rongo Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 I agree rongo.John Dehlin's future career rests on him remaining an active member of the church. He plans on counseling those Mormons going through their own faith crisis and having Bishops and Stake Presidents recommend him and his work shops to help these members. How many would go to him if he'd been ex'd? He and his wife are already holding workshops weekly from what I understand and plan on doing this together as a career. He also plans on writing books and the same goes for members buying and reading his book if he's been ex'd.Ain't gonna happen (the Brother and Sister Dehlin self-help seminars being endorsed and recommended by priesthood leaders). He's being watched closely by the Brethren. Remember his hissy fit over the Greg Smith article, where he supposedly contacted a General Authority and got it quashed? That spectacle, and the Smith paper, have the Brethren's attention, and there are lots of Dehlin statements and accusations available that would be grounds for considering formal discipline due to apostasy.I'm curious... What do you think would or could have been the grounds for church discipline? I've listened to quite a few podcasts and don't feel like I ever heard him teach against the church. He certainly asked controversial questions but that doesn't seem like grounds for church discipline.See above. Not simply "asking controversial questions," but his overt attempts to be a movement leader and statements he made while active in this. Then there are the moral issues that only he and his priesthood leaders know about for sure (assuming full confession has already happened and other shoes won't drop).If he's completely sincere and contrite, he will need to expect to be treated with suspicion at first, like Saul of Tarsus or Alma the Younger/sons of Mosiah and patiently wait for the "witness of results" to gradually change people's dispositions towards him. In my view, this is only possible if he completely removes himself from the public fray and resists the temptation to continue to be an attention-getter. Time will tell.
rockpond Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 Ain't gonna happen (the Brother and Sister Dehlin self-help seminars being endorsed and recommended by priesthood leaders). He's being watched closely by the Brethren. Remember his hissy fit over the Greg Smith article, where he supposedly contacted a General Authority and got it quashed? That spectacle, and the Smith paper, have the Brethren's attention, and there are lots of Dehlin statements and accusations available that would be grounds for considering formal discipline due to apostasy.See above. Not simply "asking controversial questions," but his overt attempts to be a movement leader and statements he made while active in this. Then there are the moral issues that only he and his priesthood leaders know about for sure (assuming full confession has already happened and other shoes won't drop).If he's completely sincere and contrite, he will need to expect to be treated with suspicion at first, like Saul of Tarsus or Alma the Younger/sons of Mosiah and patiently wait for the "witness of results" to gradually change people's dispositions towards him. In my view, this is only possible if he completely removes himself from the public fray and resists the temptation to continue to be an attention-getter. Time will tell.I agree that he probably has gotten the Brethren's attention. But I think it is important to remember that his podcasts and communities also seem to have helped a great number of people successfully get through faith crises and stay in the church as faithful members rather than leaving.In my opinion, the Brethren need to also recognize his positive contributions.
ERayR Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 I agree rongo.John Dehlin's future career rests on him remaining an active member of the church. He plans on counseling those Mormons going through their own faith crisis and having Bishops and Stake Presidents recommend him and his work shops to help these members. How many would go to him if he'd been ex'd? He and his wife are already holding workshops weekly from what I understand and plan on doing this together as a career. He also plans on writing books and the same goes for members buying and reading his book if he's been ex'd.An old ranchers maxim from my youth seems to fit her. He who continues to straddle the barb wire fence ends up with a sore crotch. 1
rockpond Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 you MUST tell me more about thisYou'll have to listen for yourself... here's the link. I think it's one of Dehlin's best podcasts.
Tacenda Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) From what I've heard (and even Dehlin said he was thinking of leaving his wife and family), it's over moral issues. I think he was being drawn to some of the activities happening after the conferences (he has stated drinking, drugs, wife swapping, enjoying watching wives kiss). He at least had one person spend the night in his home that he later regretted (again he stated this too). I'm not saying he had participated or if he did, to what extent.I'm sure he's also being held accountable for some of his public podcasts and statements regarding his feelings towards past doctrines, church history and so on. I think if he'd been ex'd it would have been for apostasy.I can't believe you're inferring he had an affair. I read between the lines. He mentioned someone staying there and the questionable things they said around his children that made him think that he shouldn't let strangers stay at his house. Edited January 30, 2013 by Tacenda 2
Duncan Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 You'll have to listen for yourself... here's the link. I think it's one of Dehlin's best podcasts.oopsa daisy! I was reffering to the education week shenanigans! thanks though!
