Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

This is for encouragement, ideas, and support for people going through a faith transition no matter where you hope to end up. This is also the place to laugh, cry, and love together.
Korihor
Posts: 1239
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 10:37 am

Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by Korihor » Thu May 25, 2017 9:22 am

Well, last night things finally came to fruition. We had a meeting with our SP over our voting opposed. I'm hoping Mrs Misbehaved will chime in here as well and share her thoughts on the matter.

I'll have to break this into segments, mostly because I don't feel I can write a marathon post in one sitting.
Back ground info: Mrs Misbehaved Woman and I voted opposed recently in our Ward Conference in March and our Stake Conference in April. About 2 weeks after Stake Conference, they finally reached out to us to schedule a meeting. The first date was impossible as they wanted to do it on our anniversary [Hell no]. Then they reach out again with another date that was impossible for us. I replied with options for 8 different days and they finally picked a mutually available date - which was last night.

We think the Stake Clerk was a bit flumoxed because we said "No, that date doesn't work for us", but maybe we're looking into it too much.

So last night was the big day. I printed a color copy of the CES Letter and had it spiral bound with covers at FedEx Kinkos to take with me and gift to the SP. I also printed a copy of Sam Young's letter to his SP for his reasons of voting opposed.

I didn't wear garments, but I did wear slacks, a white shirt and tie. Mrs Misbehaved wore a nice casual dress. We fit the LDS look perfectly.

The kids were with us, but we got brought the Ipad and the stake clerk was kind enough to keep an eye on them in hallway as they watched video on the iPad. That worked out well.

We arrived, got the kids settled and exchanged pleasantries and settled down with the SP for a lengthy talk. We started off with the SP asking us to briefly share our history, especially our strength to the church. Long story short, we're both true blue through and through, muli-generational LDS with about as much mormon cred as possible. I thought it was a bit interesting how the SP wanted to know our level of activity/faithfulness. Kinda like he was sizing us up. I don't blame him, but it is interesting.

.....and I gotta take a break for a bit.
Last edited by Korihor on Thu May 25, 2017 10:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reading can severely damage your ignorance.

User avatar
Linked
Posts: 1533
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 4:04 pm

Re: Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by Linked » Thu May 25, 2017 10:03 am

You can't stop there, It's just getting good!

Looking forward to the rest. I hope it wasn't too stressful for either of you.
"I would write about life. Every person would be exactly as important as any other. All facts would also be given equal weightiness. Nothing would be left out. Let others bring order to chaos. I would bring chaos to order" - Kurt Vonnegut

User avatar
azflyer
Posts: 161
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 4:10 pm

Re: Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by azflyer » Thu May 25, 2017 10:49 am

Ya! What linked said! You can't stop there. You even got me to come out of the woodwork for this.

Korihor
Posts: 1239
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 10:37 am

Re: Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by Korihor » Thu May 25, 2017 3:24 pm

Alright, a bit more.

So we give our background and our "Mormon Cred" and the SP doesn't react much. I share a brief history of my faith crisis when I moved to AZ, how I told Mrs Misbehaved a few months later, our year of trying to figure it out followed by our mutual decision to vote opposed. Again, he really was just listening.
Then Mrs Misbehaved shared her experience of having a change of view. She'll do a better job of that part of the story.

The next part of the conversation is kinda hard for me to recall precisely and how to convey it in words. We didn't get into the specifics of church history, doctrinal/policy concerns, etc. We used the Nov 15 policy and Joseph Smith Polygamy as examples but the SP understood those were just examples in a myriad of concerns.

The SP brought up the questions in the TR interview, but he really focused on this one.
#4
Do you sustain the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as the Prophet, Seer, and Revelator and as the only person on the earth who possesses and is authorized to exercise all priesthood keys?
Do you sustain members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators?
Do you sustain the other General Authorities and local authorities of the Church?
It was at this point, more or less, I feel I saw the true colors come out. Our vote opposed was in opposition to sustain the leadership and if I can't sustain them, then I can't have a TR. The SP bared his testimony how he knows they are men of god and do god's will, etc etc etc and whatever they do is right even if we don't understand it.
I tried to get my point across, but I don't know how successful I was. I told him to use the Nov 15 policy as an example. I said, "let's just pretend that policy is wrong" he retorted he felt it was right. I had to twist his arm hard to just to pretend they were wrong. Even after we spent a good amount of discussion stating they are human and can make mistakes. Somewhere in the conversation, the SP quoted the infamous "Give Joseph a break".

