Mormon Bishop Sam Young To Be Excommunicated

[TOmNossor]

TOmNossor:

That being said, I believe organizations from the CoJCoLDS to American to the Girl Scouts to the 451st Lions club can and should define what it is to be a member of these organizations.

The difference I see is the membership is taught and many believe that there are some after life benefits to remaining in the organization. The lions club and girl scouts don’t make this claim.

Thank you. I really didn’t know what direction to go from your first question, but this helps.

I believe that the CoJCoLDS makes truthful claims about how membership in the CoJCoLDS can have a positive effect upon ones eternal salvation. No longer are those claims as black and white as they once were which I think represents TRUTH because the black and white claims of the past were not the full story (this evolution is similar, to the evolution from “No salvation outside the Catholic Church” to “No salvation outside the Catholic Church - as qualified by Vatican II”)

I believe all Christian religions make claims about how believes and/or actions have eternal consequences. And yet all Christian religions have behaviors and/or beliefs that will result in some type of removal from the fold which often also involves potential eternal consequences.

I believe that Sam Young does not believe what LDS believe and does not do what LDS do. I believe it might be right and appropriate for him to no longer be a member of the CoJCoLDS.

I believe salvation is still available to Sam Young if he repents of his course of action and I believe salvation is still available to Sam Young if he never in this life repents of his course of action.

But, I believe that a more sure way, a way more in alignment with God’s will for Sam Young would be that he declares, “I was right to highlight these issues, I am happy there has been some change, I would like to see more change, but I was wrong to attack the CoJCoLDS, wrong to call for others to not sustain the leaders of the CoJCoLDS. I would like to remain a member of the CoJCoLDS and I will refrain from public attack concerning this issue, the homosexual issue, and the other issues I have publicly attacked the church about. I do this for two reasons. One, I can see some error in my position while not completely abandoning my positions. Two, faced with the thought of ceasing to be a LDS I recognize that I truly believe the leadership of the CoJCoLDS is inspired though I personally do not always see this in all their decisions (the potential that not all counsel is inspired is of course the official position of the CoJCoLDS). But I want to maintain my membership.”

So salvation is possible if he does not repent and is excommunicated or if he does repent and is not excommunicated. The more sure path as I, a believing LDS, see it is to repent and maintain his membership. But as I have said less than 24 hours ago on this board, Sam Young is welcome to worship with me at my ward even if he is excommunicated as are you (and I do not know your past and current religions affiliation).

cont…

 

[TOmNossor]

In summary, you are correct removal from the girl scouts is different because the girl scouts do not claim that membership has eternal consequences (at least not in ways similar to the claims made by religions).

The CoJCoLDS teaches:

“The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it.

I embraced the “fundamental principles” before I was a LDS. If these are radically altered or my personal beliefs concerning them radically alter and I no longer believe the things LDS believe and do the things LDS do, no fear of my past view that the organization was linked to Christ will hold me to the CoJCoLDS. I will probably be a Catholic who aligns with the SSPX, but I will not be a LDS in name only just because the CoJCoLDS teaches that membership has benefits for my eternal salvation. If I reject the CoJCoLDS, I will reject the teaching that membership has benefits for my eternal salvation.

I am a baptized and confirmed Catholic. I do not regularly attend mass and do not partake of the Eucharist. If the Catholic Church is God’s Church, she teaches that I am in mortal sin and if I do not repent I will go to hell. I do not lose sleep over this because I do not believe the Catholic Church is correct in this teaching AND I believe that the CoJCoLDS is God’s church. I do not make this choice lightly. Neither should Sam Young.

Charity, TOm

 

[Horton]

Furthermore, the solution you advocate for the church you hate (see our other current thread) will be IMO more detrimental to youth in that church. These interviews in most cases give youth more guidance towards aligning their sexual mores with the sexual mores taught by the CoJCoLDS (and by the Catholic Church for that matter). The absence of these interviews will cede even more to the culture that is frequently completely opposed to the sexual mores taught by God.

Let’s get rid of your favorite notion first. I do not hate the LDS people or organization. Hate is a completely useless emotion and a waste of energy. I do not believe in LDS theory or doctrine. I disagree with the whole of the LDS story. But that is not hate.

