Abuse in the church? [Archive]

lisa

10th January 2005, 11:53 PM

The family stuff so many people go through leaves me to wonder how many people stay just to keep peace in the family. I was talking to a RS president just a few days ago. She was f bomming all over the place...."Its not like the F*** church was created by God...it was a man" Her comment exactally. When I asked her why she stayed, it was because of family.
wow!
In my job I work with people week after week that have undergone horendous abuse, and have huge issues. It angers me how so many of them have been damaged so much by the mormon church...that in itself is one of our biggest issues besides sexual and physical abuse.
I just can't understand why so many people stay in an orginization that condones, and even creates abuse. I see that the mormon church does that in huge numbers.
It sure does not work for me any more.....and It makes me sad every time I work with a client that has such huge abusive pasts with the mormon church and just can't leave it behind. I know I continue to do my fair share of therapy that in all reality has a lot to do with that cult that likes to call themselves a church.

Sorry had to rant...had a hard day
Lisa

peter_mary

11th January 2005, 08:45 AM

I know I continue to do my fair share of therapy that in all reality has a lot to do with that cult that likes to call themselves a church.

Lisa

This is interesting, Lisa, because this strikes close to home for us, too. My wife will tell you that she has seen an interesting evolution in her counseling practice, and presently estimates that between a quarter and a third of her clients are dealing with Church related issues. Many of them are struggling with just coming to terms with the realization that it isn't all it purports to be (read: not "true.") Many are couples where one has left the faith and the other can't understand. One is a young person whose primary issues are the result of growing up non-LDS in a principally LDS community, and trying to deal with all the attendant rejection she experienced for years. And then there are the handful of folks who have been disciplined by the Church in the proverbial "court o' love" and were so injured by the process and the subsequent shame that they, too, are questioning the validity of an organization that would condone such nonsense.

The good news is, people are getting help. The bad news is, for every one who does get help, there are no doubt dozens more who are too isolated, too unaware, too ashamed, or too entrenched to seek help. :(

Paul

silverfox

11th January 2005, 09:18 AM

I was going to start a thread regarding the abuse in church...good timing! I has weighed on my mind a lot lately. Over my 30+ years as a member I've been aware of several abuse cases and it haunts me. I am haunted because there was nothing I could do to help. I reported some cases to the police (that got me in trouble with my bishop but that's okay I told him where to go and how to get there), tried to recommend counseling for victims but I was surprised at how many felt IT WAS THEIR FAULT so they would only continue counseling with their church leaders who for the most part just wanted it to go away. I am getting sick thinking about it. The frustration is overwhelming, knowing that so many are getting away with this crap and using their persuastion techniques to keep it quiet.

A lot of people leave the church for intellectual reasons but a lot leave for other reasons such as abuse they have been a victim of or have been aware of.

I think it's important to validate those reasons for leaving. Whether it's for inteleectual or emotional reasons, neither is more justifyable than the other, or right or wrong, just different and very valid reasons to leave.

LMW

11th January 2005, 05:36 PM

Unregistered

11th January 2005, 08:14 PM

I am just sickened by it all. I didnt realize until it happened to so many of my friends how common it was. My case was not an isolated case of abuse. I just be sure to tell others to tell, and tell and tell until somone listens.

Lisa

I find it amazing how so many members are quick to "forgive" an abuser if he is/was a "good" member. I've known of a few cases where the pervert was "forgiven" and accepted back into "the fold" only to abuse again and again AND AGAIN. In one case the abuser was molesting his children and step children. He was "forgiven" by his wife, his TBM family and his ward. He stopped molesting his kids and step kids but he found other victims in the ward. After a few years of abusing, a victim finally spoke out. The man is in prison now and will be for a very long time. What amazes me is that his TBM father is writing the parents of the victims begging them to forgive him, etc. With no mention of concern for the victim's, the innocent children.

There should be Sunday School lessons on what "enabling" is.

peter_mary

11th January 2005, 08:42 PM

I find it amazing how so many members are quick to "forgive" an abuser if he is/was a "good" member. I've known of a few cases where the pervert was "forgiven" and accepted back into "the fold" only to abuse again and again AND AGAIN.

In my mind, this is one of the areas where the Church crosses the line from "benign" to "dangerous." Because the leadership are untrained, lay-people whose only toolbox comes in the form of a general manual and the promise that they now wear some mystical and magical "mantle", the poor guys really have NO clue what they should do in instances such as abuse. In their hearts, I think that they a) believe in the redemptive power of prayer, fasting, repentance and forgiveness, and b) hope like crazy it goes away long enough for them to be released!

In order to confront abuse, it requires someone with genuine personal power to actually confront the perpetrator. But more than that, it requires training and understanding to appreciate that their "mantle" isn't going to help someone who has a genuine and serious problem. People don't just quit being abusers or molestors. They just don't! It takes serious, professional intervention, and even then, the prognosis for perpetrators is grim. That old "spirit of repentence" is like blowing spitwads at a charging elephant.

But think about that for a minute from the perspective of the Bishop. He's been told that God is with him, and that the Power of the Priesthood, which he holds, is the very power by which God Himself acts on this earth and causes miracles to happen. So it is an EASY leap for a man without any real knowledge to believe that he can assess a perpetrator's real intent when they say, "I won't do it again." They are also very gullible, because they WANT to believe, when the perpetrator minimizes their own involvement, and embelishes the victim's involvement. Bishops are EASILY manipulated because of what they believe about their own infallibility (which is, of course, ludicrous to the max), and perpetrators are fabulous manipulators. The result is a disaster of gigantic magnitude in the lives of so many children and women (and the occasional man, too...)

