John Dehlin Attempting To Change Bishop's Interviews

[rockpond]

I am sure that his heart is in the right place. It is just that his way of going about it may not be. John also needs to balance his issues with the postives that he sees in the church. If not, he just becomes another person who attempts what he considers to be negatives. Also, I have not met many teenagers who would want their mommy and daddy with them. A much better tactic would be a good talk with the teenager about being alone with an adult and a good discussion about what is not appropriate.

These boards seem to only discuss the negatives (if you can call them that) that Dehlin highlights. I've listened to his podcasts for years and he does balance it with his positive feelings about the church and his work in helping people stay in.

[Yirgacheffe]

Does a bishop abusing his office in worthiness interviews even rise to the level of a probability? I don't see that it does. (See my post above about the routinization of charisma.)

 

I return to my prior comparison to the relationship a family has with a pediatrician. As a routine matter, we trust the pediatrician to be competent and ethical, or we don't engage his services in the first place.

 

I believe faithful Church members similarly regard priesthood leaders.

Do you get to choose your bishop? As I understand it Catholics can choose who ever they want to confess to, do you have the option to choose someone?

[Yirgacheffe]

Does a bishop abusing his office in worthiness interviews even rise to the level of a probability? I don't see that it does. (See my post above about the routinization of charisma.)

 

I return to my prior comparison to the relationship a family has with a pediatrician. As a routine matter, we trust the pediatrician to be competent and ethical, or we don't engage his services in the first place.

 

I believe faithful Church members similarly regard priesthood leaders.

Well I wouldn't trust this guy anywhere near my kids.

http://www.kpho.com/story/24535353/mormon-ex-bishop-accused-of-luring-teen-boy

[why me]

Do you get to choose your bishop? As I understand it Catholics can choose who ever they want to confess to, do you have the option to choose someone?

I do not think that one can choose their bishop since the bishop would know the person directly and he is responsible for the ward that the person belongs to. Catholics can choose their priest and many do but they usually have no choice if the priest is in the booth waiting to receive confessions. However, one can ask for a private confession with the priest of one's choice.

[Yirgacheffe]

No children's doctor should be left alone with a child and I would doubt any children's doctor would request that the parent remain outside. However, when the child is 13 or 14 it may be necessary and I am not sure if such an age would have a children's doctor.  However, with a personal worthiness interview, we are dealing with sin. And I am not sure that the teen would want their parents in the room when sins are confessed. I know that when I was 13, it was between me and the priest and I certainly would not my mom or dad in the confession booth hearing my sins.

Of course a 13 or 14 year old is going to have a pediatrician, they are not just short adults for heavens sake, not all of them have even completed puberty.

[Yirgacheffe]

I do not think that one can choose their bishop since the bishop would know the person directly and he is responsible for the ward that the person belongs to. Catholics can choose their priest and many do but they usually have no choice if the priest is in the booth waiting to receive confessions. However, one can ask for a private confession with the priest of one's choice.

Then the analogy to choosing your pediatrician fails.

[Brian 2.0]

These boards seem to only discuss the negatives (if you can call them that) that Dehlin highlights. I've listened to his podcasts for years and he does balance it with his positive feelings about the church and his work in helping people stay in.

Agreed.

[Brian 2.0]

I do not think that one can choose their bishop since the bishop would know the person directly and he is responsible for the ward that the person belongs to. Catholics can choose their priest and many do but they usually have no choice if the priest is in the booth waiting to receive confessions. However, one can ask for a private confession with the priest of one's choice.

Confession in a booth actually addressees this but I doubt we'll ever see that in a Mormon church.

I actually always thought it'd be kinda cool to confess in a booth. I'm only guessing but I feel I may have confessed more as a youth if it was set up that way.

Edited May 8, 2014 by Brian 2.0

[why me]

Confession in a booth actually addressees this but I doubt we'll ever see that in a Mormon church.

I actually always thought it'd be kinda cool to confess in a booth. I'm only guessing but I feel I may have confessed more as a youth if it was set up that way.

It is not actually that easy for some catholics. Usually the priest knows who is confessing their sin, if the person is local and present in the church. But some confessions are face to face if no booth is handy.

[why me]

I have just listened to john's interview on Radio West about new order Mormons. He mentions the recovery site a couple of times as a place to go to see the pain that Mormonism can cause or the NOM site. But he never mentioned FAIR or this forum. And I do think that this was intentional. Also, toward the last 5 minutes of the interview, john said that whether NOMs and others stay in the church will depend on what the GAs say and don't say. Strange. It sounded more like the lds church is run by humans and not by god. So, for people like him to stay, the GAs will need to make the right decisions.

He also claimed to be an agnostic. If I were interviewed, I would have mentioned FAIR and this forum, plus lds.org. I also would have shifted it from JOseph Smith and also onto the witnesses to the book of Mormon too and their deathbed testimonies. But this is the point: john seems to encourage people in their disbelief and not try to help them to regain faith.

