Hi everyone, this is my first post on here, hoping you can help me out! I've just learned the truth about the church in the last month. I was just released as an auxiliary president 3 weeks ago (unrelated to church issues... I had just been in for a long time). I was 150% bought into the church. Crazy dedicated to my calling. Lifelong member.

When the executive secretary asked me to come in to get my new calling 2 weeks ago, I just told him I didn't want to accept a calling at this time. The bishop texted to see if I could still come talk to him. Three evaded appointments later, he asked me politely what was going on with me in a text. Deciding I really didn't want to meet with him, I texted him back that I was leaving the church over Joseph Smith and church history issues and that I didn't want anyone to come talk to me about it. :) It was a long text, I'm just summarizing. This was his response:

"Thank you for confiding in me. I can only imagine how difficult of a decision this has been and how heartwrenching thinking about next steps must feel. I know you wouldn't make this decision lightly. This is surprising news that I am still processing as well. Like I mentioned in my text, I think you and your family are amazing and still look forward to friendship and association. My initial reaction is to bear testimony as you described but I want to honor your request. Testimony is a very personal journey. I do have a few questions if you dont mind me asking. Does (your husband) share in these feelings? What were the specific things you learned about Joseph Smith that led you to this decision? Would you allow me to confide in (stake president) and would you be open to a visit with us at your house to learn more about your decision and next steps?"

What do you guys recommend who have already been down this road??

Should I meet with them? How much should I tell them? Or should I just insist on privacy and to be left alone?

FYI my husband says he knows the church isn't true but he wants it to be. He's holding onto hope that he's missing something and is open to talking to them. I personally don't want to talk to them about it because I feel it's unproductive and there's nothing they can say to change the fact that the church is a fraud.

Any insights are appreciated! Sorry this was crazy long!!

"I texted him back that I was leaving the church over Joseph Smith and church history issues and that I didn't want anyone to come talk to me about it. :)"

Text him back & paste this part of your original text. Ask him to seek counsel to understand this.

Runawayaslave is a friend of mine in real life. I have her some counsel and advice, but asked her to come here for more insight

You mean further light and knowledge.

Yes, correct. Thank you for correcting me. ;)

IMO, I think that meeting with them is a bad idea. Especially because your spouse is not quite on the same page with you.

I've read so many stories of couples and families being torn apart by the church and the leaders in it. I would be very hesitant to introduce two people into the middle of this situation who are not in agreement with you and who are basically minions for the mormon church.

The sp was starting to imply that my husband should divorce me because he could do better if he had a more compliant wife. That was the last time my husband spoke to him. I'm fortunate that my husband isn't the type that would go along with that BS. What the sp doesn't know is that's one of my hubbys favorite traits about me. He can't stand it when women are doormats, it drives him crazy.


At most, I would give them some recommended reading, and tell them to study it out for themselves and come to their own conclusions like you did. You don't have to explain anything to them. It's their responsibility to find out information about their belief system, and you most likely wouldn't convince them anyway. Put that responsibility right back on their plate where it belongs.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/01/2016 07:20PM by madalice.

Wow, I wish they would say something like that to my husband. Would be just the push he needs to be done forever! Ha. Crazy. Thanks for your advice!

I would tell him that if he honestly wants to understand why you left so he can evaluate his own beliefs using the information about the church that you share, you'll meet.

But, if he wants to come tell you to doubt your doubts and come back, you're not interested in a visit.

Or, just tell him no visit for you, and let your hubby do what he wants.

Ok thank you! I think my husband wants to talk to them. It will be interesting to see how that goes. I definitely don't want to be there.

>
> I personally don't want to talk to them about
> it because I feel it's unproductive and there's
> nothing they can say to change the fact that
> the church is a fraud.
>

Just keep repeating this and hold true to it.

The bishop is just doing the normal crisis response, what he's been taught to do. You can also refer him to AofF #11: We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

And smile a lot. They hate that!!

Haha love that! Smiling I can do for sure! Article of Faith 11 is a great idea, too. :) Thanks.

I would respond with, "I do not care to discuss the issues at this time. I am not interested in any meetings. I am asking you to respect my privacy. I will contact you if and when I decide to take any further steps. Thank you in advance for respecting my wishes."

You do not need to discuss church history issues with your bishop, and I would not recommend it. Also, once you have sent this text, don't feel that you need to respond to any further texts. The bishop can text your husband if he has any questions specifically for him.

