I recently stopped by the local Deseret bookstore where I live in Logan, Utah. Even though I am a Christian pastor, I am constantly reading and studying LDS material so that I can better understand the theology and culture of the church. Other than that I’m just a book nerd in general (I have a serious problem). On this particular trip to the DB, a book caught my attention: When Church is Hard by Tyler Johnson. So I forked out $18.99 plus tax and then explained to my wife that it would be the last book that I buy for a while (do you think she bought it :). While there is some good information in the book, there are some things about it that grieved me, so I felt compelled to review it from a pastor’s perspective. Let’s dive in.
The Winds Are Changing
There are two audiences that Johnson is aiming for in this work, those who have been hurt by the church and left, and those who are hanging on by a thread either because of doubt or church hurt. But before I get into the content of When Church is Hard, I just want to take a moment to point out that I think it says a lot about the current climate of the LDS church to even publish a book title like this. Not only did Deseret publish this book but it was front and center as I walked into the store (it caught my attention, didn’t it). It reminds me of a novelty item that my grandmother kept out in her yard. It was a big rock with a sign sitting on top of it that said, “This is a weather rock. If it’s wet, it’s raining outside. If there is snow on it, it’s snowing. If it’s hot to the touch, it’s hot outside. If it’s cold to the touch, it’s cold outside.” The humor was facetious, but the point was clear, you don’t need a weather rock to determine what the weather is doing. This book seems like a weather rock to me, pointing to the obvious problem of a mass exodus of people from the LDS church (mostly younger people). Johnson admits this in the opening chapter. “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, specifically, is no longer holding sway over its members in the way that it once did.” This is why Johnson writes to try and convince those who are on the fence to stay in the church. Let’s get into the content.
The Pros
Giving credit where it’s due, I found Dr. Johnson very readable and engaging. I also appreciate the work that he does in the field of oncology. On a personal level, it took me about 5 minutes to realize that Mr. Johnson is very well-read. I automatically feel a certain level of respect and camaraderie with someone when I discover this fact about them. I enjoyed the early chapters of the book the most simply because he gave some really good data and insights on issues that affect organized religion accross the board. The truth is that we live in a TikTok world where everything must be flashy and last no longer than 90 seconds or people lose interest. On a practical level, this can make it difficult for churches of any stripe considering that a church service is going to require a certain level of listening and literary skills. It also means that people may have to go a whole hour or two without being able to check social media (Oh the agony!).
Our society is also quickly losing any sense of the sacred, and unfortunately, even many churches seem to be falling into the pit of consumerism. I haven’t checked the numbers lately but I think that it’s safe to say that most if not all mainline denominations in the U.S. are shrinking, while certain individual churches are flourishing. It is precisely for all of these reasons that a church can be small, and yet healthy. Or a church can be large and sick. The question is, what kind of spiritual food is being served, sheep food or goat food? Charles Spurgeon once said that he feared a day was coming in which, “instead of pastors feeding the sheep, we would be left with clowns entertaining the goats.” Attracting an audience isn’t necessarily the sign of a healthy church. Last year the church accross the street from my in-law’s house in Mississippi caught on fire when it was struck by lighting. The cell phone video that my Mother-in-law recorded of the incident made national news. That church had never had so many spectators, but it certainly wasn’t an indication of the health of the church. I didn’t mean to get off on a tangent here, I said all of this to say I think that people are leaving the LDS church in droves because the church is sick and not simply because of all of the cultural phenomena. I actually think that Johnson highlights this point even as he tries to deny it. Let’s examine his arguments.
No Control like Damage Control
There was a survey conducted in 2023 that determined that the top three reasons that people leave the LDS church are; 1. History related to Joseph Smith, 2. The Book of Mormon, 3. Race issues in the church. So it comes as no surprise that in a book geared towards keeping people from leaving the LDS church, these issues would be dealt with (I think that Johnson references this survey in the footnotes, although he never mentions why). Johnson never dealt with the problems of the Book of Mormon (i.e. zero ancient manuscripts to verify its validity, not one shred of archaeological evidence to prove the Lamanites, Nephites, or Jaredites ever existed, contradictions, anachronisms, massive sections of the BOM directly plagiarized from the KJV, etc.), but he does deal with some of the negative history of Joseph Smith and the racism within the church.
To Johnson’s credit, he admits that;
“Joseph Smith married many women, that some of those women were only teenagers, that some of the women were already married to other men, that most of the marriages were at least initially hidden from Emma, and that at least some of the marriages appear to have been physically consummated (though evidence suggests that was at least mostly not the case with sealings to married women, and the Joseph never fathered a child with any of his polygamous wives). Because these relationships were conducted in such privacy, much remains unknown about them. Even so, just the rough outline, at least on its surface, seems deeply troubling.”
