Another Clarification From John Dehlin.

[why me]

I kind of feel sorry for John, With his chapters and conferences, he got over his head. He should have just done the podcast and kept the Mormon Stories brand neat and simple.

http://mormonstories.org/a-clarification-about-the-mormon-stories-regional-communities-and-conferences/comment-page-1/#comment-485034

Edited February 12, 2013 by why me

[Calm]

What is his apology for?

[why me]

What is his apology for?

I am getting old, I forgot the link...it has been corrected.

[ozpoof]

What is his apology for?

Race baiting and poster removed from thread.

[Brian 2.0]

I kind of feel sorry for John, With his chapters and conferences, he got over his head. He should have just done the podcast and kept the Mormon Stories brand neat and simple.

It's just the inevitable result of becoming a bigger organization. Humans comprise communities and get enough humans together and bad things can happen. A lot of good happened with these conferences and groups.... a lot... but some bad happened as well and he just wasn't comfortable with that.

I guarantee that the COB get tons of letters saying things similar to the negative feedback John got in regards to the conferences. It's tough to run a big organization.

But I don't think his attempt to enlarge it should be considered necessarily a bad move. Aren't you glad JS didn't keep the church "neat and simple" in the Peter Whitmer home after starting it up?

[ALarson]

John Dehlin is obviously a good man and he's trying to clarify some things he said that hurt people he cares about. I get that.

I sincerely wish that he'd just withdraw from his public forum now and do what he feels is right for him and his family. Return to church or stay out of the church, John, but do it privately. That way you won't hurt the people you care about on both sides of this issue.

[Brian 2.0]

What is his apology for?

And so people that didn't read his apology know... he's not apologizing for having conferences and groups... he apologizing that his remarks in his podcast regarding the conferences and groups made it seem like they were full of sin and debauchery... he was clarifying that they were largely great meaningful and somewhat sacred.

[Darren10]

From Dehlin's apology:

While I want to (again) very strongly emphasize that my experiences with these communities and conferences were overwhelmingly positive and (dare I say) wholesome, throughout these interactions I became aware of (in some instances directly, and in some instances indirectly) a small degree of behaviors/activities that were very disturbing to me at the time. To be specific, these behaviors included alcohol and drug use, adultery, and some experimentation with open marriages.

What was difficult/problematic for me about these behaviors had NOTHING to do with my personal judgments of them, nor of the people involved in them. These are fine, good, loving, moral people, and I do not judge them in any way. To be honest, my own eye is so full of beams that I have literally no room to judge others.

Huh???

[ALarson]

Darren,

He's not referring to the same people (between your two bolded highlights). He states that a few (a "small degree") were involved in drugs, drinking, etc., but then clarifies that the majority of those at the activities were "fine, good, loving, moral people". Two separate, different quotes.

I think he's just confusing people more and should just quit making public statements. Go home John and take care of yourself and your family.

[Darren10]

Here's John Dehlin's reasoning for disbanning OSF conferences:

What was difficult for me was the following:

• I could not help but feel both saddened and at least partly responsible (as the leader of Mormon Stories and the OSF) as I watched some marriages dissolve in association with these conferences and communities. To put it simply, it broke my heart. Even though I know (in my logical brain) that divorce happens everywhere — when a spouse comes up to you and says, “My spouse met their lover at a Mormon Stories conference, and that was the beginning of the end of our marriage — so thanks a lot.” or “My spouse started drinking heavily once he started hanging around folks from the Mormon Stories community”….even though this was super rare for me…..it had an impact on me nonetheless. It felt awful.
  
• Even though these behaviors were relatively infrequent, I became fearful that Mormon Stories would become associated with some of these behaviors (since in life sometimes perception and/or reputation becomes reality — fair or not) — and the last thing I wanted to do was spoil the mission and impact of Mormon Stories (which is to build empathy for the plight of intellectuals, feminists, LGBT individuals and disaffected members from within the believing LDS community), and to SAVE families.
  
• Frankly, I worried that some of these behaviors would lead to rumors that would only confirm the stereotypes I was trying to combat.
  
• Many on the OSF board (myself included) became concerned that the conferences and communities would open the OSF up to potential law suits.
  
• It was my perception that a number of these communities (especially on Facebook) started to gain the reputation (fair or not) as being post-Mormon communities, wherein believers sometimes felt unwelcome or even mocked. As many of you know (again), our goal from the beginning has been to engage in projects wherein believers and non-believers both feel comfortable — and I did not feel like it would be good for Mormon Stories to be perceived as an organization that sponsored groups that were perceived to be hostile to belief.
  

