LDS Freedom Forum

theBruceGuy wrote:I had a close friend who was excommunicated for adultery with a 16 year old. He came back into full fellowship, served in Bishoprics, High Councils' etc., he even served at a Regional level for a while. Unfortunately he left the Church to go live with a young 16 year old girl wile in his late 50's and is no longer a member, but he had no restriction when he was active.

freedomforall wrote:

skmo wrote:

Obrien wrote:I have no interest in having their secret deeds shouted from the rooftops - I'd rather have them feed the hungry, clothe the naked etc with tithing and offerings...

The only reason one would be naked and hungry in this country is because they're children or they're trying to make a political statement. I have no desire for the church to use funds to supply lazy people with things they should be providing on their own. I like Benjamin Franklin's take on it: “I am for doing good to the poor, but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed...that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”

Good point, skmo. Obama says he's creating jobs, yet all the people have to do is either get on the phone or go to their mail box to get all the free benees from government...paid for buy to true workers that really can't afford it, and at some point quit working so they can join the freebee bandwagon. Just who are the poor? Working people struggling to make ends meet, or those doing nothing except asking where their next freebee is at and how to get it, while driving around in a new car?
Does God want to have people on welfare or learning self reliance? Does God expect the church to feed the poor, etc, or the people in the church to practice charity, not enabling?

buffalo_girl wrote:

A previous Bishop mentioned to me recently that information regarding the problems of my past are still in my Church file today. He confirmed what I had always suspected - that every Bishop I had had in the last 30 years, and I have had many, if they were curious enough to read the extra information on me, knew I had been a scarlet woman. Believe me, this information affects my self esteem.

Why is that information currently in your Church records?

I would do what is needed to have it removed.

I have a friend who was disfellowshipped 40-some years ago for leaving her husband and sons when her husband in 'good standing' began teaching the teenage sons how to beat their mother. Her bishopric concluded that she was at fault and disfellowshipped her!

When she remarried many years later, she and her convert husband were unable to go to the temple to be sealed because of this nonsense in her records. My friend's husband mustered the courage to write to the First Presidency. Within two weeks she was restored to full fellowship and she and her husband were able to go to the temple. A few years later, they became Ordinance Workers.

The problem with a 'lay' clergy is that there are too many idiots ignorantly using their leadership positions to 'grind upon' those who are already having to cope with excruciating personal sorrow and sins.

If a 'sinner' was happy doing wrong, he/she would certainly not go to the Bishop and spend time struggling to restore good standing in the Church.

The other part of the above story is that my friend's previous husband - after all those many years of his continued church activity in the limelight - was serving as a Bishop in another state when her standing was restored.

Some Sinners are very good at presenting themselves in a virtuous light. Apparently, he never felt the need to confess any of his sins!

knew I had been a scarlet woman. Believe me, this information affects my self esteem

Bless you, I certainly wouldn't let it. The LORD Jesus Christ was born through a genetic line liberally sprinkled with colorful women!

LDScop wrote:

