Conference tecrus::mormonism

    Purge?  What are you talking about?  I have never known the Church "to
    purge" itself or its people.  Loaded word "purge is.  Please explain
    
    Paul

    	The word "purge" is not a word I chose but has been chosen 
    	to refer to those individuals, such as Lavina Fielding Anderson,
    	Paul Toscano, et al, who are being refered to in newspaper 
    	articles discussing Church disciplinary councils held alledgedly
    	to "purge" them from the church for their intellectual, or feminist
    	views. These individuals are now being refered to as the September
    	Six by Lavina.  The story has made the national press.
    
    	Dave

    Haven't heard about it.  Can you give me more details?
    
    Paul
    
    

    
    I'll see if I can find a newspaper article on this.  If not I'll
    post a synopsis when I get in later.
    
    Dave

Return-Path: decpa::[email protected]
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1993 21:05:38 -0600
From: decpa::[email protected]
To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
Subject: press release (LFA)

[This is from Lavina Fielding Anderson.]

13 September 1993
STATEMENT FOR THE PRESS

In April 1993, I published a long article in _Dialogue_ documenting more
than a hundred cases of ecclesiastical and spiritual abuse. Instruction
by Elder Loren Dunn of the Seventy, my stake president, Marlin S. Miller
(630 E. Coatsville Avenue, 486-1262) told me that I had "shamed and
defamed" the Church.

On September 12, an hour after my husband, son, and I sang in the choir
at our stake conference, I received a letter informing me that a stake
disciplinary council would be held on September 23 to determine the
status of my membership. I am accused of "conduct unbecoming a member of
this Church."

I am heartsick, much less about my own situation, than about what the
pattern of suppression and punishment means for this church I love and
to which I have given my life.

Both the gospel of Jesus Christ and Mormon doctrine teach love,
liberation from limitations of all kinds, and an absolutely irreducible
respect for human dignity and freedom. Ecclesiastical intimidation,
silencing, and punishment violate these principles in every way.

Most of the cases in the _Dialogue_ article were writers and scholars,
either personally known to me or people with whose work I was familiar.
In the past five months, over a hundred other people, most of them
"ordinary" members--not writers or scholars, not known to me--have
volunteered their own experiences of spiritual and ecclesiastical
[abuse]. Although I think most wards and stakes function very
effectively as communities of affection and affiliation, ecclesiastical
abuse is clearly a systematic, churchwide problem. It needs to be
addressed on a churchwide scale.

I acknowledge President Miller's authority as my local ecclesiastical
leader and will accept his judgment. However, I do not acknowledge that
his jurisdiction over me as a member of his stake encompasses
jurisdiction over the problem of ecclesiastical abuse or its solution. I
refuse to attend the disciplinary council. Killing the messenger who
brings the bad news simply adds another abuse to the lengthening list.

% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Received: by mts-gw.pa.dec.com; id AA20232; Mon, 13 Sep 93 20:04:10 -0700
% Received: from LOCALHOST by ucs2.byu.edu (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03.byu) id AA16139;
Mon, 13 Sep 1993 20:50:12 -060
% Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1993 20:50:12 -0600
% Message-Id: <[email protected]>
% Errors-To: [email protected]
% Reply-To: [email protected]
% Originator: [email protected]
% Sender: [email protected]
% Precedence: bulk
% From: David Anderson <[email protected]>
% To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
% Subject: press release (LFA)
% X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

Return-Path: decpa::[email protected]
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1993 20:33:32 -0600
From: decpa::[email protected]
To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
Subject: My friend Paul Toscano

        I haven't been able to follow the list for a few weeks so I was
just catching up on all that's been written on Paul Toscano and the Mormon
Alliance. I was considering whether I should write something in his behalf
when I came to Mark Emmett's post on Paul's pending excommunication. All I
feel now is pain. 

Although I haven't talked with Paul and Margaret recently, we were once
very close. I was Paul's roommate at BYU and lived in he and Margaret's
basement after they were married. I can honestly say that I have never seen
the spirit of prophecy--in the fullest sense but especially as the
testimony of Jesus--in anyone as I have seen it in Paul. Paul loves Jesus
more than anyone I have ever known. He converted my wife and made me a true
Christian and we were only two of many. I knew from the day we met he was a
man of God.

Paul has tremendous gifts of writing and especially speaking; it's very
difficult to withstand his clear thinking, especially when the Spirit is on
him (which was often, when I knew Paul well). But he is one of those rare
and dangerous people who sets things out so clearly and explicitly that his
hearers are almost invariable divided. I've not seen many who could remain
neutral vis a' vis one of Paul's talks or essays. He always has stirred up
controversy; most times (at least when I knew him well) without intending
to but also without being afraid of the consequences.

Those on the list who are saying 'excommunicate him (off with his head?),
he deserves it' don't realize what we as a church will lose with Paul (or,
for that matter, with the other 'intellectuals' who are being cut off).
Yes, Paul is a dangerous guy. He's wild and unpredictable most of the time,
two characteristics that have been in awfully short supply among our people
since the early church. I wonder how wild men like Enoch and John the
Baptist and Samuel the Lamanite and Joseph Smith would be received in our
stodgy and generally quite boring Church today? Yeah, Paul rocks the boat;
always has and always will. But he loves the Lord with all his heart (this
I know) and has devoted his life to the Church since his conversion (the
account of which you may have read in Paul Dunn's book, 'No More
Strangers'). If we lose Paul, we will lose a rare and gifted brother. I
pray the Lord will save him....

In pain,

J.B. Herrick  


% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Received: by mts-gw.pa.dec.com; id AA18651; Mon, 13 Sep 93 19:32:04 -0700
% Received: from LOCALHOST by ucs2.byu.edu (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03.byu) id AB16163;
Mon, 13 Sep 1993 20:19:41 -060
% Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1993 20:19:41 -0600
% Message-Id: <[email protected]>
% Errors-To: [email protected]
% Reply-To: [email protected]
% Originator: [email protected]
% Sender: [email protected]
% Precedence: bulk
% From: [email protected] (J.B. Herrick)
% To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
% Subject: My friend Paul Toscano
% X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

I had a list of the names of the people involved somewhere, but I cannot
find it.

scott

    RE .5
    
    One of the comments made in .5 is that Lavina recieved a letter 
    inviting her to a Stake Coucil court.  Stake Council courts are
    reservered for MP.  Bishops courts are for others.
    
    There are problems with all of the mentioned courts.
    
    Court is a court of love.  If we knew what sins we were commiting
    by being a member and not following the teachings, we would ask
    for a court.  A court removes the obligation that you must follow
    the teachings to the fullest.  Your status is changed to that of 
    non member if you are ex'ed.  If you are disfellowshiped, then that 
    is something else.
    
    We all need to understand courts more.  When they are held, why
    they are held and what are the possible outcomes.
    
    Lee

	Attn fellow noters,
    
        Here is the list of the 6 who were the subject of the base note.
        Hope no hackles are raised. This note is unedited.  Apologies.
    
	Dave
    
Folks, I do not like being the bearer of exceptionally bad tidings...

I had just gone to bed when I was awakened by my friend Bonnie Mitchell.
She had a list of people who have had dates set for Church disciplinary
action (read excommunication).  Per her request, I am posting this list
publicly for all to see.

   Member                       Date of disciplinary action    
Lynn Whitesides			 Tuesday, 14 September 1993

Avraham Gileadi			 Wednesday, 15 September 1993

Paul Toscano			 Sunday, 19 September 1993

Maxine Hanks			 Sunday, 19 September 1993

Lavina Fielding Anderson	 Thursday, 23 September 1993


The following are the dates for the hearings for the following denials
of continuing status at BYU:

Cecelia Konchar Farr		 Thursday, 23 September 1993

David C. Knowlton		 Monday, 27 September 1993
[David submitted an 800-page appeal only two weeks ago...!]

Finally, two rumours:

1)Chieko Okazaki's book, _Lighten Up!_, is now outselling anything else
that Deseret books is stocking at the moment.

2)The Relief Society Presidency will be released at October Conference.


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Folks, I guess the purge is on...I am just sick inside.

Deana M. Holmes            | Oscar Wilde once said:  "I find it harder
[email protected]       | and harder every day to live up to my
(512)406-7216              | blue china."



% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Received: by mts-gw.pa.dec.com; id AA25297; Mon, 13 Sep 93 21:43:18 -0700
% Received: from localhost (postman@localhost) by po4.andrew.cmu.edu (8.5/8.5) id AAA09713; Tue, 14 Sep 1993 00:31:37 -0400
% Received: via switchmail for [email protected]; Tue, 14 Sep 1993 00:31:34 -0400 (EDT
% Received: from po5.andrew.cmu.edu via qmail ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/service/mailqs/q002/QF.MgZIXC600UddQh3Eh:>; Tue, 14 Sep 1993 00:30:06 -0400 (ED
% Received: from deepthought.cs.utexas.edu (deepthought.cs.utexas.edu [128.83.139.7]) by po5.andrew.cmu.edu (8.5/8.5) with SMTP id AAA11524; Tue, 14 Sep 1993 00:29:56 -0400
% Received: from ghostwheel.BGA.COM by deepthought.cs.utexas.edu (5.64/1.2/relay) with SMTP id AA27658; Mon, 13 Sep 93 23:30:41 -050
% Received: from wixer.UUCP by ghostwheel.bga.com with UUCP id AA20883 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [email protected]); Mon, 13 Sep 1993 23:30:22 -050
% Received: by wixer (5.65/1.35) id AA09467; Mon, 13 Sep 93 23:23:49 -050
% Message-Id: <9309140423.AA09467@wixer>
% Subject: Pending excommunications of LDS intellectuals
% To: [email protected]
% Date: Mon, 13 Sep 93 23:23:48 CDT
% From: Deana Holmes <[email protected]>
% Cc: [email protected] (Deana Holmes)
% X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]

    
    
    
    
    Please note the following, re: "the purge".  What better source.
    
    	Dave Pyle    
    
    
The following is the text of a letter that I received today from F.
Michael Watson, Secretary to the First Presidency, in response to the
letter I faxed to them two weeks ago.

September 23, 1993

Dear Sister Holmes:

	I have been asked to acknowledge your letter of September 15,
1993, to the First Presidency in which you express your concern
regarding disciplinary councils which have been held or which are
scheduled to be held.  Your comments have been carefully noted.

	Please be assured that the determination to hold a disciplinary
council and descisions reached therein are under the direction of the
local priesthood leaders and are not dictated by church headquarters.
Each situation is considered on its individual merits, with the bishop
or stake president left to decide if he has sufficient evidence to hold
a disciplinary council.  There is no "purge" being dictated by the First
Presidency or other General Authorities as some have claimed.

	Should the member being disciplined feel that the procedures of
the disciplinary council were in error or if he or she disagrees with
the decision, he or she may appeal in writing.  

	The Brethren appreciate your interest in this matter and have
asked me to extend their best wishes to you.

