The Non-Inerrancy Of Mission Presidents

[Mark Beesley]

I am very sorry for everyone who did not enjoy serving a mission under a perfect Mission President. My own perfection allowed me to appreciate the perfection in my Mission Presidents. Of course, it was derivative perfection because of who we were actually serving under, and He had the grace to make us perfect . . . in a derivative sense.

[Ahab]

I was very blessed, in the course of my two years, to have three wonderful mission presidents. Each has had a profound inflence on my life, as a good mission president should. One has passed away, but I still maintain contact with the other two, brothers who served simultaneously in neighboring missions in Sweden and who were recently released as simultaneously serving temple presidents, one in Stockholm and the other in their hometown of St. Louis.

But while I was there (I served in the mid-'70s, roughly the same time period as USU78 although in a different mission) there were still stories going around the mission about the "Norrlander's Rebellion" that took place about 10 years prior. (Norrland is a region in the north of Sweden.)

As the story went, the mission president at that time was in the habit of sending missionary companionships cases and cases of Book of Mormon copies, which the missionaries were expected to pay for out-of-pocket and then be reimbursed, in turn, by selling the books to contacts. The boxes of books would arrive unbidden, whether they were needed or not. Reportedly, a number of missionaries went hungry because their food money was tied up in book inventory.

Consequently, some of the missionaries rebelled against this unjust practice, registering their protest by willful disobedience of mission rules. Some were sent home early as a result.

I have thought since that it should have been the mission president himself who was sent home. It seems that, at the very least, he was guilty of gross incompetence, endeavoring to practice high-pressure sales techniques in place of true missionary work. Moreover, he scarred a number of lives by provoking missionaries to anger, resulting in their suffering the lasting humiliation of being discharged dishonorably from their missions.

You don't win converts by voluminous book sales. You do it by placing a copy of the Book of Mormon one contact at a time, lovingly and carefully nurturing that contact with prayer, earnest invitation, teaching and love, always honoring the principle of moral agency.

I never knew that mission president. He has long since passed on. I only know of this episode through word-of-mouth. But I get highly indignant whenever I think of it.

I can only hope that such a thing is less likely to occur in this day of the "Preach My Gospel" manual. I would hope that were it to happen, the hue and cry raised by the parents of those missionaries would be such that the Missionary Department would feel compelled to put a stop to it immediately.

I'm seeing more of a connection beteween this thread and that other thread where Whatshisname was trying to prepare potential missionaries for human mission presidents in the field. We could just sluff it all off by saying they're human and prone to making mistakes like other humans, but at some point we should probably try to put a stop to bad behavior from our leaders.

The fact that they're human and humans make mistakes doesn't mean we have to tolerate their bad behavior when they do behave badly. I'm also not so sure we should point out the flaws of other humans, though, because at some point we need to balance it with forgiveness and repentance.

[Mark Beesley]

You don't win converts by voluminous book sales. You do it by placing a copy of the Book of Mormon one contact at a time, lovingly and carefully nurturing that contact with prayer, earnest invitation, teaching and love, always honoring the principle of moral agency.

Hey, don't be dissing voluminous book sales! Remember that story about the Italian Priest who found a coverless Book of Mormon in the trash, preached sermons from it, and eventually found the Church and converted? I would love to know the story of how that Book came to be in the trash sans cover. Hmm, sounds like a Red Violin story . . .

[Scott Lloyd]

I'm seeing more of a connection beteween this thread and that other thread where Whatshisname was trying to prepare potential missionaries for human mission presidents in the field. We could just sluff it all off by saying they're human and prone to making mistakes like other humans, but at some point we should probably try to put a stop to bad behavior from our leaders.

The fact that they're human and humans make mistakes doesn't mean we have to tolerate their bad behavior when they do behave badly. I'm also not so sure we should point out the flaws of other humans, though, because at some point we need to balance it with forgiveness and repentance.

I only know that with the scenario I have described (and hopefully, it was extreme and rare), there was a sore need for intervention that, apparently, didn't take place.

