LDS and Control over Members

  • Thread starter Thread starter amills
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

amills

Guest
Could someone give me some information on what control those of higher rank in the LDS church have over those of lesser rank(members). Especially in the work situation.

Let me give an example. An LDS member I know owned a business. The LDS bishop decided he wanted an economic interest in the business. How obligated was the member to provide that interest in his personal business.
 
No bishop should exercise any control over anybody, and it sounds like a person in the position of Bishop that is greedy for money.

The only thing you are obligated to do in the LDS Church, is attending the Sunday Sacrament Meetings, and paying 10 percent tithing on your gross income, but Callings may come about, where it is bad faith to reject a calling that the church is trying to give you, like Sunday School teacher, or Ward Clerk, and all callings are without pay, except for ones that you can aply for, like janitorial work.

No one should ever use his or her position in the church, high or low, to milk goods, or services from members, against their will.

----- Edited in more below: -------

One obligation that I forgot, is Home Teacher or Visting Teacher, all this is, is that you are required to visit a certain number of familys on your list each month.

If you fail to attend church over a period of time, they will send out the missonaries to check on you, often weekly to try to get you back.
 
Geocacher,

Thank you for your information. I didn’t think the LDS church could officially support control of members in such manner. However, I see that situation is happening quite often in the Utah area and surrounding area. I am witnessing bishops controlling individuals in the workplace in a very real sense, and it is definitely for their own interests.

The members themselves have told me that there is a real sense of control over everything they do in their lives. These are devout Mormoms.

Since this is happening in an unofficial sense what would you advise the member to do regarding this situation and their church.

Also, has anyone else seen this type of control happening?
 
Hi Amills,
I am a former Mormon, and I used to manage a restaurant in Orem, UT.
Frequently, when individuals came in for a job interview, they would bring their temple recommend with them, or put that on their resume’ or application.
I think it is a culture thing, but I found it rather hilarious that they would cross that line. I don’t think that having a temple recommend proves that you are capable of being a waitress either. 😉

Steph
 
tundramom said:
Hi Amills,
I am a former Mormon, and I used to manage a restaurant in Orem, UT.
Frequently, when individuals came in for a job interview, they would bring their temple recommend with them, or put that on their resume’ or application.
I think it is a culture thing, but I found it rather hilarious that they would cross that line. I don’t think that having a temple recommend proves that you are capable of being a waitress either. 😉

Steph
Click to expand...
:bigyikes: Wow! Sadly, that one doesn’t surprise me. Glad you are back Tundramom, it looks like you had to re-register.

To the OP. I was told by a faithful LDS that if I ever saw a bishop behaving out of line that I could report him to his stake president. I would think in this particular case it might be a good idea. No one needs to have that kind of power over anyone. I would also think faithful bishops would want to know. I can’t be sure how it would be handled. I would hope that it would be handled well that way.
 
amills said:
Could someone give me some information on what control those of higher rank in the LDS church have over those of lesser rank(members). Especially in the work situation.

Let me give an example. An LDS member I know owned a business. The LDS bishop decided he wanted an economic interest in the business. How obligated was the member to provide that interest in his personal business.
Click to expand...
Not obligated at all. I’ve never heard of a Bishop trying to use that kind of ecclesiastic pressure. Maybe it is different in Utah than out in the “mission field” where I live. Out here they couldn’t get away with it.

The main control a Mormon Bishop has is whether or not to give someone a temple recommend.
 
amills said:
Could someone give me some information on what control those of higher rank in the LDS church have over those of lesser rank(members). Especially in the work situation.

Let me give an example. An LDS member I know owned a business. The LDS bishop decided he wanted an economic interest in the business. How obligated was the member to provide that interest in his personal business.
Click to expand...
I am an ex-mormon, and I have never heard of anything like that happening. On the other hand I have never been a TBM living in the corridor. This person should talk to their Stake President about the situation.
 
By-and-large, the LDS Church has no greater control over it’s members than Roman Catholics have over their members in areas where the RCC is politically and demographically significant. That is to say–in LDS-dominated areas, it is probably politically and socially advisable to keep one’s personal negative feelings about Mormonism out of polite discourse in many situations. Giving offense to one’s neighbors, friends, prospective customers or business associates, etcetera, is a sure-fire way to keep oneself lonely and limit one’s potential for success. At the same time, there are broad circles of ‘cultural’ Mormons just as there are many Catholics-In-Name-Only. Such people, frequently, are themselves hypercritical of the dominant Church of the region and might welcome critics of the Church. Keep in mind that probably 60% of all who consider themselves Latter-Day Saints are actually inactive members, even within the Utah stronghold of the LDS Church.

Because there is a somewhat higher degree of uniformity of behavior among active Mormons than among active Roman Catholics, it may seem at times that the LDS Church is politically or socially more powerful than the RCC is. After all, some very active Roman Catholics, even members of the RCC clergy, are open dissidents. Such open dissent is not welcomed in the LDS Church and dissidents are frequently censured, disfellowshipped, and/or excommunicated if they persist. While bishops in the RCC have gotten more assertive in imposing sanctions on those who are grossly out-of-sync with Catholic doctrine or practice, it is still exceptionally rare for someone in the RCC to be publicly excommunicated in the RCC. Mostly what I hear is that so-and-so has ‘excommunicated themselves’ by their bad behavior, scarcely a meaningful or decisive act on the part of the RCC.

