John Dehlin is in the news again. He announced on Mormon Stories that he has received a letter advising him to attend a disciplinary council on January 25. Then in an interview with the Salt Lake Tribune, the stake president re-scheduled the court until February 25 (rumor has it there was a death in the family of the stake president.) What do you think?
[poll id=”465″]
[poll id=”467″]
[poll id=”466″]
[poll id=”468″]
Wheat & Tares 
I think John will get the outcome he has wanted. But I question whether he’ll want the outcome he gets.
I don’t know how the church could back down and not excommunicate him now that they’ve shown their hand but I can’t even say how sorry and hurt I am that there isn’t room in the church for all kinds of opinions and for sincere people to talk about them.
If the Holy Spirit shares the truth with each one of us personally how can the well meaning errors of individuals do damage?
It seems pretty clear to me that he’s been doing what he’s been doing for a lot of time and not hiding it from anyone. When Ordain Women and full marriage equality became a part of the mix the church began trying to intimidate and silence more people than just John Dehlin and Kate Kelly. I don’t know how anyone can avoid seeing that.
My feeling daily waivers how much John is just being honest vs. how much he is actually wanting a bit of a fight – even one he loses because it proves one of his points. I do believe there is a bit of both in him.
I do think that if he wanted to pull more people out of the church he would be making a bit more of an attempt to comply.
I have mixed feelings and couldn’t vote in all of the polls; from what I can tell from his stake president, JD’s public support of OW and SSM are a problem for him. So I don’t believe those who say it has nothing to do with it. I think we have a little bit of leadership roulette combined with what he has coming…it just took the right leader to be done with him. I’m ready for the story to be over, that’s for sure.
I think John made a good point in his recent interview (and has done previously) where he indicated that he has advocated, publicly about the same issues over a long period of time and that did not previously discount him from baptising his son. If they excommunicate him now, and they will, nothing in his behaviour is that different to 3, 4 5 or more years ago.
I don’t think John wants excommunication. I think he would have been fine if he had been left alone. The question seems to be whether people believe his standing as an inactive and openly doubting church member that talks about his doubts and believes transitioning out of Mormonism is a legitimate choice is more detrimental to the church than an excommunicated John doing the same thing.
Personally, I feel there were better ways of handling this as there were far better ways of handling Kate’s situation. Excommunication in both cases was and will be incredibly harsh (more so for Kate). It is a violent act.
I have almost no firm opinion about John himself. But I’m very sorry for the people who are in a hard place with their faith that this will tip over into fear and despair. I voted that John’s excommunication wouldn’t really make that much of a difference either way–and for him as an individual and for the church as an institution I think that might be the case. But I know it will make a big difference for some struggling Mormons, and they are not insignificant to me even if they are insignificant in number. The fact of the matter is that in this case, John is a symbol as well as a person, and the church is taking action against the things John symbolizes as much as it is him.
I think John is very critical of the church and often in his efforts to help leads people away from the church. I think he could help people more if he were not so negative towards the church and truly allowed people to find their own way either away from the church or to remain in it. I think he wants to be excommunicated because he wants to be viewed as a martyr.
I am curious. Do people believe others go to JD as confident faithful members and leave because of ideas he fills them with?
To me it seems as though people who are troubled about aspects of the church go looking for answers, find JD and think his interviews and perspectives make more sense. There’s a huge difference there. And I doubt if a confident member who was getting what they needed from the church would listen to everything on any site he’s ever operated and lose their direction. Nor do I think a troubled member who got clarity from local on up would have need to go looking online from anyone.
I’m not an acolyte of JD. I came to the previous site (don’t even remember the name now) when he was still behind it. When the split came I was still more interested here than on Mormon Stories so I didn’t follow him there. From my point of view, he hadn’t been a big part of the precursor site anyway and I wasn’t looking for one point of view; I wanted a candid spectrum. Nevertheless, I am grateful for where people can speak candidly and question and arrive at their own accord with the Holy Spirit in their lives.
I don’t see that excommunicating JD is necessary and I suspect it will be damaging. Perhaps not in a big public way but you can say people are free to think and inquire but if you insist on it happening in a way that creates anxiety, mistrust or a pressure cooker atmosphere it isn’t going to do anyone any good. Furthermore, I suspect the faithful (as opposed to authorities) clamoring to silence JD are most afraid of their own doubts or their inability to deal with the doubts of others.
