![FairMormon Logo](https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/2021_fair_logo_primary.png)
FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
m |
m (→Snuffer's wife claims revelation on how disciplinary council should be conducted) |
||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
:My wife reviewed the Church Handbook of Instructions. She explained to President Hunt that the book is silent, and does not bar children from attending. He admitted that was true but it was his decision to forbid them. My wife said it was my court and I ought to be allowed to have them with me. He replied it wasn't my court, but the church's.<ref name="don't know blog">Denver Snuffer, "Don't Know," from the desk of Denver Snuffer (blog), 9 September 2013, {{antilink|http://denversnuffer.blogspot.ca/2013/09/dont-know.html}}</ref> | :My wife reviewed the Church Handbook of Instructions. She explained to President Hunt that the book is silent, and does not bar children from attending. He admitted that was true but it was his decision to forbid them. My wife said it was my court and I ought to be allowed to have them with me. He replied it wasn't my court, but the church's.<ref name="don't know blog">Denver Snuffer, "Don't Know," from the desk of Denver Snuffer (blog), 9 September 2013, {{antilink|http://denversnuffer.blogspot.ca/2013/09/dont-know.html}}</ref> | ||
+ | ====Joseph Smith rebukes such claims==== | ||
Snuffer and his wife do not understand or follow the teachings of Joseph Smith. In April 1833, Joseph wrote a member of the Church: | Snuffer and his wife do not understand or follow the teachings of Joseph Smith. In April 1833, Joseph wrote a member of the Church: | ||
Line 22: | Line 23: | ||
According to Joseph Smith, Snuffer and his wife ''cannot'' receive revelation for what their stake president—higher in authority in the Church than they--ought to do about a matter of Church government. If they did not get their revelation from God, where did it come from? | According to Joseph Smith, Snuffer and his wife ''cannot'' receive revelation for what their stake president—higher in authority in the Church than they--ought to do about a matter of Church government. If they did not get their revelation from God, where did it come from? | ||
+ | |||
+ | ====Snuffer refuses to attend if his demands are not met==== | ||
Despite his claim to sustain, Snuffer would not even respect disciplinary council procedures and the stake president's decision to exclude the children from the proceeding. | Despite his claim to sustain, Snuffer would not even respect disciplinary council procedures and the stake president's decision to exclude the children from the proceeding. | ||
Snuffer claims that his concern was that his children would assume that he was in reality guilty of some moral transgression. The stake president assured them that this was not the case—his apostasy was the only issue. Even though Snuffer's purported concern had been addressed, he refused to attend if the children were not allowed in, and left.<ref name="FHE">Denver Snuffer, "Last Night's Family Home Evening - Don't call me," from the desk of Denver Snuffer (blog), 9 September 2013, {{antilink|http://denversnuffer.blogspot.ca/2013/09/last-nights-family-home-evening-dont.html}}</ref> | Snuffer claims that his concern was that his children would assume that he was in reality guilty of some moral transgression. The stake president assured them that this was not the case—his apostasy was the only issue. Even though Snuffer's purported concern had been addressed, he refused to attend if the children were not allowed in, and left.<ref name="FHE">Denver Snuffer, "Last Night's Family Home Evening - Don't call me," from the desk of Denver Snuffer (blog), 9 September 2013, {{antilink|http://denversnuffer.blogspot.ca/2013/09/last-nights-family-home-evening-dont.html}}</ref> | ||
+ | |||
+ | ====Snuffer's family does not accept that apostate writings can be grounds for discipline==== | ||
Snuffer's attitude is reflected by at least one of his family members, which perhaps explains why the stake president did not wish to permit their attendance at the council: | Snuffer's attitude is reflected by at least one of his family members, which perhaps explains why the stake president did not wish to permit their attendance at the council: | ||
Line 33: | Line 38: | ||
This is clear evidence that Snuffer's children do not understand the implications of his apostasy any more than their parents do. | This is clear evidence that Snuffer's children do not understand the implications of his apostasy any more than their parents do. | ||
+ | ====Snuffer claims he wasn't "able" to speak to the council because his demands were not met==== | ||
Snuffer later makes it sound as if he was refused admission to the council: | Snuffer later makes it sound as if he was refused admission to the council: | ||
Line 40: | Line 46: | ||
:We talked for an hour in the hallway....The door to the High Council room was open. I assume they overheard the discussion. It was a little after 8:00 when we left.<ref name="FHE">Denver Snuffer, "Last Night's Family Home Evening - Don't call me," from the desk of Denver Snuffer (blog), 9 September 2013, {{antilink|http://denversnuffer.blogspot.ca/2013/09/last-nights-family-home-evening-dont.html}}</ref> | :We talked for an hour in the hallway....The door to the High Council room was open. I assume they overheard the discussion. It was a little after 8:00 when we left.<ref name="FHE">Denver Snuffer, "Last Night's Family Home Evening - Don't call me," from the desk of Denver Snuffer (blog), 9 September 2013, {{antilink|http://denversnuffer.blogspot.ca/2013/09/last-nights-family-home-evening-dont.html}}</ref> | ||
+ | |||
+ | ====Snuffer claims to sustain leaders even while defying them==== | ||
Despite this self-reported behavior, Snuffer continued to insist that he sustained his local leaders, even while in the act of refusing to follow their instructions or attend the council because his demands were not met: | Despite this self-reported behavior, Snuffer continued to insist that he sustained his local leaders, even while in the act of refusing to follow their instructions or attend the council because his demands were not met: | ||
