Even when I’d decided that the claims of the LDS Church were not grounded in reality, it took a while for me to resign formally. It was a big deal, so I didn’t want to rush it. But after about a year of not believing, I decided that it was time to write my Exit Letter.
You see, in the LDS Church, even if you no longer attend, or no longer even consider yourself a Mormon, you are still being counted in the church’s records. (Which are thus a bit inflated.) To no longer be counted, you need to resign formally.
A member of the Stake Presidency (who is also a good friend) was very helpful in the process. He explained that if I wanted to, I could submit a letter of resignation to the bishop of my ward, the bishop would write back asking if I was sure, I could write back and say ‘yes’, and then the matter would go to Salt Lake. There are ways around the rigamarole, but that was direct enough for my purposes.
What follows is the text of my exit letter. I don’t recommend using my letter as a model. Richard Packham has a page with information that you can adapt for your own purposes. An exit letter only has to be a one-sentence deal. But I’m a bit more verbose than that, so I wanted my letter to be a manifesto of sorts. You only get to write one of these, after all! In the end, it was exactly what I wanted to say.
Here’s the letter:
Dear (first name of bishop),
This letter is to notify you that I resign my membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, effective immediately. I’d like to ask you to carry out the necessary paperwork to remove my name from the records of the Church. I recognise that according to Church doctrine this cancels all ordinances I have engaged in, and I have made my choice with that consideration in mind.
This is not a decision that I have made lightly. ‘Being Mormon’ has been a part of my identity throughout my life, and I have made many sacrifices in service of the Church because I thought it was right. The process of ‘deconversion’ has at times been difficult. However, I have also found it to be immensely worthwhile. I have gained the ability to reason without worrying about the presumed opinions of hypothetical beings, and I am better able to enjoy and value every day of this life with the people I love, while still being the moral agent I have always been.
In my youth, the LDS Church instilled in me the highest regard for truth. That was what made it better than other churches — it had the truth, or so I thought. Ironically, it was this regard for truth that led me away from religion in general, and Mormonism in particular. As I became more aware of the scientific method, with its reliance on empirical, real-world evidence, it became clear to me that the Church was promoting an essentially false method for finding truth. Latter-day Saints try to evaluate the truth of an idea by how that idea makes them feel. They try to maintain their belief by having faith-promoting experiences and by bearing testimony to each other. But feelings, experiences, and testimony are not reliable sources of evidence because they are coloured by our tendency to see what we want to see. By contrast, the scientific method requires evidence to establish the truthfulness of claims, and it offers a set of tools that control for our human biases and our tendency for wishful thinking.
Science and religion are opposite and irreconcilable ways of understanding the world. Science does a better job. It offers testable ideas, and makes predictions that are confirmed by experimentation and observation. Religion fails miserably at this, but believers are expected to ‘have faith’ and continue believing anyway. I’m pleased to say that I no longer believe in supernatural beings — gods, angels, spirits, or devils — because there is simply no empirical evidence for the existence of such beings, and there are better explanations for the experiences people claim as evidence. I will be very interested should any good evidence appear in the future, though I find it rather unlikely. In the meantime, I do not wish to be a member of an organisation that promotes a superstitious and magical worldview, of which the LDS Church is only one example.
That said, I’d like to add that my experience with the Church — both inside and outside — has been a largely positive one where I have learned much. I have recently had occasion to speak to someone who was going through the deconversion process in his faith, and I observed that our experiences were very similar, with one exception: his church ostracises its unbelievers. The threat of losing his family and social contacts at a time of great change has caused him an added dimension of grief. I am glad that Mormons do not engage in this tactic, and that my LDS friends are still my friends, though I no longer share their worldview.
Thank you for your timely handling of this matter. I would appreciate if you could confirm when my request has been processed.
Best regards,
Daniel Midgley
In the weeks after posting my letter, I had several enjoyable chats with church leaders, in which I asked if they had any evidence for various Mormon doctrines yet, and they tried to explain why I shouldn’t need any. Sadly, their enthusiasm for these chats waned long before mine did. And then some months later, I received my very own letter from one Mr Greg Dodge in Salt Lake City, informing me I was officially No Longer Mormon. I’m having it framed.
My exit letter reflected my experience in the LDS Church. Yours will no doubt be different. But whatever your circumstances, if you no longer believe in the church, there are some good reasons for making an official resignation. Otherwise, you’re still being counted in their statistics, and as long as you’re on their rolls, the things they do are done with your tacit approval. I found a psychological benefit to having that sense of closure. My status on the outside matched my status on the inside, and that’s a great feeling.
To date, my resignation from the LDS Church is the intellectual accomplishment I’m proudest of. I was able to overcome a lifetime of religious conditioning, centuries of socio-cultural tradition, and millions of years of human perceptual weirdness, with only my mind.
