Greg Smith, Dan Peterson, John Dehlin, & Lou

[_Doctor Scratch]

Maybe - I sent the original email to the GA and DP (along with others) because DP stopped answering my emails to him a long, long time ago, and so I felt like it was the only way to get his attention. If he would have engaged me directly in the past, I would never have felt the need to go over his head...but he ignored me enough that I didn't see any other way to get his attention.

Yeah, that's an important point, I think, John. I hope that people have noticed that the apologists are complaining about one thing: that they were "scolded" by the GAs, and were forced to pull the article. And again, this just underscores the extreme differences between the "Mormon Stories" approach versus the Mopologists'. You'll notice that none of the Mopologists--not a single one: not DCP, not Hamblin, not Smith, nor any of the other key parties involved--is defending the actual article. They're not saying, "This was a really great article, and we think it's important that people read it." They're not saying, "We believe this article could have been a great comfort and help to a lot of people." Heck, they're not even saying, "We think this article would have successfully warned wavering members away from John Dehlin." They're not defending the article at all! Instead, it's all about the fact that they got slapped on the wrist. That is *extraordinarily* telling. John has been consistently able to argue in favor of the good, positive, helpful work he's doing. The apologists can't or won't do that. I appreciate the fact that Kishkumen is being even-handed, analytical, and decent in this thread, but in this case, given what's been said, I can't see how the Mopologists were at all well-meaning in this instance. They cannot (or will not) even articulate what their "good intentions" supposedly were. Based on what John D. has said, it sounds like this was a smear campaign plain and simple, and that all three of these individuals--DCP, Midgley, and Smith--had signed off on it. (Yes: I saw that Dan said that he "doesn't remember" whether he'd read it or not, but so what? All of the articles are planned/commissioned in advance.)

Finally: DCP is trying to compare this situation with the 2004 John-Charles Duffy piece on Mopologetics, which is a really poor comparison. By 2004, the Review had been publishing hit pieces for over a decade, and DCP was well into his online career of harassing and bullying people. To claim that there is any similarity between what Duffy wrote and what the MI Mopologists were up to is beyond silly.

[_stemelbow]

Maybe - I sent the original email to the GA and DP (along with others) because DP stopped answering my emails to him a long, long time ago, and so I felt like it was the only way to get his attention. If he would have engaged me directly in the past, I would never have felt the need to go over his head...but he ignored me enough that I didn't see any other way to get his attention.

Thanks. That's interesting. It seems like some simple misunderstandings were involved.

[Guest]

-

[_Doctor Scratch]

A piece of the story that is missing for me (and it probably will not come to light) is whatever the GA/s actually did. Were just these two emails from Dehlin enough to cause the editorial team at the MI to act? I was told that an apostle finally had to get involved, which would lead me to believe that this conflict went on for some time beyond what is indicated in these few emails.

[_Kishkumen]

I am inclined to listen to the emotions that Daniel Peterson expresses here with a measure of sympathy:

You may not think that it was defamatory to cull out insulting criticisms of me and send them to prestigious Mormon academics and to a senior leader of my Church, and you may not think that it was a kind of threat and blackmail to suggest that, if he didn't get a satisfactory response, he would happily gather up more such insulting criticisms and send them to a still-higher-ranking leader of my Church.

But his note was about and (copied) to me, and I did.

I'm happy for you that you can contemplate such treatment of somebody else with such equanimity.

And, as I said, the timing was poor. I hadn't yet even read the paper in question, I was on the road, my brother was dead, and I had just, a few minutes before I left, had a police officer in my home taking notes on threats of violence against me from a deranged ex-Mormon. I wasn't much in the mood for ultimatums from John Dehlin.

I imagine that Daniel was really thrown for a loop by this and felt very much attacked, and at a terrible time. I feel like the guy should be cut some major slack for this. I have stated my position on the structural (read: not personal) nature of the problem that is causing so much pain, and I think it would be the more compassionate thing to take Daniel's feelings into account here.

Let's not join mobs that are out to exterminate each other. Let's work to find solutions.

