Jump to content
flameburns623

Bill Reel announces excommunication is official, as a recording of his Disciplinary Council is released.

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Calm said:

I didn’t read the comment about the 1st Pres until after I had posted. 

I apply the same standard to the First Presidency, that is not a helpful way to encourage people to change. Whatever the reason, I hope that was an exception and one not repeated. 

I didn't know that the FP ever said anything to people when they were excommunicated.  Is that a normal occurrence?

Share this post


Link to post

David Bokovoy seems to be about social justice issues.  If I remember the daughter that went on a mission came out lgbt.  That seems to be what led him out.  The rest of the family stopped going after the November 2015 policy.  It sounds like he had been going by himself.  There are some Facebook posts that would go along with this.  Granted his take on scriptures in general is different than mine, but I always appreciate what he has to say.  He also is much more measured, even if it was on Mormon Stories.  Between social issues and outrage about them, it seems like it really doesn’t matter what the Church teaches.  The social issues have become their gospel.  I think often because of how they were taught to look at the world as LDS members.  They want to do good, even if the organization that taught them about morals disagrees with the social issue they have become indoctrinated in.  I would have never guessed in the 70s that things would be like they are.    

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/4/2018 at 2:16 PM, mfbukowski said:

If the longer term policy is in the manual it's one thing-  then it was the error of the SP- but if that was a direct de facto decision by the FP for this particular case, of course, that is another story

I hadn’t got there yet. Been interrupted and reading back to front, losing track and starting over in the wrong place. It does concern me that the FP did this. I am hoping it is not the usual, based on the belief you don’t want to overwhelm the person with too big of an obstacle to climb at first....which wouldn’t really make sense as if the point of excommunication is in part to address the seriousness of the sin, why downplay that?...so I have no speculation on why this happened except a mistake where it wasn’t read carefully enough the first time around or something wasn’t clear?

I don’t have an issue with them making mistakes, they are human, get tired and sick which interferes with both reasoning and feeling the spirit. But also I recognize there can be a big impact when leaders make mistakes. 

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I didn't know that the FP ever said anything to people when they were excommunicated.  Is that a normal occurrence?

I would like to know the procedure as well and if answering might be switched up between the three or maybe summarized by assistants first if time was limited, so not as consistent as we would hope.  I have no clue how many excommunications take place each week and how much time that would involve, but it seems likely a big chunk. 

Edited by Calm
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I didn't know that the FP ever said anything to people when they were excommunicated.  Is that a normal occurrence?

To be clear - when I state what the FP told me, it was via written communications with my stake president which were read to me.  I never spoke with or had two-way communicated directly with any apostle or FP member.

You probably know this, but applications for a restoration of blessings all go the first presidency (which I take to mean that their secretaries typically handle them). 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Exiled said:

What do you make of Dr. David Bokovoy, PhD and his leaving?  From his Dehlin interviews, he seems to have thought through the issues thoroughly and came up with a non-believing conclusion.  I don't think you can discount Mr. Bokovoy's non-belief as coming from a lack of scholarship, reasoning or not having read what apologists are saying.

Did I miss something?  Since when did Bokovoy claim non-belief?  I thought he was still a believer, albeit more nuanced.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, lostindc said:

 

NNN is absolute scumbag.  He diminishes the legitimacy of any movement in which he's involved.  I can speak for many of us non-believers and state that NNN is often criticized for what he does and most want him to stay away.

I know that a lot of the ex mormon community would rather him stay away....not impressed.  There are civil boundaries to always be considered in order to make even the smallest point  or argument relevant.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
41 minutes ago, Calm said:

I didn’t say he should post a disclaimer. 

I am not arguing any of these points. 

Then I must have misread your comment earlier about him not posting a disclaimer about his beliefs.  What was your point then, if not to argue for him needing to disclose his unbelief online prior to commenting on Mormonism?  

