DiscussMormonism.com

Why wouldn't Bill sign whatever paper, then record it audio/video
Surreptitiously? Blast it over the Internet then!
These guys are hypocrites so what's to lose?
Maybe he should ask for a cash settlement like a million $$$ to keep quiet.
Just sayin
k

GameOver wrote:He will be excommunicated, of course. You can’t call one of the Apostles a LIAR and not be disciplined.

BS I've done it a million times--well maybe an exaggeration. It's has less to do with Bill's views and more to do with his influence. As it is, his local leaders were told by higher ups to go after Bill, because they've heard of him from those effected (either in a positive or negative way).

Bill should assume the roll of Abinadi and on his way to the flames try and make a Alma out of someone. You never know when a seed you toss out there falls in good ground.

Stem wrote:Bill should assume the roll of Abinadi and on his way to the flames try and make a Alma out of someone. You never know when a seed you toss out there falls in good ground.

Bill's sown a lot of good seed. So has RFM who can't be too far behind.

Jersey Girl wrote:cwald as a Never I thought that a middle way might be possible. I agree with you now that there is not. At least for me there wouldn't. The convoluted and damaging Nov 5th policy on children of gays would have sent me running for the door never to return.

That's what would have done it for me. No question about it.

Weeeeeell, not so fast:

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2018/11 ... d-what-is/

So-called Middle Way Mormonism is generating a lot of chatter online, in homes, at churches and elsewhere. While a clear definition of the term remains elusive — even among self-proclaimed middle wayers — this approach is gaining traction, especially among millennial members, more and more of whom are seeing themselves as neither all-in nor all-out of the faith. By Common Consent blogger Sam Brunson argues all members, at some level, are middle wayers.

To hear his thoughts on the topic, click here:

https://soundcloud.com/mormonland/middle-way-mormonism

Too Long;Didn't Listen: If you can quibble away are your doubts you can stay in the Church.

- Doc

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:

Jersey Girl wrote:cwald as a Never I thought that a middle way might be possible. I agree with you now that there is not. At least for me there wouldn't. The convoluted and damaging Nov 5th policy on children of gays would have sent me running for the door never to return.

That's what would have done it for me. No question about it.

Weeeeeell, not so fast:

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2018/11 ... d-what-is/

So-called Middle Way Mormonism is generating a lot of chatter online, in homes, at churches and elsewhere. While a clear definition of the term remains elusive — even among self-proclaimed middle wayers — this approach is gaining traction, especially among millennial members, more and more of whom are seeing themselves as neither all-in nor all-out of the faith. By Common Consent blogger Sam Brunson argues all members, at some level, are middle wayers.

To hear his thoughts on the topic, click here:

https://soundcloud.com/mormonland/middle-way-mormonism

Too Long;Didn't Listen: If you can quibble away are your doubts you can stay in the Church.

- Doc

This is nothing new...just New Order Mormonism or Cafiteria Mormonism

I just want to add a comment regarding the Fate of Bill Reel:

While my heart goes out to Bill and his family, knowing that this process is a barbaric spiritually violent process, This can't have come as a surprise to Bill. With his "Liar Liar Pants on Fire" podcast episode directed at the less than honest public statements made by Jeff Holland...statements Bill combined into a scathing exposure of Holland's complicity in a manufactured plan to deceive and promote lies as being the truth or exposing Holland as a very uninformed fool of someone else supplying him with misinformation. Which ever it was, the episode made Holland come off as a complete douche bag. Once that episode was released exposing Holland, it was only a short matter of time before the church took aggressive action against Bill. Bill more or less drew first blood and threw down the gauntlet...the church is merely responding in the only manner that it can...self preservation by marginalizing Bill in the minds of its true believers by excommunicating him.

Craig Paxton wrote:I just want to add a comment regarding the Fate of Bill Reel:

While my heart goes out to Bill and his family, knowing that this process is a barbaric spiritually violent process, This can't have come as a surprise to Bill. With his "Liar Liar Pants on Fire" podcast episode directed at the less than honest public statements made by Jeff Holland...statements Bill combined into a scathing exposure of Holland's complicity in a manufactured plan to deceive and promote lies as being the truth or exposing Holland as a very uninformed fool of someone else supplying him with misinformation. Which ever it was, the episode made Holland come off as a complete douche bag. Once that episode was released exposing Holland, it was only a short matter of time before the church took aggressive action against Bill. Bill more or less drew first blood and threw down the gauntlet...the church is merely responding in the only manner that it can...self preservation by marginalizing Bill in the minds of its true believers by excommunicating him.

An institution that is spiritually violent to its faithful will hardly be equipped to be decent to the apostates.

Bill's Stake President wrote:Church disciplinary councils are sacred ecclesiastical proceeding and are intended to be strictly confidential. It would not be appropriate, for example, for anyone who attends the council (including you) to make a recording of it, whether for private or public use. Doing so would be a serious violation of the ecclesiastical purposes governing such councils and of the trust that is necessary for disciplinary councils to be effective.

The priest-penitent privilege is ALWAYS intended to protect the penitent, and NEVER the priest, NEVER the church. Attorney-client privilege, therapist-client privilege, doctor-client privilege, etc are ALL intended to protect client -- NOT the advisor. If, in any of these relationships, the priest, attorney, therapist, doctor, etc have something they need to keep confidential to protect themselves, there is something terribly wrong with that relationship.

The church is implying the sanctity of priest-penitent privilege while turning the concept on it's head and using it as a mechanism of abuse, control, and avoidance of accountability. The church's ethical duty is to protect the privacy of the person on trial. Period. The decision to record a church court is entirely up the person on trial. Period.

Despicable. God's church my a$$.

consiglieri wrote:received a summons to his disciplinary court.

What are you going to do when you get your summons, consiglieri? You do know it's coming. Your days are numbered.