Hi Dan,
I appreciate your expressed concern for me, but at the same time I am more than a bit puzzled by it. Your impressions about my Church action are quite different (nearly 180 degrees opposite) to my perspective and personal experience. I suspect that is a function of our divergent world views and experiences. But even still..
Dan Vogel wrote:Sorry, to hear how much more complicated the church has made life for you. I hope it's worth it.
Actually, it was the transgressions that had complicated my life, and the Church action helped to significantly de-complicate things. So, yes, it was well worth it.
wenglund wrote:Just to set the record straight and quail some of the wild speculations:
1) I was in no way a "victim" of a Church court, nor did I experience any measure of "abuse of priesthood authority", but rather I was benefited thereby.
It's abuse of authority when they really have no authority on which to condemn, shame, and punish you. They only have what authority you give them.
I am not sure that constitutes "abuse of authority", but nevertheless, I have given them authority in a number of ways: 1) via my joining the Church, 2) my firm belief in priesthood order and heirarchy, 3) my sustaining vote semi-annually, and 4) my innitiating the Church action with them.
2) My ecclessiastical leaders didn't need to convince me that my private acts could effect others, because I had come to that conclusion, myself. I came to that conclusion, in part, through rational and pragmatic considerations, as well as by personally observing the negative affect that my actions had on others.
So, if you recognize a problem, what do you need them for? Wade, you are not responsible for anyone but you, especially since you are single and have no children. But it is not your job to be an example for others to follow. That's way too big of a burden to put on yourself. I know Mormons constantly worry about others not accepting the gospel because of setting a bad example, but that's a load of cr*p. No one is going to go to hell because of you.
For one, I needed them to help me effectively and properly resolve the problem so that it wouldn't be too big of a burden for me to handle. As I see it, I wouldn't have gotten myself in the mess that I did were I completely capable on my own. And, unlike some, I am not averse to being assisted. I actually welcome loving counsel, a third-party perspective, and spiritual interventions. Besides, those who were affected encompased many more people than just myself, and the impact went well beyond simply my not setting a good example. But, even were it just a matter of example, I disagree with you about it being a "load of crap". In this screwed up world we now live in, children in particular can use contemporary role models to set standards and demonstrate that those standards can be abided. They also need role models that can evince the right ways to recover from a fall and continue to run the good race.
3) I initiated the court proceedings, myself, and thought it quite necessary.
Why? Isn't it between you and God?
No.
If you have seen the error of your ways, there is little more to learn. Why the self-flagellation? Mormons are so dramatic. Sometimes it is a miracle of forgiveness in the LDS church. I prefer the Catholic way of penitence and then move on with your life. Mormons want to wallow in their misery and hate their flesh.
I have no clue what you are talking about. I experienced no self-flagellation, no misery, and no hatred of the flesh. Rather, my experience was quite the opposite. It was an uplifting experience that brought me to greater respect my body, mind, and spirit, and view the same for others. The melodrama is something you are projecting onto my experience.
4) I felt the verdict was very reasonable and warranted, and even thought at the time that it may have been a bit too lenient.
This must be great for your esteem, Wade.
It was--not that I would expect that you would understand.
5) This action occured more than two decades ago, long before I had heard of CBT, and long before my fascination with helping people emotionally, psychologically, and so forth.
Well, lets hope you don't follow the church's idea of helping people.
I don't intend to help people in the ways you grossly misunderstand the Church to be helping people--though I hope to help people in some of the ways that the Church lovingly and upliftingly helped me. My Guiding Principles are based much on precepts and principles at the foundation of the restored gospel of Christ and as practiced by the Church.
Well, Wade, your secret is safe with me. And just think, all the time you were pounding me on the FAIR board with your theory that apostates were apostates because they needed to excuse their sins, and here you were in need of "moral guidance" yourself.
I don't recall "pounding" you in that way (though I may have asserted that apostasy was
unavoidably a function of sin--not necessarily of a "moral" kind). But, I am not sure how my needing moral guidance multiple decades prior to our discussion at FAIR has much of anything to do with my point about apostacy. My experience demonstrates that sin need not lead to apostasy, and that one may benefit from not attempting to excuse sin, but rather to stand accountable for, and rise above, one's sins.
Honestly, Wade, I feel bad that you have to subject yourself to such humiliation.
And, I feel bad that you woould feel bad for something that never really occured except in your imagination. What very slight and momentary humiliation I may have felt, was self-induced, and was a function of my own misunderstanding. Once I quickly gained an accurate perception, the experience became wonderfully uplifting and empowering.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-