NOM

My stake president is getting released after only 3 years to serve as a mission president. He has all of the qualifications to go far in church leadership and this move makes it apparent that he is on the fast track. I would not be surprised at all if we hear him speaking in conference in a few years. That would be a really good thing for the church because, more than any leader I've encountered, he has done the homework and he understands why some of us have the problems we do, and he is responsible for helping people like me keep temple recommends for the sake of their families and spouses.

There have been a couple of times when I was talking to him and I referred to myself as an apostate. He seemed kind of alarmed by this and he insisted, "You are NOT and apostate!" I have wondered why he is so insistent that I should not be labeled an apostate, even when I'm the one applying the label. Something I heard on a Mormon Stories interview this morning might help explain this. John Dehlin mentioned that the Handbook says that excommunication is mandatory for apostasy.

Does anybody know any more about this? If my stake president were to agree to my self-labeling as an apostate would he be required to excommunicate me?

I'd have to agree with Dehlin on this one. Apostasy requires CoL at a minimum. If you show up to one and evidence is presented that you labeled yourself an apostate, I think they'd be very like to show you the door. He doesn't want you using the label because he'd rather see your records stay in and blessings stay in place. He probably recognizes that if you're kicked out, that's likely the end for any hope of bringing you back into the fold.

Probably not. The only way he will be forced to excommunicate you is if you openly push people out, embarrass the church by suggesting women get ordained to hold the priesthood, or eat Doritos in the pew on fast Sunday.

Sorry to say but you're just not dangerous enough.

Hagoth wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 11:40 am If my stake president were to agree to my self-labeling as an apostate would he be required to excommunicate me?

The handbook does in fact require a CoL for apostasy. Handbook 1, section 6.7 lists examples of times when CoL is not necessary (6.7.1), may be necessary (6.7.2 - depending on circumstances as directed by SP), and mandatory (6.7.3). Apostasy is listed in the mandatory subsection, 6.7.3.

However, it is likely the definition of apostasy that is causing your SP to hold off giving you that label. Quoted from the handbook:

Apostasy
As used here, apostasy refers to members who:
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 they have been corrected by their bishop or a higher authority.
3. Continue to follow the teachings of apostate sects (such as those that advocate plural marriage) after being corrected by their bishop or a higher authority.
4. Are in a same-gender marriage.
5. Formally join another church and advocate its teaching teachings.

Does that shed some more light on the issue?

Hagoth wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 11:40 am Does anybody know any more about this? If my stake president were to agree to my self-labeling as an apostate would he be required to excommunicate me?

The spirit probably tells him to let you pass unfettered, but the law would require him to give you the boot. I suspect when people move up the Church food chain they become more of a Sanhedrin-like law advocate and less of a spirit-driven individual.

However, it is likely the definition of apostasy that is causing your SP to hold off giving you that label. Quoted from the handbook:

Apostasy
As used here, apostasy refers to members who:
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 they have been corrected by their bishop or a higher authority.
3. Continue to follow the teachings of apostate sects (such as those that advocate plural marriage) after being corrected by their bishop or a higher authority.
4. Are in a same-gender marriage.
5. Formally join another church and advocate its teaching teachings.

Yeah, you don't really fit into the "official" church criteria for an Apostate, Chief Hagoth.

Perhaps that's why your former SP friend doesn't want you to refer to yourself that way? And of course he's a smart man for keeping you "in" enough to keep Mrs. Hagoth happy that you still have your golden ticket.

wtfluff wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 1:39 pm And of course, he's a smart man for keeping you "in" enough to keep Mrs. Hagoth happy that you still have your golden ticket.

He's got a ticket to ride,
He's got a ticket to rye-yie-ide,
He's got a ticket to ride,
And Mrs. Hagoth cares!

...

wtfluff wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 1:39 pm

However, it is likely the definition of apostasy that is causing your SP to hold off giving you that label. Quoted from the handbook:

Apostasy
As used here, apostasy refers to members who:
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 they have been corrected by their bishop or a higher authority.
3. Continue to follow the teachings of apostate sects (such as those that advocate plural marriage) after being corrected by their bishop or a higher authority.
4. Are in a same-gender marriage.
5. Formally join another church and advocate its teaching teachings.

Yeah, you don't really fit into the "official" church criteria for an Apostate, Chief Hagoth.

I read this, and I sure want to tell my story how I got my TR by the skin of my teeth the last go around. I'll tell this much; after being accused of apostasy by MY SP, I had to use this handbook definition to explain, well, no I'm not. He wasn't buying it, I had to go back and meet with him twice more before he relented. Like fascist, racist and a host of other names, apostate is a purposeful label that identifies where you are with the conditioned group. You just better know that this is the church's definition, so you can navigate the perilous waters when that label is attached to you. Especially if you want to attend a family member's wedding, as I wanted to do. Frankly, what I learned is that one of the questions, "are you honest in your dealings with your fellowman" is not really worth it or particularly wise when you're in a temple recommend interview. For my next one, if I really want to keep it at that point, I'm just going to say "yes" or "no" in the right spots, and that's it. When I'm asked to elaborate, I'll just refuse. And then we'll see if they're willing to pull it just for my refusal to bear testimony. That will be fun.

Why do cops ask you "do you know why I pulled you over?" Every time you get stopped? They are hoping you say, "Is it the 7 poundo of coke and the dead hooker in the trunk?"

I believe it is called a spontaneous confession.

He's helping you not rat yourself out.

moksha wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 1:57 pm

wtfluff wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 1:39 pm And of course, he's a smart man for keeping you "in" enough to keep Mrs. Hagoth happy that you still have your golden ticket.