I do not know what solution you disagree with but there are far better ways to teach the youth of LDS the sexual mores aligned with God. The Catholic Church does this very well with material such Theology of the Body for teens and other well written material which is delivered in group settings. In fact teaching youth about modesty, chastity, purity, and so on is taught during many youth group sessions, just not done in explicit language or with probing questions. Do the LDS not teach this?

If a teen has committed a sin against chastity, he/she may go to confession to receive the sacrament of reconciliation.

You have linked to articles that accuse the CoJCoLDS of being somehow involved in sexual abuse

You said you read the articles, did you not see where there was clear involvement of the LDS?

You still want to deflect this issue back to the abuse scandal with the Catholic Church. No one here has denied the issues with the Church, it is just not the TOPIC of this thread. The TOPIC of this thread is the LDS. Do you deny there is a culture of covering up sexual abuse in the LDS church? Do you deny there is as much sexual abuse within the LDS as there is in any other religious organization? I have not denied the sexual abuse issues in the Catholic Church. There are plenty of threads on CAF discussing it.

 

[Chris-Wa1]

Bishop Young was interviewed on Mormon Stories a few days ago. If you would like to hear straight from him what he was doing and what has happened to him it’s right here:

Some on this thread have said he deserves excommunication because he has opposed LDS leaders and encouraged others to do so as well. But that is not the truth. He has not opposed the leaders themselves, he has simply opposed a policy. He has not encouraged others to oppose the leadership either. He has only asked them to exercise their right to vote at conferences according to what they feel is right. This is the right of every Mormon. For this he is being excommunicated, which for a Mormon means losing pretty much everything, including, they believe, your eternal salvation and your family in heaven. It also often means losing many lifelong friends and sometimes even your living. All because he spoke out. This lifelong Mormon wants to stay in the church. He still believes in their prophets and scriptures and doctrines. But he felt protecting the youth was worth putting it all on the line.

I suggest listening to his interview to hear what’s actually going on to get the real story.

 

[Lemuel]

Chris, I share a lot of your sentiments about the Church, but I think we have some disagreement on this. The Church of Mormon has the right to conduct its business however it wants. I couldn’t care less if they excommunicated men for growing beards or women for getting multiple pierces. It doesn’t bother me one iota if Bishop Young gets the ax for whatever he did, whether real or imagined. And in the long run, being excommunicated will, in my opinion, be nothing but a blessing to him as long as he uses it to find the real truth and not become bitter about it. I’m all for the Church of Mormon doing whatever they decide to do with him. But as for me, I’m hoping that it will end in excommunication.

 

[Chris-Wa1]

I mostly agree with you. He will be better off, and will call even more attention to an issue that needs more resolution. My main purpose in this thread is showing how far the LDS church will go to silence dissenters. I’m sure most people in the church never give it a second thought until it happens to them–and then they experience the horror of having their life torn to shreds. This keeps people in line through fear—fear of losing your status, your family, your community, and even your eternal salvation. Everything is fine until something comes along, some issue that causes a faith crisis. At that point a member has to choose between speaking out or just keeping their mouth shut for fear of being excommunicated. They see others who have been made examples of what happens when you speak out. It’s Draconian.

 

[Stephen168]

I … do not partake of the Eucharist

You told me you did.

 

[TOmNossor]

TOmNossor:

I … do not partake of the Eucharist

You told me you did.

I have attended dozens of masses as a non-Catholic.
When my family priest (who I discussed theology with a couple of months earlier for 3 hours during and after dinner and who knows I am a LDS and who specifically said that non-Catholics are welcome to partake of the Eucharist in his parish) offered me the Eucharist when he was giving my mother last rites, I did take the Eucharist.
My reasoning was that her mental state was such that she wouldn’t understand any conflict if I tried to pass and questions arose from my non-practicing sister who took the Eucharist or the priest who might have told me I was welcome to take it.
A few weeks later at the funeral I also took the Eucharist, for similar but less pressing reasons (as my mother was dead, but my family was there and my sister and her semi-buddist, semi-agnostic husband and … all partook).
I had not before and have not since. Not because I see any problem from a LDS perspective, but out of respect for Catholic beliefs as I understand them (as opposed to how my liberal priest understands them). I wish the anti-Mormons who record the temple ceremony were as respectful.

