John Dehlin Excommunication Discussion

[Teancum]

I give that absolutely no credibility.  If one wants to resign they simply write a letter and deliver it to ones bishop.

 

 

I agree and based on what I saw John write and heard him say on podcasts is that he would not resign but rather if the church decided on a DC he would go through to the end.   However I did find it odd that when he asked not to be contacted that a threat of "resign of have a DC" was put out there.   People ask for do not contacts all the time.

[USU78]

I agree and based on what I saw John write and heard him say on podcasts is that he would not resign but rather if the church decided on a DC he would go through to the end.   However I did find it odd that when he asked not to be contacted that a threat of "resign of have a DC" was put out there.   People ask for do not contacts all the time.

 

Why assume a threat?  When I was a missionary, we were assigned by the branch president to seek out those who hadn't been to Church in years to ask them whether they wanted to come back to Church or resign/have their names stricken from the records.

 

Most ignored us.  One took us up on the offer to come back (after having seen us in a dream just prior to our appearance at her door).  Nobody asked for his name to be stricken.

 

I imagine that a motivated and tendentious person would call what we were doing a threat, too.  They couldn't have been more wrong.

 

In jd's case, to presume a threat, one would have to make all kinds of assumptions that nobody on this here board has the right to make.

[ERayR]

I agree and based on what I saw John write and heard him say on podcasts is that he would not resign but rather if the church decided on a DC he would go through to the end.   However I did find it odd that when he asked not to be contacted that a threat of "resign of have a DC" was put out there.   People ask for do not contacts all the time.

 

It seems to me that to resign did not fit his agenda(whatever that is).  It also appears evident that he had to manufacture an atmosphere of little guy standing against the monolithic church machine.

[Kenngo1969]

Even if priesthood leaders "wouldn't let someone resign" (by refusing to submit any paperwork), people can resign directly through Salt Lake. My one resignation from when I was a bishop was from a member (I didn't know I had) resigning through Salt Lake. I visited the member, confirmed her wish, and told her that she would get a letter from the Stake President in 30 days confirming that her name had been removed if he didn't hear otherwise from her. 

 

Done.

 

 

I thought Bishops knew every single member of their ward.

As I learned all too well as a Membership Clerk, some don't want to be known ... which, I suspect, is rather your point.

[ERayR]

Only the ones actually on the ward list . . .

 

This one wasn't, and nobody was aware of her existence. Her records were sent to the ward after her contact with Salt Lake, and the stake president was asked to send the bishop to acknowledge receipt and start the process. 

 

One record rescued from the oblivion of the Address Unknown file, only to be removed . . . 

 

Keeping up with record changes and moveing members is a 60 hour a week job in most wards.  Just an observation from a former ward clerk.

[Kenngo1969]

"I don't believe in the truth claims of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, no longer wish to be associated with it, and wish to resign" is one thing.  Neither Bishops nor anyone else (should) obstruct the process if that's the case.  However, if discipline is pending when the member expresses a wish to resign, he should not be allowed to try to "outfox" the Church of Jesus Christ by saying to himself, in effect, "If I resign now (while discipline is pending) and later decide to change that decision, it will be as though no discipline ever was pending against me, so I won't have as hard of a time getting back in as I would if there were."

 

Anyone of such a mind can castigate the "Big, Bad, Mean Church" for how it handles attempts to resign while discipline is pending all he wants to.  The fact remains that there are reasons good and sound for the Church's procedures in such cases.  If John Dehlin or anyone else who has faced discipline wants to come back in with a clean slate, more power to him: but in order to do that, he first has to own up to God and to the Church of Jesus Christ for what he's done.  He should not be able to escape that responsibility by saying, "You're gonna excommunicate me?  Well, I resign!"

[Tacenda]

duplicate

Edited February 14, 2015 by Tacenda

[Tacenda]

Yesterday I finished listening to Dehlin's interview with Terryl & Fiona Givens and James Patterson. It's a fascinating podcast, faith affirming, and shares a lot of insights about the Givens' new book: Crucible of Doubt. It is also very representative of the John Dehlin that I admire.

I also find it interesting that it was produced in August 2014... Around the same time the infamous President King interview happened.

Here's the link if you care to listen. I think it's worth the time for any member.

http://mormonstories.org/fiona-and-terryl-givens-and-the-crucible-of-doubt/

I've been re-listening to this.  The first time was during an angry phase, so this time is much better.  I really like the Given's expression of "we" a lot!  They make you feel like they've or they are going through the same thing.  James' mission president sounds a lot like some on this board.  It's amazing some that struggle stick around as long as they do here with the subtle or outright mental/spiritual abuse, I think that is far from the "Mormon" way.  The church I grew to love. 

