#ISustain Campaign: Faithful Mormons Fire Back Against Seven Dissidents Who Voted Not To Sustain First Presidency And The Twelve At LDS General Conference

From the #ISustain campaign

After at least seven LDS members at last count raised their hands in opposition to sustaining the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve on April 4th, 2015 during the Saturday Afternoon General Session of the 185th Annual General Conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, faithful LDS members are launching a counter-offensive online to show that the dissidents do not speak for rank-and-file Church members. They have launched the #ISustain campaign.

But first, let's have a roundup of all the information published by the Utah media about the dissidents as of April 6th. The primary media sources are KSTU Channel 13 and the Salt Lake Tribune, and the dissidents reportedly were motivated by and announced their intentions in advance on the AnyOpposed.org website. At last count, there were at least seven dissidents. Six of them attended the session at the Conference Center and also shouted "Opposed", while one of them was in attendance at the Tabernacle, which was designated one of the overflow venues for those unable to get tickets into the Conference Center. Four of the dissidents have been identified by name. At the Conference Center were Don Braegger, M'lisa D. Martinez Glyndwr, Micah Nickolaisen, while Laura Pennock was at the Tabernacle; all identified as LDS members, and Braegger's "pedigree" includes service in a bishopric and a member of a stake presidency. After the No votes were manifested, President Dieter Uchtdorf made a brief statement regarding those who opposed the proposals, saying “We invite those who oppose any of the proposals to contact their Stake Presidents. My dear brothers and sisters, we thank you for your faith and prayers in behalf of the leaders of the church.” Unlike in previous similar situations, the dissidents were not asked to leave by security. LDS Living published an explanation of the voting procedure.

After the session, Don Braegger said he filled a Mormon mission and served in an LDS bishopric and stake presidency, and his concerns are the perception that LDS history is rife with disturbing episodes, that the faith does not treat lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons fairly or offer wide enough roles for women. Separately, Laura Pennock said she is also is unhappy with the excommunications of Ordain Women founder Kate Kelly and podcaster John Dehlin, and M'lisa D. Martinez Glyndwr opined that her efforts to speak with local leaders about their concerns have been fruitless, characterizing the stake presidency as a "glass ceiling".

Meanwhile, faithful LDS members are already firing back and proclaiming their renewed loyalty to Jesus Christ, his top servants, and the Church. LDS.net reports the emergence of the #ISustain campaign, where LDS members are pledging their continued loyalty towards the Brethren. Loyalty does NOT mean infallibility; it simply means AUTHORITY. We recognize that the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve has been chosen by the Lord, set apart under proper authority, and, to the best of our knowledge, have engaged in no ethically or morally disqualifying behavior while in office. A good example of this was posted by April McMurtney, who also published a blog post to SomethingToShoutAbout.org

“So, to sustain my prophet, whom I love dearly, I will do something to show my support. I will defend him. I will share his words. I will do what I have been counseled to do during this conference and all the others. Then, slowly, I will begin to become something better. I will not just say I will do something, or intend to be better, or raise my hand without thought. I will commit to KEEP TRYING, until I become more like my Savior. I think that’s what he would want, and what the Lord would want.”

One LDS member may have gotten a bit carried away and reproved the seven with a bit too much "sharpness". BYU running backs coach Mark Atuaia tweeted Saturday that those opposed should go see their stake presidents, as President Dieter Uchtdorf suggested to opponents, "Then find me and oppose those beloved men in front of me and witness how I sin," Atuaia tweeted. Many respondents accused Atuaia of bullying; later, he backed down a bit, acknowledging he could have phrased his reaction to the conference opposers better. But he will not apologize for standing up for Thomas S. Monson, his counselors and the Quorum of the Twelve to those that oppose them. He maintains the dissidents did not follow protocol, which is to raise one's hand but not speak when voting to sustain or not sustain leaders. But "sharpness" should never mean "abuse"; it means clarity, and must always be accompanied by an increase of love thereafter (D&C 121:43).

No weapon formed against us will prosper.

As for the fate of the "seven", it is too early to speculate about disciplinary councils. The real problem is not so much that they raised their hands to vote No, but that they appeared to have orchestrated it in advance. Undoubtedly, the four who identified themselves by name will be called in by their bishops and asked to explain themselves, but they'll be offered an opportunity to repent and recant before facing disfellowshipment or excommunication. If they have temple recommends, they will likely be pulled. Because Don Braegger is the most outspoken, holds the Melchizedek Priesthood, and has a portfolio of past leadership positions, he is the one most likely to be subject to a disciplinary council, but just as Denver Snuffer, Kate Kelly, and John Dehlin were offered numerous opportunities to repent in advance, the same consideration will be given to Braegger. Sadly, this post by Braegger on Reddit, along with his subsequent responses, indicate he may already be on his way out of the LDS Church in his heart.

Dissident LDS Blogger Rock Waterman's "Pure Mormonism" Too "Impure" For LDS Authorities According To New York Times Article

The rumors that dissident LDS blogger Rock Waterman, who edits the Pure Mormonism blog, is in trouble with his local Priesthood chain of command have been confirmed in a New York Times article entitled "Mormons Say Critical Online Comments Draw Threats From Church", published on June 18th, 2014. The New York Times has taken an interest in the latest round of prospective disciplinary actions against dissident Mormons like Kate Kelly and John Dehlin, and have now extended their scrutiny to Rock Waterman. Waterman defines "Pure Mormonism", under Joseph Smith's tutelage, as nothing less than pure Christianity, which is defined as love of God and love of neighbor; anything that does not endorse or amplify that love is considered mere religious baggage.

The money shot:

Rock Waterman, a retired innkeeper in California, writes a blog called Pure Mormonism, which attracts Mormons so orthodox that they believe their church is not sufficiently adhering to its own doctrines.

Last month [May 2014], Mr. Waterman posted a combative challenge addressed to one of the Mormon Church’s top leaders: "Stop making up your own rules and try preaching the Gospel of Christ for a change." [Ed. Note: This phrase appears in the post entitled "Vengeance And The Latter-Day Saint", under the paragraph heading "Mea Culpa"

Two days later, he said, he was summoned to a meeting with his bishop and told to either stop blogging or resign his church membership. If he did not resign he would face excommunication, he said the bishop told him, on orders from another official higher up — one of the church’s leaders known as an Area Seventy.

At the end of the article, the Times says Brother Waterman refuses to resign and is willing to face discipline, quoting him as saying "I’m not trying to get the church to change...I’m trying to get the church to abide by its doctrine".

In response to accusations that the LDS Church is trying to suppress free speech online, the Times recorded these statements by Michael Otterson, managing director of the church’s public affairs office, who appears to be concerned when LDS bloggers use discussion to recruit others for campaigns to change church doctrine or structure.

“There is no coordinated effort to tell local leaders to keep their members from blogging or discussing their questions online. On the contrary, church leaders have encouraged civil online dialogue and recognize that today it’s just part of how the world works.”

“When it goes so far as creating organized groups, staging public events to further a cause and creating literature for members to share in their local congregations, the church has to protect the integrity of its doctrine as well as other members from being misled.”

According to the Times, Rock Waterman is trying to get the church to abide by its doctrine. But is this always so? Perhaps in some cases, although he seems overly fond of hitting the Reset button back to Joseph Smith. But current LDS doctrine holds that consumption of beer is contrary to the Word of Wisdom. Nevertheless, in this post, Waterman suggests that D&C Section 89 verse 17 endorses beer because barely is O.K. for mild drinks.

