- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Someone, who is a favorite in-law of one of my relatives, had served in the past as a bishop and on HC. He has always been very active. Recently, he posted something on FB about having read lots of historical accounts and no longer believing the entire JS story .. But still seeing the church as true and righteous and an organization that was worthy of his love and support. We just found out that he was excommunicated over that FB post.
I am stunned.
For my own sense of sanity, I need to believe that there must be more to the story. I need to believe that what you have reported is not enough to get one excommunicated (especially since as a male the excommunication would need to go through at the stake level…rogue bishops maybe, but an entire rogue stake???).
Please keep us informed if you learn any additional details.
I also need more information. If that is the entire story, I believe the leaders who excommunicated him will have to answer for it.
My heart goes out to him and his family. Excommunication is an act of violence because it promises to apart marriages and eternal families. It has a place but in my experience is usually counterproductive. This concerns and scares me.
Roy wrote:Please keep us informed if you learn any additional details.
Yes, please. I want to assume there’s more to it, but maybe not.
The LDS Church does not obey the US Constitution, specifically, a freedom of speech. I suppose it is perfectly OK not to obey, if there is a religious conflict.
Christ did not excommunicate anyone. It must be a LDS culture.
LDS church is creating its own enemy like this; it is choking own neck; and it is digging its own grave hole.
I believe this continues. Sigh……
Funny thing .. My relative follows this guy on Reddit. He doesn’t know that. He has been posting a blow by blow account of his FB post and all the resultant fall out. All leading to his recent DC and excommunication for Apostasy. His Area 70 had asked him to retract the FB post. He refused.
There is nothing else going on in his life. He is a REALLY good guy.
My take .. We can think whatever we want, just don’t open your mouth or pick up a pen.
Incident like this will lead more people to go against the church and makes my missionary son’s life even harder. He has been working so hard in a barren field which makes me want to cry……Sob.
Not only I feel the pain of this bishop but also the suffering of all the missionaries throughout the world, especially in the industrialized countries where my son is.
Just a question: Has anyone been excommunicated for posting on StayLDS.com? Is posting on a web site open apostasy or rebellion against the church?
Just curious.
amateurparent wrote:Funny thing .. My relative follows this guy on Reddit. He doesn’t know that. He has been posting a blow by blow account of his FB post and all the resultant fall out. All leading to his recent DC and excommunication for Apostasy.
His Area 70 had asked him to retract the FB post. He refused.
There is nothing else going on in his life. He is a REALLY good guy.
My take .. We can think whatever we want, just don’t open your mouth or pick up a pen.
I am not going to rush off quickly and do something, but I am moving more towards – if that is the way they are going to be – fine. As in I will say what I need to and if they can’t take it, then the decision becomes more clear to me.
But there is still a big part of me struggling if I even want to “StayLDS”. I am not itching to resign by any imagination – mostly as I don’t want to hurt my spouse / kids/ parents / in-laws / etc.
LH: I don’t think STAYLDS is a problem .. It is its own island that you don’t get to unless you are looking for it.
FB includes so many people from ones very diverse social circles. It is just so PUBLIC.
The guy wrote on Reddit that his Bishop wasn’t the problem. The SP had someone bring it to his attention. SP asked A70 for advice, and order went down from A70 to the bishop on what needed to be done.
amateurparent wrote:LH:
I don’t think STAYLDS is a problem .. It is its own island that you don’t get to unless you are looking for it.
FB includes so many people from ones very diverse social circles. It is just so PUBLIC.
The guy wrote on Reddit that his Bishop wasn’t the problem. The SP had someone bring it to his attention. SP asked A70 for advice, and order went down from A70 to the bishop on what needed to be done.
You said he was on the HC and had been a bishop. I wonder if that added to the (rash) decision. There was an assumption that someone that committed would obey something from the A70 and that would somewhat quietly put it to rest.Not trying to rationalize it away, but just understanding it a bit.
I’ve followed his story a bit. I think there must be more to the story. He’s dropped a few things here and there that hint at that. It seems he has a bit of an antagonistic relationship towards his stake prez, and that is what it sounds like the primary issue is, not really the fb post. I could be wrong, but that’s my observation. He had been on the HC in the past and had been a bishop in the past. He moved a couple years ago, don’t know what his involvement had been at his new location. He is an in-law relative on one of my relatives .. Someone I’ve just met in passing at family events.
Quote:The LDS Church does not obey the US Constitution, specifically, a freedom of speech.
While I agree that the Church can do a better job of allowing honest and non-confrontational questioning, I do just want to add a note of clarification regarding the meaning and scope of “free speech”, because it is important to understand in our world where we all speak up so quickly and have an unlimited forum to do so. No (non-government) organization, like a church, club, paper, or website is bound by the US Constitution’s protections of free speech. FS is a right American’s have against their own government. The government cannot send you to the gulag, make you disappear, or publicly execute you because of what you say. Like it or not, those protections don’t extend to private enterprises (at least not in the same way). I’ll give you a quick example. If you ever walked along the Strip in Las Vegas, you’ll be handed cards with semi-porn pictures on them inviting you to call for an “escort”. For most people, their first time in Vegas, they take the card, thinking maybe it’s a discount at a local buffet, only to realize it’s something much different. After that, (most) people just ignore the folks handing these out. If you have been to Las Vegas, you know what I’m talking about. But if you spend much time there, you also quickly notice a distinction. When you are on a public sidewalk, you practically have to dodge these handouts… there are so many. But when you are on the walkways that connect the casinos, those same handouts are (blissfully) missing. The difference is that on the public sidewalk, those businesses have the right to free speech. On the private casino-owned walkway, they do not. In this particular case, I’m glad that “free speech” doesn’t force casinos to allow these handouts on their private property.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.