NOM

See the article below:

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2019/09 ... municated/

On Aug. 27, McLean delivered the First Presidency denial. The stake president, who oversees a number of congregations, remained optimistic, she said, zeroing in on the words, “at this time.”

I don't know why the hell she'd want to, but different strokes for different folks I guess. Apparently the First Presidency has a long memory, and no matter how faithful she's tried to be for 23 years, she isn't Church broke enough to get their approval for re-baptism. The First Presidency is certainly a compassionate, forgiving bunch, deeply concerned about how this will affect her family relationships in the eternities.

The Church is one hell of a messed up organization. But I don't really need to tell any of you that.

Not Buying It wrote: ↑Thu Sep 05, 2019 9:47 am See the article below:

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2019/09 ... municated/

On Aug. 27, McLean delivered the First Presidency denial. The stake president, who oversees a number of congregations, remained optimistic, she said, zeroing in on the words, “at this time.”

But then [Anderson] replied, “There’s hope, and then there’s experience.”

Besides, she said, “it was a form letter.”

This bit sickened me. The church doesn't deserve her.

I am betting that Nelson and Oaks remember the September 6 really well. They're still angry. Sometimes what the church terms "apostacy" really comes down to "disloyalty." Apostasy is the renunciation of religious belief. The church does not require any specific beliefs that I can think of quickly. What it requires is that we do what the Q15 say. I think it has been this way since JS came down on Hiram Page for using his own seer stone.

And yet they protect rapists.

She should just change her name, call up the missionaries, take the discussions, get baptized, live worthy for a year, pay lots of tithing, go through the temple, then change her name back.

It’s not like the church does back ground checks on its converts or members.

After reading the article there’s an easy explanation for her denial. She was honest.

Elder Oaks put an end to it.

In many respects, Anderson’s affirmations mirror those of other members. She did, however, tell her leaders her concerns about church “exclusion” policies: barring worthy LGBTQ couples who are legally married from full participation; blocking “worthy and righteous women” from the male-only priesthood; and keeping Mother in Heaven “from her place in our understanding.”

Got to make an example of dissenters you know. It’s not about the lost sheep, it’s about protecting the herd.

Stuff like this just confirms to me church leaders are so way out of touch with reality, and have little true compassion for anyone that is not on their wagon to the promised land.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've got an extended family member who is a current sitting bishop, interviewing minors behind closed doors alone, who molested his younger sister when he was a teen, and she is 10 years younger. This outraged my wife who wrote several letters to Kirton McKonkie and church leaders about it and no action was taken to remove him.

It is amazing what the church is willing to forgive and what it isn't.

Everyone, please remember... it is not a church, it's a massively wealthy Babylonian real estate corporation masquerading as a religion. As such, we shouldn't be shocked when we hear or learn about actions that are unethical, dishonest, immoral, unforgiving, incompassionate, judgmental, heartless or anything contrary to what Jesus Christ would say or do.

Apparently Mrs. Anderson has been attending Sacrament meeting every week at her local ward since her excommunication 25 years ago. That makes this rejection especially sad. Where do love and charity go when it leaves the hearts of Church officials?

It is insane to me that they would reject this woman after she has continued to go and be an honest and good member of the community even after being so unfairly treated by the church.

And that tells you all you need to know about who the church values and who they don't - as we've seen with all of the recent abuse stories where excommunication (as far as we know) is not happening.

moksha wrote: ↑Thu Sep 05, 2019 1:05 pm Where do love and charity go when it leaves the hearts of Church officials?

They were never found there in the first place.

This also points out the difference between the soldiers on the ground and the generals overseeing the war.

Compassionate Bishop and Stake President facilitate the process to return to the Church.

Cold hearted and clueless First Presidency stamp the application DENIED!

blazerb wrote: ↑Thu Sep 05, 2019 1:42 pm

moksha wrote: ↑Thu Sep 05, 2019 1:05 pm Where do love and charity go when it leaves the hearts of Church officials?

They were never found there in the first place.

Ha!

I was just going to say:

Q15.....where the Spirit of Christ goes to die.

I found her story heartbreaking. To continue to attend faithfully all these years and still be found “unworthy”.

