• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Mormons are being sued for doing the right thing:

SoyLeche

meh...
From the handbook of instructions (a compilation of church policies) book 2 (publicly available). There is certainly more detail in book 1, but that is only available to certain leadership positions - and I’m not in one of those at the moment.

Church leaders and members should fulfill all legal obligations to report abuse to civil authorities. In some locations, leaders and teachers who work with children and youth are considered “mandated reporters” and must report abuse to legal authorities. Similarly, in many locations, any person who learns of abuse is required to report it to legal authorities.
 

gnomon

Well-Known Member
Mormons face $9.5 million lawsuit after reporting an abusive father

The wife of a man that sexually molested his daughter, and yes he has been found guilty and is in prison so no need of the term "allegedly". is suing the church for $9.5 million. She lists herself and four of their five children (the daughter that was molested is not listed) as plaintiffs. He went to a panel of elders of his church and confessed, hoping for forgiveness and absolution. It did not quite work out that way.

Depends on how the Church reacted.


He wasn't a true Mormon....

Anybody can see that.
Tom

Utter nonsense.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Those aren't often the choices. Sometimes, not very often.

Possibly because you don't see the nuances here.

Suppose:
Chester(the Molester) goes to confession. He says "I'm banging a 14 y/o.".
Father Joe says "You know you have to stop. God already knows. And your family and her family will find out. It's just a matter of time. You can't keep this secret.
You just can't.

There's help available. I can connect you with it. You need it. She needs it. You must do this! Today!
Do what you and I both know is the right thing. Do it now."
I've never been to confession myself, but I've been told it doesn't work the way you describe.

... but the scenario you describe sounds very strange:

- this church offers mental health supports to predators who confess crimes.
- the church apparently doesn't try to connect its parishioners with mental health supports outside of confession.

Or,
Chester just walks past the church, because he knows Father Joe is a policeman.
... and stays in what he considers to be a state of mortal sin? He prefers Hell to prison?

So for the predator in this scenario:

- his faith is important enough to him to care about confession, even if there's a significant cost associated with it (i.e. pressure from the priest to confess, which would end up with him in prison).

- his faith is unimportant enough that he'd abandon confession if there was a somewhat higher cost associated with it (i.e. prison from the priest reporting him).

- his faith is also so unimportant that the idea that a sin is effectively unpardonable wouldn't stop him from committing the sin.

This seems like a very narrow category of predator you've imagined up.

Which scenario do you think more likely to prevent further mayhem?
Tom
I don't think either scenario is particularly realistic, so the question's moot.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
I am not sure myself. I think some will know that they are doing wrong and will ask for forgiveness. Some won't no matter what. Perhaps the deal could be sweetened with a lesser sentence for those that asked for help. They are far less of a threat than those that have no.conscience.
To me, the only important goal is preventing immoral behavior. In this thread we're talking about a particularly heinous crime, child molestation. But it isn't the only criminally immoral behavior anybody confesses to having committing.

Where do you think a line can be drawn? At what point does making the clergy law enforcement officials become counterproductive?
Tom
The church turned him in. He was found guilty of child rape and sentenced for 15 years.
Unless I misunderstand, quite possible as we all know, the church is not being sued for turning him in.
LDS is being sued for not sufficiently explaining to him that they turn in child molesters.
The difference is very important.
Tom
 

The Hammer

[REDACTED]
Premium Member
.

As the old saying goes:

05326df767697bdd4c5440364a9ea6545e4f84-v5-wm.jpg


.

.
But can you win.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
To me, the only important goal is preventing immoral behavior. In this thread we're talking about a particularly heinous crime, child molestation. But it isn't the only criminally immoral behavior anybody confesses to having committing.

Where do you think a line can be drawn? At what point does making the clergy law enforcement officials become counterproductive?
Tom

Unless I misunderstand, quite possible as we all know, the church is not being sued for turning him in.
LDS is being sued for not sufficiently explaining to him that they turn in child molesters.
The difference is very important.
Tom
i would draw the line at property crimes.

And it was rather foolish to assume that he would not be turned in.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
How much authority does your opinion hold amongst Mormons?

