Notatbm

I made one post. You and others contributed to the thread. Thanks for helping out. It takes a village.

I don’t care- the church should. Most organizations care how their members represent them.

Yet known child molesters are found on the rolls of the church. The guy who produced the temple endowment films is one of them. I guess child molestation isn’t a serious sin. 🙂

I don’t care if I’m counted as a member or not. The church SHOULD purge its roles of known inactives and convicted criminals as a means to protect its “good name.” I mean just this week two people come to light who are members (one inactive and the other probably active due to garment wearing) one of which is an assassin and the other a child porn trafficker all in the same incident. If the inactive had been purged and the other dude also purged because of his long list of criminal activity the church wouldn’t have the PR problem. Granted they just choose to ignore it so it goes away but people round the world read the news and know these two are Mormon. It’s one thing to have to keep tabs on your active members, but it is a whole different task having to answer to the actions of those who have not shown up to church in years or are chronically in trouble with the law. every org I have ever been a part of will purge you from the roles if you dont pay dues, attend meeting etc. why the church holds on to those who don’t tithe or otherwise participate at all is senseless… unless the theory that the truthfulness of the gospel is proved by the growth of membership numbers… oh there we go

My kids don’t need to be shunned and othered and neither do my wife and I. I put up with it in order to stay in the family. Lots of PIMO do the same thing.

Brigham approves

I’ll have to try it out. The deseret book by gilbert temple sells them. I don’t have a recommend and don’t know my membership number. I’ll see if they will sell me some. Not gonna buy em, just want to see if I can. I think I’ll have to prove membership somehow. They are not that bad, but truly the only thing in their lives is church stuff. If you ain’t in to that there’s not much of a place for you. Last few years interestingly we have had lots of grandkids bailing on the church, coming out of the closet, non temple marriages etc. at least the open talk of contempt for those types of people has basically ceased. Now that they have all been affected by an aspect of it. I remember after the family proclamation came out my stake pres (former) father waxed poetic at a family get together about it and how the gays are ruining this country. They should all swing from a rope… oh boy. Good Mormons! All those grandkids sitting around hearing that are now married adults… some with lgbtq kids anyway at least no one it openly talking like that anymore.

From the church General Handbook: “32.2.3 Protect the Integrity of the Church The third purpose is to protect the integrity of the Church. Restricting or withdrawing a person’s Church membership may be necessary if his or her conduct significantly harms the Church (see Alma 39:11⁠). The integrity of the Church is not protected by concealing or minimizing serious sins—but by addressing them.” the church is very much concerned with image.

Messy? I think most are just fine. The problem from a PR perspective is why let a child molester, bank robber, scam artist etc remain as members? inactive?? That doesn’t make someone messy, just makes them disinterested. They should get purged too unless there is a compelling reason to keep them on the rolls. This is where the failed ministering program can come in handy. If they would just do their jobs they can be the ones who find out (from those who cooperate with them) reasons for non-attendance. They could even show up with pre-written resignation papers and they can sign em. They can report that to the bishop and he can have them removed from the rolls if necessary. Obviously this would have to be authorized from the top , but logistically it isn’t a stretch to pull off. They can at least get rid of a large percentage of people who have zero interest in the church. end result is church reported numbers are realistic. With a ~25% ish attendance rate the membership truly is only about 4-5 million ish. Huge difference.

nope just piggy backing on the failure of ministering program. There is a workforce in place to take care of purging roles, but they don’t even talk to the inactives. In my neighborhood ( which is literally the entire ward) everyone’s hone is within I believe < 1/2 mile. yea so d Mormons like to visually or tacitly (byu girls) check to see if people are wearing their garments. It is a way of establishing either membership or in some cases perceived righteousness/trustworthiness. You can visually see garment lines on shoulders, backs, sleeves etc. it is a thing. this George Zinn probably wears them to make sure he is regarded as an active Mormon. He is in Utah so makes sense he can get into some circles just because of church membership. As do I. Good thing that hedge fund is well-stocked. This is what Jesus would want it used for.

Most people don’t resign for a number of reasons. For me my extended family Mormonism is their life. All conversations revolve around the church, callings, missions, temple trips etc. known apostates and inactives don’t do well in that environment. Besides, the moment I die half of em would be clamoring to do all my ordinances all o er again. They already did that for a family member who was exed st his request back then (no such thing as resignation) and right away we got a few of em bragging about getting all his stuff done. Can’t even leave the dead alone.

sure they can and they have.

