LDS Church buys the silence of another 100 sex abuse victims

[I Have Questions]

Attempting to protect the name of the Church takes precedence over protecting the members of the Church. They will spend $billions on cover ups and pay offs to keep the stories out of the press, but spend two parts of squat-all in time and resources to try and prevent sexual predators using Church positions and connections to find and groom victims.

It’s as if they think that refusing to accept that the spirit of discernment is utterly flawed, means that the spirit of discernment isn’t utterly flawed, therefore the Church is true. They might be lawyers and big business men, but they are fully, and irrevocably, Church-blind. It’s how they got the gig in the first place.

So, in your opinion, maintaining the illusion takes precedence over making money (in their minds)?

Because if that's really the case, then I struggle to understand why they would drop all the programs that made the church a community, and why they'd risk losing ever more members due to added burdens like firing all the custodians. . . because losing members destroys the illusion, too.

I think that they’re making so much money from interest and investments that maintaining the illusion by paying off victims is akin to a small marketing spend.

As for the rest, I struggle to understand those things too. I’ve long since stopped thinking on the basis that the Brethren are logical, well-informed, rational people. Something unobserved by us turns them into a bunch of illogical, uncaring, hypocrites. Your guess is as good as mine on what that is.

Perhaps they’re all on the Trump scale as Chap points out. Sociopaths, Narcissists, Ego Maniacs etc. most large organisations have such personality types in abundance in the board room. Why should the Church be any different?

[Dr. Shades]

So, in your opinion, maintaining the illusion takes precedence over making money (in their minds)?

Because if that's really the case, then I struggle to understand why they would drop all the programs that made the church a community, and why they'd risk losing ever more members due to added burdens like firing all the custodians. . . because losing members destroys the illusion, too.

I think that they’re making so much money from interest and investments that maintaining the illusion by paying off victims is akin to a small marketing spend.

Not to badger you or anything, and I might be mostly thinking out loud here, but NOT paying off victims and instead throwing perpetrators to law enforcement would have no effect on making money from interest and investments. So forgive me if I can't buy into that last sentence quite yet.

As for the rest, I struggle to understand those things too. I’ve long since stopped thinking on the basis that the Brethren are logical, well-informed, rational people. Something unobserved by us turns them into a bunch of illogical, uncaring, hypocrites. Your guess is as good as mine on what that is.

Perhaps they’re all on the Trump scale as Chap points out. Sociopaths, Narcissists, Ego Maniacs etc. most large organisations have such personality types in abundance in the board room. Why should the Church be any different?

All of that makes sense. Maybe they pay off victims and shield perpetrators because they believe (perhaps rightfully) that the church's image and their own image is one and the same? I.e., if the church's image is squeaky-clean, then so is their own?

If that's the case, then ego maintenance is overriding money-making, which is hardly an unheard-of phenomenon. Maybe that's the key.

[I Have Questions]

I think that they’re making so much money from interest and investments that maintaining the illusion by paying off victims is akin to a small marketing spend.

Not to badger you or anything, and I might be mostly thinking out loud here, but NOT paying off victims and instead throwing perpetrators to law enforcement would have no effect on making money from interest and investments. So forgive me if I can't buy into that last sentence quite yet.

That’s okay, I’m not trying to sell you on it. I’m only guessing based on what I see. It’s a struggle to find a reason for why they don’t do what seems to be the obviously right thing on this topic - which is to assist in rooting out perpetrators and take any and all actions to improve policies and practices to avoid further incidents.

As for the rest, I struggle to understand those things too. I’ve long since stopped thinking on the basis that the Brethren are logical, well-informed, rational people. Something unobserved by us turns them into a bunch of illogical, uncaring, hypocrites. Your guess is as good as mine on what that is.

Perhaps they’re all on the Trump scale as Chap points out. Sociopaths, Narcissists, Ego Maniacs etc. most large organisations have such personality types in abundance in the board room. Why should the Church be any different?

All of that makes sense. Maybe they pay off victims and shield perpetrators because they believe (perhaps rightfully) that the church's image and their own image is one and the same? I.e., if the church's image is squeaky-clean, then so is their own?

If that's the case, then ego maintenance is overriding money-making, which is hardly an unheard-of phenomenon. Maybe that's the key.

I think ego plays a massive part in First Presidency and Q12 thinking.

[MG 2.0]

I think ego plays a massive part in First Presidency and Q12 thinking.