rongo Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) I can't believe you're inferring he had an affair. I read between the lines. He mentioned someone staying there and the questionable things they said around his children that made him think that he shouldn't let strangers stay at his house.That isn't the only incident, Tacenda. That he has said he meets weekly with his bishop is telling.If he's willing to publicly say that he regrets getting excited watching two women kiss at a MS meeting, there's a lot more iceberg below the surface than what he is sharing. If he's truly contrite and penitent, he is telling everything to his priesthood leaders. In my experience, people (women, too) often don't confess everything upfront. They do when they are very sorry and willing to do anything to make things right.Why in the world he would share as much detail as he has about this is beyond me. In my experience, people who are truly sorry do not want to talk or dwell on their transgressions, which they regard with abhorrence. Yes ---- I'm sure he says that he owes a public explanation to his public and followers, but if he truly were sorry and trying to repair the damage, he would want to immediately get out of the limelight and keep private things private. To me, it seems to indicate that he sees even this "back to TBM tour" as an opportunity to be talked and thought about by people. Edited January 30, 2013 by rongo
rockpond Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 Since it is relevant to our discussion, I thought I'd share what Dehlin posted to Facebook this morning. Hope this isn't a violation of privacy but it IS on Facebook...Wow. I've lost a ton of friends/supporters since doing my most recent podcast interview. Not asking for pity here -- at all. I'm/we're doing ok -- and I'm at peace with how things unfold. As Margi likes to say, "Life is wise." But it does make me wonder....how could I have managed Mormon Stories in a way where people wouldn't have become so connected to my own personal path/decisions, such that they wouldn't have felt so angry if I (personally) chose a path that they didn't end up choosing for themselves? If I had managed things more effectively, I have to wonder if listeners would have been willing to continue supporting the podcast independent of my own, personal decisions. As it is, I seem to have alienated believers a year or two ago when I shifted towards disbelief, and now I seem to have alienated disbelievers by shifting back towards church activity. Supporters are dropping like flies.I think the answer is clear -- Too much "I/me/ego" in how I have managed the podcast.I brought this on myself. Time to re-think. No need to respond. Just venting/processing.....(and please know that I'm aware that this post in and of itself is egoic.....but I consider many of you as friends....so I welcome your feedback as I consider if/how to move forward with Mormon Stories...or if it's time to let it go).
juliann Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 That isn't the only incident, Tacenda. That he has said he meets weekly with his bishop is telling.If he's willing to publicly say that he regrets getting excited watching two women kiss at a MS meeting, there's a lot more iceberg below the surface than what he is sharing.Where did he say that? I never listen to podcasts and have admittedly only seen summaries of parts of this one but nothing of what I have seen does anything than mention he saw this. His words are fair game, as are anyone's, but adding defamatory speculation is not. 2
ALarson Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 I can't believe you're inferring he had an affair. I read between the lines. He mentioned someone staying there and the questionable things they said around his children that made him think that he shouldn't let strangers stay at his house.Tacenda,I'm sorry you thought I was inferring this! When I re-read my post though I can see exactly what you mean. I was just grouping everything together that John had listed. If you read my entire post, you'll see that I say I don't know if he was a participant in any of those activities listed (and I don't really care to know). That is between him and his priesthood leaders.I also added that I feel if he was ever ex'd it would be for apostasy (not immorality). I guess I need to work on expressing myself better!
ALarson Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 Where did he say that? I never listen to podcasts and have admittedly only seen summaries of parts of this one but nothing of what I have seen does anything than mention he saw this. His words are fair game, as are anyone's, but adding defamatory speculation is not.The "wives kissing" statement is directly from John Dehlin himself.
why me Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 I'm curious... What do you think would or could have been the grounds for church discipline? I've listened to quite a few podcasts and don't feel like I ever heard him teach against the church. He certainly asked controversial questions but that doesn't seem like grounds for church discipline.There were no grounds for church discipline. But if we go back a few months, it did seem that MormonStories was counter productive and not very faith promoting.
juliann Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 The "wives kissing" statement is directly from John Dehlin himself.If you read enough to know that it was about that you read enough to know this was also included "he regrets getting excited watching". Stop it. 4
why me Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) Since it is relevant to our discussion, I thought I'd share what Dehlin posted to Facebook this morning. Hope this isn't a violation of privacy but it IS on Facebook...John was his own worst enemy. MormonStories would have been successful if it would have remained faith promoting by focusing on controversial issues as it did in the beginning. But when he ventured into disbelief and picked up a host of new' friends' he went the wrong way with his podcasts. And we knew this sad fact on MDD. From my own experience, internet exmormons are loyal to those who share their belief system. But not so loyal when disbelief turns into belief. And john has now discovered this. In general, people do not like their 'faith' shaken and when one is an internet exmormon, one does not like to contemplate if one made the right decision by leaving the church and when a friend returns, the effect can be problematic.John had quite an exmo following which tells us that his podcasts ventured into being against the lds church somewhere along the line. Edited January 30, 2013 by why me
Tacenda Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 Tacenda,I'm sorry you thought I was inferring this! When I re-read my post though I can see exactly what you mean. I was just grouping everything together that John had listed.If you read my entire post, you'll see that I say I don't know if he was a participant in any of those activities listed (and I don't really care to know). That is between him and his priesthood leaders.I also added that I feel if he was ever ex'd it would be for apostasy (not immorality).I guess I need to work on expressing myself better!No problem, I'm don't express myself well either. And I don't believe he's cheated in any respect. The only reason he may be visiting his stake president is to work out his activity on the fringe and publicly stating his unbelief, but I've been wrong before, hopefully I'm not. I guess I'm not willing to brand him guilty of anything until there are facts to back it up. I also have to disagree with the notion of him speaking publicly about any wrongdoing, as being the wrong way to handle things. I'm pretty open when I make mistakes and it's my way of coming clean about something. Some people do that and don't keep it to themselves. He is a pyschologist too, they talk it out since that to them is the healthy way.
