My intention in creating this list was to recognize the positive changes in Mormonism which began around 2005, right after I resigned my membership around that time. In other words, many of the issues I resigned over have been dealt with since then. Thus I feel vindicated as part of my motivations were to protest for reform, and reforms did come:
Around 2010, the LDS church began experiencing a massive number of members leaving (the most since before the days of Brigham Young) according to LDS General Authority Marlin K. Jensen. It appears that the church is reacting to this by making several positive changes. The LDS concept of "Continuous Revelation" allows the church to change doctrines and policy as newer ideas, public opinion, the internet, and internal pressure from within, encourages these changes. We see many positive and progressive examples of this, including the following: the removal of the penalty signs in 1990 that were in the temple; and the washing and anointing in the temple which used to include a form of nudity that made many LDS members uncomfortable, was changed in 2005; which was obviously due to the LDS members discomfort during these rituals. This shows a level of awareness on the part of the leadership of what is not working practically, and not wanting to make the membership uncomfortable; which of course benefits them by increasing temple attendance which creates further devotion and tithes. Recent DNA evidence showing that the American Indians cannot be Jews, has led to the LDS church no longer teaching the "hemispheric model" (which teaches that all the Lamanites are American Indians) as of 2006. Instead the LDS church now teaches the limited geography model and the 2006 edition of the Book of Mormon has changed the introduction from saying the Lamanites "are the principal ancestors of the American Indians," to now stating that the Lamanites "are among the ancestors of the American Indians." The LDS church has recently changed the subheadings in the Book of Mormon that now remove the former idea that the Lamanites were literally "cursed with dark skin"; the footnotes were also updated to remove the formerly racial interpretations. Most Mormon Scholars now argue that the changes in skin color discussed in the Book of Mormon are metaphors and not about a literal change in skin pigmentation. There are also a couple of African Americans (who are part of the Genesis Group) going around giving talks at LDS meetings: who teach that the Book of Mormon doesn't teach that the Lamanites were cursed with dark skin but that it was a metaphorical or "spiritual" cursing. They also argue that the seed of Cain doctrine is false. Their presentation is offered as a DVD titled Blacks In The Scriptures, available free on YouTube. Their position rejects the former LDS dogma on skin color preached by Brigham Young, Joseph Fielding Smith, and Bruce R. McConkie. In short, we are witnessing the the end of the McConkie-Mormon era. In the past, such teachings by the Genesis Group would have been silenced by the McConkey era Mormon leadership. Today, the Genesis Group is being allowed to promote their interpretation of LDS scripture and history in church meetings without any ecclesiastical interference.
When Mitt Romney ran for president in 2012, a BYU professor named Randy Bott spoke openly about the seed of Cain doctrine and the attitude toward blacks among some of the older LDS members. This resulted in the LDS church coming as close as they ever have before at repudiating the seed of Cain dogma and past racism by condemning the BYU professor's remarks in a statement titled, Church Statement Regarding 'Washington Post' Article on Race and the Church, February 29, 2012 at www.mormonnewsroom.org. This was followed up by a 2013 Essay titled Race and the Priesthood, that blamed the priesthood ban on Brigham Young and explained that such racial views were normal and popular in nineteenth-century America, including among Protestants. The Essay, that was approved by the First Presidency, finally repudiated the Seed of Cain dogma by stating:
"Today, the [Mormon] Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form."
- Today, the LDS Church also allows some believing LDS scholars to publish books disclosing controversial aspects of church history and Joseph Smith, such as the book Rough Stone Rolling by Richard L. Bushman. There is also The Joseph Smith Papers that offers many documents not previously made available by the church to the public, which sheds light on church history for all to see. In fact, in 2013 the Church's official website lds.org published an article called First Vision Accounts at http://www.lds.org/topics/first-vision-accounts?lang=eng. There is even more information on the First Vision by The Joseph Smith Papers. According to the church's newsroom, a "new book, Massacre at Mountain Meadows, published by Oxford University Press, is not a Church production but was co-authored by Mormon historians Ronald W. Walker, Richard E. Turley Jr. and Glen M. Leonard." The book presents a more honest history of those events and offering more full disclosure. There is also a September, 2007, Ensign article by Richard E. Turley Jr., titled, The Mountain Meadows Massacre. Then there is the article, Truth in Church History: Excerpts from the Religious Educator’s Q&A with Elder Steven Snow [Church Historian and Recorder] on November 8th, 2013. In the article Snow calls for a more honest church history because of the internet making the information available anyway, i.e. it can’t be hid anymore. So places like church institute should provide more information about controversial issues and the truth should be told.