minorityofone wrote:When I was a zone leader on an lds mission I was asked to grab something in the mission presidents office, it turned out I opened the wrong drawer to the wrong file cabinet and saw folders with all the missionaries names on them.
I saw my name and grabbed the folder (I might add I felt great about doing it too since the dang thing had my name on it). So anyhow I open it up and see files on me and started reading the first one. It was from a previous stake president from across the ocean that did not like me or my brothers. I used to leave windows open a crack at the church so I could climb in and practice basketball. Anyway one day I climbed in through a window and toppled into the room and when I looked up that stake president was sneering at me with a terrible scowl and said with a very angry and raised voice "I never, EVER want to see you doing that again!" Then he started lecturing me as I picked up the ball and walked past him to the gym... Anyway I had multiple run ins with this guy and everyone knew he was on a power trip and extremely prideful. So back to the mission presidents office I start reading and it has notes from this guy saying how I had no direction and it told about my family and how I came from a questionable family etc etc. I mean I was pissed!
I asked the assistants about it and after some digging and talking to the mission president I learned these files indeed follow us and they do not only have notes if there was some kind of disciplinary action. I have never received church discipline and these previous morons were writing files about me with their opinions about who I was as a human being without even stating facts. It was very disturbing! Anyway not only do they keep files, but when people move from place to place new bishops and stake presidents often call previous bishops and leaders and have a nice chat about how they were in the previous ward and what callings they had and how they did, if they would be good for new callings in the new ward etc. and yes if you have had certain disciplinary action, for instance disfellowshipment you cannot hold a calling as a male higher than a secretary type position, even in an elders quorum presidency. Once the spirit witnessed to me to call a good brother as a counseler in the EQP, and the stake presidency told me he couldn't be a counselor (he was then my secretary). So turns out my father in law was the executive secretary in the stake presidency and I cornered him and his face went red and after probing for a while he spilled the reason and it was because he had received disciplinary action (disfellowshipped for cheating on his wife) and could never hold a calling in a presidency, bishopric, or the like. It is ridiculous. Anyway I have read such files with my own eyes and they are not just clerical records by any means. They are juicy and personal and most people have no idea the "leaders" are keeping tabs.

I was disfellowshipped and am now and EQ counselor.

minorityofone wrote:

LDScop wrote:

minorityofone wrote:When I was a zone leader on an lds mission I was asked to grab something in the mission presidents office, it turned out I opened the wrong drawer to the wrong file cabinet and saw folders with all the missionaries names on them.
I saw my name and grabbed the folder (I might add I felt great about doing it too since the dang thing had my name on it). So anyhow I open it up and see files on me and started reading the first one. It was from a previous stake president from across the ocean that did not like me or my brothers. I used to leave windows open a crack at the church so I could climb in and practice basketball. Anyway one day I climbed in through a window and toppled into the room and when I looked up that stake president was sneering at me with a terrible scowl and said with a very angry and raised voice "I never, EVER want to see you doing that again!" Then he started lecturing me as I picked up the ball and walked past him to the gym... Anyway I had multiple run ins with this guy and everyone knew he was on a power trip and extremely prideful. So back to the mission presidents office I start reading and it has notes from this guy saying how I had no direction and it told about my family and how I came from a questionable family etc etc. I mean I was pissed!
I asked the assistants about it and after some digging and talking to the mission president I learned these files indeed follow us and they do not only have notes if there was some kind of disciplinary action. I have never received church discipline and these previous morons were writing files about me with their opinions about who I was as a human being without even stating facts. It was very disturbing! Anyway not only do they keep files, but when people move from place to place new bishops and stake presidents often call previous bishops and leaders and have a nice chat about how they were in the previous ward and what callings they had and how they did, if they would be good for new callings in the new ward etc. and yes if you have had certain disciplinary action, for instance disfellowshipment you cannot hold a calling as a male higher than a secretary type position, even in an elders quorum presidency. Once the spirit witnessed to me to call a good brother as a counseler in the EQP, and the stake presidency told me he couldn't be a counselor (he was then my secretary). So turns out my father in law was the executive secretary in the stake presidency and I cornered him and his face went red and after probing for a while he spilled the reason and it was because he had received disciplinary action (disfellowshipped for cheating on his wife) and could never hold a calling in a presidency, bishopric, or the like. It is ridiculous. Anyway I have read such files with my own eyes and they are not just clerical records by any means. They are juicy and personal and most people have no idea the "leaders" are keeping tabs.

I was disfellowshipped and am now and EQ counselor.

Perhaps it is based on the reason for being disfellowshipped? I don't know all the policy on it but I understand some people cannot have callings for life because of past disciplinary action. I am pretty sure that someone who is ex-communicated for any reason at all cannot be a bishop ever, or even someone who resigns and then goes back. Is that right?

