What is apostasy anyway?

[TripletDaddy]

I wouldn't know who John Dehlin was if I wasnt a part of CUF/CS, however if what ER says is correct and he is being threatened with excommunication based on comments others have made on the website he owns I do wonder if Mr. Duderino has any reservations about owning CS? Also if this is true, perhaps it explains El Jefe's hardline approach to the religious category on CB?

Or the new rainbow category, as well.

[Northwestcoug]

Ok...now, a few observations. John came across some tough historical stuff, in a sincere effort to be a better (volunteer) early morning seminary teacher. Having some computer background, and knowing that he's not smarter than God, he established a public forum where he could learn more from people who knew more. Yes, that forum has shifted back and forth in its bias, as these things tend to do, but I don't think you can doubt his initial intentions.

I think Dehlin is a victim of his own evolution. I think he made up his mind early on that he didn't accept much, if any, of the church's truth claims. But he was sincere about trying to make membership work for him and other like-minded members. Among these people is where he gained most of his followers. He has always worked for the vision of 'big tent' Mormonism. But after time he realized that he couldn't remain in the public spotlight as a fringe member, without the inevitable run-in with leadership. He has gone back and forth over the years, within the church and outside of it, to the dismay of quite a few people who started their 'journey' with him. Many groups claimed him as their own, including liberal active members and ex-Mormons. And I think they grew frustrated with him when he would swing one way or another.

There's no question that Dehlin is bit of a narcissist (a vigil for your church court? Really?). He likes the limelight. But at the same time, I cut his histrionics some slack. I honestly think he wears his heart on his sleeve, and he still is a sincere individual. It does look flaky to those who have been watching him, when he changes the arc of his membership so often. And I will also take him for his word that he does value his heritage, and that this is a painful process for him.

Delhi certainly wasn't the first to publicize problems with the church. He isn't much of a scholar or an interviewer. But for a new generation of members, he is a pioneer for legitimizing honest inquiry about church doctrine and history. And this is where, even if people can't stand Dehlin anymore, they should feel empathy for him. A significant proportion of the church's current openness can be attributed to his work. For the most part, it is 'OK' to talk about very thorny and significant issues in the church, and not automatically be labelled anti-Mormon. It seems like the church is accepting what was taught as lies are not anymore, and that they can accept that publicly. Yet Dehlin is going to be excommunicated for publicizing some of the exact same material that the church does. (if you believe his detractors, though Dehlin believes it's also due to his public support for Ordain Women and same-sex marriage).

Whether or not it will be good for Dehlin and his family to finally have some closure, and for most others who are weary of the saga, is beside the point. He has contributed a large body of work that will shape online discussion of church matters for a long time. Church leadership has seemingly been forced to try to confront these legitimate issues. It is sad that with his excommunication, the church can delegitimize the whole of his work for most believing members. Among the other church problems he has helped bring out in the open, his excommunication will highlight the glaring problem of how an unorthodox belief, kept privately, is perfectly OK in the church, but becomes apostasy the minute you share it with others.

[old_gregg]

truth claims

this phrase makes my skin crawl. thanks, JD.

[Jeff Lebowski]

FTR, I am still against excommunication. But I just can't bring myself to muster much sympathy in this case.

[DrumNFeather]

FTR, I am still against excommunication. But I just can't bring myself to muster much sympathy in this case.

If they really wanted to stick it to him, they'd call him to be scoutmaster!

[Jeff Lebowski]

If they really wanted to stick it to him, they'd call him to be scoutmaster!

Exactly!

[creekster]

I don't follow the vicissitudes of Dehlin's mortal toil very closely, so maybe I am missing something, but as I understand it he has publicly stated he does not believe nor adhere to the premise that jesus was divine, that Joseph smith was a prophet or that there is even a God. SO if that's true, what is the issue? Why does he care if he is excommunicated? Why do we care if he is excommunicated? At this point it feels like it is much more about Dehlin wanting to be in the limelight than it does about any principled stand about mormonism. After all, if you think Jesus was not divine, how can any of the rest of this stuff matter?

[Jeff Lebowski]

I don't follow the vicissitudes of Dehlin's mortal toil very closely, so maybe I am missing something, but as I understand it he has publicly stated he does not believe nor adhere to the premise that jesus was divine, that Joseph smith was a prophet or that there is even a God. SO if that's true, what is the issue? Why does he care if he is excommunicated? Why do we care if he is excommunicated? At this point it feels like it is much more about Dehlin wanting to be in the limelight than it does about any principled stand about mormonism. After all, if you think Jesus was not divine, how can any of the rest of this stuff matter?