In employment situations, Mormons are told they should NOT use their positions as supervisors or managers to punish or retaliate against LDS dissidents or critics. For the most part this probably is honored, though in many cases an employer in a devoutly-LDS area might see an open dissident as somewhat disruptive to the harmony of a workplace. In such cases, it might be harder for a dissenting Mormon or former Mormon to find certain jobs. But this is NOT an official act of the LDS Church. It is simply a characteristic of living in a place where Mormonism is tightly interwoven into the social fabric.

Rumor mills suggest that there are secret societies such as the Danites which apply pressure up to and including violence on open dissidents, but such charges seem not to be well-substantiated. Rather, it looks as if the LDS Church as an organization prefers to isolate or repudiate those who oppose it, and then tends to ignore such opponents.

Hope this helps!
 
Thank you for your replies. I told my friends that they needed to know that what they were witnessing was not what the LDS church teaches. That these were simply “men not following their faith”. I think they understood but still said that the treatment they received had certainly shaken their faith.

I have also experienced some Mormons who were very good to work with.
 
I think that the LDS church has lots of control over their members because of the fact that Gordon B. Hinckley sets a dating age. I mean, I don’t think that the Pope has ever done that…has anyone heard of the Pope saying “your children shouldn’t date until 16”?
It’s really hard where I come from to find a date for homecoming or something because a lot of the boys are mormon and can’t go until AFTER the 16th birthday.So I personally think that they have a good hold of the members, but thats just me.
 
Scholastica15 said:
I think that the LDS church has lots of control over their members because of the fact that Gordon B. Hinckley sets a dating age. I mean, I don’t think that the Pope has ever done that…has anyone heard of the Pope saying “your children shouldn’t date until 16”?
It’s really hard where I come from to find a date for homecoming or something because a lot of the boys are mormon and can’t go until AFTER the 16th birthday.So I personally think that they have a good hold of the members, but thats just me.
Click to expand...
The General Authorities do set standards which they encourage their members to live up to. Take a good hard look however and you will see that even among fairly devout Mormons, there are lots of parents with teenagers dating at 14, lots of Mormons who attend PG-13 or other unsuitable movies, lots of Mormons who smoke or drink, lots of Mormons who never attend Sacrament Meeting or get a Temple Recommend, etcetera.

Pope Paul VI reaffirmed the proscription against the use of artificial birth control, yet many Catholics ignore His guidance on this matter. His Holiness has encouraged Roman Catholics to abstain from voting for pro-choice political candidates–if Catholics votey in a bloc in this country on this issue alone, abortion likely would already be illegal. He encourages Catholics to live chastely, yet immorality is a notable problem for many Catholics. He encourages regular attendance at daily Mass where possible and fasting or abstinence during certain seasons of the year.

The fact that the leadership of either the RCC or the LDS Church encourage certain things does not mean their membership adhere robotically to such things. The LDS Church is somewhat more uniform and consistent in it’s exhortations, which makes it more effective in communicating it’s values to it’s membership. But this does not necessarily mean that Mormons are more ‘controlled’ than Catholics by their faith.
 
hmmm… very subjective subject…😃
I guess it depends on what you mean by control and whether or not you see it as a bad thing. Moses and his successors could easily be seen as very controlling over the Jews. The Catholic church has at times been extremely controlling in actual practice. LDS authorities exercise varying degrees of influence depending on the individual and the situation. I think it more “visible” in the LDS church as they are structured to have multiple people “watching over” everyone. (home teachers, visiting teachers, etc.) that at least gives the apearance that big brother is watching. My experience is that this varies greatly with individuals interpretation of their callings and the oversight exercised by their church leaders. The LDS church is also VERY much into interviews at all levels and for all kinds of situations. All of these interviews and visits and concerns are tracked by church leaders and can certainly be viewed as an avenue of control. I think sometimes this is abused but that occurs with all churches. I think the overall structure and doctrine actually were designed to give Joseph Smith absolute control over the members. I think Brigham young took that to an even higher level. Over the years I think the LDS church as a whole has somewhat “softened” in that regard but as the tools are all still in place and one’s “exaltation” is portrayed as being dependent on various ordinances that must be performed in Temples and also as being dependent on the “delegated” authority of Christ as it is passes through a fuedal system of patriarchs and priesthood leaders it can certainly still be seen as a controlling environment/culture.

Is the control still explicit? rarely
Is it implicit? yes but only within certain limits.

The specific example in the OP appears to be an individual exercise of “unrighteous dominion” and not something inherent to “mormonism”. I do think mormonism is very vulnerable to this though due to their doctrine and practices.
 
Most religions by their very nature exercise some degree of “control” of their members. In the case of Mormons, they exercise more control than many because of many factors already discussed. One major one that hasn’t yet been mentioned is tithing. Every member has to attend a ‘tithing settlement’ once a year with their bishop where they are openly asked if they are full tithers. Not being a full tither can prevent one from receiving a temple recommend, which would prevent a Mormon from attending the temple. Temple ordinances are crucial to a Mormon’s salvation so not fully tithing can have eternal consequences for one’s soul.
 
The specific example in the OP appears to be an individual exercise of “unrighteous dominion” and not something inherent to “mormonism”. I do think mormonism is very vulnerable to this though due to their doctrine and practices.
Click to expand...
Ditto what Magick said, especially the latter sentence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top