provoman Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 48 minutes ago, Tacenda said: Thanks for bringing up the parable from Jesus, you nailed it. Why couldn't the ward have just loved her? Even if she was wrong in being so vocal and maybe a little annoying to the wrongdoers such as the husband and other woman. Couldn't the ward leaders have been the better people and loved her and just let her go through the emotions/motions? Seems like they just wanted to make her shut up, so the real elephant in the room, the emotional affair, doesn't get out too much. Again the meetings that she recorded were meetings that were held about HER conduct not others. Her conduct was the issue. Her conduct was desctructive to the ward. Her conduct seems to have included FALSE statements about the Stake President. 3
Vanguard Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 39 minutes ago, Tacenda said: If everyone had just shown love and empathy to her none of this would be in the news now right? So it's not only affecting Sister Newbie it's affecting probably thousands more. Tacenda, a couple of things - 1) I assume you don't literally mean "everyone", correct? That would be quite the unreasonable expectation and is not necessary anyway. I'll instead assume you mean "some" when speaking about those who could have shown love and empathy. That being the case, what has led you to believe no one did?, and 2) Are you also suggesting that all it takes is someone to lend an ear in order to avoid all of this drama? Haven't you run across those whose desire to talk about their trials is all consuming and never satiated? If so, what leads you to believe this sister is not one such person? I myself have not made any conclusions about her. I can only go off of what the SP has reported. Do you not believe him?
JLHPROF Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 52 minutes ago, Tacenda said: If everyone had just shown love and empathy to her none of this would be in the news now right? I don't believe that for a second.
Thinking Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 14 hours ago, Amulek said: If the conclusion is that the Stake President is a bully, then no. I honestly don't think anybody who has listened to both of those interviews in their entirety can, in good faith, come away thinking that he is a bully. Imperfect? Sure, but not a bully. Unless, you are working with some kind of hypersensitive version of the term "bully." In my experience, bullies don't typically fast, pray, and spend hours in the temple thinking about how to help the people they are allegedly bullying. Nor do they tend to apologize for any of their missteps. If this guy is a bully, he is one of the least threatening bullies I have ever come across. I don't think that the SP intended to bully. Still, the woman felt bullied because she was told to be quiet. 2
The Nehor Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 1 hour ago, Tacenda said: If everyone had just shown love and empathy to her none of this would be in the news now right? So it's not only affecting Sister Newbie it's affecting probably thousands more. I am not convinced that love and empathy would have prevented this assuming it was even absent to begin with. And those thousands are people profoundly influenced by minor news stories. No big loss there.
cdowis Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 1 hour ago, Thinking said: I don't think that the SP intended to bully. Still, the woman felt bullied because she was told to be quiet. I firmly believe he told her what she need to hear to get out of that dark place. And she was spreading that darkness. 1
ttribe Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 2 minutes ago, cdowis said: I firmly believe he told her what she need to hear to get out of that dark place. And she was spreading that darkness. And what is the basis for this "firm" belief?
Tacenda Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 1 hour ago, Vanguard said: Tacenda, a couple of things - 1) I assume you don't literally mean "everyone", correct? That would be quite the unreasonable expectation and is not necessary anyway. I'll instead assume you mean "some" when speaking about those who could have shown love and empathy. That being the case, what has led you to believe no one did?, and 2) Are you also suggesting that all it takes is someone to lend an ear in order to avoid all of this drama? Haven't you run across those whose desire to talk about their trials is all consuming and never satiated? If so, what leads you to believe this sister is not one such person? I myself have not made any conclusions about her. I can only go off of what the SP has reported. Do you not believe him? 1.) Yes, everyone. What have LDS been taught to do? And I do believe many did, just don't know about it since I'm not a member of the ward. 2.) I believe this could have been handled differently that's all. And it wasn't apparently.
2PairsofCletes Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 I wish the Church had some sort of professional training for the leaders when it comes to things like this. This was handled so poorly.
provoman Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 16 minutes ago, 2PairsofCletes said: I wish the Church had some sort of professional training for the leaders when it comes to things like this. This was handled so poorly. What are the “ things like this” you wish there were training for? The divorce was over at the time of the recordings.
2PairsofCletes Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 People are are in an emotional crisis, as this woman was. Even though the divorce was final, her personal crisis was not. If anything, perhaps her leaders should have encouraged her to seek professional help from an LDS therapist, if she wasn't already. If I recall the recordings, she may have been. The bishop and SP were in over their heads dealing with a woman who needed more than they were capable of.
kiwi57 Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 11 hours ago, Thinking said: It is a local leader's responsibility to lead a person through the repentance process. It seems to me that an apology to an offended party would be part of that process. Am I wrong? One of the things about the repentance process is that it is a process, and it takes time. It's not just a matter of ticking off items on a list. Sometimes you have to pick your moment to try to make amends. One of the things about divorces is that there are two parties involved. I rather suspect that both of them have reasons to regard themselves as "an offended party." Of course the only version of events that anyone's heard is her version, but the one absolute certainty is that it isn't the whole story. 2
kiwi57 Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 8 hours ago, ALarson said: I think I've been clear. You stated: And I pointed out that apparently the SP disagrees with you "Pointed out" means that you are drawing attention to something non-controversial. Which, as you know, you are not. To more accurately represent the true state of affairs, your statement above should read something like this: "And I argued that apparently the SP's words can be interpreted in a way that disagrees with you" 8 hours ago, ALarson said: and does feel that he was wrong to handle it like he did (and I agree with him here). He both apologized and expressed that he wished he could have a "do-over". I'm not sure why you keep doubting his word (written in an email to her) I'm not doubting his word. I'm doubting your interpretation of his word. There's a difference. Are you really incapable of seeing it? 8 hours ago, ALarson said: or why some keep insisting that's not what his apology and desire for a "do-over" meant. Let's just take him at his word. Indeed. His word doesn't include anything like "I shouldn't have taken away your Temple Recommend." Because, after all, he really should have. Furthermore, given the fact that Tiercy wasn't at any stage trying to engage with him in good faith, the apology is unmerited.
