I'm glad the LDS Church didn't do this to me

  • Thread starter Thread starter BartBurk
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The stake president should have let it go and let the guy resign. I used the form letter from mormonnomore.com and just got my letter back today, three weeks after sending it. So I’m officially out of the LDS Church. There would have been almost no publicity if the stake president had acted responsibly.
And he would have if the excommunicant didn’t blab away to other members about disagreements with doctrine. The stake president decided that members needed to know that he was now excommunicated and was no longer a member in good standing.

Remember our friend the catholic bishop who was ordaining individuals to the priesthood who were married? Why make his excommunication public knowledge?
 
And he would have if the excommunicant didn’t blab away to other members about disagreements with doctrine. The stake president decided that members needed to know that he was now excommunicated and was no longer a member in good standing.

Remember our friend the catholic bishop who was ordaining individuals to the priesthood who were married? Why make his excommunication public knowledge?
What the Catholic Church did about this one incident doesn’t apply here.

It is almost unheard of these days for the LDS Church to go public with an announcement of excommunication. Even high profile cases don’t have the results of their trials announced. Lamborn was a nobody until the stake president blew the thing wide open. It was very poor judgement on his part. And again there is no evidence that Lamborn went beyond discussing this with his family members.
 
The stake president should have let it go and let the guy resign. I used the form letter from mormonnomore.com and just got my letter back today, three weeks after sending it. So I’m officially out of the LDS Church.
Congratulations Bart! :extrahappy:

God bless you,
Paul
 
And he would have if the excommunicant didn’t blab away to other members about disagreements with doctrine. The stake president decided that members needed to know that he was now excommunicated and was no longer a member in good standing.

Remember our friend the catholic bishop who was ordaining individuals to the priesthood who were married? Why make his excommunication public knowledge?
I answered that in post # 17. Archbishop Milingo’s situation was nothing like Lamborn’s.
Paul
 
It is not all about polygamy whyme. I think you know that. You can email him and ask him for his summary of searching.

clamborn58@yahoo.com

Polygamy and Helen Mar Kimball were just the tip of the iceberg.

And that LDS link leaves a lot of pertinent info out. Destruction of a printing press to hide the lies that JS was telling. JS marrying women who were already married (polyandry). Just to name two.
The article claims polygamy and his ignorance. I posted a church sponsored site that details polygamy. He said that the church was hiding it. It wasn’t. So what’s the problem.

Please don’t move the goalposts to suit your purposes.

ldsfaq.byu.edu/emmain.asp?number=145

Oh and by the way, the printing press was destroyed because of the vicious antimormon articles that were written threatening the stability of the mormon community by stirring the pot of antimormonism among the mobs.
 
I answered that in post # 17. Archbishop Milingo’s situation was nothing like Lamborn’s.
Paul
Lambron had leadership roles in the lds church at the local level. He was elder’s quorum president four times and was currently a teacher in sunday school or high priesthood meeting. He had authority. He was not a nobody in the lds church.

As I said, his excommunication was publically announced because he was teaching false doctrine among the members. Usually, it is excommunication is secret but because of his high local profile it was deemed better to make a public announcement.

The same as the bishop in the catholic church. There is no difference since both were publically announced.
 
What the Catholic Church did about this one incident doesn’t apply here.

It is almost unheard of these days for the LDS Church to go public with an announcement of excommunication. Even high profile cases don’t have the results of their trials announced. Lamborn was a nobody until the stake president blew the thing wide open. It was very poor judgement on his part. And again there is no evidence that Lamborn went beyond discussing this with his family members.
Actually this is not true. Lamborn had several callings or responsibilities of leadership in his local church. He was not a nobody. He had certain authority with his responsibilities. And this was also the problem. Here is a section of the article:

Lamborn served a two-year Mormon mission in 1977-79 in Belgium, was elders quorum president four times and led a Mormon Boy Scout troop. Most recently, he said he was assigned to teach older men in his ward and held other roles.

To be elder’s quorum president has a great deal of responsibility with the brethern in the local church. Also, he was teacher in his church. He was not a nobody.

And this is why the public announcement was also made. He was leading people away with his teachings. The article clip that I posted earlier says otherwise to your claim that he taught nobody but his brothers. It is right there for you to read.

“I was planning to leave the church quietly, but was denied that opportunity, presumably because I was speaking openly to other members about my findings and (was) writing things down,” Lamborn said.
 
Actually this is not true. Lamborn had several callings or responsibilities of leadership in his local church. He was not a nobody. He had certain authority with his responsibilities. And this was also the problem. Here is a section of the article:

Lamborn served a two-year Mormon mission in 1977-79 in Belgium, was elders quorum president four times and led a Mormon Boy Scout troop. Most recently, he said he was assigned to teach older men in his ward and held other roles.

To be elder’s quorum president has a great deal of responsibility with the brethern in the local church. Also, he was teacher in his church. He was not a nobody.

And this is why the public announcement was also made. He was leading people away with his teachings. The article clip that I posted earlier says otherwise to your claim that he taught nobody but his brothers. It is right there for you to read.