LDS Church To Hold Disciplinary Council For Ordain Women Founder Kate Kelly, Excommunication A Possibility

On June 11th, 2014, the New York Times reported that two dissident activist members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Kate Kelly and John Dehlin, face upcoming disciplinary councils and may be excommunicated from the Church. This post is about the Kate Kelly story.

Sister Kelly received an email on June 8th from the bishop of her previous ward in Virginia (she currently lives in Provo) informing her that she faces disfellowshipment or excommunication on the grounds of apostasy, and calling her to a disciplinary council hearing at the Oakton Virginia Stake Center on June 22nd. Disfellowshipment means limiting the participation of a church member, while excommunication is removing someone from membership. Kelly’s stake president had previously warned her in a letter in May that if she did not shut down the Ordain Women website, dissociate herself from it and repent, she faced excommunication for openly, repeatedly and deliberately acting in public opposition to the church and its leaders after having been counseled not to do so. The letter said "you are not required to change your thinking or the questions you may have in your own mind", but that she must keep her questions private and resolve them by talking to her bishop. According to this comment posted on Millennial Star, Kelly was placed on informal probation at that time, the conditions of which she could not identify herself as a member in good standing, participate in temple or sacrament ordinances, pray or speak in church. Another source reveals that when Kelly attempted to appeal the informal probation up the chain of command, Elder Donald L. Hallstrom of the Quorum of the Seventy said he could do nothing for her.

Kelly has posted a copy of this letter HERE, although I've not been able to get it to load successfully.

Kate Kelly describes this development in her own words on the Ordain Women website:

I was informed on June 8 that there will be a disciplinary council held in absentia by my former bishopric on June 22 to try me for "apostasy". I have moved away from the Washington, DC area, and after I left my former Stake President sent me a letter outlining what he called “informal probation” after meeting with me one time, while I was packing to move. The trial will be held in my former ward and I am not able to return.

I was open and honest with my bishop from the day we launched ordainwomen.org on March 17, 2013. I communicated with him each and every time Ordain Women did an action and asked that he come to me if he had any questions. While I was living in his ward, he never once personally called me in to meet with him. Nor did he email or call me with any questions regarding Ordain Women. Three weeks after I had moved out of his ward, and he sent me this letter. Convening a council in my absence, after I have moved, is both cowardly and unchristlike.

During two successive General Conferences, in October 2013 and April 2014, Kelly and Ordain Women announced their intention to line up outside the Conference Center and ask for admission tickets to the all-male General Priesthood Session. On both occasions, LDS authorities told them in advance they would not be admitted. Nevertheless, they showed up and lined up anyway. The latter implies that Kate Kelly and the Ordain Women activists went beyond merely advocating for women's Priesthood ordination, coming out in open rebellion against LDS Church authorities. Sister Kelly seems absolutely blind to the effects of this action and the futility of influencing Church policy through civil disobedience. Nevertheless, the LDS Church was willing to blow it off and turn the other cheek after the first incident in October 2013, although they rebutted five formal requests by Ordain Women to meet the Church authorities.

But Ordain Women chose to do it a second time in April 2013. This means they slapped the LDS Church's other cheek. Consequently, the LDS Church had no viable alternative but to initiate a disciplinary council and try Kate Kelly for her membership. But while this is just, it is no cause for joy. Those of us who believe she deserves ecclesiastical discipline ought not to be celebrating this occasion. It is a bit troubling that Kelly reports she will not be able to attend her own council, but perhaps that's a misunderstanding on her part, since it is a requirement that the subject of a disciplinary council be allowed to attend and speak in his/her own defense.

Since this post was published, the LDS Church has issued an updated statement on Church discipline which makes no specific reference to either Kate Kelly or John Dehlin:

"The Church is a family made up of millions of individuals with diverse backgrounds and opinions. There is room for questions and we welcome sincere conversations. We hope those seeking answers will find them and happiness through the gospel of Jesus Christ.

"Sometimes members’ actions contradict Church doctrine and lead others astray. While uncommon, some members in effect choose to take themselves out of the Church by actively teaching and publicly attempting to change doctrine to comply with their personal beliefs. This saddens leaders and fellow members. In these rare cases, local leaders have the responsibility to clarify false teachings and prevent other members from being misled. Decisions are made by local leaders and not directed or coordinated by Church headquarters.

"Actions to address a person’s membership and standing in their congregation are convened after lengthy periods of counseling and encouragement to reconsider behavior. Ultimately, the door is always open for people to return to the Church."

Ordain Women Responds: KSTU Channel 13 reports that Kimberly Baptista, public relations director of Ordain Women, stated in an email that they have two actions in response. The first is that they are asking supporters to submit a letter describing how the group has improved their relationships with the Church or strengthened their testimonies. Representatives from Ordain Women will deliver these letters to the Church Office Building and will also send them to those who make up Kelly's disciplinary council. The letters are being collected HERE. The group is also planning to hold a candlelight vigil on June 22 at 5 p.m. MDT, the same time as the hearing. The vigil will be held outside the LDS Church Office Building in Salt Lake City, and those who gather will do so to show their support of Kelly.

Other Reaction: Predominantly LDS reaction from a number of sources (after the jump):

Utah LDS Member Excommunicated By Eagle Mountain Stake President For Apostasy For Allegedly "Supporting" Denver Snuffer

A member of the LDS Church reports he was excommunicated for apostasy on February 2nd, 2013. Allegedly, he expressed too much "support" for Denver Snuffer, although by his own account, he would refuse to follow Snuffer if Snuffer had said that the LDS Church had gone totally astray. The individual, who identifies himself as Brent D. Larsen of the Eagle Mountain Utah Stake, discusses the situation on an LDS Freedom Forum thread entitled "I was excommunicated this morning". He says his stake president charged him with apostasy because he publicly stated that Denver Snuffer has seen Christ and was asked to write The Second Comforter and that he had received his own witness of the validity of Snuffer's account. Brother Larsen also states that two posts he made on one of the private subforums of LDSFF were cited as evidence against him, which has triggered renewed speculation that the LDS Church is monitoring LDSFF.

Since this information was originally spread out over two lengthy LDSFF threads, my purpose was to extract and present the most significant posts, with corresponding links.

Like Denver Snuffer, Brent D. Larsen retains a positive attitude towards the Church and even towards the disciplinary council who sat in judgment of him, writing "...I hold no ill will against those who held the court and the church and those who do or have an axe to grind please take your comments to another thread. I love the men who sat in judgment on me. There was some things I intently disagree with, but I have many friends that we don't see eye to eye on everything". However, Brother Larsen is appealing his excommunication, and posted a copy of his appeal letter on LDSFF:

4 Feb 14

FROM: Brent D. Larsen

TO: The First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

INFO: Keith M. Burnham, Stake President, Eagle Mountain Utah Stake.

SUBJ: Appeal of Disciplinary Council Decision

Dear Presidents Monson, Eyring, and Uchtdorf:

On February 2, 2014, I was excommunicated for apostasy. I was given fair chance to defend myself and my position but was excommunicated for reasons outside the Church Handbook of Instructions' definition of apostasy.