I don't. Not that this isn't something they and the rest of us have to consider, think about, and control everyday.

Right?

I think that on the whole they are humble men who seek the will of God.

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

I think ego plays a massive part in First Presidency and Q12 thinking.

I don't. Not that this isn't something they and the rest of us have to consider, think about, and control everyday.

Right?

I think that on the whole they are humble men who seek the will of God.

Regards,
MG

They are not humble men. They try to play the part, especially when giving talks, but humble they are not. I’ve met quite a few, and each one of them had a very high opinion of themself.

I’ll give you a couple of examples - a Stake President was wrestling with a problem and talked it over with an Apostle, whom he knew. The Apostle, who was speaking at that time as a friend rather than as a “line manager” gave him a suggestion, which the SP said he’d consider along with a few ideas of his own. The Apostle’s tone changed and he retorted with “When an Apostle makes a suggestion, it’s not a suggestion.”

Another Apostle, still serving, refuses to enter a room for a church meeting of any sort unless and until everyone in that room is standing. And he always ensures he is the last person to enter the room, even if that means being late.

Every one I’ve met has had the same innate arrogance. You won’t see it necessarily when watching them deliver Conference talks, because they’re playing a part. But catch them in smaller gatherings, day to day sort of happenings, and the ego drips from them.

Part of me thinks that it’s the calling of Apostle that brings out the ego in them. They must think everywhere smells like fresh paint, and they are used to being pandered to and fawned over like rock stars. That’s going to change a person who has an inkling of ego lurking within.

[MG 2.0]

I don't. Not that this isn't something they and the rest of us have to consider, think about, and control everyday.

Right?

I think that on the whole they are humble men who seek the will of God.

Regards,
MG

They are not humble men. They try to play the part, especially when giving talks, but humble they are not. I’ve met quite a few, and each one of them had a very high opinion of themself.

I’ll give you a couple of examples - a Stake President was wrestling with a problem and talked it over with an Apostle, whom he knew. The Apostle, who was speaking at that time as a friend rather than as a “line manager” gave him a suggestion, which the SP said he’d consider along with a few ideas of his own. The Apostle’s tone changed and he retorted with “When an Apostle makes a suggestion, it’s not a suggestion.”

Another Apostle, still serving, refuses to enter a room for a church meeting of any sort unless and until everyone in that room is standing. And he always ensures he is the last person to enter the room, even if that means being late.

Every one I’ve met has had the same innate arrogance. You won’t see it necessarily when watching them deliver Conference talks, because they’re playing a part. But catch them in smaller gatherings, day to day sort of happenings, and the ego drips from them.

Part of me thinks that it’s the calling of Apostle that brings out the ego in them. They must think everywhere smells like fresh paint, and they are used to being pandered to and fawned over like rock stars. That’s going to change a person who has an inkling of ego lurking within.

I'm saying that these men know their place before God and they are willing to serve Him. I'm not suggesting they are immune to the same human frailties that affect everyone.

Including ego driven weaknesses.

They are on a journey just as you and I are. I don't expect them to be anything more than some of the best people I know in real life. Sometimes they might even be less. They're humans that, in my opinion, have been called to do a work that the Lord needs to have them do.

Have you considered that it might be you who is being tested as to your willingness to accept the possibility that the 'weak things of the world' that are called to do that which is great in the sight of God?

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

I'm saying that these men know their place before God and they are willing to serve Him.

I know you are. But thoughts aren’t facts.

I don't expect them to be anything more than some of the best people I know in real life. Sometimes they might even be less.

I’d love for you to explain to an actual Apostle that you think they are “less than” the people you know in real life.

Have you considered that it might be you who is being tested as to your willingness to accept the possibility that the 'weak things of the world' that are called to do that which is great in the sight of God?

Well yes, but if the test is about wether a person will blindly follow a bunch of blokes who put the name of the church as more of a priority than doing all they can to protect the children of members, then I think I passed the test.

[MG 2.0]

I’d love for you to explain to an actual Apostle that you think they are “less than” the people you know in real life.

I think they would be the first to admit that they are not 'greater than' any other individual in all respects.

You need to correct your previous post. "Quite" should be "quote".

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

I’d love for you to explain to an actual Apostle that you think they are “less than” the people you know in real life.

I think they would be the first to admit that they are not 'greater than' any other individual in all respects.

[MG 2.0]

I think they would be the first to admit that they are not 'greater than' any other individual in all respects.

So that's it?

OK.

Regards,
MG