BishopRic wrote:charity wrote:BishopRic, were you called and sustained as a bishop, or were you actiing in your capacity as First Counselor? I have never known as a situation where a First Counselor stepped out of his ordained and set apart position, even when the bishop was gone for a month. As ours just was. So, were you actually called by the stake president? Sustained by your ward as the bishop?
Please let us know.
Lucretia, little locks in the dressing room destroyed your testimony? And please, PADLOCKS is quite an overstatement. The keys to the lockers in the Portland temple are so small, I sometimes have a hard time finding mine if I have a couple of cough drops in my pocket.
I always laugh when the interrogations start about my story. The Mormon mind works wonders...when challenged, it goes straight to questioning the source, rather than the actual event. I guess it keeps the Mormon safe if they can somehow discredit the challenger...don't have to consider the possibility that the church is less than perfect!
Just so you can remain in your perfect bubble Charity, I won't answer your questions. There, now you're okay...you can imagine anything you want -- and I'm sure you will!
You shouldn't laugh Bish, after all, your story is just that...a story. I have become very leery over the years of anti or exmo "coming out" stories, for the simply reason that many of these contain thematic elements that have all the marks of being written by a committee. Not that they are, but that those thematic elements; urban legends that have grown up in the anti and exmormon world, are things that are supposed to happen to people in the Church that trigger "study" and finally apostasy. They get used over and over again, in slightly different combinations, and the overall effect is to impress upon the mind the idea of a conveyor belt churning out those romance novels all of which have essentially the same title, same cover art, and same...thematic elements. In a nutshell, much of this is clearly used as a template by many who didn't actually have the experiences they claim (even thought they may have, indeed, had some experience), but whose experiences are embeliishable within the template. Hence, the standard "how I left the Mormon Church" story that is part and parcel of places like RFM.
Historically, when confronted with an anecdote such as this, my first response is to roll my eyes and say, "uh huh". The reason for this is that if you story were true, it would be very irregular; a rather large lunge away from Priesthood responsibility for your leaders in that Stake. Abuse of one's family by a Priesthood holder, and especially sexual or physical abuses of any kind, are grounds for putative excommunication. These are sins for which one can be tried for one's membership in the Church. It is very serious. My dad was a Bishop for ten years. I've read all of the manuals, and I know how serious these things are from official Church sources.
If your leaders didn't take those claims seriously, that would be very, well, strange. I've never known a Bishop who did not take this kind of thing with extreme seriousness. I've been called to account, in no uncertain terms, by leaders in Wards I've lived in for less than this.
By the way, how do you know the claims were true? Were they ever researched and investigated? What were the individual situations? Not that something didn't happen that you were involved with, but might there not be some convenient exaggeration and embellishment going on here?
An SP who responded to claims of sexual abuse by Priesthood holding husbands as you claim would be so utterly outrageous, by Church doctrinal and cultural standards, that it probably would have merited GA intervention. Outrageous things do happen in Wards, I know that from personal experience, but when they do, it doesn't bother my testimony any. After all, why should it? Human beings who do not live up to the standards of the Gospel are no more or no less than just that. None of this, even if your story is true in every particular, involves
the Church being true, only some members being
untrue to the Church.
The face of sin today often wears the mask of tolerance.
- Thomas S. Monson