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Jeanne said:

I know that a lot of the ex mormon community would rather him stay away....not impressed.  There are civil boundaries to always be considered in order to make even the smallest point  or argument relevant.

Most ex mormons and non-believing Mormons have plenty of experience in Mormonism and also loved ones that are still within the faith.  We have an understanding of why the members do what they do.  To have a jerk like NNN harassing them in such a manner is disgusting.  The guy is absolute lowlife and a bully.  The same behavior he claims the Church does (bully it's membership), NNN does worse.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, bluebell said:

He may not be attending, but he used his membership in the church to improve his relevance and legitimacy.  When someone does that, severing the relationship on paper makes sense.

Do you think him now being able to label himself as a former member but was excommunicated from the church for exposing the lies and blah blah. (dont really know what his message is) now gives him less credibility to those that follow his broadcasts?  I think that to an outsider, being excommunicated for "exposing" the false claims of the church would only increase his credibility that what he is exposing is threatening enough to the church that they felt like they needed to silence him.

IMO, these regular excommunications of the month type events created by the church to somehow silence it's critics really do little to change opinions of those that follow such personalities both within the church and without.    I don't think there has ever in my lifetime been a time where so many members of the church are at odds with the leadership of the church.  The leadership of the church seems to think that somehow kicking out those that voice opposition to the party line will somehow fix the problem.  It seems more like it creates a whack-a-mole game.  The one dropping the hammer isn't winning this game.  Is there any evidence that these podcasters have lost such popularity that they have gone off the air?  Are their followers decreasing?  I really don't know.  Mabe, you might have an idea if you think this approach is working.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, lostindc said:

Most ex mormons and non-believing Mormons have plenty of experience in Mormonism and also loved ones that are still within the faith.  We have an understanding of why the members do what they do.  To have a jerk like NNN harassing them in such a manner is disgusting.  The guy is absolute lowlife and a bully.  The same behavior he claims the Church does (bully it's membership), NNN does worse.

I agree.  The truth is..he does not represent us very well...he is a detriment to our findiing a path that works for us and our LDS families.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Jeanne said:

I agree.  The truth is..he does not represent us very well...he is a detriment to our findiing a path that works for us and our LDS families.

So what do you think about those who appear to connect and promote his antics, even go along with them (thinking specifically about Denson)? (Serious question, not a challenge)

Edited by Calm
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

I agree.  The truth is..he does not represent us very well...he is a detriment to our findiing a path that works for us and our LDS families.

I agree!

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, california boy said:

Do you think him now being able to label himself as a former member but was excommunicated from the church for exposing the lies and blah blah. (dont really know what his message is) now gives him less credibility to those that follow his broadcasts?  I think that to an outsider, being excommunicated for "exposing" the false claims of the church would only increase his credibility that what he is exposing is threatening enough to the church that they felt like they needed to silence him.

IMO, these regular excommunications of the month type events created by the church to somehow silence it's critics really do little to change opinions of those that follow such personalities both within the church and without.    I don't think there has ever in my lifetime been a time where so many members of the church are at odds with the leadership of the church.  The leadership of the church seems to think that somehow kicking out those that voice opposition to the party line will somehow fix the problem.  It seems more like it creates a whack-a-mole game.  The one dropping the hammer isn't winning this game.  Is there any evidence that these podcasters have lost such popularity that they have gone off the air?  Are their followers decreasing?  I really don't know.  Mabe, you might have an idea if you think this approach is working.

 

 

To some, it will probably give him more credibility, but to active members of the church, yes, I do think it will give him much less.  And that's the point of excommunication in these types of situations, to protect the flock. It's not about protecting outsiders from hearing negative things or keeping someone from broadcasting whatever negative thing they want to say.  It's about keeping someone from broadcasting negative things about the church while being a member of the church.

