- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I didn’t know if there had been any further developments in the Hamula case, so I decided to look online recently… what I saw was speculation, speculation, speculation… I think this is the trouble. The church was so vague about what his excommunication was for that the public has been trying to fill in the gaps. And a lot of the speculation is pretty prurient to say the least.
Is this another situation the church has just plain mishandled? Short of Mr Hamula himself making a statement – which he hasn’t – it has actually resulted in a form of character assassination. While it is possible he is guilty of one or more of the supposed deeds that I’ve read about on various forums, it is unlikely he ever did most of what he is being accused of, which ranges from the mild to the practically unforgivable.
[Admin Note}: Rather than open another thread about this topic, I am going to paste Sam’s comment into a comment on the original thread and bump it up for anyone who wants to discuss it. [Admin update: I think the thread was locked just to keep topics organized and not repeating.(See other thread here:
James Hamula, First Quorum of the Seventy, ExcommunicatedIt is good to have the two threads linked for background for those who want to follow…but sounds like SamB has a new discussion around this topic to have it’s own thread and discussion.]
Sam…whatcha got? There seems to be lots of speculation around this…not sure what new details there are.
Is your question more around whether it is worse to say nothing and keep confidential than it is to say something so people don’t speculate?
Does the church have a responsibility of keeping gossipers from doing their thang?
Interesting that this has remained quiet. In a world of wikileaks and Mormon leaks it would seem like it would only be a matter of time. It is probably important to both Bro. Hamula and the church that his case not be used as a tool to discredit the church.
I agree, secrets hurt. Oftentimes, they hurt more than the truth. In reality, what’s the worst it could be? Here’s what we know:
-A disciplinary council convicted him. Meaning chances are he either confessed, or the evidence was strongly against him.
-He’s not in prison (that I know of), which rules out sexual assault or pedophilia, which undoubtably WOULD surface and ruin the Church.
-The Church explicitly stated that he was not excommunicated for apostasy or disillusionment.
It would have to be something bad enough to embarass the Church, but not bad enough for the Church to throw him under the bus. My guess, it was either adultry or low-level embezzlement. Both are an embarassment to the Church, and could be easily hushed, but neither puts the Church at legal risk if it was to go public. Still, the imagination paints a far worse picture. I hope we get closure on the situation, for Hamula’s sake.
What I am most surprised at is that no family member or other in the know has said anything. That seems to be the way this things usually play out. What interested me is that – in the eyes of the world – they discounted what would be one of the mildest things, i.e. apostasy. Church members might not like it, but non-members would have been okay with it and would have concentrated on that instead. From the vantage of a few months down the line, they’ve essentially opened him up to all kinds of financial and sexual speculation – most, if not all of which, he wouldn’t have been involved in. It’s actually resulted in a kind of character assassination. If they had left out the “not apostasy” clause, I doubt most of this speculation would happen.
The whole thing strikes me as being as inept as the gay parent announcement. Except that after a while they haven’t released any retractions or clarifications, because this really falls on one person. And it must still hurt him.
If this is all to make one person repent – they’ve actually done more permament damage to him than he could have done to them. I’ve no idea if he’s been rebaptized, but any kind of readmission to Mormon society will be difficult.
Quote:If this is all to make one person repent – they’ve actually done more permament damage to him than he could have done to them. I’ve no idea if he’s been rebaptized, but any kind of readmission to Mormon society will be difficult.
I don’t know. I get the possibility but I look back at excommunications I have watched. Some were very big in their area. My uncle being one of them. And time mellows things.
As a body of people we are weird. We can be mean on some fronts and chill on others. My Uncle’s was massive for our area. Maybe not as big as the September Six. But in our area it was. My aunt moved with the kids. Raised them as a single parent. My Uncle went dormant. My dad met up with him a few times. A dozen or more years passed. One night I am hanging with a new step cousin. My Uncle returned to the fold. Was sealed to someone new. Half the ward and Stake had moved on. Very few people knew his story or even cared about it.
