Yahoo Bot wrote:1. Hooking up with CES is really a dangerous thing to do if things aren't exactly right in your life, and really, who is perfect in their lives and marriage? Unhappiness with your CES job translates to unhappiness with the Church. The kind of raw ambition and assertiveness you need in your job from day to day is inappropriate in a church setting. John couldn't deal with this conflict. Weakness in the CES system and its personnel translated to weakness in the Church.
I tend to agree with this -- I've heard many say that employment with the LDS Church really hurt their testimonies about the LDS gospel. It can be hard to separate the job/religion aspects of the LDS Church.
The time will come when CES as we know it will come to an end and the educational system at the high school and local institute level will come under the control of the stake presidents (with the possible exception of larger Utah universities, which will be under the control of the Seventy). Until then, CES will be burdened with the mediocre, weak and effeminate who are not called to their positions, but volunteer. They can't function as IT experts, writers, accountants or high school teachers. These are the types who will just tell kids what they want to hear to become popular in their own minds, and develop the cult of personality John was trying to develop. CES will not attract, for instance, capable female instructors.
I think the Brethren want CES to be mediocre, as long as it's 'faithful,' and not to delve into anything that might harm students' testimonies. As long as CES teachers remain on a short leash, the product will suck.
2. Both of them are nice and attractive people. Both are very self-centered, but who wouldn't be at a time like this? They should do what is right for their family, and if they believe the Church isn't right, then that is selection they should make.
I didn't consider them self-centered at all -- certainly not more than anyone else.
3. Oddity: Her discussion of her relationship with her gay friend, and how it disrupted their marriage shows that these two are very naïve. In any work environment as a professional you're going to be thrown into relationships with persons of the opposite sex and gay people, and you will spend time in bars (unless you are in Utah). It seems that the first time this happened with her, all hell broke loose.
4. Oddity: Spending their scarce resources to be with this gay male friend for a personal trip does seem out of place and I'd have a problem with that. Since almost, but not all, of my gay male friends have had relationships with women, I can't see why people can't see there is a problem.
5. Oddity: The story of the gay friend, the marriage disruption and the invitation he had to do additional work in Florida and in Israel all coincide in the same month. One could easily conclude that their marriage was crumbling, leading to his loss of faith. Or, one could conclude that the Church is responsible, through its culture, for her naïveté.
I did not see this as big a deal as you do, particularly with their decision to leave the Church. All couples have quirks and troubles, in my opinion, and this is all that was with the Mclays.
6. I can see why somebody would have a crisis of faith if they first encountered without explanation the polyandry, MMM and Kinderhook plates. But, he was a CES employee. CES has held seminars on these topics. He doesn't seem all that well-read in his own faith and he is an educator. Whereas I particularly dislike the apologists' argument that people should study up on their faith and become expert in the latest research and publication before throwing stones against their Primary teacher, I am going to hold a CES employee up to a higher standard. I mean, Grant Palmer was obviously familiar with these issues.
I don't think that CES employees are well versed in controversial LDS history -- in fact, I think they are intentionally steered away from it. I got the impression that Grant Palmer simply learned about it because he studied it on his own, rather than through some CES class. CES employee Ken Clark did the same. Plenty of CES folks, like many TBM's, simply 'bury their heads in the sand' when anything controversial comes up.
7. Although they mention their various objections (see paragraph 6 above), they spend most of their 4 hour block, when they mention their objection to the Church, talking about the Church's position on homosexuality. Surely, when they signed onto the poor wages in CES in college that they knew this to be an essential element of Mormonism. I, too, have my issues with how the Church addresses homosexual issues but I've signed onto the priesthood structure knowing the Church's doctrine. If I were a devout Catholic, I would not be agitating to change the church's position on capital punishment. Similarly, the McLays should not be surprised about the church's position on gays.
It didn't seem to me that most of the interview dealt with homosexuality. Of course, the Church's recent high profile political activity in this regard certainly brings it to the fore. Besides, the Church's active attacks on gay marriage is a relatively recent development (with Prop. 8 being the zenith), and I doubt it was a big issue when John signed on at CES (or that he knew much about what the Church was doing then in Hawaii, California with Prop. 22, etc.).
