John Dehlin Excommunication Discussion

mfbukowski · February 17, 2015

It is highly unlikely because every SP has usually a weekly or at least monthly telephone conversation with a GA who is assigned to him. If a SP was faced with a situation like this, yes he would make the ultimate decision -- but its not credible that the SP wouldn't seek guidance. In this case, I would guess the guidance went pretty far up the chain. One of the considerations taken into account in a disciplinary case is to what extent the act for which the person is being disciplined had a negative impact on the reputation of the Church. It would, I think, have been almost irresponsible for an SP not to have sought and obtained counsel. It certainly wouldn't be fair to the SP to leave him dangling in the wind on something this high profile. Dehlin for good or ill, had a following...and awkwardly, he was known to have probably kept a few people from leaving the Church. So if you ex him, then you may be saying good bye to not just him...and he ran a popular podcast so you know its going to go viral. Out here he was pretty much a non issue. The exing of Kelly was much more of an issue because the Sisters, many of whom are professionals, tended to identify with her -- not all, not even a majority, but a few. Dehlin, on the other hand, nobody out here really identified with him much -- to the extent they did, it was more of a "oh well" shrug "another one bites the dust" sort of thing. And besides us members, people don't take the Church very serious out here so somebody being kicked out of it just doesn't hit the radar screen.

More like an Area Authority not a GA

why me · February 17, 2015

If I was a regional manager at, say, Target, and I was going to fire the founder of a very popular blog amongst Target employees (let's call it Target Stories), I'd call my boss to get her input first.
And let's be clear, I am not criticizing the SP or the Church leaders for not allowing a "rogue" SP to take action that might have a negative effect on the Church's image. The Church has a legitimate reason to be concerned with how it is perceived in the world at large.

Well, if this was case, women would now be having the priesthood and sssm would be allowed in the temple. The church would go with the flow and not against the flow. Likewise for sin. Eat, drink and be merry would be the call of the day and positive christianity would be the norm at General Conference. The church would be a joyce meyer or joel osteen event, with members coming far and wide to hear guest speakers speak about god's love and success. I don't think that the church is concerned about its image but they do want people to get it right and as such, we have I am a Mormon series. And lets face, the book of mormon musical is not exactly favorable to the church and yet, the church embraced it with their own outreach program in Time Square, which I believe is still going on today with a billboard.

I think that you need to have a better opinion of the church you belong to. You seem to like to compare the church to a private business: brand, target, image etc. Of course, who knows maybe heavenly father is into branding but I doubt it. If I believed that the lds church was led by human beings without the guidance of a heavenly father, or if the church were a man-made church concerned with image and branding etc, I would leave in a heartbeat.

But of course, I don't have much of a 'stakeholder' or a shareholder share anyway since I do not dedicate my private time to the 'brand'. :acute: And I don't spend much 'human capital' or 'social capital' in it so my 'investment' in the organization is small. But I am sure like any organization, it has its share of 'rogue' traders too.

I can see how using business terms can dehumanize a church. :acute:If I ever become hostile to the church, I can see the benefits of using such language: a great way to blow off steam.

Edited February 17, 2015 by why me

mfbukowski · February 17, 2015

We use multiple screens rather than one big one. It speeds the process along of monitoring everyone, reporting on their actions, and receiving direction from GA on exactly what to do. The GAs have loads of time to hear about everything members do. We stopped simply reporting on members and now we don't do anything unless the prophet tells us what to do with each member.

Well it only makes sense considering they are all both omniscient and omnipotent in addition to having all that technology. You forgot to mention the required cell phone apps which record and transmit all aspects of our lives into those central computers.

Scott Lloyd · February 17, 2015

We use multiple screens rather than one big one. It speeds the process along of monitoring everyone, reporting on their actions, and receiving direction from GA on exactly what to do. The GAs have loads of time to hear about everything members do. We stopped simply reporting on members and now we don't do anything unless the prophet tells us what to do with each member.

Is that why it's the Church of Micromanagement of Latter-day Saints?