Great response.
Also, don't call him "Bishop" call him by his first name. He no longer is your bishop, he's just the insurance agent in your neighborhood.

I love this! They are so hung up on their 'setting apart'!

Ask him how come, if the Apostles don't have to pay tithing because it was recognized how much they do for the church, why not SPs and Bishops?

And it just occurred to me: Anyone willing to pay tithing should get the blessings of tithing, including not having to pay tithing. It's not like ghawd needs the money, right?

It really would be neat if I had a secret friend who was all knowing and all powerful and to whom I could turn for help whenever I needed it, and he was always there for me!! If such a personage existed, there'd be no need for 10 Commandments, etc. And there'd be no wars, no strife, no contention.

No they don't. I mean, they can. Cuz it'll just go right back into their church commissioned salaries. ;)

"In August 1844 the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles issued an epistle which required all Mormons to immediately pay 'a tenth of all their property and money . . . and then let them continue to pay in a tenth of their income from that time forth.' There was no exemption for Mormons who had already paid one-tenth of their property upon conversion.

"In January 1845 a Quorum of Twelve's epistle reemphasized 'the duty of all saints to tithe themselves one-tenth of all they possess when they enter into the new and everlasting covenant: and then one-tenth of their interest, or income, yearly afterwards.' ****However, two weeks later the Twelve voted to exempt themselves, the two general bishops Newel K. Whitney and George Miller, and the Nauvoo Temple Committee from any obligation to pay tithing.**** This was due to their services to the church.

"Apostle John E. Page's enforcement of the full-tithing requirement for the rank-and-file led to his disaffection from his own quorum. Exempted from tithing himself, Page felt guilty about collecting tithing from others such as one Mormon who gave $4 which was 'the tenth of all' the man and his impoverished family possessed. Upon abandoning the Quorum of the Twelve in 1846, Page complained that he 'believes that many paid tithing & in consequence of [this, were in] want of money enough to procure misc. necessaries of life.'

"In May 1835 an official Church council voted that the Quorum of Twelve Apostles and First Council of Seventy 'have particularly to depend upon their ministry for their support, and that of their families; and they have a right, by virtue of their offices, to call upon the churches to assist them.' When Bishop Edward Partridge gave the first definition of tithing in December 1837, part of the tithing was for 'remunerating the officers of the Church for the time which they were necessarily employed in doing the business of the same.'"

...

"In 1884 Church president John Taylor limited bishops to 8% of tithing they collected (now primarily cash), while stake presidents got 2% of tithing collected by all the bishops of the stake. In 1888 Wilford Woodruff established set salaries for stake presidents and provided that a stake committee would apportion 10% of collected tithing between the bishops and the stake tithing clerk. At April 1896 General Conference, the First Presidency announced the end of salaries for local officers, in response to the decision of the temple meeting 'to not pay Salaries to any one but the Twelve."
- Quinn, "Paid Ministry and Voluntary Service," p. 205"


- D&C 42:71-73
71 And the elders or high priests who are appointed to assist the bishop as counselors in all things, are to have their families supported out of the property which is consecrated to the bishop, for the good of the poor, and for other purposes, as before mentioned;

72 Or they are to receive a just remuneration for all their services, either a stewardship or otherwise, as may be thought best or decided by the counselors and bishop.

73 And the bishop, also, shall receive his support, or a just remuneration for all his services in the church.



It's hard to respect a ghawd who is as sloppy, fickle and changing as the mormon ghawd

Thanks for that. Still trying to grasp the notion that I don't "have" to do anything anymore!

I love what summer wrote!!! How I wish I had left like that instead of explaining myself the way I did.

runawayslave Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Or should I just insist on privacy and to be
> left alone?
>
> I personally don't want to talk to them
> about it because I feel it's unproductive and
> there's nothing they can say to change the fact
> that the church is a fraud.
>

You already know what you want to do. It seems like you only need to work things out with your husband, who may take a bit longer to leave.

I'm a nevermo, but there's lots of personal experiences and good advice on exmo boards. I recommend you read the old threads on them, hang out for awhile, and continue asking questions.

Sounds like a good idea, turns out the evil exmormon.org is actually AMAZING! Haha so grateful for all this support!!

Sure, right now you are, but wait til you get the bill!!!

The way I see it, he's asking questions so that he can find flaws in your thinking and then wants to come to your home to explain why you are wrong.

