- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
SD, I’ve said in multiple places online that I hope neither John nor Kate are excommunicated. That is my ideal, without qualification. Moving away from an ideal, however, I really can see very solid arguments on each side – and that, to me, illustrates the complexity of each situation (that neither is so cut-and-dried that there is one simple, easy, obvious, objective right answer). It in no way means I won’t take a stand, but it does mean I can understand those who take a different stand than I do – and, in some cases (not all), actually respect their rationale for taking a different stance than I do.
I think the absolute worst thing about these two cases,
aside from the possibility at the personal level of excommunication itself, is that so many people ON BOTH SIDES of the discussion can’t or won’t try to understand the other side enough to grant that the other side actually has a reasonable argument – that so many people have gravitated to one extreme or the other and positioned that extreme as the only obvious answer, with corresponding verbal fisticuffs. I personally can understand why the church would clamp down on the bloggernacle. My problem, is I’m tired of the church blaming it all on the members/local leaders. The COB needs to take some responsibility and stop blaming everyone but the apostles and prophets, the guys who speak to and on behalf of God, for all the mistakes and pain that is being caused. Why is they are silent and will only speak through the PR department?
The PR stateswoman on RadioWest stated that she could not answer the questions and had no knowledge and couldn’t speak on behalf of the church for many of the questions asked. Well, then who the can? The Prophet? Fine. Lets get some answers, some truth, and find out just what the church believes and their position on these issues.
is that really so much to ask from our leaders? Our church? Our community that we have built up and given 1000’s of dollars and consecrated our time, money and talents.
Just some answers, some straight up answers without mental gymnastics and some honesty for a change.
Is that asking too much?
Quote:Church leaders are not asking members not to blog, and they are not attacking the rights of honest explorers of faith to have these conversations in the so-called Bloggernacle.” Church Spokeswoman Ally Isom on KUER radio, June 16th
Okay, so these are Church spokespersons saying these things, but they’re not the real Church Spokesperson, right? Only the President of the Church can actually speak for the Church. So where is he? Why is Church leadership at the top leaving my poor bishop to twist slowly in the wind?
This subject of local versus central control of the blogging disciplinary councils and threats is coming up in multiple threads here on StayLDS. I can only surmise that they don’t want to appear to be starting a command-and-control ousting of the bloggers — they want it to appear to be more grassroots in nature. Kind of like a local, uncoordinated September 6. There has been a lot of criticism of the top-down hierarchical nature of the church, and there has been movement toward a kinder, gentler church than we’ve seen in the past.
Perhaps they are trying to have their cake, and eat it to? Come down on the bloggers, while still appearing to be gentle and kind at the top?
Old-Timer wrote:SD, I’ve said in multiple places online that I hope neither John nor Kate are excommunicated. That is my ideal, without qualification.
Moving away from an ideal, however, I really can see very solid arguments on each side – and that, to me, illustrates the complexity of each situation (that neither is so cut-and-dried that there is one simple, easy, obvious, objective right answer). It in no way means I won’t take a stand, but it does mean I can understand those who take a different stand than I do – and, in some cases (not all), actually respect their rationale for taking a different stance than I do.
I think the absolute worst thing about these two cases,
aside from the possibility at the personal level of excommunication itself, is that so many people ON BOTH SIDES of the discussion can’t or won’t try to understand the other side enough to grant that the other side actually has a reasonable argument – that so many people have gravitated to one extreme or the other and positioned that extreme as the only obvious answer, with corresponding verbal fisticuffs. Thanks Ray — where do you stand on this issue then? How would you like to see the situation resolved? For example, the outcomes of the meetings with the bloggers. change in the church (if any)?
That’s why many of us use pseudonyms. Individual cases are difficult, since I haven’t been involved in any personal discussions up to this point and can’t judge the intent of either heart right now. Thus, the following is much more an analytical stance than what it might be in an actual council setting, where I could listen to the person directly. 1) Waterman: I see blatant apostasy and would have no problem accepting excommunication. No hesitancy whatsoever.
2) Kelly: I personally would lean toward formal probation and be willing to accept disfellowshipment, with a condition of not modeling OW’s materials after the Church’s missionary discussions – of not publishing “recruitment materials” aimed at active members. Those discussions simply look too much like an attempt to proselyte within the Church and alter active members’ affiliation in a very practical way – and it’s hard for me to describe them otherwise. Of everything involved in this case, that is the only issue that I see as reasonable to categorize as apostate – but I personally would not push for excommunication over it, largely because I think her heart really is in the right place.
3) Dehlin: I think, over the years, John has helped a lot of people stay involved in the LDS Church, and, at various times, he has given other members an easy way out of the Church who might have stayed with a different kind of support. Mercurial is a description I have used in the past, and I think it’s legitimate. I personally would not support excommunication, for multiple reasons – but I also hope he finds a personal balance in his own life that will allow him to be less mercurial. That might or might not be possible, just as it was impossible for Joseph Smith and other “visionary” people. I think John is built to sail uneven seas – and even cause the winds to blow on occasion. I just hope he can ride the waves within the Church.
I don’t know waterman, but agree on Kate and John. John Dehlin has achieved many great things, IMHO, but his dithering is also stupid. I wonder if constantly blathering on about leaving has been his undoing. Sometimes you’ve just got to crap or get off the potty. I realize that some of us here have dithered, but when I left, I was out for years. Of course, I can be on fire about the church, or lukewarm, but I don’t spend more time talking of leaving than actually leaving! (And no, I don’t think he should be excommunicated, however silly he has been in other ways.)
As far as the Bloggernacle goes – the cat is out of the bag/genie out of the bottle (delete as necessary) – and can’t really be put back in.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.