I think he eventually understood the idea I tried to convey, that I support the man but not the decision. But the man is in the position, we sustain the man and the position and his decisions. There is no good way to oppose a decision as I understand it. I could meet with my SP and tell him I disagree with a decision, and he would forward that to his 70 representative and then maybe the Q15. Maybe they would get together and talk about it, but I just don't feel there is any record of someone not agreeing with a decision. The whole process is obviously geared to an large umbrella of sustaining/supporting the leadership no matter what.

We went back and forth and the SP was trying to pin me down with a Yes or No - Do I sustain the Brethren?

OK - I leave now, sorry for the cliffhanger.
Reading can severely damage your ignorance.

User avatar
Mormorrisey
Posts: 1403
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 6:54 pm

Re: Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by Mormorrisey » Thu May 25, 2017 5:01 pm

And...that's the most important question anymore, isn't it? Not how you feel about Jesus, not how you feel about the gospel, but how you view the Brethren. That's all that's left. And if you don't answer it right, well, off you go. This is where it's headed, and that's pretty clear from your meeting with the SP, it seems to me. Good for you for speaking up.
"And I don't need you...or, your homespun philosophies."
"And when you try to break my spirit, it won't work, because there's nothing left to break."

Anon70
Posts: 606
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 11:56 pm

Re: Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by Anon70 » Thu May 25, 2017 8:53 pm

Mormorrisey wrote:
Thu May 25, 2017 5:01 pm
And...that's the most important question anymore, isn't it? Not how you feel about Jesus, not how you feel about the gospel, but how you view the Brethren. That's all that's left. And if you don't answer it right, well, off you go. This is where it's headed, and that's pretty clear from your meeting with the SP, it seems to me. Good for you for speaking up.
Yep

User avatar
2bizE
Posts: 2405
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 9:33 pm

Re: Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by 2bizE » Thu May 25, 2017 10:22 pm

I still disagree with your SP on sustaining the brethren. When you vote opposed, you are voting your conscience, that you do not approve of the decision. You were outvoted at GC by all the TBMs. You then chose to sustain the prophet because you were in the minority.
In a business meeting,i may argue my own opinion. Once the opinions have been heard and a decision made, it is my responsibility to now follow that decision. It is the same way in the church. Your opposing vote does not constitute failure to sustain the brethren.
One thing to note, you never voted on the November policy because it never came up for a vote. You can still oppose it and still sustain the leaders.
~2bizE

User avatar
Corsair
Posts: 3080
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:58 am
Location: Phoenix

Re: Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by Corsair » Thu May 25, 2017 11:01 pm

Mormorrisey wrote:
Thu May 25, 2017 5:01 pm
And...that's the most important question anymore, isn't it? Not how you feel about Jesus, not how you feel about the gospel, but how you view the Brethren. That's all that's left. And if you don't answer it right, well, off you go. This is where it's headed, and that's pretty clear from your meeting with the SP, it seems to me. Good for you for speaking up.
A legal institution simply cannot depend only on belief in God to keep parishioners attending regularly and holding the same doctrine inviolate. Jesus does not show up at staff meetings in any legal sense. But pointing members at some actual mortal leaders in charge largely works. To paraphrase Matthew 22:40
It is erroneous to claim that Matthew 22:40 wrote:On these two groups of men hang all the law and the prophets.
If you sustain Tom Monson as the prophet, then anything coming out his legal organization is ultimately a compelling idea no matter how good, bad, or boring it might be. If you don't believe that Tom Monson is the prophet then kindly explain why you should get to enjoy a membership card and entrance into their most sacred spaces?

Korihor
Posts: 1239
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 10:37 am

Re: Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by Korihor » Fri May 26, 2017 8:53 am

Mormorrisey wrote:
Thu May 25, 2017 5:01 pm
And...that's the most important question anymore, isn't it? Not how you feel about Jesus, not how you feel about the gospel, but how you view the Brethren. That's all that's left. And if you don't answer it right, well, off you go. This is where it's headed, and that's pretty clear from your meeting with the SP, it seems to me. Good for you for speaking up.
Right, that's exactly how we see it, but virtually impossible for a standard TBM SP to see it.
2bizE wrote:
Thu May 25, 2017 10:22 pm
I still disagree with your SP on sustaining the brethren. When you vote opposed, you are voting your conscience, that you do not approve of the decision. You were outvoted at GC by all the TBMs. You then chose to sustain the prophet because you were in the minority.
In a business meeting,i may argue my own opinion. Once the opinions have been heard and a decision made, it is my responsibility to now follow that decision. It is the same way in the church. Your opposing vote does not constitute failure to sustain the brethren.
One thing to note, you never voted on the November policy because it never came up for a vote. You can still oppose it and still sustain the leaders.
If you'd like to call my SP and explain this, I'd surely appreciate it. I even tried articulating this exact thing without much avail. Just because I oppose a decision, doesn't mean I won't respect the rule of majority or ultimate authority of the governing body. I just want my voice heard.