I don't see a problem with sharing some of your problems with the church, maybe he'll learn something. But I would just outline problems (maybe in an email) with no discussion to follow. I would say "no" to a home visit for sure.

When I left the church, I was annoyed that the bishop never spoke to me, but asked my TBM husband what I was thinking. So, I would tell the bishop that you think it is wrong to speak for your husband about church matters.

I may be different than everyone here but I would have loved to talk to the bishop and stake president more when I was leaving the church.

I am not afraid of them trying to find holes in my reasoning but I welcome that, I try to be open minded and realize I could be wrong. I just don't think they would be able to find any holes.

The short conversations I did have were completely void of content. The bishop didn't ask anything. The stake president asked a few questions but was completely blown away and silenced when I brought up information I had learned. The guy was clueless, like never heard stuff before.

I just wish I could have told them more to add weight to their shelves.

I guess the only bad thing would be that they might become more hostile to you, which sometimes works in your favor when they start telling a spouse what to do about you(back fires sometimes).

You're right. He just wants to be prepared with ammo when he comes to resolve all my concerns! Ha.

If you want to talk to them, then by all means talk to them. It really wouldn't hurt anything and by many accounts, people talking to the leadership helps cement the fact that they have no answers to the very real problems that plague the church, nor can they provide anything to change the history of the church that shows that it was completely made up by Joseph Smith and his friends.

That being said, you seem pretty clear on not wanting to talk to them. You've stated this once already and you're stating it again here. I felt the same way when I left the church, I had no desire to hear from them as I already knew that they wouldn't change my mind. It would be a waste of everyone's time to talk and would only be frustrating for everyone involved... And you know it would end with a tearful testimony by someone, which is at best awkward.

If your husband wants to meet with them, that's up to him. Maybe you go with him as a sign of support, maybe you don't. It's all up to you. It's OK to do what's right for you.

Great advice, thank you.

These bishop meetings are almost always an exercise in futility. The bishop's job is to coax or manipulate you deeper into the mormon program. Some non-believers hope coax or talk sense into the bishop or at least get his sympathy or a nod of appreciation.

I think it's best to say, "I've left your church for doctrinal reasons and I'm not interested in discussing it since I won't be changing my mind. Thank your for offering, but no, I won't attend a meeting. Goodbye."

Bishops start out being very kind and supportive and eventually tend to turn passive/aggressive, then become borderline threatening, anything to keep a member under church control.

Normal churches don't do this. Only very controlling cultish churches behave in this way. You're a responsible intelligent adult. You have a right to decide on church participation without explaining your reasons to anyone except a spouse or possibly your children. No one else needs to know.

I agree with Cheryl 1000%! Why is the mormon church so intent on getting people to change their mind when it comes to church participation when the member chooses another path? It screams of desperation on their part, IMO.

Great point!! It's not normal! Sometimes I have to step back and realize holy crap this stuff is so weird!!! Haha. I'm allowed to believe what I want to believe. Thanks. :)

I don't think you need to respond to the BP. You have already drawn the boundaries and he needs to respect them.

I wish you the best as you make your own path out of the church. We all have different reasons for leaving.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/01/2016 03:12PM by messygoop.

Thank you!

Been on both sides. Behind the scenes plots now between SP and bishop to "divide and conquer". Don't be fooled. Text him the essay references and a copy of CES letter and suggest he read. Offer no other specifics. Do not meet or discuss further with any member except your husband. Do not be home if they come to talk to your beloved. As Jesus said.." It is finished".

Gatorman

I think you're absolutely right!

My suggestion:

"If you want to know about my husband, ask my husband. As for me, I'll politely pass on answering your questions, and request no further contact."

Either that, or:
"Yes, I do mind answering your questions. Goodbye."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/01/2016 03:16PM by ificouldhietokolob.

It's so hard to do that to one of your friends! The bishop is my age. His wife is my friend. And they're super nice people. Makes it hard. But I definitely see the value in just stopping the conversation.

Stopping the conversation *may* just allow you to remain friends. If you get into a contentious discussion, and it ends badly, or even if you just fully explain how despicable you find JS, you might *not* be able to stay friends.

Just a thought :)

I know it's hard to say that to a friend. I had to eventually say it to most of my family. It was good I did, though. They came around to not discussing church around me, and essentially considered it a "truce." It worked out.

