Bill Reel published on his website a letter from his stake president informing him of a disciplinary court scheduled later this month. He is accused of acting in clear, open and deliberate opposition to the LDS Church.
Bill stated in his web article that he expected this to happen eventually. Based on my observations the last year, I also expected this to happen eventually.
I first became aware of Bill when he was posting on Mormon Dialogue in about 2012. At that point, I was pretty fully faith-deconstructed, and in an anxious and unsettled time period, engaging online in Mormon circles sort of as lurker. Bill was known as the guy that as a Mormon bishop, faced the historical faith crisis issues and came out of that as a nuanced believer, who had sympathy for the doubter and was a model to “make it work”. Here’s a link to his testimony on the mormon.org site. It probably won’t be there for long.
Bill became one of a few voices along with Adam Miller, Terryl Givens that helped me see a nuanced path, which finally became crystallized to me as I read Marcus Borg’s Heart of Christianity and other Liberal Christians like Borg, Crossan, Spong, Enns. That led to a faith reconstruction process that reinvigorated my testimony of the restored Church. An introduction to this view is in this short essay on Paradigms.
I took some time to articulate my message and then went online with my blog and Facebook posts in 2015. The Middle Way has been and still is a tough road that feels lonely and friendless at times. I get attacked by traditional Mormons that feel like my nuanced views of a non-historical Book of Mormon or a “less exclusive” interpretation of the First Vision event are dangerous. And then I get attacked by critics who tell me my love and support for the Church is not only intellectually unsound but also immoral as it harms LGBT+ and others.
Bill, also being in that middle ground, was one of the first people I reached out to, and I have valued our friendship since. He was the first person I broke anonymity with and introduced myself in person at Sunstone. He’s been kind and supportive to me and hundreds (if not thousands) of others that seek him out. His “Why I Stay” Sunstone talk in 2016 was very inspiring to me and left me and my wife, who at that time was very unsure of this path, more determined to make an effort to help those in LDS faith crisis find a way to stay. Included in that talk was a message that he feels so much empathy for the LGBT+ members that are struggling in Mormonism right now. But it was because of his background in the Church not in spite of it, that led him to follow Christ, and become the kind of person that could and would feel that empathy. I still feel chills when I type that. It was a powerful moment.
Since then, many have noticed in Bill a trend that he has been more and more critical of the Church. More and more willing to call out individual Church leaders. Less and less likely to point to the positives of the Church. More likely to encourage people to leave than to stay.
I’ve been sad, personally, about that trend. I’ve had some chats with Bill about it. I won’t put words in his mouth or make my own theories or guesses into his psyche or motivations. I understand where he’s coming from, and I won’t judge him for taking his path. I disagree with it. I would take a different path. I evaluate the same data points and come to a different conclusion.
One observation I’ll make on that, which I’ll try to do respectfully. In June of last year, Bill did a guest interview with the Infant on Thrones podcast, a podcast known for being extremely critical against the LDS Church. In the interview, he was absolutely blasted. I got more and more upset as I listened as the interviewer berated Bill over and over, long rants that were personal and angry and confrontational. By supporting the Church from a middle way perspective, Bill was complicit in all the evils of the Church, including causing the suicide of LGBT+ youth. Bill was respectful and tried to defend himself and what he was trying to do, but he was treated extremely rude. I could be wrong, but I thought I observed a major shift in Bill’s tone after that.
Someone on the Mormon side of this might say Bill’s being manipulated by Exmormons. Exmormons might say someone finally helped Bill see the proper perspective.
A question in this is whether Bill deserves to be excommunicated for what he is doing. Theologically, I think maybe it would be best to get rid of the church disciplinary system. But in practice, I think the church’s application for excommunication for apostasy has not been too overbearing. Over the last several years, I don’t think there has been more than a handful: Kate Kelly, John Dehlin, Jeremy Runnels, Sam Young. There might have been a few more, but I’m pretty sure it’s in the single digits for the last five years or so. That’s not that many in a church of 15 million people.
*edit after more thought: this number (ie excommunications for vocally criticizing or questioning the Church from a liberal-secular perspective) is low relative to the number of people in this space commenting in a way that is violating the “not OK” bullet points, but my claim it’s in single digits over five years is likely a little low.
The Church doesn’t have a clear standard in these cases. Since everything is unique, it’s hard to be clear in a policy. The basic idea is that you can disagree, you can even vocally disagree, but you can’t vocally oppose. I go into depth on this concept of opposition in another post. Here’s a summary.
