I found this on the Recovery from Mormonism website, and I sincerely hope the person who wrote this doesn't mind me sharing it. It's a good read.
-Andee
Recently, my family has been contacted by several caring members from the Ward, who have demonstrated a genuine concern for our well-being. The bewilderment that has been expressed, regarding our absence from church, has prompted a desire in me to relate the story of my personal search for truth and subsequent journey out of Mormonism. Hopefully, this account will provide you with some meaningful insight into our current status with the Church.
What I am about to relate is my story only, as I cannot speak for my entire family. Faced with the explicit threat of church disciplinary action, I have remained silent regarding my historical findings, until now. Since I have recently resigned my membership in the LDS Church, thus removing the humiliating prospect of excommunication, I am now at liberty to speak openly of my journey out of the Church. Though my investigation is over, I fully recognize that, presented with the exact same set of facts, others may come to a different conclusion than my own. That is ok. My intent is not to convince, but rather to convey an accurate account of my departure from Mormonism.
First and foremost, I want to make it clear that my separation from the Church had nothing to do with unworthiness or transgression. For 38 years I was 100% devoted to the LDS Church. During those years, I never once questioned the truthfulness of the gospel. My faithfulness was clearly demonstrated by my service in the Church, and anyone who has ever served with me (in the mission field, in Priesthood Quorum/Young Men’s presidencies, Scouting, Bishopric, etc.) can attest to my wholehearted dedication and commitment. Indeed, I entered into my doubts at a time when I was diligently striving to live my life in accordance with every aspect of the gospel – weekly family home evening, daily personal/family prayer and scripture study, regular church attendance, temple attendance, generous tithes and offerings, faithful home teaching, faithful fulfillment of calling as Scout Master, unwavering support for my wife in her calling as Primary President, etc.
My doubts began as I drove to work one day, listening to Living Scriptures’ Dramatized Church History on CD. I can’t begin to describe the shock and disappointment I felt as I heard, for the first time, the reenactment of Joseph Smith taking Helen Mar Kimball as his polygamous wife at the tender age of 14. The account outlined the involvement of Helen’s father, Heber C. Kimball, in brokering the deal, as well as Joseph’s promise to Helen that this step would virtually guarantee the exaltation of herself and her father’s family in the Celestial Kingdom. Helen concluded that her sacrifice was a small price to "purchase" such a glorious reward. Upon hearing this, my heart sank, and I wept openly.
That very day, with my sensibilities still smarting from what I had heard, I resolved to discover for myself the correctness of the principle of polygamy. I immediately commenced a humble regimen of prayer, fasting, and meditation, in search of an understanding of polygamy. I attended the temple for the express purpose of gaining some small insight into the "new and everlasting covenant of marriage, including the plurality of wives". I eventually modified my supplications to the Lord, asking for a simple feeling of peace to confirm that polygamy was acceptable in His sight, as I had given up on ever being able to understand it. I approached the Lord with as much faith as I could possibly muster, but my sincere and honest pleas for comfort and confirmation went unanswered. After three long months of silence, I concluded it was time to embark on a new search for truth - a search that would take me beyond the priesthood and Sunday school lesson material and beyond the faith promoting articles in the Ensign.
[Later, when I shared this frustrating experience with Bishop W., he informed me that, "asking God for a confirmation as to whether or not something is true, without first believing, is tantamount to asking for a sign. God does not often give signs". This response surprised me. Even though I had believed (and at times defended) the principle of plural marriage my entire adult life, when I expressed a fervent desire to obtain divine confirmation regarding its more troubling aspects, I was told that I was asking for a sign. The only sign I was looking for was the peaceful confirmation of the Holy Ghost, speaking truth to my soul, providing me with a spiritual witness concerning the correctness of the principle of plural marriage. That witness never came.]
