Middle way Mormons are in peril

[_just me]

What's interesting to me is that it looks like this guy who is posting on StayLDS is basically keeping his comment out of Church meetings and has reserved it to the Web. He's realized that there is no place or tolerance for it in formal LDS meetings and so he deals with it elsewhere. You'd think he'd get brownie points for that. You know, limiting his contagion to other faithless Internet Mormons.

But it appears that's not good enough for Church leadership. Not only can you not talk about it in Church...you can't talk about it anywhere. Doubt can exist but only in your head. Let any of that escape and yer in danger.

Well, sadly it started with his family. His family turned him in and this was the reaction from leadership.
My family turned me it, too, but the reaction from local leadership was quite different.

[_bcspace]

Not only can you not talk about it in Church...you can't talk about it anywhere

Sure you can. I think the problem comes when you no longer express them as doubts but as facts and teachings.

[_The Nehor]

Oh please........

Not much you can do except huff and puff and make faces, eh, Nehor?

The naïvété here is shocking. You will swallow any story without any critical thinking at all if it makes LDS look bad won't you?

[_The Nehor]

I just saw this post on StayLDS (referred to it by John Dehlin). There is a group of "middle way" Mormons in the Logan area who LDS considers to be a threat to the church.

And rightly so.

How are they a threat to the Church?

When they are recruiting and organizing.

Do you consider me to be a threat to the Church? I know that my Bishop doesn't.

Unless I have completely missed the mark on how you interact with the Church and other members I don't see you as a threat either.

[_bcspace]

Like it or not, you guys have helped me already. I agree that one should be able to appropriately express doubts and not be censured. I certainly don't agree with family members who rat out an individual for simple unbelief, but perhaps we're not talking about simple unbelief in gwald's or Dehlin's case. We here certainly don't have all the facts of either case.

[_Runtu]

Of course you do.

OK, I will just chalk this up to you not wishing to explain your meaning. Shrug. I don't know what you were referring to, and I suppose it will remain a mystery.

[_Kishkumen]

The naïveté here is shocking. You will swallow any story without any critical thinking at all if it makes LDS look bad won't you?

What naïveté is there in reporting a story as it unfolds? I have not made any final conclusions on any of this. I have no idea exactly what is going on. I have my suspicions, and, no, they are not necessarily flattering of the Church, but that is far different from making some kind of bold claim about how awful the Church based on a reading of these events.

And what story is it that I am swallowing, exactly? Are you suggesting that this fellow made it up? If not, are you trying to tell me that his report is to hold no weight at all, simply because he is on the receiving end of the Church's scrutiny, instead of being the official scrutinizer? What is the basis of your suspicions, Nehor? Are you seeing a "middle way" conspiracy at work in the unfolding of these events? Would you clarify?

Nehor, I don't know when it is that you decided to abandon any attempt at fairly reading what is posted here and responding like an intelligent human being, but the result is that most of your posts have all of the value of unsightly litter in the street.

[_bcspace]

Of course you do.

OK, I will just chalk this up to you not wishing to explain your meaning. Shrug. I don't know what you were referring to, and I suppose it will remain a mystery.

Oh c'mon. Can't you divine anything from my "Interesting stuff" post?

[_Runtu]

Oh c'mon. Can't you divine anything from my "Interesting stuff" post?

You want me to be a witness for or against the "Middle Way"? Why? I'd never heard of them (if there is such a group) until I read this thread.

[_just me]

So, if you are not "struggling" with or attempting to gain back your previous testimony you are guilty of apostacy and the church guidelines say to ex you?

Where does it say that? The handbook?

Is disbelief with no attempt to regain it excommunicable or not per the handbook?