If the missionaries felt powerless to do anything about it -- or if they felt it would have been inappropriate or unrighteous to attempt it (and I'm not so old that I don't remember what it is like to be an impressionable 19- or 20-year-old serving a mission) -- then it should have been the parents of the missionaries who urged the Church leaders to do something.

Edited June 18, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[Tacenda]

I was very blessed, in the course of my two years, to have three wonderful mission presidents. Each has had a profound inflence on my life, as a good mission president should. One has passed away, but I still maintain contact with the other two, brothers who served simultaneously in neighboring missions in Sweden and who were recently released as simultaneously serving temple presidents, one in Stockholm and the other in their hometown of St. Louis.

But while I was there (I served in the mid-'70s, roughly the same time period as USU78 although in a different mission) there were still stories going around the mission about the "Norrlander's Rebellion" that took place about 10 years prior. (Norrland is a region in the north of Sweden.)

As the story went, the mission president at that time was in the habit of sending missionary companionships cases and cases of Book of Mormon copies, which the missionaries were expected to pay for out-of-pocket and then be reimbursed, in turn, by selling the books to contacts. The boxes of books would arrive unbidden, whether they were needed or not. Reportedly, a number of missionaries went hungry because their food money was tied up in book inventory.

Consequently, some of the missionaries rebelled against this unjust practice, registering their protest by willful disobedience of mission rules. Some were sent home early as a result.

I have thought since that it should have been the mission president himself who was sent home. It seems that, at the very least, he was guilty of gross incompetence, endeavoring to practice high-pressure sales techniques in place of true missionary work. Moreover, he scarred a number of lives by provoking missionaries to anger, resulting in their suffering the lasting humiliation of being discharged dishonorably from their missions.

You don't win converts by voluminous book sales. You do it by placing a copy of the Book of Mormon one contact at a time, lovingly and carefully nurturing that contact with prayer, earnest invitation, teaching and love, always honoring the principle of moral agency.

I never knew that mission president. He has long since passed on. I only know of this episode through word-of-mouth. But I get highly indignant whenever I think of it.

I can only hope that such a thing is less likely to occur in this day of the "Preach My Gospel" manual. I would hope that were it to happen, the hue and cry raised by the parents of those missionaries would be such that the Missionary Department would feel compelled to put a stop to it immediately.

You're someone in the know, have you heard of this rumor? I read somewhere, probably NOM, that the church needed to get rid of a bunch of BoM's, now can't remember why, so someone or maybe a mission president started the idea that members could buy up BoM's, and put their testimonies in them along with a photo to give to the missionaries to hand out. Was this bogus? Edited June 17, 2013 by Tacenda

[Scott Lloyd]

Hey, don't be dissing voluminous book sales! Remember that story about the Italian Priest who found a coverless Book of Mormon in the trash, preached sermons from it, and eventually found the Church and converted? I would love to know the story of how that Book came to be in the trash sans cover. Hmm, sounds like a Red Violin story . . .

The story of Vincenzo Francesca is remarkable and inspiring indeed.

But for every one like it, there must be many hundreds of instances of haphazardly placed copies where the book ends up in the trash or, at best, neglected on a shelf or in a storage box.

Like the Ethiopian encountered by Philip, nearly everyone needs to be taught and guided carefully and caringly.

Edited June 18, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[Duncan]

I was very blessed, in the course of my two years, to have three wonderful mission presidents. Each has had a profound inflence on my life, as a good mission president should. One has passed away, but I still maintain contact with the other two, brothers who served simultaneously in neighboring missions in Sweden and who were recently released as simultaneously serving temple presidents, one in Stockholm and the other in their hometown of St. Louis.

But while I was there (I served in the mid-'70s, roughly the same time period as USU78 although in a different mission) there were still stories going around the mission about the "Norrlander's Rebellion" that took place about 10 years prior. (Norrland is a region in the north of Sweden.)

As the story went, the mission president at that time was in the habit of sending missionary companionships cases and cases of Book of Mormon copies, which the missionaries were expected to pay for out-of-pocket and then be reimbursed, in turn, by selling the books to contacts. The boxes of books would arrive unbidden, whether they were needed or not. Reportedly, a number of missionaries went hungry because their food money was tied up in book inventory.

