From his Mormonstories.org site, here are the provisions made by John's bishop in order to remain in good standing with Church:

1.“Publicly renounce and apologize for the false concepts you have widely expressed regarding God, Jesus Christ, the Atonement, the restoration of the Gospel, and the Book of Mormon.

2.Cease providing a public forum for any person who is critical of Church doctrine.

3.Stop promoting groups or organizations that espouse doctrines contrary to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

4.Resign my status as an ordained minister in another faith” (I signed up here once to be able to marry a friend, though the opportunity never materialized)

I truly understand and appreciate what John is trying to accomplish with mormonstories.org. I really do.

But the bottom line is this: John is a member of a religious organization, and he's engaged in activities that are against the policies of that organization. It doesn't matter if John believes he is doing the right thing. It doesn't matter what John believes. What matters is what his Church believes. The stipulations his bishop provided to him are very clear.

If John doesn't want to follow the rules, the honorable thing to do would be to resign his membership. That's what an honorable person WOULD do; abide by the rules, or resign out of respect. His requests for additional "clarification" and his counteroffers are stall tactics, and he knows it.

Follow their rules or step down, John. Time to stop fighting.

The problem with resigning is that he loses credibility with the Mormon crowd. What made Dehlin unique was his ability to bridge the gap between the Mormon crowd and non-Mormon crowd.

On his show he allowed ALL voices to be heard. He had the Sandra Tanner on his show as well as the president of FAIR. It was a unique forum where he had the full spectrum and many Mormons felt comfortable with him because he was still a member and let people speak their mind without judgment.

If he resigns, he's just another apostate and TBM's will no longer tune in.

This is what it really comes down to

You're welcome to give advice like anyone else, but there's no reason to insinuate that not resigning is somehow dishonorable. You make it sound like the church has some well-orchestrated approach to people like John, when there's really never been another John Dehlin. And even if there were, he could still take the route he's taking and I would not find it in any way dishonorable. Why so judgmental of John?

Yeah, the Catholic Church took the same line during the Inquisition.

John wants to be part of the tent. He's been told that the
Church is VERY inclusive. The "I'm a Mormon" campaign seem to
want to tell the world how accepting, and tolerant, and
inclusive Mormonism is.

So now John is putting them to the test. Do they really mean
it when they talk about how inclusive they are? If not then
let THEM show it to the world by ex-ing John. They would LOVE
it for John to resign and make the contradiction between their
appearances and their reality go away. In fact the original
letter from the SP suggested John do just that--resign.

Either they let John stay and allow more freedom of thought and
expression in the Church, or else they ex him and show to the
world that they are a bunch of paranoid cultists scared
spitless by honest inquiry.

Either way it's a win for the forces of truth.

"If he resigns, he's just another apostate and TBM's will no longer tune in."

Why does he lose credibility? Why wouldn't members continue to tune in? Does the fact that he attends a weekly church session somehow enhance his ability to contuct meaningful interviews on his program? If he resigns, it's on his terms. If he gets ex'd it's on THEIR terms. If he has no intention of conforming to their rules, which would you rather have happen?

"Why so judgmental of John?"

I'm not. President Nixon did the honorable thing too and stepped down.

SuperBigGulp Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm not. President Nixon did the honorable thing
> too and stepped down.

Wow. I had thought I had been harsh to John. Technically, he hasn't done anything against the law. Unless you are thinking "moral law" which you haven't defined.

I don't support John. I don't like his straddling the fence and attempting to live on the non-cogdis side while farming the cogdis side.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/27/2014 05:11PM by Elder Berry.

Yes, it makes a world of difference to his credibility with TBMs if he is a member. It may not sound logical, but it is true.

There is only one thing that he should by loyal to -- his highest values.

Integrity - does he speak with honesty?

Excellence - is he committed to quality?

Caring - does he show look for the greatest good?

If the church aligns with these values, there should be no problem. If it doesn't then conflict is inevitable.