Once again, this is a classic example of good people trying to function in really bad systems. I don't blame the Bishops or Stake Presidents...they don't know what they're doing, and they're functioning according to the rules of the only culture they know. But I DO blame the system. :mad: (Before anyone jumps my case, I do readily agree that there are ALSO bad Bishops who truly are acting with malice, but I think they are the minority. Most are just, well--ignorant. And that's a problem of the system.) I would love to see the day when someone really brings forward the abuse case against the Church that wins in court. It needs to happen to them as badly as it needed to happen to the Catholic Church. Maybe then the Church will admit that it has a serious problem, and bring to bear the necessary resources to deal with it. Goodness knows they HAVE the resources!

Paul

LMW

11th January 2005, 09:15 PM

silverfox

12th January 2005, 10:58 AM

I remeber a few yaers ago...about the same time my own EX husband was in the middle of his court; a case up in cache valley where a guy had molested a ton of boys mostly. And his ward all showed up there at court wearing their colored ribbons in support of the perp. Made me want to throw up. The guy did end up in prison...I hope him and my ex are room mates. anyway....maybe I am stupid, but I just dont get it. Wards seem to be oh so supportive to the perps....but what about all the children victims. They want nothing to do with them. When my own childrens behavior was effected becouse of their abuse...they were just labled as bad kids. Well, guess what they arent bad, they are some of the most amazing kids you would ever meet, and I am not just saying that because I am their mom either. So why can't people stand behind those hurt,by these monsters?

Lisa

Sickening and anyone who has not witnessed this, I am telling you it is TRUE. I can't believe how members will rally around the pervert. They are so in their little sheltered molded worlds that they can't comprehend that someone they know is capable of such deeds. If it's a stranger or non member, it's another story but if it's one of thier own......they scramble to sugarcoat the whole situation. ugh. I also have witnessed how victims are treated. Adult victims and children as well. Like it was their fault AND like they are tainted. Kids aren't allowed to play with them, etc.

A couple years ago a neighbor and I were going through the online sex offender registry. We put in our zip code. As we were going through the registry she recognized one of the offenders. She almost fell on the floor. Her daugther attended a dance class held in a woman's home and it was the woman's husband who was always there when she would drop off her daughter! Sexual abuse of a minor and he was out of prison, around aaaaaall these little girls. My nieghbor, while at a football game ran into a fellow parent who also had a little girl in the class. She shared the info with him. She said she thought he would want to know. He informed her that he was the offender's bishop and the offender had been forgiven and that there was no reason to not trust her daughter there. He then lectured her about "gossiping". She was simply trying to inform another parent of a potential dangerous situation.

First, if he was on parole, most sex offenders are not allowed to be around children. Second, they are not allowed to live near a school (in some states). Third, the facts are if I remember correctly, over 80% of offenders CANNOT BE REHABILITATED. Who would want to take the chance?

This stuff makes me crazy. I am glad one of the goals of this board is to offer professional help to those who need it. There are so many victims.

Again, I recommend the Mormon Alliance website. They track cases of abuse, physical, sexual, spiritual, etc. This includes manipulation on all levels.

peter_mary

12th January 2005, 02:34 PM

I can't believe how members will rally around the pervert. They are so in their little sheltered molded worlds that they can't comprehend that someone they know is capable of such deeds. If it's a stranger or non member, it's another story but if it's one of thier own......they scramble to sugarcoat the whole situation. ugh. I also have witnessed how victims are treated. Adult victims and children as well. Like it was their fault AND like they are tainted. Kids aren't allowed to play with them, etc.

I'm going to step out in some territory that I am wholly unqualified to speak about (and many of you are saying to yourself "as if that ever stopped him before!" :) )

I wonder if part of what we see in terms of people rallying around the perp and blaming the victim would be better understood in terms of a feminist perspective. Men are considered in the Church to be only one step removed from God (by virtue of their gender AND their Priesthood), while women and children are expected to "follow their husbands/fathers in righteousness." That last line can be interpreted two different ways. It can mean, "In all your husband's righteous endeavors, you should follow him," or it could equally mean, "It is righteous to follow your husband in all things." There is a difference, and because members are taught not to question the Priesthood prerogative, I think they tend to consider the correct interpretation closer to the latter than the former. To condemn the perpetrator is to condemn the Priesthood, and that is psychologically unacceptable to your typical believing Mormon, even when the evidence is pretty clear that he has violated the cultural mores. If we can blame the women or the children, then we release the Priesthood from culpability and ease our anxiety over the fallibility of the Priesthood.

That is why, in my opinion, the abuse in the Church is doubly heinous--it is immoral for it's own sake, AND because it hides behind religious authority. The men HAVE to rally to the perpetrator in order to protect their own tenuous authority, and the women have to do likewise in order to justify the obeiscance they have offered up to the Priesthood their whole lives. If a woman challenges that Priesthood, she is cut off. If a man challenges the Priesthood of another man, it raises questions about his own. So from a cultural standpoint, it makes sense to the True Believers to defend the perpetrator right up until there can be no doubt that he is condemned, and ONLY then can can they satisfy their anxiety that it was a human fault alone, and not a fault of the Priesthood.

I'm guessing it's a pretty culturally complicated phenomenon we're talking about here...

Paul

Jeff_Ricks

12th January 2005, 02:57 PM

I'm going to step out in some territory that I am wholly unqualified to speak about (and many of you are saying to yourself "as if that ever stopped him before!" :) )

I wonder if part of what we see in terms of people rallying around the perp and blaming the victim would be better understood in terms of a feminist perspective. Men are considered in the Church to be only one step removed from God (by virtue of their gender AND their Priesthood), while women and children are expected to "follow their husbands/fathers in righteousness." That last line can be interpreted two different ways. It can mean, "In all your husband's righteous endeavors, you should follow him," or it could equally mean, "It is righteous to follow your husband in all things." There is a difference, and because members are taught not to question the Priesthood prerogative, I think they tend to consider the correct interpretation closer to the latter than the former. To condemn the perpetrator is to condemn the Priesthood, and that is psychologically unacceptable to your typical believing Mormon, even when the evidence is pretty clear that he has violated the cultural mores. If we can blame the women or the children, then we release the Priesthood from culpability and ease our anxiety over the fallibility of the Priesthood.