Consequently, some of the missionaries rebelled against this unjust practice, registering their protest by willful disobedience of mission rules. Some were sent home early as a result.

I have thought since that it should have been the mission president himself who was sent home. It seems that, at the very least, he was guilty of gross incompetence, endeavoring to practice high-pressure sales techniques in place of true missionary work. Moreover, he scarred a number of lives by provoking missionaries to anger, resulting in their suffering the lasting humiliation of being discharged dishonorably from their missions.

You don't win converts by voluminous book sales. You do it by placing a copy of the Book of Mormon one contact at a time, lovingly and carefully nurturing that contact with prayer, earnest invitation, teaching and love, always honoring the principle of moral agency.

I never knew that mission president. He has long since passed on. I only know of this episode through word-of-mouth. But I get highly indignant whenever I think of it.

I can only hope that such a thing is less likely to occur in this day of the "Preach My Gospel" manual. I would hope that were it to happen, the hue and cry raised by the parents of those missionaries would be such that the Missionary Department would feel compelled to put a stop to it immediately.

I dunno if I told you my Sweden Mission story or not but here goes anyhoo. In my mission in LA we had a DA with this lady who said that years and years before she had this friend who was interested in the Gospel. He was taught all the lessons in LA but had yet to be baptized. Meanwhile this lady's brother was serving in Sweden and apparently the mission wasn't baptizing a whole lot of people. So, this investigator friend had some reason to go to Sweden, I forget why. he walked into the Mission office and requested to be baptized by the brother of his female friend in LA. So, all this connections to LA and the female freind the President didn't know anything about. So, that the Mission President was telling zone conferences "you can't tell me you can't find people to teach, why, we have people walking in off the street requesting to be baptized!!!"

@yeahbuthewasfoundandtaughtbymissionariesinlosangeles!

[Scott Lloyd]

You're someone in the know, have you heard of this rumor? I read somewhere, probably NOM, that the church needed to get rid of a bunch of BoM's, now can't remember why, so someone or maybe a mission president started the idea that members could buy up BoM's, and put their testimonies in them along with a photo to give to the missionaries to hand out. Was this bogus?

It's not bogus, and it's not a rumor.

It was called "the family-to-family Book of Mormon program." It flourished in the eighties and nineties. I believe the idea is still practiced to some degree here and there. In fact, the tithing donation slip used to have a line where one could designate a donated amount for Book of Mormon copies to be given to investigators. That was in connection with this program.

The concept is this: You pay the cost of one or more copies of the Book of Mormon into which you insert a printed text of your testimony, with or without your photo. The hope is that missionaries will place that Book of Mormon copy with an individual or family that is investigating the Church and who will be positively influenced by reading your testimony.

I have heard anecdotal information that the effort bore some fruit, though I haven't seen any statistics regarding its overall success.

But the notion that the Church started the program because it needed to "get rid of" surplus copies of the Book of Mormon strikes me as anti-Mormon spin or apostate grousing that you've picked up somewhere.

Edited June 18, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[bcuzbcuz]

I was very blessed, in the course of my two years, to have three wonderful mission presidents. Each has had a profound inflence on my life, as a good mission president should. One has passed away, but I still maintain contact with the other two, brothers who served simultaneously in neighboring missions in Sweden and who were recently released as simultaneously serving temple presidents, one in Stockholm and the other in their hometown of St. Louis.

But while I was there (I served in the mid-'70s, roughly the same time period as USU78 although in a different mission) there were still stories going around the mission about the "Norrlander's Rebellion" that took place about 10 years prior. (Norrland is a region in the north of Sweden.)

As the story went, the mission president at that time was in the habit of sending missionary companionships cases and cases of Book of Mormon copies, which the missionaries were expected to pay for out-of-pocket and then be reimbursed, in turn, by selling the books to contacts. The boxes of books would arrive unbidden, whether they were needed or not. Reportedly, a number of missionaries went hungry because their food money was tied up in book inventory.