It seems my SP's take on this the vote is sustained them as Prophets, Seer and Revelators, and any voted opposed is a vote against them individually. Just because you oppose some of their decisions is not a valid reason to vote opposed.
Reading can severely damage your ignorance.

Korihor
Posts: 1239
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 10:37 am

Re: Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by Korihor » Fri May 26, 2017 9:20 am

Conclusion:

After many words spoken, it was coming to a head. The kids had been in the hall for an 1 1/2 hours, it was late and both sides were showing a bit of frustration.
Mrs Misbehaved didn't talk as much as I did. Partly because I was looking forward to this meeting and she wasn't and partly because I'm a typical inconsiderate male. And I have the priesthood 8-)

I told the SP I didn't want to lose my TR over this matter because I would see it as a gross abuse of power. The seem to recoil to that a little. He said this wasn't about abusing power. I said if the act of withdrawing a TR because I don't agree with decisions made is an abuse of power. That was a sticky part of the conversation.

We finally came to a line in the sand where the SP asked me the question of do I sustain the Q15 (as quoted above) and I answered "yes" and I disagree with many decisions. Without telling the SP that I was very nuanced in my "yes" - ultimately I do support them in their job and I'm not looking for them to be replaced per se, just wish they'd do a better job as I see it.

the SP then asked Mrs Misbehaved and she couldn't give a yes or no.

The Stake President was stuck. He needed a "yes" to let us keep our TR. I was giving a very terrible yes and Mrs Misbaved was 'no comment'. I honestly think he was doing the best he could. I don't blame him. He shared he noticed we voted opposed to the Q15 and all GA's but sustain him and all other local leaders. He seemed to detract as if he is far from perfect and if we are going to vote opposed to anyone, it should be him. It seemed like he was falling on his sword a little to protect the Brethren. Maybe I'm looking into it a bit too much.

After some discussion, the SP said he wasn't taking our TR's, but that we should carefully think/pray about all this. He specifically told Mrs Misbehaved that she shouldn't attend the temple for the next while since she can't answer but that he wasn't taking her TR. She responded that "wouldn't the temple be the best place for me if I have doubts? Wouldn't the most spiritual place be just what I need?"

The SP said no because she shouldn't go and make covenants that she's not sure about. He tried to play it as if he's protecting her.

As we were finishing, I gave him that nice printed/bound copy of the CES letter and Sam YOung's letter on voting opposed. I told him I knew he wouldn't see eye to eye with some of the things in those documents but I want him to understand why people like us are struggling and I know other people in the stake have been affected by these documents. I tried to put the burden on him that if he is going to lead the stake, he better know what is going on out there. He mentioned the world is getting more and more wicked and I countered the world has never been better. He mentioned Jesus is coming soon, last days, etc etc etc. and I just bit my tongue.

He had to end with the last word and give his testimony and I let him. Pick your battles. He did a good job listening to us and agreed to read what I brought. He requested we read 4 Nephi and I agreed.

I knew we would end with a prayer. As I mentioned the prayer, he said "could we kneel?" I have problems with kneeling before a "god". I don't do that anymore. I gave a brief excuse that it was hard for me from an injury and that seemed sufficient to avoid kneeling. He asked Mrs Misbehaved to offer the prayer since I had done most of the talking. I interjected and said I would like to do it because I knew she didn't.

We thanked each other for their time and departed. We stopped at McDonalds and got an ice cream for the kids since they were so good that entire time.

I told Mrs Misbehaved that I'm thinking if they take my TR, I will return it to them with my resignation letter. If I can't be a member in good standing with my views, I don't see why I should be a member at all.
Reading can severely damage your ignorance.

User avatar
Silver Girl
Posts: 375
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 6:31 am

Re: Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by Silver Girl » Fri May 26, 2017 9:29 am

Anon70 wrote:
Thu May 25, 2017 8:53 pm
Mormorrisey wrote:
Thu May 25, 2017 5:01 pm
And...that's the most important question anymore, isn't it? Not how you feel about Jesus, not how you feel about the gospel, but how you view the Brethren. That's all that's left. And if you don't answer it right, well, off you go. This is where it's headed, and that's pretty clear from your meeting with the SP, it seems to me. Good for you for speaking up.
Yep
^ THIS!!! ^

The church is all about following the leaders, not following God or Christ. There's no room for individual discernment about what is right and what is wrong. Which reveals quite a bit that might shed light on how JS got teenagers and wives of other men to "marry" him.
.
.
Silver Girl is sailing into the future. She is no longer scared.

