The problem is that if the Church is doing that then it really needs to update the handbook to reflect their current views. Note I’m saying this with no knowledge of how the handbook is phrased on such matters – I might be wrong about how it’s crafted. I’m more going by comments above along with the fact I think we’ve all met people with bad experiences with their Bishops. Added into the complexity of course is that even with correlation, training, and these handbooks, it’s not that uncommon for leaders to ignore them.

That said I obviously in hindsight wish the Church got the revelation on priesthood in 1968 rather than 1978. While only 10 – 15 years after when most other churches liberalized on these matters I think it affected how the Church gets perceived. On the other hand I’m glad I’m not in a position to make such decisions and I definitely don’t have the big picture view the Lord has.

What I worry about honestly is that the apostles have so much to do just handling the administrative side of the church that they don’t have as much time to worry about such matters. That is this may reflect being swamped by practical administration matters which means such big pictures issues don’t get the attention they deserve until controversy flares up. Now I’m not sure that’s true. At least some of the brethren seem to be very aware of what’s going on socially. (Elder Oaks in particular) So I’m not sure I want to say they *are* overloaded with work. However I wouldn’t be at all surprised to find they are. This in turn would then tie in with scaling issues. Of course the usual solution to such matters is to adopt more of the structures of the corporate world – the very thing many want to get away from.

So like you I don’t have any answers and feel myself glad I don’t have to supply answers. I am confident the brethren are looking at the issue and seeking the spirit. As I think these are places change is overdue.

What I think sometimes happens is people confuse issues of healing/sanctifying from issues of retribution and punishment. They’re focused on making sure the appropriate level of punishment is made in acts regardless of consequences. While I can understand this drive (which frankly is throughout our western culture) it’s unfortunate to say the least when it gets the upper hand.

My sense, perhaps incorrect, is that the brethren of this era were making a drive to move the focus away from punishment concerns. I completely agree with you that it doesn’t sound compassionate. However I suspect in part that’s because the cultural views of America in the 1960’s were very incompassionate to say the least. It’s a sign of how far we’ve come as a culture that we worry about this. But clearly if the handbook hasn’t been significantly updated since then, it needs some updating. I suspect most bishops will follow the spirit and compassion. However we have the handbook because not all do that.

I, unfortunately, had to deal with the reality of this a number of years after the two letters referred to were sent out. A young sister was raped by a relative. The Bishop had asked that it not be reported to authorities because it “would ruin the guys life.” The solution: he arranged for both the brother and sister receive psychological help from the the Church

The rapist stopped going after one session. as he said he did not need it. The sister, regretabbly, went for a month or two. She started to develop problems, the most obvious ones being low grades, inexplainable crying jags, and refusing to stay at home. She finally opened up to a Relief Society President about what the difficulty was. The supposed Shrink had virtually insisted she write a letter to her rapist asking forgiveness for doing whatever she supposedly did to entice him to assault her and for not taking her responsibility for the rape. Devastating.

I only got involved because the Relief Society President knew that through my job in the School District I might be able to help her obtain some good help. I was able to get her a well qualified rape therapist through the County. Part of her new therapy, pardon the expression, was “to get the hell out of Dodge.” She was able to move in with a relative in a nearby city, attend a new ward, c there and take the community college bus to finish her senior year at our school. She is now happily married living 600 miles away in Utah,

My challenge was to help survivors realize they were not responsible for being raped and to help perpetrators recognize that they were. This work required respectful, open dialogue with youth. I observed some rapists eventually recognize that they had inflicted horrific suffering on someone who did not deserve nor want to be abused. I also saw rape victims reclaim their power when they realized that they did not deserve to be raped.

Rape survivors deserve and need the support of those they trust—whether it is family members, university officials, or clergymen—to help them recover. Often they need the help of skilled mental health professionals along with caring friends and family members. Recovery for rape survivors is often difficult and takes time, but it is possible.

There may be some very few Latter-day Saint men who rape, but that is individuals making bad decisions. No act of rape can be blamed on any of the doctrines, teachings, or principles of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. To the degree any rape committed by a Latter-day Saint is the product of the rapist’s culture, it would have to be the rapist’s larger national or ethnic culture — even then, blaming culture is a stretch. Blame the individual, not his or her culture. Certainly, don’t blame the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.