six nuns excommunicated for heresy!

[why_me]

I have noticed that the catholic church is a very slow moving stone. This can be a good thing because decisions are very methodical but as a whole the leadership does not seem to move at anything other than a glacial pace. This means things like excommunicating nuns and working on priest abuse can take a REALLY long time. On the bright side slow moving stones are not pushed around by the quickly changing winds of public sentiment and in general the decisions once made are set in that same slow moving stone.

Slow moving stones is what got the catholic church into trouble. They needed to move some stones much faster down the hill and into the dump.

 

[why_me]

I had a Bishop back in the 80’s who worked hard at excommunicating inactives in order to clean up the church rolls and improve the home teaching numbers. Some people were excommunicated who hadn’t seen the inside of the church for years, but an excuse was found to get rid of them.

It is never done to clean up the rolls. Your post has a contradiction. A person can be inactive and still want to see home teachers. If the home teachers are not good home teachers and never visit, the inactive person is not excommunicated. However, as your second part states, people who haven’t been inside the church for years and I might add, want nothing to do with the church, can be removed from the roles after a letter is sent informing them of the possible action if no response is given.

However, I don’t believe that this is done anymore and if it is done, it is for the benefit of the people who want nothing more to do with the lds church.

 

[why_me]

Whyme, I do appreciate your efforts at pointing out the hypocrisy rampant here but you’re talking to a very hardened lot. I think you made your point and everyone knows it.

When it comes to church discipline, it seems that there is a legitimate question on how to best balance what’s good for the sinner versus protecting the church. You don’t want to be too harsh and ex-communicate too easily but you don’t want a lot of bad examples around, eating food that’s been sacrificed to idols and all. I’d say there’s not much question that Catholics are much more lenient than Mormons.

In most cases, if a person is beset by temptation but is honestly struggling to overcome it, there’s not much point in excommunication. It’s when they are unrepentant and still insist on claims and privileges of membership when it comes as a problem.

I agree with you.

 

[why_me]

It helps me keep prospective when I am tempted to be angry. There is a temptation to be angry at the lds church when you leave, but anger and the spirit can not coexist. I like having the spirit around much more than what ever fleeting emotions anger would bring.

When a person has a belief system that they no longer believe in, it is easy to be made at that former belief system. I am sure that there are many excatholics mad at the catholic church too. Likewise for other religious groups. Most people just don’t leave their faith for no reason.

I have not known any angry exmormons. But I have seen them post on the internet.

 

[PaulDupre]

A person can be inactive and still want to see home teachers.

Yeah, that’ll be the day.

Paul

 

[PaulDupre]

We see on this thread one of the chief strategies of Mormonism: when a non-Mormon or ex-Mormon relates some experience that the Mormons wish had never happened, the Mormons call him a liar and impugn his character.

Typical cult behavior.

 

[zerinus]

Yeah, that’ll be the day.

Paul

You are either incredibly naive and uninformed about Mormonism; or else you like to deliberately spread falsehood about it—even when those falsehoods are absolutely ridiculous.

Everyone who is a home-teacher (or visiting-teacher) in the LDS Church (which means just about everybody ) would inform you that many (sometimes most) of the people on their lists are inactive or less active members who nevertheless are not against receiving such visits.

LDS folklore are full of stories of people who have been inactive for years (or even decades); and then were motivate to return to activity as a result of the care and dedication of a committed home-teacher (or visiting-teacher) who never gave up on them, but persevered in visiting and showing an interest in them over many years, until they warmed their hearts and motivated them to return to Church activity.

zerinus

 

[Jodi]

You state "I seriously doubt your version of the story. I have a difficult time believing that your husband made the bishop uncomfortable when asking questions. Of course, not everyone has an answer and that would make someone uncomfortable. And I doubt that the bishop welcomed your husband’s resignation letter. Most bishops are just average guys with family and job. And after 5 or 6 years they are released from their ‘calling’ (position) in the lds church and move on to different responsibilites. I think that he was sad about your husband.

I also doubt your story about how they handled your resignation. I have known people who have left the church. They just leave and then resign. No problem. Your story sounds just a little far fetched to me. First, you could have asked to be released from your responsibility. They have to accept your decision. Second, you stop attending the church. Third, you submit your resignation letter. Fourth, local church sends letter to Salt Lake. Fifth, Salt Lake notifies you that you are no longer a member.

Case closed."

Not all bishops are perfect. My husband and my former bishop were oil and water. My husband and him had serveral question sessions that ended up in shouting matches. It was doing a lot of harm to both parties in my opinion. Not all personalities mesh and my husband can be a very stubborn man. (but I love him) I did resign my calling and stop attending church, and sent my letter to both the local ward but also to the church membership in salt lake as my first letter mysteriously disappeared. This particular bishop had previous experiences with my family where he had been over ruled by the Stake President. His pride was involved and had been injured. I am not saying all bishops everywhere suffer from his failings. I am merely stating that my exit from the church unfortunately hit a few snags until a loving stake president stepped in a made things right.

I would not have believed my story either when I was an active member. Like many members I believed only sin would drive someone from the lds church. I do not blame you for your doubts. I can only express what I myself have personally experienced and see how that fits into the world around me.

 

[Jodi]

Zerinus has a point when I was a member of the lds church I often visiting taught women who wanted nothing to do with the church at present but still loved having their visiting teachers come and visit. If you pick up any lds church publication (ensign) you will find faith promoting stories about inactive members being reactivated through faithful consistant home and visiting teachers.

 

[ApostateRLDS]

I seriously doubt your version of the story. I have a difficult time believing that your husband made the bishop uncomfortable when asking questions. Of course, not everyone has an answer and that would make someone uncomfortable. And I doubt that the bishop welcomed your husband’s resignation letter. Most bishops are just average guys with family and job. And after 5 or 6 years they are released from their ‘calling’ (position) in the lds church and move on to different responsibilites. I think that he was sad about your husband.

I also doubt your story about how they handled your resignation. I have known people who have left the church. They just leave and then resign. No problem. Your story sounds just a little far fetched to me. First, you could have asked to be released from your responsibility. They have to accept your decision. Second, you stop attending the church. Third, you submit your resignation letter. Fourth, local church sends letter to Salt Lake. Fifth, Salt Lake notifies you that you are no longer a member.

Case closed.

I agree with Paul. Once denial fails, Last resort always seems to be *ad hominem *attacks.

 

[hosemonkey]

I agree with Paul. Once denial fails, Last resort always seems to be *ad hominem *attacks.

For shame! How dare you question Why me and zerinus, who are our resident experts in all things mormon. Don’t you know that Why me has had years of experience in speaking out of both sides of his mouth and has had special training in fence-sitting? And zerinus, why it goes without saying that when the Vatican itself wants to know anything about Catholicism, he is on their speed-dial. Don’t you realize that they are here strictly to assist we uncircumcised Philistines to understand the real truth about mormonism and to forget all the stuff that we have known before. Oh, and you former mormons, all the things that you experienced…merely a figment of your fevered imagination. Just listen to zerinus and Why me, and everything will be just fine. Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

 

[Tabitha]

Does anyone wonder if those Church leaders who knew about this for perhaps 20-30 years would have continued to ignore or covered this up, as has been the tendancy at times, had not this become more public knowledge?

I don’t think anything would be different if the nuns weren’t excommunicated last week. We would still have permission to go to the Perpetual Adoration Chapel, go to Mass there, Youth group would still be meeting there, etc.

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070926/ap_on_re_us/nuns_heresy
“The six nuns are associated with the Good Shepherd Monastery of Our Lady of Charity and Refuge in Hot Springs. Sister Mary Theresa Dionne, one of the nuns excommunicated, said the nuns will still live at the convent property, which they own.”
Anyone wonder what those faithful Catholics who donated in good faith over the years, assumingly sacrificially at times, would say concerning how much of the property those individuals own, especially now that they have veered from the faith? Makes me wonder if they ever really did understand the faith. Whose property is this? The Catholic community, or the individual nuns?

Legally the property belongs to the nuns but you have a point. They possibly wouldn’t have the property if it weren’t for the Catholic community.

arkansascatholic.org/article.php?id=1006
“On their own, the six sisters decided to join the association between 20 and 30 years ago and adopt the teachings of its founder, Marie-Paul Giguere, who believes she is the reincarnation of the Virgin Mary.”
How could this go on for 20-30 years and not have been addressed soon after it became known? Instead of allowing this “yeast” to spread?

I don’t know. As I said, I wished this would have been addressed sooner. At least announcements made that this convent/church/Catholic daycare-preschool had these “extra” non-Catholic beliefs. I would have sent my son to thier preschool thinking it was legit. I really would not be happy now if I have sent my son there.

As far as the whole community was concerned, this convent was full of very devout Catholic nuns. Nobody knew anything about this “Army of Mary” except for a few most involved volunteers who worked closely with them.

arkansascatholic.org/article.php?id=1006
“Father Benedict Picard, a member of the Army of Mary, served as the order’s chaplain in Hot Springs from 1998 until he returned to Canada in 2004.”
“Bishop Sartain worked with Father Picard and the sisters to try to get them to disassociate with the movement,” said Deacon Bo McAllister, diocesan chancellor for canonical affairs.”
Strong work! By the way, what is the status of Benedict Picard? Still a priest in good standing? What’s his Bishop have to say?

