NOM

Posted: **Sun Mar 18, 2018 6:44 pm**

I was talking with a good friend this week, we have known each other almost 17 years. She and her family left the church. Her husband left first, then she joined him with their kids. They decided that their family would resign together. (mom, dad, 2 kids ages 19 and 10 when they sent letters.) They used the lawyer who processes it for free. This was at least a year ago. Church only processed 2 of the resignations- dad & 1 kid. So they re-sent letters for mom and son. Still nothing.

My friend's husband talked to the lawyer (I'm assuming it's the same one we have heard of/used) and he said that the church was receiving so many resignations, they actually just stopped processing them. Friend's husband said they're flat out not doing resignations anymore. Doesn't sound legal to me. We all know they count everyone in the #s til they're like 120, even people who resigned. But my friend and her son are still officially members of record on the local books.

Has anyone else heard this?

Posted: **Sun Mar 18, 2018 8:10 pm**

StarbucksMom wrote: ↑Sun Mar 18, 2018 6:44 pm I was talking with a good friend this week, we have known each other almost 17 years. She and her family left the church. Her husband left first, then she joined him with their kids. They decided that their whole family would resign together. (a family of 5-mom, dad, 2 kids ages 19 and 10 when they sent letters. Their other child is severely disabled and was never baptized.) They used the lawyer who processes it for free. This was at least a year ago. Church only processed 2 of the resignations- dad & 1 kid. So they re-sent letters for mom and son. Still nothing.

My friend's husband talked to the lawyer (I'm assuming it's the same one we have heard of/used) and he said that the church was receiving so many resignations, they actually just stopped processing them. Friend's husband said they're flat out not doing resignations anymore. Doesn't sound legal to me. We all know they count everyone in the #s til they're like 120, even people who resigned. But my friend and her son are still officially members of record on the local books.

Has anyone else heard this?

I've seen a few people on FB getting letters of confirmation that their names are removed as recently as this week.

Posted: **Sun Mar 18, 2018 8:51 pm**

Mine was processed May of 2017. Took about two weeks. No lawyer. Don't know why anyone would use one.

Posted: **Sun Mar 18, 2018 9:11 pm**

Yes it is literally illegal for the church to stop processing resignations. I'm not an lawyer, but there was a court case that set this precedent. Someone smarter than me can probably easily find it.

Quitmormon posts on twitter weekly how many folks resigned that week, and a running total of how many they process, so the church has not "stopped processing" resignations. The latest tweet was two days ago:

Quitmormon.com wrote:One hundred and seventy-nine people have just resigned from the LDS church. Total QuitMormon.com resignations: 15500

I don't know what's going on with your friend @StarbucksMom, but Quitmormon continues to see "success", and based on that, the church is still processing resignations.

I have heard rumors of the church "not processing" the resignations of "children of record" or in other words: Kids who were blessed, or somehow had a membership record created, but were never baptized. Perhaps there's something going on there with this friend...

Posted: **Mon Mar 19, 2018 6:46 am**

Palerider wrote: ↑Sun Mar 18, 2018 8:51 pm Mine was processed May of 2017. Took about two weeks. No lawyer. Don't know why anyone would use one.

I just grabbed a boilerplate letter myself and sent it in, went smoothly but took 60 days. I think it started because of the resignation horror stories you hear about in exmormon communities, such stories are most likely (I've never seen data so that is just a gut call) in the minority but what gets circulated more widely? The story of over the top ridiculous leadership reacting in extremely inappropriate ways or a story of someone who sent in the letter and a few to several weeks later was resigned without any fuss? So the need (or caution) gets built up in peoples minds and then the word of mouth of the free service gets around and now the standard advice to resign is quitmormon.com on places like r/exmormon. Now that it is a thing there really isn't any reason not to use it, it is quick easy form you fill out, click a button and you're done. Not that some broiler-plate or custom letter in the mail (I can understand why meeting with the Bishop isn't a popular avenue) is horribly difficult in comparison but if quitmormon.com had been up and running I'd probably had taken advantage of it for the a minor increase of convenience over what I actually did (if nothing else, I would have saved a stamp).

Posted: **Mon Mar 19, 2018 8:30 am**

For me, I don't much see the point of resigning. Nothing to be gained from it that I can see apart from the home teachers don't come a knockin' the last day of the month.

