Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
smac97

Ordain Women Group Prohibited From Protesting On Church Property

Recommended Posts

Here: http://www.standard.net/stories/2014/03/17/lds-church-tells-mormon-women-s-group-not-protest
 
 

SALT LAKE CITY -- The Mormon church is warning a group of women pushing for gender equality that it will not be allowed to protest in Temple Square next month during a biannual conference.
 
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints told the members of Ordain Women in a letter sent Monday that if they insist on going forward with their plans, they'll need to protest in a zone set aside for protesters on the street.
 
The church says activist events detract from the sacred environment of the weekend conference in Salt Lake City.
 
The group's founder Kate Kelly says members will go forward with lining up outside the meeting of male priests and ask to be let in. She says they are discouraged by church leaders comparing them with outside protest groups.


A few thoughts:

 

First, I am glad to see the Church asserting its property rights.  While it is unfortunate that some of these protesters are LDS, perhaps this will be a wake-up call to the adversarial nature of their conduct.  Put another way, they'll have to ditch the facade of their intended protest being something other than a protest.

 

Second, I think the Church is doing the right thing here.  I do not think protesters should be afforded some sort of privileged access to church property simply because some of them are LDS.

 

Third, I am concerned about Kate Kelly's comment that her group "will go forward with lining up outside the meeting."  That sound like she is planning to disregard the Church's instruction, and also the law.  Unfortunately, I think this group may be angling for a confrontation, as it will result in more publicity for their protest.

 

Fourth, I think Kate Kelly's claim about being "discouraged by church leaders comparing them with outside protest groups" is a bit absurd.  A protest is a protest, regardless of whether the protesters are "outside" or "inside" the Church.

 

EDIT:

 

Fifth, I think the article's title ("Mormon church tells women's group not to protest") is misleading.  The Church isn't telling the OW folks that they cannot protest, only that they cannot do so on Church property.

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

Edited by smac97

Share this post


Link to post

Here: http://www.standard.net/stories/2014/03/17/lds-church-tells-mormon-women-s-group-not-protest

 

 

A few thoughts:

 

First, I am glad to see the Church asserting its property rights.  While it is unfortunate that some of these protesters are LDS, perhaps this will be a wake-up call to the adversarial nature of their conduct.  Put another way, they'll have to ditch the facade of their intended protest being something other than a protest.

 

Second, I think the Church is doing the right thing here.  I do not think protesters should be afforded some sort of privileged access to church property simply because some of them are LDS.

 

Third, I am concerned about Kate Kelly's comment that her group "will go forward with lining up outside the meeting."  That sound like she is planning to disregard the Church's instruction, and also the law.  Unfortunately, I think this group may be angling for a confrontation, as it will result in more publicity for their protest.

 

Fourth, I think Kate Kelly's claim about being "discouraged by church leaders comparing them with outside protest groups" is a bit absurd.  A protest is a protest, regardless of whether the protesters are "outside" or "inside" the Church.

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

So the Church is expected to give certain protest groups privileged, insider status now? Astounding hubris. (But then, most hubris is astounding.).

 

By the way, Smac, good to see you are still posting.

Share this post


Link to post

I read the letter sent to the group from the church. It was respectful and loving. Too bad the group refuses to act in the same manner.

Share this post


Link to post

Wow, I hadn't seen this article: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865598823/LDS-Church-says-activist-group-detracts-from-dialogue.html?pg=all

 

 

LDS Church: Aims of 'Ordain Women' detract from dialogue

 

By Tad Walch, Deseret News

Published: Monday, March 17 2014 8:55 a.m. MDT

 

SALT LAKE CITY — A small activist women's organization is detracting from thoughtful discussions about women in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a church spokeswoman said Monday in a letter to the group.

 

The letter, signed by Jessica Moody, also said the church is unable to fulfill a request made by the "Ordain Women" group for tickets to the church's semiannual general priesthood meeting next month because the meeting "is designed to strengthen men and boys as they receive specific instruction about their roles and responsibilities."

 

"Women in the church, by a very large majority, do not share your advocacy for priesthood ordination for women and consider that position to be extreme," Moody said. "Declaring such an objective to be non-negotiable, as you have done, actually detracts from the helpful discussions that church leaders have held as they seek to listen to the thoughts, concerns, and hopes of women inside and outside of church leadership. Ordination of women to the priesthood is a matter of doctrine that is contrary to the Lord’s revealed organization for His church."

