five physical senses, matters of deep import that can, as Paul said, be known only by the power of the Spirit of God (1 Corinthians 2:11–14)—that is, by a metaphysical sense, a sense above and beyond what the grandest and most complex of scientific instruments can measure or assess. When it comes to spiritual matters, often the heart begins to reveal things to the mind that it did not know. Very often, believing is seeing. As Alma taught, “Faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things; therefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true” (Alma 32:21).

5. They are troubled because they are learning some things for the first time. Other troubled Latter-day Saints indicate that many of the sensitive issues that have arisen, particularly those that involve the history of the Church, caught them totally by surprise because they had never heard such things before. Some even accuse the Church of covering them up. As historian Patrick Mason put it, “One of the primary reasons why some members of the church have become disenchanted, disappointed, or even angry in recent years is because they were never taught to expect skeletons in the closet of church history and so are shocked when they find them. . . . A person could conceivably attend a lifetime of three-hour Sunday blocks and never hear about the Mountain Meadows Massacre or discrepancies in Joseph Smith’s accounts of the first vision.” Mason pointed out that Church leaders, in an effort to inspire and edify the members, have often chosen to present the best possible image of the Church, both to those within and those outside our faith. It is not a matter of secret cover-ups but rather “an act of ministry.” He suggested that “those who are disappointed that church meetings are not as intellectually stimulating or historically nuanced as university classes suffer from category confusion; they would surely not expect or appreciate a sermon from their college professor.” Further, “the church is primarily concerned with preaching the gospel of Christ, not adult history education. . . . Much of our church literature and teaching, especially on Sundays, is devoted to a presentation of the gospel able to reach the widest spectrum of church membership. This is not only appropriate but beautiful and redemptive.”3

Keep in mind that the Restoration is an unfolding drama, that light and knowledge, understanding and perspective, are coming to the Saints gradually, precept upon precept. This is not just the case with doctrinal understanding; it holds for our history, as well. Latter-day Saint historian Keith A. Erekson pointed out that “important pieces of the Church’s history have not yet been discovered. . . . In the study of history, [however,] the absence of evidence is not a valid cause for doubt. Learning about the past is an effort of gathering as much trusted and, where possible, verifiable evidence while reserving final judgment on the portions of history that we are unable to fully understand because of the lack of information.”4 The Church’s intensified effort in recent decades to uncover and catalog historical documents and details and make them available to members of the Church as well as to persons of other faiths—is a gradual process. We learn bit by bit, item by item, historical event upon historical event. We understand much more now about our history, especially during the ministry of the Prophet Joseph Smith, than we knew when I was a student at Brigham Young University. Much of this discovery has come as an outgrowth of the remarkable Joseph Smith Papers Project. For example, I remember that in one of my very first religion classes at BYU, a Church history class, my professor, Paul Cheesman, referred to an account of the First Vision (the earliest, 1832, account) that he himself had recently discovered as a result of his research. Many details concerning the translation of the Book of Mormon have come to light in recent years as historians have carefully sifted through materials of which we were, for the most part, ignorant.

Several years ago a ward Relief Society president mentioned to me that in a Relief Society lesson the instructor had quoted from the journal of one of her ancestors. The ancestor had been present in early August 1844 in Nauvoo when Brigham Young was transfigured before the Saints and took on the appearance and voice of Joseph Smith. Another woman in the class remarked quickly that the sisters ought not put too much stock in that particular testimony, since there were so few accounts of the purported event.

The president asked me what I knew about that historical moment, and I explained that I was aware of many accounts of that incident. I did some checking with people who know much more about our history than I do and discovered that in recent years scores of accounts of that miraculous experience had been found in pioneer journals.5 The woman who spoke up may have done so in all good faith, supposing that accounts she had read or heard about the transfiguration of Brigham Young were few and far between. In the meantime, however, many, many descriptions of that experience had come to light. In short, there are many things we know now that we did not know until recently. We are learning as we go.