I like Bill Burr's analogy/metaphor (why in the hell does metaphor end in ph?) which is the game of curling at the winter Olympics, the team member lets that curling stone go, and it just goes and never comes back- out a here- gone.

Now if I could get a refund of tithes and offerings that I gave the church over the years, I would resign quicker than Rush Limbaugh can eat a ball-park hot dog-wiener.

Posted: **Mon Mar 19, 2018 9:15 am**

If it's true it would make for a great media headline: Mormon Church Keeps Its Members Captive Against Their Will

Posted: **Mon Mar 19, 2018 9:22 am**

Hagoth wrote: ↑Mon Mar 19, 2018 9:15 am Mormon Church Keeps Its Members Captive Against Their Will

This happens every Sunday.

Wash, rinse, repeat

Posted: **Mon Mar 19, 2018 9:49 am**

Palerider wrote: ↑Sun Mar 18, 2018 8:51 pm Mine was processed May of 2017. Took about two weeks. No lawyer. Don't know why anyone would use one.

Having been on the administrative side in the stake, here's the difference.

When a resignation letter is given to a Bishop, they are the ones who have to put it into the system. They fill out a form on LDS.org and are asked to attach a digital copy of the letter. More often than not, the Bishop will just sit on that letter and hopes it goes away. Some become indignant and start asking the Stake President whether they should hold a disciplinary council. Others intend to fill out the form and scan the document, but for one reason or another they don't get around to it, or decide they need a face to face meeting before they continue forward. Only a certain percentage actually make it through the whole form filling out process.

Once the form is filled out and submitted, then the Stake President has to review it. I've personally seen our SP sit on resignation letters for months. He doesn't like reading them and will actively pretend they don't exist. It got to the point where I just started taking over and approving these removals because he'd prefer to remain in the dark. I have no idea whether or not my replacement is doing the same. After it leaves the stake, then it's more or less clear sailing.

Compare this to the resignations sent through Quit Mormon. We in the stake would receive a notification from the church that member so and so used a lawyer to request no contact and that their names had already been removed by church headquarters. The letters they send us requires no action and is only for our information.

Maybe other stakes are more efficient or respectful of people's choices and send these things through the pipe immediately. I just don't live in one of those places.

Posted: **Mon Mar 19, 2018 10:30 am**

oliver_denom wrote: ↑Mon Mar 19, 2018 9:49 am
Palerider wrote: ↑Sun Mar 18, 2018 8:51 pm Mine was processed May of 2017. Took about two weeks. No lawyer. Don't know why anyone would use one.
Having been on the administrative side in the stake, here's the difference.

When a resignation letter is given to a Bishop, they are the ones who have to put it into the system. They fill out a form on LDS.org and are asked to attach a digital copy of the letter. More often than not, the Bishop will just sit on that letter and hopes it goes away. Some become indignant and start asking the Stake President whether they should hold a disciplinary council. Others intend to fill out the form and scan the document, but for one reason or another they don't get around to it, or decide they need a face to face meeting before they continue forward. Only a certain percentage actually make it through the whole form filling out process.

Once the form is filled out and submitted, then the Stake President has to review it. I've personally seen our SP sit on resignation letters for months. He doesn't like reading them and will actively pretend they don't exist. It got to the point where I just started taking over and approving these removals because he'd prefer to remain in the dark. I have no idea whether or not my replacement is doing the same. After it leaves the stake, then it's more or less clear sailing.

Compare this to the resignations sent through Quit Mormon. We in the stake would receive a notification from the church that member so and so used a lawyer to request no contact and that their names had already been removed by church headquarters. The letters they send us requires no action and is only for our information.

Maybe other stakes are more efficient or respectful of people's choices and send these things through the pipe immediately. I just don't live in one of those places.

The letter I used was boilerplate but I customized it to express precisley what I desired and it also contained the ultimatum that if the request wasn't expedited immediately, a lawyer and legal remedy would be pursued.

I hand delivered it to my "bishop" which was the first time I'd seen him and probably the last official contact we will have. Two weeks later my notice from the COB arrived.

Maybe the folks in this area of the country are a bit more respectful of a person's free agency?