Line 49: | Line 57: | ||
:used their dominion over me to sustain the charges and ratify all that went on before.<ref name="1st pres">Snuffer to First Presidency, Letter (13 September 2013), 2; reproduced in {{CriticalWork:Snuffer:Mesa|pages=42}}</ref> | :used their dominion over me to sustain the charges and ratify all that went on before.<ref name="1st pres">Snuffer to First Presidency, Letter (13 September 2013), 2; reproduced in {{CriticalWork:Snuffer:Mesa|pages=42}}</ref> | ||
− | This is nonsense. Snuffer's behavior | + | This is nonsense. When Snuffer tries to get people to behave as he would like them to behave, he is just expressing himself. But, when others do not respond to his efforts, Snuffer then labels them guilty of trying to exercise "unrighteous dominion." Snuffer has ever right to refuse to attend the council, except on his own terms—but, the high council and his stake presidency are likewise justified in not bowing to Snuffer's efforts to control ''them''. |
+ | |||
+ | He wants to have it both ways—everything he does is justified; if anyone else thwarts him, they are guilty of "unrighteous dominion." | ||
+ | |||
+ | Snuffer is always, in his mind, in the right. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ====Conclusion==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | Snuffer's behavior offers further proof that the charges against him were true—he was in active apostasy, would not respect the reasonable requests of his priesthood leaders. It had nothing to do with them using "dominion"—they had so little dominion that they couldn't even compel Snuffer to come into the room if he chose not to. All they could do was ratify what Snuffer had already done—cut himself off from the Church. | ||
Snuffer and his wife claim to receive revelation about what their leaders should do—but Joseph Smith says that this is impossible. | Snuffer and his wife claim to receive revelation about what their leaders should do—but Joseph Smith says that this is impossible. |
This page is still under construction. We welcome any suggestions for improving the content of this FAIR Answers Wiki page. |
Snuffer insisted that he and his wife were better placed to get revelation on how a disciplinary council should proceed than his local leaders:
When he arrived at his disciplinary hearing, Snuffer tells us that:
Snuffer and his wife do not understand or follow the teachings of Joseph Smith. In April 1833, Joseph wrote a member of the Church:
According to Joseph Smith, Snuffer and his wife cannot receive revelation for what their stake president—higher in authority in the Church than they--ought to do about a matter of Church government. If they did not get their revelation from God, where did it come from?
Despite his claim to sustain, Snuffer would not even respect disciplinary council procedures and the stake president's decision to exclude the children from the proceeding.
Snuffer claims that his concern was that his children would assume that he was in reality guilty of some moral transgression. The stake president assured them that this was not the case—his apostasy was the only issue. Even though Snuffer's purported concern had been addressed, he refused to attend if the children were not allowed in, and left.[1]
Snuffer's attitude is reflected by at least one of his family members, which perhaps explains why the stake president did not wish to permit their attendance at the council:
This is clear evidence that Snuffer's children do not understand the implications of his apostasy any more than their parents do.
Snuffer later makes it sound as if he was refused admission to the council:
In fact, however, he was simply not permitted to use the council to serve his own agenda. He was able, and could have spoken with the High Council, but instead, chose to leave without participating or learning of the council's decision:
Despite this self-reported behavior, Snuffer continued to insist that he sustained his local leaders, even while in the act of refusing to follow their instructions or attend the council because his demands were not met:
Later, Snuffer would claim that the high council
This is nonsense. When Snuffer tries to get people to behave as he would like them to behave, he is just expressing himself. But, when others do not respond to his efforts, Snuffer then labels them guilty of trying to exercise "unrighteous dominion." Snuffer has ever right to refuse to attend the council, except on his own terms—but, the high council and his stake presidency are likewise justified in not bowing to Snuffer's efforts to control them.
He wants to have it both ways—everything he does is justified; if anyone else thwarts him, they are guilty of "unrighteous dominion."
Snuffer is always, in his mind, in the right.
Snuffer's behavior offers further proof that the charges against him were true—he was in active apostasy, would not respect the reasonable requests of his priesthood leaders. It had nothing to do with them using "dominion"—they had so little dominion that they couldn't even compel Snuffer to come into the room if he chose not to. All they could do was ratify what Snuffer had already done—cut himself off from the Church.
Snuffer and his wife claim to receive revelation about what their leaders should do—but Joseph Smith says that this is impossible.
Snuffer claims that senior Church leadership engineered his excommunication.[7] However, his stake president made it clear that he was acting based upon a spiritual manifestation to him:
When confronted with this claim, the stake president corrected it, but Snuffer sticks to his claims regardless:
Snuffer claims that the stake president was (wrongly) forced by Church leaders, and that he only ratified a decision they had made.
This is a criticism. Snuffer's claim to not criticize is false.
Notes
<ref>
tag; name "the_facts" defined multiple times with different content
FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
We are a volunteer organization. We invite you to give back.
Donate Now