ksfisher Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 I really think that our efforts to discredit Dehlin are working far more in his favor than our own. The disciplinary council was not convened to "discredit" Dehlin. Disciplinary councils in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are convened to accomplish three purposed. Those are: 1) To save the soul of the transgressor2) To protect the innocent3) To protect the purity and good name of the church How to accomplish these three points is what Dehlin's stake presidency and the high council are trying to decide, not how to discredit him. 3
Tacenda Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 And even more than the sheer numbers of viewers is the narrative. While I would guess that his excommunication will not solely rest on his support of SSM and OW, that's the impression that a viewer reach from the interview. And the best part was the comparison of other faiths to our own and the suggestion that we need to "grow up."How does that add to our "restoration of the original church" narrative? And the worst part is that Dehlin's complaints are not invalid. The modern Catholic Church doesn't try to strip membership from its rank and file members over issues of heresy. In fact, they're still trying to live down some of their more strident efforts at enforcing orthodoxy from more than a 1,000 years ago. And they didn't even have to contend with Twitter.I really think that our efforts to discredit Dehlin are working far more in his favor than our own.Can you name someone like Dehlin in the Catholic church, or any other religion as outspoken as Dehlin or who has the following he has with podcasts etc? A current individual?
mormonnewb Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 Can you name someone like Dehlin in the Catholic church, or any other religion as outspoken as Dehlin or who has the following he has with podcasts etc? A current individual? Good question. I couldn't name any off the top of my head either so I looked it up. Here are some of the ones I found: Rev. Andrew Greeley Here's how the LA Times described him in his obituary:"Maverick priest Andrew M. Greeley was a noted sociologist, prolific writer and vocal critic of the Roman Catholic Church's policies on issues such as birth control, divorce and sexual abuse."http://articles.latimes.com/2013/may/31/local/la-me-andrew-greeley-20130531 Due to being so outspoken, he appears to have been denied his own parish, but he wasn't excommunicated. Cardinal Raymond Burke Burke was the highest ranking American catholic official, but was recently demoted for his outspoken criticism against Pope Francis (once again, demoted but not excommunicated). http://www.breakingnews.com/item/2014/11/08/cardinal-raymond-burke-an-outspoken-critic-of-pop/ Carlos Celdran The 42-year-old tour guide and performance artist is one of the most influential detractors of the Catholic Church in the Philippines. He has blamed the Church for not being in touch with the people, for interfering in government affairs and for not doing enough on social issues that they should care about. Celdran is even facing possible jail time after being convicted of "offending religious feelings" for protesting inside the Manila Cathedral during a meeting of religious groups in September 2010. "I'm a terrible Catholic, but I'm still Catholic," he added. http://www.dpa-international.com/news/asia/profilecarlos-celdran-flamboyant-critic-of-the-catholic-churchby-girlie-linao-dpa-a-43883216.html And that's only the first dozen of 600,000 hits for the term "outspoken Catholic critic." So yes, it appears that the Catholics have more than their fair share of John Dehlins.
Hamba Tuhan Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 (edited) Can you name someone like Dehlin in the Catholic church, or any other religion as outspoken as Dehlin or who has the following he has with podcasts etc? A current individual? http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=14890: A radical Catholic priest in London has revealed that he is legally married to his homosexual lover and has presided over many other same-sex unions. In his new book If it Wasn't Love: Sex, Death and God, Father Bernard Lynch writes at length about his advocacy for gay rights and his belief that the Church oppresses homosexuals. He has told reporters that he has been expelled from his religious order, the Society of African Missions, and anticipates further disciplinary action against him. Father Lynch, a native of Ireland who now operates a counseling service in London, has been a harsh critic of the Catholic Church for years. In 2010 he joined the notorious atheist Richard Dawkins in a “Protest the Pope” rally voicing opposition to the visit to Britain by Pope Benedict XVI. Edited February 10, 2015 by Hamba Tuhan
Tacenda Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 Good question. I couldn't name any off the top of my head either so I looked it up. Here are some of the ones I found:Rev. Andrew GreeleyHere's how the LA Times described him in his obituary:"Maverick priest Andrew M. Greeley was a noted sociologist, prolific writer and vocal critic of the Roman Catholic Church's policies on issues such as birth control, divorce and sexual abuse."http://articles.latimes.com/2013/may/31/local/la-me-andrew-greeley-20130531Due to being so outspoken, he appears to have been denied his own parish, but he wasn't excommunicated.Cardinal Raymond BurkeBurke was the highest ranking American catholic official, but was recently demoted for his outspoken criticism against Pope Francis (once again, demoted but not excommunicated).http://www.breakingnews.com/item/2014/11/08/cardinal-raymond-burke-an-outspoken-critic-of-pop/Carlos CeldranThe 42-year-old tour guide and performance artist is one of the most influential detractors of the Catholic Church in the Philippines.He has blamed the Church for not being in touch with the people, for interfering in government affairs and for not doing enough on social issues that they should care about.Celdran is even facing possible jail time after being convicted of "offending religious feelings" for protesting inside the Manila Cathedral during a meeting of religious groups in September 2010."I'm a terrible Catholic, but I'm still Catholic," he added.http://www.dpa-international.com/news/asia/profilecarlos-celdran-flamboyant-critic-of-the-catholic-churchby-girlie-linao-dpa-a-43883216.htmlAnd that's only the first dozen of 600,000 hits for the term "outspoken Catholic critic." So yes, it appears that the Catholics have more than their fair share of John Dehlins.I think that statement about being a bad Catholic, but still a Catholic, could be Dehlin. He's often mentioned a similar sentiment.