That is why, in my opinion, the abuse in the Church is doubly heinous--it is immoral for it's own sake, AND because it hides behind religious authority. The men HAVE to rally to the perpetrator in order to protect their own tenuous authority, and the women have to do likewise in order to justify the obeiscance they have offered up to the Priesthood their whole lives. If a woman challenges that Priesthood, she is cut off. If a man challenges the Priesthood of another man, it raises questions about his own. So from a cultural standpoint, it makes sense to the True Believers to defend the perpetrator right up until there can be no doubt that he is condemned, and ONLY then can can they satisfy their anxiety that it was a human fault alone, and not a fault of the Priesthood.

I'm guessing it's a pretty culturally complicated phenomenon we're talking about here...

Paul

A friend of mine tells a heart-wrenching story about abuse perpetrated by a home teacher where his daughter was the victim. When I have the time I’m planning to bring it from the old PostMormon.com website and place it in the magazine probably as an entry in the editorials section. But you can read it here if you like. His is only one of many accounts. The abuse within the Church is real as well as the coverup, right up to Hinckley himself. Here’s the link:

http://www.post-mormons.com/empathy.htm

Jeff

candy15

12th January 2005, 06:04 PM

i believe that because i'm not mormon and have never been, my reply can be considered reasonably objective here. i hate to see discussions of abuse in the LDS church discussed as if this has something to do with the church itself. i don't believe this is the case. i have had many years of being with people of their faith, and while i don't believe the church is "true", I would have to defend it in the sense that i don't believe that mormonism would condone abuse. that being said, the people who practice the religion are the ones responsible. if they truly followed what their faith teaches, there should be no abuse. please forgive me if I have offended anyone. it's not my intention. it's just that in my experience, most mormons i have met are really good people, albeit misguided. maybe i need to be enlightened? thanks. (as a addendum, i want to add that while i'm not mormon, my hubby, children and his whole family are--and this is a struggle)

candy15

12th January 2005, 06:06 PM

again, i'm new here and want to apologize if i've offended anyone. i haven't read any of the posts on abuse. don't write me off yet. i need to be here! :)

nikki

12th January 2005, 06:27 PM

A friend of mine tells a heart-wrenching story about abuse perpetrated by a home teacher where his daughter was the victim. When I have the time I’m planning to bring it from the old PostMormon.com website and place it in the magazine probably as an entry in the editorials section. But you can read it here if you like. His is only one of many accounts. The abuse within the Church is real as well as the coverup, right up to Hinckley himself. Here’s the link:

http://www.post-mormons.com/empathy.htm

Jeff

If any of mine ever took their lives.........Oh.........they would not want my response to them! They would not get off so easy.

To lose a child to a church who thinks home teaching is more important, how sick. I do not know if your friend is still active in the church or not, I would not be. The only Devil he was around was the church. Heartless, heartless.

There are too many stories, the Doctor (LDS) from Rexburg, Idaho, how many did he molest? Wasn't it in the hundereds. The Church "Court of Love" , just disfellowshiped him, is this not correct? Guess, that way he pays his 10% of his doctor's wages.

Why is the LDS Church using their "Courts of Love" as civil courts and deceiding on criminal conduct cases? The Stake Presidents and the Priesthood holders are way out of line, and have been for decades, and decades, by using the church priesthood court system to decided criminial sexual conduct cases. This isn't Utah under Brigham Young, ya know.

( hurry and get spell check please, my brain has not totally returned yet)

For the poster who mentioned the unknowing or unqualified church leaders. What puzzels me is the pattern is the same across the country on how these matters are handled. There is little difference from one coast of the country to the other. :(

Perpetrators, my thought about them. Yep, they always want forgiveness, to blame someone else, and rarely mention any concern or care for the person they injured.
They are self absorbed and narcissistic, which is probably why they had the ability to harm someone in the first place, so forgiveness, which they write and beg and plead for, is only a continuation of the inital perpetration of the crime. By the way that is a good book to "Children of the Self Absorbed" By Brown.

I get frustrated at the church's level of influence and how many people bow to them and premit the abuses to continue, and they go off "Scott" free. :mad:

I have often wondered about people who have such a callious response to abuse, if they themselves have not been involved, at some point and time, in the same type of conduct.

Some of the posters mentioned how they and their children have had to face abuse alone. I understand. It is good you are willing to assist others as they find themselves isolated.

By the way, isolating the person, is also a way of containment, and control. Guess, that is why TBM practice it so well.

How was Hinkley involved in the cover up of abuse of your Friend Jeff? I could not understand that in the story he posted. I understood the stake president knowing the man had and was abusing other children and was letting him continue.

nikki

12th January 2005, 06:40 PM

again, i'm new here and want to apologize if i've offended anyone. i haven't read any of the posts on abuse. don't write me off yet. i need to be here! :)

Candy, on one will not write you off. Maybe it would be better to restate it this way.

There are Mormon's who are good people, but the Mormon Church system allows for high levels of abuse.
Candy, for one who has been through the system, it is the way it is.

I had very good friends who were LDS, albeit, they were a bit of free thinkers on their own, and knew the flaws of the church.

I also found the other side of the coin, and learned how the system the church is built on cover up and allows abuse, and found some very cruel and dishonest people.

I would still go with there are some people who are good who are LDS, but the church system is flawed, and condons abuse.

candy15

12th January 2005, 06:46 PM

nikki

12th January 2005, 06:57 PM

thanks, nikki. i'm sure there's a lot i have to learn here. i guess i haven't seen that kind of thing go on personally. i have met a lot of good people--of course, i have often felt they didn't see ME that way.