Sincerely yours,
F. Michael Watson
Secretary to the First Presidency

===========================================

Deana M. Holmes

[email protected]

% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Received: by mts-gw.pa.dec.com; id AA16706; Thu, 30 Sep 93 16:47:49 -0700
% Received: from localhost (postman@localhost) by po2.andrew.cmu.edu (8.5/8.5) id TAA18785; Thu, 30 Sep 1993 19:25:09 -0400
% Received: via switchmail for [email protected]; Thu, 30 Sep 1993 19:25:04 -0400 (EDT
% Received: from po5.andrew.cmu.edu via qmail ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/service/mailqs/q000/QF.8geqeMK00Udd8RxE4G>; Thu, 30 Sep 1993 19:24:08 -0400 (ED
% Received: from deepthought.cs.utexas.edu (deepthought.cs.utexas.edu [128.83.139.7]) by po5.andrew.cmu.edu (8.5/8.5) with SMTP id TAA07664; Thu, 30 Sep 1993 19:24:04 -0400
% Received: from ghostwheel.BGA.COM by deepthought.cs.utexas.edu (5.64/1.2/relay) with SMTP id AA16400; Thu, 30 Sep 93 18:24:58 -050
% Received: from wixer.UUCP by ghostwheel.bga.com with UUCP id AA00632 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [email protected]); Thu, 30 Sep 1993 18:20:30 -050
% Received: by wixer (5.65/1.35) id AA17901; Thu, 30 Sep 93 18:12:37 -050
% Message-Id: <9309302312.AA17901@wixer>
% Subject: No comment.  Absolutely none.
% To: [email protected]
% Date: Thu, 30 Sep 93 18:12:35 CDT
% From: Deana Holmes <[email protected]>
% Cc: [email protected] (Deana Holmes)
% X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]



MORMON LEADERS TARGETING FEMINISTS, INTELLECTUALS IN LATEST ROUND OF HEARINGS

Associated Press, from the 
Colorado Springs Gazette Telegraph, Saturday, Sept. 18, 1993

Salt Lake City -
	
	Six Mormon scholars and feminists have recently been summoned to defend
themselves against charges of apostasy -- evidence, they say, of a church
purge of those considered intellectual heretics.

	In the past, the Mormon Church has moved against adulterers, bigamists
and more recently, right-wing survivalists.

	But the apparent move against those who publicly differ with church
leaders on issues of doctrine, history and the role of women in the church is
new, say those accused.

	During a hearing Tuesday night, Lynne Whitesides, president of the 
Mormon Women's Forum, was temporarily stripped of the right to take communion 
and other church privileges.

	D. Michael Quinn, a former professor at Brigham Young University 
who has written about admitting women to the Mormon priesthood, was also
"disfellowshipped" in July.  On Wednesday, he received notice that an
excommunication hearing would be held Sept. 26.

	The four others face disciplinary hearings that continue into next week.
Quinn said he suspects dozens of other feminists and intellectuals have been
warned to toe the line.

DISCIPLINE SEEN AS WAY TO REGAIN CONTROL.

	Bruce Olsen, a Mormon spokesman, insisted the hearings do not represent
a concerted effort by the church's central leadership.  Instead, various local
churches are simply moving to discipline members who have made public statements
seemingly contrary to church teachings, Olsen said.

	But Quinn and others see the guiding hand of Elder Boyd K. Packer, a
senior member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, one of the church's
governing bodies.  Packer recently identified feminists, gays, and "so-called
scholars" as the three "dangers" facing the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints.

	"It's obvious it's from church headquarters," Quinn said. 

	Packer is fourth in line to take over the presidency of the church from
94-year-old Ezra Taft Benson.  Benson has been in poor health.

	Quinn, who predicted he will be excommunicated, sees the wave of
disciplinary proceedings as a response to the rapid growth of the church in
recent years.  The church has about 8.5 million members around the world, 
compared with 4.4 million in 1979.

	"The motivation I see is a drive for conformity that comes out of the
concern, unease and fear they have of losing control," Quinn said.

	Whitesides organized a recent rally in support of fired BYU professors
and suggested during a speech in August that Packer needs a broader view of
women.

	Bishop Virgil Merrill declined to discuss the proceedings against her
but said the action "will allow me an opportunity to work closely with Lynne
and maybe together we can get a full understanding of what the gospel of Jesus
Christ is."

	The others summoned to appear before local disciplinary councils are
Lavina Fielding Anderson, a historical researcher; Maxine Hanks, a feminist 
and editor of a book about women in the church; Paul Toscano, a Salt Lake
lawyer and founder of the Mormon Alliance, a group that investigates cases of
alleged "spiritual abuse" by authoritarian church leaders, and Avraham Gileadi,
a scholar who has published books raising questions about Mormon doctrine.

	A good reading of Alma, chapters 5 and 6, and especially Alma 6:3,
	should give some indication of the method the Lord uses to maintain
	order in his church.  Moses established order through this method,
	and the Lord went into great detail in the Doctrine and Covenants
	(D&C) to re-establish His church with order.  He also told us,
	"I say unto you, be one; and if ye are not one ye are not mine."
	(D&C D&C 38:27)

	It is very simple; adhere to the doctrine of the Lord or be cast out.
	This is true both in this world and in the next to come.  Referring to
	the newspaper article I posted, Elder Packer is *exactly* right as who
	the enemies of the church are, i.e. feminists, gays, and intellectuals.

	There are many, many scriptural references concerning the "learned"
	and "wise".  It seems to me that these *scholars* have set themselves
	up to be better than those whom the Lord has chosen to lead and guide
	His church. NOT!

	I am just surprised that the local bishops are wasting so much time,
	effort, and resources by disfellowshipment, but that is their call and
	stewardship.  I would have just ex'ed them right off as they do not
	seem to be repentant in the least bit whatsoever.  The sheep of the
	fold will be much safer when the wolves are cast out.

	In a way, however, the dissidents are correct in that the "purge" is
	from the top.  The Lord established the rules and set up the church
	in a manner that all the way down to the local ward level His will is
	carried out with the unrepentant who rebel against him.

    Whoa! Strong words Mr. Rooney.  Be careful about what you are saying
    about intellectuals.  Anyone of these folks could probably talk you
    under the table about church doctrine and interpretation of the
    scriptures.  As a feminist, I do not approve of the methods that some
    of my sisters in Utah have chosen to draw attention to the social
    problems women face in the church, but I certainly do not condem them
    for doing what they feels is necessary.  As far as I know free agency
    is still a tenant of the gospel.  Realizing of course that there are
    consequences for our actions.  All of these individuals have been
    personal friends with many of the general authorities and knew full
    well what they were doing when they published their thoughts openly. 
    It is a sad day when an organization cannot look critically at itself
    in order to make things better.  
    
    Also, there was a mention that Lavina was called in to a High Council
    Court.  She was indeed called in to a High Council court because her
    Bishop wouln't call a court on her and the stake president had been
    urged from other parties to take action against her.  So he did.  
    
    

    If an LDS member is excommunicated, which may be the fate of these
    members, what impact does this action have on their fate and/or
    position after this life.  Are they "Sons (Daughters?) of Perdition?"
    What is the fate of a Son of Perdition, after this life?
    
    Are LDS members in good standing able to keep their friendships
    with the excommunicated and not, at the same time, disobey Church
    sanctions?  Is my understanding correct that you must disassociate
    yourself with them, if they are guilty?
    
    I am sure this is quite painful.  My desire is to better understand
    LDS doctrine, not to cause further distress to you.
    
    Regards, Matt  

RE:                     <<< Note 437.13 by AKOCOA::BTAYLOR >>>

>       -< What every happened to Christ like love?   >-

	Christ like love is for the person, not the actions of that person.

>    Whoa! Strong words Mr. Rooney.  

	Its Roney.  What exactly was so strong?  Something out of context,
	or just not exactly the way someone else would put it? 

>   Anyone of these folks could probably talk you under the table about 
>   church doctrine and interpretation of the scriptures.  

	Are you sure.  What makes you so sure I'm such a dummy? Even if they 
	could, what makes you so sure their opinion right?  Does it completely 
	match with the given scriptures and the doctrine that has been given 
	us by the Lord?

>   As a feminist, I do not approve of the methods that some
>   of my sisters in Utah have chosen to draw attention to the social
>   problems women face in the church, but I certainly do not condem them
>   for doing what they feels is necessary.  

	I will condemn actions, but not the person.  There is a difference.
	If what a person does is against God, then they must accept the
	consequences of those actions.

	As a side point in you're being a feminist, I would like to see a new
	note on your views of these issues.  What exactly does the term 
	"feminist" mean to you, and where is the church falling down in it's
	treatment of women.  Thanks.

>   As far as I know free agency is still a tenant of the gospel.  
>   Realizing of course that there are consequences for our actions.  

	Agency is only for choosing, and it isn't free.  I examined the file
	scriptures once, and there is no reference to "free agency" - only 
	"agency".  I think we as member have added the "free" part.

	Choose not to obey the word of wisdom or pay tithing, and you don't 
	get a temple recommend.  The Lord is quite clear that there are 
	consequences or blessings to our choices (maybe absence of blessings
	is a better concept? ;-)).

>    All of these individuals have been
>    personal friends with many of the general authorities and knew full
>    well what they were doing when they published their thoughts openly. 
>    It is a sad day when an organization cannot look critically at itself
>    in order to make things better.  

	Judas comes to mind.  What choice did he make?  There is a right way
	to look *critically* at what is happening, and I am not naive in
	thinking there are not problems.  But those problems are because of
	the people, and I would make sure what I was thinking, and my course
	of resultant action, did not bring me to the point of fighting God.
    
>    Also, there was a mention that Lavina was called in to a High Council
>    Court.  She was indeed called in to a High Council court because her
>    Bishop wouln't call a court on her and the stake president had been
>    urged from other parties to take action against her.  So he did.  
    
	Any bishop who does not take action on a known problem will be held
	accountable for that.  I would also think that if the Stake President
	had to take action, then the bishop will get some additional counseling.



	It is interesting to read some of these accounts because anyone at the
	disciplinary council will not disclose the action taken unless the
	person who was the object of the council gives permission to do so.
	And from my experience, people on the outside can come to all sorts
	of conclusions on what has or is happening, but it is usually none
	of their business.  What we don't know sometimes can really amaze.
	For instance, when Elder Lee was excommunicated his statements could
	have led one to believe his was just a disagreement on how to treat
	American Indians.  In the next week or so he will also be going to
	civil court in Denver for child abuse (molestation), and this fact was
	never once mentioned or hinted at.

RE: <<< Note 437.14 by HOTWTR::JOLMAMA >>>

>    If an LDS member is excommunicated, which may be the fate of these
>    members, what impact does this action have on their fate and/or
>    position after this life.  Are they "Sons (Daughters?) of Perdition?"
>    What is the fate of a Son of Perdition, after this life?

	Look in note 4 and use dir/title= as this topic has already 
	been discussed.

	Generally speaking, it would take the shedding of innocent blood or
	the denying of Christ after complete and sure confirmation to become
	a Son of Perdition.  They are sent into the kingdom of outer darkness.
	(Refer to Revelations, chapter 20)
    
>    Are LDS members in good standing able to keep their friendships
>    with the excommunicated and not, at the same time, disobey Church
>    sanctions?  

	There are no sanctions *against* a person excommunicated.  There *are*
	blessings removed because of the absence of church membership, but no
	sanctions.

>    Is my understanding correct that you must disassociate
>    yourself with them, if they are guilty?

	Whether they are guilty or not, members are *encouraged* to associate
	with them.
    
>    I am sure this is quite painful.  My desire is to better understand
>    LDS doctrine, not to cause further distress to you.
    
	The process of disciplinary councils is to establish a point for
	members to *start* their repentance process.  Some people do things
	in which excommunication are mandatory and necessary, but other than
	that it all depends upon the amount of repentance exhibited during
	the council.  

    I cannot seem to find the reference in Note 4 to Perdition.  I'll
    do some homowork, on this topic, over the weekend.
    
