MormonLeaks: Former Mormon Mission President Admitting to Inappropriate Interactions with Women

[Guest]

6 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

I was talking to a friend last night for whom Joseph Bishop was also the MTC president, and he reminded me of something I had completely forgotten. President Bishop often spoke of a vision he said he had. In this vision he saw that the whole world was full of dark, evil spirits, but when you came to the MTC, there was a vanguard of angels and Nephite warriors surrounding the temple, protecting the missionaries and keeping the evil spirits out. He would tell us that any sin we committed at the MTC was the same as allowing one of those evil spirits to enter and drive out the spirit from our midst. Seems awfully ironic.

A few things really stand out. My heart breaks for this woman, who came to the MTC for all the right reasons and was preyed upon by someone who recognized and used her vulnerability. I am horrified to know that she reported his actions to a general authority and was ignored. That seems like an even greater betrayal, almost, than the original offense. Finally, reading the transcript, Bishop seems to believe he is some sort of victim in all this, and it was especially galling when he said he felt like he would have been a GA if not for this. At least he had the decency to admit what he did.

What a sad, sordid affair. I sincerely hope that the church is learning from its past mistakes in matters like this. Any organization is only as good as the people who run it, and the church is no exception. In this case, multiple people did wrong, either through overt actions harming this sister or through passively ignoring what was right in front of them.

And I can't say enough about how brave she was to finally confront him. It took me over 20 years to confront my abuser, so I know how hard it must have been.

Amen, and amen! It is so sad and frightening how predators can always recognize prey. As a Father, and a Papa, who set a daughter on a mission, and in just four years could be sending a granddaughter on a mission, the GA who was told, should also be punished! My daughter served her mission in Colorado and Wyoming, and each day I would remind myself that she was only a 24 hour straight drive away, if her Daddy needed her, and each day I was ready to come to her rescue if she needed me. Thankfully, her mission was a very positive experience. 

[CV75]

10 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I was talking about the virtues of telling the truth, nothing more. But I’ll bow out. Listening to Bolivian music, which always makes me happy. Talking about abuse doesn’t. 

Long live the charango!

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I was talking about the virtues of telling the truth, nothing more. But I’ll bow out. Listening to Bolivian music, which always makes me happy. Talking about abuse doesn’t. 

Every time I see the name "Bolivian", it reminds me of the movie clip where, Butch Cassidy (a Mormon BTW) and the Sundance Kid, arrive get of the train and see where they are. 

[Robert F. Smith]

17 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Not understandable or morally justifiable in my book.  Rather it was a precedent of deception and violating laws using a justification that some laws of God (polygamy) take precedence over other laws, (honesty and marital fidelity.) 

As with same sex marriage, there are those like you who do not allow freedom of choice and want to dictate morals, honesty, and marital fidelity.  That was why Mormons had to keep polygyny confidential, but you already knew that when you made your false statement.  Of course, you neglect to point out that Martin Luther could not condemn polygyny, because the Bible does not condemn it -- it is clearly acceptable to God in the Bible (that's what Luther said).

17 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Mormons have a clean slate when it comes to racism?  Wow, what world are you living in.  

Joseph Smith ordained Black men, and ran for President on a platform which included freeing the slaves.  Mormons never engaged in the wholesale murder of Black people the way your fellow "Christians" did in the South, even after Emancipation.

17 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Last time I checked, I thought Mormons were claiming a Christian heritage?  You can't claim to be Christian and pretend you're not part of that legacy.  

You mean that "Christian" heritage of murder and the Inquisition? You mean that "Christian" legacy of absurd, apostate creeds and nonsense theologies?  You might try the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which that legacy trashes.

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, CV75 said:

Long live the charango!

One of the many positive things in my life I owe to the church.

[canard78]

15 hours ago, JAHS said:

It's happened before and will happen again. Doesn't make it right, but it is a fact that we have to live with in this world of imperfect people.
God doesn't take over a man's brain and force him be perfapostect and without sin. He does still inspire most church leaders to help lead us in the right way.
Their own personal sins are something they have to work on, like we all do. 

This doesn't go far enough and is too easy a way to shrug this off. 

In your model:

• God called a sexual predator, several times, into positions of authority and opportunity to abuse. 
• God's apostle (Boyd Packer) gave advice to a seventy to not fund counselling for a suicidal missionary and instead instructed that she meet her bishop
• Despite confessing, the general authorities leading this predator took no action and instead gave him further callings in positions of authority and influence

To close your eyes and cover your ears by saying that people are imperfect avoids the core issue at the heart of this: Mormonism does not have inspired leaders and don't act in God's name. There has been evidence for this before, this is evidence now and there will be evidence again in the future.