LDScop wrote:

minorityofone wrote:

LDScop wrote:

minorityofone wrote:When I was a zone leader on an lds mission I was asked to grab something in the mission presidents office, it turned out I opened the wrong drawer to the wrong file cabinet and saw folders with all the missionaries names on them.
I saw my name and grabbed the folder (I might add I felt great about doing it too since the dang thing had my name on it). So anyhow I open it up and see files on me and started reading the first one. It was from a previous stake president from across the ocean that did not like me or my brothers. I used to leave windows open a crack at the church so I could climb in and practice basketball. Anyway one day I climbed in through a window and toppled into the room and when I looked up that stake president was sneering at me with a terrible scowl and said with a very angry and raised voice "I never, EVER want to see you doing that again!" Then he started lecturing me as I picked up the ball and walked past him to the gym... Anyway I had multiple run ins with this guy and everyone knew he was on a power trip and extremely prideful. So back to the mission presidents office I start reading and it has notes from this guy saying how I had no direction and it told about my family and how I came from a questionable family etc etc. I mean I was pissed!
I asked the assistants about it and after some digging and talking to the mission president I learned these files indeed follow us and they do not only have notes if there was some kind of disciplinary action. I have never received church discipline and these previous morons were writing files about me with their opinions about who I was as a human being without even stating facts. It was very disturbing! Anyway not only do they keep files, but when people move from place to place new bishops and stake presidents often call previous bishops and leaders and have a nice chat about how they were in the previous ward and what callings they had and how they did, if they would be good for new callings in the new ward etc. and yes if you have had certain disciplinary action, for instance disfellowshipment you cannot hold a calling as a male higher than a secretary type position, even in an elders quorum presidency. Once the spirit witnessed to me to call a good brother as a counseler in the EQP, and the stake presidency told me he couldn't be a counselor (he was then my secretary). So turns out my father in law was the executive secretary in the stake presidency and I cornered him and his face went red and after probing for a while he spilled the reason and it was because he had received disciplinary action (disfellowshipped for cheating on his wife) and could never hold a calling in a presidency, bishopric, or the like. It is ridiculous. Anyway I have read such files with my own eyes and they are not just clerical records by any means. They are juicy and personal and most people have no idea the "leaders" are keeping tabs.

I was disfellowshipped and am now and EQ counselor.

Perhaps it is based on the reason for being disfellowshipped? I don't know all the policy on it but I understand some people cannot have callings for life because of past disciplinary action. I am pretty sure that someone who is ex-communicated for any reason at all cannot be a bishop ever, or even someone who resigns and then goes back. Is that right?

https://theboard.byu.edu/questions/60473/

I don't know the specifics on when you can and can't be called to which calling after being disfellowshipped or excommunicated. My instincts tell me the answers in the link are correct. If you've repented and returned to full standing then the Lord will know and will call you to any calling he needs you in.

I think we all agree that depending on your sin you should be banned from certain callings for life.

theBruceGuy wrote:

freedomforall wrote:

skmo wrote:

Obrien wrote:I have no interest in having their secret deeds shouted from the rooftops - I'd rather have them feed the hungry, clothe the naked etc with tithing and offerings...

The only reason one would be naked and hungry in this country is because they're children or they're trying to make a political statement. I have no desire for the church to use funds to supply lazy people with things they should be providing on their own. I like Benjamin Franklin's take on it: “I am for doing good to the poor, but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed...that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”

Good point, skmo. Obama says he's creating jobs, yet all the people have to do is either get on the phone or go to their mail box to get all the free benees from government...paid for buy to true workers that really can't afford it, and at some point quit working so they can join the freebee bandwagon. Just who are the poor? Working people struggling to make ends meet, or those doing nothing except asking where their next freebee is at and how to get it, while driving around in a new car?
Does God want to have people on welfare or learning self reliance? Does God expect the church to feed the poor, etc, or the people in the church to practice charity, not enabling?

freedomforall wrote:

Finrock wrote:Jesus does not lie. When He says He remembers your sins no more He means it as He plainly said it.