I think the bottom line with him is that he makes money from people who want counseling so they too can stand to stay in.

He loses a lot of his professional income if he leaves.

I'm not so sure this is a fight between truth and lies. I think it old fashioned greed.

There are many mormons that make money off of networking in the Church -- accountants, insurance, doctors, lawyers, etc...

I think there will be a big business opportunity for those looking to care for those who have been damaged by the Church.

"Yes, it makes a world of difference to his credibility with TBMs if he is a member. It may not sound logical, but it is true."

You're right, it isn't logical. This makes it sound as if TBMs are incapable of their own thought. Mindless sheep.

How can you even use mormonism and honor in the same phrase?

John Dehlin is under absolutely no moral imperative to obey or believe in anything.

The Church has the prerogative of excommunicating him if they wants, but if they don't, he's free to do whatever he wants and at the same time associate with the institution.

The ball is on their court, not his.

<<<If John doesn't want to follow the rules, the honorable thing to do would be to resign.>>>

The problem is the Morg doesn't really have rules. It has authority figures and a chain of command.

"The ball is on their court, not his."

Not true. Obide by the church rules, or bye bye.

It's in John's court. Since he obviously has no intention of abiding by the rules, I would suggest he resign versus facing the embarrasment of excommunication.

That way it is in HIS court under his terms.

Possibilities and outcomes:

If Dehlin resigns, he looks principled, and the church looks "out of touch".

If Dehlin refuses to resign, AND refuses to obey the gag order, he looks principled AND heroically aggressive, in that he deliberately calls the church's bluff - he dares them to fight.

In that scenario, the church could either (A) back down and not excommunicate him, in which case, they would look weak, or (B) excommunicate him, in which case, they would look crabbed, bully-like, and intolerant of personal conscience and freedom of thought.

In (A), Dehlin would look like the mouse that whipped the lion. He'd be regarded as a hero by many, AND he'd get to keep on identifying himself as a "Mormon", which is obviously important to him. If (B), Dehlin would look like a martyr for conscience's sake, and a guy who pulled back the curtain on the church's absurd "inclusivity" claims (in which he case, he'd also be regarded as a hero), AND he'd be the cause of another international round of bad publicity for the Mormon church.

In any scenario, it seems to me, Dehlin will walk away looking like the winner, and the church the loser. The only question is to what extent.

While I personally would resign, I think Dehlin will look better if he refuses to resign and calls the church bluff, because in either (A) or (B) scenarios, he'll look like a little kid who stood up to a bully. And he'll be no worse for wear, while the church looks bad in either scenario.

And by the way, with Dehlin's talent for publicity, I think he could really make the most of his trial. It could set him up for a serious book deal, AND although he will be the defendant, so to speak, in the actual trial, in public, he can play prosecutor, and hold the church responsible for its ecclesiastical abuses and its continued perpetuation of outright lifes.

Just my two cents.

I like Tal's take on the Dehlin Situation. However, I find it extremely aggravating when people who do not fit within the theological mold of a very closed, defined system of belief (mormonism, JW's, 7th day, etc) try to affect change within the organization to "improve it" or make it more inclusive. Mormonism was born of racist, sexist and elitist ideas. The very core of mormonism would be diminished if women could hold the priesthood, if homosexuals could get married, if appologies were issued for past stances. It would no longer be the exlusive, "particular" thought club that it is today. Diluting a "sysetem of fucked up beliefs, so that it is more palatable for your own sensibilities, is a strange thing to me. I could never fight for that. However there are those who feel compelled to try their best to fix flawed and corrupted systems, systems that are inherently flawed by design. I am sure there are nice people in government hopeful of effecting real change just as their are mormons looking to bring the church into the 21st century. If the church survives, it will need to doggedly stick to a policy of exclusion and hate, otherwise it will lose its greatest selling point, exclusivity

I like John Dehlin he seems like a really thoughtful complex dude. If I had clout within the morg I would feel very uneasy with the guy as well as his motives and the vagueness of said motives. In some ways he seems like a TROLL. I doubt that he intends for his actions to be "trollish" but man are they ever. He seems to have a deep love for the mormon culture and story, but he be trolling. Guy has got some balls for sure standing up to all of the flack he must be getting

Heres to John Delhin, inadvertant Troll King!

