Date: February 27, 2023 06:46AM
On behalf of myself and concerned members of the church globally, we find
ourselves at a loss of how to reconcile the contradiction between being asked
to account for our own honesty and integrity in Temple Recommend
interviews, and having to sustain brethren who are seemingly unaccountable
in matters of being honest in their dealings and finances. Common Consent is
being ignored, and yet the Scriptures and Church Handbook are very clear on
just how this matter can be dealt with.
I understand the likely response to this email will be an insistence that the
First Presidency are blameless and the fault lies with myself. However, if this
is the case, please counsel me as my priesthood leaders as to why this is so, in
spite of the clear case for Church Discipline against those involved in the
intentionally misleading investment behaviour which has violated and
betrayed the sacred trust of church members, as outlined below.
On 21st February 2023 it became public and global knowledge, that Ensign
Peak Advisors, Inc, created multiple Limited Liability Companies (LLCs)
over 15 years, with the approval of the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter-day Saints. The creation and operation of these LLCs caused
the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to institute cease-and-desist
proceedings pursuant to Section 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
against Ensign Peak Advisors, Inc., and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-
The Order states:
“8. To prevent disclosure of the securities portfolio managed by Ensign Peak, the
Church approved Ensign Peak’s plan of using other entities, instead of Ensign Peak,
to file Forms 13F. The Church was concerned that disclosure of the assets in the name
of Ensign Peak, a known Church affiliate, would lead to negative consequences in
light of the size of the Church’s portfolio. Ensign Peak did not have the authority
to implement this approach without the approval of the Church’s First
According to the report, in 2001, December 2005, 2011, and November 2015,
there were separate instances of senior church leadership approval of the
creation of additional LLCs. This implicates the First Presidencies at each of
2001 & 2005:
Gordon B. Hinckley (Deceased)
Thomas S. Monson (Deceased)
James E. Faust (Deceased)
2011 & 2015:
Thomas S. Monson (Deceased)
Henry B. Eyring
Dieter F. Uchtdorf
“31. Throughout its history, at least once each year, Ensign Peak’s Managing
Director met with the senior leadership of the Church to discuss Ensign Peak’s
activities, including at times the LLC Structure. Unanimous approval from the
senior leadership of the Church was required before Ensign Peak could deviate from
the LLC Structure and file Forms 13F in Ensign Peak’s own name.”
This potentially implicates the current First Presidency, who allowed this
behaviour to continue:
Russell M. Nelson
Dallin H. Oaks
Henry B. Eyring
Also implicated due to his historic position as Presiding Bishop is Gary E.
Please now consider the following sections of the Church Handbook of
The Church Handbook of Instructions 32.0 states:
“The First Presidency defines the policies and processes for repenting of serious sin.”
But what is to be done when that First Presidency is involved in serious sin?
Serious sin is defined by the Church’s Handbook as:
Severity of the Sin and Church Policy
Serious sins are a deliberate and major offense against the laws of God. Categories of
serious sins are listed below.
• Violent acts and abuse (see 188.8.131.52 and 184.108.40.206)
• Sexual immorality (see 220.127.116.11 and 18.104.22.168)
• Fraudulent acts (see 22.214.171.124 and 126.96.36.199)
• Violations of trust (see 188.8.131.52 and 184.108.40.206)
• Some other acts (see 220.127.116.11 and 18.104.22.168)
When a Membership Council Is Required
The bishop or stake president must hold a membership council when information
indicates that a member may have committed any of the sins described in this section.
For these sins, a council is required regardless of a member’s level of spiritual
maturity and gospel understanding.
Sins That Require Holding a Membership Council
• Sexual assault conviction
• Child or youth abuse
• Abuse of a spouse or another adult (as outlined in 22.214.171.124)
• Predatory behavior (violent, sexual, or financial)
• Child pornography (as outlined in 38.6.6)
• Plural marriage
• Serious sin while holding a prominent Church position
• Most felony convictions
Fraudulent Acts Financial Predatory Behavior. A membership council is required if
an adult has a history of deliberately and repeatedly harming people financially and is
a threat to others (see 126.96.36.199). This includes investment fraud and similar
A membership council is required if a member commits a serious sin while holding a
prominent position. These include a General Authority, General Church Officer,
Area Seventy, temple president or matron, mission president or his companion, stake
president, patriarch, or bishop.
Protect the Integrity of the Church
The third purpose is to protect the integrity of the Church. Restricting or
withdrawing a person’s Church membership may be necessary if his or her conduct
significantly harms the Church (see Alma 39:11). The integrity of the Church is
not protected by concealing or minimizing serious sins—but by addressing
The above named brethren have undermined the integrity of the church by
their authorisation of deliberately misleading investment behaviour, which is
now internationally known. In addition, they have clearly committed
“serious sin while holding a prominent church position”, by the handbook's
own definition of serious sin.
The Book of Doctrine and Covenants, Section 107 teaches us:
25 The Seventy are also called to preach the gospel, and to be especial witnesses unto
the Gentiles and in all the world—thus differing from other officers in the church in
the duties of their calling.
26 And they form a quorum, equal in authority to that of the Twelve special witnesses
or Apostles just named.
36 The standing high councils, at the stakes of Zion, form a quorum equal in
authority in the affairs of the church, in all their decisions, to the quorum of the
presidency, or to the traveling high council.
82 And inasmuch as a President of the High Priesthood shall transgress, he shall be
had in remembrance before the common council of the church, who shall be assisted
by twelve counselors of the High Priesthood;
83 And their decision upon his head shall be an end of controversy concerning him.
84 Thus, none shall be exempted from the justice and the laws of God, that all things
may be done in order and in solemnity before him, according to truth and
Stake High Councils are equal in authority to the Quorum of the Twelve
and First Presidency. D&C 107 authorises Stake High Councils and Bishops
to take action and initiate Church Disciplinary Procedures.
I am therefore calling for Church Discipline against the First Presidency of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Unfortunately given the span of
the financial behaviour that was subject to the SEC order, it must also be
called for against Dieter F. Uchtdorf given his position in the First Presidency
from 2008 - 2018. I also call for church discipline against the Presiding
Bishopric, Roger Clarke as Managing Director of Ensign Peak, and any others
who have taken part in publicly embarrassing this church and undermining
its integrity through this financial behaviour. They have betrayed the sacred
trust of tithe paying members who trusted them to handle their offerings
with uprightness and propriety.
Joseph Smith himself submitted to church disciplinary councils. Are the
current senior leadership of the church less accountable than Joseph Smith?
A Council must be called to address the financial behaviour of the
aforementioned senior church leaders and any others involved. None are
exempt from the Justice and Laws of God.
Warm Regards in anticipation of your response,"