NOMs "Hiding Without Consequence" Stake/Regional Meetings

[_consiglieri]

Here's what I said in context:

I can guarantee you a one Sunday a monther is not going to get a TR or priesthood advancement (Aaronic to Melchizedek) unless they have better than a BS excuse. For example, we have a truck driver who is gone but a few days a month. However, we are fairly certain he's telling the truth when he says he attends meetings whenever he can wherever he is at because he's been seen there.

It's useless for a NOM to think he or she can hide without consequence. We've actually had Regional and Stake leadership meetings on this issue.

Please consider this a formal CFR.

Notice the difference?

Answering a question with a question is poor form, BC.

Please stop dodging and tell us:

What training have you had in Regional and Stake leadership meetings on the issue of NOM's and how they cannot hide without consequence?

Please consider this a formal CFR.

[_Kishkumen]

Thus saith Gilbert W. Scharffs.

So mote it be.

I expect this is the same fellow who wrote The Truth About the Godmakers back in the 1980's?

Is he still around doing stuff?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Yes, the very same. He is the author of the Encyclopedia of Mormonism entry on "apostate" which is being quoted here. So, if you accept the idea that this publication is somehow doctrine, then Mr. Scharff's very exacting definition of "apostate" is authoritative in your eyes.

It probably goes without saying that I don't grant Mr. Scharff's personal opinion such a great weight of authority on this issue, no matter how wonderful a man he may have been.

[_sock puppet]

It probably goes without saying that I don't grant Mr. Scharff's personal opinion such a great weight of authority on this issue, no matter how wonderful a man he may have been.

That's so non-LDS of you, Reverend. If a man is wonderful, you should give great weight to the wonderful man's opinions.

[Guest]

.

[_Tad]

Current bishopric member here, occasional lurker, seldom poster. In all my stake leadership training meetings (50+ to date) they have never talked about going after cafeteria or closet nonbelieving members. And we have not implemented "the rescue" in our stake. Our stake presidency is by-the-book but kind. I can't see them taking action unless the NOM was injuring another's faith.

[_why me]

I can't see them taking action unless the NOM was injuring another's faith.

That's right. And it would be standard action for most wards and stakes.

[_why me]

Sidebar: Many members bring technology into sacrament meeting. First, they look up scriptures from the talks that are given. And yes, some may check their email. But mostly these devices are brought to church because they are not as heavy as a triple combo etc.

Second, sacrament meetings after the passing of the sacrament can resemble an informal meeting where one listens to a speaker. It would not be uncommon for people to check an email etc. However, it is not very polite. And it symbols no signs of a NOM for doing so.

Third, we have no idea what people are looking at or looking up with their device. And so, we should not judge.

[_Drifting]

Sidebar: Many members bring technology into sacrament meeting. First, they look up scriptures from the talks that are given. And yes, some may check their email. But mostly these devices are brought to church because they are not as heavy as a triple combo etc.

Second, sacrament meetings after the passing of the sacrament can resemble an informal meeting where one listens to a speaker. It would not be uncommon for people to check an email etc. However, it is not very polite. And it symbols no signs of a NOM for doing so.

Third, we have no idea what people are looking at or looking up with their device. And so, we should not judge.

I think this may be a landmark...

First - I agree
Second - I agree
Third - I agree