ERayR Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 You can summarize what happened in one statement * Leadership roulette I believe the church needs to follow the come join with us sentiment of a big tent church that Uchtdorf articulated, but others think it’s important to root out the doubters who dare to publically express themselves. That’s why you have some people like the Calderwoods getting excommunicated and others who don’t get disciplined. When you make the tent too big it becomes a "great and spacious building". 2
BookofMormonLuvr Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 I will have to disagree. The best would be those that keep their covenants.What covenants have the Calderwood's not kept in your estimation?
JLHPROF Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 One little error. This community is not for everyone. It is for those who are willing to become God's covenant people and keep those covenants. Exactly. There is a mistaken notion that if they but understood that EVERYONE would want the gospel and salvation and exaltation.Whether we find it nice or not, there are those who simply don't want to do the will of God. God says be baptized, they say I don't want to. God says get married, they say I don't want to. God says follow my son. They say I don't want to. Some people will simply choose Telestial or Terrestrial environments, even if the Celestial is right in front of their faces. Too much responsibility for some according to D&C 132. 1
JLHPROF Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 (edited) What covenants have the Calderwood's not kept in your estimation? Well if they've lost belief in the Church and been ex'd I would presume they have broken several temple covenants.Of course, here's where someone argues that if they don't believe in the covenant they didn't really break it... Some big shocks for those that think that:"Inasmuch as you have come into this Church, and made a covenant to forsake the world, and cleave unto the Lord, and keep His commandments, the Lord will compel you to do it, if it should be in ten thousand years from this time. These are my views, and I know it will be so." - Heber C. Kimball Edited May 23, 2015 by JLHPROF 1
Freedom Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 NoI'm saying the LDS Church places more speech constraint on its membership, than the US government places on its citizenry.Well of course it does. So does everybody. You have the right to protest the government, but don't expect to be welcomed back to your office at the tax office after participating in a protest against your boss. You are welcome to criticize Ford, but don't expect to keep your sales job at Joe's Ford Dealership after posting criticisms of the very cars you are paid to sell. How can you not get this very simple reality? You have the right to your free speech, and I have the right not to tolerate it. 3
BookofMormonLuvr Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 Well if they've lost belief in the Church and been ex'd I would presume they have broken several temple covenants.Of course, here's where someone argues that if they don't believe in the covenant they didn't really break it... Some big shocks for those that think that:"Inasmuch as you have come into this Church, and made a covenant to forsake the world, and cleave unto the Lord, and keep His commandments, the Lord will compel you to do it, if it should be in ten thousand years from this time. These are my views, and I know it will be so." - Heber C. KimballWhich covenants? Are you accusing them of some type of moral negligence? I am unaware of any covenant where we agree to believe every declaration that comes from the leadership of the church and every declaration that conflicts with every previous declaration, and any future declaration that may proceed from them.Perhaps you could point me to that covenant?I know about this covenant of baptism... 8 And it came to pass that he said unto them: Behold, here are the waters of Mormon (for thus were they called) and now, as ye are desirous to come into the fold of God, and to be called his people, and are willing to bear one another’s burdens, that they may be light; 9 Yea, and are willing to mourn with those that mourn; yea, and comfort those that stand in need of comfort, and to stand as witnesses of God at all times and in all things, and in all places that ye may be in, even until death, that ye may be redeemed of God, and be numbered with those of the first resurrection, that ye may have eternal life— 10 Now I say unto you, if this be the desire of your hearts, what have you against being baptized in the name of the Lord, as a witness before him that ye have entered into acovenant with him, that ye will serve him and keep his commandments, that he may pour out his Spirit more abundantly upon you? 1
ERayR Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 So you're equating disbelief with opposition? Publicly published statements attacking the Church is a bit more than disbelief. 2
ERayR Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 No church except well, all the other ones. Show me where the Catholic Church has excommunicated a lay member for heresy in, say, oh the last two centuries. Or the Baptists. Or the Methodists. Or pretty much any of the other 2 BILLION Christians on the planet. And the Catholics and the Baptists and the Methodists and (fill in the blank) are free to run their Church however they see fit. You are a sharp guy and know that so why the comparison. 1
DonBradley Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 Well if they've lost belief in the Church and been ex'd I would presume they have broken several temple covenants. How, exactly, are you in a position to judge this? And which "several" covenants do you have in mind? I can't think of any temple covenants in which we covenant to believe a particular thing, and belief is far less under volitional control than action is; and is therefore a more difficult area in which to either keep or violate a covenant. Don 1
Avatar4321 Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 What covenants have the Calderwood's not kept in your estimation?Other than not meeting and worshiping on the Sabbath, not standing as a witness for Christ, supporting fellow saints, how should we know?
