Blog # 33 - Trial of Bro. Joe for Sexual Abuse - Documents

Please don't miss my recapping questions in the P.S. after this 5 page installment from way back in 1993.

P.S.  Just a few recapping questions:  The earth shaking admission of Bro. Owen of having many, many reports of Joe's and George's se.xual abominations for 8 to 10 years, long before the trials on these 2 "apostles", and the fact that Bro. Owen did nothing except what I forced him to do way back in 1993, or 22 years ago, does that trouble you at all? 

Is this the same cover-up programming and perpetuated patterning that the old council has passed onto the "new" council today, and which also seems to be continuing on full throttle as well?  Why don't they ever seem to get around to judging a righteous judgment?  Do they really have the Gift of the Holy Ghost which automatically conveys the Godly attribute of Justice or not?

Joe and George were both dropped from the council but were they put on probation?  No!  Were they disfellowshipped?  No!  Were they excommunicated?  No!  Why not?  Did you know that Bro. Owen even invited Bro. George back to meetings saying, "George is a good man - just weak."  Bro. Owen wrote that to my wife in a letter that we have.  Did Bro. Owen also not possess the Gift of the Holy Ghost either?  To be a prophet, one has to have actually received the power from the Gift of the Holy Ghost, don't they?  We all know that "power in the priesthood" is through the Holy Ghost, don't we?  No Holy Ghost, no power in the priesthood necessitating the use of doctors more and more, right?  [see D&C 20:60]

I, Bro. Steve, am writing this blog in a "disfellowshipped" state, resulting from the unrighteous decree of our council, but without even being questioned or any trial being held on me whatsoever.  One might wonder if the council will actually try me for continuing to ask all these embarrassing questions before they get the courage to bring Bro. Lynn to trial who has, at least, 3 competent witnesses against him for pedophilia.  Again, remember that both Joe and George we not even disfellowshipped, after their lengthy trials of hours and hours [I was there for both of the trials, and even convened them because my gals were the chief witnesses].  They definitely were not disfellowshipped or excommunicated!  Why is my supposed "sin" of exposing these abominations to you "judges at large", then and now, worse than these 2 or 3 council member leaders actually doing all these heinous sexual perversions?  Does that mean telling the truth is worse than committing egregious sins?  Apparently so, 22 years ago and it still to be today as well?  Do you have enough of the Holy Spirit in you to dare have eyes that see this clearly?