[mormonnewb]

I have just listened to john's interview on Radio West about new order Mormons. He mentions the recovery site a couple of times as a place to go to see the pain that Mormonism can cause or the NOM site. But he never mentioned FAIR or this forum. And I do think that this was intentional. Also, toward the last 5 minutes of the interview, john said that whether NOMs and others stay in the church will depend on what the GAs say and don't say. Strange. It sounded more like the lds church is run by humans and not by god. So, for people like him to stay, the GAs will need to make the right decisions.He also claimed to be an agnostic. If I were interviewed, I would have mentioned FAIR and this forum, plus lds.org. I also would have shifted it from JOseph Smith and also onto the witnesses to the book of Mormon too and their deathbed testimonies. But this is the point: john seems to encourage people in their disbelief and not try to help them to regain faith.

You would have mentioned a forum (this one) that constantly vilifies you -- accusing you of being Satan (at least, three such references in the last three days)? Yeah, right. Or maybe you would have recommended the website that compiled (and subsequently leaked) a 100-page hit piece on you? How many references do church leaders make to ihatemormons.com and thechurchisnottrue.com?

"Those who throw stones shouldn't expect positive recommendations on the radio." -- The Book of Obvious 2:49.

[Storm Rider]

You would have mentioned a forum (this one) that constantly vilifies you -- accusing you of being Satan (at least, three such references in the last three days)? Yeah, right. Or maybe you would have recommended the website that compiled (and subsequently leaked) a 100-page hit piece on you? How many references do church leaders make to ihatemormons.com and thechurchisnottrue.com?

"Those who throw stones shouldn't expect positive recommendations on the radio." -- The Book of Obvious 2:49.

 

Said another way, little johnny only wants to play smack face if the other guy never hits back or is tied up. If it is a level playing field then little johnny runs home to tell his daddy that other kids are being mean to him.

 

Hit piece? Seriously?  And the crap that comes out of his mouth incessantly is loving kindness and happy rainbows of truth and love.

Edited May 8, 2014 by Storm Rider

[Senator]

Said another way, little johnny only wants to play smack face if the other guy never hits back or is tied up. If it is a level playing field then little johnny runs home to tell his daddy that other kids are being mean to him.

 

Hit piece? Seriously?  And the crap that comes out of his mouth incessantly is loving kindness and happy rainbows of truth and love.

 

Be  careful to take note of those other three fingers.

[Calm]

"(and subsequently leaked"

The article on Mormonstories was written first (but then rejected by Bradford even without reading) for the Maxwell Institute and not FairMormon. Also, it was one of Dehlin's fans that leaked the info to Dehlin, nobody at FM. Don't know if it was the same individual or someone else who gave the article to iirc a critic who then began to post sections on an antisite which led to the decison to post the whole paper at that time. FM didn't publish the article either, it was published by the Interpreter by those who had been involved in its creation. It was legally their right to publish it so and they did so up front so I am assuming you are not referring to that as a leak. FM is not the Interpreter though there are a couple of individuals that are members of both.

This board had nothing to do with it save Dehlin attempting to use it as a forum to attack Dan Peterson and others by publishing private emails without permission (though the mods offered to host it once MI rejected it).

It is wise before making accusations to educate yourself as much as possible so you don't unintentionally give a false witness.

http://thestudentreview.org/controversial-paper-critiquing-popular-mormon-podcast-published/

PS: I would love to know where you got the idea that FM "leaked" the document (assuming I have read your accusation correctly).

Edited May 8, 2014 by calmoriah

[rockpond]

I have just listened to john's interview on Radio West about new order Mormons. He mentions the recovery site a couple of times as a place to go to see the pain that Mormonism can cause or the NOM site. But he never mentioned FAIR or this forum. And I do think that this was intentional. Also, toward the last 5 minutes of the interview, john said that whether NOMs and others stay in the church will depend on what the GAs say and don't say. Strange. It sounded more like the lds church is run by humans and not by god. So, for people like him to stay, the GAs will need to make the right decisions.

He also claimed to be an agnostic. If I were interviewed, I would have mentioned FAIR and this forum, plus lds.org. I also would have shifted it from JOseph Smith and also onto the witnesses to the book of Mormon too and their deathbed testimonies. But this is the point: john seems to encourage people in their disbelief and not try to help them to regain faith.

Why would he have mentioned this forum or FAIR in that context?

And aren't the GA's the source of God's word to the church? So wouldn't you agree that what they say will make a difference?

And if Dehlin doesn't believe in the truth claims of the Book of Mormon why would he mention the witnesses?

You really seem to be stretching to find criticisms.

[Calm]

Did Dehlin give anywhere as references to find information out about the Church (rather than seeing members' experiences)?

If not, I agree the context doesn't seem to suggest a need to mention FairMormon. And this board could be an example of a range of belief positions, but it definitely doesn't focus on members' personal experiences, there would be a lot of wading through irrelevant material if that was what was wanted.

I think you have the same problem at the 'recovery' board, but it certainly serves Dehlin's purposes if he wants to emphasize the pain the Church allegedly causes (having read some over there, it seems to me that most issues are family based and families that are not following gospel teachings, but there are some stories of tragedies caused by church leaders that I see as possible, though in most cases very one sided and I would need to hear from the other side to accept it as a valid critique...a standard I would assume for attacks on those who have left the Church as well as while I accept that the vast majority of leaders are well meaning that does not mean they are incapable of doing wrong, even horrible wrong...and i have no doubt there is the (hopefully) rare predator among our leaders, there are the few examples known through the press so that I don't feel the need to document them.