As I began my new quest, I discussed my concerns with Bishop A. (my then current bishop) and asked him for assistance in locating suitable reference material. In response to my request, he recommended a book he found on DeseretBook.com entitled, "Mormon Polygamy, A History". I immediately secured a copy of the book and began my study. This book confirmed the accounts I had heard on the Church History CD’s and unfolded, in a very factual manner, the disturbing origins and practice of polygamy in the Mormon Church. But the most devastating blow to me (even more alarming than the tender age at which Joseph Smith took Helen Mar Kimball as his polygamous wife) was the revelation of the fact that Joseph married 11 women who were already married to other men.
Confused and sickened by what I had learned, I became unable to sleep, eat, or concentrate at work. As more information came to light, the shock took a severe toll on my physical and emotional well-being. Continuing my investigation, I searched for church sources that could further corroborate the newly revealed facts surrounding Joseph Smith’s practice of plural marriage. My efforts led me to a May 1887 publication of an official Church periodical, "The Historical Record". Contained in volume VI of this periodical is an article written by President Joseph F. Smith and Andrew Jenson (Assistant Church Historian), which documents the plural marriages of Joseph Smith, listing twenty-seven plural wives who were sealed to Joseph during the last three years of his life. This list includes Joseph’s polyandrous unions (marriages to other men’s wives), as well as his numerous sealings to teenage brides. A search of the Family History Archives on lds.org enabled me to obtain the ancestral files for many of Joseph’s polygamous wives. Two of the ancestral files I retrieved from the Family History Archives are those for Helen Mar Kimball and Zina Diantha Huntington. One need only look at the dates to determine that Helen was married to Joseph at the age of 14 (the current age of my oldest daughter), and Zina was already married to Henry Jacobs at the time of her sealing to Joseph. Zina’s journal makes it clear that she and Henry were living together as husband and wife when Joseph secretly took her as his own plural wife. The extant diaries, autobiographical sketches, journals, and correspondences, of some of Joseph’s polygamous wives, further demonstrate the undeniable fact that there was a sexual dimension to their relationship with the Prophet.
Canonized as holy scripture in the 132nd section of the Doctrine & Covenants, the principle of plural marriage is clearly delineated as a sacred tenant of the Mormon faith. The central nature of this tenant is demonstrated by the current practice of Mormon men being sealed for time and all eternity to a second wife, in cases where the first wife has passed away. Furthermore, Bruce R. McConkie succinctly confirmed this belief in his authoritative volume, Mormon Doctrine, wherein he stated: "Obviously the holy practice [of plural marriage] will commence again after the Second Coming of the Son of Man and the ushering in of the millennium." In light of these facts, I found the statement that, "it [polygamy] is not doctrinal", made by President Hinckley in a nationally televised interview with Larry King, to be very baffling.
Joseph Smith stated on numerous occasions that he entered into the practice of polygamy, only after being threatened with death, by an angel with a drawn sword. After learning the true nature of Joseph’s involvement in polygamy, I had to ask myself the following questions: "Is it reasonable to assume that a kind, just, loving, moral God has such blatant disregard for the sanctity of marriage (and life itself) that He would have his humble servant slain for refusing to take another man’s wife as his own? Or, is it more likely that a mortal man lied?"
The answer is so crystal clear to me now, that I find it extremely difficult to comprehend how some find it easier to hold God responsible for Joseph’s marriage to teenagers and married women, than it is to hold Joseph himself responsible. For me, this issue goes far beyond the character of Joseph Smith. It goes to the very nature of God. To believe Joseph’s account, is to profess belief in a God whose own actions go against every holy attribute He is supposed to possess - a God who, at one time, commands, "thou shalt not commit adultery" and "thou shalt not kill", and at a later time, in essence, commands, "thou shalt commit adultery or thou shalt be killed". I do not believe in a God whose nature is so mysterious, that He would feel it necessary to kill His anointed servant for refusing to commit adultery.