teddyaware Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 And even more than the sheer numbers of viewers is the narrative. While I would guess that his excommunication will not solely rest on his support of SSM and OW, that's the impression that a viewer reach from the interview. And the best part was the comparison of other faiths to our own and the suggestion that we need to "grow up." How does that add to our "restoration of the original church" narrative? And the worst part is that Dehlin's complaints are not invalid. The modern Catholic Church doesn't try to strip membership from its rank and file members over issues of heresy. In fact, they're still trying to live down some of their more strident efforts at enforcing orthodoxy from more than a 1,000 years ago. And they didn't even have to contend with Twitter. I really think that our efforts to discredit Dehlin are working far more in his favor than our own. How much stock should an active, testimony-bearing member of the LDS Church put in the criticisms of a man who's left the Church and now says he's on "team apostate?"
Hamba Tuhan Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 I really think that our efforts to discredit Dehlin are working far more in his favor than our own. I've lost track of how many times someone in this forum has pointed out to you over just the past few weeks that the point of Church discipline is not to discredit anyone. It's clearly pointless to keep making factual statements that you simply choose to ignore in favour of your preferred, albeit fanciful, narrative, so maybe another tack: As a fulltime missionary I served in a district with a senior missionary couple whose previous mission had been at a Church historical site. They recounted how a committed local Evangelical preacher had spent his retirement days sitting in a lawn chair across from the entry to the visitors centre, handing out photocopies of his personal 'Don't believe the missionaries' lies' handout. This couple told me how one day in the visitors centre, they and the other missionaries all noticed how 'flat' the visits felt. Guests were polite but uninterested and seemed to lack the questions that the missionaries were used to. No one wanted to take a copy of the Book of Mormon. When this couple left to go to lunch, they noted that the critic was missing from his perch. The next day, he was still missing, and the visitors who dropped in were still unengaged. On the third day, the interest of the visitors was back up again, and the missionaries were able to give away a good number of Book of Mormons and get addresses for follow-up visits. When this missionary couple left for lunch, the critic was back in his lawn chair, so the missionaries stopped to ask him if he'd been sick. No, he said, he'd just run out of money to photocopy his handout, so he'd waited for more donations to come his way. The missionary couple said that if that ever happened again, he was more than welcome to run off some handouts using the visitors centre's photocopier since he was an integral part of the operation of the site. 3
Tacenda Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=14890:Wow, you and Mormonnewb found these so quickly, I guess John is insignificant compared to the thousands of Catholics who come out against their church. Makes me wonder why John gets so much media attention.
Hamba Tuhan Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 Makes me wonder why John gets so much media attention. Perhaps you've noted that he makes frequent press releases and contacts media outlets offering interviews??? 2
mormonnewb Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 How much stock should an active, testimony-bearing member of the LDS Church put in the criticisms of a man who's left the Church and now says he's on "team apostate?" This is precisely my point! The Church is hoping that the rest of the membership has the same knee-jerk (and completely unthinking) response. "Don't listen to Dehlin! He's no longer a member." I've been told time and again on this board that the saints are too thoughtful for such an approach to work. However, I'm aware quite teddily of at least one member who determines truth solely on the basis of church affiliation. And I bet I can find another.