"Does (your husband) share in these feelings?" I think this is him fishing for someone to take his side and double or triple team you when he visits or confronts you on issues. This really has nothing to do with your concerns or even your faith as it is really personal. It is an old cult tactic to use family as leverage or hostages.

"What were the specific things you learned about Joseph Smith that led you to this decision? Would you allow me to confide in (stake president) and would you be open to a visit with us at your house to learn more about your decision and next steps?"

scaredhusband translation: We want you to say something to hold above you and can get you ex-ed for apostasy. After we find some leverage or use your family as hostages, that is.

But that is what I read into it. I don't know the situation and this is just speculation.

As for what you can tell him or say, "No thank you", is sufficient. You have already offered enough context to the situation and you don't owe him anything more. If you don't want to meet him don't. He has no real authority.

Bishop: "Does (your husband) share in these feelings?"

Runaway: "He's a grown man. Why don't you ask him yourself?"

Bishop: "What were the specific things you learned about Joseph Smith that led you to this decision?"

Runaway: [At most, just put together a short bullet point list of maybe 6-8 issues, no details. Don't spend more than 5-10 minutes on it; the bishop doesn't really care other than to talk you down.]

Bishop: "Would you allow me to confide in (stake president)"

Runaway: "It sounds like you're going to do that anyway, since you're already pressing me to meet with both of you."

Bishop: "and would you be open to a visit with us at your house to learn more about your decision and next steps?"

Runaway: "Now you're being disingenuous. You know good and well that you're not interested in 'learning more' about my decision, only in trying to reverse it. Besides, you've already learned enough from the list I sent you. And since I've declared my intention to leave the church, any 'next steps' are none of your business. I've specifically informed you that I don't want any visitors, and therefore your request to visit is insensitive, disrespectful and cultish. Your suggestion that the SP accompany you here tells me that your visit is designed to gang up on me, which is unacceptable. As I have stated, there will be no meeting. Period."

^^^^^This is very direct and to the point, but I doubt that anyone leaving the church said this at any time, ever.

TSCC and, and cultish stuff generally, takes advantage of politeness to push people, and especially, to push fake authority on people. No one is rude enough to "tell it like it is" such as the dialogue suggested above. So the leadership gets to push, push, push, with disingenious requests that make the other party's deflections appear rude and unreasonable; thus, they control the other person through their own, natural, desire to be polite. The polite person assumes their decision about the church will come as a shocking blow that they must deliver gently. The leaders see "niceness" as weakness, and exploit it. Moreover, the nice person is afraid of being gossiped negatively about. So they try to be even more nice, until every communication backs them further into a corner.

This kind of response, though, pointing out the contradictions and agression within the nicey, nice message itself, jerks the chain tight on self-appointed leaders. I love it.

Tough call. Hard to tell if you "planted seeds" or if it's the usual lure you back "because the church is such a good place to raise kids even if it's false" tactic.


One thing is for sure: No matter how much you will be asked to pray about the the truthiness of the BoM and whether JS was a prophet, the facts are still the facts: the BoM and BoA are provably false/made up/copied (mistakes and all), and JS was a con man who ran the scam until hubrus overtook him.

I may pray and pray about whether my pickup truck is a religious deity, but the actual hard fact is that it's just a good old truck made of earth-bound steel (and not precious steel, either).



All this in a church that prides itself on "plain and precious"...

If any member of the church wants to meet with you, NEVER go to them. ALWAYS make them come to YOU. Meet them on YOUR turf.

What has worked for me in situations like yours is to just flat out state, "I am no longer capable of having a testimony of Joseph Smith. Through my own personal study, prayers, and by reading the church essays, the way he lived his life contradicts with my core values and what my beliefs of a "prophet of god" should be, Without that testimony of Joseph Smith, there really isn't much reason to continue participating in the church now is there?"

That usually stops them dead in their tracks. Every now and then someone will try to push it a little further. When they do I remind them of how I was taught that god would never allow his prophet to lead the members astray...that god would take him from this earth before letting that happen. I then point out that this is obviously what happened with Joseph Smith. That at some point, just like with you, god got tired of Joseph's shit. It could have been claiming to see things in a common rock, destroying printing presses, or marrying 14 year old girls and/or screwing the wives of those he had sent away on missions. No matter what, at some point god said, "Enough of this shit" and had Joseph whacked before he could lead any more astray.