Consequently, some of the missionaries rebelled against this unjust practice, registering their protest by willful disobedience of mission rules. Some were sent home early as a result.

I have thought since that it should have been the mission president himself who was sent home. It seems that, at the very least, he was guilty of gross incompetence, endeavoring to practice high-pressure sales techniques in place of true missionary work. Moreover, he scarred a number of lives by provoking missionaries to anger, resulting in their suffering the lasting humiliation of being discharged dishonorably from their missions.

You don't win converts by voluminous book sales. You do it by placing a copy of the Book of Mormon one contact at a time, lovingly and carefully nurturing that contact with prayer, earnest invitation, teaching and love, always honoring the principle of moral agency.

I never knew that mission president. He has long since passed on. I only know of this episode through word-of-mouth. But I get highly indignant whenever I think of it.

I can only hope that such a thing is less likely to occur in this day of the "Preach My Gospel" manual. I would hope that were it to happen, the hue and cry raised by the parents of those missionaries would be such that the Missionary Department would feel compelled to put a stop to it immediately.

The "Norrlands Rebellion" was exactly as you tell it. And I agree with your conclusion. It should have been the MP who was sent home. This was a man who was inspired only by his own self-righteousness and blinded by a desire for glory in the glow of success.

I was one of the missionaries who starved. I was too "green" to be sent home. I entered my mission right in the middle of the controversy. But some very good people were sent home in disgrace, dishonorably discharged, because they dared to speak up. Some others were sent home because they reacted inappropriately in showing their disapproval for how they had been treated.

But those who here respond dismissively to the whole issue, saying "people are only human" are applying a sort of "down on the farm" kind of savvy to human behavior that isn't appropriate for the situation. We should demand more of our leaders, from the top on down. The calling given, must be lived up to. Merely finding the lowest common denominator is looking through one's fingers or turning a blind eye to the actual situation and only encourages similar actions.

[USU78]

The "Norrlands Rebellion" was exactly as you tell it. And I agree with your conclusion. It should have been the MP who was sent home. This was a man who was inspired only by his own self-righteousness and blinded by a desire for glory in the glow of success.

I was one of the missionaries who starved. I was too "green" to be sent home. I entered my mission right in the middle of the controversy. But some very good people were sent home in disgrace, dishonorably discharged, because they dared to speak up. Some others were sent home because they reacted inappropriately in showing their disapproval for how they had been treated.

But those who here respond dismissively to the whole issue, saying "people are only human" are applying a sort of "down on the farm" kind of savvy to human behavior that isn't appropriate for the situation. We should demand more of our leaders, from the top on down. The calling given, must be lived up to. Merely finding the lowest common denominator is looking through one's fingers or turning a blind eye to the actual situation and only encourages similar actions.

Who's being dismissive? I mistakenly let my nimrod of an MP affect my then future life for far too long. My nephew the same. Those are our mistakes, and how we respond to a bad situation is ultimately up to us, each individually. Assuming full moral responsibility for one's own acts is the adult saint's choice. Forgiving those who have offended us is the adult saint's choice.

It doesn't take any moral strength or any particular amount of courage to point out somebody else's booboo, be it great or small. It takes a great deal of strength and courage to maintain one's convictions despite life's vicissitudes, man-made or other.

Do you always have to find a way to insult others in your posts? If you intend further insults, please do them elsewhere, keeping them out of this thread.

[Scott Lloyd]

Who's being dismissive? I mistakenly let my nimrod of an MP affect my then future life for far too long. My nephew the same. Those are our mistakes, and how we respond to a bad situation is ultimately up to us, each individually. Assuming full moral responsibility for one's own acts is the adult saint's choice. Forgiving those who have offended us is the adult saint's choice.

It doesn't take any moral strength or any particular amount of courage to point out somebody else's booboo, be it great or small. It takes a great deal of strength and courage to maintain one's convictions despite life's vicissitudes, man-made or other.