User avatar
MerrieMiss
Posts: 580
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 9:03 pm

Re: Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by MerrieMiss » Fri May 26, 2017 9:48 am

I’m surprised he didn’t take the TRs. Perhaps I’m not remembering all of this accurately, but you did vote opposed very publicly in Stake Conference? It’s interesting that he doesn’t take your TRs as a sign to other members of the stake. I get the impression he really wants you to say “Yes” to the question, but I can only imagine what kinds of questions this is going to raise to other members of the community when it’s obvious you voted opposed but are still a member in good standing. Perhaps the fact that you have a TR isn’t broadcasted and he’s counting on that? I don’t know.
Korihor wrote:
Fri May 26, 2017 9:20 am

After some discussion, the SP said he wasn't taking our TR's, but that we should carefully think/pray about all this. He specifically told Mrs Misbehaved that she shouldn't attend the temple for the next while since she can't answer but that he wasn't taking her TR. She responded that "wouldn't the temple be the best place for me if I have doubts? Wouldn't the most spiritual place be just what I need?"

The SP said no because she shouldn't go and make covenants that she's not sure about. He tried to play it as if he's protecting her.
And I don’t understand this. It isn’t as if she is making the covenants – she’s a proxy. I don’t see how it is damning to her, unlike the sacrament which is covenant taken by the participant every week. Or, maybe telling her not to go is his way of keeping the fact she has a TR secret?

asa
Posts: 107
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:03 pm

Re: Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by asa » Fri May 26, 2017 9:49 am

Korihor
I notice you are in AZ. I am in Tempe. As you may know there have been a number of excommunications over doctrinal issues in the last year. This has been particularly true in Mesa and Gilbert. There was a priesthood leadership training a year ago on how to deal with dissenters. I personally know 7 families in that geographical area that were all active ,TR holding, holding leadership positions that have been exed in the last year because while they believed in Christ, The restoration ,Joseph Smith and the historicity of the B of M they "didn't sustain the brethren". Good luck to you . I would have told him to read D and C 122 and be careful because he is placing at risk his own priesthood ( I know it probably would not make any difference). If you feel comfortable with it would you mind telling me the city and Stake you live in . I suspect I know your SP

User avatar
MerrieMiss
Posts: 580
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 9:03 pm

Re: Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by MerrieMiss » Fri May 26, 2017 9:55 am

Korihor wrote:
Fri May 26, 2017 8:53 am
Mormorrisey wrote:
Thu May 25, 2017 5:01 pm
And...that's the most important question anymore, isn't it? Not how you feel about Jesus, not how you feel about the gospel, but how you view the Brethren. That's all that's left. And if you don't answer it right, well, off you go. This is where it's headed, and that's pretty clear from your meeting with the SP, it seems to me. Good for you for speaking up.
Right, that's exactly how we see it, but virtually impossible for a standard TBM SP to see it.
This is so true. It's amazing how compartmentalized the TBM brain is. God and the brethren are one and there is no separating the two. You can't have a relationship with god without the brethren. I'm sure I'm still quite myopic in many ways, but I look back to when I saw the church this way and it's astounding to me. It's no wonder that many Mormons seem to leave christianity altogether when they were only practicing leader worship the entire time.

User avatar
nibbler
Posts: 904
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 7:12 pm

Re: Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by nibbler » Fri May 26, 2017 10:35 am

Korihor wrote:
Fri May 26, 2017 9:20 am
The SP said no because she shouldn't go and make covenants that she's not sure about. He tried to play it as if he's protecting her.
Presumably your wife has been to the temple before. What covenants would she be making during return visits to the temple? Those covenants are for the deceased... or do we view vicarious work in the temple as a way for the living to renew their covenants as well?
We don’t see things as they are, we see them as we are.
– Anais Nin

User avatar
FiveFingerMnemonic
Posts: 1484
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 2:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by FiveFingerMnemonic » Fri May 26, 2017 10:52 am

nibbler wrote:
Fri May 26, 2017 10:35 am
Korihor wrote:
Fri May 26, 2017 9:20 am
The SP said no because she shouldn't go and make covenants that she's not sure about. He tried to play it as if he's protecting her.
Presumably your wife has been to the temple before. What covenants would she be making during return visits to the temple? Those covenants are for the deceased... or do we view vicarious work in the temple as a way for the living to renew their covenants as well?
Exactly! He can't formulate a counter argument that works for that question. She made the covenants the first time she went.

