Jump to content

Church Sued in California


Recommended Posts

On 6/4/2020 at 5:56 PM, smac97 said:

Yes, I think that's likely.

I asked my wife if she's ever heard it, and she said she recalls it being in the lyrics of a primary song.  Sure enough, she was right.  I've never heard that song.

Thanks,

-Smac

Of course the Bishop ceases to be "Father of our Ward" upon release, and certainly upon excommunication. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
  • 3 weeks later...
  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The fact that Jesus chose Judas to be one of his apostles negates the idea that those who are called to serve will always make good decisions.  Everyone who is called to serve still has agency and can

I wonder if you have succumbed to a form of fundamentalist, black-or-white, all-or-nothing thinking.  You seem to reject inspiration altogether as part of the process of "the extending of callings" in

Correct, Fair Dinkum.  Indeed, an honest man or woman should be prepared to turn down a calling, unless receiving an authentic confirmation via the Holy Spirit.  How to know the will of the Holy Spiri

Posting here for some clarity on a few of these similar topics I'm seeing.  I have been in and around the wards in that area for decades and have also known the Neipp family.  The reason for his release as an acting Bishop was 100% hidden from the rest of the Ward/Stake and I'm staggering at the details I'm uncovering as all this unravels.  It looked from outside of that family's circle like a normal transition to another Bishop.   It turns out that he was released on the heels of the grooming and seducing a very young mom in his ward who was dealing with some deep emotional issues already.  On the heels of their affair, he began stalking her and she had to get a restraining order because he was following her child and trying to make contact (on public record).

I've been so sick to my stomach over this.  The family has done a great job hiding the cysts in so many places.

Link to post
On 6/4/2020 at 2:05 PM, Fair Dinkum said:

Evidentially a Pedophile was Called as Bishop.  Its been a long time since I believed that "Callings" are made by God through inspiration. Instead, personal experience has instead shown me that the extending of callings is a very human enterprise. That said many within the church still believe that callings are made by God through inspiration.

As someone who has been interviewed by a GA to fill the position of SP, I came to realize just how human this process really is.  (I am only sharing my opinion and do not expect anyone else to share my viewpoint)  Way too often, people such as this California bishop, sneak through the process, to leave me with any other conclusion.  God would not inspire leaders to call a pedophile as a Bishop, however well meaning human's would make this mistake and obvisouly do.

Then you must belong to another church...

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2005/10/called-and-chosen?lang=eng

Link to post

Speaking as a person who actually lived in that area, the Neipps have maintained a very connected life in the Ward and Stake.  The were close personal friends of Nan and Richard Hunter - yes, *the* Hunters.  When Bishop Neipp was released, there was nothing to indicate that it was for a reason.  The disciplinary issue was kept secret - apparently known only to a select few leaders outside of the family.  I guarantee that once this starts coming out more there will be a lot more like scratching our heads and saying 'what????? he was forced out on a disciplinary issue?????'

Link to post

re-posting here for some clarity on a few of these similar topics I'm seeing.  I have been in and around the wards in that area for decades and have also known the Neipp family.  The reason for his release as an acting Bishop was 100% hidden from the rest of the Ward/Stake and I'm staggering at the details I'm uncovering as all this unravels.  It looked from outside of that family's circle like a normal transition to another Bishop.   It turns out that he was released on the heels of the grooming and seducing a very young mom in his ward who was dealing with some deep emotional issues already.  On the heels of their affair, he began stalking her and she had to get a restraining order because he was following her child and trying to make contact

Link to post

You probably should wait and ask mods before posting personal info or stories of possible victims that may not be choosing to share their info publicly or hasn’t been shared in the media. 
 

I can understand the need to vent, but better not to make it worse for the victims. 
 

If the Church leadership was negligent in protecting its members, hopefully this will come out in the lawsuit and better procedures instituted. 

Edited by Calm
  • Like 3
Link to post
  • 3 weeks later...

@Calm    Oh wait, so an entire thread occurs of rampant speculation and assumptive discourse and someone finally gives some specifics that answer a lot of that speculation and only now it's time to invoke the mods?   mm k.  Nothing but random speculations will make this worse for the victims.  I will never understand why this beautiful church still is such a port of harbor for that 10% that will defend and enable every mis-step of church leadership even when that lack of foresight has resulted in the compromising of the innocence and virtue of children.   Better-a-millstone rings loudly here.

Link to post
59 minutes ago, Ms Misc said:

Nothing but random speculations will make this worse for the victims.

I agree, gossip about victims is damaging and should be avoided with all efforts.  But victims deserve the right to have control over their lives as much as possible and that includes sharing their stories publicly or not. We should not add to their abuse by assuming we know what is best for them and release personal info without letting them decide that for themselves. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
18 hours ago, Ms Misc said:

@Calm    Oh wait, so an entire thread occurs of rampant speculation and assumptive discourse and someone finally gives some specifics that answer a lot of that speculation and only now it's time to invoke the mods?   mm k. 

I started this thread to discuss a press release.

18 hours ago, Ms Misc said:

Nothing but random speculations will make this worse for the victims.  I will never understand why this beautiful church still is such a port of harbor for that 10% that will defend and enable every mis-step of church leadership even when that lack of foresight has resulted in the compromising of the innocence and virtue of children.   Better-a-millstone rings loudly here.

I'm not sure what you are talking about here.  What do you mean by "port of harbor for that 10%"?  10% of what?

What "mis-step of church leadership" are you referencing here?

Who is "defend{ing} and enabl{ing}" this mis-step?

Thanks,

-Smac

  • Like 1
Link to post
On 7/18/2020 at 11:42 PM, Ms Misc said:

Posting here for some clarity on a few of these similar topics I'm seeing.  I have been in and around the wards in that area for decades and have also known the Neipp family.  The reason for his release as an acting Bishop was 100% hidden from the rest of the Ward/Stake and I'm staggering at the details I'm uncovering as all this unravels. 

Could you elaborate on your reasoning here?  What is "staggering?"

On 7/18/2020 at 11:42 PM, Ms Misc said:

It looked from outside of that family's circle like a normal transition to another Bishop.

Okay.  How is that a problem?

On 7/18/2020 at 11:42 PM, Ms Misc said:

It turns out that he was released on the heels of the grooming and seducing a very young mom in his ward who was dealing with some deep emotional issues already. 

How do you know this?

On 7/18/2020 at 11:42 PM, Ms Misc said:

On the heels of their affair, he began stalking her and she had to get a restraining order because he was following her child and trying to make contact (on public record).

That is deeply troubling.

On 7/18/2020 at 11:42 PM, Ms Misc said:

I've been so sick to my stomach over this.  The family has done a great job hiding the cysts in so many places.

Do you think "the family" should have publicized the transgressions of Joseph Neipp?

Do you think the Church should have done so?

I'm not trying to provoke or anything.  I want to better understand your position.

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...