While I have read some of what JD has said over the past year or so, and I have listened to a few of his podcasts, I am certainly not all that knowledgeable about the nature of his beliefs or disbeliefs. I am not able to fairly judge if he goes “too far” in his commentary (so far that his intent is not to help and educate, but to convince). I, personally, try to be sensitive to those with “weak spirits (see I Corinthians: 8) and try not to expose them to my most testimony-threatening beliefs and opinions when they are present.
However, I am quite familiar with what I think the bloggernacle refers to as “leadership roulette.” I have known and worked closely with multiple bishops and stake presidents whose personal level of (I struggle for the right terms) open-mindedness regarding non-traditional beliefs varied widely. I used to be very much opposed to the “central planning committee” (yes, shades of totalitarian governments, e.g., “Strengthen the Church Committee”) and their undeniable string-pulling back in the late 80’s and early 90’s so as to hang a few “town drunks” (set an example, send a message). At least some of the local leaders involved would most likely not have taken church court action if left to their own opinions and “inspiration.”
Now that the leaders in the COB “seem” to have changed many of their overly conservative and traditional ways, folks like John Dehlin might be less readily tolerated by many local leaders who are only recently becoming more knowledgeable about how many of we “saints” have become better-informed, thoughtful, open-minded, and are challenging the old ways of thinking. (Because the better-informed, thoughtful, open-minded members are highly unlikely to be chosen as bishops or stake presidents)
I think the Internet has changed everything with regard to delivery of information both factual and not. Many Church members are now being exposed to materials only a few of us saw over the years. Details about Mormon historical events have shed light on events only summarized or glossed over in Church settings while the amount of disinformation and critical information is now also available to all.
Some can handle it and some cannot just like when the materials were available in print form only.
Not sure how many of you listened to the John’s whole end of the year podcast (http://mormonstories.org/mormon-stories-2014-end-of-year-update/) and reviewed his written materials. But, from my view, I saw and heard a lot of classic Anti-Mormon rhetoric.
1. I’m here to tell you the Truth
2. The church is deceiving you
3. The leaders are not what they purport to be.
4. The Book of Mormon is fake and written by Joseph Smith
5. The church is a cult.
6. I can help you escape it.
7. I love the Mormon people.
I think that if John is ex’d ( and likely he will be), his overall effectiveness will diminish. From being semi-loyal opposition to being an outside, he will take a tremendous hit. And his overall support will as well.
@Jeff #11
I too pulled some of those same messages, but I do think you missed the part where he is 100% fine if you hear the information (both sides of an argument) and WANT to stay. Some people can’t fathom that having such a stance is different than wanting people to leave.
I feel his compassion for others and the hard time if they decide to leave. Think about that. If in your heart of hearts feel that Mormonism isn’t for you and you decide to leave. For many this means their marriage will end, employment will end, and extended family will treat you as either a much-less-than person and/or a project to get you back in. Now not everyone has as much to lose as the extreme I mention, but I think there are many that stay that feel they must do so because the social and personal costs are too high. I think you would have to admit Mormonism isn’t something most can casually walk away from.
I don’t know that him being ex’ed will diminish his (as you call it) “effectiveness”. It isn’t just John. It is the information that is out on the internet. And there are many people that are active members that are interested.
And before you write me off as an apostate myself, I am an active member that feels he absolutely is worthy of his recommend and even serving in a bishopric. But even with all those “creds”, I fear even mentioning almost any of the issues I am struggling with as it would cause major issues in my life.
Happy,
I don’t think I missed any part. John can say what he wants, I was merely reacting to the materials on his slides, which, as I said, looked like traditional anti-Mormon rhetoric.
Just as you outline some of the consequences of leaving the Church, the same can be applied to those who leave their family traditions to join the Church. My wife was kicked out of her home for joining the Church and my parents were not happy that I joined. So it can go both ways. So what? We’re not talking about that here.
Those of us who have had involvement with John over the past ten years and been part of Dehlin Enterprises maybe have a bit more insight as to how he operates. He’s been all over the map as far as his Church membership is concerned. This time, it seems, he has passed the point of no return.
Yes Jeff, some is the same “anti-Mormon” stuff, some of which the church has admitted on their own web site (tucked away a bit though) which saying years ago would get you excommunicated.