Shouldn't the decision about whether or not membership in an organization is valued by someone be left up to the individual? Should a lack of faith be grounds for booting someone out? Somehow that doesn't seem like a very Christian thing to do.

[Goatnapper'96]

I don't follow the vicissitudes of Dehlin's mortal toil very closely, so maybe I am missing something, but as I understand it he has publicly stated he does not believe nor adhere to the premise that jesus was divine, that Joseph smith was a prophet or that there is even a God. SO if that's true, what is the issue? Why does he care if he is excommunicated? Why do we care if he is excommunicated? At this point it feels like it is much more about Dehlin wanting to be in the limelight than it does about any principled stand about mormonism. After all, if you think Jesus was not divine, how can any of the rest of this stuff matter?

I think he cares because he wants the Mormon Church to change so that people who don't believe it are as welcome as they want to be and free to talk about not believing it as much they want to be. After all if you are related to Brigham Young you should get a seat at the table - we are thinking about voting another Bush or Clinton as President for Hellsake!

I also think that there is a good chance God failed him by not giving him older brothers so he has no core compass to keep him from morphing into a whining pussy. Here is to the "healing" waters of Lava Hot Springs Baby, go you Marsh Valley Eagles!

While I don't get his or his entourage's whining or his noble defense of his intellectual integrity, if my vote mattered I am not a fan of excommunication. I am a fan of 'norin' people. I also like to occasionally mock as well, but 'norin' folks for the most part is a course of action that works for me.

[SandYFan]

Shouldn't the decision about whether or not membership in an organization is valued by someone be left up to the individual? Should a lack of faith be grounds for booting someone out? Somehow that doesn't seem like a very Christian thing to do.

I agree, but what I can't understand is why he wants to be a member of the church at all.

[creekster]

Shouldn't the decision about whether or not membership in an organization is valued by someone be left up to the individual? Should a lack of faith be grounds for booting someone out? Somehow that doesn't seem like a very Christian thing to do.

Well that summary doesn't even begin to cover the circumstances of this particular court. But, in general, if the organization concludes that a particular attestation of faith (or belief or oath of loyalty, etc.) matters, and the individual knows that and still very publicly states that he does NOT hold that tenet to be correct, then what is the issue? This is even more true here where the church's position is that the individual is better off, long term, by going through this process. Now the individual may not agree, but he knew that this was the church's position going in, so what's the surprise? Do you hold a vigil for that? Moreover, speaking very broadly, which your comment did, almost all organizations have membership rules or requirements. If they didn't, then there would be no meaning to membership.

[jay santos]

Well that summary doesn't even begin to cover the circumstances of this particular court. But, in general, if the organization concludes that a particular attestation of faith (or belief or oath of loyalty, etc.) matters, and the individual knows that and still very publicly states that he does NOT hold that tenet to be correct, then what is the issue? This is even more true here where the church's position is that the individual is better off, long term, by going through this process. Now the individual may not agree, but he knew that this was the church's position going in, so what's the surprise? Do you hold a vigil for that? Moreover, speaking very broadly, which your comment did, almost all organizations have membership rules or requirements. If they didn't, then there would be no meaning to membership.

I don't think his statements on the "truth claims" are that strong, and IIRC they have come since all this has come out, not before. does anyone have a link?

[eldiente]

This blog contains several posts discussing how JD presents those parts of the story he wishes to use to support his position. https://dearjohndehlin.wordpress.com

[creekster]

I don't think his statements on the "truth claims" are that strong, and IIRC they have come since all this has come out, not before. does anyone have a link?

I googled and found the givens artivle, which I had already read, and it links here

http://www.postmormon.org/exp_e/index.php/discussions/viewthread/28352/P40/

However, Givens' conclusion is much more specific than Deh lin's statement, so it is hard to tell what Dehlin thinks. Plus, the linked statement by Dehlin is from 2011 So who knows?

Either way, GN is probably correct; ignoring him is likely the best policy.


Edit:

El Diente did a much better job than I did finding stuff.

[DrumNFeather]

I agree, but what I can't understand is why he wants to be a member of the church at all.

A cynic might say it is because it helps his bottom line (not strictly financially, we've been down that road before). As an on the books "active" member, he can make the claim that he is one of "us." It is much harder to do that from a position outside the church.

I obviously have strong feelings on the subject, but I believe that his activity over the last year or even few months has probably done more to damage his standing in the church than has his original intent to discuss difficult issues. His censorship and narrative activities alone raise one's eyebrows.

Unfortunately, this is really one of those where you sit is where you stand issues. Those who are for him are eating everything he says and links up...almost on blind faith (ironically). Those who are against him are likewise provided with plenty of ammo.