Scott Lloyd · February 17, 2015

More like an Area Authority not a GA

They don't call them Area Authorities anymore. It would be an Area Seventy.

Scott Lloyd · February 17, 2015

Well, if this was case, women would now be having the priesthood and sssm would be allowed in the temple. The church would go with the flow and not against the flow. Likewise for sin. Eat, drink and be merry would be the call of the day and positive christianity would be the norm at General Conference. The church would be a joyce meyer or joel osteen event, with members coming far and wide to hear guest speakers speak about god's love and success. I don't think that the church is concerned about its image but they do want people to get it right and as such, we have I am a Mormon series. And lets face, the book of mormon musical is not exactly favorable to the church and yet, the church embraced it with their own outreach program in Time Square, which I believe is still going on today with a billboard.

I think that you need to have a better opinion of the church you belong to. You seem to like to compare the church to a private business: brand, target, image etc. Of course, who knows maybe heavenly father is into branding but I doubt it. If I believed that the lds church was led by human beings without the guidance of a heavenly father, or if the church were a man-made church concerned with image and branding etc, I would leave in a heartbeat.

But of course, I don't have much of a 'stakeholder' or a shareholder share anyway since I do not dedicate my private time to the 'brand'. And I don't spend much 'human capital' or 'social capital' in it so my 'investment' in the organization is small. But I am sure like any organization, it has its share of 'rogue' traders too.

I can see how using business terms can dehumanize a church. :acute:If I ever become hostile to the church, I can see the benefits of using such language: a great way to blow off steam.

I don't think the Church embraced it so much as used it as an occasion for outreach.

I've not seen the musical, but from what I hear it's not what you would call being "of good report or praiseworthy."

Stone holm · February 17, 2015

They don't call them Area Authorities anymore. It would be an Area Seventy.

Correct, but in this case, chances are that Seventy would have conferred also with someone above that. I suspect it is conceivable that an SP would have acted without consultation. From my experience, unlikely. To talk of evidence here is basically non persuasive, SP don't normally mention that sort of thing and the Church always either denies or stays behind the confidentiality shield. This's was true of the rumours that flew around concerning BKP's involvement in the mass ex years ago.

Storm Rider · February 17, 2015

Correct, but in this case, chances are that Seventy would have conferred also with someone above that. I suspect it is conceivable that an SP would have acted without consultation. From my experience, unlikely. To talk of evidence here is basically non persuasive, SP don't normally mention that sort of thing and the Church always either denies or stays behind the confidentiality shield. This's was true of the rumours that flew around concerning BKP's involvement in the mass ex years ago.

Let's assume that they talked; in fact, everyone talked to one another. What is the value of the accusation? I am missing what makes this so vital to you.

why me · February 17, 2015

I don't think the Church embraced it so much as used it as an occasion for outreach.
I've not seen the musical, but from what I hear it's not what you would call being "of good report or praiseworthy."

I meant that by not challenging the musical, they embraced it to turn a musical into a good opportunity for people to learn more about mormons. The church was not concerned about its brand as mormonnewb implied it would be. I don't think that the church is about branding and imaging but it is about bringing people to the gospel and its truth.

ERayR · February 17, 2015

Let's assume that they talked; in fact, everyone talked to one another. What is the value of the accusation? I am missing what makes this so vital to you.

It supports the rhetoric that the GA's are micromanaging our lives.

bluebell · February 17, 2015

Correct, but in this case, chances are that Seventy would have conferred also with someone above that. I suspect it is conceivable that an SP would have acted without consultation. From my experience, unlikely. To talk of evidence here is basically non persuasive, SP don't normally mention that sort of thing and the Church always either denies or stays behind the confidentiality shield. This's was true of the rumours that flew around concerning BKP's involvement in the mass ex years ago.

So, if I understand you right, there is zero evidence to back up the assertion that the church did not follow their own policies and then lied about it, but that doesn't matter. It's still a valid thing to accuse them of.

Is that what you are saying?

