Diamondhands69 Posted December 3, 2023 Author Posted December 3, 2023 25 minutes ago, InCognitus said: If your stake president acknowledged that neither he or any other stake president has jurisdiction in this, then your issue is with your stake president, because "Salt Lake" should have nothing to do with this. From the General Handbook: As it says above, "only the stake president decides if a council should be held to address the conduct". It's all on him, according to the Handbook. This is true even if the person was in a different ward or stake when the serious sin was committed: So who disciplines an apostle? That’s not what I’m talking about here, but would a stake president ex an apostle? Or anyone who outranks a stake pres? Like I said there is a reason no stake pres will be a decision maker in this unless someone with juice in salt lake calls him and tell him to. They won’t dare touch it unless salt lake has finished an investigation. This isn’t a situation of just simply a wayward temple sealer. Much more complicated than just that.
Pyreaux Posted December 3, 2023 Posted December 3, 2023 19 minutes ago, Diamondhands69 said: Much more complicated than just that. .... Is there proof? Could it be what you're seeing is he's been able to lie his way out of it?
InCognitus Posted December 3, 2023 Posted December 3, 2023 23 minutes ago, Diamondhands69 said: So who disciplines an apostle? That’s not what I’m talking about here, but would a stake president ex an apostle? Or anyone who outranks a stake pres? Like I said there is a reason no stake pres will be a decision maker in this unless someone with juice in salt lake calls him and tell him to. They won’t dare touch it unless salt lake has finished an investigation. This isn’t a situation of just simply a wayward temple sealer. Much more complicated than just that. Then I would take webbles advice and just let it drop, because you did your part. It's out of your hands. And if it is that much more complicated, then there may be complications for which you are not aware as well. 1
rpn Posted December 3, 2023 Posted December 3, 2023 4 hours ago, Diamondhands69 said: The replies back have been 100% verbal and third hand so I have no way of knowing how far this has gone, who has seen it etc. whenever I get a talking to about it no one can provide a name of whoever it is coming from since we are so far down the chain. Definitely no written correspondence coming from salt lake. When you send the written material and get a verbal response, then you write to that person documenting what happened, that you asked for names and what you were told by whom. When you shoot it up further you include what you did, what you wrote after you met with them documenting what they said and did (or didn't/refused to do). If they then tell you you got it wrong, you follow up and document haven't been told that. It doesn't matter who told them what, you use the bishop/stake president/area president ---even though they don't have direct ecclesiastical authority over Bishops and SP I think --- then to the President of the Quorum of the 12 and finally to the office of the First Presidency. Remember that your goal here isn't about getting it resolved, but making sure at every level, those with authority have the information to fix it, and therefore can be held accountable if they do NOT fix it or prevent ongoing or future harm. 1
Diamondhands69 Posted December 3, 2023 Author Posted December 3, 2023 41 minutes ago, rpn said: When you send the written material and get a verbal response, then you write to that person documenting what happened, that you asked for names and what you were told by whom. When you shoot it up further you include what you did, what you wrote after you met with them documenting what they said and did (or didn't/refused to do). If they then tell you you got it wrong, you follow up and document haven't been told that. It doesn't matter who told them what, you use the bishop/stake president/area president ---even though they don't have direct ecclesiastical authority over Bishops and SP I think --- then to the President of the Quorum of the 12 and finally to the office of the First Presidency. Remember that your goal here isn't about getting it resolved, but making sure at every level, those with authority have the information to fix it, and therefore can be held accountable if they do NOT fix it or prevent ongoing or future harm. Who am I supposed to write to and where when even the stake pres has no idea who is working it or who has seen my written letter? Other than the area authority saying “ yes salt lake has it and they are not responding to me. I have no idea what they are doing with it… if anything at all.” Two years of this. The system doesn’t work. I imagine a response of “ we consider this matter closed” is what they would say anyway lol.
Diamondhands69 Posted December 4, 2023 Author Posted December 4, 2023 1 hour ago, InCognitus said: Then I would take webbles advice and just let it drop, because you did your part. It's out of your hands. And if it is that much more complicated, then there may be complications for which you are not aware as well. I am fully aware of what the complications are and why this is echelons above the pay grade of any stake pres.
webbles Posted December 4, 2023 Posted December 4, 2023 2 hours ago, Diamondhands69 said: So who disciplines an apostle? That’s not what I’m talking about here, but would a stake president ex an apostle? Or anyone who outranks a stake pres? Like I said there is a reason no stake pres will be a decision maker in this unless someone with juice in salt lake calls him and tell him to. They won’t dare touch it unless salt lake has finished an investigation. This isn’t a situation of just simply a wayward temple sealer. Much more complicated than just that. Stake President would not be able to hold a disciplinary action against an apostle. That would be done by the Quorum of the 12 Apostles. I think the Seventies are similar. 1
InCognitus Posted December 4, 2023 Posted December 4, 2023 3 minutes ago, webbles said: Stake President would not be able to hold a disciplinary action against an apostle. That would be done by the Quorum of the 12 Apostles. I think the Seventies are similar. Seventies are handled similar to apostles. When Elder James J. Hamula (an area seventy) was excommunicated, the church news article said it was "disciplinary action by the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles." 3
Rain Posted December 4, 2023 Posted December 4, 2023 6 hours ago, InCognitus said: If your stake president acknowledged that neither he or any other stake president has jurisdiction in this, then your issue is with your stake president, because "Salt Lake" should have nothing to do with this. From the General Handbook: As it says above, "only the stake president decides if a council should be held to address the conduct". It's all on him, according to the Handbook. This is true even if the person was in a different ward or stake when the serious sin was committed: I have no idea about Diamond's situation. Just had a question from what you posted here. If the sealer did whatever he did in the temple, possibly during his temple shift would those 2 sections still apply?
Recommended Posts