I was told that I had a chance to “humble” myself and “submit” to “priesthood authority”

I am unaware of anywhere where I covenanted to submit my agency to the good will and pleasure of those whom I fully sustain and honor as church officers. I would rather make the gravest of mistakes than surrender my own judgment and agency to another yet this is exactly what I was asked to do, as I was directly told my reasoning was unsound. It was worse than asking for blind obedience, it was being asked to act in direct opposition to the promptings of the Holy Ghost. I feel that this is antithesis to the gospel and the purpose of the Atonement and plan of Salvation. I was also unaware that “submission to priesthood authority” was a requirement to retain membership. I believe that what happened on February 2 was in direct opposition to Presidents Uchtdorf's talk, "Come, Join With Us", as I was told, there is no room for YOU, unless you do as we say and believe as we say.

I was asked a theoretical question: If President Monson was here right now and he asked you to do “a thing” would you do it. My answer was no, I do not follow any man, I follow Christ, and I would have to ask Christ if I should do it.

I honestly don’t even understand why such a question would be asked. Or why my membership would hang on the balance of saying, yes, or how this relates to the charge of apostasy.

I was charged with apostasy because I stated that Denver Snuffer has seen Christ and was asked to write The Second Comforter and that I have received my own witness of that. I believe that makes him a prophet. I do not believe that gives him ANY authority in the church.

I was asked the theoretical question: “if Denver said the church was totally astray and you had to follow him now, what would you say to that?” My reply was: I would say he was full of crap!

I was told that I was excommunicated because Denver has not seen Christ and I cannot say that he has, or that he meets MY definition of prophet. I was unaware that this has become Church Doctrine. I do not affiliate with Denver Snuffer so it cannot be that definition of apostasy that is being used to excommunicate me.

My position is that the doctrine of the church is that people can see Christ and testify of it. I concur and agree that we may not always agree on who has done that but that it is very scriptural that it can happen.

To support this position I quoted Mark 16:14, where the undisputed leader of the Church, Peter, was chastised for not accepting the testimony of Mary and Cleopas and some other random chap on the road to Emmaus. Those who had received a witness of the risen lord outside of the priesthood chain of authority and before them. In fact the greatest news ever given “He is risen!” came outside the established leadership.

I also testified that there are prophets outside of the current church leadership that are known that meet MY definition of prophet. John the Beloved still walks the earth, and the Three Nephites, and holy men we know not of, yet I don’t believe they have any keys for the church. . I believe that Luke was a prophet and yet he was never one of the Twelve.

So my understating is that we would agree on the points of Doctrine, that people can see Christ. And that they have and do testify that “He Lives”. Unless it has become a point of Doctrine that Denver has not seen Christ, then I am left to wonder why I was excommunicated.

We have three definitions of apostasy:
1. Open, public and repeated opposition to the Church or its leaders.

2. Teaching as doctrine something that is not Church doctrine after one has been advised by appropriate authority that that’s false doctrine. In other words, just teaching false doctrine is not apostasy, but [it is] teaching persistently after you’ve been warned.

3. To affiliate and belong to apostate sects.

Thank you for your consideration of this appeal.

Brent D. Larsen.

Additional perspective on the disciplinary council hearing was posted by Brother Larsen's wife, who was present at the hearing (after the jump):

Kate Kelly Won't Face Church Discipline For Her Ordain Women Activities; Too Bad Denver Snuffer Didn't Have The Same Stake President

I fully expected Ordain Women's founder Kate Kelly to face a disciplinary council over her effort to seek admission to the General Conference Priesthood Session on October 5th, 2013. Because she chose to seek admission even after she was told by Church authorities that she and her group would not be admitted, I interpreted that as an act of open rebellion against duly constituted Church authority.

However, Sister Kelly's local priesthood chain of command in Washington DC does not share that perspective. Kelly states that while she was called in by her bishop and stake president to explain her actions, she was told she was not facing any disciplinary action. Furthermore, she states that her priesthood chain of command told her they were not ordered to call her in by senior Church authorities, and that the senior leadership is not contemplating a crackdown on Ordain Women activists.

The money shot from Sister Kelly's post on Feminist Mormon Housewives:

The most important, immediate takeaways from my encounter with leadership were:

1) They explicitly and emphatically assured me that I was not facing any type of disciplinary action for my founding of, and participation in, Ordain Women.

2) They told me there was no directive from any area authority or higher-level Church leader instructing them to meet with me, interview me or punish me in any way. Hence, they assured me when I asked, there is no concerted effort on the part of the Church to “crack down” on members of Ordain Women or target us specifically for our unequivocal calls for female ordination.

Clearly the power dynamic was not balanced, but I came away from the meeting feeling proud and satisfied. While they do not agree with me, I felt I spoke clearly and the discussion was a productive one. My friend Suzette, and my dad also recently met with their leaders. They both discussed their Ordain Women participation with candor and had their temple recommends renewed.

Other commenters to the post indicate they also haven't faced any excommunication threats. So if Kate Kelly's activism passes muster with her local leadership, that would seem to settle the issue. The Church has set a newer and more flexible standard as to what constitutes acceptable public disagreement with Church policy by members.

Too bad Denver Snuffer didn't have the same stake president. Unlike Kate Kelly, Snuffer never led any public protests; his book, Passing The Heavenly Gift, was deemed by Church authorities to denigrate all LDS presidents since Joseph Smith. I can offer two reasons as to why Denver Snuffer was treated more harshly than Kate Kelly:

(1). Stake presidents enjoy considerable autonomy to run their fiefdoms with minimal interference. The Church chooses not to micromanage their stake presidents, reflecting Joseph Smith's old mantra "I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves". The First Presidency upheld the excommunication of Denver Snuffer on appeal.

(2). Unlike Kate Kelly, Denver Snuffer also held the priesthood. Because the priesthood confers additional authority and responsibility, a bearer of the priesthood incurs additional accountability. Thus Snuffer's stake president must have concluded that Snuffer, as a priesthood holder, should be judged by a higher and harsher standard than an ordinary member. This is implied by Doctrine & Covenants 121:36 which states, in part, "...the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness".

Is Ordain Women Organizer Kate Kelly Guilty Of Apostasy? Feminism Becoming Incompatible With Mormonism

The actions by Ordain Women during the 183rd Semiannual General Conference continue to generate considerable backlash from believing Mormons. And one woman pulls no punches about her attitude. Jenny Hatch, the editor of The Natural Family Blog, lets 'em have it right between the eyes. She reproves with major-league "sharpness".

Most impressively, Jenny Hatch is wise to the true agenda of the Mormon feminist movement:

I believe this group of activist women are an organized cabal of professionally trained leftist agitators who have been tasked with doing a well publicized stunt in order to be excommunicated so they can then then whine to the media for the next twenty years about how evil and patriarchal the church is, having put their Feminist beliefs on the line and paid the seemingly ultimate sacrifice. I just wonder how much money they have been paid to do it…

I have quietly observed Joanna Brooks well timed book rollout, her many blog posts, media appearances, book tours, and I even attended her lecture on the campus of SUU [Southern Utah University] last fall. She is a statist progressive who has no clear understanding of the basic doctrines of the church.

She is someone who believes her agenda of ordaining women to the Priesthood will “shape” the future of the Faith I love.

And I am here to tell you, “No, it will not”.

In her post today [October 7th] she made it clear they are just getting started as a group.