    Another question.  Who determines that someone is a "Son of Perdition?"
    Does the Church make this determination or is this done by God?
    If the Church determines someone to be a Son of Perdition, is
    this decision made public?
    
    Thank you.
    
    Matt Jolma

Hi Matt,

<    I cannot seem to find the reference in Note 4 to Perdition.  I'll
<    do some homowork, on this topic, over the weekend.

See topic 4.63.
    
<    Another question.  Who determines that someone is a "Son of Perdition?"
<    Does the Church make this determination or is this done by God?
<    If the Church determines someone to be a Son of Perdition, is
<    this decision made public?
    
This determination is made by God.  Some people may share opinions they have
about whether or not so and so is a Son of Perdition, but it is something
that is decided by God.  Since it is something that is decided by God,
the question about whether or not the decision is made public becomes a moot
point.  For an example in the scriptures, consider what Judas did and 
whether or not he is a Son of Perdition.  Some say he is and others say he
is not.

    
    
    Here is a copy of Elder Packer's talk on May 18, 1993 to the All
    Church Coordinating Council meeting.  This is the talk referred 
    to in the preceding newspaper article posted by Charles Roney.
    When I read it the talk conveyed to me a whole different attitude
    and desire than others who have referred to it have conveyed.  All
    I know is, simple and uneducated though it may be, is that this 
    man is an Apostle of our Savior Jesus Christ and we, all of us, 
    are accountable to be obedient to his counsel.  He was speaking here
    in his official capacity and we should respond accordingly if we wish
    to be approved of the Lord.  May the Lord bless us to do so.
    
    Dave Pyle
     
    
    Subject: Re: Elder Packer's talk of 5/18/93
In-Reply-To: <9309222049.AA09206@primavera>
References: <9309222049.AA09206@primavera>

Original copyrighted 1993 by LDS Church.  Paragraphing changed.


               All-Church Coordinating Council Meeting
                         Elder Boyd K. Packer
                             18 May 1993

The twelfth chapter of Alma is like a field of precious stones lying
about on the surface.  I have picked one very small one, very precious
one, only fifteen words, to use as my text.  "God gave unto them
commandments, after [first] having made known unto them the plan of
redemption." (Alma 12:32)

Thirty-eight years ago I came from Brigham City to the office I now
occupy in the Administration Building to see Elder Harold B. Lee, who,
next to President Joseph fielding smith, was the senior member of the
Quorum of the Twelve.  I had just been appointed the supervisor of
Seminaries and Institutes of Religion.  I knew there were serious
problems in the system and I wondered why they had not appointed
someone with more experience.

Elder Lee had agreed to give me counsel and some direction.  He didn't
say much, nothing really in detail, but what he told me has saved me
time and time again.  "You must decide now which way you face," he
said.  "Either you represent the teachers and students and champion
their causes or you represent the Brethren who appointed you.  You
need to decide now which way you face." then he added, "some of your
predecessors faced the wrong way." It took some hard and painful
lessons before I understood his counsel.  In time, I did understand,
and my resolve to face the right way became irreversible.

One of the early lessons was also my first lesson in correlation.  The
seminaries were sponsoring speech contests., They were very successful
- -- much better than similar contests sponsored by the Mutual
Improvement Association.  It was an ideal gospel-centered activity for
seminaries.  They were succeeding beautifully under able teachers who
could assist even the shy students.  We were instructed to discontinue
them!

There was something of an uprising among the teachers. They accused
Superintendent Curtis of the Young Men and President Reeder of the
Young Women of being responsible. Perhaps they were.  The teachers
wanted Brother Tuttle and me to plead their cause before the Brethren.
The logic was all on our side.  Nevertheless we remembered the counsel
of Brother Lee, and really, just out of obedience, we declined.

Later I could see that the seminaries served then only a very small
part of our youth; the MIA, all of them.  A B-minus program reaching
most of the youth would, in the aggregate, bring better results than
an A-plus program which reached relatively few.  It wasn't until many
years later, when some other problems arose, that I could see that
those contests, even though they were gospel centered, pulled the
teachers into an activity-oriented mind-set and away from the less
exciting responsibility of teaching the Old and New Testaments to
teenagers.  Finally I could see that the very success of the program
was an enemy.

Other lessons followed, some of them hard ones.  I was asked to
write an article for the Improvement Era.  It was returned with the
request that I change some words.  I smarted!  The replacement words
didn't convey exactly what I was trying to say.  I balked a bit, and
was told that Richard L. Evans, then of the Seventy and magazine
editor, had asked that the changes be made.  I remembered Brother
Lee's counsel.  I had to submit.  Now, though that article is piled
under thirty-five years of paper, I'm glad, very glad, that if someone
digs it out, I was "invited" to change it.

After one of my first general conference talks, I received a call from
Joseph Anderson.  In a very polite way he said that President McKay
and his counselors suggested that I add one word to the text of my
talk.  Would I mind doing that?  Actually the word was in my text, I
just failed to read it at the pulpit.  A most embarrassing lesson --
the First Presidency!  It was easier when Elder Evans corrected my
work; even easier when one of my associates was kind enough to do it.

Only last Friday while putting together some things for a
presentation, I read part of it to some brethren from BYU.  I noticed
they looked at one another at one place in my reading, and I stopped
and asked if there was a problem.  Finally one of them suggested that
I not use a certain scripture that I had included even though it said
exactly what I wanted to convey.  How dare they suppose that a member
of the Twelve didn't know his scriptures!  I simply said, "What do you
suggest?" He said, "Better find another scripture," and he pointed out
that if I put that verse back in context, it was really talking about
another subject.  Others had used it as I proposed to use it, but it
was not really correct.  I was very glad to make a change.

Now you may not need a correlating hand in what you do, but I
certainly do.  This brother lingered after the meeting to thank me for
being patient with him.  Thank me!  I was thankful to him.  If I ever
make that presentation, it will only be after some of our Correlation
staff have checked it over for me.

Now I give you all full credit for knowing more about your work than
anyone else -- more, certainly than the staff of the Correlation
Department.  That is how it should be, for you are hired or called to
be a specialist.  I also know from experience how easy it is to get
turned around, and, as Brother Lee warned, to face the wrong way.

However much you know about your work, I doubt that you know, or have
the time to learn, as much as do the Correlation staff about how your
work interacts with everything else that is going on.  The Council of
the Twelve Apostles is the Correlation Committee, with the President
of the Twelve and the two senior members acting as the executive
committee.  Correlation is the one department where they are hired to
be generalists.  They represent the Brethren in pointing out to you
areas where you, in one detail or another, might, in the interest of
the overall program, need to make an adjustment or two.

The principle of correlation is a sound principle.  Except for its
having been established, we could not now possibly administer an
ever-growing multi-national and multi-lingual church.  The full
purpose for its having been established, I know, is yet to be
realized.  If we neglect it, we will pay a very, very heavy price one
day.  The value of having struggled through those years, and there
aren't many around who struggled through those years, will one day be
apparent.  The greatest use of this is yet to come.

The responsibility to effect a reduction and simplification in
programs was assigned by the First Presidency to Correlation
Department.  We have been only modestly successful at best.  Perhaps
just to have slowed the growth is enough reward for all the effort
that has been put in.  There are isolated success stories.  The Music
Department, catching the vision, reduced five manuals of 190 pages
into one manual of 18 pages.  They did it themselves, and they count
themselves better for it.

Perhaps too many of us are strong advocates of our own specialized
work or are such strong protectors of our own turf that we face the
wrong way -- maybe just sideways.  Simplification and reduction must
come.  Simplification and reduction will come!  If we cannot do it on
our own -- and we seem to be in that circumstance -- the future will
see us doing, in anxious haste, that which we might have done with
deliberate care had we followed the vision which has been given to us.

Surely you have been anxiously watching the worldwide evaporation of
values and standards from politics, government, society,
entertainment, schools. Could you be serving in the Church without
having turned to those pages in the revelations and to those
statements of the prophets that speak of the last days?  Could you, in
working for the Church, not be conscious of or have ignored the
warnings?  Could you be blind to the drift that is taking
place?  Are you not conscious of the drift that is taking place in
the Church?  Could you believe other than it is critical that all of
us work together and set aside personal interests and all face the
same way?

It is so easy to be turned about without realizing that it has
happened to us.  There are three areas where members of the Church,
influenced by social and political unrest, are being caught up and led
away.  I chose these three because they have made major invasions into
the membership of the Church.  In each, the temptation is for us to
turn about and face the wrong way, and it is hard to resist, for doing
it seems so reasonable and right.

The dangers I speak of come from the gay-lesbian movement, the
feminist movement (both of which are relatively new), and the
ever-present challenge from the so-called scholars or intellectuals.
Our local leaders must deal with all three of them with
ever-increasing frequency.  In each case, the members who are hurting
have the conviction that the Church somehow is doing something wrong
to members or that the Church is not doing enough for them.  To
illustrate, I will quote briefly from letters on each of those
subjects.  They are chosen from among many letters which have arrived
in the last few weeks.  These have arrived in just the last few days.

                      The Gay/Lesbian Challenge

The first if from a young man, possibly a gay rights activist:

"May 3rd marks my 18th year in the Church.  As a gay Mormon, IJhave
witnessed and experienced first-hand during those eighteen years what
it's like to be a homosexual in a Church which is sometimes less than
accepting of its gay members.  My experiences have run the range from
incredible, Spirit-filled and loving encounters with members, Bishops
and Stake Presidents to a laughable run-in with a departing Mission
President. JMay I share with you some of the more permanent and
meaningful memories?"

After a page or two of those, he said, "So in a spirit of friendship I
offer that which I have to give -- the life experience of a gay
Mormon.  At your convenience I would be happy to meet with you to
discuss the issues facing gay Latter-day Saints and the Church.  The
purpose for meeting is not to debate, or to presumptively call you to
repentance, or to be called to repentance myself for being gay.  The
point is to meet together and share what we have for the good of The
Kingdom and the furthering of the Will of the Lord on Earth."

                        The Feminist Movement

The next quotation is from a woman who is hurting, and perhaps wonders
if anyone but the feminists care about her problems:

"I'm upset that I was always advised to go back and try harder only to
get abused more.  I need some comfort, I need solace, need hope, need
to know Heavenly Father sees all that I have endured.  What hope do I
have for a chance to live with Heavenly Father?  If temple marriage is
the key to the celestial [kingdom], where am I?  Outside gnashing my
teeth for eternity?  Help me."

                             The Scholars

The last is from a self-described intellectual:

"My concern is that the Brethren are contending with the church's own
scholars. ... In the Catholic Church, the great scholars' efforts were
used by the Church to refine and strengthen the doctrine (St.
Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, for example).  In our Church, the scholars
are put down, even banished [and he names three of them, and they
would be names all of whom you would know].  Once again I extend an
offer to you to be a peacemaker between the Brethren and the scholars,
if you wish me to attempt it, since I know so many in both groups.
More than that, I understand the mind-sets of both groups."

These letters and hundreds more are from members who are hurting or
leaders who are worried.  I might say here that I can see in the last
few weeks a change in the letters coming in.  There isn't time to talk
about it now, but out in the Church there is another growing group of
the discontented.  That is the rank and file who are trying to do what
they are supposed to do and feel neglected as we concentrate on
solving the problems of the exceptions.

Those who are hurting think they are not understood.  They are looking
for a champion, an advocate, someone with office and influence from
whom they can receive comfort.  They ask us to speak about their
troubles in general conference, to put something in the curriculum, or
to provide a special program to support them in their problems or with
their activism.

