https://bringingtolighthiddenthings.wor ... blog-post/
Below are a couple of comments from the blog:
Denver and Adrian Larsen have responded to your statements with what is effect a firm denial of your narrative of what happened. Who is telling the complete story here ? In my view the denials exacerbate the problems greatly. Previously the question was a conflict in inspiration. Now the issue is who is less than truthful. Can someone knowledgeable speak to the conflict between the two narratives ?.They both can not be true. In addition why isn’t the malefactor’s name disclosed. If he was guilty and unrepentant as the OP said what is to keep him from misleading others in the future. What kind of Shepard sees the wolf enter the sheepfold and refuses to tell the sheep where he is or how to identify him. I understand the need for confidentiality in some circumstances but in this case we already have (between the 15 sitting in judgement and the several witnesses ) dozens of people who know the identity of said John Doe but the average vulnerable little ewe does not. Don’t those who know bear responsibility to those he may deceive in the future if they remain silent ?
I think this will come down to whether the Remnant members are 'converted' to Denver Snuffer's position as a prophet, sharing his revelations from God or whether they see him as simply another 'enlightened' person, a teacher who is sharing his own personal 'revelations' and views.I think both parties feel they are truthful. If it helps, Denver was approached to help resolve this before it escalated to a court. He only listened to one of the witnesses although two others emailed him personally with evidence and facts. At the court he denied having received those emails.
Denver attended the Women’s council for the very first 45 minutes. During that time he spoke in defense of John Doe. When he finished, he was encouraged to stay for the entire trial. He declined to stay. He never heard any of the witnesses testimonies nor did he hear John Doe’s confession of guilt for recent immoral misconduct. Denver’s perspective is limited to John Doe’s side and a few other women who he referenced in his email.
Denver’s latest post only focused on bonded soulmates as the main issue. Had Denver stayed for the entire trial he would have seen bonded soulmates was something John Doe did at one time and was only a portion of the trial. The trial showed a consistent pattern of deception and manipulation which involved priestcraft, which eventually showed he was not using his priesthood righteously.
The name has not been disclosed because that was the decision of the Women’s Council (not the witnesses decision). You are right that those who do know bear the responsibility and it is a source of concern for me and many others right now. We are saying as much as we feel we can. Everything is still in process. I share the same concern for the sheepfold and the little ewe. And it keeps me awake nightly. We are exposing as much as we can and questions have really helped the process. So thank you for this comment.
It's obvious that Denver Snuffer has treated the remnant groups as not his responsibility and he uses them when they are of use to him. He doesn't want to be involved or take control--until he finds it necessary, as in this instance. Now that he sees that his scripture project is in jeopardy of being tainted by John Doe's involvement, he's trying to protect it. That's why he's protecting John Doe, because it's in his best interests.
Some have wondered about Snuffer's motivations and I think we can see that his motivations are to create 'scripture', just as he created his books, before his break with the church. His writings must be preserved, they must be protected, and if he has to turn a blind eye to obvious, serious sin and deception, he will do so and he will undermine the women of the council, who only followed his directions in passing judgement based on the evidence they received. If they'd only come to the decision Snuffer wanted them to, the crisis would have been averted, but they didn't and then they had the audacity to go public and defy him further.
Now it has the potential to cause schism.
The schism will be between those who have no trouble following a 'prophet'--they just replaced Pres. Monson with Denver Snuffer and there are many in the Remnant who fit this category--they are ones who hang on his words, who study his writings etc. Then there are those who like his writings and what he stands for, but they aren't lockstep with Snuffer on all his teachings. They are the ones who will take John Doe's side if they share his fringe beliefs in rationalizing promiscuous sexual behavior or possibly take his side if they question why Snuffer is able to decide what is 'revelation' on a personal basis and what is not. Some of them may wonder how the movement which was so open and fluid is now jelling into a code of orthodox beliefs--and this one of marital fidelity Snuffer proposes may not align with their own individual interests. It also clearly calls out the polygamists and polygamy sympathizers within the group(they exist)--they won't find a comfortable home in the Remnant any more than they were accepted in the mainstream LDS church.
I know there are still a number of Remnant folks on this forum, if they are even aware of this situation which has arisen, do they see the changes which have come about in the remnant and Snuffer's teachings? There were some insightful comments on the blog from those who weren't afraid to admit it. I wonder if many within the movement are willing to recognize and admit the changes which have taken place over the years.
I wonder if many of them have lost faith in the 'covenant' which is associated with Snuffer's scriptures?