Mary wrote:Using this logic then Richard Bushman, Armand Mauss, John Dehlin, Joanna Brooks, Daniel Peterson, Ben Park, Jared Anderson and many, many more should all be 'had up' for apostasy since they have all discussed online and in print, controversial issues.
When their Stake Presidents deem them to be purposely putting out information that is intended to, or likely will damage faithful Mormons' testimonies, they may make a judgment call that the individual is in apostasy, and if so, then the person will either have to go answer the charges, not show up and accept a default judgment, or resign and pre-empt the hearing. If their Stake President doesn't deem the person to be likely in apostasy, then none of this will happen. It's a judgment call, and it's one the Stake Presidents are entrusted with making*.
* I also think it's likely that pressure can be brought down on the Stake President from their higher command, however much the church denies it.
Mary wrote:Heck, even the 'dodo' guy (can't think of his name)
Elder Holland
should be cautioned because he referred to the Catalyst theory of the Book of Abraham and the link between the temple ceremony and masonry.
Would you like to place a bet that Elder Holland's Stake President will agree with you?
Where's the line Sethbag? That's the issue surely, and I'm not sure the leadership genuinely can agree on where the line is, thus Twede's meeting has been cancelled.
The line is in the eyes of the beholder. Why does there have to be a line? Are we all a bunch of language lawyers now? Are we really going to go into a church court and try to defend against a charge of apostasy on the grounds that Webster's Dictionary says one thing and we can argue some technicality and suddenly it's all OK?
The bottom line is it's the church's longstanding practice to defend itself against any threats to its members testimonies. Constituting such a threat, in the eyes of one's bishop and stake president, is likely to get one hauled into a church court for apostasy. Is this really rocket science?
My guess is that, weighing the damage being done by MormonThink as it is now, against the damage that will be done by MormonThink once the church's actions are published far and wide and brought to a great many more members' attention than was the case before, they may opt for the lesser of two weavils.
I'm betting that A) after the election the media won't give a crap anymore (unless Romney wins), and B) after the media stops giving a crap, the Stake President will probably move against Brother Twede again.
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen