LDS more comfortable with dissidents?

That is good news, Brian – for multiple reasons.

I should have added how much I enjoyed the article itself. I hope everyone here reads it.

I like it too – that she was not asked to disavow her former topics…sounds like a kinder, gentler priesthood leadership than what we were used to…who knows, there may be room for intellectuals/academics on a grander scale than originally thought someday.

Also, at one time I think it was in the CHI that we were discouraged from attending conferences and symposia (which I felt was a thinly veiled reference to Sunstone). Is that not a problem either?

I think it will be highly interesting to hear what triggered her return to the patriarchal priesthood structure of Mormonism after so much exploration and spreading her wings without the umbrella of Mormonism. Should make for a very interesting podcast/discussion/workshop.

According to the story, she was not asked to disavow her former positions and writings, and was not asked to stop writing on those subjects.

So it was all just a little misunderstanding? No harm, no foul?

Obviously, doug, it wasn’t “no big deal” then – but it isn’t a big deal anymore to her or the Church.

That’s a good thing, and it ought to be understood as such.

This is a case where clinging tightly to the past isn’t good – for her, for the Church OR for someone looking at the overall situation now. Reading the actual article, she sees her journey as necessary at the time and holds no current anger or bitterness about it.

I think there is a POWERFUL lesson in there for everyone here.

Obviously … it wasn’t “no big deal” then – but it isn’t a big deal anymore to … the Church.

So, how am I to know from one day to the next what is and isn’t a big deal to the church? If past experience isn’t a faithful guide, then what is? And supposing I was able to figure this out, how do I get the message out to everyone else? And if it’s not really my responsibility to get the message out, how do I manage the unavoidable conflict when I bump into someone who still thinks, for instance, that it is an offense worthy of excommunication to publicly state or publish opinions that are in direct opposition to the stated position of the church?

And is it now okay to openly contradict the church, or is it the position of the church that has changed? If the latter, what is the current position of the church on feminism? And has the church position on other matters that are important to me changed? How am I to find these things out when the church doesn’t communicate them openly and directly?

Yes, stories of reconciliation and forgiveness are inspiring and touching. But at the end of the day, a person still needs to know what the rules of the game are. To me, this kind of thing raises more questions than it answers.

Obviously, doug, it wasn’t “no big deal” then – but it isn’t a big deal anymore to her or the Church.

That’s a good thing, and it ought to be understood as such.

This is a case where clinging tightly to the past isn’t good – for her, for the Church OR for someone looking at the overall situation now. Reading the actual article, she sees her journey as necessary at the time and holds no current anger or bitterness about it.

I think there is a POWERFUL lesson in there for everyone here.

I hope someone will publish a podcast or a written piece by Maxine at Sunstone or some pulic forum so we can hear her version of what happened.

I can see wisdom in Ray’s words….they take a long term perspective and how that the experience of leaving was important for a renewed relationship with the church again. It sounds like her exploration outside of Mormonism led her right back to the church. I’d love to know the reasons why as they come out.

One thing I would like to see, too, is whether she makes it all the way to temple blessings again, and on what timeline.