What do you think?
Leaving the Fold: Candid Conversations With Inactive Mormons
Anyone raised a Latter-day Saint belongs to the culture, no matter how they may try to escape its influence, observes Ure after conducting the eighteen interviews that comprise Leaving the Fold. While examining the cultural influences on well-known "Jack Mormons" -- people who no longer actually participate in church functions -- the author wanted to explore the issues that separate them from their common roots. Interestingly the participants expressed respect for the church, its leadership and members, but hinted at a disappointment and longing, a sense of futility in their search for a promised ideal. Ure wonders if this is ironically due to the concept of perfection taught by the church.The author chose men and women who were raised LDS but left when they were older, and whose life experiences allow them to render thoughtful analysis of their religious choices. Readers will realize that every Mormon -- active or not -- is in some ways similar, something Ure hopes both groups will come to understand about the other
253 pages, Paperback
First published December 1, 1999
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
July 17, 2015
This is a difficult book to review, because I think it is for a very specific audience. Non-Mormons will probably not understand a lot of what is referred to, unless they are intimately familiar with the LDS church. Ex-Mormons who have had their names removed will probably not understand the mindset of many of these people, who for the most part do not believe at all, but for various reasons either don't want or don't feel they can have their names removed from the records. Active members of the Mormon church will, by and large, not understand these people either. I completely understand that these are generalizations, and of course there will be exceptions. But overall, this book's audience seems to be people like me - those who are inactive in the LDS faith and don't have any desire to return, but don't hold much anger or animosity toward active members, although the organization itself can still stir up those feelings.
So it seems to be geared toward a small group. But many of these stories are quite affecting. I was particularly touched by those of many of the Mormon feminists. I also found Cal Rampton's story very interesting. There are several subjects who chose to remain anonymous, and for the most part, I found those stories less effective, perhaps because it was harder to connect with the nameless. But the last story in the book was anonymous, and I found it very stirring.
Overall, this is not a book for everyone, but those who chose to read it will find it thought-provoking and worth the time.
So it seems to be geared toward a small group. But many of these stories are quite affecting. I was particularly touched by those of many of the Mormon feminists. I also found Cal Rampton's story very interesting. There are several subjects who chose to remain anonymous, and for the most part, I found those stories less effective, perhaps because it was harder to connect with the nameless. But the last story in the book was anonymous, and I found it very stirring.
Overall, this is not a book for everyone, but those who chose to read it will find it thought-provoking and worth the time.
September 9, 2026
A SERIES OF INTERVIEWS WITH 18 ‘INACTIVE’ MORMONS
James Ure wrote in the Overview of this 1999 book, “If you were raised Mormon in Utah, most likely the church is at your very core, whether you’re active or inactive. You are part of the culture, and no matter how you may try to escape its influence, it’s always with you… This work is an examination of the LDS church as seen by well-known Mormons, most of them Utahns, all of them inactive (nonpracticing or infrequently practicing) in the church after being active at one time in their lives. This is not an anti-Mormon work; its purpose from the beginning is to create and foster understanding.
“You may find criticism in these interviews: no institution with the worldwide profile of the Mormon church is immune to it. But it is also interesting to note that many interviewees articulate honor and respect for the church and individuals in its leadership and its membership. Their views most often reflect thoughtful consideration. And in almost every one, there’s a hint of disappointment and longing, as if they’re searching for a promised ideal not yet achieved, perhaps ironically the result of the idealization and perfection taught them by the church…
“I established three criteria interview subjects had to meet: 1. They had to be members of the church (not excommunicated or disfellowshipped and not having asked to have their names removed from the official roles.) 2. They once actively attended church functions. 3. They don’t regularly attend church at the present time and don’t pay tithing. Avoided were those whom Peggy Fletcher Stack calls ‘Evangelical Jack Mormons,’ those who regularly foment against the church. I also avoided those transitioning out of the church. This isn’t the place for their stories. Sought were men and women of intelligence who offer thoughtful commentaries as a result of life experience within the LDS community… you’ll find recurring themes: repulsed by the zeal of an individual; intellectualized rejection of doctrine; an inactive parent; the politics of gender, and politics in general.” (Pg. ix-x)
Calvin L. Rampton was asked if he still had a ‘bedrock belief in the Book of Mormon,’ and he replied: “No, I don’t. That’s probably my principal problem with the LDS church. I have a hard time accepting the authenticity of the Book of Mormon stories. On the other hand, I feel that the philosophy of the Mormon church is wonderful. I am, as most people, uncertain about the existence of God. I try to believe in it because I want to believe in it---I sort of make myself believe. I have a hard time forcing myself to accept the Book of Mormon stories literally. Just as I have trouble accepting the biblical stories literally… I think this is responsible for the fact that I’m not as active as I should be.” (Pg. 6)