I view the institution of marriage as a sacred trust, and consequently, I am fiercely loyal to my dear wife and absolutely devoted to my kids. For me, morality and goodness are absolutes – not fluid, ever-changing attributes, wholly dependent on time and circumstance. My conscience cries out in opposition to a married man marrying and having sex with other women (especially married women and young teenagers). That Joseph Smith, himself, engaged in this very conduct is virtually indisputable, and I believe his behavior is inexcusable.
Shouldn't moral individuals possess a healthy degree of skepticism towards anyone professing a revelation from God as authorization to commit adultery? Joseph’s justification for his actions was clearly delineated in a written marriage proposal to Nancy Rigdon (daughter of Sydney Rigdon), wherein he stated, "Whatever God requires, is right, no matter what it is . . . even things which might be considered abominable to all who understand the order of heaven only in part, but which in reality were right because God gave and sanctioned by special revelation." Nancy courageously rejected Joseph’s proposition, despite his Godly justification.
To be unaware of these happenings, as I was until recently, is one thing. But having read the first-hand accounts, as recorded by the actual participants in their letters and diaries, I can no longer plead ignorance. Knowing what I know and refusing to acknowledge it, would be a betrayal of my conscience. I refuse to accept the idea that God would demand such behavior of his anointed servant. To profess that He would, in my opinion, is to profess belief in an immoral, unjust God – a God that, I must say, I do not believe in. On the other hand, to claim that Joseph Smith acted on his own, in these immoral activities, is to undermine his character, credibility and authority, hence calling into question every word that has fallen from his lips. Either way, I flatly reject him as a servant of God.
Though polygamy has been the catalyst for my journey out of the Church, it is by no means the sole reason for my disengagement from Mormonism. I have taken my pursuit of truth very seriously. It has included numerous trips to Salt Lake City, where I have conducted interviews and gained access to valuable historical material, including: the Book Of Commandments, early editions of the Doctrine & Covenants and Book Of Mormon, the Lectures On Faith, all 26 volumes of the Journal of Discourses, and other historical documents not readily available to the church membership at large. (The one and only edition of the Nauvoo Expositor, published June 7, 1844 - a copy of which, I currently have in my possession – was especially enlightening.) Suffice it to say that, the body of evidence I have examined does not support the Church’s claim to divine authority.
I believe many Latter-day Saints would be stunned by the extraordinary doctrines expounded in numerous sermons, delivered by Prophets, Seers, and Revelators, and faithfully recorded in the Journal Of Discourses. "Blood Atonement", which I found to be particularly disturbing, is one such doctrine that quickly comes to mind. In an address to LDS Institute instructors, Boyd K. Packer remarked, "there is a temptation for the writer or the teacher of Church history to want to tell everything, whether it is worthy or faith promoting or not. Some things that are true are not very useful". Elder Packer’s statement reveals, what I believe to be, a concerted effort by the brethren to suppress non-faith promoting historical facts. The withholding of these "not very useful" truths has, indeed, resulted in a more sanitized version of LDS Church history. The resultant transformed religious institution, known as "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints", is, undeniably, a wholesome organization. However, I now recognize that goodness and truth are not necessarily co-dependent.
Heaven knows I am far from perfect, and I certainly have my share of faults, but I can say with confidence that I am a man of integrity. Being such, I expect honesty from others. And when it comes to an establishment of religion, claiming to be God’s only true Church on the face of the earth – to which I have selflessly devoted my entire life – I not only expect full disclosure, accuracy, and absolute honesty, I demand it. In this area, the Church has failed me, and the realization of such has been a keen disappointment.
I completely agree with President Hinckley’s assessment that, "Either the Church is true, or it is a fraud. There is no middle ground." His declaration leaves no possibility of the Church being partially true or mostly true. According to President Hinckley, all of it is true – every historical claim, every revelation, every verse of scripture, every prophetic utterance, every divinely sanctioned act – or none of it is true. My investigation of the past two years has led me to conclude the latter. Nevertheless, regardless of our divergent theological views, I believe we continue to share the same core values, and it is my sincere hope that you will still consider me to be your friend.