I have lost count of how many lifelong Latter-day Saints that I have talked to that don’t know this about Smith. And every time that I mention it, the LDS want to write me off as a rabid anti-Mormon. I appreciate Johnson for bringing this out, although I will say that I think that the internet has forced the church’s hand. They have lost their echo chamber as this information is so easy to find. However, I was staggered that Johnson didn’t say another word about it. He just went on to the next subject. Wait a second, the founding prophet of Mormonism, Joseph Smith, married over 30 women, many of them teenagers (at least one as young as 14, Johnson left that out), at least 11 of them were married to other men when Smith married them, and at least eight of them he married before Emma found out about it, and we’re just going to act like it’s not a big deal? Move along folks, nothing to see here. Not only that, Joseph Smith actually had the gall to tell Emma that God said to him that if she didn’t forgive him and accept these new wives she would be destroyed (D & C 132:52-54).
In what universe is this ok? To my LDS readers, is this the man that you’re going to trust your eternal soul to? This is the “prophet” that you’re going to trust the souls of your family with? Do you trust this man when he criticizes and changes the Bible? Do you trust him when he says that the church and the gospel of Christ were essentially lost on the earth and God commissioned him to restore it? This man was a pedophile, a deceiver, and a serial adulterer, and Johnson just mentioned it in passing and moved on to something else. See, this is the part where everyone who’s not drinking the Kool-Aid sees it for what it is. No wonder people are leaving the church in droves. Nobody in leadership has the answers to these obvious problems. Like Johnson, they just go on damage control.
Johnson went on to mention the obvious history of racism in the church, as blacks weren’t allowed to receive the priesthood or enter the temples until 1978 (everyone outside of the echo chamber knows they caved because of the pressure of the civil rights movement). However, I found it staggering that right after Johnson mentions Smith’s sex romps, he tries to distance him from racism, as if Smith would be above that. Johnson stated, “The revelation of 1978 was not a new policy but instead a restoration of the policy Joseph Smith had implemented.” This assertion is very debatable, but even if it’s true, it still raises hard questions to which Johnson and the church have no answers. This brings me to my next point.
Questions with No Answers
After briefly (as in less than a page and a half) mentioning Smith’s sexcapades and the church’s historical racism, Johnson proceeds to try to deal with the obvious question that all thinking people are asking at this point; if the prophets that supposedly speak for God can get it so wrong, then how can the church be true? As you can probably guess, it was a dumpster fire. Johnson begins by saying;
“It’s one thing to note that these teachings have changed, but the larger point here is to acknowledge that some Church teachings from previous eras were wrong and harmful- a truth we can now recognize precisely because those old teachings have been superseded by greater light and further revelation.”
This is smooth as silk right here folks. In the same sentence, Johnson calls these teachings from a previous era (polygamy and racist policies) “wrong and harmful”, and then proceeds to say that these teachings have been “superseded by greater light and further revelation.” The implication is that the previous revelations that were “wrong” were also given by light and revelation from God and have just been outdated and superseded by greater light and revelation. This is what George Orwell called “doublethink.” He said, “Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.” Johnson’s doublethink reveals a terrifying proposition, even when the prophets are wrong, they are right.
If there was any doubt about this, Johnson removes the doubt by what he says in the following pages, “The imperfections of prophets must therefore draw us back to the necessity of the Atonement, grace, and love of Jesus.” I almost spit my decaf out when I read this statement. Wait, what? So the imperfect teachings of the prophets should drive Latter-day Saints back to other teachings that were also given and taught by imperfect prophets. Does the reader see a problem here? Again, even when the prophets are wrong, they are right. No wonder people are leaving the church in droves, there isn’t any solid foundation of truth. The LDS church is built upon a foundation of sand.
This point is further driven home by what Johnson says about LGBT issues. He never condemns the LGBT lifestyle, nor does he condone it. Instead, he heavily implies that just like the prophets changed their mind about blacks in the priesthood, they could also change their minds about the LGBT. What utter confusion. What was a sin yesterday, could be accepted and celebrated tomorrow and vice versa. And I’m just going to call it, I give the LDS church 5-10 years before they figure out a way to seal gay weddings in the temple. But when they do, I can still pick up my Bible, written by the true Prophets and Apostles and it will still say that homosexuality is an abomination unto God. Johnson made it sound like the greatest hope for the LGBT is that the prophets change their mind about it being sinful. I want to say that the greatest hope for any sinner is the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ for sinners. The beauty of the gospel is not that Christ affirms us in our sin, but that He saves us from our sin!