Super big gulp, Tal Who is the bigger troll the woman recently exed for wanting priesthood powers or John Delhin?

> Heres to John Delhin, inadvertant Troll King!

Long live the king!

I hear you, duskus. I think one question you have to ask is whether any particular organization is really so valuable aside from its unpleasant characteristics, that one's energies should be directed into "reforming" it (rather than, say, simply leaving it, or even trying to destroy it).

In the case of Mormonism...I don't really think there's enough there to merit staying in to try to reform it. You have Scouts outside of Mormonism; you have girls's organizations, too. And God knows that the youth programs of mainstream evangelical churches are incredibly robust compared to Mormon programs...so why try to stay in and reform it?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/27/2014 06:37PM by Tal Bachman.

If you are a heroic loner, then these solutions are fine. Ideals are more difficult to uphold if the church's tentacles reach all the way into your family, your livelihood, and your core identity. I think part of his stand might include, "I'm a Mormon, but I wish that were a more respectable and modern thing."

I think if it was just his investment into the church, any of the above solutions would be quick, relatively easy, and relatively painless. But, with the church being what it is and doing what it does, it's much easier to talk about severing ties than it actually is.

"If Dehlin refuses to resign, AND refuses to obey the gag order, he looks principled AND heroically aggressive, in that he deliberately calls the church's bluff - he dares them to fight."

I don't think it makes him look principled and heroically aggressive. I think it makes him look like an asshole.

The people whom he looks like a hero to are his band of disenchanted followers. But to the rest of the world, the whole "I'm going to snub my nose at your policies and dare you to fire me" routine looks silly and immature.

I'm surprised by the binary nature of your thinking. The church says that Dehlin must toe the line or leave. I can see why they want him to resign: it would spare them the need to take responsibility for their own behavior, their own policy.

But why are you carrying the church's water? Why do you accept and affirm their black-and-white standard? You may call Dehlin names all you want: the fact remains that he is probably the single best example of someone forcing the church to decide what it really thinks and then to bear responsibility for that decision.

Life for the apostles and first presidency would be much easier if Dehlin resigned. Is that your motivation too, or are you still so culturally Mormon that ambiguity is uncomfortable?

I think it is unlikely TSCC exes John Dehlin. John is known as a proponent of LGBT causes, and the last thing the Morg wants is national publicity for exing someone who is trying to prevent LGBT suicides in the Church. It would be a PR nightmare.

So, I think his bishop will disfellowship him, as that doesn't sound as serious to the national media.

OP is wrong. People can and should urge change in any organization including the MORG. Why shouldn't he. It is not as easy as keep the rules or get out. Change the rules! Such black and white thinking by OP.

OP is not wrong. There is a difference between urging change and blatantly disregarding policy.

And why should John or anyone else respect the church's policy?

John's actions and the church's response to them are between John and the church. It's none of your business, and I have no idea why you believe that you have any grounds to criticize what he does.

1.“Publicly renounce and apologize for the false concepts you have widely expressed regarding God, Jesus Christ, the Atonement, the restoration of the Gospel, and the Book of Mormon.

3.Stop promoting groups or organizations that espouse doctrines contrary to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.


I never witnessed him doing these things, that is, he never taught false concepts (just reminded church leaders of what they once taught and what they claim to teach), and never promoted organizations that espoused doctrines contrary to TSCC, although I suppose they're talking about LGBT support, which a lot of other members also do.

I'm with Tal. I think that he will hold high ground whatever he does, and his biggest goal should be to make TSCC appear to be the one who is being chickenshit about this. He can go a couple of different directions and accomplish that very thing.

In Mormonism, if you're not FER, you're AGIN.

Simple as that.