It is bad that your in-laws disowned your wife for joining. Are we not as members asked to be above such petty, “You are either on my team or you are my enemy!” ? I too have family that were nearly disowned for joining the church. Can’t we come to a place were we lament when someone leaves, but we don’t generally consider them very bad people and shun them? I wish we could as a church say to someone that decides to leave, “Sorry this didn’t bring you closer to God. May God be with you in your journey and just know we are always here to welcome you back with open arms if you wish to come join us again.” I can tell you that I don’t see this happening in my ward and I don’t hear much at all (Maybe 1 talk from Pres. Uchtdorf) saying anything like that. It is more, “bad and terrible things will happen if you leave!”
I do realize he has been all over the map, but as someone that is honestly trying to figure out what God wants me to do, I often wander around the map. I have never prayed so hard as when I was asking, “Is all this true? Are you telling me to leave the church?” It is very hard to figure out. I know that God knows I am trying even though I grumble on blogs a bit (partially because I can’t begin to talk with others in my ward on this – let alone my wife!)
I am not disagreeing that John has probably stepped over a line, but your one post just seemed to me to be writing him off as ONLY some anti-Mormon doctrine promoter. I don’t think it is that simple. I do think he cares about those that are hurt as they leave the church and wants to make that something less emotionally/socially damaging.
I tend to think John would not have been ex’d six months ago. Since then, he seems to have been seeking it. What changed? Among other things perhaps, Kate Kelly was ex’d. Personally, it looks to me as though John has sought excommunication in the wake of that. John is less believing yet more Mormon than Kate ever was; he was in a position to handle a court better than she was. And yet, I don’t think this will be the final chapter for John. Either way, I wish him the best.
#15 I don’t really agree that Dehlin’s been seeking excommunication. His SP drew a line in the sand. JD said I don’t recognize that line and continued doing what he had been doing all along.
Yes, that was pretty in your face once the gauntlet was thrown down but the choices were 1) be intimidated or 2) don’t. Whichever choice he made was a reaction to the SP’s ultimatum. And which choice he was likely to make must have been abundantly clear to his SP before his first letter based on the long term direction of JD’s podcasts. So to continue doing what he does just doesn’t rise to JD’s seeking excommunication to me.
Likewise, if his podcasts have focused on excommunications, SSM and OW for the last year or so it’s because those topics are timely and all the more so because his SP and Kate Kelly’s SP underscored them as issues.
It seems inevitable now that he will be excommunicated. I just don’t think it will contribute anything because the above issues along with the others like JS’s polygamy/polygyny, the historicity of the BOM and the church’s manipulations of history are NOT going to go away. We will now simply add punitive discipline and chilling attempts at thought control to them.
Yes, I know it’s not thought control. It’s just that it walks like thought control and swims like thought control and quacks like thought control so I just keep mistaking it for thought control.
I do think that the excommunication of Kate and (assumed) John will not make either “issue” go away. They might quiet down some and embolden others, all the while a larger group will just silently attempt to fade into the background. Meanwhile the church will be left even less diverse of a range of thought and the chanting of those remaining will be even louder and less interrupted by those with any differing opinion.
Dang I am cynical tonight.
I’ve only sat in two disciplinary councils (thankfully), and I did not feel that the disciplinary intent was punitive. Call me naïve, but I believe that a SP in Logan is looking at the soul of an individual with the goal of helping the bring to pass the individual’s salvation. One of the councils I sat in involved a member who was relishing in their sexual liberation from the restraints of the law of chastity and facebooking with detail the energizing and youth-reclaiming effects of casual sexual relationships. So, you might say that what that person wanted was to be out of the obligations of church membership with a goal of either being left alone or excommunicated.
As the face of Mormon Stories, John is also associated with an online account where other LDS individuals read about his experiences of living a less committed LDS life. If he is no longer a member of the church, as Jeff mentioned, his effectiveness in presenting an energizing alternate path will diminish. But for his salvation, the SP is looking for an action that will lead to faith, repentance, communion, and coming to Christ according to the gospel taught by living prophets.
Look at the example of early church member Harvey Whitlock. He joined the church in 1831 and was a witness to the Book of Commandments. He was excommunicated in 1835. He wrote a letter to Joseph Smith expressing repentance, returned to Kirtland and was rebaptized in 1836. He withdrew from the church in 1838. He became a member of Sidney Rigdon’s church in 1846, moved to Salt Lake City in 1850, and joined the Utah LDS church in 1858. He was excommunicated in 1859. He moved to California and lead a branch of the RLDS church in 1864. In 1868, he was excommunicated from the RLDS church.