2 responses
The Dark at the Top of the Stairs Sometimes, going over scripture is like passing over the seabed in a Remote Observation Vehicle. My lights and cameras are poised in the grid square of Section 123 of the Doctrine and Covenants. My viewing screen is poised on verse 7, or as a priest of the Anglican Church would say, “I shall take for my text . . .” 7. “. . . urged on and upheld by the influence of that spirit which hath so strongly riveted (joined with bolts of iron) the creeds of the fathers, who have inherited lies, upon the hearts of the children, and filled the world with confusion, and has been growing stronger and stronger, and is now the very mainspring of all corruption, and the whole earth groans under the weight of its iniquity. 12. For there are many yet on the earth among all sects, parties, and denominations, who are blinded by the subtle craftiness of men, whereby they lie in wait to deceive, and who are only kept from the truth because they know not where to find it –” I should add men don’t only not know where to find the truth, they don’t know how it is found. A man can be in the presence of truth, but it has no meaning unless he admits it into his being, and this is a big part of man’s failure to understand God and a key to where we as a Work have gone wrong these many years. Pontius Pilate, Procurator of Judea, famously said to Jesus at the beginning of the ordeal of his atonement, “What is truth?” The premise of this article is that Mormons of all stripes have been contaminated by the world’s attitudes such that they live their lives with extra knowledge of God’s truth, but from the point of view and with the notions of worldlings. Members of the Work, in particular, have accepted traditions whose origins are of men and incorporated these into their religious belief and practice. These traditions of men have had the effect of separating us from the mind of God, and do not contain the true religion of God as delivered to us through Joseph Smith and his prophetic successors, notably Brigham Young, John Taylor, Joseph Musser, and Rulon Allred. Some of these traditions have, in fact, made us separated and alienated from the Spirit of the Savior and have lined us up in kinship with the apostate churches of men. In a spiritual sense, although it is virtually impossible to believe, our understanding and practices have far more in common with them than with the congregation and priesthood of Jesus Christ. Truth Magazine 3:20-21 John W. Taylor: A Return to Fundamentals Advised March 3, 1889 “We are getting into such a condition that if we were to meet the Lord, we could not look him in the face, and the way we are going it will soon be impossible to tell what we do believe….” It is the premise of this article that we, titled the Work of God, have already arrived at that condition. Note that this sentence has been extracted from an article entitled A Return to Fundamentals Advised. A return to fundamentals is what this Work desperately needs; because we are getting the same treatment that God is giving the sectarians and the LDS Mormons: absence of His Spirit in strength upon this people and upon their sacred works. For the elect of God, for a chosen people this should be a matter for alarm, not complacency and willful blindness. Out of our own intransigence, we stand condemned. Having eyes, see ye not? and having ears, hear ye not? And do ye not remember? (Mk. 8:18) There are two sorts of Mormons: there are the practitioners and there are the followers. This division crosses all ranks and seniority and weight of marriage. Examples of practitioners include Heber C. Kimball and B. Harvey Allred. The prophet-practitioners you already know. The essential difference between what this people are and what God wants is we are followers and God wants practitioners. It’s as though a practitioner is riding the horse, while the follower is being pulled along by the horse. Practitioners have a sense of purpose, like a boxer, and so they are working out at the gym of life building up their endurance and their strength and agility and the savvy to put all these together to win the overcomer’s championship belt. Also, practitioners have innate courage that carries them. The followers will do what is set in front of them to succeed the easier way by making themselves known and useful to a powerful godfather who can prefer them. The followers want to please men to earn recognition on this plane and the assurance they are blessed from men, while the practitioners want to please God to earn eternal blessing from Him. The followers want rank in order to be, while the practitioners want to do more, because they are already in a state of being. Being, in the Mormon sense, means knowing and doing. Followers don’t trust their own judgment, so how can God trust them? The great breakthrough that sounded the eclipse of Medieval thinking was this concept developed in 14th century Italy, “Man is the measure of all things.” The great breakthrough that sounded the eclipse of the governments of men on earth was this concept developed in 19th century America: “God (not man) is the measure of all things.” (As a corollary, truth is the measure of all things.) So it is no wonder that when a man who has been shaped from childhood to be a follower, by creed and by experience, finally gets to the highest rank of the inner circle, he has not developed the skills and the experience as a practitioner to be able to uphold the character of God, the honor of God, the law of God, the gospel of God, the justice of God, the love of God, or the mind and Spirit of God. He doesn’t even know God; he only knows about God. Man, to him, is the measure of all things. And such a man, so schooled, when told by men who God is and how things work, will be content to accept a state in which the Holy Spirit, either as a palpable force, or as an authoritative voice, is not really present. It never goes well for one’s career to offend the brethren. To know God, you have to be a practitioner with Him as He has laid out in scripture. Such men who are followers will go along with all sorts of departures because they believe what they have been told, that they have graduated from the ranks and now consensus (which is influenced by the social pressure to agree and be agreeable) among themselves is sufficient and the way they have made for themselves is the rightful way to continue. When a man sets a goal, other things get prioritized according to their value in achieving the goal. If the eyes are on the prize of being once again in the presence of the Savior, one set of values will predominate. If the eyes are on the prize of getting rank from men, another set of values will take the fore, and the rest will be discarded. If somebody we look up to or trust tells us how things are before we are aware ourselves, we will accept his version, and that can avoid the trial of critical thinking for a lifetime. Most people depend on a teacher to start out with. Beware false teaching. Vox humana, vox dei, the saying was. It means, "The voice of man is the voice of God.” This belief has removed one essential ingredient from the relationship. The voice of man, even of one bearing the title of Prophet, is only the voice of God when the Holy Spirit bears witness. Practitioners, after Christ, have cultivated the active companionship of the Holy Spirit, so they have the power of discerning spirits. Followers just check in every now and then. Just the saying doesn’t make it so. If the blogs bear the truth, this is the reason why a council and a head of priesthood embraced two disciples of wickedness: they knew how to lead and steer followers with flattery and fear using true doctrines, but wrong applications; true scriptures, but no spirit. This is where we are now, experiencing the legacy of those “good men, but weak” in the regime of their