She hits the nail on the head; the fact that Kate Kelly is a "human rights lawyer" from Washington DC is no coincidence. Feminism is divisive, corrosive, inherently anti-male, blaming men for all the sins of the universe, past, present, and future. In fact, one non-Mormon preacher, John Hagee, once suggested that feminism could be considered witchcraft, defining witchcraft as the unrighteous control over someone through manipulation or intimidation for the purposes of domination (scroll down to Hagee on Feminism). Feminism actually cultivates and enshrines female victimhood by encouraging vulnerable women to blame men and patriarchy for their problems instead of taking their share of responsibility for problem-solving. And although some "sensitive" men may go into "Uncle Tim" mode and identify with feminists as a reflection of Stockholm Syndrome, most men and are put off by feminism because they want to remain men and don't think they should have to walk on eggshells in their own homes or in church.

However, it might be a mistake to condemn all 150 of the activists who showed up at Temple Square on October 5th as apostates. Not all are equally culpable; many have been misled and have become deluded. It is only the leadership of this group that could really be considered as "sinning against the light". On The Millennial Star, LDS Philosopher articulates a good distinction between heresy and apostasy. He suggests that while heresy is limited to thought alone, apostasy takes place when the "heretic" promotes that heresy publicly. To wit:

In short, if you have a different opinion, if you disbelieve certain core Church teachings, you are fully welcome to worship with us. It’s ok to have questions and doubts. That doesn’t make you a bad Mormon. We want you with us. But when you start to publish opinions that directly contradict the established teachings of the Church, and earnestly try to persuade others to believe such an opinion, you are engaging in apostasy. For example, if you believe that same-sex activity is not sinful, you might be a heretic, and that’s ok. We can accept you. We will try and teach you, but we will embrace you with open arms and fellowship nonetheless. If you publish a book about it, or write a blog post about it, in which you try to convince others that the established teachings of the Apostles on sexuality are wrong and misguided, you are not longer just a heretic — you are an apostate.

According to the 2010 Church Handbook of Instructions Volume 1 (not officially available online), it is not heresy that's actionable, but apostasy. According to paragraph 6.7.3, apostasy is one of the transgressions mandating a disciplinary council. Here's how the Church defines it:

Apostasy. As used here, apostasy is used to refer to members who:

(1). Repeatedly act in clear, open, and deliberate public opposition to the Church and its leaders.

(2). Persist in teaching as Church doctrine information that is not Church doctrine after they have been corrected by their bishop or a higher authority.

(3). Continue to follow the teachings of apostate sects (such as those that advocate plural marriage) after they have been corrected by their bishop or a higher authority.

(4). Formally join another church and advocate its teachings.

Unlike other transgressions like murder, rape, and incest, which mandate excommunication as the only outcome, the CHI does not mandate excommunication as the only outcome for an apostasy trial. Thus a stake court may consider the full range of actions from formal probation, disfellowshipment, or excommunication.

While Kate Kelly is certainly not guilty of items (2), (3), and (4), she comes close to the line on Item 1. Even after she was told in advance by the Church that women would not be admitted to the Priesthood Session, she and her cohorts chose to go to Temple Square and seek admission. This is more than just apostasy; this constitutes open rebellion against the Church leadership, and even if there's no track record of Kate Kelly doing this "repeatedly", it certainly warrants a response by her local Church leadership in Washington DC. At the very least, her bishop and/or stake president should call her in and ask her to explain her actions. In fact, some of the Ordain Women activists have already been called in by their bishops to explain their participation, although Kelly herself claims her local leadership has been supportive. Whether it would escalate into a full-blown disciplinary council would depend upon her response. If Kate Kelly's act of open rebellion goes unexamined, this could encourage more rebellion. Denver Snuffer's so-called "apostasy" pales by comparison.

Feminism is growing more and more incompatible with Mormonism with each passing day.

LDS Church Stands Strong Against Radical Feminists; Backlash Erupts Against Ordain Women's Plan To Crash The Priesthood Session Of The LDS General Conference

The plan by Ordain Women to crash the Saturday evening Priesthood session of the 183rd Semiannual General Conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has bumped up against a big STOP sign by the Church itself and a growing manifestation of backlash by rank-and-file Church members. The LDS Church plans to stand strong and refuse admittance to these radical feminists. Here's the full statement released on September 24th by the LDS Church:

"It is the hope of the Church that the Priesthood session will strengthen the men and young men including fathers and sons, and give them the opportunity to gather and receive instruction related to priesthood duties and responsibilities, much the same way parallel meetings are held for sisters, such as the general Relief Society meeting. It's for these reasons that tickets for the Priesthood session are reserved for men and young men and we are unable to honor your request for tickets or admission".

Good response. Just as the women have the right to their own meeting, so we men likewise have an equal right to our own meeting. Diversity and equality do not require that everything be equally kaleidoscopic. The fact that the First Presidency shows up at both the General Relief Society Meeting and the General Young Women Meeting doesn't make these meetings any less of "women's meetings"; the First Presidency is merely exercising their obligation to preside over the Church when they show up at the women's meetings. The women's meetings are actually conducted by the respective women's presidencies themselves.

However, the LDS Church did try to address Ordain Women's concerns part way by also announcing that for the first time, the Priesthood Session will be broadcast live on television and online on BYUtv, as well as on LDS.org and the Mormon Channel. However, the announcement may have come too late for cable companies to pick up the additional broadcast; check Bonneville.info to see if your cable company has added the Priesthood broadcast. In the past, the Priesthood session was only broadcast live from the Conference Center in Downtown Salt Lake via satellite to LDS stake centers and the Tabernacle on Temple Square, although the session eventually appeared on Conference archives and transcripts of talks published in the Ensign magazine. Mormon Momma believes the two announcements are related, and they could be right.

In response, representatives of Ordain Women said they still plan to wait in the standby line at the Conference Center in downtown Salt Lake City for tickets to the session. One of the lead organizers, Kate Kelly, who is also a so-called "international rights lawyer" from Washington DC, sees this as a continuation of them asking, seeking and knocking, and demonstrating their willingness to receive the priesthood and to accept the responsibilities that come with it.

Feminist Mormon Women Plan To Crash The LDS General Conference Priesthood Session For Political Reasons; Where Are The Disciplinary Councils Now?

According to a post on Feminist Mormon Housewives, the group Ordain Women plan to crash the Priesthood Session of the upcoming 183rd Semiannual General Conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

They do plan to be dignified about it, however. On Saturday, October 5th, 2013, at 4:00 p.m. MDT, they plan to meet at City Creek Park and walk over the the Conference Center together. The women and their so-called "male allies" will form up in the standby line in order to gain admittance to the Priesthood Session. If they are admitted, they will celebrate this "historical achievement" by attending the Priesthood Session together. Afterwards, they will reconstitute at City Creek Park to speak to the public about the outcome. At this meeting, Ordain Women will also make a public statement continuing their unequivocal call for complete equality and the ordination of Mormon women. The possibility of a full-blown media circus exists. How many will show up? As of this post, 126 people have posted their intent to participate on the Ordain Women Facebook Page, with another 67 saying Maybe.

Despite their protestations to the contrary, these people are not doing this because of an honest desire to serve the Lord. Their real motivation is obvious -- to turn Priesthood ordination into a political football, sow hate and dissension within LDS ranks, and inflict damage upon the Church. On FMH, Rah writes "I predict that the conversation will be hard, messy and in some sad cases pit mother against daughter, wife against husband, friend against friend." This is NOT the way our Savior works; this is the way of Satan. Unfortunately, Ordain Women is also leading astray some fundamentally honest but frustrated women who have been persuaded that ordination of women could "double the power of God in one day". Notice there is no corresponding group of men planning to crash the General Relief Society Meeting to be held on Saturday September 28th. The LDS Church needs to politely but assertively lay the smack down on these women and refuse them entrance.