When members are hurting, it is so easy to convince ourselves that we
are justified, even duty bound, to use the influence of our
appointment or our calling to somehow represent them.  We then become
their advocates -- sympathize with their complaints against the
Church, and perhaps even soften the commandments to comfort them.
Unwittingly we may turn about and face the wrong way.  Then the
channels of revelation are reversed.  Let me say that again.  Then the
channels of revelation are reversed.  In our efforts to comfort them,
we lose our bearings and leave that segment of the line to which we
are assigned unprotected.  The question is not whether they need help
and comfort.  That goes without saying.  The question is "How?"  The
Prophet Joseph Smith, when he organized the Relief Society said,
"There is the need for decisions of character aside from sympathy."

                           Working Mothers

To illustrate principles which apply to all of these problems, I have
taken one common one -- working mothers.  President Ezra Taft Benson
gave a talk to wives and mothers.  There was a reaction within the
Church.  (Ten years ago, that would not have happened.)  That was very
interesting, because if you read his talk carefully, it was, for the
most part, simply a compilation of quotations on the subject from the
prophets who have preceded him.

Some mothers must work out of the home.  There is no other way.  And
in this they are justified and for this they should not be criticized.
We cannot, however, because of their discomfort over their plight,
abandon a position that has been taught by the prophets from the
beginning of this dispensation.  The question then is, "How can we
give solace to those who are justified without giving license to those
who are not?"

The comfort they need is better, for the most part, administered
individually.  To point out so-called success stories inferring that a
career out of the home has no negative effect on a family is an
invitation to many to stray from what has been taught by the prophets
and thus cause members to reap disappointment by and by.

I think President Thomas S. Monson may not appreciate what I am going
to say now.  I know of no one who maintains such a large private
ministry of counsel and comfort in the midst of heavy pressures of
office than does Brother Monson.  He says very little about it, but he
visits the sick, hospitals, homes, comforting, counseling, both in
person and in writing.  However, I have never heard him over the
pulpit, nor have I read anything in his writings -- not one thing --
that would give any license to any member to stray from the counsel of
the prophets or to soften the commandments that the Lord has given.
There is a way to give comfort that is needed.

If we are not very careful, we will think we are giving comfort to
those few who are justified and actually we will be giving license to
the many who are not.  The process of correlation is designed to keep
us from making mistakes in manuals, in publications, in films, in
videos, in those specialized programs which are justified.

Those fifteen words from Alma state: "God gave unto them commandments,
after having made known to them the plan of redemption." There are
many things that cannot be understood nor taught nor explained unless
it is in terms of the plan of redemption.  The three areas that I
mentioned are among them.  Unless they understand the basic plan --
the premortal existence, the purposes of life, the fall, the
atonement, the resurrection -- unless they understand that, the
unmarried, the abused, the handicapped, the abandoned, the addicted,
the disappointed, those with gender disorientation, or the
intellectuals will find no enduring comfort.  They can't think life is
fair unless they know the plan of redemption.

That young man with gender disorientation needs to know that gender
was not assigned at mortal birth, that we were sons and daughters of
God in the premortal state.

The woman pleading for help needs to see the eternal nature of things
and to know that her trials -- however hard to bear -- in the eternal
scheme of things may be compared to a very, very bad experience in the
second semester of the first grade.  She will find no enduring peace
in the feminist movement.  There she will have no hope.  If she knows
the plan of redemption, she can be filled with hope.

The one who supposes that he "understands the mind-set of both groups"
needs to understand that the doctrines of the gospel are revealed
through the Spirit to prophets, not through the intellect to scholars.

Only when they have some knowledge of the plan of redemption will they
understand the supposed inequities of life.  Only then will they
understand the commandments God has given us.  If we do not teach the
plan of redemption, whatever else we do by way of programs and
activities and instructions will not be enough.

"God gave unto them commandments, after having made known unto them
the plan of redemption." We face invasions of the intensity and
seriousness that we have not faced before.  There is the need now to
be united with everyone facing the same way.  Then the sunlight of
truth, coming over our shoulders, will mark the path ahead.  If we
perchance turn the wrong way, we will shade our eyes from that light
and we will fail in our ministries.

God grant that a testimony of the redemption and knowledge of the
doctrine will be so fundamentally in our minds and in our hearts that
we will move forward with his approval.  This Church will prevail.
There is no power in existence that can thwart the work in which we
are engaged.  Of that I bear witness, and of him who is our redeemer I
bear witness in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

------- End of Forwarded Message


% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Received: by mts-gw.pa.dec.com; id AA06727; Thu, 23 Sep 93 22:10:44 -0700
% Received: from localhost (postman@localhost) by po5.andrew.cmu.edu (8.5/8.5) id AAA10617; Fri, 24 Sep 1993 00:44:25 -0400
% Received: via switchmail; Fri, 24 Sep 1993 00:44:23 -0400 (EDT)
% Received: from carnot.itc.cmu.edu via qmail ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/service/mailqs/q002/QF.Igcber600hYt8wjE4p>; Fri, 24 Sep 1993 00:42:31 -0400 (ED
% Received: from carnot.itc.cmu.edu via qmail ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr3/dba/.Outgoing/QF.wgcbeTq00hYt8ueqZC>; Fri, 24 Sep 1993 00:42:08 -0400 (ED
% Received: from BatMail.robin.v2.12.CUILIB.3.45.SNAP.NOT.LINKED.carnot.itc.cmu.edu.rs.aix31 via MS.5.6.carnot.itc.cmu.edu.rs_aix31; Fri, 24 Sep 1993 00:42:07 -0400 (ED
% Resent-Message-Id: <[email protected]>
% Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1993 00:42:07 -0400 (EDT)
% Resent-From: David Anderson <[email protected]>
% Resent-To: LDS Net List <[email protected]>
% Message-Id: <9309240029.AA13164@primavera>
% To: [email protected]
% Subject: Elder Packer's may address
% Date: Thu, 23 Sep 93 20:29:33 EDT
% From: Charles Hardy <[email protected]>

	In the Saturday, Oct. 2, 1993, priesthood session of general
	conference, Elder Faust (sp) gave the first talk, and it quite
	put the church's position on this topic very well.  I will enter
	it as soon as I get the conference Ensign.

	RE: 437.19

	Thank you very much for posting that report.  It was a very good talk
	and I can now incorporate into my life the saying, "Which way 
	(are you)/(am I) standing?"  It all goes back to the Lord setting up
	his church, and that what he set up will not change.

	D&C 20:17 By these things we know that there is a God in heaven, who is
		  infinite and eternal, from everlasting to everlasting the 
		  same unchangeable God, the framer of heaven and earth, and 
		  all things which are in them.

	D&C 35:1 Listen to the voice of the Lord your God, even Alpha and 
		 Omega, the beginning and the end, whose course is one eternal
		 round, the same today as yesterday, and forever.

	We, as members of Christ's church, are guided and directed through the
	wisdom of God.  Our wisdom is polluted by the world and the influences
	there, while God's way are not man's ways.  We must keep the law or

	D&C 41:5 He that receiveth my law and doeth it, the same is my 
		 disciple; and he that saith he receiveth it and doeth it not,
		 the same is not my disciple, and shall be cast out from among
		 you;

	There is only one way God will speak to His people as a whole, and
	that is through His prophets.  Since he has re-established and set up
	His church back on the earth, that church is guided and directed by
	Christ through his servants (prophets, apostles, stake presidents,
	bishops: it is called stewardship...)

	D&C 1:38 What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not 
		 myself; and though heavens and the earth pass away, my word 
		 shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by 
		 mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same.


	Now we must all ask ourselves; "Which way am I standing?"

    	In the Sunday 10/10/93 issue of the Arizona Republic is was 
    	reported that Pulitzer Prize winning cartoonist Steve Benson,
    	oldest grandson of Ezra Taft Benson, has sent a letter to his 
    	Stake President requesting that his name be removed from the 
    	records of the church.  His wife has also.  He said that he has
    	been thinking about this for almost a decade and the fact that 
    	he feels his grandfather is not leading the church finally moved
    	him to action.  He said, "I hated to see the church manipulate 
    	him (Pres. Benson) and....use him to falsely prop up the notion
    	that he is actively leading the church."  Steve believes that 
    	Pres. Benson is senile and can't lead the church.  He said that 
    	he felt that his grandfather would understand and respect his 
    	decision.
    
    	So sad.  
    
    	Dave Pyle

Return-Path: decpa::[email protected]
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1993 02:09:41 -0600
From: decpa::[email protected]
To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
Subject: Arizona Republic, Steve Benson Resigns from church

CARTOONIST STEVE BENSON, WIFE RESIGN FROM CHURCH
by Paul Brinkley-Rogers
The Arizona Republic
Sunday, October 10, 1993

        Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist Steve Benson -- first
grandchild of Ezra Taft Benson, the ailing head and prophet of the
Mormon Church -- has resigned from the church
        The sixth-generation Mormon delivered a letter to his
bishop and stake president in Gilbert on Monday night, asking that
his name be removed from the rolls.  His wife of 16 years, Mary Ann
Benson, 36, also resigned.
     Steve Benson, 39, an Arizona Republic editorial cartoonist for
11 years, said he had been considering resignation for a decade. 
The Bensons said they resigned to protest what they believe is an
increasingly intolerant church leadership.
     Steve Benson came to his decision after a five-day visit to
Salt Lake City.  He agreed to make the trip in order to help a
Republic writer who was reporting on the church's reaction to
dissent gain access to high church officials and to key supporters
and critics.
     While there, Benson visited his grandfather, who is church
president, and his parents.
     He said the example set by his conservative, outspoken 94-
year-old grandfather, who taught him the importance of remaining
true to what you believe, gave him the fortitude to make and
emotionally wrenching split from the church.
     "There is an old Mormon hymn." he said in explaining his
resignation." 'Do what is right, let the consequence follow, battle
fro freedom in spirit and might.' 
     "In order to be truly obedient, one must be allowed the right
to think, question, doubt, and search for truth.  The modern church
is intolerant of these God-given rights.  ... I didn't leave the
church.  The church left me."
     Mary Ann Benson said leaving the church was "painful, yet
exhilarating."
     "Since I've left, I feel very empowered and free, free to
define my relationship with God, follow my purpose in life and free
to finally find peace." she said.
     Reacting to the decision by the Benson, Bruce L. Olsen,
managing director of public affairs for the church, said,  "we
regret the loss of church membership on the part of anyone, whether
by and individual's request or as the result of church discipline.
     "The attendant consequences felt over time by the individuals
and their families are very real.
     "Our hearts reach out to them."
     Steve Benson said he believes one sign of the church's
"dysfunctionality" was reaction to his statements in July on his
grandfather's infirmity.
     At that time, Benson said he believed that due to his failing
health, his grandfather was incapable of exerting any true
leadership.
     "I hated to see the church manipulate him and ... use him to
falsely prop up the notion that he is actively leading the church,"
he said.
     "Local church leaders called me in to explain my actions.  I
received anonymous letters, some hateful, from church members -- in
essence damning me to hell and telling me I was possessed by the
devil."
     Benson said he always has had a close relationship with his
parents and his grandfather.
     "I love my family, and I'm grateful for all that they taught
me," he said.
     He added, "I recall being reminded constantly by my family and
most especially by my mother that it was no accident  that I was
born a Benson and that the Bensons were destined to carry a special
shield and sword for the Lord.
     "I was told it was no accident I was the grandson of the
prophet, and that it was foreordained that I was born into a family
haded by the prophet, seer and revelator Ezra Taft Benson.  I was
told I had a special obligation to act accordingly."
     When he was at Brigham Young University, Benson said, his
grandfather dissuaded him form joining the military, telling him he
could do more as an artist or cartoonist.
     "He said I had another mission to complete ...'Your ability to
draw with the conviction of truth has been given to you by God,' he
said.  'With these talents, you have a duty to tell the truth and
to fight against evil.'
     "This is what I am trying to do.  Grandpa would understand.
     "He would say, as he did when a cartoon would get me into
trouble, 'Stephen, you sure are in the thick of things.'"

% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Received: by mts-gw.pa.dec.com; id AA11927; Mon, 11 Oct 93 01:08:06 -0700
% Received: from LOCALHOST by ucs2.byu.edu (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03.byu) id AA39090; Mon, 11 Oct 1993 01:55:42 -060
% Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1993 01:55:42 -0600
% Message-Id: <[email protected]>
% Errors-To: [email protected]
% Reply-To: [email protected]
% Originator: [email protected]
% Sender: [email protected]
% Precedence: bulk
% From: [email protected]
% To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
% Subject: Arizona Republic, Steve Benson Resigns from church
% X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0b -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

Return-Path: decpa::[email protected]
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1993 08:18:23 -0600
From: decpa::[email protected]
To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
Subject: SLTrib: Steve Benson

>From the SLTribune, 11 October, 1993 (without permission)

Grandson of President
Asks to Be Removed
From LDS Church Roll

        By Jennifer Skordas
       THE SALT LAKE TRIBUNE

  Three months after contradicting the official LDS Church account of  
President Ezra Taft Benson's health, the prophet's grandson has left the  
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
   Steve Benson, Pulitzer Prize winning editorial cartoonist for the  
Arizona Republic, 39, submitted a letter to his bishop and stake president  
last week asking that his name be removed from LDS Church rolls. His  
36-year-old wife, Mary Ann, also resigned.
   Mr. Benson said the letter was prompted by a growing intolerance among  
church leaders, particularly the recent disciplining of outspoken  
feminists and scholars. The church excommunicated five intellectuals and  
disfellowshiped another last month.
   "I could not, in good conscience, be in an organization that was  
destroying the spirituality of the very souls of its members," Mr. Benson  
said Sunday. "In the name of freedom of religion, the church has turned  
freedom of speech on its head."
   "[I left] because of the current atmosphere of fear, intolerance and  
intimidation in this dark period of the church we're groping through now,"  
he said.
   Mr. Benson said LDS Church leadership has moved in a direction that  
runs contrary to Mormon history, and he recounted a story about church  
founder Joseph Smith, who said he wouldn't excommunicate any member over  
doctrinal differences. "That's for other churches," the cartoonist  
paraphrased.
   In July, he spoke out against the "distorted" image the church projects  
of his 94-year-old grandfather, who is ill and has long struggled with  
encroaching senility, according to Mr. Benson.
   "I believe the church strives mightily to perpetuate the myth, the  
fable, the fantasy that President Benson, if not operating on all  
cylinders, at least is functioning effectively enough ... to be regarded  
by the saints as a living, functioning prophet," he said in July.
   After that interview, Mr. Benson received angry letters from anonymous  
church members and was summoned by his local church leaders.
   "There was puzzlement, consternation and concern on the part of my  
leaders on why I was saying what I was saying."
  He spoke out again last month on behalf of excommunicated feminists, and  
was contacted again by his leaders. After that he was reprimanded again.
   "I felt the church had put a theological plastic bag over my head that  
was spiritually and intellectually suffocating me," he said.
   In reference to Mr. Benson's reslgnation, LDS Church spokesman Bruce L.  
Olsen said Sunday, "We regret the loss of church membership on the part of  
any one,-whether by an individual's request or as the result of church  
discipline."   But the spokesman could not say whether President Benson  
had been notified of his grandson's action. Mr. Olsen said the family  
would be responsible for alerting the leader.
   It was the example of his grand father--who taught him to be true to  
his beliefs--and his unusual position in the church that gave him the  
courage to leave.
   "I was raised as not only the first grandson but also the first  
grandchild of President Ezra Taft Benson," Mr. Benson said. "I was taught  
from the cradle that I had a special mission, and it wasn't a mistake I  
was born into the family I was."
   "My grandfather told me, 'Steven, you have a role to play, you are on a  
mission for the Lord to teach the truth, to expose error."
   Be refusing to be silenced, and by leaving a church he believes to be  
run by a "corrupt" leadership, he said he has lived up to his  
grandfather's expectations.
   But on Sunday, his family did not agree with his decision.
   "We have counseled with Steven and Mary Ann. We disagree with their  
decision requesting to have their names removed from the rolls of the  
church. We love them very deeply and hope for the day when they will want  
again to be in full fellowship with the church," Mark Benson, Steve's  
father, told The Tribune.   Mark Benson declined to say, however, if his  
father, the church president, had been informed by the family of Steve and  
Mary Ann's action.
   Some members of the liberal Mormon community also disagreed with Mr.  
Benson's decision 
because they say it may weaken their movement.   "He  
shouldn't leave the church," said Levi Peterson, a professor of English at  
Weber State University.-"It's very important for the liberal community not  
to turn their backs. It has to stay in the church because the  
excommunications will stop when the powers that be realize they aren't  
working."
   University of Utah women's studies student Lynne Kanavel Whitesides  
agreed, but said Mr. Benson's action may be a needed wake-up call for  
church members 
and leaders.
  "He is the grandson of the prophet, and [his resignation] said  
something. When he can't tolerate the church the way it is, we need to  
look at what's happening," said Ms. Whitesides, who was disfellowshiped by  
the church last month.
   "Mr. Benson rendered us all a real service. Being a relative [of the  
prophet's], he had the right to speak candidly that the rest of us  
didn't," said Mr. Peterson.
   Mr. Benson believes he has fulfilled his duty to "tell the truth and to  
fight against evil.
   "Grandpa would understand." 




% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Received: by mts-gw.pa.dec.com; id AA04106; Mon, 11 Oct 93 07:16:47 -0700
% Received: from LOCALHOST by ucs2.byu.edu (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03.byu) id AA21455; Mon, 11 Oct 1993 08:03:54 -060
% Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1993 08:03:54 -0600
% Message-Id: <[email protected]>
% Errors-To: [email protected]
% Reply-To: [email protected]
% Originator: [email protected]
% Sender: [email protected]
% Precedence: bulk
% From: Karl Best <[email protected]>
% To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
% Subject: SLTrib: Steve Benson
% X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0b -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

Return-Path: decpa::[email protected]
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1993 08:28:34 -0600
From: decpa::[email protected]
To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
Subject: SLTrib: BKP

from the SLTribune: 11 October, 1993 (without permission)


LDS Apostle Denies
Ordering Dissident's
Excommunication 


        THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

  Mormon Apostle Boyd K. Packer has acknowledged meeting with dissident  
Paul Toscano's local church leader before Toscano was excommunicated.
   Toscano was one of six dissidents disciplined in September for writing  
and speaking publicly about church doctrine, feminism, the state of the  
faith's leadership and other issues.
   Elder Packer, considered by many to be the power behind the church's  
recent crackdown on dis sidents, told the Arizona Republic that he met  
with fellow church leader Loren Dunn and Toscano's stake president, Kerry  
Heinz, to discuss Toscano.
   However, Elder Packer said the conversation focused on docrtrine and  
philosophy.
   "I did not instruct him to hold disciplinary council and absolutly did  
not direct a verdict. That is against church policy. When he [Heinz] left,  
I did not know what he would do," Elder Packer was quoted Sunday in the  
Phoenix newspaper. 

    Toscano, however, said Heinz told him later that while the decision  
was Heinz's, the stake president was left with the "fair implication" that  
Elder Packer wanted Toscano excommunicated. 

  "I knew all along that Boyd Packer was behind it," Toscano said Sunday.  
"He's behind al this."
  In an interview with The Republic, Elder Dallin H. Oaks, also of the  
Council of the Twelve Apostles, said such a meeting could be improper if  
Elder Packer told Heinz what to do.
   "Elder Packer does not have the authority to make church policy," said  
Elder Oaks, a former Utah Supreme Court justice.
   Elder Oaks said that if Elder Packer had any conversations with the  
disciplinary council, "it is outside the normal channels and . . . if he  
gave a directed verdict [against Toscano], that is contrary to policy and  
irregular, and it is contrary to what I know about Elder Pack er and the  
way he operates."
   Elder Packer, 69, declared in May that dangers in retaining church  
members' loyalty "come from the gay-lesbian movement, the feminist  
movement and the ever-present challenge from the so-called scholars or  
intellectuals."
   Toscano said he was excommunicated on Sept. 19 for criticizing church  
leaders and acting contrary to the rule and order of the church. The  
action came after he delivered a paper at the Sunstone Symposium, an  
independent forum for Mormon thought that is shunned by church leaders. 
  Toscano told The Associated Press on Sunday he had spoken about another  
church official who earlier had described "proper priesthood protocal" as,  
among other things, rising when an ecclesiastical superior enters a room.    
Toscano said he also criticized Elder Packer for his statements on gays,  
feminists and intellectuals.
   "The high council tried me on that one speech," he said. "They were  
upset because I criticized leaders by name. Not them personally, but their  
ideas."   Toscano also said a "circuitous linkage" of church officials led  
to Heinz's call to Packer   He said he had been told by his bishop that  
Elder Packer or Elder Dunn, or both, had contacted F. Melvin Hammond, a  
member of the Second Quorum of the Seventy and a counselor in the Mexico  
South Area mission, about Heinz, an old friend.
   Toscano said Heinz con firmed that the conversation centered on his  
wife, Margaret Toscano, a feminist, and Ham mond was asked why Heinz  
"can't control this woman."
   "So Mel [Hammond] calls Kerry [Heinz] and says, 'What's going on?' "  
Toscano said. "You have no idea how that will affect a stake president." 


% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Received: by mts-gw.pa.dec.com; id AA04754; Mon, 11 Oct 93 07:26:59 -0700
% Received: from LOCALHOST by ucs2.byu.edu (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03.byu) id AA16883; Mon, 11 Oct 1993 08:13:15 -060
% Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1993 08:13:15 -0600
% Message-Id: <[email protected]>
% Errors-To: [email protected]
% Reply-To: [email protected]
% Originator: [email protected]
% Sender: [email protected]
% Precedence: bulk
% From: Karl Best <[email protected]>
% To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
% Subject: SLTrib: BKP
% X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0b -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

RE: <<< Note 437.24 >>>

>   Mr. Benson said the letter was prompted by a growing intolerance among  
>church leaders, particularly the recent disciplining of outspoken  
>feminists and scholars. The church excommunicated five intellectuals and  
>disfellowshiped another last month.
>   "I could not, in good conscience, be in an organization that was  
>destroying the spirituality of the very souls of its members," Mr. Benson  
>said Sunday. "In the name of freedom of religion, the church has turned  
>freedom of speech on its head."
>   "[I left] because of the current atmosphere of fear, intolerance and  
>intimidation in this dark period of the church we're groping through now,"  
>he said.
>   Mr. Benson said LDS Church leadership has moved in a direction that  
>runs contrary to Mormon history, and he recounted a story about church  
>founder Joseph Smith, who said he wouldn't excommunicate any member over  
>doctrinal differences. "That's for other churches," the cartoonist  
>paraphrased.