 

Thanks for sharing this, it's a good one!

Edited February 14, 2015 by Tacenda

[halconero]

Nope. And it is an a priori assumption to think he is the absolute one in error. Maybe, just maybe, just maybe a tinsie winsie chance that you might be in error?

Nah

[mfbukowski]

I struggle with the anonymity question on line.  I am not a published author or scholar so my name does not lend credibility to my positions.  On the other hand having opinions and musings on line with my real name could make me a target of identity theft, bullying, or other nefarious goings online.  The only place I use my real identity (full name - yes I really am a Kevin) is a private Facebook account where only family and friends I select know what I say.

 

The risks of someone abusing a public identity are too great.  My private and public opinions are pretty consistent however. 

Bwwwaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaa!

 

Now all I have to do is look for guys named Kevin who kind of look like a wolf/ german shepherd on facebook and I will be able to steal your identiy!! 

[mfbukowski]

 

Certainly this is a primary reason why I suggest that:

• "Dehlin, while probably 'right' in his own mind, is a very poor evaluator (or at least "communicator") of virtually any subject (just listen to his podcasts). He's too sided, too jovial, and certainly too non-critical of interviewees and the connected subject matter."

  ... and ...

• "I'm hardly suggesting that my father, in his quest for real truth, in any way compares to Dehlin and his departure ..."

 

I don't see how anybody could take the guy seriously enough to "follow" him, but I guess one can never underestimate the gullibility of people.

[mfbukowski]

Who thinks he will one day down the line see the error of his ways, repent, and come back to the church? That would be an amazing story.

It's all a set-up.

 

Just think how much publicity he could generate by doing that.  His books would fly off the shelves!

[KevinG]

Bwwwaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaa!

 

Now all I have to do is look for guys named Kevin who kind of look like a wolf/ german shepherd on facebook and I will be able to steal your identiy!! 

Just ask Duncan. He's in my inner circle.

[Teancum]

Nah

Wish I was as self assured .

[Pahoran]

I agree and based on what I saw John write and heard him say on podcasts is that he would not resign but rather if the church decided on a DC he would go through to the end.   However I did find it odd that when he asked not to be contacted that a threat of "resign of have a DC" was put out there.   People ask for do not contacts all the time.

But Dehlin did not only ask not to be contacted; he also asked that his Bishop ceased to regard him as a member of the Ward.

So while you'd love to be able to cast the SP's response as a "threat," it is clear that it was Dehlin who was trying to force the issue.

"Don't anyone treat me as a member any more, or even mention my name among yourselves -- but I refuse to ask for my name to be removed."

If you can't see what's going on there, then I'm afraid I can't help you.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Teancum]

But Dehlin did not only ask not to be contacted; he also asked that his Bishop ceased to regard him as a member of the Ward.So while you'd love to be able to cast the SP's response as a "threat," it is clear that it was Dehlin who was trying to force the issue."Don't anyone treat me as a member any more, or even mention my name among yourselves -- but I refuse to ask for my name to be removed."If you can't see what's going on there, then I'm afraid I can't help you.Regards,Pahoran

Ah cool your jets Mr. Polemics. I would not love to do anything and no you can't help me because I want no help from you really. I was simply talking about what I knew and heard and read.

[Tacenda]

But Dehlin did not only ask not to be contacted; he also asked that his Bishop ceased to regard him as a member of the Ward.

So while you'd love to be able to cast the SP's response as a "threat," it is clear that it was Dehlin who was trying to force the issue.

"Don't anyone treat me as a member any more, or even mention my name among yourselves -- but I refuse to ask for my name to be removed."

If you can't see what's going on there, then I'm afraid I can't help you.

Regards,

Pahoran

Do you know why JD asked that they not discuss him? Probably not Pahoran, I don't think you care to hear the rest of the story. Just keep jumping to conclusions.

[why me]

Do you know why JD asked that they not discuss him? Probably not Pahoran, I don't think you care to hear the rest of the story. Just keep jumping to conclusions.

There is another angle in all this. When john returned to church I am sure that it was embraced warmly by his ward. And I am sure that all were happy for his return and that he and his family were treated well by the members. But then, after a relatively short time, he left the fold again and went to the opposite position of disbelief. How did many members of the ward feel when this happened? I am sure that many must have been affected by his behavior. And what was their reation to the flip flop? Disappointed? Lack of trust? And how was their own spirituality affected by john? And then to make an announcement that his name should not be discussed. Wow.