I agree that USU78 is not seeking to excuse or minimize the misconduct of errant mission presidents, but rather, is advocating personal strength of character in spite of it.

I am reminded of Victor Frankl's book Man's Search for Meaning, a chronicle of his struggle to maintain his dignity and decency while in a Nazi concentration camp.

(And lest someone accuse me of a Godwin violation, I hasten to state that I am not comparing bad mission presidents to Nazis.)

Edited June 18, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[Storm Rider]

There is great dignity in holding your tongue in the face of trials. There is also wisdom in knowing when to speak and when to remain quiet. There is even greater wisdom in taking a personal stand to follow the Spirit when authority is telling you something contrary. I have tried to ignore that counsel that does not feel right. Following blindly does not make sense.

[USU78]

I am reminded of Victor Frankl's book Man's Search for Meaning, a chronicle of his struggle to maintain his dignity and decency while in a Nazi concentration camp.

Rabbi Kushner preserved the greatest quote of Frankl's, though. My paraphrase:

Where was G-d while the Jews were being burnt? He was there with the sufferers, offering comfort.

[bcuzbcuz]

Who's being dismissive? I mistakenly let my nimrod of an MP affect my then future life for far too long. My nephew the same. Those are our mistakes, and how we respond to a bad situation is ultimately up to us, each individually. Assuming full moral responsibility for one's own acts is the adult saint's choice. Forgiving those who have offended us is the adult saint's choice.

It doesn't take any moral strength or any particular amount of courage to point out somebody else's booboo, be it great or small. It takes a great deal of strength and courage to maintain one's convictions despite life's vicissitudes, man-made or other.

Do you always have to find a way to insult others in your posts? If you intend further insults, please do them elsewhere, keeping them out of this thread.

Forgiveness is given, when it is asked for, if the person asking is willing to acknowledge their actions and willing to offer retribution. Isn't that how it works?

Is forgiveness given when the perpetrator sees nothing wrong in their actions, even thinking they did a good job?

Yes, as an adult, you move on. But it is foolish to forget, even foolish to let bygones be bygones until working to right the wrongs is done.

[Ahab]

Forgiveness is given, when it is asked for, if the person asking is willing to acknowledge their actions and willing to offer retribution. Isn't that how it works?

I forgive others even when they don't ask to be forgiven, and just because it helps me. It's for our own good, if not theirs.

Is forgiveness given when the perpetrator sees nothing wrong in their actions, even thinking they did a good job?

By me it is, and yes sometimes it can be a funny moment as I continue to see them making the same mistakes even after I've told them about it.

Yes, as an adult, you move on. But it is foolish to forget, even foolish to let bygones be bygones until working to right the wrongs is done.

I don't forget what someone has done when I know they have made a mistake, although I do try to not let their mistake bother me anymore. That's what forgiveness is all about, to me. Giving up any harsh feelings I may have against someone who has done something that I know is wrong. And knowing the weaknesses of others helps me to know what to be careful about in the future.

[Calm]

Is forgiveness given when the perpetrator sees nothing wrong in their actions, even thinking they did a good job?

D&C 64:8 My disciples, in days of old, sought occasion against one another and forgave not one another in their hearts; and for thisevil they were afflicted and sorely chastened.

9 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.

10 I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men.

11 And ye ought to say in your hearts—let God judge between me and thee, and reward thee according to thy deeds.

[USU78]

Forgiveness is given, when it is asked for, if the person asking is willing to acknowledge their actions and willing to offer retribution. Isn't that how it works?

Is forgiveness given when the perpetrator sees nothing wrong in their actions, even thinking they did a good job?

Yes, as an adult, you move on. But it is foolish to forget, even foolish to let bygones be bygones until working to right the wrongs is done.

Forgiveness is given. Period. Your view is a particularly nasty one . . . reminds me of the curser in Drag Me to Hell, who, even from beyond the grave, keeps torturing the low-level bank employee who was the messenger reporting that the foreclosure sale would go on to its sad conclusion.