If Ordain Women does indeed try to carry this out, the leaders of this group also need to be hauled before disciplinary councils and tried for their Church membership. If Denver Snuffer, who has consistently expressed love and loyalty towards the Church and the Gospel, was worthy of excommunication, then excommunication of these insurgents is FAR MORE JUSTIFIED. A commenter on Pure Mormonism noted the double standard between the treatment meted out to Denver Snuffer and that accorded to dissident Mormon feminists.

LDS Author Denver Snuffer Gets Publicity In The Salt Lake Tribune; Snuffer Reaffirms His Loyalty To The Gospel And The Church

Update September 9th: Denver Snuffer's disciplinary council hearing ends inconclusively; updated post HERE. Subsequently, Snuffer reported he was excommunicated.

The mainstream media has finally picked up on the Denver Snuffer controversy. Peggy Fletcher Stack, who on her best day could never be confused with LDS spokeswoman Ruth Todd, has published a short article in the Salt Lake Tribune that really adds little to existing reports circulating on the Web except to opine that unlike most earlier high-profile cases of church discipline against Mormon intellectuals such as the September Six, Snuffer is no liberal.

The Tribune recorded reaction from both sides. While Snuffer intends to defend himself at the disciplinary council to be chaired by his stake president, Truman Hunt, on Sunday September 8th, he says he fully expects to be excommunicated. "I think [my stake president] has received instructions to do so from downtown [LDS Church headquarters]," Snuffer says. "I believe the decision has already been made to excommunicate me." Snuffer says the outcome will not change his religious behavior. In fact, he continues to rejoice over the fact that he joined the Church in 1973, and he simply wants to alert Latter-day Saints about Joseph Smith’s prophecies on the end times that they are unwittingly fulfilling.

But LDS officials say that church discipline is left to local leaders, and the Tribune cited content from a letter Truman Hunt wrote to Snuffer, stating "I am not anxious to chase people out of the church...My goal is the opposite — to enable all to enjoy the blessings of the gospel." The story has triggered 720 comments so far, most of which are drivel.

Denver Snuffer continues to update us on his blog. In a post entitled "Compliance (So Far As Possible)", he says he can't cease publication of Passing The Heavenly Gift because would involve violation of agreements between him and others, even though the Church offered him money as compensation for potential liability. He also states he never intended to speak or promote Passing the Heavenly Gift during his upcoming tour; he says it has to do with the scriptures and promoting them.

In another post entitled "Contentment", Brother Snuffer vigorously proclaims his continued loyalty to the Gospel and the Church:

Tomorrow [Sept. 8] will not end my love of this restored faith, though it may cost me some "things" that the organized entity claiming to own the faith thinks it can remove. I'm reconciled to that potential loss. But I'm also reconciled to these few truths underlying my faith:

-- God spoke to me BEFORE I joined the LDS church. If He hadn't, I wouldn't have joined.
-- God has continued to speak to me since.
-- Administrative allocation of membership numbers, status and privileges inside an organization don't matter much to God. I know that because I've been the least of the Latter-day Saints and He has taken note of me.
-- God will continue to have fellowship with me.
-- The religion I believe has existed from eternity and will continue into eternity. Therefore, a temporary, corporate organization that is owned by a sole individual, which IS The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints won't survive beyond the veil. There you leave behind your money. You can't buy or sell in that better place. Since I've been there already, the turbulence here is of little moment to me.
-- Souls matter. Yours, mine the living and the dead. God is more compassionate that we are. No matter how serious we take our organizations, our things, the souls of mankind are infinitely more valuable than commerce between ourselves.
-- I have an assignment given to me I intend to discharge. It is because I love God and therefore love His children. It will cost me a great deal to accomplish that. Not only ire of the organization, but the money I will spend to accomplish the task.
-- I am converted. Not to things, but to God. Whatever stuff is taken away, that will remain.

Being that this is an imperfect Church with imperfect human beings, not all excommunications in the past proved to be valid. German LDS member Helmuth Hübener was excommunicated after his arrest by the Gestapo in 1942 for publicly opposing the National Socialist regime which ruled Germany. However, the official who excommunicated him, Arthur Zander, was a fervent member of the NSDAP, even to the extent of affixing notices to the church door stating "Jews not welcome" beginning in 1938. After the end of World War II, when the excesses of the National Socialist regime became fully manifested, the Church posthumously reinstated Hübener in 1946. So it is not impossible for an LDS member to be wrongfully disciplined.

Initially, LDS members primarily took two sides on this issue, with people like Tim Malone vigorously supporting Snuffer, while others, some suspected of being COB (Church Office Building) flaks, portraying Snuffer as an "apostate" (read some of the comments HERE). However, a third position has emerged, as expressed on LDS Alive In Christ. Jared suggests that Denver Snuffer started out well, but may have been deceived with the passage of time. Jared writes:

After reading his first book in 2007 I was excited. I talked with him a couple of times and prayed about his message, I was surprised when I began to feel uneasy, so I decided not to read any of his other books. I took a wait and see attitude. That’s the reason I haven’t read PTHG except for the first chapter. Over the years, I’ve kept up with him by reading others bloggers and reading his blog.

Even though I haven’t read all of his books I know enough about his message to offer a few thoughts on his work. Denver is a gifted researcher and writer. After reading his first book it was evident that he was going to become well known in Mormon circles.

His first book was written in April 2006. Today, Sept 6, 2013, he is on the verge of losing his church membership. Denver changed course from writing faith-supporting books, where now, in his latest book he undermines the credibility of the church and its leaders. To use the words of his Stake President Denver denigrates LDS prophets from Joseph Smith to President Monson.

I am very uncomfortable with the idea of a stake president asking Denver Snuffer to break commitments. This whole sequence may prove to be justified, but the execution is ham-handed.

Denver Snuffer Called To An LDS Disciplinary Council Over His Book "Passing The Heavenly Gift", Faces Disfellowshipment Or Excommunication

Update September 9th: Denver Snuffer's disciplinary council hearing ends inconclusively; updated post HERE. Subsequently, Snuffer reported he was excommunicated.

Back in March 2013, I reported that Tim Malone, the editor of Latter-Day Commentary, had speculated that Denver Snuffer, who has written eight books, was being investigated for possible Church discipline, and that the investigation was coming to a head. Malone did not give a specific reason at the time, though.

Now it's come to a head. Denver Snuffer has posted a letter from his stake president on his blog without any personal commentary. He is invited to appear before a disciplinary council to be held at the Sandy Utah Crescent Stake Center on September 8th, 2013. Presiding will be the stake president, Truman Hunt; also in attendance will be the stake high council and Snuffer's bishop. In a second post, Snuffer explained why he posted the letter, saying that he did not want anyone to attend any of his upcoming talks, including the first in Boise, without making them aware they were listening to someone who has church discipline pending. Snuffer also says there's no need for anyone to write letters to the Church defending him; he would just as soon let this run its course.