	It's not the fact that there are doctrinal differences, but how those
	differences are discussed.  From reading the above, I am reminded of
	the wolves in the flock.....

	ACTS 20

	29   For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves 
	     enter in among you, not sparing the flock.
	30   Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things,
	     to draw away disciples after them.

        MATTHEW  7

	13   Enter ye in at the strait gate; for wide is the gate, and broad  
	     is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which 
	     go in thereat:
	14   Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth 
	     unto life, and few there be that find it.  

	15   Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, 
	     but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

	16   Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns,
	     or figs of thistles?
	17   Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt 
	     tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
	18   A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt 
	     tree bring forth good fruit.
	19   Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and 
	     cast into the fire.
	20   Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

	21   Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the
	     kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which 
	     is in heaven.
	22   Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied
	     in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name
	     done many wonderful works?
	23   And then will I profess unto them,  I never knew you;
	     depart from me, ye that work iniquity.


	The Lord will accept only those who follow the commandments and enter
	in at the strait gate. If we compare the actions, or "fruit", of these
	people and Elder Packer, who is following Christ?


>   Some members of the liberal Mormon community also disagreed with Mr.  
>Benson's decision 
because they say it may weaken their movement.   "He  
>shouldn't leave the church," said Levi Peterson, a professor of English at  
>Weber State University.-"It's very important for the liberal community not  
>to turn their backs. It has to stay in the church because the  
>excommunications will stop when the powers that be realize they aren't  
>working."
>   University of Utah women's studies student Lynne Kanavel Whitesides  
>agreed, but said Mr. Benson's action may be a needed wake-up call for  
>church members 
>and leaders.
>  "He is the grandson of the prophet, and [his resignation] said  
>something. When he can't tolerate the church the way it is, we need to  
>look at what's happening," said Ms. Whitesides, who was disfellowshiped by  
>the church last month.
>   "Mr. Benson rendered us all a real service. Being a relative [of the  
>prophet's], he had the right to speak candidly that the rest of us  
>didn't," said Mr. Peterson.

	Ah, the liberal community.  A pack of ravening wolves if there ever 
	was one.  Just because a person is born through the lineage of a 
	prophet does not give them any special privileges.  President Kimbal 
	had a wayward son, and I am sure there are many more instances that 
	could be brought up to show that all people, prophet's children not 
	withstanding, all have their agency to choose for themselves.

	It all goes back to "which way are you facing."

re:   <<< Note 437.25 >>>

>   Toscano was one of six dissidents disciplined in September for writing  
>and speaking publicly about church doctrine, feminism, the state of the  
>faith's leadership and other issues.

	Note that it was for the *actions* (writing and speaking publicly)
	and not the dissent that caused the church to do something.

>    Toscano, however, said Heinz told him later that while the decision  
>was Heinz's, the stake president was left with the "fair implication" that  
>Elder Packer wanted Toscano excommunicated. 

	Wonder if the stake president will now get some counseling?

>   Elder Packer, 69, declared in May that dangers in retaining church  
>members' loyalty "come from the gay-lesbian movement, the feminist  
>movement and the ever-present challenge from the so-called scholars or  
>intellectuals."

	There have always been worldly influences or current social standards
	that butt heads with church doctrine.  Elder Packer just identified
	some of today's current ones, and he was not the first general
	authority to do so.

>   Toscano said he was excommunicated on Sept. 19 for criticizing church  
>leaders and acting contrary to the rule and order of the church. The  
>action came after he delivered a paper at the Sunstone Symposium, an  
>independent forum for Mormon thought that is shunned by church leaders. 

	This is a correct action.  I wonder if Toscano knows what repentance 
	is?  At what point does a person go from a disciple to rebel.  Again,
	it is always good to know which way we are facing....

	The only correct forum for Mormon thought comes from the Lord himself,
	and through those *He* has given the stewardship to communicate such
	thought.

>  Toscano told The Associated Press on Sunday he had spoken about another  
>church official who earlier had described "proper priesthood protocal" as,  
>among other things, rising when an ecclesiastical superior enters a room.    
>Toscano said he also criticized Elder Packer for his statements on gays,  
>feminists and intellectuals.

	There is no such thing as an "ecclesiastical superior."  There is
	stewardship and reverence, but no military superiority.  There is
	order in the Lord's church; there is service in the Lord's church;
	but there is trouble when a person thinks of themselves as superior
	over any other person.

    I picked up a copy of the May 93 Dialogue and read Lavina Fielding
    Anderson's article.  It is a chronological listing of actions taken by
    Church authorities and the dissidents.  I chuckled when I read it
    because it was like this:
    
    "Then he said.......
    "Then he said.............
    "Then Brother so and so did.........
    "Then Elder so and so said...........
    
    Quite frankly I read about 6 pages and put it down because it sounded
    like a tempest in a teapot - a bit of a soap opera quite frankly.
    
    I love the Gospel of Jesus Christ not only for its liberating practices,
    but also for its liberating thoughts and ideas that are so simply stated, 
    but so profoundly lived. I was raised in an "intellectual environment" with
    what is called "higher criticism".  What attracted me to the Gospel was
    and still is the simple sweetness that renews and deepens my
    intellectual, thinking, feeling, intuiting abilities every day. For
    somneone to say Mormonism does not have intellectual challenges and
    depth is naivete, in my opinion.
    
    I feel that I have to apologize but all this "flap" from Salt Lake
    seems so hilarious, so silly, so myopic.  I guess living in Mass., away
    from Utah, has its blessings.  
    
    Paul  

re:   <<< Note 437.27 >>>

>>  Toscano told The Associated Press on Sunday he had spoken about another  
>>church official who earlier had described "proper priesthood protocol" as,  
>>among other things, rising when an ecclesiastical superior enters a room.    
>>Toscano said he also criticized Elder Packer for his statements on gays,  
>>feminists and intellectuals.
>
>	There is no such thing as an "ecclesiastical superior."  There is
>	stewardship and reverence, but no military superiority.  There is
>	order in the Lord's church; there is service in the Lord's church;
>	but there is trouble when a person thinks of themselves as superior
>	over any other person.


	I had a good, though cursory, talk with my bishop last night over this
	concept.  It did, however, get me to thinking about why I reacted the
	way I did.  So I looked up the word "superior" for both definition and
	synonym.

	Some of the synonyms are "higher", "better", "excellent", "choice",
	"arrogant", "elder", "higher-up", and "senior."  If we were to limit
	the definition of superior to "senior", "higher" (as far as stewardship
	goes), and maybe "elder," then I would have no problems.  My problem 
	comes in when the terms such as "better" or "arrogant" come into play.

	If Jesus Christ entered the room I was in you can bet I would defer to
	"proper priesthood protocol"!  I see no reason to do the same to any
	other general authority or church leader.  First it is a matter of
	respect for the position, or office held, and the fact that that person
	is giving of themselves to fulfill the calling.  Second it is matter of
	learning to be led before we can lead.  One who is a leader in this
	church has to do so under the dictates of the scriptures and doctrine of
	the church.  Unrighteous dominion is explicitly talked about, and the
	leaders of this church are expected to adhere to that discourse.

	But how can we become Gods, or fill the measure of our creation, if we
	can not first follow, or let our will be measured, by those placed
	over us?  Just as Jesus had to learn obedience, so do we.  It is all
	part of our training.  

	Any leader in this church who thinks themselves better than others 
	just because of their calling or position is wrong, wrong, wrong.
	I can not remember any time where Christ led in that manner.  If 
	Christ did not, then are we *better* than Him?

Attn All,
    
    This note was sent on the Internet and apparently is the church's 
    response to what has been occuring.  Just an FYI.
             Dave Pyle
    
 
Under the headline "LDS Church Leaders State Their Position":

In light of extensive publicity given to six recent church disciplinary
councils in Utah, we believe it helpful to reaffirm the position of the
First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles.

We deeply regret the loss of church membership on the part of anyone.  The
attendant consequences felt over time by the individuals and their families
are very real.

In their leadership responsibilities, local church officers may seek
clarification and other guidance from general authorities of the church.
General authorities have an obligation to teach principles and policies and
to provide information that may be helpful in counseling members for whom
local leaders are responsible.  In matters of church discipline, the general
authorities do not direct the decisions of local disciplinary counsels.
Furthermore, the right of appeal is open to anyone who feels he or she has
been unfairly treated by a disciplinary council.

It is difficult to explain church disciplinary action to representatives of
the media.  Considerations of confidentiality restrain public comment by
church leaders in such private matters.

We have the responsibility to preserve the doctrinal purity of the church.
We are united in this objective.  The Prophet Joseph Smith taught an eternal
principle when he explained:  "That man who rises up to condemn others,
finding fault with the church, saying that they are out of the way, while he
himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road
to apostacy."  (_Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith_, p. 156.)

In instructing His twelve disciples in the new world about those who would
not repent, the Savior said, "But if he repent not he shall not be numbered
among my people, that he may not destroy my people . . . . " (3 Nephi 18:31;
see also Mosiah 26:36 and Alma 5:59.)  The Prophet also remarked that "from
apostates the faithful have received the severest persecutions." (_Teachings
of the Prophet Joseph Smith_, p. 67.)  This continues to be the case today.

The longstanding policy of church discipline is outlined in the Doctrine and
Covenants:  "We believe that all religious societies have a right to deal
with their members . . . according to the rules and regulations of such
societies; provided that such dealings be for fellowship and good standing;
. . . .  They can only excommunicate them from their society, and withdraw
from them their fellowship."  (Doctrine and Covenants 134:10.)

Faithful members of the church can distinguish between mere differences of
opinion and those activities formally defined as apostacy.  Apostacy refers
to church members who:  "1, repeatedly act in clear, open and deliberate
opposition to the church or its leaders; or 2, persist in teaching as church
doctrine information that is not church doctrine after being corrected by
their bishops or higher authority; or 3, continue to follow the teachings of
apostate cults (such as those that advocate plural marriage) after being
corrected by their bishops or higher authority."  (_General Handbook of
Instructions_, 10-3.)

The general and local officers of the church will continue to do their duty,
and faithful members of the church will understand.

As leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we reach out
in love to all and constantly pray that the Lord, whose church it is, will
bless those who love and seek divine truth.

STATEMENT RELEASED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE FIRST PRESIDENCY AND THE QUORUM OF
THE TWELVE APOSTLES OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS, as
reprinted October 17, 1993 in the Salt Lake Tribune.  

% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Received: by mts-gw.pa.dec.com; id AA26065; Sun, 17 Oct 93 21:14:17 -0700
% Received: from localhost (postman@localhost) by po2.andrew.cmu.edu (8.5/8.5) id AAA14632; Mon, 18 Oct 1993 00:08:11 -0400
% Received: via switchmail for [email protected]; Mon, 18 Oct 1993 00:08:11 -0400 (EDT
% Received: from po3.andrew.cmu.edu via qmail ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/service/mailqs/q003/QF.AgkVMvy00Udb172k5s>; Mon, 18 Oct 1993 00:06:20 -0400 (ED
% Received: from bos1a.delphi.com (delphi.com [192.80.63.1]) by po3.andrew.cmu.edu (8.5/8.5) with ESMTP id AAA18182; Mon, 18 Oct 1993 00:06:11 -0400
% From: [email protected]
% Received: from delphi.com by delphi.com (PMDF V4.2-11 #4520) id <[email protected]>; Mon, 18 Oct 1993 00:05:34 ED
% Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1993 00:05:34 -0400 (EDT)
% Subject: The Last Word?
% To: [email protected]
% Message-Id: <[email protected]>
% X-Vms-To: INTERNET"[email protected]"
% Mime-Version: 1.0
% Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
% Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT

ATTN ALL:
    
    Elder Oaks rebuttal of Steve Benson's comments.
    