[EllenMaksoud]

In another thread, there is considerable (over 7 pages now) of discussion on a website that purports to prepare missionary candidates for their missions and to be a resource on dealing with sometimes difficult questions from investigators. In the course of the conversation, certain statements about sometimes arbitrary sometimes silly mission rules has gotten a fair bit of bandwidth.

I would like in this thread to make a serious point: mission presidents are not the prophet. They are also not infallible. They sometimes mess up, big time, but we should be mature enough to forgive their questing towards doing the right when it leads them to places other than Shangri-La. We should also be humble enough to recognize that maybe we cannot see what problem was being addressed with an inexplicable mission rule such that the rule appeared to be (or maybe was) the best way to address it.

Now, that said, I wanted to share a couple of things, one from my own mission (Austria '73-75) and a nephew of mine, now 41, who was in the Wazzu Mission in Eastern Washington back when he was 19-21.

My mission president gave an address at a mission conference in which he accused the missionaries of taking advantage of their parents by wasting their hard-earned money on frivolities, and calling on all of us to tighten our belts, avoid extravagance and live on less. I had been living on $130 a month from my folks up till that point, and I immediately wrote my parents to send me only $100, notwithstanding I didn't see how I could pay the bills. This was how I spent the last 9 months of my mission. I went from 185 lbs (at 6'1/2") to 150 (if that) over those months living on oatmeal and not much else (very few dinner invites in those days). I was also very sick and weak and not very up to working, though I gave it my best shot in a mission where nobody baptized much. As a result, I became somewhat disaffected from the Church because of this enforced starvation (as a missionary could only view the imposition by authority) by a dragnet, global criticism by an incautious Church authority. I became indifferent but not entirely inactive and stayed that way for almost 10 years.

My nephew brought a bicycle with him to his mission. A good one. He was instructed after he got there that he would have to turn that bicycle in to the mission, and buy a standard mission bicycle, and he would be reimbursed the whole price of his bike as long as it was turned back in in good condition. Then the mission president spent the money on something else . . . no reimbursement and no, you may not take the bicycle back home with you to Utah. This caused so many hard feelings that many of the missionaries left the church, including my nephew, who will likely never return.

Now . . . should I have been more adult and forgiving? Yes. My nephew? Same thing . . . get over yourself, you're in your '40s now. Should these two presidents have made different calls? Seems pretty clear they should have.

But why should we be upset or become disaffected when they prove what we already knew? That they are humans, and humans screw up?

While I love the church, I feel there is a huge disconnect between the doctrine taught by missionaries, and that of the GA. Admittedly, this is colored by the fact that I do not trust men easily. With the Atonement, there is a curious double talk practiced in the church, and I feel "lied to". I say this not as a traitor to the church, but as a daughter speaking respectfully to her new "father", because in many ways there has been so much healing.

I have a past, part of which I am ashamed of; felt repentant of; was contrite for; and was led to believe that with all that, if I accepted it, could have the full benefits of the Atonement. I excercised all the repentance posible, though some things can not be undone. With great emotion, astonishment, and thankfulness, I took the vows, made the commitments, purposed in my heart to obey and lived a life of obedience. Yet, still, in my most unguarded moments, people in authority choose to bring it up and before my face. This hurts a lot and after a while you'd think I would just toughen up, but it actually weakens, and disillusions me. It is sad to feel like being inactive after only 28 months.

Edited June 19, 2013 by EllenMaksoud

[Ahab]

While I love the church, I feel there is a huge disconnect between the doctrine taught by missionaries, and that of the GA. Admittedly, this is colored by the fact that I do not trust men easily. With the Atonement, there is a curious double talk practiced in the church, and I feel "lied to". I say this not as a traitor to the church, but as a daughter speaking respectfully to her new "father", because in many ways there has been so much healing.

I have a past, part of which I am ashamed of; felt repentant of; was contrite for; and was led to believe that with all that, if I accepted it, could have the full benefits of the Atonement. I excercised all the repentance posible, though some things can not be undone. With great emotion, astonishment, and thankfulness, I took the vows, made the commitments, purposed in my heart to obey and lived a life of obedience. Yet, still, in my most unguarded moments, people in authority choose to bring it up and before my face. This hurts a lot and after a while you'd think I would just toughen up, but it actually weakens, and disillusions me. It is sad to feel like being inactive after only 28 months.