Update August 26th: In a new post entitled "Current Events", Snuffer provides more background. He says his previous stake president defended him against allegations of "apostasy" put forth by the Strengthening the Members Committee, which is apparently behind this kerfluffle. He warned Snuffer that the new stake president (Truman Hunt) would be the "Pharaoh that knew not Joseph". Snuffer says President Hunt has investigated, delayed, discussed this with him, pushed back against LDS headquarters, has been called in for "training", and received input from the top leadership in the church. He told Snuffer a great deal at the start about what was going on behind the scenes, which matched what the former stake president had been telling him during his tenure. Snuffer says he will continue to try to help the Church regardless of its opinion of him, and he simply has no axe to grind no matter the outcome on September 8th. What a Christ-like attitude!

The question to be considered by the stake disciplinary council is whether or not Snuffer's book, "Passing The Heavenly Gift", is considered apostasy. If the council concludes that the book is an act of apostasy, the only alternatives are disfellowshipment or excommunication. President Hunt does not seem enthusiastic about convening this council, which makes me wonder if he is being pressured by Church headquarters. Nevertheless, President Hunt suggests the "Passing The Heavenly Gift" is not constructive to the work of salvation or the promotion of faith in the Gospel. He considers the book's thesis to be in direct conflict with Church doctrine, and he accuses Snuffer of mischaracterizing Church doctrine, denigrating every prophet since Joseph Smith, and placing the Church in a negative light, although he does concede that the book tries to bridge the gap between the Church and its dissidents.

President Hunt imposes three conditions for Snuffer to avert the disciplinary council:

(1). Remove "Passing The Heavenly Gift" from circulation.

(2). Acknowledge to readers of his blog that "Passing The Heavenly Gift" contains content that needs to be withdrawn.

(3). Cancel his planned speaking tour which begins in September.

I have not read "Passing The Heavenly Gift", so I cannot personally rule out the possibility that there may be some foundation for concern. Here's a description of the book from Amazon:

Mormonism has undergone four distinct phases. The first began in 1820 and ended with Joseph Smith’s death in 1844. The second began upon Joseph Smith’s death and ended with abandonment of plural marriage, publicly in 1890 and privately in 1904. In the third phase Mormonism denounced as apostasy its practice of plural wives, marking the first time an orthodox practice became grounds for excommunication. The fourth phase began with David O. McKay and is still underway. In it Mormonism has adopted corporate management techniques to consolidate and direct central church decision-making. The first phase was innovative and expansive, continually adding doctrine, scripture, teachings and ordinances. Subsequent phases have curtailed, abandoned, even denounced earlier teaching and doctrine. Phases two through four have all abandoned doctrine. Growth in these subsequent phases has been defined in terms of political influence, financial gains, cultural inroads, and population growth; while the underlying religion has been curtailed. Today, marketing the institution has become more important to Mormon success than preserving the original religious content. The changes from phase to phase have completely transformed Mormonism, sharing a vocabulary but redefining the terms. Modern Mormonism has now institutionalized change. For the first time in this book Mormonism is candidly described in terms which track the changes by examining doctrine, teachings and practices. Interestingly, the passing of the heavenly gift was anticipated by Joseph Smith’s prophecies and the Book of Mormon.

While it may be harsh to say that the Church "abandoned doctrine" in phases two through four, I find nothing in the description alone that would hint of apostasy. As a matter of fact, Denver Snuffer has gone out of his way to assure readers that he is neither trying to supersede the General Authorities nor promoting apostasy. Snuffer himself made this abundantly clear in this post:

1. I sustain today’s church leaders as prophets, seers and revelators. The scriptures give them the right to use those titles (D&C 107: 92). They preside, and it is their right to do so. They have our common consent and ought to be upheld by our “confidence, faith and prayers” (D&C 107: 22). I uphold them in this way. They carry heavy burdens and have my sympathy, not my judgment, for any human frailties they display.

2. It is utterly untrue that I have said the church is apostate. I reject the accusation. If the narrative I suggest in PTHG is true, then the Lord’s post-Nauvoo ire is evidence the Lord is still watching over and intends to further His work with the members of this church. Those whom He loves, He chastens. (Heb. 12: 5-11; Helaman 12: 3; D&C 95: 1.) Mine is not a faithless, but a faith filled history. I’ve reiterated this before and reiterate it again. (See my post: The Traditions of Men, Part 1, April 21, 2010.)

Tim Malone has posted another defense of Denver Snuffer on Latter-day Commentary. He notes that if Snuffer is excommunicated, he would have to answer the temple recommend question “Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints” for himself with a little bit more thought". Since Denver Snuffer wishes no harm upon the Church, my answer would still be No. Other reaction has been posted on LDS Anarchy and Wheat and Tares, and some comments on Pure Mormonism.

If the LDS Church can excommunicate Denver Snuffer, then Samuel the Lamanite must be thankful he came forth when he did. Could you imagine what would happen if Samuel the Lamanite started crying repentance in downtown Salt Lake today?

The Ugly Truth About Feminism: Confronting, Combatting, And Preempting Feminism Within The LDS Community:

Mormon feminists strive to sanitize their worldview as much as possible. On The Exponent, the feminists there seem more willing to engage and persuade rather than bully and intimidate; one usually goes away from that blog educated rather than enraged.

The same cannot be said for Feminist Mormon Housewives. Despite weak protestations to the contrary, they enrage far more often than they educate. And some of them even maintain that men can be feminists (such men are often referred to as "Uncle Tims"). On June 30th, they present a post from their folk heroine Joanna Brooks, considered an intellectual calendar girl by Mormon progressives. Entitled "Ask Mormon Girl: Should Women Be Ordained? Or Do They Already Hold the Priesthood?", Brooks in her post seems to advocate for priesthood power for women in everything but in name. This, of course, is the same strategy employed by the gay rights lobby when they initially agitated for "civil unions", which proved to be a ploy to soften us up for gay marriage.

The video embedded below reveals what feminism seems to be really all about -- POWER! The person who uploaded the video embedded below to YouTube wrote "Feminism is interesting. Ask any feminist about men and almost immediately their true nature comes to the fore. Mention anything about Male advocacy and see how fast they shame you, abuse you or turn to the pig swill that is their 'belief system' no matter how much information or unbiased studies you put forth, their feelings are more important than your pesty logic ever will be".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EakCqdkSoPs



At one time, feminism was a means to an end rather than an end unto itself. Feminists like Susan B. Anthony worked for important reforms such as obtaining the right to vote for women rather than obsess with wearing pants to church. But modern feminism is different. At its core, modern feminism is divisive, corrosive, inherently anti-male, blaming men for all the sins of the world, past, present, and future. Modern feminism could even be considered a form of witchcraft, defining witchcraft as the unrighteous control over someone through manipulation or intimidation for the purposes of domination.

Feminism promotes tunnel vision through its exclusionary theology and liturgy. Feminists believe that women always have and always will be victims. Feminists promote the false and divisive doctrine of male privilege, in which even a male earning a mere $50,000 per year is considered to be inherently privileged over a female CEO earning millions. Basically, male privilege is the flip side of male supremacy. Feminists complain about so-called "male gaze", expecting that men will ignore their biology and quit looking at women. In short, feminism defies human nature itself. And in her book "Men On Strike", Helen Smith documents the negative consequences of feminism, such as the financial traps of marriage and fatherhood, family courts which hold men financially liable even for children conceived by women who falsely claimed to be using birth control, colleges which deny the presumption of innocence for men accused of sexual misbehavior, and the growing presumption that male sexuality is a scary disease, all of which are driving men away from women.