 

[bluebell]

2 minutes ago, canard78 said:

To close your eyes and cover your ears by saying that people are imperfect avoids the core issue at the heart of this: Mormonism does not have inspired leaders and don't act in God's name. There has been evidence for this before, this is evidence now and there will be evidence again in the future.

So, what your saying is that if mormonism had inspired leaders and was actually lead by Christ, no leader would ever be called who would go on to cause someone pain and harm.   Am I understanding you correctly?

[rockpond]

3 minutes ago, bluebell said:

So, what your saying is that if mormonism had inspired leaders and was actually lead by Christ, no leader would ever be called who would go on to cause someone pain and harm.   Am I understanding you correctly?

I don't think that's what Canard is saying but obviously he can reply for himself. I'll say this, however, for those who haven't listened to the audio or read the transcript yet...

I have long accepted the fact that we are going to call leaders who do things that cause pain and harm.  I have been a ward leader and have likely made mistakes in calling people.

What makes this particular case so devastating is that Bishop admits that he first molested someone while he was in a bishopric.  He went on to be called as a bishop, counselor in a mission presidency, mission president, and MTC president all while continuing a pattern of sexual abuse.  He presumably confessed sexual abuse.  He was reported for sexual abuse.  And it appears that nothing was done to ever stop him.

Now, as the story breaks, we see the Church quietly removing his books and biography from the website of their publishing arm.  I heard they pulled his articles off of the LDS.org archives.  All the while, no comment from church officials.

It's feeling a lot like the Catholic church cover up of abuse by their priests.  But, it's still early -- this only broke yesterday.

[Jeanne]

5 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

Wow, track your positives and ignore negatives.  It seems like this was his MO.  Besides all the other problematic issues that were revealed in this recording, I found it especially disturbing that Mr. Bishop continued to try and fix his problem without professional help and without real accountability for his actions.

Ignore negatives?  Is this part of the culture of Mormonism?  I surely hope its not, however I worry about the precedents set by early church leaders, the deceptions that were perpetuated, the cover-ups, and lack of accountability for mistakes made.  Even the we don't apologize ideal espoused in recent years by President Oaks.  It seems to me that our Mormon culture has a serious problem here.  

I  agree..how is this even possible to ignore...there is nothing right one can do..to make up for all the negative impacts that makes huge ripple affects all over.

[Jeanne]

3 hours ago, smac97 said:

We cannot control what MormonLeaks does.  We can only control our own behavior.

Thanks,

-Smac

Thank you. 

[jkwilliams]

3 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

Thank you. 

I have it on good authority that the guy who runs MormonLeaks is a pretty decent fellow. 

[Jeanne]

3 hours ago, sunstoned said:

MormonLeaks didn't do anything except to shed light on some very troubling actions by a church leader.  Apparently, brother Bishop could not control his own behavior.  Apparently the church didn't do anything about it.  Someone needed to speak up.  Changes need to be made so that these types of things will not be repeated.

I agree with this totally.  But I gave Smac a rep point because ...controlling our own behavior means that MormonLeaks is not responsible for the context of what they have exposed. We cannot blame the messenger..the real messenger was ignored.

[Jeanne]

2 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

I was talking about the virtues of telling the truth, nothing more. But I’ll bow out. Listening to Bolivian music, which always makes me happy. Talking about abuse doesn’t. 

Don't go...you are an honest poster who sees both sides of everything and tries to get along..don't go..

[Jeanne]

5 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I have it on good authority that the guy who runs MormonLeaks is a pretty decent fellow. 

I think so too...never blame the messenger..it doesn't change  a truth or false...it just informs.

[jkwilliams]

2 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

I think so too...never blame the messenger..it doesn't change  a truth or false...it just informs.

I'm biased, as he's a family member. Good guy, despite his association with me (by marriage).

[Storm Rider]

55 minutes ago, canard78 said:

This doesn't go far enough and is too easy a way to shrug this off. 

In your model:

• God called a sexual predator, several times, into positions of authority and opportunity to abuse. 
• God's apostle (Boyd Packer) gave advice to a seventy to not fund counselling for a suicidal missionary and instead instructed that she meet her bishop
• Despite confessing, the general authorities leading this predator took no action and instead gave him further callings in positions of authority and influence

To close your eyes and cover your ears by saying that people are imperfect avoids the core issue at the heart of this: Mormonism does not have inspired leaders and don't act in God's name. There has been evidence for this before, this is evidence now and there will be evidence again in the future.