[USU78]

"Those who throw stones shouldn't expect positive recommendations on the radio." -- The Book of Obvious 2:49.

 

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/dramatic+irony

[Brian 2.0]

I have just listened to john's interview on Radio West about new order Mormons. He mentions the recovery site a couple of times as a place to go to see the pain that Mormonism can cause or the NOM site. But he never mentioned FAIR or this forum. And I do think that this was intentional.

If he's pointing people to a place to see the pain Mormonism has caused some people, then why would he point to this forum or FAIR? The only pain I find here is when I step my foot into an evolution thread against my better judgment.

Also, toward the last 5 minutes of the interview, john said that whether NOMs and others stay in the church will depend on what the GAs say and don't say. Strange. It sounded more like the lds church is run by humans and not by god. So, for people like him to stay, the GAs will need to make the right decisions.

That's because a lot of NOMs do believe the church is run by humans and not God, and that humans can run fulfilling and worthwhile organizations if they make the right decisions.

He also claimed to be an agnostic. If I were interviewed, I would have mentioned FAIR and this forum, plus lds.org. I also would have shifted it from JOseph Smith and also onto the witnesses to the book of Mormon too and their deathbed testimonies.

Since I assume you are not agnostic it doesn't surprise me that you would have handled the interview differently.

[USU78]

[T]he pain Mormonism has caused some people

 

 

Are we really back in "Clergy Abuse" territory again?  Is this 1986?  Is JD really Paul Toscano?

Edited May 8, 2014 by USU78

[ERayR]

rockpond, on 07 May 2014 - 9:03 PM, said:

These boards seem to only discuss the negatives (if you can call them that) that Dehlin highlights. I've listened to his podcasts for years and he does balance it with his positive feelings about the church and his work in helping people stay in.

 

 

Agreed.

 

Yep to paraphrase:  I really like the Church if they would only change all those things I don't agree with.

 

Sounds like good solid support to me.

[why me]

You would have mentioned a forum (this one) that constantly vilifies you -- accusing you of being Satan (at least, three such references in the last three days)? Yeah, right. Or maybe you would have recommended the website that compiled (and subsequently leaked) a 100-page hit piece on you? How many references do church leaders make to ihatemormons.com and thechurchisnottrue.com?

"Those who throw stones shouldn't expect positive recommendations on the radio." -- The Book of Obvious 2:49.

My point was simple. If john wishes people to remain mormon, then he would need to mention the sites that may help them to remain mormon. The only site that he mentioned was his own. Plus, he recommended that active members should go to the recovery site and read about all the pain. John admitted that he didn'

t have a testimony of the church. And this would clarify his reasons for not recommending more pro-lds sites.

[ALarson]

If john wishes people to remain mormon, then he would need to mention the sites that may help them to remain mormon.

Did John state that he "wishes people to remain Mormon"?  I didn't listen to the interview and that's why I'm asking.  

 

I know that he claimed he wanted this way back in the beginning of his Mormon Stories venture, but I doubt that's his current goal.  But, maybe he's still claiming this?

[why me]

Why would he have mentioned this forum or FAIR in that context?

And aren't the GA's the source of God's word to the church? So wouldn't you agree that what they say will make a difference?

And if Dehlin doesn't believe in the truth claims of the Book of Mormon why would he mention the witnesses?

 

Well, this is the point. He doesn't actually believe in the church anymore and so for him it has become a church of men. Thus, it is perfectly okay to challenge the bunch of men. The witnesses are a great faith promoter. What gets lost in John's message is that it is not just about Joseph Smith but also about 11 men and one woman who saw the plates  and kept to the testimony of it. That is a big plus for the church and for the book that john doesn't believe in.

[why me]

Did John state that he "wishes people to remain Mormon"?  I didn't listen to the interview and that's why I'm asking.  

 

I know that he claimed he wanted this way back in the beginning of his Mormon Stories venture, but I doubt that's his current goal.  But, maybe he's still claiming this?

I think that he more or less said that it is up to them. I didn't hear anything in the interview that someone could grasp if they wished to be in the church or remain in the church. The last 5 minutes said a lot about his attitude toward the leaders. .

 

http://radiowest.kuer.org/

Edited May 8, 2014 by why me

[Pahoran]

You would have mentioned a forum (this one) that constantly vilifies you -- accusing you of being Satan (at least, three such references in the last three days)? Yeah, right. Or maybe you would have recommended the website that compiled (and subsequently leaked) a 100-page hit piece on you?

 

It wasn't a "hit piece."  That is boilerplate Dehlinite propaganda, and is, as everyone who has actually read the review knows, false.  It was a review of Mister Dehlin's so-called "Mormon Stories" project.

 

And it wasn't "compiled" by any "website."  It was written by an LDS scholar.

 

Nor was it "leaked" by any "website."  It was published on Interpreter.

 

Regards,

Pahoran