He's got a ticket to ride,
He's got a ticket to rye-yie-ide,
He's got a ticket to ride,
And Mrs. Hagoth cares!

For now. A couple of days ago she suggested that I talk to the outgoing SP to see if he would renew my recommend one more time, even though there's a year left on it, so I would be a real boy for two more years. I told her it's time to just accept that my card-wielding days are finally sputtering to an end. I explained that I'm just not willing to tiptoe around those questions anymore. She asked which ones and I said, "well, for starters, that Russell Nelson and the apostles are prophets, seers and revelators, because they're not. And the fact that I don't pay tithing anymore, not just because I'm a full-time student, but because I don't intend to ever pay tithing again. And the fact that I drink tea and coffee pretty much every day now. Any of those is sufficient to keep me out of the temple."

Her response: "It's just so stupid that they would do that."

The other reason that I forgot to mention is that I'm a 60-year old man, for crying out loud, and I am just done with the absurdity of sitting down in a closed room with a middle-aged guy from down the street and allowing him to judge me in regards to my "worthiness," and to verify that I meet his standards of underwear respect. It's madness. I think I'm old enough to finally be a grown-up.

Hagoth wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 10:00 am

moksha wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 1:57 pm

wtfluff wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 1:39 pm And of course, he's a smart man for keeping you "in" enough to keep Mrs. Hagoth happy that you still have your golden ticket.

He's got a ticket to ride,
He's got a ticket to rye-yie-ide,
He's got a ticket to ride,
And Mrs. Hagoth cares!

The other reason that I forgot to mention is that I'm a 60-year old man, for crying out loud, and I am just done with the absurdity of sitting down in a closed room with a middle-aged guy from down the street and allowing him to judge me in regards to my "worthiness," and to verify that I meet his standards of underwear respect. It's madness. I think I'm old enough to finally be a grown-up.

F*@! yeah, Hagoth! This gave me all the positive vibrations.

Enoch Witty wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 2:32 pm

Hagoth wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 10:00 am

moksha wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 1:57 pm
He's got a ticket to ride,
He's got a ticket to rye-yie-ide,
He's got a ticket to ride,
And Mrs. Hagoth cares!

The other reason that I forgot to mention is that I'm a 60-year old man, for crying out loud, and I am just done with the absurdity of sitting down in a closed room with a middle-aged guy from down the street and allowing him to judge me in regards to my "worthiness," and to verify that I meet his standards of underwear respect. It's madness. I think I'm old enough to finally be a grown-up.

F*@! yeah, Hagoth! This gave me all the positive vibrations.

Well said. What a messed up system.

Hagoth, ignore this if this question is too personal, but, do you actually attend the temple, or do you just carry the card?

Maybe it would be better to refer to yourself as a heretic instead of an apostate. Maybe the SP could get on board with that term.

Hagoth wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 11:40 am There have been a couple of times when I was talking to him and I referred to myself as an apostate. He seemed kind of alarmed by this and he insisted, "You are NOT and apostate!" I have wondered why he is so insistent that I should not be labeled an apostate, even when I'm the one applying the label. Something I heard on a Mormon Stories interview this morning might help explain this. John Dehlin mentioned that the Handbook says that excommunication is mandatory for apostasy.

If you really want out, let's elope. You'll be labelled "apostate" immediately. You're close to Vegas, aren't you. Let's do it. Does your wife want to be polyandrous?

All kidding aside, think about that: all I have to do is get married and "BAM", apostate.

Hagoth, you might be more of a heretic than an apostate. Unless you define apostasy as disagreeing with the Brethren.

deacon blues wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:34 pm Hagoth, ignore this if this question is too personal, but, do you actually attend the temple, or do you just carry the card?

Every once in a while I will go if Mrs. Hagoth really wants me to. I think I went once last year. It's actually a more pleasant experience in some ways than it was when I believed. I'm not afraid that anything that goes on there will put me in Satan's power. The more I think about it the more creepy that idea becomes. "If you do not live up to every covenant that you made..." In other words, the church above everything. or you go to hell. People were right to be concerned that Mitt Romney's loyalties might be compromised.

achilles wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 2:58 pmIf you really want out, let's elope. You'll be labelled "apostate" immediately. You're close to Vegas, aren't you. Let's do it. Does your wife want to be polyandrous?

All kidding aside, think about that: all I have to do is get married and "BAM", apostate.

Hagoth, you might be more of a heretic than an apostate. Unless you define apostasy as disagreeing with the Brethren.

A mixed sexual-orientation polyandrous marriage, now that would be something! Or I could just join another church. That would do it too. I'm ok with either.

Hagoth wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 3:43 pm

deacon blues wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:34 pm Hagoth, ignore this if this question is too personal, but, do you actually attend the temple, or do you just carry the card?

Every once in a while I will go if Mrs. Hagoth really wants me to. I think I went once last year. It's actually a more pleasant experience in some ways than it was when I believed. I'm not afraid that anything that goes on there will put me in Satan's power. The more I think about it the more creepy that idea becomes. "If you do not live up to every covenant that you made..." In other words, the church above everything. or you go to hell. People were right to be concerned that Mitt Romney's loyalties might be compromised.

I bet you don't take the slippers off then put them back on? Amiright??

You know what's funny about this whole thing is that it's just about someone deciding not to give a damn about people with make-believe authority, and how much that threatens the make-believe authority of those people. Since they don't have any REAL authority they have to resort to fear tactics. "Follow your own conscience instead of us and we'll take away your family for freakin' ever! Not to mention your genitals. The Good Ship Zion is sort of a floating Halloween hunted house where you pay (a lot) to have people jump out and scare you.