User avatar
deacon blues
Posts: 1934
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 7:37 am

Re: Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by deacon blues » Fri May 26, 2017 11:00 am

Silver Girl wrote:
Fri May 26, 2017 9:29 am
Anon70 wrote:
Thu May 25, 2017 8:53 pm
Mormorrisey wrote:
Thu May 25, 2017 5:01 pm
And...that's the most important question anymore, isn't it? Not how you feel about Jesus, not how you feel about the gospel, but how you view the Brethren. That's all that's left. And if you don't answer it right, well, off you go. This is where it's headed, and that's pretty clear from your meeting with the SP, it seems to me. Good for you for speaking up.
Yep
^ THIS!!! ^

The church is all about following the leaders, not following God or Christ. There's no room for individual discernment about what is right and what is wrong. Which reveals quite a bit that might shed light on how JS got teenagers and wives of other men to "marry" him.
Amen and Amen. I once told a TBM friend that I didn't believe God and the church were the same thing and he was speechless. He couldn't agree with me, and yet he couldn't disagree with me either. :roll:
God is Love. God is Truth. The greatest problem with organized religion is that the organization becomes god, rather than a means of serving God.

User avatar
Misbehaved Woman
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2017 9:10 pm

Re: Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by Misbehaved Woman » Fri May 26, 2017 3:40 pm

I mostly stayed quiet throughout the meeting. But when asked to give a yes or no to sustaining the brotheren, I responded similar to Kori stating that I can sustain them as prophets, seers, revelators. But I disagree with policy's being made. I explained I feel they have gotten things wrong in the past too and that I can no longer see their decisions as synonymous with God but that they are men making mistakes and it's possible for them to misinterpret revelations and or make wrong decisions. The sp agreed they aren't perfect and that if I disagree w things I should pray about it. Kori and I both argued what happens when we pray and still disagree?? It came to a stalemate on that topic. But then it came back to me needing to give a yes or no. I couldn't say yes to the 2nd part of the question.
"as the only person on the earth who possesses and is authorized to exercise all priesthood keys?"
I was vague in stating I'm not sure I can say yes to that part. He went off and explained they are not the only ones w the priesthood, just the only ones authorized to exercise all. I thought um that's not quite what I mean by not agreeing with it but didn't bother going into detail. Instead I explained as kori did that I don't agree w my TR being taken away for voting opposed however I candidly said I don't think I can say yes to other questions in the TR interview. He obviously wanting a yes sincerely wanting to give me the benefit of the doubt said maybe we should have another meeting to go over that and as kori said the SP told me not to use my TR. I argued that point but as Kori said the SP is protecting me by asking me to not go. He said you should never go into the temple questioning these things. This idea make absolutely no sense to me. But not much does anymore. I am seriously considering going to the temple. Not out of defiance but I think the end of my TR is near so I think it may be worth a try to sincerely take my questions to the temple and see if I feel anything? If I did this would you give the sp notice or ask for forgiveness after?
Last edited by Misbehaved Woman on Fri May 26, 2017 4:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
LostMormon
Posts: 123
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 10:38 am

Re: Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by LostMormon » Fri May 26, 2017 4:07 pm

Korihor wrote:
Fri May 26, 2017 9:20 am


I told Mrs Misbehaved that I'm thinking if they take my TR, I will return it to them with my resignation letter. If I can't be a member in good standing with my views, I don't see why I should be a member at all.
I have to admit, I have not keep up with this board as much as I have in the past, but from some of your earlier threads I have read, I was under the impression that you were pretty much done with the church, at least mentally, and now that your wife is on board with you, what's keeping you in the church? Why do you care if the SP takes your TR, and why do you care if you're a member in good standing?

User avatar
Linked
Posts: 1533
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 4:04 pm

Re: Meeting with SP after Voting Opposed

Post by Linked » Fri May 26, 2017 8:05 pm

Misbehaved Woman wrote:
Fri May 26, 2017 3:40 pm
I am seriously considering going to the temple. Not out of defiance but I think the end of my TR is near so I think it may be worth a try to sincerely take my questions to the temple and see if I feel anything? If I did this would you give the sp notice or ask for forgiveness after?
I don't think the stake president ever needs to know. It's between you and God, and if he finds out then you can tell him you felt inspired to seek answers in the temple, which sounds true to me based on your post, and it's hard to refute for sp.
"I would write about life. Every person would be exactly as important as any other. All facts would also be given equal weightiness. Nothing would be left out. Let others bring order to chaos. I would bring chaos to order" - Kurt Vonnegut

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 51 guests