“I was planning to leave the church quietly, but was denied that opportunity, presumably because I was speaking openly to other members about my findings and (was) writing things down,” Lamborn said.
Almost every active male in the Mormon Church holds those types of positions at one time or another. I was Elders Quorum President for five years, but that’s not a calling of any particular note. I was a returned missionary. There are tens of thousands of them. There are thousands who have been EQ Presidents. I don’t think this would have happened anywhere else in the Mormon Church except with this Stake President. They just don’t do those types of announcements anymore. The Stake President poured gas on the equivalent of a very small ember and it has blown up in his face.
 
Lambron had leadership roles in the lds church at the local level. He was elder’s quorum president four times and was currently a teacher in sunday school or high priesthood meeting. He had authority. He was not a nobody in the lds church.

As I said, his excommunication was publically announced because he was teaching false doctrine among the members. Usually, it is excommunication is secret but because of his high local profile it was deemed better to make a public announcement.

The same as the bishop in the catholic church. There is no difference since both were publically announced.
What was he teaching that was false, do you know? If it was just stuff thats out in the open as you say anyway, then what’s the problem?

edit: and I really doubt he was pretending to be something he was not to other members, to lead them astray. And as has been pointed out several times here, it seems he was talking with members of his own family and he himself is the one who told his bishop about that.
 
What was he teaching that was false, do you know? If it was just stuff thats out in the open as you say anyway, then what’s the problem?

edit: and I really doubt he was pretending to be something he was not to other members, to lead them astray. And as has been pointed out several times here, it seems he was talking with members of his own family and he himself is the one who told his bishop about that.
That’s the real problem here. Lamborn was actually telling the truth about problems with Mormon history. He wasn’t preaching any false doctrine. The Mormon leaders in southern Arizona don’t want Mormons to know that Joseph Smith was marrying the wives of other men, 14 year old girls, etc.
 
That’s the real problem here. Lamborn was actually telling the truth about problems with Mormon history. He wasn’t preaching any false doctrine. The Mormon leaders in southern Arizona don’t want Mormons to know that Joseph Smith was marrying the wives of other men, 14 year old girls, etc.
How ridiculous. Good luck to them.

Congratulations, Peace and God’s blessings to you, Bart. I’m glad you received confirmation of your name removal. I received mine over a year ago, and no mention of chuch court of any kind followed. I have had a good experience in that regard. I think the only people who even know I’m Catholic are the people I have told myself, and they’ve been wonderful to me. They don’t treat me any different. I hope things settle down for Mr. Lamborn and his family. I feel bad for his wife particularly. Hopefully the rank and file members won’t react harshly toward them. I know it’s hard for them, I’ve been there too. I hope their friendships will remain friendships.
 
The article claims polygamy and his ignorance. I posted a church sponsored site that details polygamy. He said that the church was hiding it. It wasn’t. So what’s the problem.

Please don’t move the goalposts to suit your purposes.

ldsfaq.byu.edu/emmain.asp?number=145

Oh and by the way, the printing press was destroyed because of the vicious antimormon articles that were written threatening the stability of the mormon community by stirring the pot of antimormonism among the mobs.
please stop with the LDS spin. have you even read the paper that printing press was going to publish? Joseph smith was doing bad things, he was going to be exposed and abused his position to destroy the newspaper. the “stability” of the mormon community at that time (which was already a problem) was in jeopardy because of the leadership of joseph smith. his original witnesses to the BoM were in many cases being publicly denounced by Joseph himself. He was at odds with his own counselors and was trying to run for president amongst all of this. you need to read William Law’s account. ( he was one of josephs counselors in the first presidency) you can read the actual nauvoo expositor ans see what was going to be printed. perhaps joseph should have stayed away from other men’s wives, not to mention the young daughters and stayed faithful to his own wife none of this would have happened.

The LDS church is currently going the orwellian route of changing lesson manuals to make the polygamy of those days invisible. look at the teachings of brigham young…only mentions one wife. do you really think that brigham wasn’t characterized by his emphatic endorsement of polygamy as the stepping stone to godhood? not to mention the relief society room photos of the dutiful emma smith when she left the LDS church. where are the pictures of joseph’s other wives in there?

a lot of mormons really feel deceived when they find out the true history of the LDs church. they fell for the GBH “I don’t know that we teach that” line and assume that the current watered down “milk” lessons on sunday are the same doctrine the LDS church has always taught and emphasized. when the “meat” is revealed then many come to know the truth and are set free. why do you think they keep toning down the temple endowment?

at least you have finally come out of the closet. you are definitely a TBM. 32 years of Mormonism has overtaken your 18 as a Catholic and you are proving your belief in the LDS church. I am glad that you are doing it here though where perhaps you can finally see the real issue. one cannot “accept” mormonism and say oh wonderful christian friends let’s join up against secular humanism. Catholics need to stand up for the Catholic church and promote it to all as God’s church. we can’t let ecumenism create a complacent attitude that impedes our efforts to bring all into FULL communion with GOD’S church. we certainly can’t let heresy go unchecked and thus have to speak out against mormon doctrines and practices. even zerinus will tell you that. he at least is consistent in denouncing all other churches as apostates. there simply is no middle ground here. remember what jesus said he would do with the lukewarm?
 