So … why do you ask?
Charity, TOm

 

[Chris-Wa1]

You’re completely missing the point. Perhaps try reading further to see what this is all really about.

 

[TOmNossor]

Well, Chris-Wa1 thinks you are missing the point.

You’re completely missing the point. Perhaps try reading further to see what this is all really about.

I think the point is as follows.

Long before Pope Francis began changing the Catholic Church’s beliefs regarding divorce/communion, the death penalty, and …

Long before the Pennsylvania grand jury or Archbishop Vigano’s accusations against Pope Francis …

There has been a group of critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saint here on Catholic Answers who know that despite what they claim, the CoJCoLDS makes a compelling case to being a restoration of Christ’s Church directly questioning the idea that the Catholic Church is God’s Church on earth and is indefectible.

These critics continue to engage with anti-Mormon atheists, ex-Mormons and … so that they can mine their words for attacks on the CoJCoLDS.

So, the point is that you should dismiss the CoJCoLDS. The reason @Chris-Wa1 and @Horton and @Stephen168 spend so much time on the CoJCoLDS is because it is so obviously false. I mean there is so much material to plumb that can show it is false and they must prove it false 172 times for it to REALLY be false. Or ???

So, you might think this is an attempt to distract from the horrors of the Pennsylvania Grand Jury report. You might think this is an attempt to distract from the division in leadership as people claim Pope Francis is involved in the cover up or others claim he is not. You might think this is …

But, when John Paul II was Pope and Catholic Answers taught what it was to be a conservative Catholic who didn’t abuse Vatican II and the Boston sex scandal was an isolated distant memory … these anti-Mormon Catholics were “defending” the faith by offering anti-Mormon arguments. It is not distraction. It is their witness (reluctant and unknowing though it may be) that the CoJCoLDS makes a compelling case to be God’s Church on earth!

Charity, TOm

 

[Chris-Wa1]

It is their witness (reluctant and unknowing though it may be) that the CoJCoLDS makes a compelling case to be God’s Church on earth!

This is the biggest load of bunk you have ever posted on these forums. Now you’re trying to make an argument that myself and others are unwittingly making a case for Mormonism. You have stepped into some alternate reality that only you understand.

The reason I oppose Mormonism is ultimately for one and one reason only–it is false. The evidence I and others have presented on these forums is overwhelming, far outweighing the tidbits presented by various LDS posters like yourself. You appear to make intellectual arguments, but they always come down to murky tidbits here or there, plus plenty of distraction along the way.

 

[Stephen168]

You appear to make intellectual arguments, but they always come down to murky tidbits here or there, plus plenty of distraction along the way.

That is his sophistry.

In the thread “Are Mormons and Unitarians Christians?,” Tom taught us that he uses words he cannot define and makes claims he cannot prove.

In the thread “Is it acceptable for a Mormon to learn about the Catholic Church, but still not want to join?” and this thread he was caught making false claims.

In the thread “Do Mormons still believe the Book of Mormon to be actual History?” he tried to shift wacky claims made by Mormonism to a Catholic priest.

In the thread “Are Mormons and Unitarians Christians?,” Tom taught us that any teaching against Mormonism is a “witness” that Mormonism is true. And any teaching that agrees with Mormonism is a “witness” that Mormonism is true.

I am never surprised by his sophistry, but it needs to be pointed out.

 

[Horton]

who know that despite what they claim, the CoJCoLDS makes a compelling case to being a restoration of Christ’s Church directly questioning the idea that the Catholic Church is God’s Church on earth and is indefectible.

My goodness Tom, this really takes the cake. It’s been a long time since I’ve read a claim such as this.

Most of my time on CAF is spent on topics that truly affirm the Catholic faith. Not, as you claim, trying to prove the LDS is false. I actually don’t have to prove it’s false, the LDS do a pretty good job of it themselves. My concern is for the poor souls who are somehow convinced to turn their backs on Christianity for the LDS and severely jeopardize their salvation.