 

I think the Church is correct to take exception to the "non-negotiable" position take by the OW group.  Demanding a change in revealed doctrine, and saying that "nothing less will suffice" (as Kate Kelly has said repeatedly) is not compatible with the the revelatory process.

 

 

In October, women with the Ordain Women group approached the priesthood meeting and entered the stand-by line, which his for people without tickets. They left when they were denied entry.

 

Ordain Women spokeswoman Kate Kelly said Monday morning the group would repeat the process on April 5.

 

"We're going to continue to ask and knock as we are are told to do in Matthew 7:7. The only thing we're going to demonstrate is that we're ready for the blessings and responsibilities of the priesthood. We’re going to continue to gather, ask and to knock as planned.”

So directly disobeying the Church is the order of the day. This is not going to end well for Sis. Kelly and her compatriots. I am saddened by their attitude.

 

Kelly said she felt Moody's letter is a sign the church is willing to continue the dialogue.

 

Moody asked the group in her letter to reconsider its plans to demonstrate and said any demonstration should be kept to the free-speech zones outside Temple Square.

 

Kelly said the group doesn't feel like it belongs in the free-speech zones, provided by the city for protestors who demonstrate during the church's semiannual general conferences in April and October.

Plenty of other protesters no doubt feel the same way, but only Sis. Kelly has the gall to claim some sort of special privilege to protest against the Church on the Church's property.

 

"It's striking they would direct us to the free-speech zones," Kelly said. "We feel as faithful, active Mormon women we have nothing in common with people who oppose the church and want to protest against it. The church is its members. We aren't against the church, we are the church."

This doesn't strike me as altogether honest.  Just last year the OW group sponsored a "Priestesshood Session" in which the OW group was apparently represented by an excommunicated apostate named Margaret Toscano.

 

Note to Sis. Kelly: I don't think you can invite an excommunicated apostate to be your keynote speaker and then claim you have "nothing in common with people who oppose the church."

 

The rest of the letter to OW group is at the link.

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

Edited by smac97

Share this post


Link to post

how will what they do this year turn out any different than last year? seems like the same thing . wait in line, get turned away. the end.

 

am i missing something?

Share this post


Link to post

Just an FYI, there is already a thread about this in the News forum.

 

Maybe the two can be merged or something.

Share this post


Link to post

This doesn't strike me as altogether honest.  Just last year the OW group sponsored a "Priestesshood Session" in which the OW group was apparently represented by an excommunicated apostate named Margaret Toscano.

 

Note to Sis. Kelly: I don't think you can invite an apostate to be your keynote speaker and then claim you have "nothing in common with people who oppose the church."

 

The rest of the letter to OW group is at the link.

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

 

Kelly has a record of not being very honest on the issue of exactly who comprises OW.

 

In the past she has stated outright that the profiles on OW are from sincere believing mormons for example, while a quick look at the profiles shows that many are resigned members or people who have never been a member.  There are even a few excommunicated member profiles.

 

I don't think she wants church members to view OW as extreme or anti-LDS so she tries very hard to portray the organization as completely friendly to the LDS church.  However, a lot of her power base seems to be ex members.   She seems to be in the difficult position of seeking support from non and ex members on the one hand while trying to distance herself from that group of people on the other.

Share this post


Link to post

how will what they do this year turn out any different than last year? seems like the same thing . wait in line, get turned away. the end.

 

am i missing something?

 

What you are missing is exactly what you are participating in.  Further discussion, dialogue, and keeping on peoples minds so they aren't forgotten.  They are accomplishing all of their goals. 

Share this post


Link to post

Kelly has a record of not being very honest on the issue of exactly who comprises OW.

 

In the past she has stated outright that the profiles on OW are from sincere believing mormons for example, while a quick look at the profiles shows that many are resigned members or people who have never been a member.  There are even a few excommunicated member profiles.

 

I don't think she wants church members to view OW as extreme or anti-LDS so she tries very hard to portray the organization as completely friendly to the LDS church.  However, a lot of her power base seems to be ex members.   She seems to be in the difficult position of seeking support from non and ex members on the one hand while trying to distance herself from that group of people on the other.

So if you subtract all the non-members, apostates and excommunicants, they are an even smaller minority than appears at first glance.

 

"We are the Church"? Hardly.

Edited by Scott Lloyd

Share this post


Link to post

What you are missing is exactly what you are participating in.  Further discussion, dialogue, and keeping on peoples minds so they aren't forgotten.  They are accomplishing all of their goals. 