ERayR · February 17, 2015

Correct, but in this case, chances are that Seventy would have conferred also with someone above that. I suspect it is conceivable that an SP would have acted without consultation. From my experience, unlikely. To talk of evidence here is basically non persuasive, SP don't normally mention that sort of thing and the Church always either denies or stays behind the confidentiality shield. This's was true of the rumours that flew around concerning BKP's involvement in the mass ex years ago.

Since imaginary conversations have become popular lets imagine what this one would be like.

SP. Hello Brother GA I have this member of my stake who has this popular blog and he is publicly teaching the basic doctrine of the Church is false. What do I do?

GA. Well Brother SP remember when the brother of Jared prayed to the Lord to get light in his barges?

SP. Yes

GA. What did the Lord tell him?

SP. He turned the problem back to the brother of Jared and asked him what he would have him(the Lord) do.

GA. Yes, well that is what I am doing for you. You know what needs done better than I do so do it.

SP. But he is high profile and it will turn into a media circus.

GA. Same answer. Bye Brother SP May the Lord guide you and bless you.

Stone holm · February 17, 2015

No accusation. I just mentioned casually mentioned in response to someone asserting that the Salt Lake doesn't confer with the SPs on such matters, that nobody out here (meaning New England) believes that. Personally, I would expect the SP to confer with Salt Lake and ask questions like: "Hey we have a member here that is publishing this and that about the Church. What is the Church's policy on that sort of thing, what do we consider apostasy. Does the Church have a problem with me instituting a disciplinary proceeding because these podcasts kind of smell like apostasy to me." And, I would expect the Church would tell him, "Look this is ultimately up to you, but yes if he is doing this or that then that may be considered apostasy. We do[, or we don't,] have a problem with you starting proceedings."

To run around saying, "Oh Salt Lake never talks with SP about disciplinary cases, we don't do that and we don't know anything about this" That is just plain silly.

bluebell · February 17, 2015

No accusation. I just mentioned casually mentioned in response to someone asserting that the Salt Lake doesn't confer with the SPs on such matters, that nobody out here (meaning New England) believes that. Personally, I would expect the SP to confer with Salt Lake and ask questions like: "Hey we have a member here that is publishing this and that about the Church. What is the Church's policy on that sort of thing, what do we consider apostasy. Does the Church have a problem with me instituting a disciplinary proceeding because these podcasts kind of smell like apostasy to me." And, I would expect the Church would tell him, "Look this is ultimately up to you, but yes if he is doing this or that then that may be considered apostasy. We do[, or we don't,] have a problem with you starting proceedings."

To run around saying, "Oh Salt Lake never talks with SP about disciplinary cases, we don't do that and we don't know anything about this" That is just plain silly.

When you imply or out right say that someone is lying, that seems like the definition of an accusation.

And that's what you're saying, isn't it? (honest question for clarification. I don't want to misunderstand you).

Stone holm · February 17, 2015

"Lying" is a harsh word that I rarely use. I don't think that the Church tells any SP that the SP has to excommunicate someone. I have seen, in the distant past, however, where the Church has told an SP that certain things had to go in the notification letter as a condition to rebaptism and the Church does sometimes tell an SP that rebaptise someone. So who came up with the conditions that had to be met for some of these people to remain in the Church might be up for question.

why me · February 17, 2015

It supports the rhetoric that the GA's are micromanaging our lives.

And of course members are far from being micromanaged. If members were micromanaged we would have a much more cohesive board. As it is members are very independent minded on this board and they do not show any source of micromanagement. However maybe john or his supporters would like to stress this myth of micromanagment but it does not exist. However the GAs do have some practical advice about how members should do life but at the end of the day, it is a matter of choice.

And of course, no church can be successful if members were allowed to publically believe what they want to believe even if it goes against church doctrine and lead people away from the church and yet still remain a member. The church is about preserving the community.

Stone holm · February 17, 2015

Why Me, I agree with what you just said for the most part.

Hamba Tuhan · February 17, 2015

... nobody out here (meaning New England) believes that.

Welcome to New England. Population: 1.

Scott Lloyd · February 17, 2015

"Lying" is a harsh word that I rarely use.

