If the reports of three different people are to be believed, Elder Erich Kopischke ended the "Swedish Rescue" meeting by admonishing those who attended not to share anything of the meeting or of their own doubts and issues with any other church members. This may or may not have been accompanied by the suggestion that sharing such information could result in church discipline.

If true, this is less than admirable behavior, to say the least, but then I wasn't there, so I don't know exactly what happened. I have assumed the basic gist of the story is true because it has happened to me and to a lot of other people I know.

In my case, I have spoken to 3 bishops and one stake president about my issues with the church. 3 of the 4 told me in no uncertain terms that I was not to share my issues and doubts with anyone else in the church. 2 of them told me that failure to keep things to myself could result in church discipline.

In discussing the Swedish episode with believing Mormons, I've been told that I'm just imposing my bad-faith interpretation on something I know nothing about. That's always possible, but I see it more as a church leader acting in a way that isn't uncommon.

A good analogy is microwave popcorn. No matter how I adjust the microwave settings, there are always unpopped kernels left over in the bottom of the bag. If I reach into the bag and get an unpopped kernel, it's not because I wanted to point out that the particular brand is no good. Similarly, if some church leaders react badly to members' doubts, reporting and expressing disappointment does not represent a bad-faith attack.

But maybe my experience isn't all that common. So, I'm asking if you've had the same experience I did when you expressed your doubts or issues to a church leader. Were you told to keep quiet? Were you told to expect church discipline if you didn't keep quiet?

A close friend of mine was excommunicated precisely because she didn't keep her issues and doubts to herself. The ground of her excommunication was 'apostasy', even though she never did anything that actually fit the Church Handbook's definition of 'apostasy'. She did, however, commit the unforgivable sin of daring to mention to another ward member that they should investigate the issue and make up their own mind. (That, and her bishop and stake president both had personal grudges against her.)

This has been a long term issue I have had. I have thought many times to start a thread on responses that should be given to SPs and bishopricks when they say this. They seem to look at this as the owners of a cattle herd and they have identified someone with brucellosis so you are not allowed to intermingle or cough in the herd because you will ruin our cash in when you go to the slaughterhouse.

More needs to be made of this to ensure people aren't polite about this.

FWIW--a TBMish account of the Swedish Rescue and the Givens/Bushman clean-up in Europe: http://www.withoutend.org/mormon-doubt-part-2-approaches-reaching/#more-2832

"re-contextualizing" that an interesting word.

Pretty sure he is telling the doubter to:
Re-contextualize his faith issues so that his faith isn't dependent on getting answers from the Church regarding its history and past doctrines. (Because you're not getting any.)

Context = its true it just has to be.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/05/2013 09:21PM by crom.

I was very explicedly told to shut up and not to discuss my doubts and the supporting evidence with anyone; and if I did, I would face church discipline.

Also, after I left activity with the LDS Church, the stake presidency visited the homes of my friends to ask what if any information I had shared with them; and to encourage them to stay away from me.

I have never been visited by any Mormon, in any church-related capacity, or missionary since leaving the LDS Church.

I have published extensively, never formally resigned, and never been excommunicated.

Oh, and they have my home address, phone number and email address.

They don't bother you, because you scare the crap out of them.
Good job.

Thanks Mia. You are always so kind to me and have quite a way with words.

Tom

I think you have been handled differently. I know that the LDS Church has been very quiet and accomodating about how other top level leaders have left. I suspect the Swede 70 has not been excommunicated and that the church will take a different approach with him that the other Swedes who aren't quite so public.

I know that Twede was threatened until his case became very visible.

Anointedone, I would assume they want no part of you as you have more knowledge of the finances and business practices of their empire than probably any other 'apostate' outside of the bubble and that scares the hell out of them. My view is that they are far more concerned about financial info leaks than they are about truthfulness of history or doctrine.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/05/2013 06:16PM by sanitationengineer.

I need to thank you for outing the fact that the second anointing thing is still going on, for reminding us that it was and still IS a part of the LDS INC. MORmON cult religion. Thanks.