8 February 2010 at 7:21 am
Thank you. I am writing mine today! (although… the disciplinary council sounds like sooo much fun). If 'they' consider me to be too anti, will they override my letter with their own decision for excommunication?
8 February 2010 at 7:51 am
Once you've submitted your exit letter, you are no longer a member of the church, and no further action on their part is possible.
It's bad enough having a lifetime of other people messing with your head, without then being threatened with the stigma of excommunication. I hope that's not what's happening for you, but if it is, a formal resignation letter ends the process.
8 February 2010 at 2:03 pm
You said religion(faith) cannot be confirmed by science. However, God is the greatest scientist of all. How can we begin to explain the space in which this tiny planet earth is located. From the time of Adam and Eve until now, the biggest sin man has ever engaged in is to say they don't need God or were not created by him. God reminds us in a very profound way throughout history that we need him. He sent prophet after prophet to nations to testify that he does live and his son Jesus Christ atoned for our sins. I testify we are God's creation and going about our lives acting like he doesn't exist only will bring sadness to you my brother. We were created in his image and after his likeness, look at your own body for scientific proof. You didn't create yourself I tell you that. Going about our lives like we weren't created by his divine power is the wrong idea (where is your evidence he doesn't exist? I encourage you to reconsider your faith and look to God and live.
8 February 2010 at 11:57 pm
Isn't it funny how, as knowledge gets more sciency, people treat their god like some amazing scientist? Yeah, he created the world and the universe, he understands physics and chemistry — and he likes the smell of burning goat.
Good luck harmonising that.
9 February 2010 at 1:46 pm
I have to admire you guys; it must be hard to grow up in such a clannish religious environment and then attempt to leave it. Reading some comments in this blog, there also seem to be more than a few people out there willing to judge that choice negatively and/or try to coax leavers back to the fold. Growing up in an environment of free choice as to whether a person believes in God or not, and in what form, or in any organised religion, or in the dicta of any religious text, is much easier and really doesn't take up very much mindspace !!
9 February 2010 at 3:57 pm
Jev, that sounds awesome. I am looking forward to clearing out the Mormon-ness from my head space and I hope to create an atmosphere for my children that is like the one you describe.
10 February 2010 at 4:18 pm
I'm sure that's the best approach Maureen. BTW Daniel, I managed to gate crash half of your first year linguistics lectures last semester (evidently needed a Saussure/Chomsky fix)and really liked all the stuff on the Western Apache (Portraits of the Whiteman) and the funny stuff from Weaselwords really cracked me up.
20 March 2010 at 2:54 am
Kudos, very well written. Think it's time to officially do mine! My dad is currently bishop so lets hope I can fast track it! hehe.
20 March 2010 at 3:41 am
Congratulations, Giganticube. You have certainly added a new dimension to the process.
20 March 2010 at 5:24 am
Yay giganticube, I sent mine off on the 12th Feb but haven't heard anything back yet. I'll give it till 12th April then chase it up I think. Daniel, how long did it take to get your letter from Utah?
20 March 2010 at 6:17 am
I sent mine off to the bishop in early August, and my Dodge letter came in late October. So about three months.
24 April 2010 at 6:30 pm
I will be posting mine too even though I lasted about 5 months in the LDS church and did enjoy what went on. Something I saw shocked me and gave me a very bad feeling which I could not shake off about the church. This is not from an Anti Mormon and I am not Anti Mormon.
I probley miss the people there but I need to do it in order to get rid of this unconfortable feeling in false prophets and satanic influnces with this religion.
25 April 2010 at 1:58 am
Bad stuff happens in the Mormon church just as it does in the Catholic church and probably any church. One of the biggest failings that I have seen in the Mormon church is the way that they will protect criminals by somehow 'cleansing' the sinner through their Bishop or other leader and then not reporting the crime to the authorities. I know of at least 3 cases where child molesters were being protected by the leaders at church. These offenders are allowed to walk to halls at church and parents don't know that there is a pedophile walking around.
I agree with you on the false prophets thing. I don't believe in satan but I do know what you mean about disturbing practices and situations. There is some serious creepiness going on there but the members on the most part are blind to it. One word – brainwashed.
4 August 2013 at 1:56 pm
This happens way to often in the church.
25 April 2010 at 3:18 am
Hi, Vincent. Glad you're out.
If you feel concerned about false prophets and satanic influences, one way is to consider that all prophets are false, and that devils probably don't exist. Helped me a lot.
25 April 2010 at 5:35 pm
Marueen I never realised they can be bad as Jehovahs Witnesses as in protecting criminals and pedos or catholics abuse. Also I am very against pedos.