It is good to trust in Jesus Christ over man or flesh.

Simple belief produces great results.

-Finrock

When Christ, who is Jehovah, says he knows all things past, present and future, does this mean he can forget our sins and still be God?

2 Nephi 9:20
20 O how great the holiness of our God! For he knoweth all things, and there is not anything save he knows it.

Moroni 7:22
22 For behold, God knowing all things, being from everlasting to everlasting, behold, he sent angels to minister unto the children of men, to make manifest concerning the coming of Christ; and in Christ there should come every good thing.

Prov. 5:21
21 For the ways of man are before the eyes of the Lord, and he pondereth all his goings.

D&C 38:2
2 The same which knoweth all things, for all things are present before mine eyes;

Helaman 9:41
41 And there were others who said: Behold, he is a god, for except he was a god he could not know of all things. For behold, he has told us the thoughts of our hearts, and also has told us things; and even he has brought unto our knowledge the true murderer of our chief judge.

moses 1:6
6 And I have a work for thee, Moses, my son; and thou art in the similitude of mine Only Begotten; and mine Only Begotten is and shall be the Savior, for he is full of grace and truth; but there is no God beside me, and all things are present with me, for I know them all.

Now, here is an account of something I learned years ago.

I wrote to Brother Stephen E. Robinson concerning this question. He teaches religion classes at Brigham Young University, where he is also chairman of the Department of Ancient Scripture. He has at least five articles in the Ensign magazine. He has written many books including “Are Mormons Christian?”, “Believing Christ”, “Following Christ” and “The Testament of Adam”. He says this as follows:

“If God knows everything (2 Nephi 9:20, Moses 1:6, D&C 38:2), that must include any mistakes he may have made as a mortal being.  And if we are exalted and become as God now is, we must also know all things—including our own mortal history, complete with our former sins.  Memory is eternal; guilt is not.  If there is anything we remain ignorant of in eternity, we are not as God is, and have not been exalted”.
.............................................................................................................................................

So, if God forgets things he would cease to be God. Memory is eternal; guilt is not.

Elder Packer wrote:I bear witness that God lives, that Jesus is the Christ, that the Atonement is not a general thing that is for the whole Church. The Atonement is individual, and if you have something that is bothering you—sometimes so long ago you can hardly remember it—put the Atonement to work. It will clean it up, and you, as does He, will remember your sins no more. In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

minorityofone wrote: If it was always the case that the lord was calling them there would be no reason for annotated "red flags" as one of the quotes you shared described. Paul and Alma the younger were described to be about as bad as anyone. But then again neither of them were called through a church organization but they were called directly by God so that would explain a lot.
Again I think it depends on the reason for disfellowshipment. Some people are disfellowshipped for doing drugs in high school and I don't know that it goes against their permanent record. But the stake presidency I referred to apparently thought this brother could not be called as a counselor in the EQP because of the annotation by his name in the membership records. And an even greater question is why this isn't public knowledge how this all works? Why do people have to guess and wonder about what kind of records this organization has on them? That alone is weird enough. Why can't any member look up everything on him or her on a website at least, and if some doosh leader wrote something why can't they refute it openly on the record? I see more transparency in the government which is ridiculous.

inho wrote:

theBruceGuy wrote:I had a close friend who was excommunicated for adultery with a 16 year old. He came back into full fellowship, served in Bishoprics, High Councils' etc., he even served at a Regional level for a while. Unfortunately he left the Church to go live with a young 16 year old girl wile in his late 50's and is no longer a member, but he had no restriction when he was active.

That's actually surprising. I would guess that adultery with a minor would result in annotation in the member record and inhibit callings like bishop where person will conduct one-on-one interviews with youth.

Obrien wrote:

freedomforall wrote:For the record, I highly dislike breaking bad news to everyone...let's look at the scriptures, shall we?