I know with absolute certainty there was never a need for a restoration church as the gates of hell had not prevailed. Why you can’t even say when or how that “restoration” came to be, why should any thinking Christian believe it.

My witness will never indicate there is any truth to any portion of any principal of the LDS organization. If you’d like I can present that witness at a Sunday meeting, or is that not allowed?

We know all know (even you Tom) the Catholic Church is the one true continuous church since Jesus Christ in 33AD. If you were so certain in the LDS, you probably wouldn’t spend so much time here protesting a bit too much.

 

[TOmNossor]

Hello again!

I expected the responses I got though I am always caught off guard by the presentation of my dishonesty in the prose of Stephen168.

I submit that my explanation is a solid one for this:

So, the point is that you should dismiss the CoJCoLDS. The reason @Chris-Wa1 and @Horton and @Stephen168 spend so much time on the CoJCoLDS is because it is so obviously false. I mean there is so much material to plumb that can show it is false and they must prove it false 172 times for it to REALLY be false. Or ???

Anyway …

Stephen168,

In this thread you have attempted to collect ANOTHER example of my dishonesty. Here in this thread just 1 day ago (and as usual silence from you until months or years later you bring it up again) as in the other items in you “collection” I responded. It is simple to see that I was 100% honest and you are stretching. You may not even believe that I am dishonest, you just need to add some logical fallacy to your 172 proofs!

Your “definition” argument comes because I told you that you do not know your Catholic faith when you claimed that the Holy Spirit was begotten. I showed that Athanasius (not to mention 1600 years of Catholic Tradition) directly claim the Holy Spirit is “not begotten.” I offered then and I offer now to define “begotten” as it is used (even though it is an “ambiguous” word), explain why your claims are theologically problematic, and discuss this ONLY if you promise to interact unlike what you usually do when I respond to your silliness.

Anyway, I will await your commitment to interact on this point or just sit back and wait for you to call me dishonest again.

Charity, TOm

 

[Stephen168]

Excellent.

It seems like most Mormon Stories are so heart-wrenching.

 

[Chris-Wa1]

Bishop Sam Young’s disciplinary court will be held this Sunday, Sept 9th. Here was his response letter last week to his stake president about the upcoming trial:

Dear President,

As you know, I’m in receipt of your summons to the church court. Below are questions and concerns that I’d like addressed well before the 9th.

I . Thank you for your heartfelt reassurance of God’s love and Christ’s atonement. That was very meaningful.

II . I will be present at the council.

III . You have leveled 2 charges. In order to plan my response, please forward the evidence against me that you are going to present. Are you going to call witnesses? If so, who are they and what evidence will they present?

IV . Charge #1 is new to me. “Encouraged others to vote opposed to Church leaders.”

We have never discussed this before. According to the Church Handbook, you are supposed to personally call my sinful behavior to my attention well before any disciplinary court proceedings. You have not done that. As a result, I ask that this new and unexpected charge be removed from the allegations to be considered on the 9th.

Last January, we clearly discussed indictment #2. So, it’s fair game. As for #1, if there was any wrong doing on my part, I should have been given the opportunity to repent. Up to this point, you’ve been good at following the handbook dictates. I would expect no less of you in regards to this matter. Charge #1 should be deleted.

V . With regards to not recording the proceedings in any form. As you should know, I have never recorded any of our meetings. I don’t plan to record this one either.

However, it does seem strange that you are requiring every person in attendance to sign a document. This is the Stake Presidency & High Council for heaven sake. It seems odd that you don’t trust this group enough to take them at their word.

Is this a new Handbook dictate? Or are there High Councilors and Stake Presidency members that you don’t trust? Right out of the gate, we seem to be starting out as adversaries with little trust in the room. Not even trust for the 15 men that will be surrounding you. Whatever happened to trusting those who have served with us for years? Whatever happened to the spirit of discernment that you as the Stake President are supposed to have?

I don’t have anything to hide. Hopefully you don’t either. So, I don’t care one wit if you or anyone else records. But, if all 15 tell me they won’t record, that’s just what I’d expect of them, whether in word or in writing.