 

Was it fair toward his ward? Did john show himself to be a conscientious human being? Sometimes we need to take a step outside ourselves to see that a person's behavior has a knock on effect toward others.

[Tacenda]

There is another angle in all this. When john returned to church I am sure that it was embraced warmly by his ward. And I am sure that all were happy for his return and that he and his family were treated well by the members. But then, after a relatively short time, he left the fold again and went to the opposite position of disbelief. How did many members of the ward feel when this happened? I am sure that many must have been affected by his behavior. And what was their reation to the flip flop? Disappointed? Lack of trust? And how was their own spirituality affected by john? And then to make an announcement that his name should not be discussed. Wow.

Was it fair toward his ward? Did john show himself to be a conscientious human being? Sometimes we need to take a step outside ourselves to see that a person's behavior has a knock on effect toward others.

You also don't know either. I'll have to get a transcript of what he said about this. Too brain dead to remember word for word. But apparently some in his ward weren't very nice. Thus the reason he and his family discontinued attending, there's a difference between that and wanting to resign!

[why me]

You also don't know either. I'll have to get a transcript of what he said about this. Too brain dead to remember word for word. But apparently some in his ward weren't very nice. Thus the reason he and his family discontinued attending, there's a difference between that and wanting to resign!

In research, one cannot depend on one point of view because that point of view may be skewed. One would need to go to the ward and interview people on how he was treated. Also, I don't believe that he had any intention of resigning. Usually, such 'public' figures want to be exed. It increases their standing in the critic world. To  resign is an anticlimax to their long struggle with the lds church. The borders are pushed until the desired reaction takes place. I would have a difficult time believing that the welcome was cold. Of course, there may have been a couple of people who did not appreciate it or saw it as a ploy but.....

[Calm]

Tacenda, it is not the rest of the story to hear Dehlin's description of how the ward and his leaders were interacting with them. The rest of the story would have to include the story from the ward's side as well.

Given Dehlin's tendency to limit information from others or himself that might damage his narrative as well as the tendency to ignore data even when he presents it as background material, all one is going to get when listening to John is his narrative of the experience, which may have relatively little to do with what happened in that community.

As an example of limiting info...where is the email that Dehlin sent to Bishop Hunt requesting no contact with the ward. As part of the conversation, why did he not include it in his press releases?

Edited February 15, 2015 by calmoriah

[why me]

Tacenda, it is not the rest of the story to hear Dehlin's description of how the ward and his leaders were interacting with them. The rest of the story would have to include the story from the ward's side as well.

Given Dehlin's tendency to limit information from others or himself that might damage his narrative as well as the tendency to ignore data even when he presents it as background material, all one is going to get when listening to John is his narrative of the experience, which may have relatively little to do with what happened in that community.

As an example of limiting info...where is the email that Dehlin sent to Bishop Hunt requesting no contact with the ward. As part of the conversation, why did he not include it in his press releases?

This is the point I tried to make in my last post. I tend to believe that the majority of the ward would give him and his family a warm welcome. I just can't see it being no other way. And the disappointment this ward must have felt when he left and he went further into his criticisms of the lds church. But it seems that people regardless of what may come out would still want to believe that the fault is with the local church or with the church in general. However, the john's flip flops tend to speak otherwise. Also, one never knows why he returned when he did. I do remember that there were predictions on critic boards that he would leave sooner than later. But what his motives were when he returned, only  he may know why.

[mormonnewb]

It seems to me that to resign did not fit his agenda(whatever that is). It also appears evident that he had to manufacture an atmosphere of little guy standing against the monolithic church machine.

I don't have a podcast and am a newb, but even I know that you don't want to resign from this Church? I flirted with the idea of going inactive for a spell and it was made quite clear to me that if I didn't give an acceptable reason, several "unacceptable" reasons would be assumed.

And remember, I don't have a slew of "faithful" Mormons who are dying to find some way to discredit me. And since it wasn't possible for him to just fade into inactivity, he HAD to let it all play out so that he would have a record.

Of course, we are still arguing over the real reason for his excommunication, but at least, no one is claiming that he left the Church for hot caffeine or porn.

[Calm]

I flirted with the idea of going inactive for a spell and it was made quite clear to me that if I didn't give an acceptable reason, several "unacceptable" reasons would be assumed.

 

By whom?

[mormonnewb]

By whom?

By my best friend in the Church, a lifelong Mormon who is extremely devout (he doesn't even consume cold caffeine). He loves the Church and so I trust that he wasn't trying to unfairly malign his brothers and sisters. Also, given that people on this board have reported similar experiences when they went inactive, I find his prediction to be at least plausible, if not probable.