D&C 1:3
3 And the rebellious shall be pierced with much sorrow; for their iniquities shall be spoken upon the housetops, and their secret acts shall be revealed.

Luke 12:3
3 Therefore whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light; and that which ye have spoken in the ear in closets (places of privacy) shall be proclaimed upon the housetops.

All of our secret, unholy, acts will be made known abroad. So what is written in our church records, not repented of, will not stay secret. Unless someone can come up with a different message from these verses.

Agree, FFA, all the more reason for the big 18 (first presidency, Q12 and presiding bishopric) to come clean on finances. I have no interest in having their secret deeds shouted from the rooftops - I'd rather have them feed the hungry, clothe the naked etc with tithing and offerings...

Franco wrote:

Obrien wrote:

freedomforall wrote:For the record, I highly dislike breaking bad news to everyone...let's look at the scriptures, shall we?

D&C 1:3
3 And the rebellious shall be pierced with much sorrow; for their iniquities shall be spoken upon the housetops, and their secret acts shall be revealed.

Luke 12:3
3 Therefore whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light; and that which ye have spoken in the ear in closets (places of privacy) shall be proclaimed upon the housetops.

All of our secret, unholy, acts will be made known abroad. So what is written in our church records, not repented of, will not stay secret. Unless someone can come up with a different message from these verses.

Agree, FFA, all the more reason for the big 18 (first presidency, Q12 and presiding bishopric) to come clean on finances. I have no interest in having their secret deeds shouted from the rooftops - I'd rather have them feed the hungry, clothe the naked etc with tithing and offerings...

I see that you, Obrien, maintain that the First Presidency, the Quorum of the 12 Apostles, and the Presiding Bishopric are “the rebellious” in D&C 1:3, and they shall be “pierced with much sorrow,” while you live your version of the gospel based on your interpretation of the scriptures.

Chapter 13 of Matthew comes to mind.

The Savior said, “For whosoever receiveth, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance; but whosoever continueth not to receive, from him shall be taken away even that he hath,” and you obviously believe that you have received and thus have “more abundance,” and you maintain that the chosen and anointed servants of God have continued “not to receive,” and thus that which they had has been “taken away.”

You believe that Jesus Christ was talking about you when he said, “Blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear.”

You believe the Lord was talking to you when He said, “Many prophets and righteous men have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them.”

According to you, when “the Son of man shall send forth his angels” to “gather out of his kingdom all things that offend and them which do iniquity,” it will be the Latter-day Apostles and Prophets who shall be cast “into a furnace of fire,” where there shall be “wailing and gnashing of teeth.”

You, on the other hand, view yourself as among “the righteous” who will “shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father,” and you base it all on your own interpretation of the scriptures instead of what the Latter-day Apostles and Prophets have told you.

It's all there in Matthew 13, each and every quote that I cited. Feel free to admit that I have accurately characterized your perspective.

Stahura wrote:Franco, you just said the word "YOU" or "YOUR" TWENTY TIMES in that post. You said "I" like twice.

Do you need a bigger indication that you really need to look at the beam in your own eye?

shadow wrote:

Stahura wrote:Franco, you just said the word "YOU" or "YOUR" TWENTY TIMES in that post. You said "I" like twice.

Do you need a bigger indication that you really need to look at the beam in your own eye?

Ha ha that's funny coming from the guy who starts threads on the failures and misunderstandings of others. You even "experiment" on it. Thanks for the laugh!