Not sure if I communicated that right. I meant I have some family members who will not associate with or do business with non Mormons if they have any control of it. One has gone so far his “roll-o-dex” is loaded with all his Mormon contacts for everything from the last 50 years or so. He won’t do business, use a handy man etc unless they are Mormon because non-Mormons are all dishonest (his words). family talks with me just fine.

not really, but you would think if they wanted to keep counting me as a member maybe someone would put forth some effort to see what’s up. No one cares and that is fine. I’m pretty sure zinn wanted to stay in the good graces of all his Mormon political friends. The garment checker wackjobs are real people. I have some in my family. You aren’t Mormon? Not worth talking to. https://floodlit.org/accused/

I told you two times I don’t have proof. I don’t care if you don’t believe it. you can read thru this if u like : https://mrm.org/mormon-missionary-strategy-gone-wrong#:~:text=“These British boys thought they,seek parental permission at all.&text=Unlike the recent ploy of,were undoubtedly baseball-baptism boys.&text=Perhaps the four overly-enthusiastic,Mexico need to hear that. The church can tell them exactly what to do. Stake president or not, they answer to the Q15

sounds like the ministering program is killing it. Have not attended in about 1.5 yrs. No one talks to me. I live within a literal baseball throw of I think six active families… six he is wearing garments… kinda hard to waltz into a bookstore and buy them without a recommend I suppose. Last time i bought them ( many moons ago). Had to present my recommend. I thought the church had to authorize the wear of garments or is that just an old wives tale? why would he wear garments if he wasn’t an active member anyway. I guess there are wierd people out there. so the church does not retain any child known child molesters? You faith in the force is weak Luke

To make sure we are on the same sheet of music a generation is approx twenty years: my understanding is the church counts someone on the roles as a member if they were baptized AND they have not yet reached the age of 110. If that is true, a person baptized at age 8 and never darkens the doorway of the church for the rest of their lives will remain a member in the rolls until the age of 110. That is FIVE generations they could be on the rolls so yea it is possible. A neighbor of mine hasn’t been to church since she graduated high school… she is in her late 60s so she has been inactive for two generations. My understanding is he is an inactive member.

if one had the “right” to be a member then how does the church go about excommunicating someone? I made it clear I had no proof so no CFR. Google it. Baseball baptisms, chile eliminated 30 stakes etc. what? Even if he (who) has what? church prob should have exed them earlier

If bishops and EQPs are doing their jobs, they will learn who many of them are. Relief society presidents get all the drama from the wives so there is another source. It isn’t hard. The George Zinn fellow (old guy with child porn) was well known all over Utah as getting picked up by the cops on a regular basis. The church knows how to retain child molesters so maybe the kirton mckonkie help line be a good start. the church can do anything it wants to do with a little addition of the power of the priesthood or do you not believe that?

Do you pay tithing? Do you do anything that would indicate you want to remain a member? Why don’t you attend? Doesn’t sound like it is what a devout believer would do unless it is for health reasons or being in a geographical area where there is no access to the church. Yes. What positive outcome can happen from keeping a child molester on the rolls of the church… or a beer swilling jack Mormon who doesn’t pay tithing? I do know one can point at those two examples and say- they are Mormons. It would be a bit tougher if they were not members.

The Mormon church regularly cites ~17million ish members, but many if not a majority of members are inactive and haven’t attended in decades or even a generation or two. I personally believe it is safe to say about 25% or less attend and probably an even smaller percentage pays a full tithe if any at all. So why keep people on the rolls if they by their own behavior demonstrate they don’t want to be? Some would say they should resign their membership and I may agree. Perhaps the church should do what I believe was done in England, Chile and the Philippines ( no proof but anecdotally I feel it happened) and purge the church of those who do not attend for whatever reason. Also, why not purge the rolls of those who are habitual criminals for example? Ex them and let them come back on their own terms if they decide to get it together. The reason I bring this up is this past week the church has had to face admitting the Charlie Kirk shooter is a member. Also in the same incident another guy (old man) is arrested at the scene for confessing to the shooting as a way of distracting law enforcement. He was hauled off and somehow his pants got pulled down and he was wearing his Gs. People got upset at another newspaper for an article mocking garments… isn’t this kinda the same thing? Allegedly this dude is a long time trouble maker in Utah and well known. Jim Bennet even knows of him. He has been arrested several times for stuff like bomb threats. And if that wasn’t bad enough the old man was found to have child porn on his phone and is now facing charges for that. I bet he has a current recommend. The temple film maker turned child molester is yet another. Why is the church holding on to these guys? it is tough enough for the church to have to parry away criticism over this stuff, why make it even more of a burden by keeping inactive and criminals on the rolls? It isn’t a good look. One would think it would be better to have a smaller number of members who are all-in as opposed to keeping no participants on the roster. Heck with this criteria just my non-attendance and non tithe paying would get me purged. anyway-discuss if you will.

Exactly…. Sooo dumb of a change it makes the Cracker Barrel sign thing look like a good idea.