Calm Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 (edited) 12 hours ago, Tacenda said: If everyone had just shown love and empathy to her none of this would be in the news now right? So it's not only affecting Sister Newbie it's affecting probably thousands more. Is she less a member of the ward than any other? Are her troubles somehow more significant than allthe rest combined somehow? Or should you be demanding of her the same impossible standard asyou are the rest of the ward, not to be emotionally impacted in a negative way or at least not to let it show and instead hide your feelings so any troubled member can feel safe. What would have been as close to ideal as possible in my view is for everyone in the ward, including this woman, to have tried to be loving towards others a little bit more even if forgiveness wasn't there yet. That way all the lost sheep in the ward can feel like they are part of the flock, both because they feel wanted and because they are trying to want others. Edited February 19, 2018 by Calm 2
kiwi57 Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 4 hours ago, Thinking said: IMO what happened in this situation seems to go contrary to what Jesus taught in the parable of the Lost Sheep. The SP can be heard explaining that he has a responsibility to the ward. The woman feels like she doesn't matter. Yes, that seems to be the way she's trying to dramatise it.
Calm Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 49 minutes ago, Tacenda said: 1.) Yes, everyone. What have LDS been taught to do? And I do believe many did, just don't know about it since I'm not a member of the ward. 2.) I believe this could have been handled differently that's all. And it wasn't apparently. Including her as she is LDS as much as any other? 1
kiwi57 Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 4 hours ago, Thinking said: Again. Got it. The parties just have to accept whatever decision is finalized - right, wrong, or indifferent. Just like when you go to court. The party representing him/herself as aggrieved doesn't get to deliver the verdict or hand down the sentence.
ALarson Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 (edited) 20 minutes ago, kiwi57 said: "And I argued that apparently the SP's words can be interpreted in a way that disagrees with you" Who are you quoting here? These are not my words. I really dislike this type of dishonest dialogue. I stated clearly (twice) what I thought. Do not put words in my mouth. Edited February 18, 2018 by ALarson 3
kiwi57 Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 7 hours ago, Tacenda said: Thanks for bringing up the parable from Jesus, you nailed it. Why couldn't the ward have just loved her? Even if she was wrong in being so vocal and maybe a little annoying to the wrongdoers such as the husband and other woman. Couldn't the ward leaders have been the better people and loved her and just let her go through the emotions/motions? Her behaviour wasn't merely "annoying," it was destructive. Make no mistake. And, just BTW, who says that her ex and the alleged "other woman" were the "wrongdoers?" Well, she does. I'm not quite sure how to break it to you, but her word doesn't exactly carry a lot of credibility any more. Quote Seems like they just wanted to make her shut up, so the real elephant in the room, the emotional affair, doesn't get out too much. The alleged "emotional affair." The thing is that she was trying to get the members of the ward to take sides with her, and thus socially isolate her ex. Such behaviour is utterly reprehensible and cannot be tolerated. Now Tacenda, I realise that we've got a major bit of feminist dudgeon going on here. Well, it happens that one of the victims of her systematic smear campaign was a woman. Who's going to speak up for her? Do not smear female posters. Do not put words in other poster's mouth.
juliann Posted February 18, 2018 Posted February 18, 2018 4 hours ago, CA Steve said: Explanations may not be possible because if a guy like me tries to explain why this thread is so popular he is just mansplaining, but if a woman tries to explain it, she is just a whiny gossip, who can't understand how difficult it is to be in a leadership position and having to make all the decisions. Just one clarification....not one man in this thread has been accused of mansplaining. 4
Popular Post CA Steve Posted February 18, 2018 Popular Post Posted February 18, 2018 1 minute ago, juliann said: Just one clarification....not one man in this thread has been accused of mansplaining. Maybe not, but a lot of them should be accused of manexcusing. 6
cdowis Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, ttribe said: And what is the basis for this "firm" belief? From my study of how church leaders handled similar situations, that they were inspired to speak in plainess to those traveling on the path of spiritual self-destruction, Edited February 19, 2018 by cdowis 2
Scott Lloyd Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 2 hours ago, ALarson said: Who are you quoting here? These are not my words. I really dislike this type of dishonest dialogue. I stated clearly (twice) what I thought. Do not put words in my mouth. He’s not saying these are your words. He was suggesting what should have been your words. Do you really not see the distinction? 1
ALarson Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 5 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: He was suggesting what should have been your words. Do you really not see the distinction? And, once again....I stated twice exactly what I thought and was clear regarding what I meant. I do not need someone telling me what "should have been" my words and putting them in quotes. 4
Scott Lloyd Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 9 minutes ago, ALarson said: And, once again....I stated twice exactly what I thought and was clear regarding what I meant. I do not need someone telling me what "should have been" my words and putting them in quotes. I get that. But contrary to your assertion, he was not quoting you, nor was he putting words in your mouth. Nor, for that matter, was he engaging in “dishonest dialogue.” 1
Recommended Posts