LDScop wrote:

minorityofone wrote: If it was always the case that the lord was calling them there would be no reason for annotated "red flags" as one of the quotes you shared described. Paul and Alma the younger were described to be about as bad as anyone. But then again neither of them were called through a church organization but they were called directly by God so that would explain a lot.
Again I think it depends on the reason for disfellowshipment. Some people are disfellowshipped for doing drugs in high school and I don't know that it goes against their permanent record. But the stake presidency I referred to apparently thought this brother could not be called as a counselor in the EQP because of the annotation by his name in the membership records. And an even greater question is why this isn't public knowledge how this all works? Why do people have to guess and wonder about what kind of records this organization has on them? That alone is weird enough. Why can't any member look up everything on him or her on a website at least, and if some doosh leader wrote something why can't they refute it openly on the record? I see more transparency in the government which is ridiculous.

I don't think it's not common knowledge because the church or any leader is trying to keep it secret. I think it's largely because of the taboo and/or confidential nature of church discipline in general. I bet if you asked your bishop or stake president about your file and how past sin and discipline affects future callings they would tell you. I also bet you could refute what is on there.

The church doesn't work in secret. This issue has only arisen due to a lack of knowledge, and grew to a false accusation based on speculation and gossip. Go to the source of truth. Ask your leader. Ask.

In the end I have to believe that God and Jesus care about every detail of my life and their unseen hands are guiding my path if I but do my part. Be believing. God loves you and I do too as a brother in Christ.

minorityofone wrote:

LDScop wrote:

minorityofone wrote: If it was always the case that the lord was calling them there would be no reason for annotated "red flags" as one of the quotes you shared described. Paul and Alma the younger were described to be about as bad as anyone. But then again neither of them were called through a church organization but they were called directly by God so that would explain a lot.
Again I think it depends on the reason for disfellowshipment. Some people are disfellowshipped for doing drugs in high school and I don't know that it goes against their permanent record. But the stake presidency I referred to apparently thought this brother could not be called as a counselor in the EQP because of the annotation by his name in the membership records. And an even greater question is why this isn't public knowledge how this all works? Why do people have to guess and wonder about what kind of records this organization has on them? That alone is weird enough. Why can't any member look up everything on him or her on a website at least, and if some doosh leader wrote something why can't they refute it openly on the record? I see more transparency in the government which is ridiculous.

I don't think it's not common knowledge because the church or any leader is trying to keep it secret. I think it's largely because of the taboo and/or confidential nature of church discipline in general. I bet if you asked your bishop or stake president about your file and how past sin and discipline affects future callings they would tell you. I also bet you could refute what is on there.

The church doesn't work in secret. This issue has only arisen due to a lack of knowledge, and grew to a false accusation based on speculation and gossip. Go to the source of truth. Ask your leader. Ask.

In the end I have to believe that God and Jesus care about every detail of my life and their unseen hands are guiding my path if I but do my part. Be believing. God loves you and I do too as a brother in Christ.

Thank I love you too brother. I am giving you the benefit and assuming when you said "Go to the source of truth. Ask your leader," You were saying to go to God our leader as the source of truth. Blessings.

theBruceGuy wrote:The Church set up a Welfare program because Harold B. Lee, at the time a Stake President, saw good men from his Stake willing to work, but unable to find work. These men were not "lazy", nor looking for "freebies". They were unemployed, for various reasons, and unable to find work, therefore poor. I pray that the Lord does not have you experience this situation as you will not enjoy it. Try having empathy for your fellow men instead of Judgment.

Thinker wrote:Skmo
You are aware that the most extreme poverty is not in this country, right?

ebenezerarise wrote:Man -- what a bunch of straining at gnats.

Who cares?

Those who aspire for position in the Church get what they deserve. And if someone is keeping notes on me, well, it's got to be a pretty boring read.

There's a big difference between the Gospel and The Church, folks.

I personally don't care who is a leader in the Church -- that doesn't change my relationship with Christ.

jbalm wrote:Jesus forgives. But the church keeps track.

D&C 64:9-11 Wherefore, I say unto you, that ye ought to forgive one another; for he that forgiveth not his brother his trespasses standeth condemned before the Lord; for there remaineth in him the greater sin. I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men. And ye ought to say in your hearts — let God judge between me and thee, and reward thee according to thy deeds.