 

Yeah, not so much, Canard78.  You exaggerate and when you do I dismiss your entire argument. You were doing well until you started with that exaggeration and grandstanding.  Based on your logic you are a murderer because you casually killed bugs and therefore cannot be trusted with children.  

It is so much simpler to state the truth.  Leaders failed in this instance does not equate to them being uninspired leaders.  It means they failed in this instance.  See how easy that was and you don't need to spin anything.  People watch far too much TV and try to spin to "win" an argument when it is not necessary or advisable.  

[Teancum]

18 hours ago, bluebell said:

In some way it’s hard, but in others it’s the easier option. 

I guess it is an individual thing.  For me it was hard to ask such questions or think like this for a long time. Then when I started asking and coming to possible conclusions that were not what I really wanted but felt I had to face it was incredibly painful. There were days I wanted to die in the early part of this process. So no it was not the easier option. I certainly was not looking for an an easy way to not believe.

[Jeanne]

3 minutes ago, Teancum said:

I guess it is an individual thing.  For me it was hard to ask such questions or think like this for a long time. Then when I started asking and coming to possible conclusions that were not what I really wanted but felt I had to face it was incredibly painful. There were days I wanted to die in the early part of this process. So no it was not the easier option. I certainly was not looking for an an easy way to not believe.

I hear you...it is as you described..incredibly painful.  It is only easy if you never believed in blessings and promises.

[omni]

9 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

Yeah, not so much, Canard78.  You exaggerate and when you do I dismiss your entire argument. You were doing well until you started with that exaggeration and grandstanding.  Based on your logic you are a murderer because you casually killed bugs and therefore cannot be trusted with children.  

It is so much simpler to state the truth.  Leaders failed in this instance does not equate to them being uninspired leaders.  It means they failed in this instance.  See how easy that was and you don't need to spin anything.  People watch far too much TV and try to spin to "win" an argument when it is not necessary or advisable.  

Where was the power of discernment in this situation?  

I assume his calling was approved at the highest levels.  How many times as an MTC President did me meet with apostles or members of the First Presidency?  Where was the Spirit whispering to these men that something was off?

We're not talking about a gospel doctrine teacher who got a little frisky with his girlfriend, Bishop was an MTC President who intereacted frequently with the brethren.

Were this a one-off issue, you may have a better case, however similar examples have happened many times in the past and this isn't even the most egregious.

Either the power of discernment is a myth or its awfully inconsistent. 

[Jeanne]

3 minutes ago, omni said:

Where was the power of discernment in this situation?  

I assume his calling was approved at the highest levels.  How many times as an MTC President did me meet with apostles or members of the First Presidency?  Where was the Spirit whispering to these men that something was off?

We're not talking about a gospel doctrine teacher who got a little frisky with his girlfriend, Bishop was an MTC President who intereacted frequently with the brethren.

Were this a one-off issue, you may have a better case, however similar examples have happened many times in the past and this isn't even the most egregious.

Either the power of discernment is a myth or its awfully inconsistent. 

The sad part on a personal lever for me is...not where is discernment...but where is God?  This has really done a number on me.

[Duncan]

18 minutes ago, omni said:

Where was the power of discernment in this situation?  

I assume his calling was approved at the highest levels.  How many times as an MTC President did me meet with apostles or members of the First Presidency?  Where was the Spirit whispering to these men that something was off?

We're not talking about a gospel doctrine teacher who got a little frisky with his girlfriend, Bishop was an MTC President who intereacted frequently with the brethren.

Were this a one-off issue, you may have a better case, however similar examples have happened many times in the past and this isn't even the most egregious.

Either the power of discernment is a myth or its awfully inconsistent. 

and nevermind Moms!!! they know EVERYTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!! how did you know that person was XYZ? "oh, you can just tell! I know that like 20 years ago, it's no surprise"

[JAHS]

1 hour ago, canard78 said:

This doesn't go far enough and is too easy a way to shrug this off. 

In your model:

• God called a sexual predator, several times, into positions of authority and opportunity to abuse. 
• God's apostle (Boyd Packer) gave advice to a seventy to not fund counselling for a suicidal missionary and instead instructed that she meet her bishop
• Despite confessing, the general authorities leading this predator took no action and instead gave him further callings in positions of authority and influence

To close your eyes and cover your ears by saying that people are imperfect avoids the core issue at the heart of this: Mormonism does not have inspired leaders and don't act in God's name. There has been evidence for this before, this is evidence now and there will be evidence again in the future.

