The Nehor Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 Did you read his comments on his stake president?And I don't believe they are an unbiased and truthful account.
rockpond Posted October 21, 2014 Author Posted October 21, 2014 Yet you are comfortable with his description of the intent of an entire Stake High Council (i.e. sharing the description of their actions as threats?) Please read Elder Nelsons description of the disciplinary counsel process before proceeding. I have only referred to Larsen's claim that the stake president told him that he had to remove his blog or be excommunicated. That seems like a threat. Is it better if I retract that term and call it an ultimatum? What word would you use to describe it?
rockpond Posted October 21, 2014 Author Posted October 21, 2014 (edited) And I don't believe they are an unbiased and truthful account. I meant where he acknowledged that his SP as a good man doing the best he could and acting entirely within his authority. Edited October 21, 2014 by rockpond
KevinG Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 With that statement are you proclaiming Larsen's guilt? Were you in the disciplinary council? No. If it helps that was a general observation of how these cases get reported if the participants are not repentant. Not a specific judgement about a case I only heard of in this thread.
The Nehor Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 I meant where he acknowledged that his SP as a good man doing the best he could and acting entirely within his authority.I meant the account as a whole.
KevinG Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 (edited) Did you read his comments on his stake president? You can respect someone, like someone, even love them, and not support them. Edited October 21, 2014 by KevinG
Avatar4321 Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 Larsen says that he felt called of God to write the blog. Is there any limit as to the demands that priesthood leaders can make while threatening our membership? Why was it okay for them to order him to take down the blog? Or is that not even a question we get to consider?and how is someone called of God? Shouldn't that alone tell you he wasn't?
KevinG Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 (edited) Did you read his comments on his stake president? No. I am making observations about the process in general, and taking your statements at face value. From what you are reporting there is inconsistency between demands and threats, and the process the church uses to determine what action to take in cases of apostasy. Please, please, please read the entire article from Elder Nelson or we are just posting at cross purposes, without you having any concept of how LDS Church disciplinary counsels work. Hint: Loaded words like purge, threats, demands... don't jive with the official LDS disciplinary process. So either Larson or the Stake President and entire High Counsel is lying. Or at the very least they have failed to communicate. In my experience when someone comes out complaining about the process, they were in it to prove themselves justified in their actions, not to understand the repentance process and come back into full fellowship with the Saints. If that is the case they may be better off following their own authority than pretending to be an active Latter-day Saints. Edited October 21, 2014 by KevinG 1
rockpond Posted October 21, 2014 Author Posted October 21, 2014 You can respect someone, like someone, even love them, and not support them. So by not deleting his blog writings he was not supporting his stake president? Are there any limits to what a stake president can ask?
Avatar4321 Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 (edited) I have and he is quite supportive of the church and a firm believer in the gospel.but not enough of a supporter to repent when called upon to make a choice on whether he would support the church or his blog. Edited October 21, 2014 by Avatar4321
rockpond Posted October 21, 2014 Author Posted October 21, 2014 No. I am making observations about the process in general, and taking your statements at face value. From what you are reporting there is inconsistency between demands and threats, and the process the church uses to determine what action to take in cases of apostasy. Please, please, please read the entire article from Elder Nelson or we are just posting at cross purposes, without you having any concept of how LDS Church disciplinary counsels work. Hint: Loaded words like purge, threats, demands... don't jive with the official LDS disciplinary process. So either Larson or the Stake President and entire High Counsel is lying. Or at the very least they have failed to communicate. I think you are getting at the heart of what I think is really important here. I understand the LDS disciplinary process as I am serving as a bishop's counselor right now... it's part of my calling. And, yes, words like purge, threats, demands do NOT fit with the process. So what is happening? What did Larsen write that is worthy of excommunication? And if he is spreading falsehoods about why he was excommunicated, than the SP has a responsibility to explain his excommunication. 1
Avatar4321 Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 I have to marvel at a situation like this. Saints have sacrificed all for the sake of the gospel and church. Wealth, their lives, their spouses, their children, their homes. Everything.this man won't even give up a blog and we are expected to believe he is not only a true believer but loves the church.sorry his actions yell louder than any profession of faith does 2