Johnson repeatedly calls the prophets imperfect, and therefore they prophesy imperfectly. But this wasn’t true of the Biblical Prophets and Apostles. Deuteronomy 18:20 says, “But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.” Speaking for God is a very serious thing. To speak lies in the name of God is an offense punishable by death and yet the LDS church says, well nobody is perfect, no big deal. What makes someone a false prophet, but prophesying false things in the name of God?
Johnson is a smart guy, and he clearly recognizes the screaming implications of these issues that I have raised. He brings all of this full circle when he says;
“This brings us back to those insistent questions: if living means evolving, how can the Church be both true and evolving? If the Church changes its stance on important issues, then what makes it any truer than any other church or well-meaning organization?”
See, Johnson gets it. How can the church be true (something settled and objective) and also be evolving (fluid and changing)? This is the million-dollar question. This would be a perfect time for Johnson to hit a grand slam in the bottom of the ninth, considering the importance of this issue. I have told many of my LDS friends that if they could give me objective reasons to believe that Mormonism is true, then I would leave the Christian church and be the most dedicated Latter-day Saint that I can possibly be. But thus far, no one has been able to give me a single objective proof for Mormonism. Let’s see if Johnson can surprise me. He answers this question by saying, “Some parts of the answer to this question can be understood only within the most private chambers of an individual seeker’s heart.” Um, what? So all thinking people both inside and outside of the LDS church recognize a clear violation of the law of non-contradiction with the idea of the church being both true and evolving and Johnson says, well you just have to listen to your heart. But what about when a person’s heart is screaming that the church isn’t true? This is the most subjective, culty answer imaginable.
Johnson gives four reasons why he thinks the church is true; I will save the first one until last for commentary’s sake.
4. “An environment, a set of precepts, and access to the power of grace that transform us into men and women of Christ.” (yeah, because other churches don’t have that)
3. “Access to unique authority because of the restored priesthood and priesthood keys” (prove it)
2. “Covenant communities where we strive to become like Jesus while lifting and building the Saints who surround us.” (yeah, because other churches don’t have that)
1. “A soaring theology distinguished by sometimes subtle and sometimes radical departures from creedal Christianity and that, when taken in its entirety, offers a grand and robust set of answers to modernity’s most pressing and existential answers.”
This last one really got me. “A soaring theology,” “robust answers,” We can’t even get a straight answer for how the church can be both true and evolving. We can’t even get answers as to how the prophets could have been speaking and acting on behalf of God when they barred blacks from the priesthood and the temples. We can’t even get an answer as to how Joseph Smith could have been both a true prophet of God and a nympho at the same time. Are you kidding me? And the church wonders why the church is experiencing a mass exodus. They have absolutely no answers to these important questions. However, according to Johnson, Latter-day Saints should embrace these blessings of uncertainty and confusion;
“By opening ourselves to questions, accepting ambiguity can be for us a powerful spiritual accelerant, reminding us that certainty can stunt spiritual growth and put blinders on our ability to take in full spiritual vistas.”
Absolute goobly gock. Certainty about the foundations of what you believe is a powerful spiritual accelerant. Just ask the Apostles, who ran scared on crucifixion day and yet, were willing to be tortured and martyred after they saw the risen Christ.
Faith Means to Let Your Brains Fall Out and Just Love People and Stuff
This blog review has already gotten longer than I prefer. I will wrap it up with this section. Johnson closes the book by repeatedly downplaying the importance of intellectual inquiry into the LDS faith. I mean, repeatedly. There are so many block quotes on this issue that I would have to nearly double the size of this blog to squeeze them all in. But let’s look at a few, and then have some final words.
“Faith is not an academic or purely cognitive exercise. Ultimately though epistemological confidence matters, such confidence is a necessary means, but not an end. We are not here on earth attempting to procure sufficient confidence in a list of certain truth claims. Rather, the truth-claims matter because prophets and scriptures are meant to draw our eyes to God, and as we come to know God, that closeness changes who we are.”
I can’t even pretend to completely understand this word salad. Our confidence in truth claims matters, but not really. Truth claims only really matter because it’s the prophets that are saying them. And by their truth claims that we can’t vet, and that could be wrong and be completely reversed in a few years by new decrees from new prophets, they draw us closer to God and stuff. Let’s proceed.
“We Should likewise take care to ensure that intellectual queries, no matter how honest or important, do not eclipse the real work of discipleship, which is more about action; loving God, and loving our fellow humans; than it is about anything strictly intellectual.”
