A former Latter-day Saint bishop faces felony charges for allegedly sexually assaulting a teenage girl in his office nearly 20 years ago.
Mark Lehnhof Stevens, 68, of Washington, Utah, is charged in 3rd District Court in with one count of forcible sodomy, a first-degree felony, and two counts second-degree of forcible sexual abuse.
Between 2006 and 2007, Stevens allegedly asked the 16-year-old girl to meet with him to discuss her leadership role in church according to charging documents. The girl, identified in court documents only with initials, met with him in his office at The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He allegedly told her he wanted to meet weekly.
He allegedly started asking the teen about sex and her personal sexual behavior. He told her she would be expected to keep her future husband sexually satisfied and if her husband had issues with pornography or sin, God would hold her accountable, the charges state.
Stevens then walked around the desk and sexually assaulted the girl, according to charging documents.
According to the Church a Bishop is given the job after divine guidance has been given. Was God asleep at the wheel on that day?
1. Eye witness testimony is notoriously unreliable. 2. The best evidence for The Book of Mormon is eye witness testimony, therefore… 3.The best evidence for the Book of Mormon is a type of evidence that is notoriously unreliable.
Mark Stevens was a Mormon bishop in 2006 in the Cobble Creek 3rd Ward, West Jordan Utah Cobble Creek Stake. He began his position as bishop in 2004 or 2005.
In 2025, Stevens was criminally charged with sexually assaulting a 16-year-old girl. The alleged assault took place in his office at church in 2006 or 2007.
Stevens was a Mormon missionary in San Diego, California from 1975 to 1977.
He attended Weber State College when Joseph Bishop was its president.
Stevens was married in the Ogden Utah LDS temple in 1978.
Whoever was involved in calling him as a Bishop should also be immediately barred from serving in any Church calling. Including any current Apostles who signed off on it.
Last edited by I Have Questions on Tue Feb 04, 2025 5:39 pm, edited 2 times in total.
1. Eye witness testimony is notoriously unreliable. 2. The best evidence for The Book of Mormon is eye witness testimony, therefore… 3.The best evidence for the Book of Mormon is a type of evidence that is notoriously unreliable.
When the stake president feels directed to release a bishop, he fasts and prays for inspiration to know whom the Lord has chosen as his replacement. When he feels he has identified the Lord’s choice, the stake president then sends a recommendation to the First Presidency for approval. (There’s actually a form the stake president fills in and sends to the First Presidency.) The First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles then prayerfully consider the person recommended by the stake president. Once the person recommended is approved, the stake president can extend the call to the potential bishop and ask his wife for her support. If he is worthy and accepts the call, the new bishop is then presented to the ward for their sustaining vote and is ordained and set apart, usually by the stake president.
Bishop appointees are approved directly and personally by the First Presidency and Quorum of 12 Apostles. Prophets, Seers, and Revelators? Don’t make me laugh, they can’t even keep pedophiles from being called as Bishops.
1. Eye witness testimony is notoriously unreliable. 2. The best evidence for The Book of Mormon is eye witness testimony, therefore… 3.The best evidence for the Book of Mormon is a type of evidence that is notoriously unreliable.
Schools are worse is an apologetic I’ve seen at SeN.
I am reminded of an awful FAIR conference address five years or so ago titled “Private Bishop Interviews as Protective Factor: Why LDS Teens Benefit From a Few Moments Alone With Their Bishop.”
“But if you are told by your leader to do a thing, do it. None of your business whether it is right or wrong.” Heber C. Kimball, 8 Nov. 1857
“FairMormon wrote:B.H. Roberts left us a marvelous analogy about this approach to truth. Speaking of an anti-Mormon of his day, Roberts said:
Mr. Wilson is as one who walks through some splendid orchard and gathers here and there the worm-eaten, frost-bitten, wind-blasted, growth-stunted and rotten fruit, which in spite of the best of care is to be found in every orchard; bringing this to us he says: “This is the fruit of yonder orchard; you see how worthless it is; an orchard growing such fruit is ready for the burning.”
Whereas, the fact may be that there are tons and tons of beautiful, luscious fruit, as pleasing to the eye as it would be agreeable to the palate, remaining in the orchard to which he does not call our attention at all. Would not such a representation of the orchard be an untruth, notwithstanding his blighted specimens were gathered from its trees?
If he presents to us the blighted specimens of fruit from the orchard, is he not in truth and in honor bound also to call our attention to the rich harvest of splendid fruit that still remains ungathered before he asks us to pass judgment on the orchard? I am not so blind in my admiration of the Mormon people, or so bigoted in my devotion to the Mormon faith as to think that there are no individuals in that Church chargeable with fanaticism, folly, intemperate speech and wickedness; nor am I blind to the fact that some in their over-zeal have lacked judgment; and that in times of excitement, under stress of special provocation, even Mormon leaders have given utterance to ideas that are indefensible.
But I have yet to learn that it is just in a writer of history or of ‘purpose fiction,’ that ‘must speak truly,’ to make a collection of these things and represent them as of the essence of that faith against which said writer draws an indictment.
Brothers and sisters, please don’t let a handful of wayward bishops trouble you. Look at how beautiful the orchard still is. Just step around the children being abused and keep your heads up.