successors. “Ou sont les feuilles de lointemps?” The worst of the twisted doctrines that enabled the careers of the unholy trinity is that of the oath of brotherhood be used to cover a pattern of ungodly conduct and grant it immunity from correction. See blog 33 p. 9. Brethren and sisters, consider the source of this advocacy! I believe that the Lord has the power to clarify such matters in a prophetic pronouncement, but has not done so deliberately so as to provide a test for those called by his name to pray and ask for themselves what the Lord’s standard of righteousness is and how to defend it when it involves those having brethren status. “Salvation is an individual operation,” so said Brigham Young. Allegations having the in definition of rumor are not to be honored, but if there be witnesses, they are to be called forth that truth may be established through the mechanism of a trial. Those unwilling to cleanse the councils and the temple of the Lord of iniquity must claim some other reason to justify themselves. Admittedly, it takes some courage to step outside of a perceived lawful covenant and weigh which is the higher counsel that best represents the Lord, but isn’t that what a priesthood is for? If we can't tell right from wrong and refuse to trust in the Lord to go to him, who upbraideth not, to inquire that his way may be our way, what are we good for? “Therefore, he that lacketh wisdom, let him ask of ME, and I will give him liberally and upbraid him not.” (D&C 42:68) (For the love of God, people!) If we have men who presume to preside over us with the Lord’s authority who do not trust the Lord in establishing his righteousness among them, why should we trust them? The Work is populated by “good men, but followers.” Unhappily, they are following a man who is not so good, as the conduct of the regime over which he presides shows, as well as the silence of the Heavens. What comes to mind is the cruel experiment of the entomologist who led the file of caterpillars onto the rim of a flower pot, upon which they glided until exhausted. We can’t blame the Devil for this; we’ve done it to ourselves. We had the tools (prayer) and the authorization (ordination) to know the truth. Look at the consequences in wrecked marriages, shattered families, children cast to the winds of disillusionment, blind following of a man advocated by men, gifts of the spirit absent, validity of ordinances and covenants doubtful, division among the stalwarts of this Work, confusion among the members, silence and delay from the council in failing to address issues, unresolved grievances, refusal to be accountable, authoritarianism based on men’s interests. Fasting and prayer won’t fix this; the prayer needs to be directed to obtain the Lord’s will, not his favor. Then we have to clean our skirts of the bloodshed and lives wounded by the catamites and obey God. Does this council still follow the legacy of George, Joe and the law of Satan and hide each other’s sins?
— Bro. Johannes
For the Oath’s Sake “Dieu et mon droit.” (Pronounced quickly: Djer eh moh dwa) This is the motto of an English monarch, first uttered in the Middle Ages by Richard II. It translates, “God and my right,” meaning my authority comes from God, or my will is right and it comes to me from God. Whatever I please to do makes right and God supports it. God was giving them the silent treatment, too. Richard was later deposed and murdered. I am afraid we have become another church of men. Yes, I know you hate those words. God hates sin that cuts His people off from access to His blessings and from the way back to His presence. What’s the practical difference between discarding ordinances the way the LDS leadership has done and not being able to form them properly because the Lord has withdrawn his Spirit because of the manifest disconnection of the ordainers. (Do you really want to experience an eternity with their style at your head as your law?) The problem with such people is they don’t have a sense of moral rectitude. I suppose they all want to be accepted by the Savior into a great reward, but who wants to actually be like him? The purpose of this Work is to help people as many as possible as much as possible to overcome and be like the Savior. At least that’s what it was when Joseph was commissioned to set it up. They’re trying to find a way to do the minimum, taking advantage of God’s lenity, just to get by. They’re essentially about themselves first, not God. They’re like little kids dressing up in daddy’s robes. We have a group of people who can't see the forest of God’s intent to establish a strait and narrow way of goodness, for the trees of a mutually-protecting oath. Sin is not desirable to keep around; it corrodes the personality. Personality is another way of saying, who we are. They are afraid when they shouldn't be (wiping the lip of the cup) and they’re not afraid when they should be (of what’s inside the cup they are drinking). It is better to be hated of men than told to take a hike by God. It bears repeating. Men should not give ear to unsubstantiated rumors about their colleagues to judge them secretly in their hearts or spread these tales. By the same token, men should not ignore the presence of witnesses, nor withhold the will of the Lord in obtaining true justice. A brother who sins and seeks to hide it from his brethren, or hide behind the hell-spawned perversion of a sacred oath designed to preserve the way of the Lord, is less than a brother. To expect or appeal to one’s brethren to honor the oath of brotherhood above their oath to God is to tempt them all to their mutual damnation. (The blog records that the subversive interpretation that an oath among men should take precedence over their oath to God was insidiously dripped from the fangs of the old serpent, himself, by one of his well-placed disciples, respected, even cherished for his wise and useful counsel and profound knowledge of scripture. See blog 33, p. 9) Do you think it would have happened if those who held that office had been men of God? Why did God withhold the identity of these fiends from Joseph Musser and Rulon? I believe it is because one man alone is not satisfactory to God to preserve the way of righteousness in the house of the Lord. The Lord has long been aware of the weakness and worse among his saints and the counterfeit religion of men serving man that has possessed and blinded us these many years, in spite of having men of God at our head. The sins for which we are tested are not just those of a few who reside on the stage. I believe God has enabled a Mr. White to be positioned as a choice, and prepared and raised up a Mr. Black that as many among us who will can discern between the two religions and truth and counterfeit will be enabled to choose either the right and be drawn to Him to carry out His will or be drawn to the other and receive the reward of disobedience – and worse, if it comes to that. This is how the Adversary has taken over the effective government of this Work and brought the righteous Lord to silence and cessation of the power of the priesthood among us. This is what has brought us all to the trial spoken of by the Savior in the book of revelation to the church of Philadelphia. We are the first to receive this trial of faith, discernment, loyalty and love. “And out of my own house shall it begin, first among you who have professed to know my name and have blasphemed me . . .” For the oath’s sake, be true to one another, but for Christ’s sake, be true to him first. Wherefore Lamech, being angry, slew him, not like unto Cain, his brother Abel, for the sake of getting gain, but he slew him for the oath’s sake. (Moses 5:50) How far distant are we from the days of Cain and Lamech when an oath is taken, understood, respected and used for the purpose of hiding wrongdoing and protecting the guilty?
— A posthaven user