Bishop Sartain was moved to Illinois a few yrs ago. We don’t have a Bishop right now. Prayers are much needed for a new Bishop.

Benedict was forced to move back to Canada in 2004 (or 05?). He was excommunicated also. These orders were from the Vatican so it effects everyone in the “Army of Mary” organization.

Benedict was first to tell me about “Army of Mary” but he was very vague. He made it sound like just another Marian group with special devotions. He said he was being persecuted here because of the “Army of Mary” but he was very vague on that as well which had me confused. Now I know why and what he meant by that.

arkansascatholic.org/article.php?id=1006
“During the press conference, Msgr. Hebert said the sisters’ decisions mean the monastery will no longer be recognized by the diocese, and laity in Garland County should not financially support the order.”
Most discerning lay Catholics probably figured that out years ago, unless the truth was hidden from them.

For the most part the truth was hidden from us. Only those who worked closely with the nuns knew and financially supporting them was always ok and never frowned upon. Just last year they were allowed to speak at the podium after Mass about their fundraiser they were doing to raise $6000 to bring another nun here from somewhere (Canada, don’t remember). They sold egg rolls and made their goal.

arkansascatholic.org/article.php?id=1006
“It was common for parishioners in Hot Springs and Hot Springs Village to raise money for the day care and assist with projects around the grounds.”
If only they had know the beliefs of those they were supporting Wonder if they feel betrayed and fooled? Something like, what was I supporting?

I would feel betrayed. I never had the opportunity to support them other then a few cheap books I bought. When I arrived for the eggrolls, they were gone. But if I had been sending my son to thier preschool, I would be feeling VERY betrayed!

 

[ApostateRLDS]

For shame! How dare you question Why me and zerinus, who are our resident experts in all things mormon. Don’t you know that Why me has had years of experience in speaking out of both sides of his mouth and has had special training in fence-sitting? And zerinus, why it goes without saying that when the Vatican itself wants to know anything about Catholicism, he is on their speed-dial. Don’t you realize that they are here strictly to assist we uncircumcised Philistines to understand the real truth about mormonism and to forget all the stuff that we have known before. Oh, and you former mormons, all the things that you experienced…merely a figment of your fevered imagination. Just listen to zerinus and Why me, and everything will be just fine. Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

I stand a chastened and humbled Josephite Mormon. I’m in awe of their prescience and omniscience.

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

Shouldn’t they have at least gave us a heads up? Catholics were sending their children there assuming it was a Catholic daycare/preschool. I would have sent mine there.

A heads-up would have been a decent thing to do, a good start. Then again, are any of us Catholics surprised to being blinded by our teachers in matters of teachers gone astray?

God bless,

Michael

 

[ApostateRLDS]

why me;2781502]Simon was excommunicated for adultery. I am surprised that you missed that information.

I didn’t miss that information. I just don’t buy the party-line given by the TBM’s as to the reason for his excommunication.

It had nothing to do with his findings.

It had everything to do with his findings. The LDS sect just didn’t have the guts to try to silence him for his research. Not only would it come off looking spiteful, petty and vindictive, but it would have been humiliated by what Southerton would say. So it took the sleazy way out.

However, as someone who knew the case from the beginning I can say that he wasn’t excommunicated for his findings.

You can say it all you want, that doesn’t make it true. I can say I had a beer with the three Nephites the other day, but that doesn’t make it true, either.

The fact is the LDS began digging dirt on Southernton only after he had started to discuss his findings. By this time, his extra-marital affair was over, and he reconciled with his wife. If it wasn’t because of his findings, why did LDS church begin its investigations only after he had let the genie out of the bottle. Why was he excommunicated only after the affair was over and after he had gotten back together with his wife?

Simon is an interesting individual. He wanted to remain a member even though he didn’t believe in the book of mormon. Why?

What’s wrong with that? The Community of Christ Church(formerly the RLDS) doesn’t require its members to believe in the authenticity of The Book of Mormon. I think it’s more strange when someone tries to remain both a TBM and a Catholic, but who am I to point out someone’s inconsistencies.

I think that he wanted to be excommunicated for his findings. But he wasn’t. It was for adultery.

The LDS put on a dog-and-pony show called a ‘court of love’, and excommunicated him so TBM’s can say ‘don’t belive him, he’s an anti-Mormon. He was excommunicated for adultery.’. Even so, if Southernton had been excommunicated for what was in his book, he would have made a laughingstock of the LDS church.