Overall that's good reasoning and franly I'm glad Dehlin nipped the potential problems in the bud. But now I want to nit pick:

Even though these behaviors were relatively infrequent, I became fearful that Mormon Stories would become associated with some of these behaviors (since in life sometimes perception and/or reputation becomes reality — fair or not) — and the last thing I wanted to do was spoil the mission and impact of Mormon Stories (which is to build empathy for the plight of intellectuals, feminists, LGBT individuals and disaffected members from within the believing LDS community), and to SAVE families.

First off, I'd like to place "intellectuals" in a separate category. John Dehlin, it seems, bashes LDS intellectuals regularly and has even stated to, well, tattle, on them to certain General Authority friends of his. So why would he be so sensative to LDS members who are intellects but not apologtic for the LDS Church? I don't get it.

As for the plight of the, "feminists, LGBT individuals and disaffected members from within the believing LDS community", save them from what plight? A good friend of ours in our ward, very active in the church, is divorced after his wife left him for another man and then left that man for another woman. THis ex wife came to a scout ceremony in our chapel building with her current partner and there was nothing but open arms for them. What, exactly, would be their plight? Does Dehlin expect us to throw Book of Mormons at them when they come to the church building? Does he expect us to point our fingers at them and reprimand them to repentence? Or was our behavior not mainstream and in precise accordance to LDS Church standards and teachings?

It was my perception that a number of these communities (especially on Facebook) started to gain the reputation (fair or not) as being post-Mormon communities, wherein believers sometimes felt unwelcome or even mocked. As many of you know (again), our goal from the beginning has been to engage in projects wherein believers and non-believers both feel comfortable — and I did not feel like it would be good for Mormon Stories to be perceived as an organization that sponsored groups that were perceived to be hostile to belief.

Perhaps that is one of Dehlin's downfalls. By catering to all and trying to make all feel comfortable, he's going to, perhaps inevitably, cause all to feel uncomfortable. It happens in politics all the time so why not under Dehlin's umbrella?

Edited February 13, 2013 by Darren10

[Darren10]

Darren,

He's not referring to the same people (between your two bolded highlights). He states that a few (a "small degree") were involved in drugs, drinking, etc., but then clarifies that the majority of those at the activities were "fine, good, loving, moral people". Two separate, different quotes.

I think he's just confusing people more and should just quit making public statements. Go home John and take care of yourself and your family.

If he's not referring to the immoral people why would he emphasize the fact that he's not making judgements against them?

Edited February 12, 2013 by Darren10

[rpn]

His original podcast was very thorough at separating the some sinning from the rest of the disaffection having nothing to do with sinning. He was also careful to affirm that most did not. His old friends/new critics simply refused to hear it the way he said it. And there is nothing he can do about that.

[Darren10]

ALarson;

Let me requote my second quote in my #9 post and add another bold mark:

What was difficult/problematic for me about these behaviors had NOTHING to do with my personal judgments of them, nor of the people involved in them. These are fine, good, loving, moral people, and I do not judge them in any way. To be honest, my own eye is so full of beams that I have literally no room to judge others.

Edited February 12, 2013 by Darren10

[Darren10]

His original podcast was very thorough at separating the some sinning from the rest of the disaffection having nothing to do with sinning. He was also careful to affirm that most did not. His old friends/new critics simply refused to hear it the way he said it. And there is nothing he can do about that.

Perhaps because he tried to please them all, no?

And there is something he can do about that: take ALarson's advice and get out fo the public eye. He should focus on his own rigteousness and that of his family's.

Edited February 13, 2013 by Darren10

[Darren10]

Here's the final statement Dehlin made:

It has been my position for 8 years (since starting Mormon Stories) that these beautiful, moral, and thoughtful people deserve love, respect and support, and they are certainly not getting it at present in their wards and stakes (for the most part…my ward/stake excluded).

My ward/stake excluded as well.

So, whose wards and stakes would be excluded from Dehlin's characterization of them being cold hearted and uncaring for gays and lesbians, intellectuals and feminists?

Edited February 12, 2013 by Darren10

[why me]

It's just the inevitable result of becoming a bigger organization. Humans comprise communities and get enough humans together and bad things can happen. A lot of good happened with these conferences and groups.... a lot... but some bad happened as well and he just wasn't comfortable with that.

An organization of people who are dissatisfied with another organization is an organization difficult to control. Also, as the organization spreads, more control is needed over the members and who is let in. But in the case of MormonStories, it would be difficult to deny membership or boot out people. An organization like MS needed to be united by likeminded goals and beliefs. When this began to unravel, John could not take it.

[why me]

I think he's just confusing people more and should just quit making public statements. Go home John and take care of yourself and your family.

Good advice. Time to take a break from podcasts and other people's lives and concentrate on family.

But it seems that he is still going strong with the podcasts. I think that the problem will come when the chapters and conferences that can still exist and take place are at odds with his podcasts and goals. Same name (Mormonstories)..different problem.