6. They are troubled by the fallibility of Church leaders. As Latter-day Saints, we love the scriptures and thank God regularly for them. We believe, however, that one can have sufficient confidence and even reverence for holy writ without believing that every word between Genesis 1:1 and Revelation 22:21 is a word-for-word dictation of the Almighty or that the Bible now reads as it has always read. Indeed, our own scriptures attest that plain and precious truths and many covenants of the Lord were taken away or kept back from the Bible before it was compiled (1 Nephi 13:20–29; Moses 1:40–41; Articles of Faith 1:8).6 We still cherish the Holy Bible, recognize and teach the doctrines of salvation within it, and seek to pattern our lives according to its timeless teachings.

In like manner, we can sustain with all our hearts the prophets and apostles without believing that they are perfect or that everything they say and do is exactly what God wants said and done. In short, we do not believe in apostolic or prophetic infallibility. As we have been reminded again and again, whom God calls, God qualifies. That is, God calls his prophets. He empowers and strengthens the individual, provides an eternal perspective, loosens his tongue, and enables him to make known divine truth. Being called as an apostle or even as president of the Church, however, does not make him perfect. President David O. McKay, then a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, explained that “when God makes the prophet He does not unmake the man.”7 A more recent apostle, Elder D. Todd Christofferson, reminded us that “not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. It is commonly understood in the Church that a statement made by one leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, not meant to be official or binding for the whole Church. The Prophet Joseph Smith taught that ‘a prophet [is] a prophet only when he [is] acting as such.’”8

Prophets are men called of God to serve as covenant spokesmen for his children on earth, and thus we should never take lightly what they say. The early Brethren of this dispensation were the living prophets for their contemporaries, and much of what we believe and practice today rests on the doctrinal foundation they laid. The work of the Restoration, however, entails a gradual unfolding of divine truth in a line-upon-line fashion. Some years ago my late colleague Joseph Fielding McConkie said to a group of religious educators: “We have the scholarship of the early brethren to build upon; we have the advantage of additional history; we have inched our way up the mountain of our destiny and now stand in a position to see things with greater clarity than did they. . . . We live in finer houses than did our pioneer forefathers, but this does not argue that we are better or that our rewards will be greater. In like manner our understanding of gospel principles should be better housed, and we should constantly be seeking to make it so. There is no honor in our reading by oil lamps when we have been granted better light.”9 Ultimately the Lord will hold us responsible for the teachings, direction, and focus provided by the living oracles of our own day, both in their commentary on canonized scripture as well as in the living scripture that is delivered through them by the power of the Holy Ghost (D&C 68:3–4).

“From our perspective today,” Brother Erekson wisely observed, “we obviously know more than participants did about the outcome of the past, but we also know far less about their experience of living in it. The people who lived in the past belonged to their own times and places and circumstances. To have charity for their differences and empathy for their experiences, we must begin with humility about our own limitations. It requires humility not to judge people in the past by our standards. It requires humility to admit we do not know everything, to wait patiently for more answers, and to continue learning.”10

In reminding the Saints of Lehi’s teaching relative to “opposition in all things” (2 Nephi 2:11), Elder Dallin H. Oaks observed that some of the opposition the Church faces “comes from Church members. Some who use personal reasoning or wisdom to resist prophetic direction give themselves a label borrowed from elected bodies—‘the loyal opposition.’ However appropriate for a democracy, there is no warrant for this concept in the government of God’s kingdom, where questions are honored but opposition is not (see Matthew 26:24).

“As another example,” Elder Oaks pointed out, “there are many things in our early Church history, such as what Joseph Smith did or did not do in every circumstance, that some use as a basis for opposition. To all I say, exercise faith and put reliance on the Savior’s teaching that we should ‘know them by their fruits’ (Matthew 7:16).”11

7. They do not feel they are enjoying the intellectual stimulation or the private spiritual experiences that ought to be had by members of the Church of Jesus Christ. In recent years I have encountered a number of members of the Church, as well as former members of the Church, whose chief criticism is, “I don’t get anything out of Church any more,” or “I go to Church hungry and come home unfed. It’s the same old stuff over and over.”

As a religious educator myself, I am especially attentive to such complaints. Too often teachers in the Church do not take the time to prepare properly; they come to their classes and attempt to wing it, that is, teach without preparation, talent, or substance. Others called to teach do not prepare well and depend on God’s assistance to enable them to teach by the Spirit. That is foolish. The Holy Ghost bears testimony of truths that are taught, of doctrines that are set forth, of propositions that are delivered. There is no such thing as teaching by the Spirit when there is no substance to the lesson or sermon. The Holy Spirit must have something about which to certify and confirm. We could clearly do better to make our lessons more interesting, more relevant, more meaningful. Having the fulness of the gospel is no excuse for presenting it poorly.

Having said that, let me hasten to add that what we experience in our worship services or in our lessons is largely a matter of our individual expectations and our individual participation. First, a word about expectations. What is it I expect to happen in a sermon or a lesson? Is it realistic to suppose that the speaker or teacher will consistently bring forth new doctrinal insights or formerly undiscovered historical details? Not really. Is it reasonable to suppose that we will spend most of our time in Church dealing with the “meat” of the gospel of Jesus Christ? Not really. Why? In a church like ours, Brother and Sister Johnson, who joined the Church forty years ago, are frequently in the same chapel and in the same classroom with Brother and Sister Taylor, who were baptized Saturday. Because of that, because of the diversity of experience and understanding within a given ward or branch, it will probably be the case that in Church meetings we will consistently teach the “milk” of the gospel, the fundamental principles and doctrines. Such teachings will stretch the Taylors, will motivate them to read and search and pray and seek for clarity and for deeper understanding. The acquiring of “meat,” the obtaining of deeper and more profound insight, is largely an individual responsibility.

And what about the Johnsons? How do they attend class and not be bored to tears or frustrated by hearing things they have heard a hundred times? Now we turn to a consideration of participation. What might the Johnsons do to derive the most spiritual benefit from class? They could partake of a few ounces of humility and not suppose they know everything that is to be known. They could read the scriptural passages (or other lesson material) assigned for that day’s lesson, study them carefully, and come prepared to make a contribution in class. That contribution may take the form of listening intently, thinking seriously, and seeking for divine guidance in finding new meaning, new applications for the scriptural passages or prophetic statements. It may take the form of making a few worthwhile comments and observations throughout the lesson. It may take the form of praying earnestly for the instructor that she or he will be guided, empowered, and inspired in teaching the truth and leading the class discussion. No matter how much we know, no matter how much formal education we have, no matter how many scholarly works we have devoured, there is always room to learn and experience more at Church. But it will usually require humility and openness on our part. Elder Neal A. Maxwell wrote that “meekness is needed not alone to open to us understandings but also to keep us free and intellectually active. Meekness with its emerging spiritual resilience also provides a soft landing for hard doctrines.”12

In recent years there has grown up in our midst, especially in what we might call the heartland of the Church, an attitude and mindset that manifest a serious case of spiritual impatience. These members of the Church, presumably dissatisfied with the elementary manner in which a study of the gospel is undertaken, have chosen to turn toward more flashy, more sensational, certainly more dramatic means of gaining great knowledge and having unusual experiences. I call this group the “Mormon Gnostics,” some of whom may be characterized by (1) their enthusiasm, almost obsession, for the esoteric, for “deeper” matters of the faith; (2) their claim to be enjoying what might be called extraordinary spiritual experiences—regular visits from the Savior himself or consistent conversations with such notable prophets as Enoch or Melchizedek; (3) their eagerness to discover and broadcast precisely when the Lord Jesus Christ will return in glory. When it comes to matters that ought wisely to be left with the prophets and apostles, the Savior is very emphatic that “it shall not be given to any one to go forth to preach my gospel, or to build up my church, except he be ordained by some one who has authority, and it is known to the church that he has authority and has been regularly ordained by the heads of the church” (D&C 42:11; emphasis added).

“You cannot force spiritual things,” President Boyd K. Packer explained. “Such words as compel, coerce, constrain, pressure, demand do not describe our privileges with the Spirit.

“You can no more force the Spirit to respond than you can force a bean to sprout, or an egg to hatch before its time. You can create a climate to foster growth; you can nourish, and protect; but you cannot force or compel. You must await the growth.

“Do not be impatient to gain great spiritual knowledge. Let it grow, help it grow; but do not force it, or you will open the way to be misled.”13

8. They find themselves at odds with the Church’s leadership on social or moral issues. It has been half a century since I entered the Mission Home in Salt Lake City to begin my formal preparation for full-time missionary service. After a glorious week of testimonies and instruction from members of the First Presidency, Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, and First Council of the Seventy, our group of about three hundred left for various missions. As I recall, there were then about thirteen thousand full-time missionaries throughout the world. After arriving in New York City (the headquarters of the Eastern States Mission), I was assigned to work for a short time in Manhattan and then transferred to Greenfield, Massachusetts. I remember well what it felt like to look into the eyes of total strangers and bear testimony of a message of great importance—that God had chosen to reestablish his Church on the earth and had called modern prophets to lead and provide divine guidance for that Church. In most cases, the people were thoroughly uninterested in what we had to say, but occasionally we would stumble across a genuine truth seeker willing to consider our message.

While my companion and I were knocking on doors in a small town in Massachusetts, a lovely woman, probably in her mid-forties, came to the door, opened it, and with a smiling face asked what she could do to help us. I was bold enough to reply that actually we had come to do something for her.

“Oh,” she said, “that’s good news. So what can you do for me?”

I responded eagerly, “We have come to bring a message to you that God is indeed our Heavenly Father, that he loves every one of his children, and that he has chosen to bless us by sending modern prophets into the world.”

She stood a little straighter and said, “Modern prophets? What do you mean?”

I spoke briefly of the boy Joseph Smith’s search for the truth, his desire to know which of all the churches in his village he should join, and his glorious experience in the Sacred Grove. One of the reasons I remember this particular conversation is I recall the feeling that came over me as I bore witness of the prophetic call of Joseph Smith. I was almost overcome with emotion, and as I looked deeply into the woman’s eyes, I saw that she had been touched by the power of that same Spirit and knew in her heart of hearts that what I had just said was true. She asked us to say more, and my companion told of the coming of Moroni, the translation of a book of ancient American scripture, and of heavenly messengers sent to restore the authority to act in God’s name.

Now she had tears in her eyes. She looked squarely at me and said, “I believe you are telling me the truth.” She put her hand on her heart and said simply, “I feel it.” She then explained that she would love to invite us in to tell her more, but that her husband would soon be home from work, and she was afraid he would not be interested in what we had to say. Then this sweet lady said, essentially, “I really do want to hear more; I hope my husband will feel the same way.”

We set a time to return later in the week and then left. Sadly, when we did return, she greeted us at the door, apologized that her husband refused to allow us into the home, and then said tenderly, “I hope I will be able to learn more about your unusual message some day.”

We left, heartbroken. I grieved for several days, because it was obvious that our testimony of modern prophets had struck a chord within her soul. I took some consolation in the knowledge that God is merciful and kind and that everyone will have an adequate and appropriate opportunity to hear the message of the Restoration, whether in this life or in the next. That particular incident and hundreds of similar ones in the next two years, combined with the priceless privilege of teaching and bearing witness of the restored gospel to tens of thousands of students at Brigham Young University, convinces me that there is a mighty power associated with the message of modern revelation and continuing prophetic direction.

That is our distinctive message to the world. It is a pearl of great price. I am moved by the Lord’s instruction to Joseph Smith given in March of 1833: “Verily I say unto you, the keys of this kingdom shall never be taken from you, while thou art in the world, neither in the world to come; nevertheless, through you shall the oracles [revelations, divine direction] be given to another, yea, even unto the church.” And now comes the clincher, a sobering directive, a type of warning: “And all they who receive the oracles of God, let them beware how they hold them lest they are accounted as a light thing, and are brought under condemnation thereby, and stumble and fall when the storms descend, and the winds blow, and the rains descend, and beat upon their house” (D&C 90:3–5; emphasis added). My sober assessment is that mighty storms are now beating upon us, horrific winds and rain are now pounding us with gale force, beating upon our house of faith.

In what was clearly a prophetic warning, Elder Neal A. Maxwell declared to BYU students: “Make no mistake about it, brothers and sisters; in the months and years ahead, events will require of each member that he or she decide whether or not he or she will follow the First Presidency. Members will find it more difficult to halt [hesitate, stumble, falter] longer between two opinions. . . . In short, brothers and sisters, not being ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ includes not being ashamed of the prophets of Jesus Christ.”14

If we have chosen to be baptized into The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, if we have taken upon us the covenants and ordinances associated with Church membership, if we once rejoiced and delighted in being a part of an organization that is led by prophets, seers, and revelators, are we still excited about it today? To wrest Alma’s words from their context, if we once felt to sing gratitude and shout praises to the Almighty for sending modern prophets to the earth, do we feel so now? (see Alma 5:26). And if not, why not? Here are a few points to ponder:

• To what extent is there an exemption clause in our loyalty to the prophets?

• Where do we draw the line between following and not following the counsel and decisions of the prophets and apostles of the Church?

• Do we seek to know and then to follow prophetic direction, unless that direction conflicts with our own social, political, or moral views?

• Do the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles cease, in our eyes, to be living prophets when what they counsel is contrary to what we feel or have decided about a given issue?

• As Elder Maxwell inquired, “Do I believe in the living prophet even when he speaks on matters affecting me and my specialty directly? Or do I stop sustaining the prophet when his words fall in my territory? If the latter, the prophet is without honor in our country!”15

• Do I believe the Brethren are true prophets when they deliver stirring and inspiring messages at general conference, when they write moving and motivational books, when they establish the Humanitarian Fund and offer the resources of the Church to needy persons of other faiths throughout the world, when they announce the Perpetual Education Fund, when they encourage members to be actively involved in Christian service in helping to calm the fears and meet the needs of homeless refugees, but not when what they declare to be the mind of God on matters pertaining to marriage and the family is at odds with society’s values?

President Henry B. Eyring explained that “looking for the path to safety in the counsel of prophets makes sense to those with strong faith. When a prophet speaks, those with little faith may think that they hear only a wise man giving good advice. Then if his counsel seems comfortable and reasonable, squaring with what they want to do, they take it. If it does not, they consider it either faulty advice or they see their circumstances as justifying their being an exception to the counsel. Those without faith may think that they hear only men seeking to exert influence for some selfish motive.”

Further, some erroneously suppose that “to take counsel from the servants of God is to surrender God-given rights of independence. But the argument . . . misrepresents reality. When we reject the counsel which comes from God, we do not choose to be independent of outside influence. We choose another influence. . . .

“Another fallacy is to believe that the choice to accept or not accept the counsel of prophets is no more than deciding whether to accept good advice and gain its benefits or to stay where we are. But the choice not to take prophetic counsel changes the very ground upon which we stand. It becomes more dangerous. The failure to take prophetic counsel lessens our power to take inspired counsel in the future. The best time to have decided to help Noah build the ark was the first time he asked. Each time he asked after that, each failure to respond would have lessened sensitivity to the Spirit. And so each time his request would have seemed more foolish, until the rain came. And then it was too late.”16

A colleague of mine, Professor Shon Hopkin, suggested another very sound, practical question for our consideration: Do I really want to be a part of a Church that agrees with me on every point? I would add: Is that my criterion for deciding what institution, what religious organization, I will associate with?

Matters pertaining to marriage, home, family, and sexual orientation have been in the news and in the courts for much of the past few decades. These tender topics are not just conversational matters about which curious observers may comment in disinterested fashion. No, they are real and poignant, because in many cases it is a member of our own or our extended family—or a beloved friend and associate—who is seeking love, support, and understanding. How we interact with spouses, children, or acquaintances who deal with same-sex attraction every hour of every day strikes at the heart of what it means to be a Christian, a follower of the Lord Jesus Christ. There is no place in the Church of Jesus Christ for hatred, bigotry, vicious speech, or even thoughtless insensitivity, for such feelings and actions are alien to the Spirit of Him who is the Prince of Peace, the Great Physician. As covenant people, we are called upon “to bear one another’s burdens, that they may be light; yea, and . . . to mourn with those that mourn; yea, and comfort those that stand in need of comfort” (Mosiah 18:8–9). It is what Jesus himself would do; hence, it is what we are charged to do.

And yet, while loved ones are to be as caring and supportive as possible, there is no need to spurn or rebel against the Church’s moral standard or even to contend for it to be altered, adjusted, or tweaked so that it will be in harmony with the current consensus in our world. As we have discussed, there are absolute truths, God-ordained values and virtues, that must be observed and upheld if society and the family unit are to be preserved. A mother or father, a brother or sister, a friend or associate need not choose between the Church of Jesus Christ and a loved one. Again, it is so very tragic, so terribly unnecessary, for members to choose to leave or disaffiliate from the Church or to slip into the ranks of the less active because of our leaders’ counsel to maintain the Church’s moral standard. President Thomas S. Monson observed, “Where once the standards of the Church and the standards of society were mostly compatible, now there is a wide chasm between us, and it’s growing ever wider.”17 The simple plea of that same prophet is profound and extremely pertinent: “May we maintain the courage to defy the consensus. May we ever choose the harder right instead of the easier wrong.”18

Through the years it has been my sweet privilege to become acquainted with some of those we sustain as prophets, seers, and revelators. They are ordinary men with an extraordinary calling, a weighty responsibility. Scripture teaches that seers are those who are watchmen on the tower (see Ezekiel 3:17; D&C 101:45), those who behold also “things which [are] not visible to the natural eye” (Moses 6:36), things “afar off” (D&C 101:54). “When the Spirit teaches prophets the truth of things as they really are,” Elder Maxwell observed, “this includes sensitizing these special men to the implications of what is just beginning, implications that are imperceptible to others. Prophets are alerted to tiny trends that bode ill for mankind. Prophets, therefore, are the Lord’s early-warning system: they both detect and decry at his direction. What may seem to be a premature expression of prophetic concern is actually the early discovery of a difficulty that will later plague the people.”19

9. One’s personal behavior has slipped below gospel standards. I have saved for last this reason why some persons have chosen to discontinue membership or association with the Latter-day Saints. I hasten to add that this is not why most people leave. But it is one reason. Some doubt because they are living in unrepented sin. As a priesthood leader, I once sat opposite a member of the Church who had just moved into our ward. He came in to see me to ask to have his name removed from the records of the Church. I asked him why. He responded, “Well, there are some serious doctrinal problems with Mormonism.”

“Like what?” I followed up.

“Oh,” he said, “there are some pretty deep theological issues that I simply cannot reconcile, and I’m not sure you are in a position to know much about them.”

I replied, “Why don’t we try one or two issues to see if I can’t help just a bit.” I pushed and persisted to get him to volunteer one of the “deep theological issues,” but he continued to put me off. Within an hour it was clear what the real problem was—not intellectual but spiritual, for he had lived in wanton immorality for years. He didn’t have questions about the doctrines of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints but rather about his own ability to abide by the standards of that Church. “Some have behavioral lapses,” Elder Maxwell affirmed, “and then seek to cover these by pretending to have reservations about a doctrine or a leader. Having misbehaved, they try to cover their sins.”20

Christian theologian Alister McGrath wrote: “In part, doubt reflects the continued presence and power of sin within us, reminding us of our need for grace and preventing us from becoming complacent about our relationship with God. We are all sinners, and we all suffer from doubt, to a greater or lesser extent. . . . Sin causes us to challenge the promises of God, to mistrust him. . . . Our limitations as God’s fallen and fallible creatures prevent us from seeing things as clearly as we would like.” Sin prevents us from discerning “the big picture of the workings of God in the world.”21 Isn’t that an apt description of Laman and Lemuel’s state? They “did murmur because they knew not the dealings of that God who had created them” (1 Nephi 2:12).

As we have said, this final reason for leaving is probably not the reason of most persons who choose to disengage from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Experience teaches me, however, that occasionally a member’s inappropriate conduct can in fact lead him or her to respond to what psychologists call “cognitive dissonance.” If a woman is a heavy smoker and finds herself reading a newspaper article on how continued use of tobacco products may result in lung cancer, she may choose one of two courses to deal with her problem: (1) she can begin the difficult but rewarding process of overcoming the smoking habit, or (2) she can choose to stop reading the newspaper!

