Mormon WikiLeaks (MormonLeaks)

[Eddie]

That is one my my favourite passages in scripture. Of course, we lack context and therefore are unable to fully appreciate the whole circumstances which lead to Christ's judgment.

It's reasonable to discern that the scribes and Pharisees left the presence of Christ so readily, not merely because they themselves were hypocrites and adulterers, but also because it was they, wanting to 'tempt' Christ who had put the woman in the compromising situation in the first place. Perhaps she was an unwitting pawn?

I didn't realize how long Cambridge Analytica has been around.

[Pelado]

It's funny the things that we allow to bother us, but when I was on my mission, I was deeply disturbed that Alma the Younger's son Corianton was called back to the ministry after spending some alone time with the harlot Jezebel.

It didn't quite work out that way for the guy in my mission who spent some time with a Jezebel.

[Art Vandelay]

Awful things were done by a prominent Mormon, welcome back ER! Has Byron stopped by yet?

This is why HFN is the MVP of this whole effin' board. He says more in 2 sentences than most posters do in 2 pages. Donut gets a runner up award for his nonchalant use of flaccid.

[The_Tick]

Two things I know:

1. No matter what the Church does, they will be wrong.
2. No matter what the Church does, they are liars.

I'm sure there is a 3rd item I am missing.

[Art Vandelay]

Two things I know:

1. No matter what the Church does, they will be wrong.
2. No matter what the Church does, they are liars.

I'm sure there is a 3rd item I am missing.

3. GBH was a ... can't remember which antiquated word was used.... shyster?

[falafel]

The context was the appropriate short-term institutional response to a sexual predator. Not whether or not God forgives someone. Try to keep up.

Try to be consistent.

[falafel]

I am fine with that; no callings, period. You can still receive forgiveness from god (i.e. the Atonement) but still not be put in a position to hurt others ever again.

You really think a person who is going to repeat those sins it's going to be stopped by being denied being the second counselor in the SS pres?

Besides, service is an integral part of the gospel.

[PaloAltoCougar]

...Donut gets a runner up award for his nonchalant use of flaccid.

Well now you can look forward to DH's attempt to go for the gold by using the word, "tumescent."

[Northwestcoug]

This is just the gospel according to Eddie...

But I think that sometimes excommunication is needed not necessarily for the atonement for work, but for the sinner to have faith in the atonement. To repent you have to have sorrow for your sins. I think some people feel the need to be punished, and if the punishment isn't severe enough then they don't feel like they've "earned" the atonement...

But I think that some people CAN'T move forward until they've really felt the pain! And for some of those, excommunication might be what helps them get to the place where they've suffered enough and are ready to move forward.

I have a family member who was ex'd, who told us in so many words that you can't imagine how empty you feel when you lose the companionship of the spirit. When she was baptized again, she was very grateful to get it back again. She is a stronger member now than she ever was before the excommunication. So I can definitely see there is a group of people that may need to feel terrible remorse for what they've done. And going through that harrowing guilt is necessary for them mentally to get back on track.

But this does not speak to the 'doctrinality' of excommunication. It just doesn't make any sense to me, in the context of Christianity.

Despite all persons being resurrected, not all individuals will return to live in the presence of God, because many will choose (agency) not to seek redemption through Christ's atonement. I can't say exactly why the need for excommunication other than it is the mechanism that has been given to us, by which persons can be born anew, so that they may choose to be born again.

It's been determined through modern revelation that there are certain sins that require excommunication. Perhaps in the future, new mechanisms will be revealed to deal with the complexities of exercising agency in the context of an abject mortal existence. That's the great blessing that is inherent to modern revelation.

Let's assume that excommunication for some sins is required for forgiveness, and that this is the reason why the church has been commanded to do it. Is the stigma and all the other negative things associated with it necessary also? For instance, the public shaming of not being able to talk in church, no callings, etc. Is there any doctrinal need for this humiliation? Furthermore, it is LDS doctrine that ex'd members do not have the companionship of the holy ghost. For something that is taught to be so essential in this world, what is the doctrinal explanation of why an already struggling ex-member cannot have access to this gift to keep him/her on the right path to forgiveness?

