Problematic John Dehlin, a short list

[Lem]

I did. Rosebud:



I can see that may work for some, but for myself, I would have to disagree. I left the Mormon church and don’t define any relationships I have as being based on being NOT something. This is one of the places where I discuss the ongoing events in the Mormon world that I grew up in, and that are still part of the world of my many Mormon relatives, but no, it’s not MY ex-Mormonism, it’s a world I am no longer a part of but still have an interest in. I consider this board to be a community, but it’s certainly not all ex-Mormon.


It may to you, but not to me. It simply defines my interest in a world in which I was raised, but which no longer defines me.

I mean, you're more than free to reject the label, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a widely accepted label that anyone who has a cursory understanding of your background (used to be Mormon) would apply to you. Just because a label applies does not mean it wholly defines.

Your objections really just read as a bunch of distinctions without any real difference.

Widely accepted label? You mean, calling me ex-Mormon because I used to be Mormon? Sure, ok.

But Rosebud’s assertion that “ex-Mormons are a sect within Mormonism” goes well beyond that, and I would disagree with that definition, including her de facto assertion that Dehhlin is a secular prophet over that group. I can see how geographical constraints might make one feel that ex-Mormon is an actual group, but not in most places in the world. I literally don’t know one single Mormon or ex-Mormon who lives near me who is part of my in real life experiences. It is simply not part of my world, and definitely not a community by which I define myself.

[Meadowchik]

This interpretation is beyond laughable. Dehlin may be starting his own cult, but to define every person who has left the LDS church as part of that is nonsensical. The only thing that defines me (and I suspect most) as ex-Mormon is the fact that I am no longer a member of the church I was born into. Period. That's it. Defining people who have left the LDS church as "a sect within Mormonism" only tells me that Rosebud still isn't able to move past this and unfortunately feels obligated to cast everyone else in the same role in which she feels stuck.

Right, it's similar to people who frame all atheists as opposites of theists, when theists are generally gravitating to theist-centric sources and atheists are generally dispersing from them. Atheists aren't generally gravitating towards some other atheistic center. Many are simply living life differently. Instead of centering their lives around the ideological ground of religion, they reformat their lives in multiple possible ways. And, by the way, there are plenty of theists who also retain religious identity but loosely enough that they also don't orient themselves around theistic-centric sources.

Likewise, a construct of "TBM versus exmormon" is overly simple. There are LDS folks who fall on a spectrum of centering around the church. That's why we've invented terms like TBM, Jack-Mo, and PIMO--to name a few. But those who leave can branch our even further, and they can completely shake-up this stereotype of ideological-centering.

However, what still affiliates to Mormonism and leaving Mormonism is the discourse about it. We're human beings. We talk about things. We're healthier when we talk about things. If we leave the church, then, naturally we are going to engage in talking about it. And in this age, podcasts and other internet media are instantly accessible. We could probably say that it's not just internet that causes people to question the church, but internet that gives people a place to process leaving the church, making it more likely that people will leave. In my case, when I was on that precipice of asking questions, I went to Recovery from Mormonism. Like many others in many other spaces, I quickly understood that there is a legitimate place away from believing in Mormonism. It is like crossing a river and seeing the subsequent stone so you can advance, instead of retreated back to the safety of the familiar shore.

And in the beginning of leaving Mormon Stories is a very visible stone in the river. In the place where we desperately need discourse, John Dehlin entered at an optimal moment. He was established first as a believer who subsequently left after becoming a fixture. And even in the little pond of Mormonism, fame still breeds more fame. And his platforms still remain popular staging grounds for discourse, centered around his voice and his personality.

Yet the field of discourse for those leaving Mormonism is widening. Places we can go are becoming more visible.

[jpatterson]

Widely accepted label? You mean, calling me ex-Mormon because I used to be Mormon? Sure, ok.

Well, yes.

But Rosebud’s assertion that “ex-Mormons are a sect within Mormonism” goes well beyond that, and I would disagree with that definition, including her de facto assertion that Dehhlin is a secular prophet over that group. I can see how geographical constraints might make one feel that ex-Mormon is an actual group, but not in most places in the world. I literally don’t know one single Mormon or ex-Mormon who lives near me who is part of my in real life experiences. It is simply not part of my world, and definitely not a community by which I define myself.

Not all sub-sects of a larger movement have the same distinct attributes. There are very distinct differences between the LDS Church and, say, the FLDS but no one would argue that they're not related, or live within the same general movement.

Ex-Mormonism is certainly different and much more fluid in terms of any kind of organizational structure, but that in and of itself is a defining characteristic because of the very nature of the sect itself -- ex-Mormons coming out of strict correlation are naturally going to want to eschew any type of correlation. So the non-correlation becomes a defining attribute in and of itself.