First question out of the SP's mouth after I had my last talk with them. "What have you told your kids?" I replied "What I have told my kids is none of your business. My youngest daughter is old enough to vote for the POTUS and can be treated like an adult."

I got censorship from the Bishop, HP leader, SP and SP counselor and from the HP group leader and the SP counselor in my home afterwards.

Screw censorship!

That's the point where the shit HITS the fan. No ONE will tell me what I can discuss with my family... ESPECIALLY my children.

From reading RFM for several years now, bishops and stake presidents asking/warning doubting members not to "discuss" or "share" the information which made them doubt sounds like standard procedure. They don't want them to infect the rest of the believers with the truth.

I don't know if its actually spelled out in some handbook or training but it seems like most of them do it.

Bishop Jackwagon made some, now forgotten, threat to me about keeping my mouth shut. I must have given him a hell of a dirty look because he immediately amended it to say I could tell my family anything I wanted, because it was my family and clarify he was talking about those outside my family. I'd better not say anything to THEM! Both he and the First Minion told my husband, in two separate interviews, that he could "keep me and try to get me back to church, as long as I wasn't teaching against the church or trying to de-activate anyone else." The implication being that if I didn't shut up, the "or else" was that he should throw me away like garbage or he would be in the same trouble with the church I was in.

DH decided to keep me and throw the church away. Part of him still believes but the longer he doesn't attend, the less he believes in it.

But this thread gave me an idea of something to say if certain people ask why you leave. You know the type - those who just want to know your doubts so they can tell you why you are wrong and when you outsmart them, they dump you like dirt. Maybe the answer to people you know are going to pull that stunt is "I don't want to talk about it - the bishop said if I let other people know what I know, they'd come after me. So I assumed my doubts must be right and undeniable, because otherwise, why would they try so hard to shut me up. What I know must be damning to Mormonism. But I can't share it with you because they threatened me - I know you'll understand..."

Bwahahaha!

That's a great way to turn it around them CA girl. I bet it would REALLY make some TBM's scratch their heads. And I bet they would be DYING to know what you know and it really makes the Morg look like they are hiding dirty little secrets.

I love "or else" threats...'cause I want to see what the jerk(s) will do next after I call them on it.

Ron Burr

So they are NOT hiding the history, and it is up to the members to educate themselves about the history. Members who don't know the history are "lazy" according to the apologists.

But DON'T pass on your findings about the history to anyone else.

yep, got the cognitive dissonance going full throttle. If you dare to research history, find truth and act on the truth, then you are not listening to the still, small voice of the "Spirit" and are being influenced by Satan.

My husband was having huge doubts about history. I went with him to talk to the bishop and he suggested two people for him to talk to. (One is a long story for another day). The other was a guy in the ward who knew a lot about church history. Well fast forward to several meetings with the bishop later and he acted very different. He told my husband that he should not talk to anyone about it. As he said it, he tried to sound like he was being lighthearted and joking and kind of gave him a pat on the back. The way that guys do when they shake hands. But I remember feeling really bad about it. I felt like the pat was ... "Or else". And I knew him well, we were friends. So this was different for him to act this way. I know for sure he talked to the stake president. I'm not sure if the SP is the one who told him to tell us, or if someone else gave him that idea, but he sure didn't act that way the first time we spoke to him.

I wasn't so blatantly threatened.

However, a GA did say to me "Tom, it's not worth losing your family over". At the time, I thought how ridiculous. I could not possibly lose my family just by telling the truth.

I assumed he was giving me advice. Now I realise it was a threat. I did not believe, at the time, they had the power to take my family off me. Now I have learned, as many others on this board, they can and they do.

Cult, run by lying hypocrites.

I wasn't just threatened with "church discipline", I was told at my "Love Council" that they would excommunicate me if I so much as spoke with any family member about my beliefs. And I then complied (except for my DW) until the SP got the result of my appeal to the FP. Then, all hell broke loose and they tried to re-try me, especially because I had told one person, my wife. In the meantime, they had acted to hold my family against me. My SIL in a nearby bishopric said it could not have happened as I say. But what I wrote in "Before the Sanhedrin" is the truth.