[_stemelbow]

I am inclined to listen to the emotions that Daniel Peterson expresses here with a measure of sympathy:

I imagine that Daniel was really thrown for a loop by this and felt very much attacked, and at a terrible time. I feel like the guy should be cut some major slack for this. I have stated my position on the structural (read: not personal) nature of the problem that is causing so much pain, and I think it would be the more compassionate thing to take Daniel's feelings into account here.

Let's not join mobs that are out to exterminate each other. Let's work to find solutions.

+1.

[_Infymus]

When all of this comes down final, I hope someone as talented as MsJack will compile it all together in one final piece. It will make for a great read later on.

[_LDS truthseeker]

Just wanted to say thanks for all you do John and I am glad you responded in a respectful but assertive way so that hopefully these kinds of situations will not happen in the future (one can hope).

[_Doctor Scratch]

I have stated my position on the structural (read: not personal) nature of the problem that is causing so much pain, and I think it would be the more compassionate thing to take Daniel's feelings into account here.

Let's not join mobs that are out to exterminate each other. Let's work to find solutions.

The trouble is that people have tried in various ways for over 30 years to "find solutions" with the Mopologists. They just won't listen. John Dehlin himself said that he tried multiple times to get DCP to listen, and the only thing that finally worked was alerting colleagues and General Authorities. I guess that's the only "solution" that will work. "Mormon Stories" has been about getting people to have an open dialogue on all these structure issues that you mentioned, and for his troubles Dehlin was targeted for a smear campaign. You would think the bridge-building and open dialogue would be the best solution. Clearly, the apologists have a difference of opinion. I'm sorry, Reverend, but I think these guys are too far gone to be "saved." No amount of compassion, reasonableness, or anything else will ever, ever persuade them to be charitable or decent. They will keep attacking and smearing until they are six feet under....Or until a General Authority puts a stop to it.

I'm still just beside myself as to why the apologists would have wanted to target Dehlin in the first place. Why? They won't even defend their own "hit piece." What "good" did they think it would accomplish? I can just imagine them laughing, thinking how funny it would be to skewer Dehlin and make him look like this "wolf in sheep's clothing." "I've got a provocative sense of humor," DCP often says. I'm sure that, as they were planning this, they found it hilarious.

In any case, the last piece of the puzzle here is whatever the GA/s said to the apologists, but Dehlin won't post it out of respect, and the Mopologists won't post it because it doubtless makes them look bad.

[_Equality]

Good to hear. it seems, in part, this is a classic case of misunderstanding each other and lack of communication. It seems DCP is under the impression the emails you initially sent weren't primarily to him. They were sent primarily to another. When I read his comments I had in mind the idea that when I send an email out for something I often will cc someone who may or may not be interested in the conversation or information in the email, often thinking, by cc'ing them they are welcome to the information but it is directed at another. I wonder if that's what he had in mind in all of this.

Maybe - I sent the original email to the GA and DP (along with others) because DP stopped answering my emails to him a long, long time ago, and so I felt like it was the only way to get his attention. If he would have engaged me directly in the past, I would never have felt the need to go over his head...but he ignored me enough that I didn't see any other way to get his attention.

John, it's not so easy to ignore feeding the gaping-mouthed trolls, is it? I am glad to see more information about this coming out today. I was confident you were telling the truth and that stemelbow, statics, and the other apologists posting yesterday on the other thread were engaging in character assassination in an attempt to get the focus off the reprehensible actions of Smith, Midgley, Peterson, and company. It is gratifying to see you set the record straight. One can only hope the apologists who yesterday said repeatedly that you were lying about what happened, even calling into question the existence of the hit piece, will today apologize to you and acknowledge their errors. You have been gracious in apologizing for the tone of your first post on the subject, Kishkumen has likewise been gracious in apologizing for specific things he said that turned out to be wrong. I would hope that apologies would be forthcoming from stem and statics and Peterson and Midgley. But I won't hold my breath. John, I'm going to honor your wish to not address the apologists directly in this thread.

I can verify that what you say about being able to take criticism is true. You have taken pointed criticism from me in the past and you have a very thick skin, often taking criticism from both sides of the faithful/apostate divide. You absolutely did not deserve this kind of treatment from your fellow members of the church. The people responsible for this hit piece should all be ashamed of themselves. Even when we have disagreed in the past, you have always been courteous, kind, and understanding.