Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by bsjkki

  1. Yes, in that situation, they can’t do much. I had situation of harassment. Proved it was from a guy in my ward. Bishop interviewed him. He denied it. Many families have been harassed by this guy. I laid out all the evidence. The Bishop did not confront him with the actual evidence and let him deny it. Lets him speak, pray and teach knowing what he’s done. It’s an open secret in leadership this guy is a creep but they don’t warn the young move ins. It’s between adults he said after a call to Salt Lake. He has a fake account on Facebook and Snapchat. Texts and contacts teen girls in the ward. Harasses from spoofed numbers. Has a complete double life. He’s a ward missionary and converts, then drives away the new members. I don’t understand why it is allowed to continue. We confronted him and unless he does anything else to us, legally we can’t do anything. He threatened to go to the authorities if we talk to him again. We told him we welcome an investigation. We can’t confront or speak to him again or we could get charged.
  2. In my experience, it’s best not to need pastoral care and then everything is good. Minimal interaction is the best course. 😏
  3. I don’t believe God calls unworthy people to serve. It is the mistakes of humans this happens. I think worthy people might ‘fall’ during their service. That’s on them.
  4. Wouldn’t a big mistake by a stake President be calling a Bishop who was a swindler? A Bishop calling a rapist as a counselor? Do you really believe God would inspire those callings? I don’t. Sometimes inspiration is not clear or we think we are doing God’s will but it’s really our will. Doesn’t mean the Bishop or the Stake President is completely incompetent. In my experiences, it was Bishops the handling of situations that hurt my family. Some actions had long term repercussions that we still deal with. A loss of trust that has been very difficult to restore due to ongoing issues. These were not bad men or bad people but maybe in over their head.
  5. You seem to be speaking of my personal experiences with a very broad brush. When people have disagreements with their church leaders, these issues should not be categorically dismissed as 'simple' and it is important how they are dealt with for the health and well being of all involved. Disagreements and/or offenses (a dirty ward in our culture) can be trivial or horrific even when it does not involve physical or sexual abuse. And while you might dismiss something as trivial, it might not be trivial to those effected. But, I will again state, if things are at all subjective, the member complaints will be dismissed and the church leader upheld. It's how it works.
  6. And your dismissive arrogance when people share their experience and concerns is well noted.
  7. So my discussing my personal experience with this issue is what has upset you? I’ve had some great Bishops. Recently, it’s been tough.
  8. So you admit there are some bad apples? Bad situations? Bad decisions?
  9. I think you are a bit sensitive here. Members do experience trauma interacting with church leaders and some bad leaders do create collateral damage. It’s the truth. You can categorize this as ‘simple’ disagreements. That’s your opinion.
  10. I have a realistic view of the church, not adversarial.
  11. I’m only expressing things are not always rosy out there. Do we have to pretend it’s all unicorns and rainbows all the time?
  12. Some members are collateral damage to bad leaders.
  13. Behaving what way? I’ve had some very awful experiences with Bishops. I’m still active. People have these experiences and dismissing concerns in the name of unity and not sowing division does not help those who have or are suffering from bad acts by leaders. Simple trauma counseling training for Bishops would do so much good.
  14. I’m not inferring any secret knowledge or church wide knowledge. I made it clear it was personal experience. Some has been discussed in the past. Some was mentioned in this thread. There are other experiences I don’t share. You dismissed the experiences of two other posters before I jumped in. Mocking the use of the word ‘trauma’ or difficulties about going over the head if your Bishop or Stake leader. My husband expressed displeasure with a Bishop to a stake leader. His response. ‘I know so and so and he’s a wonderful man.’ So, why bother? They know so and so which means you are just a disgruntled, thin skinned , easily offended complainer.
  15. And you wonder why people don’t think going to the Stake is a viable option. 🤔 The bias in favor of a Bishop or Priesthood leader is this strong.
  16. I felt like you until my experiences changed. It’s been eye opening to say the least.
  17. I think the potential is there. I did say I should have said ‘can be.’ They are not always traumatizing. So much depends on the leader.
  18. So dismissive. You keep saying the word ‘simple’ which I never said. Yes, I am speaking based on personal experience and in generalities because I don’t have to share details or justify my terminology to you. So, you are dismissing my representation while completely ignorant of the details which I think represents a certain bias on your part. You don’t think these things happen and disagreements are ‘simple’ so dismiss things while mentally filling in and minimizing trauma. Bishops really need to take a trauma counseling class so they don’t inflict more trauma.
  19. Here we go, SMAC’s definition of words and when they are applicable. Arrogance on display…again.
  20. Who said ‘simple?’ Why put your qualifier to my statement?
  21. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. This seems way too subjective. Simple disagreement with an ecclesiastical leader, without more, is "traumatic?" I should have phrased this ‘can be traumatizing.’ They don’t have to be. So much depends on your leader and the situation.
  22. And, since you do not have the facts of personal situations, you do not know if this is overwrought verbiage or not, do you? And no, I don’t have to share but you should not make definitive statements on others people’s experiences. IMO, another example of an underlying arrogance in your posts in this thread.
  23. Yes, and that is your opinion which comes off a bit arrogant and condescending in my opinion. But, IMO, that goes for many of your posts in this thread. I don’t find this disagreement with you traumatizing in the least. Disagreements with church leaders can be traumatizing because the consequences of their bad judgement can have very personal side effects that you suffer with for a very long time. The higher up you serve the more damage that can be done. So, I am very happy you have not had traumatizing interactions with church leaders and I wish everyone was so lucky.
  • Create New...