Why is there an outcry here, go read how many people were anathemized at councils for heresy. Also the Pope has publicly ex’d a few Bishops himself. And I know I’ve read tons of people screaming “why don’t they just publically excommunicate politicisn who support abortion”…

This is making a mountain out of a mole-hill, if the guy is leaving why should he care that they announce his ex-communication? Apparently this guy was a “big deal” in their Church and I don’t see anything wrong with it.
 
Why is there an outcry here, go read how many people were anathemized at councils for heresy. Also the Pope has publicly ex’d a few Bishops himself. And I know I’ve read tons of people screaming “why don’t they just publically excommunicate politicisn who support abortion”…

This is making a mountain out of a mole-hill, if the guy is leaving why should he care that they announce his ex-communication? Apparently this guy was a “big deal” in their Church and I don’t see anything wrong with it.
I agee. in fact my reaction when reading this is not why are the LDS bishops doing this-it was why ae the catholic Bishops NOT doing this.
 
Also, I posted an lds sponsored website that contains polygamy. Our excommunicated friend could have read that site if he had the mind too.

After all he did search the web right?
And how do you know that he did not? Did you ask him?
 
For the same reason why catholic parishes throughout the United States had Da Vinci Code seminars. Get the point?

Also, I posted an lds sponsored website that contains polygamy. Our excommunicated friend could have read that site if he had the mind too.

After all he did search the web right? 🤷
Are you purposely disregarding the fact that the guy in the article stated he had 1,000 different reasons to come to the conclusion that the Church can’t be what it claimed to be? (so obviously polygamy was just the jumping off point) Or did you just not bother to read the article you keep commenting on?
 
please stop with the LDS spin. have you even read the paper that printing press was going to publish? Joseph smith was doing bad things, he was going to be exposed and abused his position to destroy the newspaper. the “stability” of the mormon community at that time (which was already a problem) was in jeopardy because of the leadership of joseph smith. his original witnesses to the BoM were in many cases being publicly denounced by Joseph himself. He was at odds with his own counselors and was trying to run for president amongst all of this. you need to read William Law’s account. ( he was one of josephs counselors in the first presidency) you can read the actual nauvoo expositor ans see what was going to be printed. perhaps joseph should have stayed away from other men’s wives, not to mention the young daughters and stayed faithful to his own wife none of this would have happened.
It was worse than that for ol’ Joe. People had caught wind of that he was practicing polygamy. He denied it, absolutely and very publicly. And he did as whyme is doing here, he blamed public slander and antimormon sentiments. When in fact, Joe was lying through his teeth. William Law knew the truth. He knew Joe was lying his *** off and he was going to expose this lie in the Nauvoo Expositor. Joe got wind of this and ordered that the printing press be destroyed.

Citizens in the US have this thing called Freedom of the Press, and the citizens in Nauvoo were angered that a theological despot had ordered the destruction of a newspaper press. This is what your “antimormon” mob was angry about.
 
It was worse than that for ol’ Joe. People had caught wind of that he was practicing polygamy. He denied it, absolutely and very publicly. And he did as whyme is doing here, he blamed public slander and antimormon sentiments. When in fact, Joe was lying through his teeth. William Law knew the truth. He knew Joe was lying his *** off and he was going to expose this lie in the Nauvoo Expositor. Joe got wind of this and ordered that the printing press be destroyed.

Citizens in the US have this thing called Freedom of the Press, and the citizens in Nauvoo were angered that a theological despot had ordered the destruction of a newspaper press. This is what your “antimormon” mob was angry about.
They were also afraid for their civil liberties and their safety. Joseph Smith’s private army, The Nauvoo Legion, was 2nd only to the US Army in its size.
 
The big thing that messed me up in the LDS church was that I had some tapes by Paul H. Dunn ( he was a General Athority of the LDS church), and these tapes by him were filled with spiritual experiences of his past life that never really happened. This Scandal knocked down my faith in the church big time, and became very inactive after they threw out everybody over age 30 out of the Singles Ward including ME. The Singles Ward incident happened much later in time though

I had thought about resigning from the church some time ago but, I consider myself as a NEW ORDER Mormon. Check out this Google link. They have a message board over there at New Order Mormon dot org, and these are the type that have found a Middle Way sort of in Mormonism, such that they don’t disrupt their families or cause a divorce. Some of these people have converted to Catholism or other faith, but these people will attend Sacrament Meeting out of respect for others in their families.
 
I have been told that, no matter what you do, you truly cannot erase your name from the Mormon Church records. You may be able to put yourself on some sort of inactive or non-contact list (not that those designations will help!) but you are never truly free of them.

Best not to start with them, then you won’t have to worry about getting away.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top