Resigning does not remove blessings...

[_Drifting]

From the anecdotal posts I have read on here and in other places, I always thought that resigning meant specifically that the blessings you were to receive as a result of baptism etc were removed.

In fact, isn't that what the letter confirming your resignation specifically says?


However,

Conner, who was raised Mormon and served a two-year LDS mission, said one of the hardest moments for him came after he asked to have his name removed from the church’s membership rolls. He received a letter from his bishop, he said, claiming that all the blessings he had received in the church and all the good he had done as a missionary were "null and void."

Two of the LDS participants said that "was not true," Conner reported, and that "my service is still valid and those blessings are valid."

It was, he said, "a healing moment."

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/53972 ... r.html.csp

So which is correct?

The letter from the Bishop saying they are null and void, or the verbal claim by two LDS PR types saying that they aren't null and void?

[_subgenius]

The letter from the Bishop saying they are null and void, or the verbal claim by two LDS PR types saying that they aren't null and void?

i am skeptical that the truth is being told about the letter for the Bishop, ergo this post is BUNK

[_Drifting]

The letter from the Bishop saying they are null and void, or the verbal claim by two LDS PR types saying that they aren't null and void?

i am skeptical that the truth is being told about the letter for the Bishop, ergo this post is BUNK

So, you are saying the letter received by members who resign doesn't state a warning about the loss of blessings if they go through with their name removal?

[_Drifting]

The letter from the Bishop saying they are null and void, or the verbal claim by two LDS PR types saying that they aren't null and void?

i am skeptical that the truth is being told about the letter for the Bishop, ergo this post is BUNK

So, you are saying the letter received by members who resign doesn't state a warning about the loss of blessings if they go through with their name removal?

Bump.

The Church Handbook states (If I recall correctly) that those people resigning "must understand " that this will result in their blessings becoming null and void.

Answer the question scaredy cat...ooops...I mean....sacredy cat.

Meanwhile I will ascertain the exact wording from the Bishops letter or Handbook and kick your ass (yet again) with it.

[_Drifting]

Here you go subgenius

Dated: 29 October 2007

Dear Bro. ____

"I have just been notified by the stake president that you have requested to have your name removed from the records of the Church of Jesus Christ of Later(sic)-day Saints. Although your request has been honored I wish you had had the desire to visit with me about it. This action can be rescinded only if a written request is recieved by the Stake President within 30 days from the above date.

"As Bishop, I must be certain you understand such action cancels the effects of baptism & negates any & all blessings of membership. This request should have been made independently & freely without undue pressure or coercion by anyone else."

If needed, you can send your written request to:
(stake prez's addy)

"I hope you do not forget us in the church. We will always care about you & you will always be welcome at our meetings. May the Lord bless you in all you do."

Subgenius wrote earlier:

i am skeptical that the truth is being told about the letter for the Bishop, ergo this post is BUNK

I've put up so now you can shut up...

[_bcspace]

So which is correct?

Perhaps both. I would hazard for the moment that blessings for good deeds done cannot be lost, often already having been fully given. Obviously, the continuation of blessings associated with Church membership (the Spirit, the temple ordinances, the promises made to those who so covenant, adoption into the house of Israel or Abraham etc.) are lost.

[_Drifting]

So which is correct?

Perhaps both. I would hazard for the moment that blessings for good deeds done cannot be lost, often already having been fully given. Obviously, the continuation of blessings associated with Church membership (the Spirit, the temple ordinances, the promises made to those who so covenant, adoption into the house of Israel or Abraham etc.) are lost.

Nice try.
But the phrase ''cancels the effects of baptism & negates any & all blessings of membership'' makes it clear that it is cancelling all blessings retrospectively.

[_Albion]

Why on earth would anyone wanting to resign from Mormonism (a) Consider there were any blessings in the first place and (B) Why would those assumed blessings be of any value since the resignee has rejected the organization that apparently grants them in the first place? More important, I would think, would be an assurance that, since it is the intent of the one resigning, his or her name has been literally expunged from all Mormon records and they become persons unknown to the Mormon Church. You can resign from the Mormon Church but the Mormon Church won't leave you alone because somewhere your name still sits in a file somewhere and might still be included in official Mormon Church records as a member. I won't accept any name removal for resignation or for excommunication has ever actually happened because the Mormon Church cannot be trusted on this issue. One step they could take that would give some credence to the idea that reignation results in name removal would be to include in annual membership statistics the number of those resigning each year. I think hell will freeze over first.

[_Tobin]

Why on earth would anyone wanting to resign from Mormonism (a) Consider there were any blessings in the first place and (B) Why would those assumed blessings be of any value since the resignee has rejected the organization that apparently grants them in the first place? More important, I would think, would be an assurance that, since it is the intent of the one resigning, his or her name has been literally expunged from all Mormon records and they become persons unknown to the Mormon Church. You can resign from the Mormon Church but the Mormon Church won't leave you alone because somewhere your name still sits in a file somewhere and might still be included in official Mormon Church records as a member. I won't accept any name removal for resignation or for excommunication has ever actually happened because the Mormon Church cannot be trusted on this issue. One step they could take that would give some credence to the idea that reignation results in name removal would be to include in annual membership statistics the number of those resigning each year. I think hell will freeze over first.

I don't think there is an agenda here other than laziness and sloppiness. Personally, I would prefer they just kicked people out if they haven't seen them in the past 6 months. If they really want back in, they can get rebaptized. I don't understand why they just don't do that other than the reasons I stated before.

[_son of Ishmael]

Why on earth would anyone wanting to resign from Mormonism (a) Consider there were any blessings in the first place and (B) Why would those assumed blessings be of any value since the resignee has rejected the organization that apparently grants them in the first place? More important, I would think, would be an assurance that, since it is the intent of the one resigning, his or her name has been literally expunged from all Mormon records and they become persons unknown to the Mormon Church. You can resign from the Mormon Church but the Mormon Church won't leave you alone because somewhere your name still sits in a file somewhere and might still be included in official Mormon Church records as a member. I won't accept any name removal for resignation or for excommunication has ever actually happened because the Mormon Church cannot be trusted on this issue. One step they could take that would give some credence to the idea that reignation results in name removal would be to include in annual membership statistics the number of those resigning each year. I think hell will freeze over first.

I don't think there is an agenda here other than laziness and sloppiness. Personally, I would prefer they just kicked people out if they haven't seen them in the past 6 months. If they really want back in, they can get rebaptized. I don't understand why they just don't do that other than the reasons I stated before.

The church would never excommunicate someone for not going to church for over six months. If they did that official church membership would drop by almost two-thirds. Even if someone falls of the church’s radar they will keep them on the roles until they are like 100+ years old.