At least that is what I remember. :shrug

I"ll bet Southernton and his wife remember differently.

 

[why_me]

Not all bishops are perfect. My husband and my former bishop were oil and water. My husband and him had serveral question sessions that ended up in shouting matches. It was doing a lot of harm to both parties in my opinion. Not all personalities mesh and my husband can be a very stubborn man. (but I love him) I did resign my calling and stop attending church, and sent my letter to both the local ward but also to the church membership in salt lake as my first letter mysteriously disappeared. This particular bishop had previous experiences with my family where he had been over ruled by the Stake President. His pride was involved and had been injured. I am not saying all bishops everywhere suffer from his failings. I am merely stating that my exit from the church unfortunately hit a few snags until a loving stake president stepped in a made things right.

I would not have believed my story either when I was an active member. Like many members I believed only sin would drive someone from the lds church. I do not blame you for your doubts. I can only express what I myself have personally experienced and see how that fits into the world around me.

And I think that you bring up a good point. Your bishop was not perfect. For the catholics on the board, a lds bishop is quite different from a catholic bishop. Lds bishops deal with members on a constant basis unlike catholic bishops.

I wanted to clarify that your bishop was not a typical lds bishop and showed all his faults in dealing with you and your family. But he is not a mirror of the lds church as a wayward priest wouldn’t be a mirror of the catholic church.

 

[why_me]

We see on this thread one of the chief strategies of Mormonism: when a non-Mormon or ex-Mormon relates some experience that the Mormons wish had never happened, the Mormons call him a liar and impugn his character.

Typical cult behavior.

Really??

 

[why_me]

For shame! How dare you question Why me and zerinus, who are our resident experts in all things mormon. Don’t you know that Why me has had years of experience in speaking out of both sides of his mouth and has had special training in fence-sitting?

For some strange reason my fence sitting seems to create strange feelings in some posters. I have this same problem on exmormon boards.

However, my fence sitting allows me the opportunity to have a balanced picture of situations. I am not encumbered by orthodoxy as some posters on this forum are. I can defend mormonism from a perspective that actually takes a middle ground. If catholic posters suddenly show signs of antimormonaitis because they glisten information from antimormon websites, I am here to stifle some of that antimormonaitis and disinformation.

 

[Jodi]

Since it seems as if I derailed the original point I’ll try and tie this back to the original.

I think an argument can be made that the lds church excommunicates more people for less concrete reasons as it appears to take to invoke the same reaction from the catholic church.

Yes both churches do excommunicate, and excommunication is necissary in some occasions for both religions.

I would say that even the practicing lds on this site would agree that excommunicating extremely innactive members in name is not a good practice. And although I am willing to admit my bishop was not a shinning example or a template for the entire unpaid bishop ranks of the lds church. I would in a general way it is wrong to start proceedings in a church court against members who are choosing to seperate themselves from the church. Thankfully my Stake president agreed with me, and using his proper authority admonished my bishop and I was spared such a horrible scene but given my own experiences with this I can no longer believe that excommunication under these circumstances does not happen. If I had not made the time and effort to personallly track down my stake president and plead my case I doubt very much things would have had the same ending.

The six nuns case is not a good parallel for my own in truth. I was not preaching to others and I am so new to my catholic faith that my questions still outnumber my answers. I doubt if the nuns were actively disasociating themselves from the catholic church as I was the lds faith they would have been excommunicated. Now if I had tried to remain a lds member and started ordaining my own bishops and claiming to still be in good standing with the lds church the parallel would be more appropriate.

 

[hosemonkey]

For some strange reason my fence sitting seems to create strange feelings in some posters. I have this same problem on exmormon boards.

However, my fence sitting allows me the opportunity to have a balanced picture of situations.
Your fence-sitting allows you to avoid condemning the manifest errors of mormonism.

I am not encumbered by orthodoxy as some posters on this forum are.
You are certainly not encumbered with Catholic orthodoxy.

I can defend mormonism from a perspective that actually takes a middle ground.
Mormonism is indefensible because it is a false religion, with false and artificial doctrine, constructed out of whole cloth by a man of dubious morals. Error has no rights.

If catholic posters suddenly show signs of antimormonaitis because they glisten information from antimormon websites, I am here to stifle some of that antimormonaitis and disinformation.

Catholics do not "suddenly “develop” “antimormonitis” The falsity of mormonisn has been known since it’s inception. We are merely pointing out the fact that the mormon emperor has no clothes. Nothing new here. It is merely shameful that you as a so-called catholic would attempt such dishonesty as to defend that which is the enemy of the true church.