cwald wrote:I have talked to John about the "emotional devastation" he has gone through. I believe him. I have also witnesses first hand the pain and emotional trama the church is inflicting on the heretical members. It's real. And whether one agrees with JD's tactics or whatever, the issue of the church corporation bullying it's members and "spying" is a serious problem they are going to have to address and face up to eventually.
Just my opinion.
Sincerely, a "Dehlinite"
I think it is unfortunate that heretical essentially means disloyal/disobedient to leaders. Sure, one can point to ways in which these so-called "heretics" diverge from normative LDS beliefs, but since no one can define what the doctrine of the LDS Church is in a satisfactory way, the idea of doctrinal heresy in Mormonism borders on absurd.
And, cwald, I notice you have humorously called yourself a Dehlinite in your signature. This raises another interesting issue, which is the model of charismatic leadership in the LDS community and the boundaries erected around it. It seems that anyone who sticks his or her neck out to opine or take action on religious matters is going to face some kind of formal or informal push back from Mormons
and ex-Mormons, unless they kowtow to LDS leaders.
Public figures within the faith need to navigate their public Mormon identity very carefully, particularly if their activities touch directly on the faith. Anyone who presumes to step out of the narrow confines of approved speech risks the wrath of present and former members of the faith. Ex-Mormons can dismiss Mormons who speak in line with the Brethren as TBMs, but they will also castigate those who speak out of line with the Brethren as aspiring cultists.
In my own case, I have routinely felt a dislike for people stepping out to form para-ecclesiastical communities. I was not really keen on Mormon Stories becoming a "community." I did not care for the way Kate Kelly seemed to attract a following with its own orthodoxy and techniques of boundary maintenance.
But, I have to wonder, are these perhaps two sides of the same coin? The saintly fiction of Joseph Smith is not to be touched either way. It is not to be touched because it is too holy, or because it is the sham that disappointed people. But, far be it from anyone to stick their neck out. Or, could it be that anyone who sticks her or his neck out is inevitably going to fall into the distinctly LDS kind of charismatic leadership? If you like that model, you will accuse this aspiring person of being an apostate. If you don't like it, the person is the reflection of the evil Joseph Smith.
In any case, I am not "any manner of -ite." I am fascinated by these folk leaders, but I have not followed any of them. I am interested in Snuffer, Waterman, Kelly, Dehlin, the Toscanos, Maxine Hanks, Don Bradley, DCP, etc., etc. I wouldn't say that I have signed on to any person's particular cause, to the extent one of these folks could be said to have one, but I do enjoy talking about them and seeing what their experiences can tell us about being a Mormon or ex-Mormon at this time.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
