Posted by:
bishopatheist
(
)
Date: October 27, 2013 12:25AM
In early September, my wife and I visited with our stake president and told him that we no longer believed that the church was true, and that our family of seven would be leaving the church. I saw the posts today on this site and on another site. It occurred to me that the church has controlled my story so far. But it's my story, so I posted it on the exit stories board.
I appreciate this website very much. It helps us feel sane during a very difficult, and potentially lonely process. I would be so pleased to think that my story could contribute somewhat.
I think the most interesting part of my story to the board will probably be my visit with a general authority, so I have pasted that here.
VISIT WITH A GENERAL AUTHORITY
My original coming out plan was for stake conference weekend in October. I had wanted to spare my friend, the outgoing stake president, this difficulty. I did not think I would care as much to trouble the new stake president. The bishops, high councilors, and stake presidency had received letters that indicated an interview time with the visiting general authority, along with a survey in which we were asked to describe our family, job, affirm certain worthiness standards, disclose whether we had ever been divorced or subject to church discipline, and what we believe needs to be emphasized in the stake. We were also asked to recommend three men who would serve well as stake president. My plan was to go out of town that weekend, unannounced, then let the new guy know.
When Shayne Bowen of the 1Q70 came to our stake, he visited our home for about an hour with the outgoing stake president. I was not sure whether to expect a kindly man who wanted to have a conversation, or a condescending priesthood holder who knew everything about us because the spirit had already told him everything. The amateur anthropologist in me would not be disappointed either way. I later found out that his career was as an insurance salesman, and he was true to that form. The first thing he told me was, "I want you to know that I love you." Inauthenticity was not the best way to start our meeting.
After "establishing trust", he asked us what he could do to have us return to church. I paused and did not know how to respond. His question is very telling. Maybe he believes in the whole “offended” excuse (I don’t think anybody who believes in the truth claims of the church would leave it for such a comparatively trivial reason). Or maybe he believes that the church is just a social institution and that he could actually do something to get us back.
Eventually, I told him that although there were some true and good principles that the church taught, there were also false and harmful principles. I told him that although I believed that the people were true, I had a strong conviction that the church was not. He asked what principles we appreciated. I responded “love, kindness, friendship, service, and forgiveness.” He then asked what principles were false. I did not discuss them for two reasons: one, I was trying to have a pleasant meeting; and two, I did not want to give him an easy excuse for my disaffection.
Next, he tried to persuade us and find some common ground. He asked how we know right from wrong. I recognize this as the Argument from Morality, which is that if there is objective morality, then god must exist. I explained that we do not need god to tell us right from wrong. And just because the idea of subjective morality scares somebody, it doesn’t mean god exists. He had no idea what the terms “objective morality” and “subjective morality” even meant. He asked, “who gets to decide right from wrong?” I said, “I do.” He seemed puzzled and offended by this personal responsibility.
We also spent some time discussing eternal families. My wife wants to believe in a personal god and an afterlife. He seized on this common ground. He testified that we could not be together forever as a family unless we stayed with the church. I told him that I thought mormons had over-simplified this issue. I said that even the telestial kingdom is supposed to be a kingdom of glory, not a prison. I asked if he thought god would suspend free agency, and physically prevent me and my wife from being together (never mind Joseph Fielding Smith’s crazy teaching that lower kingdom inhabitants would not have their private parts). I asserted that within mormon theology, celestial marriage means something more than just being together. He did not respond, other than to testify that families could be together forever only through priesthood ordinances.
More juvenile discussion proved that everything this man knew about religion and philosophy, he learned in primary. He questioned whether we had been lazy in our praying and scripture study (I certainly became so at some point). He suggested that we were hasty in our decision (took me almost a year of doubting). He appealed to the significant investment we’ve made in mormonism as a reason for us to stay (I wouldn’t expect an insurance salesman to understand the important financial concept of sunk costs). He said that everybody gets exactly what they want in the afterlife, and since mormonism is the only religion to promise eternal families, we should believe in it (apparently, he never heard a non-mormon talk about being reunited with loved ones after death).
He bore testimony, starting with “as a special witness,” then mentioned the usual items. I asked, “What makes your witness so special?” He said that it was because a prophet had laid hands on his head and set him apart as a special witness. I asked if his witness were stronger or better than the stake president’s. He said, “no, it’s a special witness.” After some more questions, he admitted that he doesn’t HAVE a special witness, but that he IS a special witness. This was the only thing he taught me during our meeting. I did not realize that “special witness” was just the name (a misleading one) of a calling like “sunday school president” or “Saturday morning toilet washing committee member.”
He also asked us what our biggest issues were, guessing polygamy and the BoA. I mentioned something about the BoA being a literal translation of Abraham’s own writings upon papyrus. He incredulously asked, “Have you really been taught that?” I explained that it said so right in the scriptures and JS affirmed it in his journals, to which the stake president nodded.
The meeting then hit a low point. Instead of discussing specific issues like the BoA, my wife mentioned that during the process we had really wished to speak with somebody who understood the issues and still remained faithful. He looked my wife right in the eye and said, "You’re looking at him. I’m that man. I know the issues. Any issue that you’ve studied, I know about it." I responded, “Okay, then, how about a simple test?” I asked why god would mention smashed windows to the brother of Jared while building the barges, when windows would not be invented until thousands of years later. He looked at my wife, and said, "You don't have the faith to hear the answers." She was upset and remarked how disappointed her mother would be. Her mother had prayed that a general authority would answer our questions, and even though he had "all the answers," my wife lacked sufficient faith for him to tell her. Of course, if we had enough faith for him to answer us, we never would have asked the question in the first place – catch 22!
At this point, I started getting a little more aggressive. I asserted that if mormonism were true, then the holy ghost is a poor witness that only leads 0.1% to the truth. He countered that it's because everybody has their agency - as if 99.9% willfully reject the obviously true message. He said that we would never find happiness on our current path. We had already told him that we lived many of the best principles that mormonism teaches. I guess he thinks that living the major principles of "the gospel" only results in happiness if you also go to the mormon church. Or could it be that the spirit told him that we were lying, and that we really just wanted to pursue a life of sin?
Next, he tried to teach us something about faith, but it was a confusing and bizarre lesson. He asked, “If I took you to SLC and put the windows from the barges on a table, would that help you?” My wife said that it wouldn’t help because there were no windows on those barges. He agreed, “You’re right. There weren’t. What if I put the plates on the table?” We told him if we could see the true plates, of course we would believe. I think we must lack the faith to understand this lesson.
As we finished our meeting, I bore a powerful "testimony" to him. I promised him that if he would apply the same skepticism to mormonism that he applies to all other religions, it would not take him five minutes to discover that mormonism is false. He disagreed, but I'd bet quite a lot that he hasn't spent more than five minutes studying any of the non-christian religions that he has already rejected.
As he left, he asked my wife to pray for one thing, “If you pray, pray to father tonight and ask if he sent a special witness to you today.” I found it odd that he did not ask us to pray about something more meaningful, but I guess this request gives us a glimpse into his self-importance.
In case you wonder, the stake president just sat and nodded occasionally. I’m sure he knew his place as a junior companion. I haven’t spoken with him since, but would be interested to hear his perceptions. He is a very good people person who should not have been pleased with the meeting, but he also believes this guy is a “special witness” – so who knows?