Thinking about my family member I referenced above, in my anecdotal experience she is the exception. I know of a handful of ex'd people in my area who fell off the grid, so to speak. All the trappings that go with the supposed doctrine of why excommunication; i.e. the capriciousness of the discipline, the shame involved of regular attendance after being ex'd, the long time before even being considered 'good enough' for rebaptism, were just not worth it for them. I know others work through it and are eventually grateful for the whole ordeal. But for a supposed step in the path towards forgiveness, excommunication sure does leave quite the scar.

[snowcat]

Reading through the transcript paints a pretty damning picture. The Bishop family shares their side of the story.

Bishop adamantly denied the allegations through his son, Gregory Bishop, who questioned the woman's credibility, saying she has accused 10 other men of sexual assault, sexual harassment or assault without charges being filed and has sought cash settlements in other cases.

Some media reports have focused on different parts of the tape. Bishop appeared to admit sexual misconduct when the woman asked him about another missionary at the Missionary Training Center.

Greg Bishop dismissed the apparent admissions. He said his father had just been released from the hospital after treatment for a heart attack and was under medication when the woman traveled to Arizona to meet him, ostensibly for an article on mission presidents.

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900013479/woman-levels-accusations-against-former-mtc-president.html

[Pelado]

This conversation has progressed so quickly - with so much going on - that it's really hard to respond to everything I've read and wanted to respond to.

This guy needs to be in trouble. I don't know exactly what that looks like - that's for the courts to decide. But depending on other, more recent, victims - I could see it involving criminal, civil, and a court of love.

I've worked with the police when investigating a sex abuse case. More often than not, they didn't want me talking to an "alleged" perpetrator until they'd had a chance to get as much information from as many victims as they could and then talked to him themselves. Once in a while, if they thought I might get a confession out of him, they'd let me go first. But only if they had given me the go-ahead and knew I was recording the conversation. If there is a possibility of other victims, I could see the police telling the church to slow down a little.

Once the information is made public via mormonleaks or any other source, then it's in the open and any response or actions then need to be made a little more public. So that's when you get a press release from the church stating some of what they know and some of what they are doing. Doesn't mean nothing was done up until then, and it doesn't mean that there won't be more. But short of having a victim that needs immediate protection - there's also no need to rush into things when there's time to do things right.

We've got a guy in our ward who has a history I'm not fully aware of. What I do know, is that he isn't allowed to be around any children, ever. He's nearly 90 years old and needs a walker to get around - but leaders have been made aware that he isn't to be with children and he knows this is the rule and follows it as well. About as close as he gets is sitting in Sacrament Meeting with kids there - but he doesn't even get home taught by someone with a youth companion.

It appears to me that there have been some failures here. But I'm not sure where the failures occurred or who is responsible. I'm not sure what or how much of a cover up there was or who was responsible. And that makes it difficult to judge what needs to happen next. It's possible that there was a group of men in leadership positions that made a decision as a group. It's also possible that there was one person who used horrible judgement and didn't pass this along to the right people. So - is it a system failure in which multiple people should've taken action but instead ignored this guys actions? Or is it the failure of an individual who did that on their own? I don't know.

What I DO know is that the church has made a TON of headway in the last 5-10 years to expressly make sure all of their local leaders know that if there is a report of abuse, there is no expectation of some sacred and confidential confessional that cannot be violated. Bishops are to immediately call the church hotline as well as report it to the proper authorities.

And this is a HUGE step forward. About 20 years ago I was doing Child Protective Services intake and spoke with a man who identified himself as a Bishop who was concerned with a family in his congregation. The father had admitted to abuse (he didn't say what kind), and the Bishop was interested in finding out what the process was and what would happen next if he reported it. I went through that with him, then encouraged him to go forward with reporting the incident. His response was that he wasn't sure he was ready to do that yet, and was deciding if he could work with the family himself to address the issues first. Disappointing.