 

Unfortunately God may not always be involved in the selection process of choosing leaders, but we hope that He is and in my experience most of the LDS leaders are inspired and do act in God's name when making those choices.
You are right that there is evidence that a few have not been inspired but you can't make such a sweeping statement and say they all are not inspired. 
And we have to remember to place the bulk of the blame where it really lies and that is on the shoulders of those who accept the callings who are perhaps less than worthy and commit these sins; they will receive condemnation for it if they do not repent. 

[hope_for_things]

2 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

As with same sex marriage, there are those like you who do not allow freedom of choice and want to dictate morals, honesty, and marital fidelity.  That was why Mormons had to keep polygyny confidential, but you already knew that when you made your false statement.  Of course, you neglect to point out that Martin Luther could not condemn polygyny, because the Bible does not condemn it -- it is clearly acceptable to God in the Bible (that's what Luther said).

Your thinking is backwards.  SSM supporters are in favor of freedom, religions that opposed it are against freedom on that issue.  Dictating morals has been the purview of religious traditions everywhere and the mechanism by which they police behavior.  I'm in favor of rational arguments to support morality positions, and I'm against appeals to authority and tradition without reason.  Your side point about Luther is just another appeal to an authority figure, which I don't find persuasive.  

2 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Joseph Smith ordained Black men, and ran for President on a platform which included freeing the slaves.  Mormons never engaged in the wholesale murder of Black people the way your fellow "Christians" did in the South, even after Emancipation.

I'm sure you are aware of the complexities on this issue, yet you pick and choose select facts to try and promote a very one sided perspective.  Many evils have been perpetuated against blacks by the Mormon tradition, this is a reality that I've read by multiple reputable Mormon historians.  We have much to do to atone for the evils of the past and to correct the current inequities in our contemporary culture with respect to blacks.  Comparing our mistakes to the mistakes of others that might have been more egregious strikes me as not very Christian.  

2 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

You mean that "Christian" heritage of murder and the Inquisition? You mean that "Christian" legacy of absurd, apostate creeds and nonsense theologies?  You might try the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which that legacy trashes.

If Mormonism wants to call itself a Christian church, then it can't pretend that it hasn't been built upon the foundation of evils that have been perpetuated by that same Christian tradition.  You can't have it both ways. 

I'm quite surprised by the tone you've taken in this thread, almost as if you have an axe to grind against critiques of Mormonism.  If you aren't willing to look at our mistakes in the past with an honest appraisal, then how can you possibly hope to make positive changes in the present.  

[hope_for_things]

1 hour ago, Jeanne said:

I  agree..how is this even possible to ignore...there is nothing right one can do..to make up for all the negative impacts that makes huge ripple affects all over.

The whole idea that there is some kind of scale that weighs right actions we do against wrong actions is a problem in and of itself.  That we should ignore the wrong and just move full steam ahead pursuing the right is a problem.  There are much more healthy ways to deal with mistakes, and the gospel even teaches these principles. 

Its almost as if these very corrosive ideals have crept into Mormon culture and they have no support in the wisdom of reason or tradition, yet are pursued with vigor by those who would promote them as pseudo religious ideals.  Mormonism seems especially vulnerable to this kind of thinking because all it takes is one authority figure promoting an idea, without any supporting evidence and because of deference to authority people accept these ideas uncritically.  

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

I don't think that's what Canard is saying but obviously he can reply for himself. I'll say this, however, for those who haven't listened to the audio or read the transcript yet...

I have long accepted the fact that we are going to call leaders who do things that cause pain and harm.  I have been a ward leader and have likely made mistakes in calling people.

What makes this particular case so devastating is that Bishop admits that he first molested someone while he was in a bishopric.  He went on to be called as a bishop, counselor in a mission presidency, mission president, and MTC president all while continuing a pattern of sexual abuse.  He presumably confessed sexual abuse.  He was reported for sexual abuse.  And it appears that nothing was done to ever stop him.

Now, as the story breaks, we see the Church quietly removing his books and biography from the website of their publishing arm.  I heard they pulled his articles off of the LDS.org archives.  All the while, no comment from church officials.

It's feeling a lot like the Catholic church cover up of abuse by their priests.  But, it's still early -- this only broke yesterday.

His books on Deseret were already getting reviews with things like 'sexual predator' written in them, so i'm not at all surprised that his stuff has been pulled before the church made any public comment.  I'm guessing they'll say something eventually.

I'm struggling to fully believe that he was confessing these sins with no consequences, all the while being given more and more authority, mostly because i've known other examples of confessions of wrong doing and they have always been taken seriously and repentance was always required.  The idea that this kind of stuff is systematic in the church to the point that a leader could do it over and over while being known and nothing done doesn't match the personal evidence that I have.  That's why I'm waiting to see what else comes out before forming any real opinions about how it was handled.