None, but you asked.

Why?

People who seem to know very little about confession are the ones with the clear and simple opinions.
Tom

Because this is not the Catholic church, the Mormons do not go by the Catholic rules for confession. Did you read the linked article? Their standards were made clear.
 

SoyLeche

meh...
Unless I misunderstand, quite possible as we all know, the church is not being sued for turning him in.
LDS is being sued for not sufficiently explaining to him that they turn in child molesters.
The difference is very important.
Tom

I agree that this is the issue. I posted the church’s published policy though, which he had access to at any time. I would hope that would indemnify* the church.

* I’m not a lawyer - I’m not sure if that’s the right word.
 

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
I honestly don't know how anybody...especially any LDS...could claim that s/he doesn't know about the 'mandated reporter' thing.

One really shouldn't go to a Bishop to confess something unless one is willing to do the WHOLE repentance thing. Telling the Bishop and putting HIM in an ethical/moral dilemma is simply adding to the problem, We don't believe that a Bishop can exonerate or pardon one. It's part of the process, but 'restitution' and asking for forgiveness from the victim...and willingness to pay any legal consequences of one's actions has always been a part of repentance. One simply cannot go to a Bishop and say "I killed my wife/abused my kids/robbed the bank/whatever" and expect the Bishop NOT to report this to the police. IMO, the most he should say is "Fine, we can help you through this, but if you don't turn yourself in by...say...Friday, I'll have to report you to the police."

This policy is very clearly stated in our policies, on LDS.org...just about any place one cares to look if one is thinking about this. As someone else has noted: the job of our leadership (bishops) is to help with the repentance process...NOT to hide things from those who may have been harmed, or from the authorities. I know of very few LDS who do NOT understand this, except, perhaps, this man and his wife. Who are being terminally stupid.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
Unless I misunderstand, quite possible as we all know, the church is not being sued for turning him in.
LDS is being sued for not sufficiently explaining to him that they turn in child molesters.
The difference is very important.
So was this guy supposed to go to his bishop and ask, "Bishop, I have a question for you... a hypothetical question, mind you. If I knew of a member of the Church (it's actually a friend of my brother-in-law's next-door neighbor) who was molesting his daughter, and if you were his bishop, what would happen to him if he were to confess this to you?" At any rate, I think I already pretty much answered this objection in a prior post. I'm assuming the offender was an active, practicing member of the Church. If so, he had no excuse for not knowing what was going to happen to him.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
I honestly don't know how anybody...especially any LDS...could claim that s/he doesn't know about the 'mandated reporter' thing.

One really shouldn't go to a Bishop to confess something unless one is willing to do the WHOLE repentance thing. Telling the Bishop and putting HIM in an ethical/moral dilemma is simply adding to the problem, We don't believe that a Bishop can exonerate or pardon one. It's part of the process, but 'restitution' and asking for forgiveness from the victim...and willingness to pay any legal consequences of one's actions has always been a part of repentance. One simply cannot go to a Bishop and say "I killed my wife/abused my kids/robbed the bank/whatever" and expect the Bishop NOT to report this to the police. IMO, the most he should say is "Fine, we can help you through this, but if you don't turn yourself in by...say...Friday, I'll have to report you to the police."

This policy is very clearly stated in our policies, on LDS.org...just about any place one cares to look if one is thinking about this. As someone else has noted: the job of our leadership (bishops) is to help with the repentance process...NOT to hide things from those who may have been harmed, or from the authorities.
Perfect answer. This post probably won't, but should, lay the matter to rest.

I know of very few LDS who do NOT understand this, except, perhaps, this man and his wife. Who are being terminally stupid.
Either that, or maybe both of them were crazy like a fox (or "stupid like a fox," as Homer Simpson might say). Man molests his daughter. Wife learns of the abuse and confronts him. Both know what this means and what's going to result from his confession. He'll end up in jail. She can sue for $9 million. He'll serve out his term. Daughter will be safe while he's incarcerated and will be grown and out of the house by the time he gets out. Husband and wife will have a nice retirement income.
 
Last edited:
Top