OK to:
- disagree with Church policy or doctrine
- express disagreement on Facebook and social media
- desire for change and ask the brethren to seek revelation to change policies and doctrine
Not OK to:
- stage protests
- campaign publicly against the church
- demand change
- attempt to sway public opinion against the prophet or certain church leaders
- harshly criticize the prophet or other general authorities
I think you could go online to the normal sources: Mormon related blogs, Facebook groups, podcasts, and forums and you would find many LDS that are arguably doing a lot on the “Not OK” list. There’s a pretty long leash on what the Church allows. But occasionally, maybe a couple times a year on average there is someone who “crosses the line” in terms of how critical the person is being and how big the audience is.
Based on the above bullet list and the threshold that only the members at the very top of that list get a disciplinary court, I sadly have to acknowledge that a court for Bill fits that pattern. Out of respect for Bill, I’m not going to make a list of examples where he’s done that. I thought the famous “hit piece” by Greg Smith published in the Interpreter that did this for John Dehlin was nauseating.
It’s sad for me that what Bill is doing is putting him on the opposite side of the fence as me. I wish we were both fighting together in the Middle Way space, encouraging members to stay, and hoping to affect change in the LDS Church long term, within the bounds the Church has set for that. But I understand he feels a need to do it a different way. And in Bill’s language: “I honor that and hold space for you.”
Wheat & Tares 
I am sad about this for Bill. I have really enjoyed his podcasts and gotten to know him personally. I have no idea how he has the time and energy to do everything he does. I don’t think we should excommunicate anyone. I think that it does a lot of harm to everyone, including the Church. I hope that we can do better in the future.
You all know the saying: As Bill Reel is, John Dehlin once was. As John Dehlin is, Bill Reel will become.
I don’t know anything about Bill Reel or whether his excommunication is warranted, but I find it strange that so many people disapprove of excommunication in general. I’ve heard plenty from people who’ve left the church, about how it’s an “abusive relationship”, and it seems to me that if they really feel that way, then by all means they should leave. But I also feel that works both ways. There’s only so much the church should have to put up with. Yes, it’s a tragedy, but just like in a divorce, the tragedy commences long before the separation, occurs in slow motion, and only culminates in divorce/excommunication. Any organization founded on a set of ideas must necessarily guard the boundaries of those ideas or else it becomes an organization of different ideas.
I personally think there’s an awful lot of room for various viewpoints in the church. There are plenty of participating members who believe virtually none of the fundamental premises of the church, and as long as they’re not actively working against the church, they get along just fine. I’ve heard them complain that if they express their contrary viewpoint they get sideways looks, but I view it as similar to be a pro-life Democrat or pro-choice Republican — most people don’t care as long as you’re not too outspoken, are actively contributing to the party, and vote the right way. The minute you start organizing around your contrary opinion, you’re gone. The comparison to party politics seems coarse, but a lot of people have stronger political convictions than they do religious ones.
Personally, I think the church has been too slow wrt to some excommunications, and I think that’s because the local bishop often really cares about the dissident and hopes for reconciliation. But just like a marriage counselor can often tell after a single 30-minute session whether a marriage is salvageable just by the level of mutual contempt, I think the same applies to dissidents. Once the contempt level reaches a certain point, it’s just a poison. It’s a gangrene. It’s not going to heal by holding it close, and it’s liking to spread.
“The Middle Way has been and still is a tough road that feels lonely and friendless at times. I get attacked by traditional Mormons that feel like my nuanced views of a non-historical Book of Mormon or a “less exclusive” interpretation of the First Vision event are dangerous. And then I get attacked by critics who tell me my love and support for the Church is not only intellectually unsound but also immoral as it harms LGBT+ and others.”
That’s the same definition of middle way that I have. It’s happened to me too.
“Over the last several years, I don’t think there has been more than a handful: Kate Kelly, John Dehlin, Jeremy Runnels, Sam Young. There might have been a few more, but I’m pretty sure it’s in the single digits for the last five years or so. ”
Uhh that’s way too low, unless you’re only counting public excommunications. Lots of LGBT get exed with no fanfare. And John Dehlin has made it a point to interview many exed for apostasy with much less publicity than the people you listed.
I follow Bill’s podcast and think he’s pretty good, but if you haven’t listened to RFM (Radio Free Mormon), you are missing out! I agree with the OP that Bill has gotten a little bit carried away on a few points. I sense from his tone lately that he has become antagonistic towards anything religious. This is sad to me as I see so many people throw out God when Mormonism blows up on them.
Church is True, I find your comments a bit disingenuous. You seem to be saying the Church is ok with your middle way, but retain your anonymity out of fear of Church retribution? Which is it?
I realize I criticizing you use of anonymity from an anonymous account. Difference is I’m quite certain the Church is absolutely not ok of the middle way.
Disappointing news. Bill seems like a good dude.
You are a great friend to acknowledge that Bill really probably should find himself in a disciplinary court where he can be removed from the Saints. Where his eternal marriage can be dissolved by the church. Where he can expierence ultimate rejection by his tribe. Thanks for doing your part, Churchistrue, with this post to clearly explain how God has established the proper way for his members to appropriately point out blatant errors that are harming his children.
I disagree that it was because of his background in the LDS church, it was 100% Bill working in spite of his background in the LDS church.
When I learned that the church had taught me a whitewashed version of history, I was reminded of an incident where my father said to me, “The problem with lying is that once you are being lied to, you begin to realize that you cannot trust anything that person (or organization) says.”
The depth of the LDS dishonesty is frankly staggering. Almost nothing is portrayed with any degree of accuracy. The church fails its own definition of honesty. It lies with omissions, winks, nods, and changes in vocal tone…and does so with the intention to deceive…all with the noblest of intentions of course, to keep those tithing dollars flowing and to control members.
Even worse the church armed me with that false version of history and commanded me to go forth and lie to others, at my own expense and time. When I figured out that I was being lied to from the very top echelons of the church I walked away. The church taught my family to shun me. They did so with innuendo, slander, and character assassination.
Make no mistake, excommunications are the church’s method of cultural character assassination. In today’s world, people’s attempts to effect change have escalated to harsh criticisms, protests, and more because church leaders don’t listen. They haven’t listened for 180 years and now they are in danger of watching the church collapse from under them.
The middle way is ultimately as dishonest as corporate Mormonism. The only real difference is that instead of lying to others, you lie to yourself. But then humanity has always been good at that, haven’t they?
Gregggg…I understand it could seem a little off to post under pseudonym and claim that the Church is fine with unorthodox like me without putting any skin in the game. All I can say to defend that is I can point to hundreds of other online commentators that are further than me in terms of my “not OK” bullet point list that don’t get called in for courts.
Dan, you misread me. I said according to the rules and pattern the Church has established recently I a) don’t feel they are being overbearing–ie the excommunications have been relatively few and understandable based on the criteria b) according to those rules, it seems like Bill’s excommunication would be expected. I personally don’t want it to happen.
Churchistrue,
Do we know those are the only Apostasy excommunications? I think there are many, many more that are less high profile. I personally know two guys in my stake excommunicated for conducting re-baptisms and promoting a spiritual rebirth style of Mormonism. They were excommunicated for apostasy. Maybe you were only alluding to high profile Mormons on the internet? If I were to give a sacrament talk and discuss a non literal view of the BoM or say something like the dominant origin narrative is false. My leaders would certainly haul me in, tell me to keep quiet, and if I didn’t they would excommunicate me.
The middle way Mormonism path is very much like the “don’t ask, don’t tell” former policy of the military. As long as you keep it a secret and dont influence anyone else, they likely wont try to hunt you down for it.
Gregggg…Yes, you’re right, there are some excommunications on that far right side related to Snufferites and all that. I wasn’t including that as it seems like a completely different world. I’m also not talking about excommunication due to “sin”, such as violating chastity commandments and that type of thing. I am talking about the excommunications in the ProgMo world related to questioning or criticizing things from secular/liberal perspective, ie historical issues, LGBT+ issues, etc. The rate could be a little higher than my couple per year, but I pay some attention to these things, and they are nearly all publicized at least a little bit, on Reddit or whatever. It’s not a huge number compared to the people that are obviously doing things in the “not OK” bullet list.
I’m not sure if the number of apostasy excommunications matters. I think the purposes are:
1. Send a message to faithful members that they should not start listening to these people or their sympathizers
2. Send a message to middle-way Mormons that they should be silent or private with their concerns
A pretty clear message can be sent with just one high profile excommunication every couple of years.
I believe there are more excommunications, and more people pushed to resign, than we are aware of – not everyone publishes their life on Reddit. But there really is no way to know if it’s a lot or not.
Churchistrue,
I’m also talking only about Apostasy excommunication.
I actually think that the higher profile the person, the more protection they might have. That imagine dragons guy, had a full blown HBO documentary that trashed the Church. His profile protects him. The PR s### storm that would ensue if they ex’d that guy would be epic. If little nobody Gregggg advertised to his ward members that I’m hosting a Believer watch party, and kicking off a discussion series at my home focused on how the church has wronged gay youth, and how we can promote change – I’d get a talking to. If I refused to conform, I’d get ex’d.
The fact that a relatively tiny amount of middle way mormons get ex’d for Apostasy should not be a gauge of the Church’s tolerance towards it or its acceptance of it. The rate may also be low as people know they really only have two choices, stay quiet about non-conformist views, or leave the Church. Most would rather slip out the back door than go head-to-head with the Church and allow them the pleasure of a humiliating court of love event.
There is no path currently in the Church for outspoken, authentic, middle-way Mormonism.
Does the Church leadership have the right to ex members? Sure, they have that right. Most of you sustained the leadership.
Is it the right thing to do in cases of progressive members. Hell no. Who wants a church of just blind followers? I don’t. Diversity is great and necessary for a vibrant and healthy organization. Besides, an organization of just sheep is boring.
Is it moral and ethical to ex progressive members. Hell no. In smacks of leadership paranoia and insecurity. Signs of an aging oligarchy.
I don’t feel sorry for him at.all. The guy is a total leach. He uses the Church to springboard his desire for some form of internet fame like all these other people, Waterman, Runnells, Dehlin (where are they all now?) and being exed plays right into it. He is on record, see his FB post from July this past year, as saying he has read more and knows more than 99% of members, like can you get more egotistical? What a joke. He’s read everyone, everything, he knows it all. He’s probably jealous he hasn’t had the second anointing like Tom Phillips, someone who he sees as intellectually inferior. He wants to be something he isn’t. he works in some dead end pawn store and trying to get some internet fame is his ticket out to get people to take him seriously. I think the guy needs therapy. There is a middle way but the Bill Reel way isn’t it.
@Roger Hansen-No, you’re wrong. The Church is changing but people like you and others still aren’t happy. You need to get unstuck from the idea that the Church is wooden and never changing. The First Presidency and Q12 are on instagram, are you? Who really is progressive? I don’t know if you pay attention to the Church at all but they change things up. The Church is progressive but you need to be as well.
The Church is regressing toward extreme conservative Christianity, NOT progressivism. And the excommunications demonstrate that. Prez Nelson-Oaks want blind obedience. They don’t want us thinking too much.
Prez Eyring father was a brilliant scientist and progressive Mormon. What happened to his son? Why won’t he speak up?
@Roger Hansen-“Extreme conservative Christianity”? please explain, I think I know what that means but what do you think it means? You contradict yourself, you say the Church doesn’t want us thinking too much yet Pres. Eyring’s father was a “brilliant scientist and progressive mormon” ??? For all we know his son is speaking up, the church is changing
It’s telling that the Church has been actively targeting progressives for discipline but they refuse to do anything about people like the Bundys, Ayla Stewart (Wife With a Purpose) or Joseph Bishop. These people are far more dangerous to the mission and image of the Church than the “feminists, gays and intellectuals” but they remain members, with no apparent threat of Church discipline anytime soon.
Roger, I don’t think it’s necessarily that the LDS Church is regressing toward extreme Evangelical conservativism so much as it’s a matter of the wider society and liberal Mormonism rushing toward an extreme and unfounded culture of sexual experimentation.
Martin writes “Once the contempt level reaches a certain point, it’s just a poison. It’s a gangrene. It’s not going to heal by holding it close, and it’s liking to spread.”
Well stated! The deep issue is contempt. Once there is contempt I can see no reason to even pretend to a social communion.
I believe contempt is often a product of pride. This is, IMO, why the church leadership has cautioned “intellectuals”; not because there’s anything wrong with intelligence but intellectuals tend to become prideful, and that leads to contempt of others. I see it often in technical helpdesk staff; young men that express contempt for people that have difficulty with computers while at the same time depending on those victims of computers for their paychecks.
When I help someone with a computer I show interest in what that person is doing with it; accounting or graphic arts for instance, and by so doing show respect for the skills of the person I am helping; I do not show contempt neither do I feel it.
It is so also at church. Contempt cannot be hidden. Why would you stay in an organization for which you feel contempt? Is it a form of revenge or is it to “level up” your victim virtue points? I bleed so you can hear the splashes! (credit to Poul Anderson, science fiction writer, for that description).
I seldom feel contempt for anyone, but in a church setting I suppose I feel a bit of it for those people that have never opened their own books of scripture; perhaps were compelled to read a few passages now and then in Sunday School, and while that too is okay, then suppose themselves to have a meaningful opinion on any church topic. But what is my duty regarding such persons? I have none beyond the Christian duty to love my neighbor. He or she is on a path and I am on a different path.
There seems to have been no mention of people leaving the path (in Lehi’s Dream), dragging people back onto the path.
D&C 11:21 Seek not to declare my word, but first seek to obtain my word, and then shall your tongue be loosed; then, if you desire, you shall have my Spirit and my word, yea, the power of God unto the convincing of men.
First Nephi chapter 8 describes the blogosphere. I reviewed it to see how much force is used to drag people to the tree of life, or push them away. In the dream no force is used either way; people choose their paths.
Some accept persuasion:
15 And it came to pass that I beckoned unto them; and I also did say unto them with a loud voice that they should come unto me, and partake of the fruit, which was desirable above all other fruit. 16 And it came to pass that they did come unto me and partake of the fruit also.
Some do not:
17 And it came to pass that I was desirous that Laman and Lemuel should come and partake of the fruit also; wherefore, I cast mine eyes towards the head of the river, that perhaps I might see them. 18 And it came to pass that I saw them, but they would not come unto me and partake of the fruit.
Some do not stay:
25 And after they had partaken of the fruit of the tree they did cast their eyes about as if they were ashamed. 28 And after they had tasted of the fruit they were ashamed, because of those that were scoffing at them; and they fell away into forbidden paths and were lost.
I am permitted to persuade; but that is my path. You are permitted your own path. It is perhaps proper, maybe even a duty, for leaders (prophets in particular) to identify those forbidden paths. But they won’t stand in the way of you following those paths.
There was a big fire on USS Forrestal (*). To save the ship many expensive jet fighters had to be pushed overboard; they could not be saved. The metaphor is perhaps a bit strong, but what was the justification for Laban’s murder?
13 Behold the Lord slayeth the wicked to bring forth his righteous purposes. It is better that one man should perish than that a nation should dwindle and perish in unbelief.
That is the key. If your path includes trying to cause other people to “dwindle” and perish in unbelief, that’s pretty serious. If you merely have doubts and seek greater light and knowledge; well, who does not?
Korihor’s doubt was not a sin; it was his advocacy against the church that was a sin. He could have simply started his own church; the Church of Angels Who Say There Is No God.
* en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_USS_Forrestal_fire
Be mindful of your own cleverness. Asking, or pretending to ask, difficult questions in the presence of weakly converted souls is malicious; its design is not to seek greater light and knowledge but is designed to confuse and plant seeds of doubt in others.
“The Christian with a weak conscience does not have the knowledge to make correct moral judgments. Paul worries that this person might follow the example of those presumed to have knowledge but eat idol food as truly offered to an idol, that is, as a sacrificial act. … He would abstain from eating meat altogether (8:13).” 1 Corinthinas 8 http://www.vanderbilt.edu/AnS/religious_studies/SNTS2002/garland.htm
I’d love to hear from Bill here in response to your comments.
Whizzbang: examples include discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community, refusal to give woman significant leadership roles, anti-science statements by leaders, unjustified biblical literalism, etc.
Prez Eyring doesn’t give talks on significant and important issues, issues he should be more than qualified to discuss. Instead he just gives safe easy talks.
And having an Instagram account doesn’t make you progressive.
Seth: Are you talking about LGBTQ+ issues? Or the repressive children’s interviews, or slut-shaming of women?
What Bill needs is a letter writing campaign from people he has brought back to the church in the last year.
@Roger, Oh I see what you mean! No, you’re still wrong. I attend Church with someone who has a doctorate in Medicine, the Church didn’t push them out. I have a former mission comp. who is gay, still attends Church. Bill Reel’s ego is unbelievable, He like others think his Court is being orchestrated from SLC, because he can’t think of himself as just another lowlife and who’s court is being handled locally. Kick him out for an overinflated ego, be done with it already. he’s proved he’s chaff (Matt 3) and it’s time to seperate
@Roger, let me ask you this. At church do you listen to women when they speak? Does it matter if it’s one woman or thirty of them? if you don’t listen to one then you wouldn’t listen to more, so the change for listening has to come from within and that’s up to you, not the Church. If you want your version of “progressivism”, then that’s up to you not anyone else. I am not going to be forced into anything just so you can feel good about yourself being “progressive”
The OP wrote; “…..someone who “crosses the line” in terms of how critical the person is being and how big the audience is.” Hmm…
I guess this suggests the size of my audience is a negative number. Or perhaps an irrational number.
BTW Kristine, Dsc is making arguments he/she can’t back up. I love this blog.
I don’t know if this helps- but screaming in moderate amounts is good for babies. But it is hard on care-takers.
You’ll be fine and one day look back on these times as the salad days of your life.
It is funny to me how fast people go through the stages of:
The only place to find true happiness is in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
The Church and the Gospel are two separate things. Happiness is found in living the gospel.
One can find happiness in the Church, they just have to find it and focus on the good.
There is little in the churches teachings or practices that offer happiness.
It is a damn cult.
I’ve listened to Bill for about five years and have appreciated his perspective. As a missionary, I taught that our church and the prophet has the answers. Sad that Bill’s questions and deep concerns have remained unanswered by the church he loved and served. May the Lord warm Bill’s shoulders as he passes through this horrible ecclesiastical experience.
I found Bill about a year ago and promptly listened to many of his podcasts starting at the beginning. He has been a devote convert, who became a Bishop at age 29 and served his ward well, studying like many of us adult converts. He was so ALL IN and enthusiastic. I hear the pain in his voice now, the betrayal, the loss of trust, the frustration and the hurt. He has a new podcast and web site, Christ of Faith, in addition to Mormon Discussion. He is trying so hard to be true to Jesus’ teachings IMHO. I like Bill. He is in deep pain. I predict he will be ex’d but also trust that Bill will emerge stronger and still rooted in Our Savior. Wish the best for you Bill. You have helped me in many ways.
I respectfully disagree with most of this article. The LDS Church does not change from the grass roots. It changes when pressure from outside sources, usually government ones and often because money is at stake, force it to change. It is run about as “top down” as any organization can be. It’s nice to talk about the middle way and changing from within. But, as the father of a gay son, the only change I’ve seen in the LDS Church is retrenchment on LGBTQ issues. Other than discussion on blogs and Facebook groups, there is no space for open Middle Way Mormons which is why blogs like this have to be anonymous.
Hats off to Bill for having the courage to call a spade, a spade and telling it like it is. For some, the LDS Church is no more than a religious country club. If that’s what works for you then by all means, stay in and support it. Middle way Mormons will accomplish nothing in terms of change in the LDS Chruch. They will be ignored. The LDS Church hardly knows or cares that they exist.
Bill is going down speaking his truth and will have my greatest respect and admiration for his courage to do so.
I’ve been wondering where Bill went. I loved his podcasts with FAIR. They were always well done. While I am saddened to learn of these events I can only say this 2 great commandments were given Love the Lord thy God will all thy heart and mind, the 2nd is like unto it to love one another like I have loved you. On this hang all the commandments.
I think Bill is a good guy. I am sad to see him getting the boot. I stalk his profile on Facebook because I am too much of a coward to friend him. If it is true that David Bokovoy is out of the church, that really bums me out too. The problem with this middle way bs, is that it assumes the church is constant. I would bet that most people have a breaking point. If the church moved more to the fundamentalist side with it’s temple questions or practices (didn’t BRM say polygamy would come back at some point?), more people would find themselves in this middle ground trying to make it work. If the church continues it’s progressive slide, middle way people will feel more at home and some of the fundies will have to pipe down at church or find a new home.
The church has to shift over the next few years and people like Bill, David, Anthony Miller, Hans Mattson, Kate Kelly etc… could have been huge assets, but instead they get kicked out or walk away because they were cursed with a thinking mind and a loud voice. The silver lining is that they will have the honor of being proved right 30 years from now. Hello Byron Marchant, BH Roberts, Lowry Nelson etc…
Zach, don’t forget John A. Widtsoe, the last science-minded GA who was willing to speak out. When he died, JFS and BRM tried to takeover and and turn the Church into a bastion of Christian conservatism. Prez. Nelson/Oaks are continuing the process.
Anti-science is okay in today’s Church. That is deeply troubling. It’s driving youth from the Church.
The OP is right that the church seems to excommunicate people once their criticism of the church becomes too pointed AND reaches a large enough audience. My public Facebook feed has been fairly critical of the church, but as I reach an audience of maybe thirteen people on a good day I am not really in danger of being ex’d. My question is why does size of audience matter? If the purpose of a court of love is to bring the sinner to repentance, why have I not been excommunicated? Clearly these high profile excommunications are less about helping the ex’d member and more about protecting the “good” name of the church. As Rockwell notes, these high-profile excommunications are more about sending a warning message to active members. “Don’t get too out of line or this might happen to you.”
@Roger, “anti science” driving people away from the Church is simply ridiculous. JFS and BRM have been dead a long time, a long time. Members got advanced degrees in science in their era and post JFS and BRM. Remember Don Lind(who spoke in Conference), James Fletcher (twice President of NASA) Henry Eyring and many, many more members with advanced degrees in Science
Whizzbang, many in the Church are still anti-science: anti-evolution; anti- vaxxing, anti-global warming, anti-big bang, pro LGBTQ+ discrimination (ignoring biology), biblical literalism, etc. This includes many in the CES. Why aren’t any of your scientists in the Q12 or P3? Instead we have business men and professionals.
MTodd writes “Don’t get too out of line or this might happen to you.”
If a person is that far out of line, he’s not in the line. People seem to want the benefits of standing in line without standing in line.
Roger Hansen writes “Anti-science is okay in today’s Church. That is deeply troubling.”
Trivially true. I can hate on the value of “pi” and the church won’t make objection although it could produce a lively priesthood meeting debate arguing over the 13th digit of its decimal representation which has deep but secret implications for the current location of the small plates of Nephi.
Render until God that which is God’s, and unto Science that which is Scientific. Why is this troubling?
” It’s driving youth from the Church.”
That seems unlikely but it is an interesting observation.
Zach writes: “It is funny to me how fast people go through the stages of”
The scriptural mention of this process is explored in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Sower
Roger Hansen asks of this expert group: “Why aren’t any of your scientists in the Q12 or P3? Instead we have business men and professionals.”
I have no idea. But then I have also not studied their former professions. Their purpose is to witness for Christ. They don’t seem to be doing that as much as I had hoped, but their former professions do not much concern or interest me.
The author states s/he has looked at the same data points as Bill has and come to a different conclusion. There are two data points I suggest the author has not considered. Bill has two gay children. At the risk of calling humans “data points” I suggest you are not both looking at the same data set.
@Roger Hansen – I don’t know why they need to be , would you rather have an unprofessional person there? I want to hear the good word of God when I hear conference, not a science lecture or a law lecture, none of which I actually do hear. Besides of which Elder Scott was in the 12, check out his CV. Also remember “many” is not all.
I listened to most of his interview today with John Dehlin and he’s not in a “middle way space”. He sees all the basic foundational stories and doctrines as false and wants to church to own up to it. He’s called Elder Holland a liar on multiple occasions and at the same time doesn’t want to be removed from his “tribe” as he calls it. He talked about hoping that someone on the council would be understanding but I’m not sure about what. I agree with all of his points and criticisms but for the life of me I don’t see the point in sending letters to the First Presidency and the Twelve and honestly expecting them to answer him back. For the life of me I don’t understand what he’s thinking.
Whizzbang, you listen to Prez Oaks’ law lectures all the time. I haven’t heard you complain. One of the major issues facing the Church is its relationship to science. A little enlightenment would be helpful. But Prez Eyring remains silent.
Zach, to the best of my knowledge, David Bokovoy is out of BYU but still in the church. Last I heard he is a prison chaplain and doing good work there with the inmates.
@Roger Hansen, you must be in the military-that was clear, concise and makes no sense whatsoever. Why would President Eyring give a science lecture in conference? he isn’t a scientist. Based on the fact that there are a LOT of members of the Church in science, you seem to be the one facing this issue. It’s all in your head. Ask yourself why is this an issue for you? Do you work in science? Where did you get your MA or PH.D. or Med. degree ? if you aren’t working in science then who cares what you think about science and the Church’s relationship to it. Next time I talk to my friend, who serves in the Bishopric, who has a MA in Physics i’ll ask him or email my female friend who has a Doctorate in Astrophysics and ask. Otherwise, if you don’t have any degree in science, I don’t care what your opinion is. Sorry man.