Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Latter-day Saint
History and Religion
Why Some Leave the Church and How We Should Respond

Why Some Leave the Church and How We Should Respond

Last updated on: June 6, 2026 at 10:31 pm by Dan Peterson

0 Comments

Why Some Leave the Church and How We Should Respond 2026-06-06T22:31:29-06:00 Dan Peterson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

The cover of the book (fair use)

I’ve not yet read — nor, truth be told, have I so much as seen a copy of — Jeff Strong’s book Torn: Why People We Love are Leaving the Church and What We Can Learn from Them. It appears to be generating conversations, as is perhaps indicated by the fact that the Interpreter Foundation has already published Daniel T. Ellsworth’s “Beyond ‘Church Culture’: A Response to Jeff Strong’s Torn“ and by this typically thoughtful separate response from my friend and former BYU colleague Ralph C. Hancock, which he has kindly permitted me to share here, in full:

Torn Between the Restoration and the Gospel of Relativistic Empathy

Jeff Strong’s Torn is gaining massive attention in LDS circles, starting with strong promotion from the Faith Matters organization, which has always shared the book’s aim to soften the moral demands of Christian faith in order to accommodate a late-modern sensibility of relativistic acceptance.

I will be analyzing this book in more detail, together with Brother Strong’s appearances in Faith Matters videos. But for now it is sufficient to consider with just a little critical attention the Foreword to the book provided by football-great-turned-LDS-progressive Steve Young. Young’s touting of Strong’s argument makes perfect sense, since Torn flows perfectly into the channels of thought already prepared by Young’s The Law of Love. Young’s foreword tells us all we need to know about the direction and implications of Strong’s project. And it is definitely a project, an attempt to shape our understanding of the Restored Gospel in order to reduce its necessary tension with the idol of extreme individualism that rules the present age. To avoid being “torn,” Young and Strong would have us be . . . soft.

Young’s (and Strong’s) premise is that we must consider those leaving the church to be in the right so that we can learn from them. Any consideration of the possibility that dissidents might be in the wrong and not always necessarily the best judges of their own choices is dismissed at the outset. The dissident or estranged is always perfectly innocent and even wise. Meanwhile, any members who would question the soundness or the rightness of decisions to leave are quickly classified as “country club” false-Christians who are obsessed with “gate-keeping.” Any attempt to understand falling away that fails absolutely to respect the “unique journey” of every individual is dismissed as “transactional” thinking, that is, to a style of belief that links eternal rewards with obedience to law, to meaningful standards of moral agency, and to eternal standards of exalted character.

All concern for such standards and rewards dependent upon individual qualification is rejected as “fear-based thinking.”

We are told that “the data” (self-selected survey results) prove that sin or laziness (including, I would add, unhealthy attachment to worldly goals and ideologies) cannot be significant factors in the abandonment of covenants, since of course these are not the kinds of reasons self-reported by those who apostatize or fall away. All “guardrails for others’ growth” (or for one’s own) are ridiculed as “living by checklists and merit-badge theology.” All we need is “love” — a love divorced from accountability and concrete factors of moral and spiritual growth. The Beatles weren’t wrong, for Young, and for Strong: All We Need is Love. “No Agenda, no expectations, no transactions.”

Or course these analysts of our “torn” condition are right to remind us of the need to love and to listen to those for whom Church affiliation and practice has become uncomfortable or intolerable. But true Christian love must never be divorced from virtue and accountability. If that statement makes me a “transactional country-club Christian” in the eyes of our new reformers, then so be it. I will not be “torn” between the gospel’s beautiful vision of redemption and exaltation and the relativistic empathy that now passes for “love.”

(I posted this yesterday on X, and it’s received a lot of attention. I need to learn to cross-post simultaneously to X & Facebook.)

So that I’m not misunderstood — though, realistically, not being misunderstood is an Impossible Dream for me, since I’m obsessively monitored and critiqued by a small and anonymous online cabal for whom misunderstanding me daily appears to be a duty modeled on George Orwell’s Two Minutes Hate — I want to state, explicitly, that I believe that we should listen carefully to those who leave the Church, and that we should treat them kindly and with charity. Each case of disaffiliating from the Church and Kingdom of God, each loss of faith and trust, each abandonment of solemn covenants is a tragedy. The heavens weep over them, and so should we. The ramifications extend forward into the eternities as well as into the indefinite future here in mortality.

So I’m sympathetic to the project that has apparently been undertaken by Jeff Strong and Steve Young — but I’m also worried by the concerns expressed by Brothers Hancock and Ellsworth. The dangers of both the Scylla of judgmental rigidity and the Charybdis of relativistic assimilationist are real, and serious.

The Twin Falls Idaho Temple (LDS.org), is fairly close to Shoshone Falls.

Deseret News: “Sens. Lee and Curtis question new Pentagon designation for Latter-day Saints: Curtis said he would ask the Pentagon for a correction after the subhead ‘Christian’ was left off of the designation for the church” Some have been crowing about this decision from Pete Hegseth and the Department of Defense. I can’t say that it really surprises me, stupid and offensive though it is.

Many years ago now, in a book entitled Offenders for a Word: How Anti-Mormons Play Word Games to Attack the Latter-day Saints, I had quite a bit to say about the accusation that members of my church aren’t Christians. I still regard my argument as a strong one and have been fortified in my opinion of it by the fact that I haven’t seen any cogent attempts to refute it. If they’re out there, I haven’t encountered them.

Shoshone Falls, in Twin Falls County, Idaho, shown with a moderately high water level. There was considerably less water there this evening. (Wikimedia Commons public domain image).

Posted from Twin Falls, Idaho

History and Religion

Travel and Religion

Previous Post

June 5, 2026

"I recommend my church"

Next Post

June 7, 2026 An apostle's reported experience

Recent Comments

0 | Leave a Comment

"Another class of memories are of individuals who previously lived. Some of these remembered individuals ..."

PlasmaMiasma

Accounts of Premortality?

"Sutherland's lecture sounds interesting. He seems to restate the Washington consensus that trade brings peace ..."

B. Wilson

Learning more about a region of ..."

"In a meeting today, I learned another important reason why accurate (or at least as ..."

the PROBLEM

From Serbia’s “White City,” Belgrade

"I've been watching a lot of video interviews of NDErs and researchers. I think in ..."

brotheroflogan

Accounts of Premortality?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 March 2014 August 2013 February 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

How many days was Jesus tempted in the wilderness?

Select your answer to see how you score.

50 days 40 days 60 days 30 days