    Dave Pyle
    
    
Text of SL Tribune "Commentary" section of editorial page, Thursday,
October 21, 1993
"Oaks: 'I've Been Victim of Double-Decker Deceit'"
by Dallin H. Oaks

On October 12, 16, and 17, The Salt Lake Tribune gave prominent and
extensive coverage to wire-service stories on cartoonist Steve
Benson's charges that I "lied" to an Arizona Republic reporter in an
interview on current controversies over church discipline.  I have no
desire to prolong this controversy, but feel it necessary to set the record
straight on some important matters omitted or obscured in this attack
upon my integrity.

My dictionary defines lying as being "deliberately untruthful" and a "lie" as
"a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive." I did not "lie" to
the reporter and, contrary to the wire-service story printed in the
October 16 Tribune, I did not "admit" to "falsely telling" the reporter
something that was untrue.

I withdrew one sentence I had spoken in a long interview, and I did so
three days before the article was published because I realized, when I
saw the written transcript, that this single sentence was not "truthful"
(meaning "accurate" or "correct").  When a newspaper *publishes*
something that it later realizes to have been incorrect, does it apologize
to its readers for "lying" or does it just print a correction?  My statement
to the reporter was corrected *before* it was published.

The sequence and timing of various events is important.

On Sept. 9, Elder Neal A. Maxwell and I met with Steve and Mary Ann
Benson for about two and one-half hours to discuss their questions. 
Because he was a newspaperman, we sought and he gave solemn
assurances that our discussions would be confidential.  We continue to
honor that confidence.

On Sept. 10, Steve Benson wrote us a letter expressing gratitude for
"being able to talk freely in an atmosphere of trust," reaffirming his
commitment to "honor completely the confidentiality of our conversation,
in not speaking, or even alluding to, for the record anything said by either
of you," and asking for another meeting to deal with "some follow-up
questions."

On Sept. 24, we met again with Steve Benson for about an hour and a
half.

On Oct. 1, a reporter for the Arizona Republic interviewed me for about
an hour on a wide variety of subjects pertaining to current controversies
over church discipline.  Though Steve Benson works for this paper, he
did not arrange this interview and was not included in it.

At about 4:30 p.m. on Oct. 6, I received a "personal and confidential"
letter from Steve Benson.  Relying on his personal notes of our
confidential conversations, he chargedthat I had "lied in public" in my
interview with the reporter and stated that unless I "publicly set the
record straight" by calling the reporter within 24 hours, he would do so
himself.

I immediately studied the lengthy transcript of the Oct. 1 interview (16
pages single-spaced), received the previous day.  I was distressed to
find one statement to the reporter I could see was not accurate ("I have
no knowledge of whether he did").  I am sure I did not speak that
sentence with intent to deceive, but whether it was an inadvertence or a
result of forgetfulness in the context of a long and far-reaching
interview, I cannot be sure.  But the important thing was that I could
recognize that this sentence was not correct.  (Three other statements
challenged by Steve Benson required no correction.)

That same evening (Oct. 1) I reached the reporter, advised him of the
circumstances, and asked to withdraw the single sentence.  He agreed.

On Oct. 7, I received another "personal and confidential" letter from
Steve Benson thanking me for calling the reporter "to clarify your earlier
statements."  His letter did not even hint that he thought further
clarifications were necessary.

The Arizona Republic article appeared on Oct. 10  It made no mention of
the sentence I had withdrawn.  There was also a separate story about
Steve Benson and his wife seeking to have their names removed from
the records of the Church.

On Oct. 11, Steve Benson sent a copy of his "personal and confidential"
letters of Oct. 6 and 7 to the Associated Press in Salt Lake City.  He also
gave TV and radio interviews on this subject.

In summary, when I found that I could not defend the correctness of one
brief sentence in a long interview, I immediately contacted the reporter
and withdrew that sentence, doing so more than three days before the
story was scheduled for publication.  When the publication honored that
correction and made no comment on it, Steve Benson accused me of
lying in public and participating in a cover-up, and the wire-service
coverage of this episode has inaccurately portrayed me as deliberately
making false statements to the public.

My perception of this matter is simple.  I have been the victim of
double-decker deceit: 1, betrayal of promises of confidentiality, and 2,
false accusations of lying.

My heart goes out to all who have suffered from this painful sequence of
events.


% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Received: by mts-gw.pa.dec.com; id AA22205; Thu, 21 Oct 93 09:33:12 -0700
% Received: from localhost (postman@localhost) by po2.andrew.cmu.edu (8.5/8.5) id MAA07712; Thu, 21 Oct 1993 12:11:39 -0400
% Received: via switchmail for [email protected]; Thu, 21 Oct 1993 12:11:38 -0400 (EDT
% Received: from po3.andrew.cmu.edu via qmail ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/service/mailqs/q000/QF.AglfFkK00UdbImjE4X>; Thu, 21 Oct 1993 12:10:26 -0400 (ED
% Received: from WordPerfect.com (wordperfect.com [151.155.3.33]) by po3.andrew.cmu.edu (8.5/8.5) with SMTP id MAA12980; Thu, 21 Oct 1993 12:10:20 -0400
% From: [email protected]
% Received: from Gateways-Message_Server by WordPerfect.com with WordPerfect_Office; Thu, 21 Oct 1993 10:09:34 -060
% Message-Id: <[email protected]>
% X-Mailer: WordPerfect Office 4.0
% Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1993 10:11:03 -0600
% To: [email protected]
% Subject:  New Oaks Commentary

	From the November 1993 issue of "The Ensign" (without permission).
	Pages 36 - 39.

	PRIESTHOOD SESSION, 2 October 1993

	    "Keeping Covenants And Honoring The Priesthood"

		Elder James E. Faust
		Of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles


	    Brethren, I have never come before this great body of 
	the priesthood with greater humility than I do this evening.  
	I fervently pray, not only for understanding, but also that 
	I might not be misunderstood.  I earnestly seek the support 
	of the Holy Spirit and the understanding of my brethren.  I 
	affirm my love and profound respect for the brethren of the 
	priesthood of this church.  Soon you younger men and boys 
	will be placed in the responsibility of spiritually guiding 
	your homes and the Church.  It is essential that you young 
	men understand the importance of keeping the covenants and 
	honoring the priesthood you bear.

	    As a prelude to the specific items I wish to discuss, I 
	believe it is important to set forth a few fundamental 
	principles as I understand them.  The object of God's work 
	is "to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man" 
	(Moses 1:39).  God has given the priesthood to man at various 
	times since Adam's day to bring about the great plan of 
	salvation for all mankind.  Through faithfulness, the 
	transcendent blessings of eternal life flow from this 
	priesthood authority.

	    For these priesthood blessings to flower, there is a 
	constant need for unity within the priesthood.  We must be 
	loyal to the leadership who have been called to preside over 
	us and hold the keys of the priesthood.  The words of President 
	J. Reuben Clark, Jr., still ring loudly in our ears: "Brethren, 
	let us be united."  He explained:

	    "An essential part of unity is loyalty....Loyalty is a 
	pretty difficult quality to possess.  It requires the ability 
	to put away selfishness, greed, ambition and all of the baser 
	qualities of the human mind.  You cannot be loyal unless you 
	are willing to surrender....His own preferences and desires 
	must be put away, and he must see only the great purpose which 
	lies out ahead" (_Immortality and Eternal Life_, Melchizedek 
	Priesthood Course of Study, 1968-69, p. 163).

	    What is the nature of the priesthood?  The Prophet Joseph 
	Smith said of the priesthood: "It is the eternal authority of 
	God by which the universe was created and governed, and the 
	stars in heaven came into existence, by which the great 
	authority of exaltation operates throughout the universe."



	    The Prophet Joseph further taught: "Its institution was 
	prior to 'the foundation of this earth, or the morning stars 
	sang together, or the Sons of God shouted for joy,' and is 
	the highest and holiest Priesthood, and is after the order 
	of the Son of God" (_Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith_, 
	Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1938, p. 167).  There is 
	no question that the power of the priesthood exceeds our 
	understanding.  The Prophet Joseph Smith taught of this great 
	power "that every one being ordained after this order and 
	calling should have power, by faith, to break mountains, to 
	divide the seas, to dry up waters, to turn them out of their 
	course:

	    "To put at defiance the armies of nations, to divide the 
	earth, to break every band, to stand in the presence of God;
	...and this by the will of the Son of God which was from 
	before the foundation of the world" (JST, Gen. 14:30-31).

	    The priesthood operates in a system of sublime order.  The
	priesthood is not, however, a floating essence.  It must be 
	conferred by ordination with specific offices.  It is held by 
	men under sacred duty to use its authority to accomplish God's 
	work for the blessing of men, women, and children alike.  No 
	one can claim priesthood authority except it is conferred 
	openly by those possessing the authority, "and it is known to 
	the church that he has authority and has been regularly 
	ordained be the heads of the church" (D&C 42:11).  The exercise 
	of priesthood authority is directed by the keys of the 
	priesthood.  These keys rest with the presiding local and 
	General Authorities of the Church.  Those who have the keys are 
	responsible for the guiding momentum and direction of the work 
	of the Lord on the earth.  Clearly, as Alma states, the 
	shepherds of the Church are responsible for protecting the flock:

	    "For what shepherd is there among you having many sheep doth
	not watch over them, that the wolves enter not and devour his 
	flock?  And behold, if a wolf enter his flock doth he not drive 
	him out?" (Alma 5:59).

	    Those who have keys, which include the judicial or 
	disciplinary authority, have the responsibility for keeping the 
	Church cleansed from all iniquity (see D&C 20:54; 43:11).  
	Bishops, stake presidents, mission presidents, and others who 
	have the responsibility of keeping the Church pure must perform 
	this labor in a spirit of love and kindness.  It should not be 
	done in a spirit of punishment, but rather of helping.  However, 
	it is of no kindness to a brother or sister in transgression for 
	their presiding officers to look the other way.  Some words on 
	this subject come from President John Taylor:

	    "Furthermore, I have heard of some Bishops who have been 
	seeking to cover up the iniquities of men; I tell them, in the 
	name of God, they will have to bear...that iniquity, and if any 
	of you want to partake of the sins of men, or uphold them, you 
	will have to bear them.  Do you hear it, you Bishops and you 
	Presidents?  God will require it at your hands.  You are not 
	placed in a position to tamper with the principles of 
	righteousness, nor to cover up the infamies and corruptions of 
	men" (in Conference Report, Apr. 1880, p. 78).



	    On this matter, we urge you presiding brethren to seek the 
	Spirit of God, to study and be guided by the scriptures and the
	_General Handbook of Instructions_.  Church discipline is not
	limited to sexual sins but includes other acts such as murder,
	abortions, burglary, theft, fraud, and other dishonesty,
	deliberate disobedience to the rules and regulations of the
	Church, advocating or practicing polygamy, apostasy, or any 
	other unchristianlike conduct, including defiance or ridicule 
	of the Lord's anointed, contrary to the law of the Lord and the 
	order of the Church.

	    How does the priesthood function?  The decisions of the 
	leaders and quorums of the priesthood should follow the pattern
	of the presiding quorum,s.  "The decisions of these quorums ...
	are to be made in all righteousness, in holiness, and lowliness
	of heart, meekness and long suffering, and in faith, and virtue,
	and knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly 
	kindness and charity" (D&C 107:30).