Also I heard from a friend today who was a baptised Mormon since March 10 quite new just like I am where I was baptised in Jan 10 and she is now forced to abandon the bell ringing hobby in the Church of England Church in order to stay Mormon I was not happy with this as I am a Bell ringer too. I see this as discrimination from the LDS church however I dont think my friend actually went to the Church service of that church she rings bells in therefore it should be ok for a Mormon to do that as it is just a hobby. I will not let the LDS church make me stop bell ringing. Hmm might be a good way to get myself excommunicated lol
25 April 2010 at 8:11 pm
My Mistake, the Tower Captain at the Bell ringing church decided get all the bellringers to shun her due to her involvement in the Mormons as result of showing the missonaries how bell ringing is performed. It was that church that tried to get my friend leave the LDS church. Serious oppersitions made her inactive mormon.
I have told her what I doubt in the Mormons, not to make her leave as it is free agency for her.
3 September 2010 at 9:56 pm
Congratulations on your coming to the age of reason! I can somewhat relate to your experience, as I have myself done so, in the past, when I broke away from the Catholic Church. I will add, however, that I have been married to a wonderful Mormon woman who, due to our abysmal philosophical and cultural differences, unfortunately, did not accept me with my limitations, once she realized that I would never convert to the LDS church. I completely supported her decision, though, since I would never give her what she had always wanted: a temple marriage. In any case, my main objection to the LDS Church is its separatist dogma, which precludes others from having equal access to their temples and ceremonies. Another one is with regards to posthumous baptism, an act of violence against someone's will. I have many others, but, in the end, who really cares? I find it important that Mormons continue living as they please, just as the rest of the planet may also do so. Bottom line: there are many righteous paths available for a fulfilling life. We must respect one another's choices. My final thought, nonetheless, is to mention that the LDS Church must revisit the concept of separation between Church and State. There is a fine line that may be easily crossed between being a good Samaritan and "my brother's keeper"—or, in the case of the LDS Church, "my brother's oppressor." But, again, Daniel, congratulations to you! Cheers!
21 October 2010 at 8:14 am
Interesting.
Religion has done more good than bad for the world because it teaches in moral reasoning where without religion you risk everybody simply doing what feels good without moral reason.
But religion does bring about many social dogmas as you have found in mormonism.
Science is a great way to study life, but in science you will find that there is always something more intelligent and complex than previously understood.
Most science is theory; or yet to be proven. God (intelligent creation vs chance) also is a scientific theory yet to be proven.
You will eventually find God by studying science.
Good Luck!
21 October 2010 at 11:43 am
Religion has done more good than bad for the world because it teaches in moral reasoning where without religion you risk everybody simply doing what feels good without moral reason.
While I agree that religion can lead to dogma, I don't find that religion leads to moral behaviour, nor does atheism lead to hedonism. Most people make good moral choices whether religious or not, if we define 'moral' as something like 'in a manner likely to help people live together peacefully'.
Also, I don't see how studying science would lead to a god. Gods are profoundly unscientific concepts. Poorly defined, not well-evidenced. Science may take us a lot of places, but it doesn't lead there.
3 February 2011 at 1:42 pm
I feel so sorry for what u have done…but again it's still ur choice.tnx
3 March 2011 at 9:18 pm
I enjoyed your note about this situation as I have a friend who is having a tough time right now with her decision to leave LDS. I showed this to her and I hope that it gives her some releif.
4 March 2011 at 2:23 am
Thanks, melanineva. Have her send me an email if she needs someone to write to.
27 June 2011 at 3:09 am
thanks for sharing your letter and good luck to you in the future… i don't blame anyone for leaving the church for all of the reasons you mentioned. I am one of the those who believes that religion and science can and should co-mingle. I see science as the foundation and background that we as humans should all be grounded in (and I believe every human has the potential and the right to understand the scientific way of looking at the world)… at the same time I like religion for the symbolism it provides concerning the before and after-life, as well as an organized place of 'refuge' or safety from the dog-eat-dog world, or kind of like a wise old friend who can offer some wisdom from past generations, or keep records,etc… or just a an organized place and time where people can go to discuss things like metaphysics, religion, possibilities and fantasies about where we come from and things like that… and also to learn about topics like love, humility, patience, work, etc… basically, i think if one is grounded in science, the idea of an organized religion could be a cool thing…
What is your opinion, or other scientists opinion on 'testimonies' that aren't supported by feelings, but supported by 'experimenting with god' you know, like what if someone said to the universe, or to god or nature, something like 'alright, prove to me that you hear me… i'm going to do A as outlined in such and such religious text… and if B happens, then I'll know that A was correct…ready… go' And this event B is sooooo terribly unlikely to happen that if it does happen, you'd have no other choice but to accept with a significant degree of certainty that the power or energy or god that activated the universe in the beginning actually allows for humans to communicate with it and answered that inquiry… i'm just curious how someone who calls themselves a true scientist react to ''experimenting with god'' in one's personal life
29 June 2011 at 3:02 am
I've done a couple of posts on 'prayer as an experiment with god'.
http://goodreasonblog.blogspot.com/2010/07/revelation-is-not-good-evidence.html
and later:
http://goodreasonblog.blogspot.com/2011/01/moronis-promise-still-not-evidence.html
The short answer: it's a biased test.