Storm Rider Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 I think you are getting at the heart of what I think is really important here. I understand the LDS disciplinary process as I am serving as a bishop's counselor right now... it's part of my calling. And, yes, words like purge, threats, demands do NOT fit with the process. So what is happening? What did Larsen write that is worthy of excommunication? And if he is spreading falsehoods about why he was excommunicated, than the SP has a responsibility to explain his excommunication. Rock, I think it would be highly inappropriate for the SP or anyone else in the Church to explain the excommunication. The responsibility is to the individual. If the individual goes about afterward and cast aspersions on the leadership they only condemn themselves further. 2
KevinG Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 I think you are getting at the heart of what I think is really important here. I understand the LDS disciplinary process as I am serving as a bishop's counselor right now... it's part of my calling. And, yes, words like purge, threats, demands do NOT fit with the process. So what is happening? What did Larsen write that is worthy of excommunication? And if he is spreading falsehoods about why he was excommunicated, than the SP has a responsibility to explain his excommunication. That is the question that only Larson, the Stake President and High Counsel, and God can answer. It really is none of our business beyond what he has chosen to make public. Which is one reason I'm commenting on the process and not his case specifically. I served as a Bishops Councillor years ago and experienced a remarkable process during a Bishops counsel. The Bishop and I agreed that a young woman should have her formal probation lifted without conditions, yet his other counselor did not reach that conclusion after prayer. We followed the manual and in turn spoke and prayed several more times. Finally, with a very powerful presence of the Lord's Spirit, we came to a unified conclusion that she should take some positive steps as part of her final repentance process (admonition to read scriptures and pray daily). Afterwards she thanked us and told us with relief, that she needed those conditions, because if we had simply said the process was done, she would not have felt the process was complete, and unworthy to receive the grace of Christ. This experience left a strong impression on me about the church discipline process. God is involved, and individuals needs are met. The idea that a threat came out of the blue, as opposed to a series of meetings and discussions intended to guide the participant prior to the consideration to excommunicate is foreign to my experience. Could it happen the wrong way? Sure. Is that consistent with Church teachings and common practices? No. Does it happen as often as those who publicly apostatize and speak out against the church and its leaders say it does? Not likely. 1
Avatar4321 Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 I think you are getting at the heart of what I think is really important here. I understand the LDS disciplinary process as I am serving as a bishop's counselor right now... it's part of my calling. And, yes, words like purge, threats, demands do NOT fit with the process. So what is happening? What did Larsen write that is worthy of excommunication? And if he is spreading falsehoods about why he was excommunicated, than the SP has a responsibility to explain his excommunication.being familiar with the process you should be aware that they cannot say anything.and have you ever been in a disciplinary council where revelation was not sought? 2
Sleeper Cell Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 (edited) So by not deleting his blog writings he was not supporting his stake president? Are there any limits to what a stake president can ask? That raises an interesting question. If a member really is using oral speech to promote apostate views, would it be unreasonable for the stake president to require him, as a condition of repentance, to stop? If not, why would it be unreasonable for the SP to require him to delete the same words from his blog? Edited October 21, 2014 by Sleeper Cell
KevinG Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 That raises an interesting question. If a member That raises an interesting question. If a member really is using oral speech to promote apostate views, would it be unreasonable for the stake president to require him, as a condition of repentance, to stop? If not, why would it be unreasonable for the SP to require him to delete the same words from his blog? using oral speech to promote apostate views, is it unreasonable for the stake president to require him, as a condition of repentance, to stop? If not, why would it be unreasonable for the SP to require him to delete the same words from his blog? I know this was directed at RockPond, but even if the request in substance is reasonable (which in the situation you describe I would agree is reasonable) then the way it is presented, asked, or demanded can be important. Just like disciplining my children am I more concerned with my ego, or the safety of my children and those they are around? However, that leaves us with "he said, she said" or ore accurately in this case "he says, they won't reveal the content of a private meeting". By publicly expressing dissatisfaction with the private actions, instead of appealing through the channels available in the church structure, the subject is demonstrating unwillingness to sustain those the Lord has called to authority at least on a local level. That in itself is telling.