But - the reality is that not 6 months later I was in a social work class up at the U of U graduate school and had my least LDS-like professor (flaming feminist who hated men AND the LDS church) basically say the same thing. If she became aware of an incident of abuse within a family, she would try to work with them on it and only report it to the authorities if she began to see a pattern of repeated abuse.

This is just the gospel according to Eddie...

But I think that sometimes excommunication is needed not necessarily for the atonement for work, but for the sinner to have faith in the atonement. To repent you have to have sorrow for your sins. I think some people feel the need to be punished, and if the punishment isn't severe enough then they don't feel like they've "earned" the atonement.

Quite honestly - I think there is some breakdown in how the LDS general population understands the atonement and how the rest of the Christian world views it.

For much of the Christian world, it feels like "hey, accept Christ and you're done! You can keep on living like you always have, keep on sinning, but because you've accepted Christ, the atonement will totally cover for you! So...eat, drink, and be marry! For you have accepted Christ!"

For many (most?) within the LDS church, there is a sense of being worthy, or making yourself worthy, of Christ's atonement. You show you've accepted the atonement by getting baptized and living the gospel. We take James at his word, that we are saved by Christ after all we can do - so there is a sense of "you better do all you can do!" We have to earn the atonement and make ourselves worthy.

I think reality is somewhere in the middle. I think accepting Christ requires more than saying "I accept Christ". I think if we have faith in Christ and accept him and the atonement, then we try to follow his teachings. I also think that we, as humans, are deeply flawed. And we should take solace in the knowledge that it is through the atonement that we are saved in spite of our flaws, not because we began to live perfect lives. Do we need to do our best? Sure. But at a certain point we need to start doing our best and move on instead of being overwhelmed by depression due to ruminating on thoughts of past failures.

But I think that some people CAN'T move forward until they've really felt the pain! And for some of those, excommunication might be what helps them get to the place where they've suffered enough and are ready to move forward.

As a total aside - I also think there are people who have decided they aren't interested in living the gospel and are no longer believers. So adultery, fornication, etc., is totally cool. In instances where these folks are leaders and have no interest in recognizing their waywardness - sometimes I can see excommunication being necessary to protect the church from an unrepentant sinner.

I didn't realize how long Cambridge Analytica has been around.

Eddie is killing it in this thread.

[RC Vikings]

I've been in the SS Presidency. It is absolutely possible that he could have access to someone to groom through this position. SS Presidency meeting discussing who to call for Gospel Doctrine. Former Mission President Bishop suggests that 18-year old Sally really would make a great teacher. The spirit has told him she could use this opportunity so much to prepare her to serve a mission. Former Mission President Bishop is well respected, so they extend the call to Sally.

Brother Bishop decides that he really wants to help Sally be the best Gospel Doctrine teacher that she can be. She is young and could use a Priesthood leader with such a distinguished history of church service to help her. He arranges meetings with her to help her prepare lessons, develop teaching strategies, etc.

For someone like this asshole, any position of Priesthood authority is an opportunity.

My second year up at Ricks I was in the SS Presidency and in charge of the rolls. I invited the SS secretary over to my apartment to go over the rolls and get everything in order. We ended up at the Sand Hills that night and made out. I'm hoping this doesn't come back to bite me.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Try to be consistent.

Ha. OK, falafel.

[Donuthole]

Well now you can look forward to DH's attempt to go for the gold by using the word, "tumescent."

That word sounds best if Gus Haynes is is the one using it. Same with the word "Dickensian".

[Jeff Lebowski]

It's funny the things that we allow to bother us, but when I was on my mission, I was deeply disturbed that Alma the Younger's son Corianton was called back to the ministry after spending some alone time with the harlot Jezebel.

Hey, that was going to be my next example!

I like to use the story of Paul the apostle also.

I think the whole process of repentance has everything to do with changing our hearts and transforming our desires and inclinations. There is a lot of value in undergoing some godly sorrow. I don't think it has anything at all to do with earning God's forgiveness. I think the second we sincerely turn to God, God accepts us.