Now that is how to do excommunication! The hopeful outcome of Harvye’s first excommunication–faith, repentance, communion and coming to Christ through the gospel as taught by the living prophet was accomplished. That is what I believe the SP wants for John. I don’t know John Dehlin, but if his conscience is not allowing him to go down that pathway, then he has really asked for excommunication.
In Japanese, the word used for an apostate was ‘hantaisha’–if that usage is incorrect by someone who understands Japanese better than me, let me know. The standard English translation for hantaisha includes: opponent or dissenter. The ‘anti-mormon’ rhetoric described in #11 above is an oppositional plan to the message that is being given to the Logan congregation by the authorized priesthood leaders.
As Hawkgrrl mentions, I also wish John the best. I have enjoyed a few of his podcasts and would likely listen to more if time and technology were more available to me. I definitely felt, however, that I needed to balance those programs with more positive gospel viewpoints to maintain the feeling that I believe to be ‘the spirit’ working in me.
Jeff S,
Thanks for the link, it really puts it in perspective. Alice and others present him as a “faithful” member with “honest” questions. He is an apostate and deserves to be excommunicated, in my view, long over due. Thanks for the clarifying commentary — the truth
I only thought it was interesting how far John has actually come in his progression out of the Church. It’s one thing to have questions, we all do. It’s another thing to have doubts, we all do at one time or another. But to actively preach against the Church and fundamental truth claims, well, that to me is a different story.
We are free to believe whatever we like. about the Gospel, the Plan of Salvation, the live of Jesus, the veracity of the scriptures, the authority of the leadership, SSM, polygamy, whatever.
But when we try to persuade others to believe as we do, that can be a problem.
Jeff, thanks for your exchange without getting nasty. I was in a bit of a huffy/defensive mood yesterday (real lack of sleep was a contributing factor). More of the “happy” of “happy hubby” is back. I will back off much of what I said and after doing even a bit more investigation into the matter, I do think that John is already mentally out of the church.
I do still very much wish the church and the members could allow people to leave the church and say (as I posted yesterday), “Sorry this didn’t bring you closer to God. May God be with you in your journey and just know we are always here to welcome you back with open arms if you wish to come join us again.” To me that feels Christ-like. I see very little of that for those that doubt and can’t get past those doubts and leave the church.
Thanks again Jeff for your rational dialogue – even while I was venting a bit.
Happy,
I am always sad when folks leave. I’ve had it happen in my family. It happens for so many different reasons, you really can’t classify all the reasons and give an actual cause and effect to it.
I so strongly believe in the concept of agency that I have to respect people’s choice, even if I disagree.
I think a lot of the lack of love toward those who leave could be rooted in fear that it can really happen to any of us under the right set of circumstances, no matter how strong we think our testimonies are. Even those with strong testimonies can decide to no longer participate for one reason or another. I’ve seen that as well.
Thanks.
“It happens for so many different reasons, you really can’t classify all the reasons and give an actual cause and effect to it.”
Actually, John has put together a survey and presented it to the GA’s. Yes, there are many different reasons people leave the church, but we CAN classify them, and it has been done. This feels like misdirection because you don’t want to accept Happy Hubby’s premises, but certainly there are a lot (but not all) of people who leave precisely for the reasons Happy Hubby mentions. The GA’s are aware of these reasons, and don’t seem to have come up with a coherent strategy yet.
General reasons, perhaps. Specific personal reasons, combination of reason, not so much.
I think John will be excommunicated. There’s really not any fundamental truth claim in the church that John hasn’t publicly disagreed with or called a blatant falsehood. There’s nothing wrong with that if he’s being honest, but in that same spirit of honesty, he should have resigned his membership. Why didn’t he? He’s clearly beyond family or cultural pressure, and the group he moves in will be just as accepting of him as an ex-member as they would of a semi-member. So what’s his motivation? The only one I can see is that he’ll lose “insider” influence. A person questioning the church might be looking for an impartial source who can see both sides, and John’s built his community from such. They’d be less likely to see John as balanced if they know he’s an ex-mo from the outset.
How would Dehlin feel about being disfellowshipped? Still a member as he says he wants to be, and officially labeled a Bad Mormon Who Ought to Repent.
Alice: “His SP drew a line in the sand. . . the choices were 1) be intimidated or 2) don’t. Whichever choice he made was a reaction to the SP’s ultimatum.” I get where you are coming from, but no, I don’t think so. Everything is a negotiation. There are never only 2 choices. He could say, let’s shelve that for now, and let me talk to you about what I’m concerned about. He could achieve a different outcome by presenting different outcomes. I’m not criticizing his choice in saying that. I’m just pointing out that there are always more than two options, and he certainly doesn’t have to be intimidated either way. That’s just silly. I imagine that the SP wasn’t seeking to intimidate him, but that his view of the outcomes were that this line was significant. But it’s still a two-sided discussion. John also has a POV that he can represent to the SP.
Authority attempts what we might call “thought control” when they don’t trust those who are doing that thinking. But there are ways to restore that trust. It takes time, willingness, and communication. There can be reconciliation. There can be persuasion and common ground.
Hawk,
“There can be reconciliation. There can be persuasion and common ground.’
It’s hard to reconcile, when the other person is throwing rocks at you…. in public
I’ve said before, the person with the most understanding has the most responsibility for how the relationship turns out. What I like about this advice is that we all have to imagine we are the one with the greater understanding. Therefore, we have to demonstrate the patience, the willingness to take the high road, the listening. The other person failing to do so just demonstrates their lack of understanding and our own responsibility to guide the relationship.
Jeff, you said,
“But to actively preach against the Church and fundamental truth claims, well, that to me is a different story.”
What does that mean and can you give an example? I must admit I avoid the MS podcasts that seem like they would have strong emotional bias against the church, but I’ve can’t recall one that seemed to try and persuade people away from the church or its fundamentals. Mainly they seem to encourage transparency and understanding. Essentially, MS is a bunch of people just talking in an open space.
To me this is very different from the OW movement which active sought to force change.
I don’t understand how JD’s case qualifies for apostasy as the church defines it.
OS
Olsin, I’m not a close observer of these things, but now and then JD has talked about creating alternate organizations for those who want to be Mormons but on different terms than the LDS Church would choose. In his 2014 year-end podcast that was mentioned somewhere above, he brings up such organizing as one of his hopes for the future. Whether he does more about it than talk, I don’t know, and whether it rises to the level of apostate dissension will be for the high council to discuss, but there’s a little more going on, or at least being proposed, than chatting in public.
Oisin,
I provided the link in an earlier comment to the podcast I am referring to. Rather than re-print it here, I would encourage you to look and listen to information John gives at around the 20 minute mark and the 30 minute mark.
You can decide for yourself. I would agree that the Mormon Stories podcast are not specifically the issue. I have listened to most of them and have enjoyed and learned from many of them.
The issue is not that John has doubts; the issue is that he is popular. If he and Kate Kelly weren’t popular, neither of them would be in trouble.
MH,
Absolutely correct. He is both popular and tending to be very public and challenging…. that’s really the issue.
Although I agree with John on some of these issues, my lack of popularity and utter laziness save me from being a target.
Hawkgrrrl – do you honestly think that there isn’t a file with your name on it in the Strengthening Church Members Committee? 🙂
I have a question about John Dehlin’s upcoming meeting with the high council: If he is excommunicated, will he wear a sleeveless shirt in subsequent media appearances?
Happy Hubby: If so, I guarantee you it’s misspelled. Everybody misses the third “R” in hawkgrrrl. Whatchagonnado?
Jeff, I listened to the year-end podcast. I don’t know if he realized it, but sounded pretty revved up. I bet some of it comes from knowing that the excommunication axe is hanging over his head.
What’s hard to reconcile is that regardless of his opinions, John seems to display a high level of honesty and integrity. Yes, he has some obvious biases, but he is all about transparency. The church has great intentions, but leaders seem to be even less aware of their biases and they dont even recognize transparency as a virtue.
I don’t agree with John on how he handles some things and he seems he now longer understands the role of spiritually-based testimonies but what he said all seemed pretty logical and aimed at helping people rather than hurting the church.
Hawkgrrrl, it doesnt matter if the church is keeping track of you. If you are know you agree with John, then so does heaven. It’s your responsibility to schedule an appointment with your stake president and confess your apostasy. Don’t forget that on judgement day you need to score 100% to pass.
I was hoping that to get into Heaven I just had to beat St. Peter at Trivia Crack.