Posted: **Mon Mar 19, 2018 10:49 am**

Gatorbait wrote: ↑Mon Mar 19, 2018 8:30 am For me, I don't much see the point of resigning. Nothing to be gained from it that I can see apart from the home teachers don't come a knockin' the last day of the month.

I like Bill Burr's analogy/metaphor (why in the hell does metaphor end in ph?) which is the game of curling at the winter Olympics, the team member lets that curling stone go, and it just goes and never comes back- out a here- gone.

Now if I could get a refund of tithes and offerings that I gave the church over the years, I would resign quicker than Rush Limbaugh can eat a ball-park hot dog-wiener.

For me it's my way of saying, "Let me show you exactly how much influence you now have in my life. I'm putting you on notice that if you ever approach me again it will be with your hat in your hand and knowing that you have absolutely ZERO authority as far as I'm concerned. You are the ones who are "cut off" from among the people."

They took my time, they took my money, they took my resources, they took my family's time and money and they took me away from my family to do their work because they consider themselves more important than anything or anyone else.

But most importantly, they took my trust and they betrayed it by their self-deceit and their cowardice. They are cowards who are too fearful to look in the closet or under the rug for the dirty little truths that live there.

They need to know I am not well pleased.... I'm showing them the door and I'm not saying "Please".....exit this way

Posted: **Mon Mar 19, 2018 8:54 pm**

I never understood the need to resign. It’s not like you are getting a refund or something. They church is not paying you so you have no obligation to it. No need for two weeks notice.

If you just stop going are you not essentially resigning? Does putting it in writing make a difference somehow?

Posted: **Mon Mar 19, 2018 10:53 pm**

My view on it is that as long as a person is on the rolls, they have something over you, at least in their view. They can claim you for a a member for whatever purposes they want. By removing yourself, you remove their ability to use you for their own ends. Even if it is just to make their numbers sound better, you are out.

Posted: **Tue Mar 20, 2018 6:08 am**

1smartdodog wrote: ↑Mon Mar 19, 2018 8:54 pm I never understood the need to resign. It’s not like you are getting a refund or something. They church is not paying you so you have no obligation to it. No need for two weeks notice.

If you just stop going are you not essentially resigning? Does putting it in writing make a difference somehow?

If you resign, you are less apt to be a "project." No HTs or VTs assigned, no requests to meet with the bishop (even if you ask not to be contacted, that goes out the window when leadership takes over). I would definitely like to resign, but I have one son who is very active and the idea of being sealed to his parents is important to him, so I will let it be knowing that I will continue to have to fend off church interactions.

Posted: **Tue Mar 20, 2018 7:34 am**

1smartdodog wrote: ↑Mon Mar 19, 2018 8:54 pm I never understood the need to resign. It’s not like you are getting a refund or something. They church is not paying you so you have no obligation to it. No need for two weeks notice.

If you just stop going are you not essentially resigning? Does putting it in writing make a difference somehow?

It puts a damper on behavior like this: http://tech.lds.org/wiki/Locating_members

Plenty of Mormons just fade into the background, others are periodically pestered by members trying to do their duty of finding or reactivating lost sheep. Exmormons are a bit of a curious breed because they do resign instead of just deciding to stop attending (which is what most Christians in the US do when they decide they are done with their current church), but Mormons are a weird breed in that they don't get the hint and if you move without informing them of where you live they seem to think it is because you are too stupid to figure out how to contact someone in your new location. They also because of this duty of reactivation have official policy against Do Not Contact lists and you can end up the ward project having to put up with unwanted reactivation efforts.

There are also psychological reasons:

Some find the act cathartic.
Some just don't like the thought of being officially associated with an organization that they no longer want to be associated with for moral, ethical, or pragmatic reasons.
Some do it to communicate something to those near them concerning their faith status. In my case part of why I resigned it was to communicate to the members in my life that this wasn't a faith crisis (by that point) and that this wasn't just some phase of inactivity.
Authority and procedure are big in Mormonism, it can take a while to rub that aspect of it off of you. So done with the church? Follow the exit procedure.

Want to know exactly what reasons were at play and what were the primary ones motivating a particular exmomron? You'll have to ask them.