Loneta M. Murray asserts, “Joseph Smith didn’t see God. The Book of Mormon isn’t a revealed history. It’s words brought about by Joseph Smith’s personality, and I don’t believe that the beginnings of the church are true, and I don’t believe, above all, in polygamy. I think that’s been one of the worst things that’s happened to the Mormon church. So there are many things about its beginnings that I simply don’t trust. In fact, I would believe more strongly in the philosophy of a Sterling McMurrin than I would the president of the church.” (Pg. 24)
Levi Peterson explains, “Anybody who points out the lunacies of Mormonism, just let them identify their religion, and I’ll point out their lunacies. Human beings have their lunacies no matter which organization they’re in, and you just hope there’s some good people who try to rectify them in each organization. See, unlike anti-Mormons, who somehow think if you can stamp out this wicked thing called Mormonism, then you’re going to have this wonderful thing called born-again Christianity, which is just as loaded with irrationalities and craziness as the thing they’re trying to stamp out. I’m not anti-Mormon. I’d like to see Mormonism flourish. It’s got a wonderful history.” (Pg. 52)
Helen Bowrien Ure observes, “when … kids got into your teens and were more independent---all of you more or less changed your lifestyle. And your hair was long. I thought it was just a way for you to show your independence from the church. But the fact [was] that the church wouldn’t accept kids who had long hair… They’d always be riding them. And kids who smoked, they weren’t good. And yet people who drank---closet drinkers or anything like that---could go to church and be accepted as fine members. I thought the church did the opposite from what they should. I was quite active in community youth affairs by then, and I thought they should’ve accepted them and made them feel welcome. They lost a lot of kids in that era. They certainly lost me.” (Pg. 109)
Rod Decker notes, “Active Mormons tend to have strong feelings about Mormonism, but inactives are so scattered and few that nobody else in the world shares their strong feelings. There’s a whole culture regarding to what extent one should believe or disbelieve in Judaism or Catholicism or Christianity. In Mormonism there are people writing books, but few of them read each other’s books. There’s no real culture. Active Mormons don’t pay much attention and non-Mormons can’t figure out what the fuss is about. So Mormonism by itself is small and marginalized, although it’s becoming larger. Moreover, it chooses marginalization. It chooses to be different. Inactives are at the margin of the margin, so the things that seem important to an inactive Mormon are doubly marginalized.” (Pg. 198)
Ardean Walton Watts was asked, ‘if you could say something to the president of the Mormon church, what would it be?’ and he replied, “Only to lighten up with regard to intellectuals, gays, the women’s movement, etc. … I think that BYU’s course is tragic. It’s not because they’re trying to teach values in addition to science and other disciplines---that’s wonderful. But the fact is they’re not practicing good values. They’re putting athletics ahead of scholarship, for one thing… I think that our kids are encouraged to obey rather than think. I consider that a terrible thing, a human tragedy---at the very time when they have the most energy to devour things, to learn, to contribute. The students are at the age of Joseph Smith when the church was founded, and the attitude seems to be ‘don’t trust them as far as you can throw them.’” (Pg. 211)
This book will be of keen interest to anyone studying inactive Mormons.
James Ure wrote in the Overview of this 1999 book, “If you were raised Mormon in Utah, most likely the church is at your very core, whether you’re active or inactive. You are part of the culture, and no matter how you may try to escape its influence, it’s always with you… This work is an examination of the LDS church as seen by well-known Mormons, most of them Utahns, all of them inactive (nonpracticing or infrequently practicing) in the church after being active at one time in their lives. This is not an anti-Mormon work; its purpose from the beginning is to create and foster understanding.
“You may find criticism in these interviews: no institution with the worldwide profile of the Mormon church is immune to it. But it is also interesting to note that many interviewees articulate honor and respect for the church and individuals in its leadership and its membership. Their views most often reflect thoughtful consideration. And in almost every one, there’s a hint of disappointment and longing, as if they’re searching for a promised ideal not yet achieved, perhaps ironically the result of the idealization and perfection taught them by the church…
“I established three criteria interview subjects had to meet: 1. They had to be members of the church (not excommunicated or disfellowshipped and not having asked to have their names removed from the official roles.) 2. They once actively attended church functions. 3. They don’t regularly attend church at the present time and don’t pay tithing. Avoided were those whom Peggy Fletcher Stack calls ‘Evangelical Jack Mormons,’ those who regularly foment against the church. I also avoided those transitioning out of the church. This isn’t the place for their stories. Sought were men and women of intelligence who offer thoughtful commentaries as a result of life experience within the LDS community… you’ll find recurring themes: repulsed by the zeal of an individual; intellectualized rejection of doctrine; an inactive parent; the politics of gender, and politics in general.” (Pg. ix-x)
Calvin L. Rampton was asked if he still had a ‘bedrock belief in the Book of Mormon,’ and he replied: “No, I don’t. That’s probably my principal problem with the LDS church. I have a hard time accepting the authenticity of the Book of Mormon stories. On the other hand, I feel that the philosophy of the Mormon church is wonderful. I am, as most people, uncertain about the existence of God. I try to believe in it because I want to believe in it---I sort of make myself believe. I have a hard time forcing myself to accept the Book of Mormon stories literally. Just as I have trouble accepting the biblical stories literally… I think this is responsible for the fact that I’m not as active as I should be.” (Pg. 6)
