The Gerontocracy are sick and tired of bad press from legal matters that involve their members because the Lord's only true church must be seen as pure as the driven snow.
I laughed at the usual smoke screen of first claiming this is to protect victims and their families, cuz, uh the church leaders really really care.
This is followed of course by what they are really concerned with:
"Following the church's policy also keeps the church from being inappropriately implicated in legal matters."
It's all about the cracked facade those mean old hands are barely keeping up. If the first counselor was inappropriate with your daughter they DO NOT WANT it making the papers. And their legal department will make sure the daughter gets the blame as a bonus.
I was going to say I'm not surprised, but I am. They stoop to new lows all the time. I still think the children of gays was worse than this, but this is LOW.
I've been watching Epstein and then a story about Audrie and Daisy on netflix (true story). Daisy just committed suicide recently. Audrie committed suicide while still in high school. I was thinking maybe the church did some good in teaching kids to not abuse others sexually???? (These 2 girls were molested/raped while drunk by a group of boys.) (It is of interest to me that it is where my aunt--the temple e-mail one--lived for a while, Maryville, Missouri).
Anyway--I was thinking that maybe if they had been taught like we were. Whoops! Wait a minute. At age 12, a 40 some year old man asked me if I masturbated and if I necked and petted. And the list goes on and on. They set us up and then say "talk to our lawyers, we'll take care of you."
Google "mormon sex letter 1982" and you'll find plenty of links to it
tumwater Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > O/T a little, but that letter reminded me of the > one sent out regarding oral sex years ago. > > I've gone looking for it but can't find it, > thought I had kept a copy. > > Anyone have a link to that letter?
The reason I think this policy is so bad is that the church leaders do involve themselves in these same matters which does create moral precedence, regardless of whether or not they want to be involved in the official legal proceedings. The higher-up church leaders in Salt Lake, train these lower-level church leaders (the Bishops and Stake Presidents) about how they should respond to given situations. Amidst all of this, they do not advocate simply going in to meet with prosecutors to tell the truth or testifying in court to the actual truth of the matter at hand. They meddle. Their meddling causes both legal injustices and moral injustices that harm the innocent and that publicly diminish the significance of the crime or dishonest act.
My advice to anyone either in the church or out of the church is to ignore any church policies or advice or personal appeals from church leaders and start issuing subpoenas to church leaders right away, where appropriate. Even if you know the church leader will claim ecclesiastical privileges and that they are likely to be granted those privileges, subpoena them anyway. Let them sit waiting for their turn to testify or to claim ecclesiastical privilege, while watching their church member lieing on the stand under oath while they themselves may know the actual truth, along with seeing the other evidence presented. Both the church leader and all members involved may see openly who lied and that everyone else present knows the truth of both what they have done and in what lies they've told under oath (hand on the bible) to escape being responsible for their actions. If you are in the right and even if you lose in court, the sociopath that committed the crime or civil offense will probably not be trusted by anyone else in the future. If the church and its leaders get dragged through the mud often enough and hard enough, maybe they'll just start telling their ward members to "do what is right, let the consequence follow", instead of attempting to protect them from the results of their own illegal or dishonest actions. If not, eventually the church itself will lose credibility in the world as being any kind of ethical organization. If the church doesn't like this heat, they need to stay out of the kitchen. They need to start asking the right temple-recommend questions and paying attention to what is really going-on with the members instead of just trying to grow the church and keep the tithing rolling in.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/08/2020 05:34PM by azsteve.
When the mormon church has to play the higher law card, they have made the final transition to become the Catholic Church.
This is as bad as telling missionaries God will protect them if they are just sharing the gospel and they get killed by a hit and run - then asking the family to not sue the church as it will forever damn their chances of reuniting with loved ones.
I was involved in a lawsuit where the other party (my ex spouse) brought his bishop to court to testify on his behalf.
A year or so later, and after my ex had gone to jail for battery (on another spouse), I ran into that bishop and his wife while shopping. He said, "We wish you had won that case."
The most plain reading of this letter applies its stricture to members of the ward or stake of any particular leader.
As church leaders are meant to be fair and impartial to all under their stewardship, it is best for them to stay the hell out of the legal lives of the members of their flock.
It's too bad they cannot extend this doctrine by removing the word "legal" from the preceding sentence.
Church makes dumb policy and obedient sheep members follow it to a tee: It is not proper for priesthood holders to be alone while in the company of the opposite sex, especially a married woman. This applies to both indoor and outdoor venues.
(This story is about 6 years old when the church had a Home teaching program/mandate).
My Mom was in her mid-seventies as a widow. Her HT was a high priest in his late 60's. He had been my families HT for almost 10 years and was considered a friend of the family. He always brought his wife until the stake made a big deal then he only came over with a 14 year old aaronic priesthood holder.
So my Mom was in need of firewood for the winter. Her HT had a tree that had been cut-up on his property. The OBVIOUS solution would have been for the HT to deliver the wood to my Mom. However, he stated that he could not deliver it because it would violate church policy~ I have no idea why the HT's wife could not have accompanied him to deliver the wood.
However, he says that my Mom can drive her vehicle to his property (while his wife is there) and then my Mom can drive back and unload it herself. So this was the plan.
Mom drives her vehicle over and he directs her where to back up. She sees that it is not safe to back down a hill and gets out of her vehicle. She points to a stump of a previously cut tree and tells Brother High Priest that her car will slide right into the stump. He disagrees and my Mom refuses. So Brother HP jumps in and begins to back up her car.
-You guessed it! He crashed my Mom's car into the stump. The door is damaged and no longer opens.
Brother HP admits that he made a mistake and agrees to make amends for the damage.
No wood was collected and my Mom drives home in a damaged vehicle.
Two days later Brother HP calls and begins to "negotiate" repairs. He wants to pay only 50% because my Mom goaded him to get 500 dollars worth of firewood. Moreover, he insists that he knows a backyard mechanic that will fix it on the cheap.
My Mom refused and told him that she would be reporting it through her insurance. She also explained that she wanted a competent repair shop (of her choice) to fix her vehicle. She also tells him over the phone that she has a $500 deductible.
****Church meddling***
The following Sunday, the bishop informs her that she will be without a HT because she has sought legal action against a priesthood holder (the HT). She was also informed that the stake would be meeting to discuss whether she would have to attend a different ward while the civil-dispute is "ongoing".
The HT decided to seek permission to attend a different ward and it was granted! Yes, he reluctantly paid my Mom's deductible (and two day rental)and her vehicle was professionally repaired through her insurance.
He has since returned to my Mom's ward, but he won't speak to my Mom.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/12/2020 10:42PM by messygoop.