Usually by that point the church leaders who had come to visit me are pale, dizzy, and just about willing to do anything to get out of my house.

This is amazing!! hahaha love it!

Simply text him the 11th article of faith along with a simple Not interested in any meeting here or anywhere.

No further contact wanted or tolerated by you are anyone.

Please respect my decision as I am an adult with free agency.

The tricky thing here is that the bishop holds the keys to the disciplinary process. If you are well set and ready to resign/be excommunicated, and don't feel threatened about that, then maybe you can consider meeting.

I was intellectually disconnecting from the LDS Church much faster than I was emotionally and practically disconnecting from it. Sometimes we can rapidly disconnect on an intellectual level and understand why it's all not true. But it took longer to come to terms with how I had lived my life to that point, and have any sort of idea what to do next.

That's an emotionally vulnerable place and an authority wielding bishop may not be what you need emotionally.

On the other hand, being a bishop does not leave a person impervious to this information. I was a branch president during my mission, Bob McCue, Ken Clark and many other exMormons were bishops, so why not. Maybe like Gatorman suggested you could send him some stuff, and if he comes to you--then maybe he's interested in dropping rank and talking to you as an equal.

Thank you for that. I absolutely feel as you described!

Direct him to the CES letter?

Everyone has to decide the option that works best for them.

Having said that I told my home teacher who was in the

Bishoprick at the time that I no longer believed in the church

and that I was leaving. He had been a really good guy to know

and to have as a home teacher. He took it like a man. was very

nice.It felt good for me to be open and honest about it and I

have never regretted the way I did it. At the time I had a

calling so I gave them two weeks notice so they could find

someone to replace me. I was sad to leave the friends that I

had made over the years there but doing the right thing always

gave me strength. When I see some of my old ward memebers now

they are very cordial and we catch up with each other on

what is happening in the ward.


The mormon church is such a negative and repressive

organization that it was really important for me to just leave.

I'll never be sorry I got out.

In my letter of resignation addressed to the Mormon president, I listed each of the many reasons I no longer believed the church was true. I also made it very clear that I wanted NO CONTACT from the local leaders.

SLC HQ handled the entire matter and I have never been locally contacted since they received my resignation letter. I don't know if the local leaders were somehow involved - nor do I care. I got out of the cult with as little fanfare as possible, which is exactly what I requested.

My family left the church over twenty years ago. I was the holdout but finally came to my senses. As I look back, leaving the church is much like joining; I was a convert. The decision to join was a personal journey as was the departure and once the decision was made no member was going to change my mind. I would tell the bishop thanks for his concern, but that you have moved on.

For me it would depend on two things; 1) Do you want to talk to him about the issues, possibly enlighten him? and 2) How well do you know the issues?

I personally would welcome the opportunity to spill all the beans on church history to a bishop or stake prez. But I know the material very well.

I have talked to bishops before and they were clueless about things like Joseph marrying other men's wives and said I was wrong. It was satisfying to show him I was speaking the truth using church resources.

On the other hand, I have talked to a Stake Prez and he did not respond or acknowledge any of the issues with any sort of rebuttal other than he puts those things on 'his shelf'. So it was kind of a useless conversation but I personally want these local leaders to know the seriousness of the issues and try to enlighten them.

Many bishops and stake prez are still clueless about this stuff. I think some are becoming somewhat more educated with the essays and such but a well-read exmo could bring up very sound yet troubling issues to which he would have no reply that made any sense other than 'spiritual' responses.

I see no reason to meet with the bishop. I met with mine cuz he was a nice guy. We talked about the issues, I pointed him to the Essays, but he hadn't even heard of them (this was 6 months ago). I referenced CES Letter, and again, he had no idea what I was talking about. He knew next to nothing about real church doctrine or history. You won't convince your Bishop of anything, and he will try like crazy to keep you. Skip the pointless meeting and guilt... just stay home and do your best to move on. Everyone on this board is here for you.

There's no reason to meet with the bishop or anyone else.

Note also that he used the classic salesman's trick of asking you questions. Speaking as a former salesman, I point out that we control conversations and the behavior of others by asking them questions. Most people have been programmed since Day 1 to feel required to answer someone else's questions. This gives the questioner the opportunity to engage in any number of rhetorical tricks to get us to change our minds or commit to something out of quilt or confusion.