VI . Please send me a copy of the document you are requiring all to sign. These days, I prefer not to sign anything that I have not seen in advance.

 

[Chris-Wa1]

(cont.)

VII . Witnesses!! Oh man, you are killing me on this one. The requirements you have specified are a huge handicap. You are putting me on trial for excommunication. Think about that. What member in good standing is going to risk their membership, temple recommend, livelihood, family relations by being a witness in my behalf? There are many members of my ward and stake who totally support the changes I’ve been calling for. They don’t believe that I’m “expressing opposition to the Church or its leaders.” But they are afraid to state this out in the open. If they did, they would be in the very position that I am. We have such a culture of fear in the church. By calling this court action against me, you are reinforcing that culture of fear and silence.

At this point, I have only found ONE member “in good standing” who might risk being punished for speaking up as a witness. But, even this person’s commitment is tenuous.

It’s my eternal salvation that’s at risk. Nobody else’s. Only I risk being torn away from my family for eternity. Yet, your actions have intimidated the very witnesses that could come to my defense. How is that fair? It’s not. You and the Church culture have bullied credible witnesses into silence. There are many possible witnesses in good standing who live in my ward and in the stake you govern. But you and the Church have filled them to the brim with fear.

I’ve never viewed disciplinary councils as kangaroo courts. The restrictions you have placed on potential witnesses have eliminated the vast majority of my friends from being qualified. Your intimidation has effectively eliminated my friends who ARE ‘members in good standing.’ The way this tribunal is presently constructed IS a kangaroo court. ‘You can call witnesses. But, we have already scared the bejeebers out of all that we consider credible.’

I call on you to change your witness requirement stating that “witnesses must be members of the Church in good standing.” Otherwise, you are belittling & making a mockery of the Plan of Salvation. I should be given every opportunity to present a compelling defense so that I have at least a small chance at real justice. Not kangaroo justice.

With all that said, I do plan to call witnesses. You have simply made it a really daunting task to search them out. Please change the requirement.

 

[Chris-Wa1]

(cont.)

VIII . 45 MINUTE time limit? Is that a new Handbook requirement? How disrespectful of the plan of salvation is that? I have put my entire heart and soul into serving Christ, my fellow members and the Church for almost 5 decades. And what do I get in return? 45 MINUTES! 45 MINUTES to defend my right to eternal salvation. 45 MINUTES to defend my right to spend eternity with my loved ones. Is that the value the Church places on my eternity? How sad is that? We spend 3 hours every week in church services. Just think how much accumulated time that is over the decades that I have dedicated to the Church. Yet, when push comes to shove, my eternal family ties are only worth 45 MINUTES?

Even the church toilets are worth more than salvation. I have spent hours and hours cleaning them and the rest of the church building. The defense of my eternal destiny isn’t even worth 1 hour. What kind of a time limit is that?

Here’s my request. Give me at least as much time as we dedicate to cleaning the church building. In my ward that’s 2 hours. Certainly, my years of dedicated service, my family and my eternity are worth as much time as the Church toilets.

IX . Option to request that my name be removed: I want to make it clear that this is not my desire. I value my church membership and am confident that the Stake Presidency and High Council will come to realize that there is no legitimate reason to excommunicate.

Your quick response will be very much appreciated.

Until Sept 9th, all my best wishes,

Sam Young

Based on the summons letter and his response, it’s clear that this trial will be a kangaroo court. The requirements and restrictions being put on Sam by the stake high council with regards to witnesses are particularly troubling. It all appears designed to silence Sam and any potential witnesses as much as possible.

 

[Hereiam]

I don’t know what to tell ya, pal. This is the Non-Catholic Religions forum, where we talk about Non-Catholic religions.

Its only marginally morally acceptable if the comments are being made by non-Catholics, but any Catholic using this forum to rip other religions might want to do some self-examination.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Well I take it back, I made it all up, trolled you successfully. You showed your colors, shifting blame to me, and ignoring completely the actions of your hypothetical fellow members in high places. To the point of reporting me in order to silence me.

Protect your church man, that is what a good Mormon DOES.