	    In some legislative assemblies of the world, there are some 
	groups termed the "loyal opposition."  I find no such principle
	in the gospel of Jesus Christ.  The Savior gave us this solemn
	warning: "Be one; and if ye are not one ye are not mine" (D&C
	38:27).  The Lord made it clear that in the presiding quorums
	every decision "must be by the unanimous voice of the same; 
	that is, every member in each quorum must be agreed to its
	decisions (D&C 107:27).  This means that after frank and open
	discussion decisions are reached in council under the direction
	of the presiding officer, who has the ultimate authority to 
	decide.  That decision is then sustained, because out unity 
	comes from full agreement with righteous principles and general
	response to the operation of the Spirit of God.

	    Free discussion and expression are encouraged in the Church.
	Certainly the open expressions in most fast and testimony 
	meetings, or Sunday School, Relief Society, and priesthood
	meetings attest to that principle.  However, the privilege of
	free expression should operate within limits.  In 1869, George Q.
	Cannon explained the limits of individual expression:

	    "A friend ... wished to know whether we ... considered an
	honest difference of opinion between a member of the Church and
	the Authorities of the Church was apostasy ....  We replied that
	... we could conceive of a man honestly differing in opinion 
	from the Authorities of the Church and yet not be an apostate;
	but we could not conceive of a man publishing these differences
	of opinion and seeking by arguments, sophistry and special
	pleading to enforce them upon the people to produce division and
	strife and to place the acts and counsels of the Authorities of 
	the Church, if possible, in a wrong light, and not be an 
	apostate, for such conduct was apostasy as we understood the 
	term" (_Gospel Truth_, sel. Jerreld L. Newquist, 2 vols., Salt 
	Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1974, 2:276-77).



	    Among the activities considered apostate to the Church 
	include when members "(1) repeatedly act in clear, open, and 
	deliberate public opposition to the Church or its leaders; 
	(2) persist in teaching as Church doctrine information that is 
	not Church doctrine after being corrected by their bishops or
	higher authority; or (3) continue to follow the teachings of
	apostate cults (such as those that advocate plural marriage)
	after being corrected by their bishops or higher authority"
	(_General Handbook of Instructions_, 1989, p. 10-3).

	    Those men and women who persist in publicly challenging 
	basic doctrines, practices, and establishment of the Church 
	sever themselves from the Spirit of the Lord and forfeit their
	right to place and influence in the Church.  Members are 
	encouraged to study the principles and the doctrines of the
	Church so that they understand them.  Then, if questions arise
	and there are honest differences of opinion, members are
	encouraged to discuss these matters privately with priesthood
	leaders.

	    There is a certain arrogance in thinking that any of us may
	be more spiritually intelligent, more learned, or more righteous
	than the Councils called to preside over us.  Those Councils are
	more in tune with the Lord than any individual persons they
	preside over, and the individual members of the Councils are
	generally guided by those Councils.  In this church, where we
	have lay leadership, it is inevitable that some will be placed
	in authority over us who have a different background from our own.
	This does not mean that those with other honorable vocational or
	professional qualifications are any less entitled to the spirit
	of their office than any other.  Some of the greatest bishops of
	my lifetime included a brickmason, a grocer, a farmer, a dairyman,
	and one who ran an ice cream business.  What any may have lacked
	in formal education was insignificant.  They were humble men, and
	because they were humble, they were taught and magnified by the
	Holy Spirit.  Without exception, they were greatly strengthened
	as they learned to labor diligently to fulfill their callings,
	and to minister to the Saints they were called to preside over.
	So it is with all of the callings in the Church.  President Monson
	teaches us, "Whom the Lord has called, the Lord qualifies" (Thomas
	S. Monson, ENSIGN, May 1988, p.43).

	    How should the holders of the priesthood treat the women of
	the Church?  The sisters of this church since the beginning have
	always made a great and marvelous contribution to the work of 
	the Lord.  They have added so very much of intelligence, work, 
	culture, and refinement to the Church and our families.  The
	contributions of the sisters as we move into the future are 
	needed more than ever to help establish the values, the faith, 
	and the future of our families, and the well-being of our society.
	They need to know they are valued, honored, and appreciated.  The
	sisters who serve as leaders need to be invited to participate
	and to be listened to and included in our stake and ward council
	meetings, particularly concerning matters involving sisters,
	youth, and children.



	    How should those who bear the priesthood treat their wives
	and the other women in their family?  Our wives need to be
	cherished.  They need to hear their husbands call them blessed,
	and the children need to hear their fathers generously praise
	their mothers (see Prov. 31:28).  The Lord values his daughters
	just as much as he does his sons.  In marriage, neither is
	superior; each has a different primary and divine responsibility.
	Chief among these different responsibilities for wives is the
	calling of motherhood.  I firmly believe that our dear faithful
	sisters enjoy a special spiritual enrichment which is inherent
	in their natures.

	    President Spencer W. Kimball stated: "To be a righteous
	woman during the winding up scenes on this earth, before the
	second coming of our Savior, is an especially noble calling ....
	Other institutions in society may falter, and even fail, but the
	righteous woman can help to save the home, which may be the last
	and only sanctuary some mortals know in the midst of storm and 
	strife" (ENSIGN, Nov. 1978, p. 103).

	    Priesthood is a righteous authority only.  Any attempt to 
	use it in the home as a club to abuse or enforce unrighteous
	dominion is a complete contradiction of that authority and
	results in its loss.  As a holder of the priesthood, the father
	holds a primary responsibility to claim spiritual and temporal
	blessings from the Lord for himself, his wife, his family, but
	these blessings can only be claimed in righteousness as he
	honors his priesthood.  We are taught by the Lord that "no
	power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of
	the priesthood, only by persuasion, by longsuffering, by
	gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned" (D&C 121:41).
	In my opinion, there are few words in the holy scriptures of
	greater significance than the beautiful language contained in
	the 121st section of the Doctrine and Covenants as to how the
	priesthood is to be exercised:

	    "By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly 
	enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile-
	    "Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the
	Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of
	love toward him whom that hast reproved, lest he esteem thee
	to be his enemy;
	    "That he may know that thy faithfulness is stronger than
	the cords of death.
	    "Let thy bowels also be full of charity towards all men,
	and to the household of faith, and let virtue garnish thy
	thoughts unceasingly; then shall thy confidence wax strong in
	the presence of God; and the doctrine of the priesthood shall
	distil upon the soul as the dews from heaven.
	    "The Holy Ghost shall be thy constant companion, and thy
	scepter an unchanging scepter of righteousness and truth; and
	thy dominion shall be an everlasting dominion, and without
	compulsory means it shall flow unto thee forever and ever"
	(vs. 42-46).



	    President Spencer W. Kimball stated, with respect to 
	priesthood covenants: "There is no limit to the power of the
	priesthood which you hold.  The limit comes in you if you do
	not live in harmony with the Spirit of the Lord and you limit
	yourselves in the power you exert"(_The Teachings of Spencer W.
	Kimball_, Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1982, p.498).  President 
	Kimball further stated: "One breaks the priesthood covenant by
	transgressing commandments - but also by leaving undone his 
	duties.  Accordingly, to break this covenant one needs only to
	do nothing." (_The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball_, p.497).

	    Another great reminder of our obligations and blessings is
	the oath and covenant of the priesthood as contained in the
	84th section of the Doctrine and Covenants.  We are told that 
	the transcendent obligations of priesthood holders are "to give
	diligent heed to the words of eternal life," and to bear
	"testimony to all the world," and teach the world of the 
	"judgement which is to come" (vs. 43,61,87).  Then there is 
	this marvelous promise, if we are faithful in our priesthood
	responsibilities: we shall be "sanctified by the Spirit," and 
	become "the elect of God," and all that the "Father hath shall
	be given unto him" (vs. 33,34,38).  How much more important is
	it to receive "all that [the] Father hath" than to seek or
	receive anything else which this life offers.

	    The crowning blessings of life come through obedience to 
	the covenants and honoring the ordinances received in the holy
	temples, including the new and everlasting covenant of marriage,
	which is the capstone of the holy endowment.

	    In our desire to be broad-minded, to be accepted, to be 
	liked and admired, let us not trifle with the doctrines and the
	covenants which have been revealed to us, nor with the 
	pronouncements of those who have been given the keys of the
	kingdom of God on earth.  For all of us, the words of Joshua
	ring with increasing relevance.  "Choose you this day whom ye
	will serve; ... but as for me and my house, we will serve the
	Lord" (Josh. 24:15).

	    May the Spirit of the Lord be with us to help us magnify
	this great priesthood authority, I pray, in the name of Jesus
	Christ, amen.
	

    Lately, my wife has received newspaper articles, statements,
    counter-statement from a source in Utah describing the Soap Opera from
    Mormon central.
    
    Because of quanity and keen competition, I have seen but a small
    fraction of the written words.  From what I have seen gave me the
    distinct impression that the people being excommunicated and
    disfellowshipped still wanted membership in the church.  What I am
    trying to say is that they are not hostile like the Ed Decker group of
    apostates.
    
    These are people who still very much care about the church and desire
    to improve it.  The unfortunate part is that they are unwilling to
    censor themselves.  They are unwilling to shade the truth they found. 
    They are unwilling to bow down before a few but rather serve the many. 
    Oppression is alive an well.  It is the Mountain Meadow Massacre all
    over again.  The first presidency nor the council of twelve are
    involve.  It is the Bishops and stake presidents doing the "dirty" work
    with only direction coming from the "Lord".
    
    I also have this bridge... 

    I was talking with a friend who works for the Church in Salt Lake.  He
    said that he knew Boston was a "liberal" environment and what was being
    said about all this flap going on in Utah. I told him that pretty much
    noone out here knew anything about it.  The media has been quiet.  He
    was surprised.  I'm not.  There is just nothing to report when compared
    with all the stuff going on out here.

    I've just today (dec 27th) read this note ... I realize that it's old
    and already all discussed, but I still wanted to ad something to it, 
    if nothing else, but for myself.
    
    I think Paul Rondina captured the thoughts well when he referred to
    this as "...a storm in a teapot..." or something to that effect (I hope
    I've not mis-quoted you Paul).
    
    As much as I support the Church and love the Gospel and I support
    the General Authorities, I hold very dear to me the right to express
    myself in anyway I choose, even if my expression goes against a 
    specific doctrine, that is my God given privilege and no one can take
    this away from me.  No one has the right to censure the words of
    another, just because we may be offended by the other ...are we so
    weak or so worried about our standing as a Church that it cannot
    stand a challenge of any form ??  Let's be truthful and admit that
    most people in the Church their best ..."... do what is right..."
    but that there are leaders who abuse their positions at various levels
    that has happened to me, and NOT I was not being a "dissident" but just
    expressing an oposing view on something.
    
    We must have the tolerance we claim is our right, for ALL others in 
    and out of the Church, terms of the way people think and feel.  We
    may disagree with others, but each one of us has the right to feel
    differently, we cannot condem people because of their thoughts ...that
    even goes against the laws of this land, that we are supposedly bound
    to obey, as part of the Gospel.
    
    I would also like to say that some of the comments were very strong,
    and I wouldnt' want non-members who read or have read this note to
    think that some of these comments represent how the "Church" feels
    or how the "Church membership" feels ...these are individual
    expressions of individual Church members only, and I can attest that
    some of the condeming comments do not represent me or mine, and I
    am an active LDS woman.
    
    Thanks for this forum !
    mathilde webster