In a weird way he got the better end of the deal than my Aunt did.
The Hamula’s maybe the same way.
I think it depends who they are. I know one guy who’s been ex’d and rebap’d this year. I wouldn’t have known – he’s a low key member. I imagine your uncle was a big bod in your stake or area, but GAs are a lot higher profile. Your uncle fortunately didn’t get international press coverage.
I dare say the memory of this event is fading. But those who take an interest in Mormonism, either as members, exmembers or unhealthily for other reasons, will remember Hamula and continue to speculate. I think there have only been two high level ex’s in my lifetime. The other is Lee’s, a sad and sorry story if ever there was one, but I suspect Hamula has not done anything on the same level as Lee did.
The fact that there has not been any further news about this is good. Elder Hamula was a General Authority and it was dealt with well, I think. It is part of the responsibility when you accept a calling that is so public and in a position of authority. Give the man space to work out what he will. richalger wrote:
The fact that there has not been any further news about this is good. Elder Hamula was a General Authority and it was dealt with well, I think. It is part of the responsibility when you accept a calling that is so public and in a position of authority. Give the man space to work out what he will.
He hasn’t been given space though has he?
The church has said “not apostasy”, which means the church’s enemies (and some members) have been coming up with all kinds of suggestions, including every type of sexual misdemeanor and criminal activity with the exception of murder! I looked to see if there were any further developments, and most of what I saw fell into this category.
If they had *not* excepted apostasy, such people would have concentrated on speculation about that instead of all these things.
Short of the poor man making a personal public statement, he is being condemned for crimes he didn’t commit. Including pedophilia – and for the record I do *not* think he ever did such a thing. But there are those out there trying to say that he has and this is what the “not apostasy” statement has resulted in. Nobody is accusing him of murder, thankfully, but given some of the other wild ideas circulating about him, it is amazing they aren’t.
The irony is that I suspect he may have done something quite mild in the eyes of the world, but the church has done irreparable damage to him.
Quote:If they had left out the “not apostasy” clause, I doubt most of this speculation would happen.
Fwiw, I am 100% convinced it would have happened no matter what (that literally anything being said now would have been said no matter what). I’ve read enough in the ex-Mormon and anti-Mormon world over the years to be sure of that. Also, I still am convinced he wanted to make sure nobody thought he was an apostate. You don’t excommunicate a highly-visible GA for no reason or for something minor, and speculation will be rampant any time it happens. All the statement about it not being for apostacy did was remove one of the things about which people are gossipping – and people who won’t believe anything the Church says still will gossip about it. The statement primarily was for him, his family, and the active church membership, I believe, not for people who are prone to speculate regardless of what is or isn’t said.
Quote:Give the man space to work out what he will.
Good reminder Rich. The sin of speculation maybe worse the error/choice he made.
It’s kind of like that judge not comment.
Quote:If they had left out the “not apostasy” clause, I doubt most of this speculation would happen.
I have always suspected they said that so the post Mo and other communities wouldn’t try to run podcasts and the rest on it. The line closed the door on that activity.
They can speculate all they want, but they can’t create a narrative around apostasy.
I had totally forgotten about it till we started this. I know many former members get riled up when the idea of “they can leave, but they can’t leave it alone” comes up. It’s stuff like this that proves the point. If you’re done. Be done. Go find a productive hobby. Learn a new skill. Create something beautiful.
As Pumba would say, “Ya gotta leave your past in the behind.”
mom3 wrote:
Quote:Give the man space to work out what he will.
Good reminder Rich. The sin of speculation maybe worse the error/choice he made.
It’s kind of like that judge not comment.
That was my original point! The church has set it up in such a way that people WILL speculate (and have done so) in the worst possible ways.
They’ve done him no favors. There is almost no way he has done some of the things he is being accused of. God knows how this has affected his mental wellbeing and social standing. The poor man will have to deal with this for years.
No one’s “judging” here.
I don’t think this is necessarily deliberate on the church’s part, just clumsy.
- The topic ‘Hamula revisited’ is closed to new replies.