Since this is my blog, I moderate comments and determine whether I allow them to be published or not. Truthfully, I allow nearly everything. The only comments I've disallowed are ones which tend to be inflammatory and consist mostly of personal, emotionally based, attacks. If there is enough substance to react to, I'll react to the comments on the basis of merit and ignore the personal attacks.


There were a couple of strong reactions to the following posts:
Sgt. Calvin Gibbs: How Mormon Is He?
Response to "Thoughtful Christian" Concerning Sgt. Calvin Gibbs 10/05/10



A few took issue with my examining how "Mormon" someone was, in this case, Calvin Gibbs. This initially puzzled me because these examinations are rather commonplace in Mormondom.


We often examine how Mormon someone is by looking at indicators. This is very similar to how you might evaluate whether someone is a good student in school. You might look at attendance, enthusiasm, participation, grades, etc.


Mormons tend to look at whether someone is actively attending, holds callings (volunteer church positions), temple-worthy, etc.


Although I didn't feel I could allow these comments to be published on this blog the question of whether we Mormons should be evaluating fellow Mormons in this manner is certainly worth examining.


This examination has to be done by our lay church leaders for a number of good reasons. Lay church leaders hold positions only temporarily. We all tend to cycle in and out of these positions. I'm thinking this is where the tendency to examine fellow Mormons comes from.


I'd have to say though, that this tendency probably isn't healthy for Mormons. Reactions from those outside the Church suggests it can be deeply offensive.


Perhaps it is time to rethink this practice . . .



Continue reading at the original source →