"This is NOT the place to ask questions"!

[_Yoda]

By the way, you realize that you are posting on a site run by people that are hostile to the Church, right? There is no way in he** that they will give your IP address to anyone associated with the Church. Isn't that right Shades?

Also, you could save yourself some trouble and use a proxy server to post. It should effectively hide any personal information.

For the record...I don't think you can classify the Moderators of this site as hostile to the Church. Harmony and I, both Moderators, are both active LDS members. That being said, however, the reason we volunteered to be Moderators for the board is that we share Shades' vision of free speech. So, yes, your anonymity and your IP address are safe on this site. We do everything we can to protect the posters here.

I agree with dbleagent's suggestion of using a proxy server, if you have any qualms. That is a very safe and easy way to post, and sounds like a lot less hassle than the method you are going through now, zzyzx. Please feel free to PM me if you would like me to walk you through the method of setting up a proxy server.

[_harmony]

This isn't the first time that zzyzx has just made stuff up. He appears to be a pathological liar.

Lots of people "just make stuff up". Joseph Smith comes to mind.

[_Yoda]

This isn't the first time that zzyzx has just made stuff up. He appears to be a pathological liar.

Can you give a specific example?

Here is my take on the situation. To be honest, I really hope that zzyzx is lying!

The thought of someone in a Bishop or High Council role, who would actually jump the gun to this magnitude, and attempt to sabotage a Church member's business based on that member's crisis of faith, makes my skin crawl. It is this type of behavior that will destroy the Church and deflate membership.

The gospel of Jesus Christ is about people and, to quote my friend, Paul O, unconditional love.

[_Yoda]

Let's give zzyzx the benefit of the doubt, and say that he is telling the truth.

Let me pose a question to those of you who are members of the Church.

What can we, as members do, to eliminate this type of behavior? What advice can you give zzyzx as far as proper steps he could take to file a formal complaint through Church channels? What is the proper check and balance system when you have both a bishop and a high counselor involved in this type of activity? Should he make an appointment with the Stake President as a next step?

Also....I can understand the congregation being in shock from this type of counsel, and not speaking out publicly during that meeting, but have you heard from anyone who attended that meeting being bewildered by that attitude?

What was the general consensus and attitude that you could gauge from the other members? Did they seem accepting or troubled?

[_The Nehor]

Let's give zzyzx the benefit of the doubt, and say that he is telling the truth.

Unable to do so, beyond realm of credulity.

Let me pose a question to those of you who are members of the Church.

Sure.

What can we, as members do, to eliminate this type of behavior?

Excommunicate zzyzx and ban him from meetings so he can't make up events that happened there.

What advice can you give zzyzx as far as proper steps he could take to file a formal complaint through Church channels?

I advise him to resign his membership in protest.

What is the proper check and balance system when you have both a bishop and a high counselor involved in this type of activity?

Excommunicating people? Let them.

Should he make an appointment with the Stake President as a next step?

Only if he holds the Melchizedek Priesthood. He has to handle the excommunication if that is the case.

Also....I can understand the congregation being in shock from this type of counsel, and not speaking out publicly during that meeting, but have you heard from anyone who attended that meeting being bewildered by that attitude?

No.

What was the general consensus and attitude that you could gauge from the other members? Did they seem accepting or troubled?

I think it's unfair to ask the poor man what the reactions of the figments of his imagination did. How would he know? The mushrooms tend to block that kind of awareness.

[Guest]

What can we, as members do, to eliminate this type of behavior? What advice can you give zzyzx as far as proper steps he could take to file a formal complaint through Church channels? What is the proper check and balance system when you have both a bishop and a high counselor involved in this type of activity? Should he make an appointment with the Stake President as a next step?

Liz, even if this was true (it's not), it would have to be classified in the one-time occurrences bin, which means it is not worth trying to figure out how to eliminate. It was a one-off event.

A more likely scenario is that a member apostatizes and the members silently boycott him without any formal agreement or structure. The members just stop doing business with him because he's an apostate (remember there are NO good reasons to leave the Church in the mind of most members) and they would rather do business with so and so down the street who is a faithful member. I think this happens much more frequently.

[_Yoda]

Who pissed in your corn flakes this morning, Nehor?

[_Yoda]

What can we, as members do, to eliminate this type of behavior? What advice can you give zzyzx as far as proper steps he could take to file a formal complaint through Church channels? What is the proper check and balance system when you have both a bishop and a high counselor involved in this type of activity? Should he make an appointment with the Stake President as a next step?

Liz, even if this was true (it's not), it would have to be classified in the one-time occurrences bin, which means it is not worth trying to figure out how to eliminate. It was a one-off event.

A more likely scenario is that a member apostatizes and the members silently boycott him without any formal agreement or structure. The members just stop doing business with him because he's an apostate (remember there are NO good reasons to leave the Church in the mind of most members) and they would rather do business with so and so down the street who is a faithful member. I think this happens much more frequently.

I appreciate that it is a one-off event. That being the case, however, there would still be a process that a member could go through to right the wrong of the situation. What I am asking for are the steps to that process.

[_consiglieri]

I appreciate that it is a one-off event. That being the case, however, there would still be a process that a member could go through to right the wrong of the situation. What I am asking for are the steps to that process.

I would suggest obtaining affidavits from those in attendance as to what happened, and specifically the adjuration to boycott the brother's business; then send copies of same under cover of letter to the stake presidency requesting a meeting; then suggesting that the bishop and high councilor both be directed to appear at the next ward sacrament meeting and publicly recant, retract and apologize; followed by an unpaid advertisement for all members to patronize the offended brother's business.

All with the gently hinted-at threat of going public, should it be necessary.

Just my two-cents.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Guest]

I appreciate that it is a one-off event. That being the case, however, there would still be a process that a member could go through to right the wrong of the situation. What I am asking for are the steps to that process.

Liz, there is no formal procedure for handling this. You can do anything you feel comfortable doing.

There is a guy (HMX-1 moniker) on MADB who claims to have taken down two or three stake presidents (and he's in the process of taking one down now). If I recall correctly, one was ex'd and the others were released early due to his efforts. He did this by complaining to the GAs about the stake pres's egregious conduct. You can always do what this guy did.