A comment I read today that resonated with me: This adds to my observation that the current prophet absolutely cannot handle criticism (or anything he takes as criticism) especially if the perceived criticism comes from a woman...

It was never about Lavinia Fielding Anderson anyway, and it sure as hell wasn’t ever about finding a way to help her restore her eternal ties to her forever family. It was about the Brethren maintaining control back in September 1993, and its about the Brethren maintaining control today. What she said was more or less irrelevant to them - that it challenged their authority and threatened their control was all that mattered. Difference is, now their grip on control is even more tenuous than it was in September 1993, so they are going to respond by being even more authoritarian and assertive of their control than they were even then.

In an era where they can’t control the narrative like they once did, there was no way they were going to legitimize Anderson’s views by restoring her membership. And if it keeps her from her family for the eternities, that’s a price the Brethren are more than willing to pay.

Remember - they believe they have taken away her eternal family relationships. It says a lot that they are OK with that.

This entire thing really underscores the "forgiveness" and "reconciliation" issue that I keep harping on. (Probably some of you are tired of it.)
But it is obvious that when the church is working with adulterers, child molesters, abusers, etc. we all need to forgive and be fully reconciled in a quick and timely manner so as to "save the family". And perhaps not always, but most of the time, women and children seem to take the brunt of those policies. The innocents in the family are forced to live with the pain and uncertainty of having an untested offender living or interacting in close proximity.

But when it comes to the church corporation it's an entirely different story. In the name of protecting the body (family) of Christ they get to restrict and shun those they deem a threat as long as it pleases them. The offender must come to the church on the church's terms only and they have to have a track record of conforming and "good" behavior. The leadership must feel entirely secure and comfortable with the behavior of the one time offender.

To me this just reeks of hypocrisy and a double standard. Apparently ruining a child's life is nothing compared to insulting the corporation....

Palerider wrote: ↑Fri Sep 06, 2019 9:10 amTo me this just reeks of hypocrisy and a double standard. Apparently ruining a child's life is nothing compared to insulting the corporation....

Sigh.

[Picks up a Grand Prize ribbon and tacks it onto Palerider's forehead.]

I think the problem with Livina is WHAT she was excommunicated for way back in 1993. Quinn, Hanks and the Toscanos wrote books on historical topics that have been proved to be the truth, so they aren't the problem. I'm sure if they wanted back on the boat, a place would be found. However, Livina shone a very bright light on ecclesiastical abuse and other abuses by church leaders, something they clearly don't want lights shined on. And this is still a major issue today, given the Martinsburg case, the Kirton McConkie leaks, Sam Young, the debate over interviews, etc.

They don't want any more attention on these issues, and having her re-baptized might bring all these issues back into the headlines. I'm sure they don't mind putting the salvation of one soul upon the altar of expediency. It's ridiculous, she was just outlining the facts when she reported on all the cases of abuse, but of course we all know facts don't matter in issues like these. Lavina was right then, just as Sam Young is right now. And they chopped the both of them for it.

Mormorrisey wrote: ↑Fri Sep 06, 2019 10:24 am And this is still a major issue today, given the Martinsburg case, the Kirton McConkie leaks, Sam Young, the debate over interviews, etc.

They don't want any more attention on these issues, and having her re-baptized might bring all these issues back into the headlines.

And doesn't this point out the leadership craving for control? The real foundation of the church?

The separating of an eleven year old child from his parents for the purpose of making him/her accountable to a church authority in a one on one interview. The handbook makes it sound innocuous by stating that the Bishop is supporting the parents in making sure their kids are living Christlike lives, but the reality is they're teaching the kids who is really in charge, who has jurisdiction over their lives and to whom they are ultimately accountable.

What better way to get your psychological hooks into someone early than this method?

Of course they don't want these subjects discussed in an open way or in a public forum. Without church control of the environment this stuff starts to look suspicious when observed with open eyes.

This is powerful - our old friend Robert Kirby tells us exactly what kind of person for whom the First Presidency refused rebaptism and refused to restore her temple sealing with her departed husband:

https://www.sltrib.com/opinion/kirby/20 ... us-lavina/