In other words, stop asking those pesky questions. Just trust us. Keep your heads down and be good Latter-day Saints and everything will be ok. Now who wants some cookies and Kool-Aid? What Johnson is ignoring is that statements like this are theological, which means that they require theological answers. Even statements like “love God” raise questions that require answers. Who is God? What is He like? What does He require of us? What does it mean to love God? What is love for that matter? Johnson is essentially saying don’t think, just do. Johnson continues;
“Faith is not ultimately about accepting cognitive premises. Rather, it is the love that kept the prodigal son’s father eagerly scanning the horizon and the fire that burned under the father’s feet as he ran to embrace his son (see Luke 15:11-32).”
Don’t think, just love. At this point I can’t help but wonder what Dr. Johnson has against the intellectual, especially considering that he’s a cancer doctor and a Stanford professor! He deals with objective cognitive premises every day of his life. Christ Himself told us to love the Lord with all of our mind (Mark 12:30).
It’s also ironic that Johnson uses the illustration of the prodigal son considering that Jesus was using this parable to teach theological truth. Christ was speaking to a crowd which included the Pharisees. The Father represents God welcoming sinners who come to Him in repentance and faith. But something that is often missed is that the elder brother was upset because this sinful brother had come home. The elder brother represented the Pharisees, a point that they would have easily recognized. Jesus was saying that the prodigal son was better off than they were because even though he left for the far country of sin, he came to the Father in repentance. The elder brother was in the far country of sin even in his father’s house. But I guess I’m thinking too much. Ok, two more quotes and I’m done, I promise.
“I hope that our doubts about the veracity of this or that historical or theological claim will eventually fade, not so much because we have arrived at a state of unquestioning certainty--which is often impossible and sometimes undesirable--but instead because the absolute certainty of truth-claims fades in significance when seen against the pressing need to feed the hungry, comfort the sad, welcome the refugee, and bind up the wounds of the hurting.”
Don’t worry about the negative or confusing historical or theological claims that the LDS church has no answers for. Just do stuff. Here is what Johnson misses with this type of epistemology. The sincerity of our faith doesn’t matter if the object of our faith is false. Our faith will never be greater than the object of our faith. So this brings us right back to square one, are the teachings of the LDS church based in reality,? Are they true? This is ground zero. The top three reasons why people are leaving the church are because they can’t get straight answers to questions that question the validity of the LDS faith. It’s as simple as that. Dr. Johnson wrote a whole book trying to address the problems without answering the questions. Instead, he suggests that people should stop asking the questions.
For the grand finale, the crescendo, the climax, and the encore, Johnson closes the final chapter with these words; “Believing is fired not by intellectual inquiry, but by belonging and becoming beloved…believing is simply that: love.”
I think that Hallmark should sue Johnson for plagiarism. Seriously though, this whole book is designed to give people reasons to stay in the church, but in the end, all the reader is left with are the same old questions without answers, empty platitudes, smart-shaming, and Hallmarky cliches. This is why the LDS church should have a bumper sticker that says, “intense belief in nothing, that could change tomorrow”
Closing Thoughts
I hope that my motives of love and concern aren’t overshadowed by my spiritual gift of sarcasm. I just can’t stand to see people in spiritual bondage because they have been repeatedly lied to. The truth is that church can be hard because that church is standing upon the truth of the word of God and the people in the pews don’t want to hear it. However, church can also be hard because that particular church is led by false prophets who are wolves in sheep’s clothing. Church can be hard because they are consistently inconsistent in their doctrine and have no answers to the hard questions. Church can be hard because the leadership sweeps their sin under the rug and expects the members to do the same. Church can be hard because they have a false gospel that adds works to the finished work of Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection. I would say that the LDS church is hard precisely for all of the reasons except for the first one.
Sadly, a recent survey shows that nearly 70% of people that leave the LDS church to get out of church completely. To those Latter-day Saints who are struggling, you have options. You can have Jesus without Joseph. You can have pastors who teach you, without having so-called prophets that try to control the way that you live and think. You can have certainty in the unchanging truth of God’s Word as found in the Bible. You can have a church family without all of the comrades. You can have freedom and forgiveness in Christ alone without the ordinances and authority of the LDS church.
So much more could be said. I have written extensively on all of these issues. Please check out some of my other blog articles. And if I can help you in any way, please reach out to me.
In His Service, Pastor Vaughan, Ephesians 2:8-9
Notes
1. Tyler Johnson, When Church is Hard (Deseret Book, Salt Lake City, UT, 2024)
2. Jana Riess (8 March 2024). "Who is leaving the LDS Church? Eight key survey findings". The Salt Lake Tribune. Salt Lake City, Utah. Religion News Service. Archived from the original on 9 March 2024
3. George Orwell, 1984 (Signet Classics, 1961)