Teancum Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 Ironic when your poisoning the well on him.Why isnit ironic to point out a typical polemic? Show me where I am wrong, anyone who speaks at all positive about John Dehlin is labeled a Dehlinite by Pahoran and he uses it as a pejorative sneer. Show me where I am wrong
mormonnewb Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 I've lost track of how many times someone in this forum has pointed out to you over just the past few weeks that the point of Church discipline is not to discredit anyone. It's clearly pointless to keep making factual statements that you simply choose to ignore in favour of your preferred, albeit fanciful, narrative, so maybe another tack: Yes, one person will make your claim (that the purpose of Church discipline is "love") while another will state that Dehlin's membership is problematic because it gives him credibility with members. As a result, they enthusiastically support his excommunication as they believe it will make other saints less likely to listen to him. Now, I will grant you that both forces could be at work at the same time. His local leaders could be truly hoping for his repentance, while at the same time, attempting to diminish his influence amongst other saints in the event that he doesn't repent. Yet, I don't think we have to ignore the fact that discrediting him amongst the saints is at least a PART of the reason being his excommunication.
teddyaware Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 (edited) Yes, one person will make your claim (that the purpose of Church discipline is "love") while another will state that Dehlin's membership is problematic because it gives him credibility with members. As a result, they enthusiastically support his excommunication as they believe it will make other saints less likely to listen to him. Now, I will grant you that both forces could be at work at the same time. His local leaders could be truly hoping for his repentance, while at the same time, attempting to diminish his influence amongst other saints in the event that he doesn't repent. Yet, I don't think we have to ignore the fact that discrediting him amongst the saints is at least a PART of the reason being his excommunication. For Latter-day Saints with testimonies, they know the fact is that Dehlin has discredited himself -- no one's had to do that for him. If he doesn't repent and reverse course, his excommunication will, among other things, be an official acknowledgement of that self-discreditation. Edited February 10, 2015 by teddyaware
rockpond Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 The disciplinary council was not convened to "discredit" Dehlin. Disciplinary councils in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are convened to accomplish three purposed. Those are:1) To save the soul of the transgressor2) To protect the innocent3) To protect the purity and good name of the churchHow to accomplish these three points is what Dehlin's stake presidency and the high council are trying to decide, not how to discredit him.Part of purpose #3 would be to not let someone continue to claim church membership if they are actively doing things that a member should not be doing and unrepentant about it. Obviously we don't know the specific intents of Dehlin's SP, but perhaps this is what mormonnewb is thinking of when he says to "discredit".
Tacenda Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 Part of purpose #3 would be to not let someone continue to claim church membership if they are actively doing things that a member should not be doing and unrepentant about it. Obviously we don't know the specific intents of Dehlin's SP, but perhaps this is what mormonnewb is thinking of when he says to "discredit".Wouldn't it be a shock if John isn't ex'd, then what would the game plan be?
Nemesis Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 I wonder how much I could make off this site? Maybe start small like charging to take posters of limited? And charging them per post! Could I make bank? 90k sounds like a nice easy life, I'd be willing to even spend more time moderating for that kind of cash! Nemesis
teddyaware Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 I wonder how much I could make off this site? Maybe start small like charging to take posters of limited? And charging them per post! Could I make bank? 90k sounds like a nice easy life, I'd be willing to even spend more time moderating for that kind of cash!Nemesis How much would charge to take me off limited? 1
Nemesis Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 How much would charge to take me off limited?
Nemesis Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 Before or after taxes and insurance?Gross of course.
Buzzard Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 I've known several members who lost their testimonies, and were happy to tell you if you asked. One, a close family member and RM, lived with a series of women before finding his current wife, a nice Atheist gal who was raised Catholic. He's never been asked to appear in front of a church court. The difference is that it's private. If he decided to come back, then he might be accountable for his wild times, but right now neither his past behaviors nor current lack of belief are if concern to the church. Now, if he was posting YouTube videos and running seminars about how to leave the church or cohabitate without your bishop finding out, that situation might change. Both John D. and Kate K. got themselves in trouble for public advocacy, not private questions. 2
ksfisher Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 Part of purpose #3 would be to not let someone continue to claim church membership if they are actively doing things that a member should not be doing and unrepentant about it. Obviously we don't know the specific intents of Dehlin's SP, but perhaps this is what mormonnewb is thinking of when he says to "discredit". Protecting the purity and good name of the church is much different than discrediting an individual. 1
Rob Osborn Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 If I just had one dollar for every time I got blocked on this board...
Coreyb Posted February 10, 2015 Posted February 10, 2015 I found this perspective respectful and enlightening for someone like myself who knows next to nothing about non profits or tax law.http://bycommonconsent.com/2015/02/09/does-open-stories-foundation-qualify-as-tax-exempt/ 1
Recommended Posts