rockpond Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 John had quite an exmo following which tells us that his podcasts ventured into being against the lds church somewhere along the line.I disagree with that conclusion. I've listened to a significant number of the MS podcasts spanning multiple years. And while I admit that the podcasts support questioning, I don't think they can be characterized as "being against the LDS Church". Unless, it is against the church to interview someone who is against the church. 2
Hestia Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 Let's not speculate or spread rumors, particularly about moral behavior.
Tacenda Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 Not to derail, but I'd like to make a comparison if I may. Things are a changin' out in the bloggersphere and the media. I posted awhile back about Shawn McCraney being fired and his show being cancelled, it was due to him coming out against the way the Christian sects were conducting church. He was disappointed that they weren't really teaching the word anymore, it was all a show. He found this out when he and his family visited several churches during the month of December. Then when he said these things out on the air, all heck broke lose. Apparently the non LDS Christians were willing to accept him only when he was downing the LDS church but when he turned the table on them they let him have it! Much like what John Dehlin is going through. With his newfound desire to once again believe or stay active, this has upset the ex-mormons or people on the fringe. It seems people are seeing that the LDS aren't the people some make them out to be. This whole thing reminds me of the movie "Forrest Gump". Where all the people start running with him across country and he's put on the news and he gained a huge following, and suddenly he stops out in the middle of nowhere and turns back and starts walking home, leaving them wondering what to do. I guess alot of us like to be led, or we tend to get on the bandwagon and believe what we're told or do what everyone else is at the moment. It can happen to the best of us.
Tacenda Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 The last segment of John's podcast describes how some marriages end up in divorce when people have identity crisis along with faith crisis. The saddest divorce I've seen is the McLays (John & Brook). They seemed very happy on this podcast but something changed along the way and they are now divorced. You have to wonder if it would have been so much better if they had stuck it out, staying in the church, but instead they left it rather quickly. I just wonder how that affected their marriage.
rockpond Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 Yeah, I used to live in the same stake as the McLays. John was on the high council. I was very sad to hear of their divorce.To me, it seemed that they felt forced to make a very quick and permanent decision regarding the church because he was the institute director at the time of this faith crisis. Knowing what I know about them (which isn't a lot) it feels like they could have worked through their faith questions and been a good influence for others.That said, there could have been reasons (outside of religion) that led to their divorce. I'm not trying to judge them. I just tend to feel sad about any divorce.
cliodude Posted January 31, 2013 Posted January 31, 2013 Dehlin, who I admire a great deal, just proves the great lie that one can stay in the fold with contrarian views. One cannot. Not that some haven't but they are surely few and far between. Seems to me you're either in or out. My advice, not that's being asked for, is either go all in or get out.
Tacenda Posted January 31, 2013 Posted January 31, 2013 (edited) Dehlin, who I admire a great deal, just proves the great lie that one can stay in the fold with contrarian views. One cannot. Not that some haven't but they are surely few and far between. Seems to me you're either in or out. My advice, not that's being asked for, is either go all in or get out.Actually, if you look at it closely, he is proof one can STAY IN and still hold an almost agnostic view. He is the poster boy for this! Edited January 31, 2013 by Tacenda
omni Posted January 31, 2013 Posted January 31, 2013 Dehlin, who I admire a great deal, just proves the great lie that one can stay in the fold with contrarian views. One cannot. Not that some haven't but they are surely few and far between. Seems to me you're either in or out. My advice, not that's being asked for, is either go all in or get out.I think you'd be surprised how many manage to stay in the fold with contrarian views and make it work. I'd be willing to bet there's more in your own ward than you realize, some may even be serving in leadership callings. 4
Calm Posted January 31, 2013 Posted January 31, 2013 I think you'd be surprised how many manage to stay in the fold with contrarian views and make it work. I'd be willing to bet there's more in your own ward than you realize, some may even be serving in leadership callings.Interesting how different people can read the same thing...I assumed this was from an exmormon POV encouraging people to get out.
Recommended Posts