He's perfectly capable of researching Joseph Smith--he doesn't need you to explain anything to him. He only wants to get the hook in you from a different angle. You don't owe him an additional second of your time--in person, on the phone, online, nada.

Ignore him. If he continues to pester him tell him he's bothering you and to cease immediately or you'll escalate it to authorities and have him busted for harassing you.

The SP's secretary sent me a text to organise an interview just after I left. I sent back, 'Please tell [used SP's first name] that I no longer recognise his authority over me and therefore, have no need to meet with him'.

^^^^^ Oh, I love this.

It's not only indisputably true, it will make a leader who's enamored with his own sense of superiority absolutely nuts--especially coming from a (gasp!) female.

"How dare you disregard my authority?!"

My feeling,although I do not offer it as advice, is that I would avoid such a meeting as if if were exposure to the bubonic plague.

Ha ok!! I'm seeing a pattern here!

Although using polite language, your bishop is still on point to give you and your husband, along with the sp, the standard pressure treatment. If he honestly wanted to have an open minded academic discourse with mutual respect he would meet with you alone. Whatever happens in a meeting, you will not be heard and he will have only one object in mind. He wants you, or at least your husband, actively attending church so he won't get the blame for losing yet another family to apostasy. If you like this man and want to keep him as a friend just tell him you understand he is expected, as a part of his job as bishop, to make every effort to keep you in the church. That isn't going to happen no matter what he says so a meeting with the sp would be a waste of everyone's time. Then invite just him out to dinner, a football/basketball game, a movie, or some other non-religious event and watch him decline or try to bring backup with him.

You're right! Thanks for your response!

What are the next steps? Seriously? His next steps will be to BACK THE F@%% OFF! You informed him already of your decision, as a courtesy I imagine. It's not up for discussion. Tell him you are not interested or don't even reply. The sooner you get Mormonism out of your life, the better.

Hahaha love it! Thanks!!

"It's so hard to do that to one of your friends! The bishop is my age. His wife is my friend. And they're super nice people."

This is kind of like my situation. I live in an area where I am almost completely surrounded by active LDS. I have lived here many years and I love my neighbors. They are my friends. Not everyone has the same experience that I have, but my ward is filled with good, kind, sincere people.

When I e mailed the bishop that I no longer believed in the church, he asked me if I wanted to discuss it further, and I said no thank you. I told him I am not removing my name from the church records, just because it would hurt my husband to much at this time. I may do it in the future.

I don't have a problem calling him "Bishop" precisely because I recognize he has no authority over me. He is a very nice man.

Here is the gist of the e mail I sent to him:

"Dear Bishop _____,

With regret and heavy heart I need to tell you that I no longer believe that the Church is true. It is best to release me from my calling as soon as possible. I cannot accept that polygamy, polyandry, racism, and harsh treatment of gay people come from a loving Heavenly Father. There are many other things I object to, but these are the main things that cause me to believe that prophets have not been inspired. I love the good people and neighbors that are members of the Church, and I don't judge you or them. I believe that there are good, wonderful, inspired people in every religion, including the LDS church, as we are all children of God. I believe in and love my Savior Jesus Christ.

I have no desire to draw anyone away, but I also don't want to live a lie. I need to be honest. When I had my temple recommend interview with you last summer, I still believed in the truth of the Church, in spite of some doubts. After many hours, over many months, of study, prayer, and pondering, I came to the conclusion that I no longer believe. The Church itself verifies everything that I have a problem accepting. My main sources are the essays on lds.org, the book Rough Stone Rolling, and Church History books and documents.

I will not attempt to attend the temple. If you need for me to give you my recommend, I will do so.

I do not have a desire to remove my name from the Church records.

This is understandably very hard for my husband. He is faithful, good, and has total faith that the Church is true.

Thank you for your goodness, kindness, and the self sacrificing you do as a bishop.

with appreciation,"


You have to do what feels right to you, and we all want to give our input. So please let us know how it goes!

Wow, that must have been hard, I can definitely empathize! I thought I might hyperventilate after I pushed send on my text! (ha cult much??) I'm also sorry that your husband is totally believing still, that has got to be hard. Good for you being true to yourself and thanks for sharing!!

Advice from my therapist, regarding a difficult family situation. If you decide to meet with them...........do not have them come to your home. Instead, meet with them some at their home or office. It is easier for you to get up and leave than to have to ask them to leave (throw them out!) your home. I wold think that would apply here, also.