Despite what some Mormons might think, the LDS Church does not oppose the teaching of evolution and allows evolution to be taught at BYU. LDS members are free to believe in it or not as the church is now officially neutral on the subject. I read Evolution and Mormonism: A Quest for Understanding by an LDS member, who firmly believes in organic evolution, when I was an active Mormon:
The Mormon Church has also made a step toward showing more compassion toward LBGTQ persons on their website; and while critics can make a case that they made mistakes in the past and need to make further changes in policy in the future, the current LDS website in its section on same sex attraction, does in fact condemn any Latter-day Saint parent who would ostracize they're LBGTQ child; and the church officially has declared one's sexual orientation is not a choice and that it has a likely genetic component; and you can't simply choose to change your nature and overcome your same-sex attraction by merely choosing to do so. This is a massive step toward a more scientific and compassionate and accommodating direction compared to the past. This does not mean that the LDS leadership are not currently making mistakes and need to change things even more from the perspective of the LBGTQ community. But it's important to point out the positive changes the Mormon church has made thus far.
There is also a major change in the attitude of most Mormon apologists today. In the past it was not uncommon for many or most LDS apologists to attack and slander former Mormons with vicious verbal attacks (in fairness this is likely due to the same behavior by some exmormons). Former Mormons were vilified by apologists as lying cowards and intellectually lazy for not learning the controversial issues from day one. There has since been what appears to be a major change in Mormon apologetics. Starting with an article by the apologist Jeff Lindsey called Cutting A Little Slack for Exmormons. To see how questioning Mormons used to be vilified by apologists, just see how a doubting missionary is represented in the film God’s Army (a Richard Dutcher film) as a cynical, powerless, coward, and a villain (See minutes 28-30, 42-43, 58-59, 1: 10-1: 13):
Today the director of that film (Richard Dutcher) who played the older, true believing missionary, who aggressively confronts the doubting missionary before he leaves to go home, is ironically no longer a Mormon; here is a clip of Dutcher discussing the vilification of former Mormons. Mormon apologists today are much more respectful toward those with doubts. In fact, a church sanctioned book called Planted by Patrick Mason, has a chapter on Testimonies where he argues that Mormons should be more tolerant of those who don’t say “I know …” and that it may be the case that not everyone is designed by genetics to have spiritual experiences. This leaves room for intellectuals in the church to feel that their more intellectual form of conviction should be tolerated and embraced by the more emotionally driven LDS members. Compare the film God's Army with a recent short film called Alone by mormonchallenges.org; the description of the film reads, “Feeling alone, Justin shares with his father and wife his concerns about his church and comes to a new understanding of his faith and those he loves." The film portrays a young Mormon, Justin, struggling with the controversial issues, especially the Book of Abraham; and how his search for truth and his healthy skepticism is treated respectfully by his family and church leaders who actually listen to him, even read "both sides" with him, and show patience and compassion. In the end his doubts don’t disappear like magic. Instead he decides to embrace doubt and faith and remain in the church at the end of the film. This to me is evidence that the internet is forcing the LDS church apologists to adapt and they are doing so in a positive direction.
The Mormon church has in fact made many major changes since 2010. I resigned from the Mormon church around 2005 because of issues like the Seed of Cain doctrine, but now seeing this doctrine repudiated, and many other things I formally disagreed with now being changed or changed. A lot of the frustration has gone away. I feel like a won in my protest for reforms. I was protesting with my resignation and wrote on the internet seeking for changes. Well the changes I wanted happened. More changes need to be made, but I happy with the progress thus far. As a result I have grown to be less frustrated with the Mormon institution after seeing these positive changes take place. The voices of not just myself but other exMormons and other LDS insiders, seeking the same kinds of changes, were heard and major changes have been made. I predict that even more positive changes will occur as time goes on. These changes are worth acknowledging and recognizing among exMormons.
