JLHPROF why do you have to search for some kind of "out" in a case like this? Such as you assuming that I didn't read the statements. Of course I read everything before I posted.
The told her to shut her mouth. She challenged why they chose to consequence her and not the two guilty parties in the very affair that left her in despair.
Then, they tried to manipulate her by asking her if she sustained them in their callings. In other words, was she going to sustain the very decision they made to consequence her by trying to make her shut up. She refused.
It's nothing more than shady manipulation on their part.
No, JLHPROF, I don't think I missed a thing there.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
Did YOU read his apology? He said he was wrong. That's that.
- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.
Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
Jersey Girl wrote:So the lady is not permitted to share her concerns with her own faith community?
That isn't how this appears to me. Question, how does the SP even know she's talking? Clearly someone has complained. Almost a year AFTER the divorce. The way it comes across is that everybody has already heard about it, and are sick of the continuation of this drama. But maybe I'm missing something. I agree the SP is an ass though.
...At some point prior to the finalization of the divorce [in April 2016], Mr. Clayton [the Stake President] revoked Ms. Hadlock’s temple recommend.
...Mr. Clayton asked Ms. Hadlock to meet with him in May or June of 2016 to discuss what he viewed as discord among ward members because of the divorce. This meeting was recorded:
Recording here
nor is there agreement on why it was done:
In this meeting, Ms. Hadlock questions the rationale used to revoke her temple recommend. She is upset because it was done, from her perspective, for not supporting the Bishop’s decision to allow her ex-husband to ordain their son. Mr. Clayton disagrees states that the reason the temple recommend was revoked was because she refused to stop talking to members of the ward about her divorce.
Water Dog wrote:... but if I have to choose sides I think I side with the stake president on this.
Good point. It is the right of Church leaders to lack inspiration. That way if they ever are inspired, then it is a miracle and they can count it as a blessing.
Water Dog wrote:... but if I have to choose sides I think I side with the stake president on this.
Good point. It is the right of Church leaders to lack inspiration. That way if they ever are inspired, then it is a miracle and they can count it as a blessing.
you wait, some irony-impaired lurker is going to post that elsewhere for truth!
"Better that one woman should perish than a whole ward perish and be riven with the dissensions of gossip and innuendo."
Obviously, because grown-adults ostensibly dedicating their lives to forgiveness, long-suffering, humility, and Christlike love cannot possibly figure out how to manage gossip and innuendo.
you wait, some irony-impaired lurker is going to post that elsewhere for truth!