It depends on what the definition of "is" is.

Kenngo1969 · February 17, 2015

So, if I understand you right, there is zero evidence to back up the assertion that the church did not follow their own policies and then lied about it, but that doesn't matter. It's still a valid thing to accuse them of.
Is that what you are saying?

No accusation. I just mentioned casually mentioned in response to someone asserting that the Salt Lake doesn't confer with the SPs on such matters, that nobody out here (meaning New England) believes that. ...

"Lying" is a harsh word that I rarely use. ...

It depends on what the definition of "is" is.

:good: :rofl: :good:

mfbukowski · February 18, 2015

They don't call them Area Authorities anymore. It would be an Area Seventy.

Oh yeah- thanks.

mfbukowski · February 18, 2015

Since imaginary conversations have become popular lets imagine what this one would be like.

SP. Hello Brother GA I have this member of my stake who has this popular blog and he is publicly teaching the basic doctrine of the Church is false. What do I do?

GA. Well Brother SP remember when the brother of Jared prayed to the Lord to get light in his barges?

SP. Yes

GA. What did the Lord tell him?

SP. He turned the problem back to the brother of Jared and asked him what he would have him(the Lord) do.

GA. Yes, well that is what I am doing for you. You know what needs done better than I do so do it.

SP. But he is high profile and it will turn into a media circus.

GA. Same answer. Bye Brother SP May the Lord guide you and bless you.

I have known of cases where bishops disagreed with SP's on how a disciplinary council should go, in situations where "everybody in the ward knew" about personal immorality- in locally VERY sensitive situations which could have split a ward- but the SP always sustained the bishop's decision because the bishop has the keys to make these decisions for the ward, not the SP

mfbukowski · February 18, 2015

Leaders know you don't add to the responsibilities of your leader, you "take them off his plate"

One should not ask your boss how to do your own job or you should not be in the job to begin with. You shoulder responsibility, you pray about it, and make the hard decisions to the best of your abilities and let the chips fall where they may. That is a lost art called " taking responsibility"

And asking your bosses boss how to do your job?

Sigh.

ERayR · February 18, 2015

No accusation. I just mentioned casually mentioned in response to someone asserting that the Salt Lake doesn't confer with the SPs on such matters, that nobody out here (meaning New England) believes that. Personally, I would expect the SP to confer with Salt Lake and ask questions like: "Hey we have a member here that is publishing this and that about the Church. What is the Church's policy on that sort of thing, what do we consider apostasy. Does the Church have a problem with me instituting a disciplinary proceeding because these podcasts kind of smell like apostasy to me." And, I would expect the Church would tell him, "Look this is ultimately up to you, but yes if he is doing this or that then that may be considered apostasy. We do[, or we don't,] have a problem with you starting proceedings."

To run around saying, "Oh Salt Lake never talks with SP about disciplinary cases, we don't do that and we don't know anything about this" That is just plain silly.

See post # 487

Calm · February 19, 2015

Another POV (I don't believe this link has been posted before, my apologies if so):

http://www.standard.net/Standard-Deviations/2015/02/14/Excommunicated-blogger

Strong imagery, I wonder if people will like or reject the analogy he uses.

Sign In

John Dehlin Excommunication Discussion

Recommended Posts

mfbukowski

why me

mfbukowski

Scott Lloyd

Scott Lloyd

Scott Lloyd

Stone holm

Storm Rider

why me

ERayR

bluebell

ERayR

Stone holm

bluebell

Stone holm

why me

Stone holm

Hamba Tuhan

Scott Lloyd

Kenngo1969

mfbukowski

mfbukowski

mfbukowski

ERayR

Calm

Recently Browsing 0 members

Similar Content

Bill Reel on Mormon Stories 1 2 3 4 7

Do You Know People Who Left Because Of Dehlin? 1 2

New Order Mormonism: Dehlin On Radiowest

Panel About The Conference 1 2 3 4 12

Hans H. Mattsson, Area 70 On Mormon Stories 1 2 3 4 25

Activity

Browse