I would never wish you the experience Candy. It is very difficult.

Rose colored glasses sometimes works, until something horrible strikes.

Jeff_Ricks

12th January 2005, 06:58 PM

again, i'm new here and want to apologize if i've offended anyone. i haven't read any of the posts on abuse. don't write me off yet. i need to be here! :)

Candy,

To an extent I agree with you, however, (and I don’t mean to offend either) you seem to be overlooking or unaware of the intentional cover-up by its leaders that is more pervasive in the church than it ought to be. The church represents itself as a place of truth and safety for its members, but in far too many cases it’s not. It also represents itself as the organization that will help people be better people and live better lives, but in far too many cases it doesn’t.

Yes there are good people within the church as there are in all churches, and there are good atheists and good humanists, but that’s no excuse to excuse the irresponsibility of the church when it comes to dealing with its child sex abuse perpetrators. Too often these perpetrators get away with their utterly despicable crimes because they are thought by others to be good people and therefore get away with it regularly, and do so at the expense of innocent children. It’s disgusting.

You should read the article by Lanny Monson on this subject. You can find it at:

http://www.post-mormons.com/empathy.htm

About a year ago I had lunch with a woman who is a registered nurse who specializes in child abuse. She was commissioned as a function of her job to do what she did in Ogden and establish a clinic in Logan for victims of child sex abuse. In the course of our conversation I asked her if the rate of child sex abuse within the church is less than it is outside of the church. She said, no it’s about the same. Keep in mind that she only hears about the cases that get reported to the authorities. Far more go unreported because the church system tends to cover-up for its perpetrators in order to protect the image of the church.

Another way to look at this is if the nurse’s estimate is correct then that shows the church to be an utter failure when it comes to being a place of refuge from the evil of child sex abuse. The church also appears to be a failure in other areas.

The divorce rate within the Utah (which is obviously heavily influenced by the church) is at times above the national average and otherwise hovers near the national average. The church’s influence in holding down the divorce rate is nil. The rate of personal bankruptcy within Utah is consistently greater than the national average and within the last year or two was number one in the nation. So the church’s influence in the important area of personal finance is also nil. What about the promised tithing blessings of prosperity? It seems to be a lie.

Yes there are good people within the church but the facts seem to show that the church has virtually nothing to do with it.

Jeff

silverfox

12th January 2005, 07:12 PM

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,600104127,00.html

The following article in today's Deseret News - a missionary serving in Roy Utah is accused of molesting a family he was visiting. From what I heard on the news last night on TV, he also videotaped it.

A few weeks ago a Primary teacher was arrested for molesting 5-6 yr old girls while teaching Primary at church. He was also a law enforcement officer.

Candy15 - my first experience of the abuse was a personal one a year after I joined. This incident occurred in Dearborn, MI. I was 19. I was renting a room from an older couple in our ward. They were very well respected and loved by the ward. Before me, they had rented the room to a female investigator who was 18. I knew this girl, she was very nice. I ran into her one day at the mall. I was unaware that she was no longer living with the older couple. She told me Charlie had tried to molest her and that his wife was a closet smoker. She was in the middle of receiving the discussions when Charlie tried to molest her. She ran away. Well, from what I had heard in the ward, she had stolen from them and ran away with some guy. It wasn't true. She told the bishop she said about what had happened and he didn't believe her. I am sorry to say I didn't believe her, either. I rented the room about a month later. It was across the street from where I worked. Perfect! And only 40.00 a month! It only took a couple weeks for things to get weird. Just the way Charlie looked at me, etc. I had my friend spend the night one night. She was investigating the church at the time. Charlie came into my room with a key and tried molesting HER and ME!!!!! I freaked out! I was packed and gone a few days later. I was sickened! I went to the bishop feeling confident because I had a witness! HE DIDN'T BELIEVE ME. He told me that they were a fine couple and he was disappointed that I would make up such stories and that even if they were true it wasn't my place "to confess the sins of others." Needless to say I became inactive for about a year. I found out later Charlie made up the same kind of lies about me and spread them through the ward. I often wonder how many victims there were. I was SHOCKED that I was not believed. I was a good member.

After I became active a year later, a similar incident occured while I was on a date with a fellow member. He asked me out to dinner, I accepted, he picked me up DROVE ME TO THE CHURCH PARKING LOT and began attacking me. I got away before anything horrible happened. I was not believed. A few years later I hear he was finally caught and excommunicated.

In leadership positions cases of abuse were brought to my attention. I can't go into every case but there are many. It is more common than not for a ward to have issues of this nature. The cases truly are well hidden. I believe it's getting better, though. I believe members are fighting back and not allowing it to be hushed, thus all the publicity lately when something does happen. It's nothing new. I've been a member 30+ years and believe me it's nothing new.

peter_mary

12th January 2005, 11:50 PM

thanks, nikki. i'm sure there's a lot i have to learn here. i guess i haven't seen that kind of thing go on personally. i have met a lot of good people--of course, i have often felt they didn't see ME that way.

My experience by and large has been that the people in the Church are generally good, at least as good as people generally are. And the Church of course does not condone abuse. The problem is not one of doctrine, but rather culture, and the culture is a secondary function of the way in which doctrine is understood and implemented. In the case of abuse, the Church creates an environment where it is easy for the perpetrator to manipulate the system and the good ol' boys who run it, and create a wake of chaos behind them. It's a case of good people caught in a bad system. The results are still bad.

To create a scripture: "I say unto thee; Love the Church member, hate the Church."

The Gospel According to THIS Paul

LMW

13th January 2005, 01:06 AM

The thing that I mostly can't stand is the fact that women must obey the husband...and we women are just giving our power away when we do that blindly...in the name of a church. Then when the man turns out to be an abuser often the woman is asked what she did to contribute to the abuse, and downfall of the marriage...well....as I see it there may be cases where women do contribute...but why are these men being put on such a pedistal and the women are the problem.

Lisa

bigeddy

13th January 2005, 08:26 AM

Mainly, I reply to Candy, but also to any who believe "it is the people, not the church." 2 things. (No, Candy, I am not offended in the least, I am thrilled that you are here and are writing. My passion in writing this is due to the fact that I read the link to Lanny's experience. And I have my own in that. My daughter can tell you what it is like when the man who molested her, her grandfather, is called to be a bishop when he has never dealt with what he did to her.)

1. It is one thing for an organization to say; "these are our beliefs, our philosophy, our paradigm. They are based on truth, the scriptures, " etc. It is an entirely different thing to say "Thus saith the Lord. This is the truth, the end of the discussion, the it and all about it." When a person grows up having that belief (that it is all the one and only truth and the very word of God himself) the subjective reality of it is totally different. How this impacts the leaders is that if these men were intellectually, morally and socially honest, they would have to realize that to profess out of one side of their face that they are giving the world the very words of God himself, the perfect word; they would have to realize that the result is THERE IS NO WIGGLE ROOM WHATSOEVER. There is no option to later come back and say, "Well, you know that we all have our agency and some people do mess up." That option must be closed to them if they are honest. (Particularly as it pertains to leaders in the highest positions who profess to speak for God and who demand obediance, and surrender of personal authority, from followers.) When a person takes that stand they cannot, as an honest and moral human being ever come back and blame anyone else for not being cautious, not using good judgement, not . . .(whatever) . . Once that stand is taken as an institutional point of privelege. They have no way out but to take responsibility for any and all ugliness that follows. Gordo CANNOT honestly advocate (and use shame to enforce) that I follow my Bishop as if he represents God and then not accept the responsibility, AS HEAD OF THE CHURCH THAT SANCTIONED THAT MAN'S POSITION, if and when that man screws up. He has no way out of this and still stay (in my mind) a man worthy of my respect. He can say that he places a man in a position of respect and authority and wants me to listen carefully to that man but recognizes that that man may err. He can ask me to listen, judge wisely, and then choose to follow or not to follow A MAN. He cannot tell me, as the Lord's Prophet and ultimate authority for God on earth, that that man sits in God's chair and must be obeyed (You cannot say "no" to the bishop kind of shit) and then want to skate when that man screws up. Once the first postion is taken there is no room to wiggle out. Someday the law suits over this will start.

2. Why all this abuse, cover-up, Utah being one of the highest consumers of internet porn, etc. etc. As an institution that makes many statements and takes many positions relative to human sexuality, you damn well better understand what you are doing when it comes to sexuality. You better have done the work and study to understand what you are talking about. You better be willing to publish your stand and view and then stand behind it when it becomes woefully inadequate. You better be able to explain to me the patterns and realities that underlie the very experience of each man who struggles with his homosexuality, of each man who agonizes over his inability to come to terms with the deep feelings behind his "perverse" behavior. You better be able to dig in with me and work with the offenders and then in that work YOU BETTER BE ABLE TO SHOW SOME RESULTS. If you speak for God and understand his stuff, you damn well better be able to be effective in dealing with his children. (When I was teaching at BYU, Steve Robinson (author of many mo works on Christ and etc. and head of the ancient scripture department) asked me if I thought the Church "had a handle on homosexuality." I, of course told him no. (I was, at that time, well on my way out--I knew they didn't have a handle on much at all) He agreed!! This is the problem. If an organization wants to hold itself as the word of God on the earth, and if people want to be members of that organization and hold to that elitist belief (that we hold the full truth--you just have a portion thereof) then, that organization, if it fails to "have a handle" on something as important as human sexuality, cannot stand and be held to be what they profess to be. They are a sham and a boil on the buttocks of God himself. (I am ticked)

These 2 reasons place Mo Mo land in an unenviable position. These are not the opinions of a few leaders. These problems are inherant in the institution itself. They are foundations of the church. If these foundation aspects are what is causing this terrible harm to people who simply want to be good. Then it is the institution itself, not the people that is responsible.

Now, I'm late for work.

Ed

lisa

13th January 2005, 09:27 AM

A couple of years ago...a wonderful man that was my kids therapist offered to speak with the leaders of my ward....so they could be more equipt to understand my children and why they did some of the things they did. To help them know what kind of things they could do as leaders to my family to help the family, and lastly I think he was there to educate these people.
Well some of what happened out of that was very damaging to me as these kids mom. 1-the R.S. president herself refused to be a part of this educational meeting/training. She would rather pretend that child sexual abuse does not happen in the church.
2-there was people there that really honestly belived that had I done a better job the abuse would never have occured.
3-There were several people afterwards that treated the kids even worse than before.
4-some that said they would be there for us, in the end turned away; like my kids were the plague.
5-bottom line my family was no good; and not worth any memebrs time or effort.

That was a very hurtful situation in my life....this was pretty much the final straw for me as far as my reasons for leaving. I just could not be a part of such damaging behavior anymore. I was tired of being ignored...I suppose the answer is to ignore the problem. Then it really does not exist...right??!!

No matter how good of family or the therapists for the child are. It is extreemly difficult to heal from Child sexual abuse in isolation. sometimes all they need is to be heard...let there pain be heard.
Then there entire life becomes based on nothing more than surviving. What ever happened to living?

I know since I left the LDS cult; its taken a long time but I am living finally. Boy these kids still have a struggle with that church that they still want to be a part of. But when your abused maybe its that misserable but comfortable routine. Its all they know.

I just hope to one day see where they can learn to live as I had to learn to live.

Lisa

peter_mary

13th January 2005, 09:37 AM

2. Why all this abuse, cover-up, Utah being one of the highest consumers of internet porn, etc. etc. As an institution that makes many statements and takes many positions relative to human sexuality, you damn well better understand what you are doing when it comes to sexuality.

Ed

As usual, Bigeddy nails the situation. We have a book at our house entitled "A War We Must Win," the name of the author escapes me. My wife read it several years ago when we were still "in" and in fact, visiting my in-laws in Hawaii as they served a mission (and THAT'S a whole other story well worth another thread). Anyway, the book was written by a Mormon guy who I THINK was a state legislator or some elected official, who had become appalled through personal experience at the power of the pornography institution. He, being naive, thought that if anyone should jump on the bandwagon in opposition to this particular family-degrading industry, it would be the Mormon Church, right? After all, they are ALL about opposing same-sex marriage. They are ALL about opposing the Equal Rights Amendment. They are ALL about opposing the gambling industry when it comes on the ballot in various states (I remember well the battle in Idaho when they were passing the Lottery initiative). So naturally they would be willing to throw the weight of their financial and human resources behind such a worthy cause as the regulation and ruin of the pornography industry, right? All they would need is the information, and ZIP! they'd be all over it!

Nope. Every time he tried to rally support, he ran into dead ends. He couldn't get ANYONE to agree that this was something the Church should involve itself in. They simply wouldn't touch it.

Why in the world would the Church not want to involve itself? The conspiritor in me wants to believe that they all have the internet and are enjoying it's benefits ;) , but really, I suspect it is more what Ed is saying...the Church cannot come to terms with its sexuality, and that renders the leadership from Gordon on down to your local Biship wholly incappable of dealing with matters of sexuality, be they normal or deviant. Bishops can't roll up their sleeves and get to work with a "Brother" who has sexual issues because the BISHOP has his own sexual issues, too! (I'm speaking in generalities...Bishops are like any other population in that they exist on a continuum). Women are easily labeled the problem (and are labeled thus continually) because they are either sexually inhibited and thus not satisfying the conjugal requirements of their husband (gag) or if they happen to be comfortable with their sexuality, they are harlots. There doesn't seem to be a lot of middle ground there for women... It is practically a cannonized doctrine that young women are responsible for keeping young men worthy to serve missions. It's as if the Church has defined men as sexual machines who have no choice but to respond when the buttons are pushed, and women as the sole pushers of those buttons. That very comfortably places the burden of responsibility squarely on the shoulders of the sisters.

And how does that affect them? Innordinate quantities of guilt and shame (hallmarks of the good Mormon wife), and the other statistic that Jeff forgot to mention...Utah leads the country (or nearly so) in the use of anti-depressants. It messes women up. And it messes men up, too.

Sexuality is powerful medicine, and the Church has absolutely no ability to either prescribe it or regulate it. So they just let it eat at them like a cancer.

One of the benefits of becoming Post-Mormon often includes a degree of sexual freedom that, if used wisely, helps a person heal from they years of neurotic sexual oppression we endured as members... See my Victoria's Secret reference in the "Underwear" thread :rolleyes: )

Paul

silverfox

13th January 2005, 09:54 AM

That was a very hurtful situation in my life....this was pretty much the final straw for me as far as my reasons for leaving. I just could not be a part of such damaging behavior anymore. I was tired of being ignored...I suppose the answer is to ignore the problem. Then it really does not exist...right??!!

Lisa

The church many times causes more harm than good. I don't want to say that this is always the case. In most of the cases I was aware of and involved in the church did more harm than good. My observation for what it is worth (and I am no professional) is the leaders are struggling to stay in "spiritual" mode and the ulginess of the "world" is hard for them to deal with professionally and in using the right resources. They want to handle it all on a spiritual level. They limit their abilities. There is no room in their "spiritual" world for ugliness so they have difficulties handling it.

Many times the outcome is a good one and the ward has rallied around the right people. I have seldom witnessed this, though. In my experiences there have been more harm than good with the focus on helping the perpertrator and not the victims.

About 15 years ago while trying to help a fellow church member who had endured sexual abuse by her stake prez dad as a child. I was trying to get our bishop to read some books that a therapist friend had recommended for her to read to have a better understanding of the reasons for sexual abuse, the rehabilitation odds, what it does to the victims, etc, etc. The bishop wouldn't touch them because they were not "church approved" reading. It had nothing to do with the church! Nothing to do with religion, spirituality, etc. It was an informative book! His unwillingness to be open and desire infomation caused more damage. Very painful. The victim was acting out and was trying to get direction from the bish. Her mom didn't believe her when she told as a child. No one believed her but me. And only because I witnessed inappropriate behavior on his part with her daughters. (open mouth kissing????? NO WAY NOT FROM A GRANDPA! Her daugther was also in my SS class and told me he made them watch porn. Their mom found the porn, their dad blamed them, etc, etc long story) She reported her dad to church officials (he was in a leadership position). NOTHING WAS DONE. NOTHING.This devastated her. Because she was acting out and being self destructive, her husband, her mom, the bish, no one wanted to believe her. They felt she was looking for an "excuse" for her behavior. She ended up abandoning her family....a husband and 4 children and became very self destructive. Was this the church's fault? NO! But in my opinion (and again I am not a professional) they enabled her to spiral downhill rather than help hold her up. She ended up being excommunicated. Again her dad got away with it. And who knows how many other victims there are out there???? I regret not contacting authorities myself when the girl confided in me. I was told by the bish to stay out of it, they were handling it. I don't think I will ever forgive myself.

I hope this thread stays alive because I think every member and non member needs to be aware of the dangers.

I shudder to think of how often I've left my kids alone in a room with a bishop, a teacher, for the most part, strangers. There is a blind trust and it's wrong!!! I would think the church would want to avoid this and no longer allow teachers alone with children.