People are primed for what to expect.
People count the times it 'works' but not the times it doesn't.
You must assume the hypothesis is true before you start, which means you've already invested in it.
It's like saying "I know Santa Claus is true because I prayed to him and one of his reindeer told me." They're both part of the same story. Ideally evidence would come from outside the belief system, and you wouldn't have to exercise faith in it.
That wasn't very short, was it? But it shorter than the comments on those posts.
8 July 2012 at 7:46 pm
I ran across this post a few days ago, completely by accident, and was somewhat surprised by the contrast between Science and Religion presented. Somehow, the author has decided to differentiate between "empirical, real world evidence" and the "experiences" and "testimony" relied upon by (in this case) members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Certainly, the author is free (as we all are) to decide which "evidence" to give credence to, but I find Daniel's conclusion that "Science and religion are opposite and irreconcilable ways of understanding the world" puzzling.
First, the term "empirical" is defined (by a quick Google search) as "Based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic." So on the one hand, he's claiming that "scientific" experiences (empiricism) are the source of real truth, but on the other he's dismissing the experiences of Latter-Day Saints, because, well…why, I'm not sure.
He claims Science is superior to Religion because "It offers testable ideas, and makes predictions that are confirmed by experimentation and observation. Religion fails miserably at this, but believers are expected to ‘have faith’ and continue believing anyway." This is puzzling coming from a former Mormon, as he should know that members and curious truth seekers are both taught to "experiment upon [the word]" (Alma 32:27) Is faith required? Certainly – the same faith that is required by the scientist that their experiment is worth doing. It is faith in the concept being proved, whether it be "scientific" or "religious", that motivates the truth seeker to actually run the experiment.
As for the evidence that Daniel contends is missing from "religion", I testify that it is both there for the finding and also a key part of God's plan for us in finding His Truth. If we will exercise the "faith" (no, not blind acceptance, which Daniel seems to suggest is required, but belief – or hope – that leads to action) we will receive convincing "evidence" that God is real. And the "Religion" Daniel has rejected preaches that evidence is both to be sought, and found. (see Hel 5:50, Heb. 11:1.)
In Religion, as well as Science, you can run the experiment and "experience" and document the result, or you can rely on the "testimony" of others. I would wager that most of Daniel's scientific understanding comes from the latter – as mine does; Not from actually doing the experiment, but from reading and understanding the results of other's experiments (after all, not everyone has super colliders, or rocketships, or electron microscopes, or PhD's in theoretical physics, etc.). If Daniel wants to choose to credit one, and discredit the other, that is his prerogative. But I state the claim that the system by which either is proved or disproved is the same.
And in the case of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, no one need "take it on faith" that it is what it claims to be. You can learn about it, study it's claims, and run the experiments it prescribes (Alma 32, Moroni 10:3-5). I have, and continue to do so, and can testify that there is "evidence" to be had, assuming one is willing to run the experiments…
11 July 2012 at 2:27 am
Hi, Doug.
The mistake you're making is conflating 'anecdote' and 'data'. You're lumping them all together in a category called 'Things people have experienced', but anecdotes are not reliable data, no matter how many anecdotes you get.
Data is carefully gathered, and if possible, quantified. If the results are the opposite of what we expect, those are included in the data too.
But anecdotal testimonies are stories that anyone cares to tell you, and they grow in the retelling. People who have 'felt the spirit' tell their stories at church, but people who don't 'receive a witness' don't come to church, and you never hear their stories. Essentially, they're dropped from the sample. This is not careful data collection.
Moroni's promise is not an experiment, as I've written about here.
• Subjects are told what feelings to expect, which biases the experiment right off the bat.
• If they don't get a spiritual experience, subjects are told to repeat the experiment until they get the answer they 'should' get.
• It's assumed that the Holy Ghost is responsible for the positive feelings that people report. But this is not necessarily so. It could be Zeus, Shiva, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. It could be the Devil tempting you. It could be a mind-reader with a Emoto-Zap Ray, or sufficiently advanced aliens. Any of these are as plausible as a disembodied spirit. Or, even more plausibly, it could be the effect of someone's own brain chemistry making themselves feel good, particularly in response to social pressure to report the same experiences that other people have told them about all their life.
Nice try, though.
4 August 2013 at 6:53 am
Great letter, great logical reasoning. Thanks for sharing!