...Has a, or have any, modern era (these Latter-days...) apostles been successfully bribed?

Has a mormon apostle exchanged a word or deed or failed to act because he or she (I crack myself up!!!) received something in exchange for the action or inaction?

For example, has an apostle ever "sold" a 2nd Annoying?  Or has an appropriate official okayed a temple marriage (i.e., a TR) for someone they knew didn't merit it in exchange for "consideration"?

And what about church officials exercising personal pique by denying something the rules say they should have allowed just because of a personal vendetta? 

Of course, lying for the lord is a real thing...  "The Spirit informed me that lying under oath was the right thing to do on behalf of Sister Smith-Young; otherwise her exmo ex-husband might have gotten joint custody!!  The horror!!"

But a church official lying, or withholding information because he or she (hahaha!) personally benefitted...   Has anyone experienced this or heard rumors of it?

Sometimes--more often that one would expect--there is, hidden in your jocularity, a nugget of gold. In this case it lies in the phrase "personal vendetta."

Who among us has not seen a Mormon leader--a seminary teacher, a scout leader, (this one's your favorite) a Laurel instructor, a branch president or a bishop, a stake president or a mission president--who has ruined the life of someone whom he or she (I crack myself up!!!) does not like?

Did not a bishop in the Wild West have a young man castrated over a woman? Was it not a personal vendetta that Boyd Packer enacted against Michael Quinn? What about the September Six? There were many scholars who were saying the things those people did; Martha Nibley Beck was one. The truth is that the Six were selected intentionally and personally to frighten the academic herd. Do any of us labor under the illusion that the rest of the quorum would ever stop an apostle from ruining the life of someone he hated?

I've seen vendettas by church leaders on my mission and in more than one ward. And why not? We were taught, after all, that a church leader's heartfelt judgments of others are divinely inspired. So it would be malpractice for a leader not to exact vengeance over some slight if that is what the spirit demands.

https://www.exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1504472,1504774#msg-1504774

"Feb 3, 1890 - U.S. Supreme Court rules in DAVIS VS. BEASON that it is constitutional for Idaho to disenfranchise all Mormons. The decision is written by Justice Stephen J. Field who had previously been on the list of federal officials receiving bribes from the Church."


https://www.exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1144591,1144783#msg-1144783

"Jan 19, 1887 - John Taylor has $40,000 removed from First
Presidency’s safe to bribe influential members of Congress to
oppose Edmunds-Tucker bills and support Utah statehood."

"Feb 13, 1888 - John W. Young (Brigham's son and the Church's
representative in Washington, D.C.) telegraphs church
headquarters that he needs $15,000 "for [senators Shelby M.]
Cullom and [Ezra] Davis," bribe money to secure their
cooperation in a favorable committee report on Utah Statehood.
He adds that he needs another $10,000 "to make sure of the
majority of the committee." Although they have sent Young
bribe money before, church leaders reply that he should do
nothing until he has consulted with other brethren, including
Joseph F. Smith, who is already enroute to replace Young as
head of the Mormon lobby.

Oct 23, 1888 - Wilford Woodruff and apostles approve sending
$20,000 to bribe Democratic members of Congress to help Utah
Mormon cause."

"Dec 15, 1892 - First Presidency informs apostles that "our
success in the Church suits was in a great measure due to the
fact that we have a partner of Justice Field of the Supreme
Court of the United States in our employ, who is to receive a
percentage of the money if the suits go in our favor, and the
property is returned to us." Aside from Justice Field
(1863-97), U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Blatchford
(1882-93) has also been bribed by the church's intermediaries,
even though he is inconsistent ally."

Well !!!

Color me naive with regard to the ways of the world, on top of being already being naive with regard to the ways of women!!

Definitely a lesson you should take into your bosom.

I suspect we all understand that. If he's guilty, he should be hit very, very hard.

Does he still have the gold bars or did an angel take them to heaven?

Nice.

There’s always bad eggs in the bunch. Judas took a bribe.

Why does the church have a second anointing for high ranking members? To make them feel part of a special group and to make lying or doing anything else for the good of the organization ok. Such an insider license to sin opens the door to corruption. I have my calling and election made sure, I’m above judgement.

Don’t think this doesn’t go to some heads. Apostles don’t have to play to the same rules most members do. It’s one main reason you can’t trust the church.

It's like qualified immunity. People in power need to assuage their guilt for doing evil things in support of the "greater good".

Rubicon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There’s always bad eggs in the bunch. Judas
> took a bribe.

True, and he was "Breaking the law, breaking the law."