The Doctrine & Covenants tells us men how to most effectively combat feminism. Ideally, we can preempt it by responsible, equitable, and Christ-like behavior towards women. While Section 121, verses 34 through 43, sets the overall context, pay particularly close attention to verses 36, 37, and 41-43:

34 Behold, there are many called, but few are chosen. And why are they not chosen?

35 Because their hearts are set so much upon the things of this world, and aspire to the honors of men, that they do not learn this one lesson—

36 That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness.

37 That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.

38 Behold, ere he is aware, he is left unto himself, to kick against the pricks, to persecute the saints, and to cfight against God.

39 We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.

40 Hence many are called, but few are chosen.

41 No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;

42 By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile—

43 Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy;

The will and word of the Lord is crystal clear. When a man uses his priesthood to exercise unrighteous control and dominion over a woman, particularly his wife, mother, or daughter, he has crossed the line from priesthood to priestcraft. Priestcraft is the Satanic counterfeit of priesthood; having damned himself for eternity because of open rebellion, Satan has become more subtle and is now a master counterfeiter who can even masquerade as an angel of light. When man exchanges priesthood for priestcraft, the heavens become as brass until he gets his mind and heart right. Furthermore, "sharpness" as described in verse 43 does NOT mean abusiveness or anger; it means clarity. Cut straight to the chase and allow the other person a full opportunity for explanation and self-defense. A husband may preside over his family, but he rules WITH his wife.

Equal opportunity is irreconcilable with equal outcome.

Equality of value does not require equality of status.

The best antidote to feminism is the righteous exercise of priesthood power and authority.

LDS Author Denver Snuffer Vigorously Denies Superseding The General Authorities Or Promoting Apostasy

Update September 9th: Denver Snuffer's disciplinary council hearing ends inconclusively; updated post HERE. Subsequently, Snuffer reported he was excommunicated.

Update August 25th: Denver Snuffer has been called to attend a disciplinary council on September 8th over his book Passing The heavenly Gift. Updated post HERE.

The name Denver Snuffer provokes strong reaction within the ranks of members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Some believe he truly has the "heavenly gift", while others suggest he's positioning himself as a "One Mighty And Strong" character. Even the senior leadership of the Church is mindful; on Latter-day Commentary, Tim Malone suggests that Snuffer is being investigated for possible disciplinary action, and that the investigation may be coming to a head.

Denver Snuffer is the author of eight books. These include The Second Comforter: Conversing With the Lord Through the Veil, Nephi's Isaiah, Eighteen Verses, Ten Parables, Beloved Enos, Come, Let Us Adore Him, Removing the Condemnation, and Passing the Heavenly Gift. The first and last books on the list generate the most interest and discussion within the LDS community, since not everyone gets the First Comforter, and it is almost unheard of to get the Second Comforter. The First Comforter is the Holy Ghost, but when we are baptized and confirmed as members of the Church, we do not automatically get the Holy Ghost, but are commanded to receive the Holy Ghost. Thus confirmation opens up a channel for us to access the Holy Ghost -- if we choose to use it. The Second Comforter is none other than Jesus Christ Himself.

Since Passing The Heavenly Gift is the most-discussed book, here's the description of it from Amazon:

Mormonism has undergone four distinct phases. The first began in 1820 and ended with Joseph Smith’s death in 1844. The second began upon Joseph Smith’s death and ended with abandonment of plural marriage, publicly in 1890 and privately in 1904. In the third phase Mormonism denounced as apostasy its practice of plural wives, marking the first time an orthodox practice became grounds for excommunication. The fourth phase began with David O. McKay and is still underway. In it Mormonism has adopted corporate management techniques to consolidate and direct central church decision-making. The first phase was innovative and expansive, continually adding doctrine, scripture, teachings and ordinances. Subsequent phases have curtailed, abandoned, even denounced earlier teaching and doctrine. Phases two through four have all abandoned doctrine. Growth in these subsequent phases has been defined in terms of political influence, financial gains, cultural inroads, and population growth; while the underlying religion has been curtailed. Today, marketing the institution has become more important to Mormon success than preserving the original religious content. The changes from phase to phase have completely transformed Mormonism, sharing a vocabulary but redefining the terms. Modern Mormonism has now institutionalized change. For the first time in this book Mormonism is candidly described in terms which track the changes by examining doctrine, teachings and practices. Interestingly, the passing of the heavenly gift was anticipated by Joseph Smith’s prophecies and the Book of Mormon.

The description of the phases is factual, although a bit heavy-handed. I consider it more precise to say that the LDS Church, with the passage of time, has actually clarified its doctrine and better delineated between hardcore doctrine, evolved tradition, and unsubstantiated folklore. Because of the principle of continuing revelation, the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve are subject to inspiration or revelation at any time the Lord deems it appropriate for His servants to make course corrections.

However, the fact that I might consider Snuffer's assessment a bit heavy-handed in no way impinges upon his worthiness as a member. While I've not read any of his books, I've read enough of his blog, as well as this review of Passing The Heavenly Gift published by Tim Malone, to conclude that Denver Snuffer is neither trying to supersede the General Authorities nor promoting apostasy. Snuffer himself makes this abundantly clear in this post:

1. I sustain today’s church leaders as prophets, seers and revelators. The scriptures give them the right to use those titles (D&C 107: 92). They preside, and it is their right to do so. They have our common consent and ought to be upheld by our “confidence, faith and prayers” (D&C 107: 22). I uphold them in this way. They carry heavy burdens and have my sympathy, not my judgment, for any human frailties they display.

2. It is utterly untrue that I have said the church is apostate. I reject the accusation. If the narrative I suggest in PTHG is true, then the Lord’s post-Nauvoo ire is evidence the Lord is still watching over and intends to further His work with the members of this church. Those whom He loves, He chastens. (Heb. 12: 5-11; Helaman 12: 3; D&C 95: 1.) Mine is not a faithless, but a faith filled history. I’ve reiterated this before and reiterate it again. (See my post: The Traditions of Men, Part 1, April 21, 2010.)

There you have it. Denver Snuffer remains an absolutely faithful member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The fact that the Church may be investigating him for a possible disciplinary council is no guarantor that he will be disfellowshipped or excommunicated, or that such a council will actually take place. By the way, Snuffer says that any royalties he receives from the sale of his books are donated to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Apostasy Unchained: Mormon Reformation Leads Campaign To Post "95 Theses" On The Doors Of LDS Chapels

You've heard of Django Unchained. Now here's an example of Apostasy Unchained. From Digital Journal, we learn that a group of over 260 active and disaffected members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will be posting a copy of 95 LDS Theses onto the doors of their local churches around the world between the hours of 9:00 P.M. Saturday, February 16th, and 9:00 A.M. Sunday, February 17th, 2013. The project is organized by Mormon Reformation, and their 95 Theses are available HERE. They also have a Facebook page.