The church knows that excommunication doesn't silence anyone.  That's why the accusations that 'the church just does this to silence people!' are so laughable.  In all the excommunications for these types of events, has it ever silenced anyone?  Obviously no.  Is the church so stupid that it just hasn't realized that yet.  Also obviously no.  People can (and do) disagree with excommunication but it would be helpful if those that do actually understand what it is.  Otherwise it's a lot of people congratulating themselves for knocking down strawmen (I'm not talking about you CB, just speaking in general to what I often see in the online communities).

But to address something you did say, this isn't a game, and getting the podcasts to have less followers isn't what determines who wins or loses.  If excommunicating an unrepentant person who is committing apostasy removes someone that is a spiritual danger to the flock, from the flock, more times than not,  then the approach is working.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, flameburns623 said:

Who or what is "NNN"?

New name Nancy or Newman or something

Share this post


Link to post
56 minutes ago, lostindc said:

Most ex mormons and non-believing Mormons have plenty of experience in Mormonism and also loved ones that are still within the faith.  We have an understanding of why the members do what they do.  To have a jerk like NNN harassing them in such a manner is disgusting.  The guy is absolute lowlife and a bully.  The same behavior he claims the Church does (bully it's membership), NNN does worse.

Who is "NNN"?

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Duncan said:

New name Nancy or Newman or something

???????

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, flameburns623 said:

???????

it's a screen name for that guy who goes into Temples and apparently goes all over videotaping stuff, Mike Norton is his real name

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/4/2018 at 4:13 AM, Tacenda said:

Do you guys ask questions to the one who is having the court? Because it seems like in several of these recordings I've listened to, there is only a statement and interchange with the SP only. Or are others asked to become part of the conversation? Or are they told to keep fairly quiet? 

It’s a council, not a court. Important distinction.*

In answer to your question, in our stake, the stake president asks all of the questions. When members of the council have questions, they ask them of the stake president, who then asks the question. He does this so that, if necessary, he can clarify what is being asked, rephrase the question so that it’s more appropriate or less likely to offend, etc. 

In every stake disciplinary council that I’ve participated in, there have been many questions asked by the council in this way, and I’ve always been appreciative of the stake president’s improvements to questions.

——

* Where I live, all incorporated associations are required by legislation to have bylaws and to have mechanisms for disciplining or removing members who violate those bylaws. An LDS disciplinary council is just another example of this legal requirement. 

Edited by Hamba Tuhan
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/3/2018 at 8:20 AM, hope_for_things said:

I listened to the recording, well at least the parts where Bill is talking, I couldn't really hear anyone else.  It was actually very good, I thought Bill expressed himself quite well.  

Not surprised about the Excommunication, the only surprise would be if any of these high profile "courts of love" didn't result in excommunication.

 

If there is evidence of true repentance then one will find cases where a person is not exed. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Duncan said:

it's a screen name for that guy who goes into Temples and apparently goes all over videotaping stuff, Mike Norton is his real name

Thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/3/2018 at 8:58 AM, hope_for_things said:

I interact with orthodox members every week in my ward and throughout my life, and from my experience they really have very little knowledge about the controversial and complex issues of church history. 

Probably so but the gospel is not about he who has the most knowledge are the ones that are exalted.  Nobody is going to be tested on church history at their judgement.  God really does not care about it that much.  For most members, they really don't care that much about all the technical things regarding history.  Much of which we don't fully understand because were were not there to personally witness the events.  We are instead relying on information gathered by others and some important details might be not included. 

We also look at issues different.  What one person might view as "controversial" might be nothing of significance to another member.  For example some people are disturbed by polygamy and how it was practiced.  I am not disturbed in the least by any of it.  We view and interpret events and things from our own unique perspectives.

Edited by carbon dioxide

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, flameburns623 said:

Thanks. 

He has been charged with trespassing and barred from going on church property, but appears to take special delight in filming himself doing just that (just curious to lawyers, can those videos be used as evidence against him or do they have to catch him in the act?).  For some reason, some of those wanting to have their videos noticed send them to him to post or work with him.

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×