why me wrote:Wasn't simon a bishop at one time? Wasn't he a high priest? And did he not have sex with a woman? If so, its bye bye!!
I just rechecked, and he was inactive for seven years. Now I know you're not very familiar with these processes, particularly since I understand you're not active, or may not have been active for a long time, and may not have been a bishop.
Bishops do not go out "hunting" for inactive members who may be breaking the Church's standards, unless it comes to their attention that they're bringing the Church into public disrepute, writing against the Church, etc. Southerton was excommunicated for adultery, not apostasy.
Here is part of his interview
with David Rutledge:
Simon Southerton: Well that’s what I’m quite confused about. Having been a bishop, it’s very, very, unusual for the church to pursue somebody who hasn’t been to church for seven years. If I did that as a bishop, I would spend all of my time holding Disciplinary Councils and disciplining people who aren’t attending, and 60% of the church aren’t attending. And so that’s why it leads me to suspect that they’re doing this for other reasons. There are other motives behind this, and clearly the obvious one would be apostasy. And on the charge of apostasy, I’m afraid I’d have to say I’m quite guilty. But I guess I’m being a bit of a thorn in the side to them at the moment. I don’t have any gripes with the local ears in Canberra, they’re wonderful people. It’s just unfortunate when they get caught up in the wheels of the church that it becomes a little bit more impersonal and my gripe is not with them, it’s principally with the church and the beliefs that I believe need to be changed.
David Rutledge: But why do you think the church wouldn’t be moving on the grounds of apostasy, given that they’d obviously be upset about what you’ve written, both in your book and the postings you’ve made on websites.
Simon Southerton: Certainly they’re very concerned about the sorts of things that I’m writing, but there seems to be a trend occurring, starting up in the last few years, that people who do write books and subsequently invited to Disciplinary Councils, quite often the Council is either called off, or there’s really a non-result. And perhaps the church is now trying to avoid holding Councils on the charge of apostasy, because some of the information that is now available, they would probably prefer those 16 men who sit on the council, they probably prefer them not to hear it because it is so challenging to their faith.
So it wasn't "bye, bye" because of the adultery charge, it was "bye, bye" because you're publicly criticising and questioning Mormon doctrine.