Posted: **Tue Mar 20, 2018 9:07 am**

Regarding the "removal" of one's name from the records of the church.....that never really happens anyway.

I was reading in the bishop and SP handbook recently and should an ex-member ever be so foolish as to want to be re-baptized; after all the hoops have been jumped through and the new baptism has taken place, they can send your new baptismal date into the First Pres. and if you are "worthy" they can authorize a "restoration" of blessings.

At that point either a general authority or maybe even one's SP (if authorized) can restore all of your priesthood blessings and when the official paperwork is submitted to Salt Lake, they renew your records with all of your original dates of baptism, ordination to priesthood, etc., etc. and your records will then appear as if you were never exed in the first place. The new baptismal date just goes away.

So if they don't keep a record of your membership on file, how do they know when those old dates of your ordinations were? Hmmmm....

Posted: **Tue Mar 20, 2018 10:18 am**

Myself, I resigned because my tacit agreement/approval to things like the ban on baptism for the children of gay couples is not something I'm willing to give. By staying "in" I feel that you're OK with the "15 Million people can't be wrong" message that is often sent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jivFpDw4erk

Posted: **Tue Mar 20, 2018 3:19 pm**

Palerider wrote: ↑Tue Mar 20, 2018 9:07 am Regarding the "removal" of one's name from the records of the church.....that never really happens anyway.

I was reading in the bishop and SP handbook recently and should an ex-member ever be so foolish as to want to be re-baptized; after all the hoops have been jumped through and the new baptism has taken place, they can send your new baptismal date into the First Pres. and if you are "worthy" they can authorize a "restoration" of blessings.

At that point either a general authority or maybe even one's SP (if authorized) can restore all of your priesthood blessings and when the official paperwork is submitted to Salt Lake, they renew your records with all of your original dates of baptism, ordination to priesthood, etc., etc. and your records will then appear as if you were never exed in the first place. The new baptismal date just goes away.

So if they don't keep a record of your membership on file, how do they know when those old dates of your ordinations were? Hmmmm....

So, how are these blessings restored? Do they do some priesthood ordinance? Or is it just a click in the computer?
Sounds like your membership/ordination doesn’t cease, but just gets suspended and then they can unsuspend, which requires you still have info in the database. I wonder if there is simply a flag they put on your record to indicate you are no longer a member. Then they can still pull reports on ex members.

Posted: **Tue Mar 20, 2018 3:25 pm**

2bizE wrote: ↑Tue Mar 20, 2018 3:19 pm So, how are these blessings restored? Do they do some priesthood ordinance?

Yes, "restoration of ordinances" is in fact a priesthood ordinance. I'm pretty sure it involves the laying on of hands.

After that, the celestial database gets updated with a click or three...

Posted: **Tue Mar 20, 2018 3:47 pm**

2bizE wrote: ↑Tue Mar 20, 2018 3:19 pm Sounds like your membership/ordination doesn’t cease, but just gets suspended and then they can unsuspend, which requires you still have info in the database. I wonder if there is simply a flag they put on your record to indicate you are no longer a member. Then they can still pull reports on ex members.

Bingo we have a winner!!! There is no such thing as having your "name removed from the records of the Church". It is standard database practice in this day and age to not purge membership records from a corporate database when a person leaves.

A member's record is simply flagged or moved into a different database.

It is still there even after the church claims it removed "your name from the records of the church". A blatant lie. The only material change is that your records are no longer assigned to a physical ward.

Because they still retain your records, they know who you are and what ordinances have been done. If you ever rejoin, they have your history and will make you go through the predefined hoops before they simply flip the bit in the database.

A nagging question is - does the church still include a flagged resigned/excommunicated record in the membership totals. I suspect they do.

NOM

No more resignations??

No more resignations??

Re: No more resignations??

Re: No more resignations??

Re: No more resignations??

Re: No more resignations??

Re: No more resignations??

Re: No more resignations??

Re: No more resignations??

Re: No more resignations??

Re: No more resignations??

Re: No more resignations??

Re: No more resignations??

Re: No more resignations??

Re: No more resignations??

Re: No more resignations??

Re: No more resignations??

Re: No more resignations??

Re: No more resignations??

Re: No more resignations??

Re: No more resignations??