The same goes for whatever type of "leader" is out in front of the sect. Because of the collective nature of ex-Mormons, there's never going to be an actual prophet type person. You have to settle for looking for the closest thing to it, and I don't think it's a stretch to say that JD fits that bill in many respects. There's no question got the largest following and measurable longevity of out of any ex-Mormon out there. His organization pulls in almost a half million dollars every year in donations, eclipsing orgs like Sunstone and Dialogue that have been in existence for decades. The guy can post a photo of his dirty tub grout and unpedicured toe nails and it goes mini-viral for crying out loud.

JD comes as close to any type of leader as you're going to ever find within ex-Mormonism. There's never going to be an ex-Mormon prophet, except for a Snuffer type offshoot, but that's a sub-sect within a sub-sect.

TL;DR - I don't think Rosebud is as nearly off in her assessment as your vehemence suggests.

[jpatterson]

Likewise, a construct of "TBM versus exmormon" is overly simple.

This is fair, and I think Rosebud would have been more accurate to perhaps define it as something like "online ex-Mormons" or something of that nature. There's no question that, between forums like this, r/exmormon, Facebook groups, podcasts and orgs like Sunstone, etc, there is a vibrant and thriving community of people who consume ex-Mormon content and congregate online to continue discussions about or adjacent to Mormonism.

This, I believe, is the kind of community or sect Rosebud was referring to. And I think when that viewpoint is seen through the lens of her Open Stories Foundation experience, it sheds even more light. She was having quite a bit of success turning that online/content community into an actual physical/real-world community with events and other types of geographic gatherings. I get the sense she was trying to expand the meaning and purpose and strengthen the vibrancy of this online/content community and it must have been devastating to see that work come crashing down at its zenith.

If you read into RBs words a kind of longing for what could have been (whether you agree that it could have been) when it comes to the ex-Mormon community, I think her comments make much more sense.

[Lem]

This interpretation is beyond laughable. Dehlin may be starting his own cult, but to define every person who has left the LDS church as part of that is nonsensical. The only thing that defines me (and I suspect most) as ex-Mormon is the fact that I am no longer a member of the church I was born into. Period. That's it. Defining people who have left the LDS church as "a sect within Mormonism" only tells me that Rosebud still isn't able to move past this and unfortunately feels obligated to cast everyone else in the same role in which she feels stuck.

Right, it's similar to people who frame all atheists as opposites of theists, when theists are generally gravitating to theist-centric sources and atheists are generally dispersing from them. Atheists aren't generally gravitating towards some other atheistic center. Many are simply living life differently. Instead of centering their lives around the ideological ground of religion, they reformat their lives in multiple possible ways. And, by the way, there are plenty of theists who also retain religious identity but loosely enough that they also don't orient themselves around theistic-centric sources.

Likewise, a construct of "TBM versus exmormon" is overly simple. There are LDS folks who fall on a spectrum of centering around the church. That's why we've invented terms like TBM, Jack-Mo, and PIMO--to name a few. But those who leave can branch our even further, and they can completely shake-up this stereotype of ideological-centering.

However, what still affiliates to Mormonism and leaving Mormonism is the discourse about it. We're human beings. We talk about things. We're healthier when we talk about things. If we leave the church, then, naturally we are going to engage in talking about it. And in this age, podcasts and other internet media are instantly accessible. We could probably say that it's not just internet that causes people to question the church, but internet that gives people a place to process leaving the church, making it more likely that people will leave. In my case, when I was on that precipice of asking questions, I went to Recovery from Mormonism. Like many others in many other spaces, I quickly understood that there is a legitimate place away from believing in Mormonism. It is like crossing a river and seeing the subsequent stone so you can advance, instead of retreated back to the safety of the familiar shore.

And in the beginning of leaving Mormon Stories is a very visible stone in the river. In the place where we desperately need discourse, John Dehlin entered at an optimal moment. He was established first as a believer who subsequently left after becoming a fixture. And even in the little pond of Mormonism, fame still breeds more fame. And his platforms still remain popular staging grounds for discourse, centered around his voice and his personality.

Yet the field of discourse for those leaving Mormonism is widening. Places we can go are becoming more visible.

Very eloquently said, thank you.

I would only add that now, Mormon Stories may be a visible stone, but am I correct in my assessment that Mormon Stories started around 2005 or so? I left the LDS church more than 15 years before that, and lived in an area away from my LDS family members. I only vaguely know what Mormon Stories is from threads here. The subsequent stones I found that moved me away from the LDS church didn’t involve Dehlin or anyone like him, but I can certainly see how his influence may have grown as he established himself.

[jpatterson]

We good? Or, at least....as good as we're probably gonna get?

I don't have a major beef with you, I'm just pointing out the incongruency of your position, content warning or not.

It's kind of like someone starting an insult off with "I'm not trying to be rude, but..." and then being surprised that you found their comment rude. In the same family of caveats like "I'm not racist but..." and "I respect women but..."

It reminds me of the sympathy vs. empathy explanation given by Brene Brown. Sympathy is designed to make you feel better about yourself. Real empathy is when, without reservation, you focus on the emotional needs of the other person. What you said may have been sympathetic, but it wasn't very empathetic.