There have been several lawsuits against the church in which the church settled as long as the victims agreed to not talk about it. I will try to find the link where they are listed if anyone is interested.

nikki

13th January 2005, 02:45 PM

silverfox

13th January 2005, 04:17 PM

What Stake where you in? And who was the Stake President?

If you feel you cannot post-- could send me a message?

I can't remember the stake (1976-1977) but it was Dearborn Ward. My bish was Bishop Freeman whom I hear was/is stake prez as of a few years ago.

Charlie and Sandy Miller - (they lived in Inkster)
Juan Villa

I have no problem posting any of the names.

free thinker

13th January 2005, 08:38 PM

If you read Todd Comptons book , "In Sacred Loneliness", you will realize the extent of sexual mainpulation Joseph Smith was invloved in. Also Hyrum, if I am correct. If Joseph Smith did today what he did during his life, he would be arrested, and forced into therapy. I think he was a sexual addict. Why else would a man need 33 wives, one third of whom were teenagers? Some were maried to other men at the time. Hmmm, isn't that adultery?

Men in the church have always been able to get away with this stuff. Dont try to tell me the patriarchal nature of the doctrine does not add to the problem? I think it goes back to prophet number one, smokin Joe Smith!!

When humans are deprived of sexual activity, and outlet, it will manifest itself in some other way. It is too powerful to be contained. I am not a professional. This is just a laymans personal experience.

By the way. Bigeddy is dead on as usual! You cannot have it both ways! You either are, or you are not God's instrument! If you are, or claim to be, you better be holy, or step down!!

Free Thinker

Unregistered

13th January 2005, 09:52 PM

I would never wish you the experience Candy. It is very difficult.

Rose colored glasses sometimes works, until something horrible strikes.

Uhmmmmmmmm, how can I say this......

Must be the effects of our past belief system showing up.

There was been over a week of postings of experiences people have posted, as parents of vicitms, victims, friends of victims, family of victims on this site and others.

I might be naive, but I am not dumb.

Many of the people who sexually abused were in leadership positions, or covered up for by people in leadership positions. That should be telling everyone something, right there.

Some have tried to write the Church, some have brought speakers in, some have tired to hold the church accountable. They got no response, or they were snubbed, harassed, turned on, or further victimized. That should be telling everyone something, right there.

They have seen their children, friends, and families, spirits and lives wounded, or taken because of the abuses.

People who were victims, were met with distain, and victims slienced and sometimes even excommunicated. The abuser promoted within the ranks of the church. That should be telling everyone something, right there.

You see I think, we are all holding on to a bit of the last flicker of a belief system, feeling this is a church responsive to people and their needs, by expecting them to respond in a postive a concerned manner, if enough presssure is brought before them.

The Church was founded and based on explotation, sexual, money wise, and mind wise. What is happening is a repeat of history.

Make sense?

nikki

14th January 2005, 12:57 AM

Uhmmmmmmmm, how can I say this......

Must be the effects of our past belief system showing up.

There was been over a week of postings of experiences people have posted, as parents of vicitms, victims, friends of victims, family of victims on this site and others.

I might be naive, but I am not dumb.

Many of the people who sexually abused were in leadership positions, or covered up for by people in leadership positions. That should be telling everyone something, right there.

Some have tried to write the Church, some have brought speakers in, some have tired to hold the church accountable. They got no response, or they were snubbed, harassed, turned on, or further victimized. That should be telling everyone something, right there.

They have seen their children, friends, and families, spirits and lives wounded, or taken because of the abuses.

People who were victims, were met with distain, and victims slienced and sometimes even excommunicated. The abuser promoted within the ranks of the church. That should be telling everyone something, right there.

You see I think, we are all holding on to a bit of the last flicker of a belief system, feeling this is a church responsive to people and their needs, by expecting them to respond in a postive a concerned manner, if enough presssure is brought before them.

The Church was founded and based on explotation, sexual, money wise, and mind wise. What is happening is a repeat of history.

Make sense?

sorry, thought I had signed in but I hadn't the above 'unregistered' is me Nikki

I am glad to see the board posting on the issue of abuse in the church. It is widespread, many have suffered. Amazing the abuse people suffer in organizations they belong to and believe in. I was hoping the post would "make sense" as people read though it.

wescape

14th January 2005, 01:52 AM

I had a Sunday school teacher who was also a public school teacher who was convicted of molesting one of his public school students. It amazed me how my Dad defended him and said, "give him a chance" when any other time he would not have been so merciful. This guy was very odd and always gave me the creeps. His wife was the music leader in primary and she was also strange not to menton just plain mean. One of their biological kids attempted suicide and now it seems clear why.

I have a feeling that the level of abuse that goes on in Mormonism is incomprehensible. Anytime people get a "free pass" to be around children it is not a good situation. It is even worse when allegations are made and the people in authority either do nothing or very little. That is even a deeper betrayal than the original abuse.

Wes

nikki

17th January 2005, 12:44 PM

While on the internet I found a site which posted the following news report. It is from a February 2001 News Brief from "The Massachusetts News" on a story which ran in the "Union News and Sunday Republican".

The story reports on a (Mormon) temple to be built in Massachusetts and the town was unhappy with it's construction feeling the zoning laws gave a 'carte blanc' to religious buildings". The Church wanted their new Temple built so badly, the case went to the U.S. Supreme Court to allow the temple's construction.

Seems buildings to the church are far more important than the lives of women and children, who are part of the tithing payers. The church attorneys on the role and dole of the church, in TBM style, I am sure defended the Church's need for the expendature. Oh, the sacrifices of the TBM people!

One did not see, the Church stepping up to the plate on the abuse issue in Massachusetts in, December of 2004, as they did with all their TBM self rightous zelous spirit in building of a structure in 2001.

It is time that the LDS Church is stopped getting a 'carte blanc' in it's cover up of abuse it's church members.

And this I say in JC name

Amen

peter_mary

17th January 2005, 03:45 PM

Seems buildings to the church are far more important than the lives of women and children, who are part of the tithing payers. The church attorneys on the role and dole of the church, in TBM style, I am sure defended the Church's need for the expendature. Oh, the sacrifices of the TBM people!

Nikki,

I've made a similar observation in a different (though related) situation. I happen to know the realtor here in town who handles the Church's negotiations when they are buying and selling property. He recently told me about a transaction he handled in which the Church negotiated to purchase two smallish homes adjacent to a Church building that they wanted removed so that they could expand the parking lot. He was told that he could negotiate for whatever price the owners asked...no price was too high, so long as they got the precious space for asphalt.

On the flip side, my wife is frequently asked by Bishops to discount her counseling services, because it's just too expensive, and after all, "these are sacred funds."

I also got an ear full yesterday about the beautification project going on around BYU-Hawaii and the temple in Laie. The Church just spent 5.5 MILLION dollars to make the STREET more beautiful as you approach the temple. Yup, 5.5 MILLION FREAKING DOLLARS on a street.

And on the flip side of that, my in-laws (who were telling me about the Hawaii deal) had to pay $700 a month for a tiny, 800 sq. foot condominium owned by the Church so that they could serve there on their mission. I'm not kidding, it boggles my mind!

So you can see the same priority problem...spend as much as you have to when it comes to hard assets (the things that build the portfolio of the Church), but cut corners when it comes to the needs of the actual members (note that the primary consumers of counseling that is payed for by the Church are women and children).

They value property, not people. :mad:

Paul

Born Free

18th January 2005, 12:33 AM

I work closely with a psychologist who has designed programs for incarcerated offenders, and we talk at length about the particular challenges presented with offending behaviour. Over the yeasr we have seen a few serial offenders skate through and around Church systems.

I believe that most churches get into trouble around appropriate responses on this issue for a couple of key reasons:

1. They overrate agency (which means on the reverse that they fail to acknowledge how deficient the impulse control is in some individuals, particularly where behaviours have been highly habituated). The book The Blank Slate by Steven Pinker cites the latest research which informs how much control we really have, and the news is confronting to most religions (and many socialists, but for different reasons, according to Pinker).

If we desire a society where people do "the right thing", it is helpful to start from a realistic base line of understanding, and most religions are way off the mark, and Mormonism probably more than most. Stephen Covey's work lauds the ideal of 'control' over the top, and fails to encourage respect/appreciation for the power of urges/urgency.... the classic masculine fantasy of control and over-rating of the rational mind.

2. Foregiveness. I believe that most Christians have a simplistic and poorly thought through notion of what foregiveness involves and how it connects to agency. Anyone who has even the first skeric of knowledge of sexually offending behaviour, knows that the base parts of the brain are the hardest to effect permanent change. Sexual behaviours are powerfully reinforced by the endorphine high of orgasm, so anyone who fails to know how those systems work, is at serious risk of fails to pay due respect to powerful processes.

Of course that connects to the problems of a lay priesthood, who are easy to con for most sexual predators. That problem is exasperated by Church records which usually fail to adequately inform new ward leaderships of the track record of previous offenders in their old wards.

The other aspect of this is that few issues are more confronting to God's Priesthood, than repeated failures to detect the predators in their midst. I regularly ask TBMs if they know of one, just one, instance of a sexual abuser being detected by the power of the Priesthood. I have not had one affirmative reply yet. Contrast that with a friend who approached her Stake President when her faith was rattled after her priesthood holding husband has failed as a Bishop to detect a repeat offender. The SPs response to her distress was to ask if she was having an affair. Anything other than confront the failure of the 'power of the priesthood'.

There is another aspect of this that would be funny if it were not that the content is so tragic. I had a man referred to me professionally for sexual abusive behaviour in parallel to his legal proceedings (reporting is mandatory here). He had sexually abused young men. At a point in the proceedings he became aware that I was ex LDS, and he visibly tripped into judgements of my occasional smoking. The irony was that he was obviously so incensed by my smoking as an ex, but could not appreciate the life impacting toxicity of his actions which impacted several people, and teh imapct could last for years. Sadly I find that sort of disassociative state quite common.

It is like drinking tea or coffee is of life shattering importance, but the problems with the BoM are of no consequence.

Go figure!

bigeddy

18th January 2005, 07:17 AM

"I regularly ask TBMs if they know of one, just one, instance of a sexual abuser being detected by the power of the Priesthood. I have not had one affirmative reply yet. "
--Sturgdw--

I am cracking up!! What a clever thing to pin the white shirted boys down on. Years ago I attended a philosphy class taught by Chauncy Riddle at BYU. I had intended to audit much of the class to see what he had to say. We, in CES, had heard so much about him and from him in various symposia. I attended one class. He said 2 things that pissed me off so bad that I walked out and did not go back. He said both these things in one day! First he said that if a person had the spirit there was nothing that could happen to that person from the outside world (contrasting that with the inner world of thought, prayer, contemplation, etc) that had any power to effect them. The second one was that if a person had the spirit they would also know any time someone was lieing to them. This was just several months after the whole Mark Hoffman thing blew up. I wondered if he realized what he was saying about Hinckley who had detected nothing about Mark's lies. I wondered if he was just ignorant of the full ramifications of his statement or if he was trying to get people to know that Hinckley was full of shit. I looked around the room at the students knowing that statistically there were many who had been subjected to some kind of terrible abuse "from without" and thought about the kind of shame this placed on them if they believed him that their abuse would have no power in thier lives if they truly "had the spirit." More shame for the abused to feel. I was angry.

Ed