Mormon Reformation, which consists mainly of progressive, templeworthy LDS members as well as less active members and some ex-Mormons, says their protest is intended to be a peaceful, non-confrontational, and anonymous way to achieve two objectives; first, to educate the membership of the church on controversial, revised, and hidden aspects of church doctrine, history, and fundamental claims, and second, to influence church leaders to officially address topics that, in their opinion, have been dodged, dismissed, and covered up for too long. They organize their theses into 14 different categories. When you read them, you'll find that this group doesn't merely want reform; they want the LDS Church to cease to be Mormon. They question the authenticity of the Book of Mormon, consider Joseph Smith a charlatan, exalt the Journal of Discourses above the Standard Works, and deny the doctrine of continuing revelation. They want the Church to change its doctrine regarding the Priesthood, women, and homosexuals. Many of their theses smear and defame the LDS Church, condemning it for sins long since expiated; once again, they drag up Mountain Meadows, although there's been adequate memorialization and actual reconciliation. About their only worthwhile "thesis" is a call for the LDS Church to disclose its finances after the manner of other churches; since the LDS Church issues financial statements in the United Kingdom and Canada because their laws require it, this implies it could be done here as well. If nothing else, it would strip the ark-steadiers and anklebiters of one of their propaganda weapons.

Another person has posted a rebuttal to each one of the 95 Theses on this Facebook page.

Mormon Reformation can be best characterized as apostates, and if they go through with these protests, their bishops and stake presidents should convene disciplinary councils with an eye towards possible excommunication. We can tolerate diversity within our ranks, but we cannot tolerate apostasy. These people are wolves in sheep's clothing. It is no surprise that most of them identify as political "progressives"; progressives are the most destructive force in American history, constantly picking open old wounds so that no healing can occur and tearing society apart with endless political worthiness witch hunts. Progressives are a cancer upon the body politic of our country and have a carcinogenic effect upon our Church as well. We cannot afford to be polite and loving to such people; would we be polite and loving to Satan?

Disfellowshipped Gay Mormon Andrew Markle To Launch Origins Website To Enable Gay Mormons To Hook Up For Sex

A disfellowshipped gay member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is launching a new website that not only will allow gay Mormons to link up with other gays and allies, but also to hook up for sex. On January 8th, 2013, WBEZ 91.5 reports that Andrew Markle will be launching the "Origins" website sometime during the second quarter of the 2013 calendar year.

One of the purposes of the website is fine. One of the missions of Origins will be to connect gay Mormons with allies and help them reconcile their religious beliefs with their orientation. This can be quite useful and therapeutic, because sometimes a gay person needs to cry on the shoulder of another gay person in order to deal with the challenges of homosexuality. But it's the other mission that's disturbing -- to give gay Mormons an online social network to meet others like them for marriage or long-term commitment. That means hooking up for sex -- and that's a big NO-NO!

Further eroding Markle's credibility is the fact that he is currently disfellowshipped for getting involved in a relationship, although he still attends services weekly and his fellow ward members behave supportively towards him in accordance with the "love the sinner but not the sin" routine. Markle recognizes that launching this website, with its intended mission, incurs a risk of excommunication, since advocating homosexual relationships by Mormons may be considered grounds for expulsion from the church, depending upon how his stake president decides to interpret his actions. This could happen notwithstanding his obvious loyalty towards the Church in other matters. And it would be a shame if someone who is basically supportive of the Church would get excommunicated over this.

But how could the LDS Church allow a member who wants to openly hook up gay Mormons for sex to remain a member? We didn't allow David Twede to remain a member when he transformed MormonThink into an openly anti-Mormon website, so to be consistent, we would have to excommunicate Markle. We cannot allow apostates to remain enrolled members of the LDS Church.

Markle has a personal website, a Twitter page, and an Instagram page. On December 12th, 2012, he published a post on Doves and Serprents entitled "The Church and Homosexuality" in which plainly states that he expects the LDS Church to support LGBT members with every ounce of its being and it will stop requiring members to seek counseling for their same-sex attractions. Specifically, he also states "I hope that one day, we will all be able to set ourselves in temple and seal our children and our marriages before God". This, of course, will not happen except by a revelation given to the Church through the priesthood chain of command, which starts at the First Presidency, and not through some ordinary Hoosier from Indiana. We don't need some self-endowed "One Mighty And Strong" calling the leadership to repentance, particularly when it is the leadership that is still in harmony with Gospel principles.

MormonThink Editor David Twede Faces Disciplinary Council, But Excommunication Not Necessarily Guaranteed

Update October 22nd: David Twede announces his resignation from the LDS Church.

Update September 27th: David Twede's disciplinary council hearing postponed indefinitely.

An upcoming disciplinary council for a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is generating considerable buzz. David Twede, editor of the anti-Mormon website MormonThink, has been summoned by his stake president to a disciplinary council to be held at 7:30 A.M. on September 30th, 2012 at the Orlando Florida Hunters Creek Stake Center. Twede displays a copy of the summons on his personal blog; the letter states that "The Stake Presidency is considering formal disciplinary action in your behalf, including the possibility of disfellowshipment or excommunication, because you are reported to have been in apostasy”. This means that excommunication is NOT a foregone conclusion at this point, and that Twede will be able to exercise considerable control over the final outcome based upon how he explains his actions and future intentions. Other possible outcomes include probation and exoneration.

Twede not only will face the Stake Presidency, but also the entire 12-man Stake High Council. He is entitled to have another Church member there to advocate on his behalf. Twede claims his supporters will be holding a vigil or rally outside the Orlando Temple on Windy Ridge Rd at 7:00 P.M. EDT on Saturday September 29th.

CNN posts a good summary of the story, including a number of pertinent links from other media sources. The Daily Beast originally broke the story publicly on September 21st, reporting that Twede had been handed the summons at a September 16th meeting with his stake president, bishop, and two church executives. At the time it was believed that a series of articles critical of Mitt Romney that he published on MormonThink may have provoked the local priesthood's ire.

However, according to a new Washington Post article, Twede now says his church leaders never brought up Romney, a Mormon, in their exchange with him. Twede apologized to Romney, saying, “I didn’t mean for (the story) to go this way.” Twede explained that local church leaders were more upset about the fact that he revealed things about the temple, and secrecy, and other things that they just don’t want anyone to talk about. Mormonthink did have an entire section discussing LDS temple ceremonies and their connection to Masonic rites, with links to photos and text of LDS temple rituals, which is why it's considered an anti-Mormon site. Opponents of the LDS Church have spent nearly 200 years trying to discredit it by playing the "Masonic" card, which also defames and smears Freemasonry as well.

Scott Gordon, president of FAIR, a nonprofit group that defends Mormonism, suggests that church leaders took exception to Twede's other writings, including an unflattering blog post detailing his attendance at a September 9th church service at Hunter's Creek in south Orange County. Gordon said some MormonThink contributors will do anything they can to embarrass the church in order to justify their own departure from its ranks.

In response, the LDS Church has made two statements about disciplinary councils:

"It is patently false for someone to suggest they face Church discipline for having questions or for expressing a political view. The Church is an advocate of individual choice. It is a core tenet of our faith. Church discipline becomes necessary only in those rare occasions when an individual’s actions cannot be ignored while they claim to be in good standing with the Church. Every organization, whether religious or secular, must be able to define where its boundaries begin and end."

“While some may want to make their version of an issue public, the Church will not discuss the private lives of individuals. These matters are handled by local Church leaders and are done in an attitude of love and caring. There are a number of possible outcomes to a Church disciplinary proceeding, only one of which is excommunication, which would be the most severe and least common result.”

You can review both MormonThink and Twede's own blog, and make up your mind as to whether or not they are anti-Mormon resources. The degree to which David Twede calls into question church doctrine, and the egregiously disrespectful syntax used, leads me to conclude that it is anti-Mormon, and that to preserve his Church membership, he should be required to at least take MormonThink down.