rockpond Posted October 21, 2014 Author Posted October 21, 2014 I have to marvel at a situation like this. Saints have sacrificed all for the sake of the gospel and church. Wealth, their lives, their spouses, their children, their homes. Everything.this man won't even give up a blog and we are expected to believe he is not only a true believer but loves the church.sorry his actions yell louder than any profession of faith does Can priesthood leaders ask anything of us? Does there need to be any justification for their requests? What if his faith is what pushed him to keep the blog?
Rob Osborn Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 Accusing the church and its leaders of being in apostasy and thus no new revelation is one thing. The thing that got Adrian excommunicated was what appears to be a complete disregard to back down from hs stance. Just doing a 5 minute surf on the net shows that he has been all over the blogosphere and posting his opinions with distaste for church leaders since Brigham Young. He even thinks that Brigham Young was following after his own lusts and cause polygamy to continue to satisfy those sinful lusts. The bottom line- his excommunication is completely justified by the church!
JAHS Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 I think you are getting at the heart of what I think is really important here. I understand the LDS disciplinary process as I am serving as a bishop's counselor right now... it's part of my calling. And, yes, words like purge, threats, demands do NOT fit with the process. So what is happening? What did Larsen write that is worthy of excommunication? And if he is spreading falsehoods about why he was excommunicated, than the SP has a responsibility to explain his excommunication. Here's one example that in my opinion represents false doctrine.From one of his blogs called "Destroying the Doctrine of Christ":"Maybe we should talk about teachings, tenets, and beliefs. But that's just semantics. I mean, the actual doctrine, the stuff Jesus calls HIS doctrine, we certainly haven't messed with that, right? Have we?Well, unfortunately, we have. And rather badly, I'm afraid." He then goes on with an example and lists all the things church leadership has done wrong with regards to the requirements for baptism; ignoring the possibility for latter-day revelation on the subject. He only agrees with what the scriptures and Christ said about baptism but then disagrees what our latter-day prophets have said about it. If he contradicts and disrespects what our latter-day church leaders say he is preaching false doctrine or at least proclaiming publicly that church leaders are leading us astray. This activity IMO is worthy of excommunication. 1
rockpond Posted October 21, 2014 Author Posted October 21, 2014 Rock, I think it would be highly inappropriate for the SP or anyone else in the Church to explain the excommunication. The responsibility is to the individual. If the individual goes about afterward and cast aspersions on the leadership they only condemn themselves further. There are times where the priesthood leader must speak about the excommunication. There was one instance in my ward where it had to be done. It is permitted, per the handbook, in certain circumstances. Whether or not this fits those circumstances would be up to the SP. 1
KevinG Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 "You shall know them by their tweets."-New Millennial Version
rockpond Posted October 21, 2014 Author Posted October 21, 2014 being familiar with the process you should be aware that they cannot say anything.and have you ever been in a disciplinary council where revelation was not sought? No, revelation has always been sought in my experience. And being familiar with the process I know that there are cases wherein public statements need to be made.
Calm Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 Personal blogs and public teachings are so conflated these days as to be nearly indistinguishable from each other. Presenting one's self as a public authority on Mormonism, be it through discussion boards, blogs, webcasts, radio or print materials... puts one in a place of responsibility for the message. If I were to publish online about an organization I represented (which we do through the priesthood), you bet I'd be held accountable to their authorities for what I said. The level of accountability and authority would have to be a local and case by case, call. That is one reason I'm loathe to second guess a Stake President's decision, based on only one side of the story. How many times was this person asked or counselled "we don't teach that..." only to disregard the counsel and set himself apart from the church and its teachings? I think it is rather disingenuous to seek an audience for your teachings, then complain that they were only personal musings, when corrected.Especially when you start out by informing everyone you have received a revelation to do so.
KevinG Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 Especially when you start out by informing everyone you have received a revelation to do so. Well there is that...
Recommended Posts