Talk to them one on one and let them know it bothers you. And ask them to stop bringing it up, or to at least explain why they do. Don't just curl up in a ball and melt away. Stand up to them. Be confident, but humble, knowing you're doing the best you can do to follow God now while trusting that he has already forgiven you.

Mortals can be such idiots, including some mortals who are in leadership positions in the Church, so they sometimes need someone to help them to see their mistakes and how they can improve.

[Duncan]

While I love the church, I feel there is a huge disconnect between the doctrine taught by missionaries, and that of the GA. Admittedly, this is colored by the fact that I do not trust men easily. With the Atonement, there is a curious double talk practiced in the church, and I feel "lied to". I say this not as a traitor to the church, but as a daughter speaking respectfully to her new "father", because in many ways there has been so much healing.

I have a past, part of which I am ashamed of; felt repentant of; was contrite for; and was led to believe that with all that, if I accepted it, could have the full benefits of the Atonement. I excercised all the repentance posible, though some things can not be undone. With great emotion, astonishment, and thankfulness, I took the vows, made the commitments, purposed in my heart to obey and lived a life of obedience. Yet, still, in my most unguarded moments, people in authority choose to bring it up and before my face. This hurts a lot and after a while you'd think I would just toughen up, but it actually weakens, and disillusions me. It is sad to feel like being inactive after only 28 months.

a few weeks ago I emailed my Bishop about a situation that only he needs to know about and I shared some personal info (nothing sinful!) but much to my surprise he read the email in ward council mtg, without my being there or permission. Now, I either give brief tidbits or never talk to him

[EllenMaksoud]

a few weeks ago I emailed my Bishop about a situation that only he needs to know about and I shared some personal info (nothing sinful!) but much to my surprise he read the email in ward council mtg, without my being there or permission. Now, I either give brief tidbits or never talk to him

I have told the whole church that I am sick of people talking about me without my being there, and it was with considerable heat! Hyeah, like that helped. I think it is just institutionalized gossip.

[Ahab]

I have told the whole church that I am sick of people talking about me without my being there, and it was with considerable heat! Hyeah, like that helped. I think it is just institutionalized gossip.

You can't control what other people say about you, or to you... heck, you can't control other people in any way whatsoever.

You can push their buttons, though, sometimes, if you have a mind to. I can disregard it when other people push mine.

[The Nehor]

I have told the whole church that I am sick of people talking about me without my being there, and it was with considerable heat! Hyeah, like that helped. I think it is just institutionalized gossip.

I am pretty sure making a heated scene telling people not to talk about you will cause the opposite of the intended effect.

[EllenMaksoud]

I am pretty sure making a heated scene telling people not to talk about you will cause the opposite of the intended effect.

I am pretty sure making a heated scene telling people not to talk about you will cause the opposite of the intended effect.

Yes, it was done in the heat of passion, and perhaps ill advised.

[Kenngo1969]

... I have a past, part of which I am ashamed of; felt repentant of; was contrite for; and was led to believe that with all that, if I accepted it, could have the full benefits of the Atonement. I excercised all the repentance posible, though some things can not be undone. With great emotion, astonishment, and thankfulness, I took the vows, made the commitments, purposed in my heart to obey and lived a life of obedience. Yet, still, in my most unguarded moments, people in authority choose to bring it up and before my face. This hurts a lot and after a while you'd think I would just toughen up, but it actually weakens, and disillusions me. It is sad to feel like being inactive after only 28 months.

That's why Bishops are accountable to Stake Presidents, and Stake Presidents are accountable to Area Authorities, and Area Authorities are accountable to the Apostles. No one should bring up things you've repented of. No one. I'm assuming this is happening on the Ward level, with a Bishop. If I were you, I would call your Stake President's Executive Secretary and make an appointment to meet with the Stake President to share your concerns.