[Meadowchik]

Then I want to know if they consented to the letter release/public discussion.
Then a content warning, followed by material that I will no longer continue to engage in if they did not consent to the matter going public.

Regarding confirmation of consent, on page 32 of the thread, Chelovek did refer back to the Google Doc we all have access to as a valid source:

A predator is always in the making and in this case it was online. You say they actually have to kill rape or molest a child and I say they become predators when they start behaving as John Dehlin did online. I said flippantly because of exactly what you just said in that you don't know us. This is all I'm going to say on the matter as it's already taken way too much time out of our lives. You have access to the seven-page docs... And I'm assuming you have access to the post on Mormon stories podcast where she called him out. You have plenty of information to create your own deductions of the situation as does anyone else who is reading this. Please do. You've now heard this side of the story.

It's not an explicit confirmation, but it may be inferred.

To be fair to you, the woman involved here doesn't seem to mind people knowing about SexyPicGate, since she left those posts publicly visible on Facebook. All you did was make it easier for us to dig up the additional context. Such as:

It took her several years to decide if she wanted to tell her story publicly. She implies there is trauma in her story (e.g., she needs to "go to a vulnerable place" in order to tell it).

She and her husband were just about to appear on Mormon Stories in January, so it's not unusual that Dehlin was reviewing their social media pages. Interview questions don't write themselves.

Being on the verge of telling an apparently difficult story was probably already producing some complicated emotions for her, since she indicates that this was an enormous decision for her. Then she suffers a head injury, which, by definition, causes things like confusion, memory loss, and problems with perception.

/snip

I continue to find your comments about her Facebook page perplexing. I never saw her address the Mormon Stories confrontation on her personal Facebook page. And, despite what you say in a previous post--that her privacy settings have changed as of yesterday or something along those lines--I haven't noticed a change. Her posts are a mix of public and private, public posts being less common, and family, personal photos and information typically being set to private.

It still sounds to me like you were getting your information elsewhere.

[Jersey Girl]

Real empathy is when, without reservation, you focus on the emotional needs of the other person.

No. Just no.

[Lem]

Widely accepted label? You mean, calling me ex-Mormon because I used to be Mormon? Sure, ok.

Well, yes.

But Rosebud’s assertion that “ex-Mormons are a sect within Mormonism” goes well beyond that, and I would disagree with that definition, including her de facto assertion that Dehhlin is a secular prophet over that group. I can see how geographical constraints might make one feel that ex-Mormon is an actual group, but not in most places in the world. I literally don’t know one single Mormon or ex-Mormon who lives near me who is part of my in real life experiences. It is simply not part of my world, and definitely not a community by which I define myself.

Not all sub-sects of a larger movement have the same distinct attributes. There are very distinct differences between the LDS Church and, say, the FLDS but no one would argue that they're not related, or live within the same general movement.

Ex-Mormonism is certainly different and much more fluid in terms of any kind of organizational structure, but that in and of itself is a defining characteristic because of the very nature of the sect itself

I think you are missing my point entirely. You are defining ex-Mormons as a group, I am defining ex-Mormons as people who left the LDS church. There is no reason to assume that group has anything in common other than leaving a religion.

The same goes for whatever type of "leader" is out in front of the sect. Because of the collective nature of ex-Mormons, there's never going to be an actual prophet type person. You have to settle for looking for the closest thing to it, and I don't think it's a stretch to say that JD fits that bill in many respects.

No, I don’t have to settle for that! I left the LDS church, and I have a life.

There's no question got the largest following and measurable longevity of out of any ex-Mormon out there. His organization pulls in almost a half million dollars every year in donations, eclipsing orgs like Sunstone and Dialogue that have been in existence for decades. The guy can post a photo of his dirty tub grout and unpedicured toe nails and it goes mini-viral for crying out loud.

JD comes as close to any type of leader as you're going to ever find within ex-Mormonism.

Really? As I mentioned, I never heard of him prior to reading threads here. And since I don’t consider “ex-Mormonism” to be a “sect”, I’m obviously not looking for a “leader.”

I understand your points. But please understand, there is a huge world out there beyond Dehhlin and whatever sect he leads. He is completely irrelevant to literally 99% of the world.

[Meadowchik]

Very eloquently said, thank you.

I would only add that now, Mormon Stories may be a visible stone, but am I correct in my assessment that Mormon Stories started around 2005 or so? I left the LDS church more than 15 years before that, and lived in an area away from my LDS family members. I only vaguely know what Mormon Stories is from threads here. The subsequent stones I found that moved me away from the LDS church didn’t involve Dehlin or anyone like him, but I can certainly see how his influence may have grown as he established himself.

Yes, 2005 is Wiki-confirmed. I definitely was not plugged into Mormon Stories then. I left at the end of 2016-early 2017.

I impressed with you and others who managed to "cross the river" without the relative abundance of tools which became available more recently.