jwhitlock Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 How, exactly, are you in a position to judge this? And which "several" covenants do you have in mind? I can't think of any temple covenants in which we covenant to believe a particular thing, and belief is far less under volitional control than action is; and is therefore a more difficult area in which to either keep or violate a covenant. Don When we covenant to build up the kingdom, I have trouble reconciling that with what the Calderwoods are doing. 3
JLHPROF Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 (edited) Which covenants? Are you accusing them of some type of moral negligence? I am unaware of any covenant where we agree to believe every declaration that comes from the leadership of the church and every declaration that conflicts with every previous declaration, and any future declaration that may proceed from them.Perhaps you could point me to that covenant?I know about this covenant of baptism... Nope, not those ones. How, exactly, are you in a position to judge this? And which "several" covenants do you have in mind? I can't think of any temple covenants in which we covenant to believe a particular thing, and belief is far less under volitional control than action is; and is therefore a more difficult area in which to either keep or violate a covenant. Don Who is judging? I am making no judgement of any individual.But there are numerous temple covenants which either by choice or by being excommunicated they are no longer living up to.Do I really need to provide a list?Read each temple covenant and see which apply for yourself. Posting temple content is forbidden. I can think of a couple that COULD apply here. I am not in a position to judge them. When we covenant to build up the kingdom, I have trouble reconciling that with what the Calderwoods are doing. There's one that COULD apply. Edited May 23, 2015 by JLHPROF
BookofMormonLuvr Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 Other than not meeting and worshiping on the Sabbath, not standing as a witness for Christ, supporting fellow saints, how should we know?Hmmm...They were still going to church until recently, when they basically felt forced out.Believing every single proclamation ever made by the church is not the same thing as a witness of Christ.Apparently, they helped several people in their stake stay in the church. They also apparently have helped others who feel marginalized in the church to find a middle-ground and stay as active as possible. I say that is supporting fellow Saints.
BookofMormonLuvr Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 It is seeing the boots on the ground conversation from LDS folks that makes me realize that no matter how much as corporate may try to reach out and be sympathetic to doubters, the reality from the trenches is that local membership and leadership will not be as accommodating and will continue shunning and purging the perceived trouble-makers. Sad.
jwhitlock Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 It is seeing the boots on the ground conversation from LDS folks that makes me realize that no matter how much as corporate may try to reach out and be sympathetic to doubters, the reality from the trenches is that local membership and leadership will not be as accommodating and will continue shunning and purging the perceived trouble-makers. Sad. I disagree. We're not talking about doubters, or "perceived trouble-makers" here.
cinepro Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 (edited) How, exactly, are you in a position to judge this? And which "several" covenants do you have in mind? I can't think of any temple covenants in which we covenant to believe a particular thing, and belief is far less under volitional control than action is; and is therefore a more difficult area in which to either keep or violate a covenant. Don In a recent book published by the Deseret, Elder Hales listed the Temple Covenants in a drawing showing our "path" to exaltation. Two of the covenants are "Obedience" and "Consecration". Obviously we can't judge the hearts of the Calderwoods, but I'm pretty sure their public words and actions give us enough to at least make an educated guess as to whether or not they were striving to meet these covenants. But now that they've been ex'd, it's all a moot point. They're back at square one. Edited May 23, 2015 by cinepro 3
Avatar4321 Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 Hmmm...They were still going to church until recently, when they basically felt forced out.Believing every single proclamation ever made by the church is not the same thing as a witness of Christ.Apparently, they helped several people in their stake stay in the church. They also apparently have helped others who feel marginalized in the church to find a middle-ground and stay as active as possible. I say that is supporting fellow Saints.They said they left. Don't know when. It was their choice and you can't keep those commandments if you don't show up.You don't have to believe everything the leaders teach to a stand as a witness of Christ, but witnessing against Christ is clearly not for him.Why would you even conflate the two?
BookofMormonLuvr Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 I disagree. We're not talking about doubters, or "perceived trouble-makers" here.We are also not talking about KK or Dehlin. I didn't even know Carson was doing this and I am fairly up on heretical Mormonism and he was a prominent AP in my mission. They weren't making huge waves and leading people out of the church in droves. Basically, like was stated earlier- they crapped out on leadership roulette.
DonBradley Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 JLHPROF, I don't want to be in the position of defending the Calderwoods, since I don't know enough about their case to weigh in strongly on it in either direction. But I do want to respond to things you said that I find utterly puzzling. Who is judging? I am making no judgement of any individual. I don't understand. To me, surmising that people must be breaking several temple covenants, even though you don't know that, seems exactly like judging. I'm not even sure what it would mean to say that you think they must be covenant breakers but are not judging them. If this is not judging them, what would constitute judging them? But there are numerous temple covenants which either by choice or by being excommunicated they are no longer living up to. So, if I'm understanding correctly, even if the Calderwoods weren't breaking temple covenants before, they are now, because, in excommunicating them, their stake president has made it impossible for them to keep some of those covenants, such as the covenant to legitimately wear one's garments...? As I see it, being externally prevented from keeping covenants and breaking covenants are not actually the same thing. Do you also see a distinction there, or not? Don 1
rockpond Posted May 23, 2015 Author Posted May 23, 2015 Publicly published statements attacking the Church is a bit more than disbelief.True. Can you show me a published statement by the Calderwoods that attacks the church?
DonBradley Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 They said they left. Don't know when. It was their choice and you can't keep those commandments if you don't show up.You don't have to believe everything the leaders teach to a stand as a witness of Christ, but witnessing against Christ is clearly not for him.Why would you even conflate the two? I haven't read what they've written, but nothing that I've seen quoted has them bearing testimony that Jesus is not the Christ or railing against God. If they have said such things, or anything like them, this would certainly be a violation of the covenant to stand as witnesses of God. Don
Avatar4321 Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 Railing against Christ is only one way you can not be standing as a witness of Christ. Doing nothing is another. Can anyone find examples of them testifying of Christ in their blogs?
why me Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 I'm not aware that anyone has been disciplined for expressing doubt, as such. They've been excommunicated, in part, for expressing open disbelief that, as rockpond has noted, is perceived as opposition. I think the church itself has much more tolerance for the public expression of doubt, and even disagreement, than many of its members may think. For instance, Elder Christofferson has indicated that members are completely free to post to social media regarding their support for gay marriage.They haven't. The difference in coming out in support of gay marriage and not be disciplined and in criticizing the church's stance on gay marriage is a huge one. This is something that some people do not understand. There is much freedom in the church to express political decisions and social policies. But one cannot take a stance against the lds church and make claims against the leadership in public. Or talk against the church in meetings about their stances on abortion, gay marriage, women and the priesthood etc.
Calm Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 (edited) Great post, Cal. I'd encourage you to listen to the Calderwoods MS interview. Carson's discussions with people in his stake who were struggling seems to be part of what got him into trouble. But you post here gives good insight into the challenge facing us, as a church. Somehow we need to create safe spaces for people to work through issues without it creating more faith crises. It's tough - I think the Brethren are trying but haven't quite figured out how to lead us there, yet.Nope, don't do podcasts or talk shows of any kind. Drive me insane. I prefer the written word and he has provided that. Edited May 23, 2015 by calmoriah 1
ERayR Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 True. Can you show me a published statement by the Calderwoods that attacks the church? Will John Dehlin's piece do? (excerpt)After showing public support for Ordain Women, and after publicly expressing his doubts about several LDS church truth claims (e.g., polygamy, polyandry, Book of Mormon and Abraham historicity), Carson is now being charged with apostasy by the LDS Church, and by his Maple Valley, Washington stake president. A disciplinary council for Carson is set to be scheduled within the next few days or weeks.
Recommended Posts