Loneta M. Murray asserts, “Joseph Smith didn’t see God. The Book of Mormon isn’t a revealed history. It’s words brought about by Joseph Smith’s personality, and I don’t believe that the beginnings of the church are true, and I don’t believe, above all, in polygamy. I think that’s been one of the worst things that’s happened to the Mormon church. So there are many things about its beginnings that I simply don’t trust. In fact, I would believe more strongly in the philosophy of a Sterling McMurrin than I would the president of the church.” (Pg. 24)
Levi Peterson explains, “Anybody who points out the lunacies of Mormonism, just let them identify their religion, and I’ll point out their lunacies. Human beings have their lunacies no matter which organization they’re in, and you just hope there’s some good people who try to rectify them in each organization. See, unlike anti-Mormons, who somehow think if you can stamp out this wicked thing called Mormonism, then you’re going to have this wonderful thing called born-again Christianity, which is just as loaded with irrationalities and craziness as the thing they’re trying to stamp out. I’m not anti-Mormon. I’d like to see Mormonism flourish. It’s got a wonderful history.” (Pg. 52)
Helen Bowrien Ure observes, “when … kids got into your teens and were more independent---all of you more or less changed your lifestyle. And your hair was long. I thought it was just a way for you to show your independence from the church. But the fact [was] that the church wouldn’t accept kids who had long hair… They’d always be riding them. And kids who smoked, they weren’t good. And yet people who drank---closet drinkers or anything like that---could go to church and be accepted as fine members. I thought the church did the opposite from what they should. I was quite active in community youth affairs by then, and I thought they should’ve accepted them and made them feel welcome. They lost a lot of kids in that era. They certainly lost me.” (Pg. 109)
Rod Decker notes, “Active Mormons tend to have strong feelings about Mormonism, but inactives are so scattered and few that nobody else in the world shares their strong feelings. There’s a whole culture regarding to what extent one should believe or disbelieve in Judaism or Catholicism or Christianity. In Mormonism there are people writing books, but few of them read each other’s books. There’s no real culture. Active Mormons don’t pay much attention and non-Mormons can’t figure out what the fuss is about. So Mormonism by itself is small and marginalized, although it’s becoming larger. Moreover, it chooses marginalization. It chooses to be different. Inactives are at the margin of the margin, so the things that seem important to an inactive Mormon are doubly marginalized.” (Pg. 198)
Ardean Walton Watts was asked, ‘if you could say something to the president of the Mormon church, what would it be?’ and he replied, “Only to lighten up with regard to intellectuals, gays, the women’s movement, etc. … I think that BYU’s course is tragic. It’s not because they’re trying to teach values in addition to science and other disciplines---that’s wonderful. But the fact is they’re not practicing good values. They’re putting athletics ahead of scholarship, for one thing… I think that our kids are encouraged to obey rather than think. I consider that a terrible thing, a human tragedy---at the very time when they have the most energy to devour things, to learn, to contribute. The students are at the age of Joseph Smith when the church was founded, and the attitude seems to be ‘don’t trust them as far as you can throw them.’” (Pg. 211)
This book will be of keen interest to anyone studying inactive Mormons.
August 6, 2008
It's well written - not a hater-ator book at all. All the people interviewed are from Utah and most are really involved in the local politics there. I have been interested and surprised learning the churches stance against the Equal Rights Movement back then.
I liked how honest and varied each interview was. The same questions were asked of each but their answers were all over the place. Some people don't believe in God at all and some are really close to Christ but need more freedom to worship than their upbringing allowed. I would reccommend this for people interested in the church or even on the fringes that need to feel understood by someone.
I liked how honest and varied each interview was. The same questions were asked of each but their answers were all over the place. Some people don't believe in God at all and some are really close to Christ but need more freedom to worship than their upbringing allowed. I would reccommend this for people interested in the church or even on the fringes that need to feel understood by someone.
February 4, 2017
An interesting perspective through interviews with well-known Mormons no longer practicing the Mormon religion. The people interviewed were articulate, intelligent, and the questions for the interviews, as well as the process to select the interviewees was careful and thoughtful. Most surprising in the interviews was that most did not consider returning to the "fold" but few or none wanted to be withdrawn from the rolls of the church. An opportunity to learn more about a religion that has always mystified me, and that I have resisted understanding because of their position on women. That was reinforced in the reading.
April 7, 2008
Essays and interviews with individuals, some well-known and some not, who were active members of the Mormon church at one time...with discussion as to why they are no longer. They all seem to have difficulties with the First Vision and The Book of Mormon. If one doesn't have a real testimony of those two things then there's not much point, in my mind, of being a member. I found this very insightful and even tender at times.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews