The June 1

[UVACoug]

so we should just forget that something like common consent ever made an appearance in the canon. gotcha.

Do you think the Church is (or ever has been) a democracy? Common consent is a pretty week argument for that position. I don't think I could belong to a Church that decides its doctrine on the basis of popular opinion. Maybe that is attractive to some, but it makes no sense to me. The whole point of the Church for me is to learn things I don't already know. I don't have the confidence in other members that you seem to let them decide what I believe.

[SeattleUte]

Denounce the LDS church or find myself having values that are repugnant to you? I am grinning from ear to ear.

I will let you know my decision later.

Not necessary. If you don't denounce it, I'll know your values.

[SeattleUte]

Do you think the Church is (or ever has been) a democracy? Common consent is a pretty week argument for that position. I don't think I could belong to a Church that decides its doctrine on the basis of popular opinion. Maybe that is attractive to some, but it makes no sense to me. The whole point of the Church for me is to learn things I don't already know. I don't have the confidence in other members that you seem to let them decide what I believe.

I agree with this. Common consent arguments is the apotheosis of progressive Mormon silliness.

[ERCougar]

Depending on the time of day it seems he wants to (1) still be Mormon but not affiliated with any ward or calling; (2) be active Mormon and able to baptize and bless his family; or (3) not be affiliated at all. The SP is probably just wondering what he really wants since it seems to be a mystery to many. Maybe the best thing is for the SP to publicly call him to repentance in stake conference and then just ignore the guy.

I agree that he's a little all over the place, but I cut him a little slack because he's made this very public journey (by choice, of course) through all the different shades of Mormonism, each with a representative who has found a way to make it work for him or her, and has likely forged some pretty close friendships with most of those he's interviewed. it's natural to be influenced. I guess he could do what most of us do instead and just shut himself down to any voice that doesn't confirm his worldview, all in the name of stability.

In the end, he's wandering a bit (maybe a lot). So you promptly excommunicate him, of course.

[byu71]

Not necessary. If you don't denounce it, I'll know your values.

I think you know I don't worry about my values not coinciding with yours. Undoubtedly some, maybe many are the same, but I don't lose any sleep knowing some aren't. I am sure you don't lose any sleep over it either.

[Moliere]

I agree that he's a little all over the place, but I cut him a little slack because he's made this very public journey (by choice, of course) through all the different shades of Mormonism, each with a representative who has found a way to make it work for him or her. it's natural to be influenced by what one hears. I guess he could do what most of us do instead just shut himself down to any voice that doesn't confirm his worldview in the name of stability.

In the end, he's wandering a bit (maybe a lot). So you promptly excommunicate him, of course.

Yes, the difference between him and us is that he's made his journey very public....so the moral of the story is that if you have doubts don't make them public. You'd probably agree with me that this is a horrible path as it, once again, seems to be the church trying to shut down unofficial channels of Mormon thought.

[SoonerCoug]

It just occurred to me that Lebowski may be at his own disciplinary hearing for running this web site.

[byu71]

Yes, the difference between him and us is that he's made his journey very public....so the moral of the story is that if you have doubts don't make them public. You'd probably agree with me that this is a horrible path as it, once again, seems to be the church trying to shut down unofficial channels of Mormon thought.

I think leadership in any organization, especially a non-democratic organization where people have a choice to be in or out, will try to weed out trouble makers.

I sit on the board of an organization where the board is elected by the membership, not the same thing as common consent. The board has had to make some tough decisions. Most everyone seems pleased with the results now, but there are a few who are vocally dissenting. The comment in the board meeting was, "they are a cancer and trying to sew discontent, let's offer to buy them out."

My point is the response church leadership has to vocal dissenters is not uncommon.

[smokymountainrain]

It just occurred to me that Lebowski may be at his own disciplinary hearing for running this web site.

If that's what you call what he's doing, I am going to ask my bishop immediately about setting up a disciplinary hearing for myself. I support gay marriage and would really like women to have the priesthood too, dammit!

[Uncle Ted]

Do you think the Church is (or ever has been) a democracy? Common consent is a pretty week argument for that position. I don't think I could belong to a Church that decides its doctrine on the basis of popular opinion. Maybe that is attractive to some, but it makes no sense to me. The whole point of the Church for me is to learn things I don't already know. I don't have the confidence in other members that you seem to let them decide what I believe.

Sure church, or religion in general, is a democracy (well, maybe not if you ask certain republicans). People vote with their feet all the time. Heck, some even start their own church. I know a guy that did exactly that here in Texas. He got fed up with the LDS church so he started his own. At one time he had about 20 members. I think he is down to only around six now.

As for belonging to a church that decides doctrine on popular opinion you should closely study the history of blacks and the priesthood. At one time the church was (or at least high ranking members of the church were) teaching that blacks were denied the priesthood because of the curse they had from Cain/Ham and the blacks were less valiant in some other life and that is why they have the dark skin "curse". The church has finally issued an official statement that says that is a big bunch of bullsh*t even if BYU religion professors as of just a few years ago said otherwise. Of course, the church still hasn't figured out where all this crap came from but if you study the events surrounding William McCary in Winter Quarters it seems very obvious that the church decided its doctrine on the basis of popular opinion. At least it is obvious to me that many members became anti-black. Do you think the Cain dark skin curse, less valiant doctrine was some revelation?

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

It just occurred to me that Lebowski may be at his own disciplinary hearing for running this web site.

Déclassé.

[wally]

I think it would be hilarious if they went after Brother Jake next.

lol! that would be hilarious.

[Moliere]

Sure church, or religion in general, is a democracy (well, maybe not if you ask certain republicans). People vote with their feet all the time. Heck, some even start their own church. I know a guy that did exactly that here in Texas. He got fed up with the LDS church so he started his own. At one time he had about 20 members. I think he is down to only around six now.

As for belonging to a church that decides doctrine on popular opinion you should closely study the history of blacks and the priesthood. At one time the church was (or at least high ranking members of the church were) teaching that blacks were denied the priesthood because of the curse they had from Cain/Ham and the blacks were less valiant in some other life and that is why they have the dark skin "curse". The church has finally issued an official statement that says that is a big bunch of bullsh*t even if BYU religion professors as of just a few years ago said otherwise. Of course, the church still hasn't figured out where all this crap came from but if you study the events surrounding William McCary in Winter Quarters it seems very obvious that the church decided its doctrine on the basis of popular opinion. At least it is obvious to me that many members became anti-black. Do you think the Cain dark skin curse, less valiant doctrine was some revelation?

Yes, and at one point JS received a revelation that the prophet could be removed from his position if a majority of stake presidents or other leaders thought the prophet was out of line. Unfortunately that revelation didn't make it into the D&C, but it is in the JS papers.

[SeattleUte]

It just occurred to me that Lebowski may be at his own disciplinary hearing for running this web site.

He's hiding out amid the red cliffs of Lake Powell. But if they take him out, the site will continue. They can't burn this printing press.

[imanihonjin]

Stack is reporting it:

http://m.sltrib.com/sltrib/mobile3/5...ormon.html.csp

Just realized that I know both Kate Kelly's Stake President and Bishop. Those of you who are are on the side of Kate Kelly, will not care, but I am going to say it anyway...I have spent considerable time with both men and they are very good men. There has to be more to this story as neither of these individuals are the type that are how they are being depicted as crude calculating individuals are looking to embarrass and destroy others.