One who is under gospel covenant to keep the commandments of God and abide by the standards of the Lord’s restored Church may slip into serious sin and, like our smoker, find that he is faced with a number of options: (1) he can face up to his misconduct and begin the difficult but rewarding path of repentance; (2) he can decide that he no longer believes the message of the restored gospel; (3) he can choose to leave the Church; and, in some cases, (4) he can allow his troubled conscience to canker his soul and cause him to begin to deny and defy the faith he once cherished.

Conclusion

The reasons why men and women determine to leave the Church of Jesus Christ and go elsewhere are as varied as the problems and the personalities of the people themselves. Obviously we wish they would choose to stay with us, to remain a part of the great work that will grow and spread to all parts of the earth. We wish we could say something or do something that would soothe troubled hearts, provide satisfying answers to difficult questions, persuade them to place their burdens or doubts on the shelf and keep searching for acceptable solutions within the household of faith. But of course every man and woman is free to choose their path in this life and select which guides they will and will not follow.

President Dieter F. Uchtdorf extended a tender invitation: “To those who have separated themselves from the Church, I say, my dear friends, there is yet a place for you here. Come and add your talents, gifts, and energies to ours. We will all become better as a result.

“Some might ask, ‘But what about my doubts?’

“It’s natural to have questions. . . . Therefore, my dear brothers and sisters—my dear friends—please, first doubt your doubts before you doubt your faith. We must never allow doubt to hold us prisoner and keep us from the divine love, peace, and gifts that come through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. . . .

“If you seek truth, meaning, and a way to transform faith into action; if you are looking for a place of belonging: Come, join with us!

“If you have left the faith you once embraced: Come back again. Join with us!

“If you are tempted to give up: Stay yet a little longer. There is room for you here. . . .

“Come, join with us! For here you will find what is precious beyond price.”22

There really are proven ways to find answers to hard questions and confront troublesome issues, and in many cases resolution and return are a very real possibility. No one of us can know everything. Frankly, it would be impossible to identify a member of the Church whose areas of training, experience, and expertise cover every topic. There are, however, many talented, devoted, and knowledgeable Latter-day Saints who are eager and willing to share what they know and assist us to reconcile what we supposed were irreconcilable concerns. Many answers are available.

Solutions to problems may be found, but the most effective and productive path is always one of patience and faith. The resolution of most serious challenges to one’s faith requires both time and trust. Thus, don’t be in too much of a hurry to give up on what you don’t understand, and don’t minimize or neglect what you do know and understand. The promise is sure: if we are faithful in a few things, God will enlighten and empower us to be able to solve and resolve many things (see Matthew 25:21).

Notes

1. Uchtdorf, “Come, Join with Us,” Ensign, Nov. 2013, 22.

2. Hinckley, “Find the Lambs, Feed the Sheep,” Ensign, May 1999, 108.

3. Mason, Planted, 77, 79; paragraphing altered.

4. Erekson, “Understanding Church History by Study and Faith,” Ensign, Feb. 2017, 57.

5. See Jorgensen, “Mantle of the Prophet Joseph,” in Opening the Heavens, 373–407.

6. Joseph Smith, 207.

7. McKay, in Conference Report, Apr. 1907, 11; see also Apr. 1962, 7.

8. Christofferson, “The Doctrine of Christ,” Ensign, May 2012, 88.

9. McConkie, “Gathering of Israel and the Return of Christ,” 3, 5.

10. Erekson, “Understanding Church History by Study and Faith,” Ensign, Feb. 2017, 59; emphasis added.

11. Oaks, “Opposition in All Things,” Ensign, May 2016, 117.

12. Maxwell, Meek and Lowly, 60–61.

13. Packer, That All May Be Edified, 338.

14. Maxwell, “Meeting the Challenges of Today,” 149; emphasis added.

15. Maxwell, Things As They Really Are, 73.

16. Eyring, “Finding Safety in Counsel,” Ensign, May 1997, 25; emphasis added.

17. Monson, “Priesthood Power,” Ensign, May 2011, 66.

18. Monson, “Choices,” Ensign, May 2016, 86; emphasis added.

19. Maxwell, Things As They Really Are, 77–78; emphasis added.

20. Maxwell, All These Things Shall Give Thee Experience, 110.

21. McGrath, Knowing Christ, 79–81.

22. Uchtdorf, “Come, Join with Us,” Ensign, Nov. 2013, 23, 24.