8. They miss essential Christianity. An understanding of Christ's mission is completely missing from their 4 hours, although she occasionally mentions His name in sort of a New Age context. It is striking that a CES instructor is so lacking in faith and knowledge in Christ's ministry. I spent too much time hearing him explaining how was admired he was a testifier and a speaker. If I said to my close friends how often I have been admired as a speaker and a lawyer, I'd be ridiculed, disbelieved and hooted into oblivion with no friends remaining. He deserves to be criticized for focusing too much on self-admiration.
Again, I did not get this from the interview. He is extremely well spoken, and I can see why he was considered by some (especially youth) as a CES/EFY superstar.
9. These two are very insulated persons. I had to laugh when John started sobbing about his relationship with a student who was upset over the death of her pet goat. That reminded me of the time my sons attended a Deacons' Quorum meeting in central Utah where the lesson centered on whether could walk or ride his horse on Sunday without violating the sabbath. Their insular condition led to intense personal conflicts when they started to realize they weren't little children any more. Other people outside their little society were interested in Brooke.
Mormonism certainly can be very insular, especially in the West. The whole 'be in the world, but not of it' thing. Being insular goes back to the early day of the LDS Church.
10. He's desperate because his isn't the kind of marriage to which he agreed. He also comes across as a weak hanky-twister, the kind of man supremely acceptable in CES --- the crying and sobbing, but not the one to keep up with a hard-driven, capable woman. She's coming to grasp with her feminism, after years of living in an extremely insular and protected environment. As a result, she's blaming the church for her insular state, and he's blaming the church for what she's doing. But she signed onto CES, and CES is not the Church.
I hold John Mclay in high regard -- yes, he has the effeminate voice that is typical of LDS men in the West, but that's just how he was raised. They came across as a very normal couple (at least by LDS standards) and I don't think their problems with Mormonism have much to do with being insular. And I think he likes her feminism -- she's a strong woman and most men (at least those in my circle) like that in a wife.
11. The fact that he's wrapped up in CES thus makes it all the worse, and a wife whose interests are wandering outside of the marriage makes it even worse than worse. How awful would it be to be a CES instructor in a remote area in Colorado dealing with a capable wife. They have no money and no socialization outside their little church group.
John did not come across as that simple-minded. He seemed to truly love CES and Colorado, as well as his wife. The fact they left the Church together, with marriage intact, speaks volumes of their relationship, in my opinion.
12. One of their final points deals with emotion, arguing that so much that passes for the Spirit is just emotion. This is basically just an attack on all of Christianity. Unfortunately, for those who study the New Testament, the Spirit and emotion go hand in hand. Jesus taught that knowledge of Him could not come without the intervention of the Holy Spirit. So, the McLays can certainly jettison that doctrine, but it is an essential element of Christianity.
That is the real danger when it comes to 'the Spirit' and emotion -- it is extremely hard to delineate the two, and this often leads to mistakes and bad consequences. in my opinion, I think Mormonism tends to rely more on 'the Spirit' than other traditional Christian religions -- all one needs to do is look at the sales pitch of LDS missionaries -- they force 'the Spirit' on investigators like no one else.
13. One final observation of John Dehlin. This guy did this poor couple a monumental disservice by letting them expose their private lives. A friend of mine, more cynical than I am, watched the video and pronounced him "creepy." Dehlin should have controlled these two people, kept the interview to an hour to distill essential thought, and should have better controlled John McLay's largely inconsistent patter and self-aggrandizement. [The fact that John McLay came armed with notes that Dehlin hadn't seen speaks volumes -- Dehlin's lack of control and McLay's obsession with detail about himself.] I could see that Dehlin attempted to control things, but it wasn't effective.
I think perhaps the interview could have been edited better (it was far too long), but Dehlin really lets people talk and explain their feelings as to why they left. I thought Dehlin did a good job in covering all the bases, even though the interview was interminably long.
14. I hope the McLays come back. They expect perfection of themselves but fail to realize that nobody's perfect in the Church. Not even close. As I used to tell the teenagers I'd counsel, I'd tell them that each of the adults in the ward had terrible stories to tell about themselves if required. Christ is about forgiveness, not perfection.
I don't think they will come back -- it is awfully hard to 'put the genie back in the bottle' once it is out. But, who knows ....