 

They are accomplishing some of their goals, while sacrificing others.

Share this post


Link to post

So if you subtract all the non-members, apostates and excommunicants, they are an even smaller minority than appears at first glance.

 

"We are the Church"? Hardly.

 

I honestly have no idea what percentage of OW members are active believing members of the church.  But it is very obvious that it's not as many as Kelly has stated in the past.

Share this post


Link to post

I am not sure how long the bit about the majority of Mormon women....is going to work, I have heard from at least one woman i consider a Mormon activist who has said that at least the dialogue has become more enhanced and nuanced than before between the Church and feminists.  It is hard for me to envision much dialogue on the subject.  There are other ways to meet some of their requests than ordaining women to the Melchizdec Priesthood, but the Church is like a large air craft carrier it cannot make radical course adjustments easily and if the Priesthood is not going to be granted to women -- probably a radical course adjustment in other respects would be required to satisfy the activists.  So, ultimately, I suppose we are going to have some more women excommunicated or disfellowshipped.  That is just how mature religions work.

Share this post


Link to post

I am glad to see the Church treating this group as protesters.  Whether they have membership or not is irrelevant, they are there to protest a policy and should be treated as protesters.  Causing a public scene for press attention is no different that what all the EV pastors, pro-gay marriage, and other protesters do every conference time.  And so they should be treated the same.

 

Honestly, I can see this going the way of excommunication for the ringleaders if they continue these actions.  (Kind of reminds me of the "September 6" situation - go against the church too much and get the boot).

And "agitating" for change from outside the organization will absolutely reduce any efficacy they might have had if they kept their membership.  They want the priesthood.  They aren't going to get it if they're excommunicated for protesting, and it will make their cause automatically be dismissed as apostate instead of legitimate.

.

Just my opinion (of course, I don't support ordination of women so I'm obviously biased).

Share this post


Link to post

I am glad to see the Church treating this group as protesters.  Whether they have membership or not is irrelevant, they are there to protest a policy and should be treated as protesters.  Causing a public scene for press attention is no different that what all the EV pastors, pro-gay marriage, and other protesters do every conference time.  And so they should be treated the same.

 

Honestly, I can see this going the way of excommunication for the ringleaders if they continue these actions.  (Kind of reminds me of the "September 6" situation - go against the church too much and get the boot).

And "agitating" for change from outside the organization will absolutely reduce any efficacy they might have had if they kept their membership.  They want the priesthood.  They aren't going to get it if they're excommunicated for protesting, and it will make their cause automatically be dismissed as apostate instead of legitimate.

.

Just my opinion (of course, I don't support ordination of women so I'm obviously biased).

 

I support dialogue, but I agree this is not likely to end well for the ringleaders insofar as their membership is concerned.  A fair number of strident femininists got shown the door in the last century, and its likely that history will repeat itself.  Its most likely going to take a whole new generation of GAs before change radical change occurs, if it does.  That is the way the Lord works, He lets His leaders die off as He raises a specific leader who will implement any change that He wants.

Share this post


Link to post

Why not line up? If they line up and ask for a ticket/entrance they will be told "no", right?

Share this post


Link to post

A few more bits about how the OW group has aligned itself with an apostate:

1. http://ordainwomen.org/resources/ - The OW website includes an article by Margaret Toscano, an excommunicated apostate.

2. http://ordainwomen.org/project/hi-im-margaret/ - The OW website includes a profile for Margaret Toscano.

3. https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/update-issue-171/ - This article includes a photo of women described as "the force behind Ordain Women." The group includes Kate Kelly and . . . Margaret Toscano.

4. http://mormonfem.wordpress.com/2013/04/21/priesthood-ordination-for-women/ - This includes a photo of the panel at last year's "Priestesshood Session," at which Kate Kelly shared the stage with, among others, Margaret Toscano.

Toscano's participation in the OW group is entrenched and top-tier. She is a person who was excommunicated for apostasy.

Thanks,

-Smac

Share this post


Link to post

Here is an excerpt from the Trib's article: http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/57694249-78/women-church-says-priesthood.html.csp

Mormon women seeking tickets to the faith’s general priesthood session next month will not only be denied access to that all-male meeting, but also may be shut out of Salt Lake City’s historic Temple Square itself.

On Monday, the Utah-based Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints formally rebuffed Ordain Women’s second push for entrance to the priesthood session and urged the grass-roots group to "demonstrate" instead in "free-speech zones adjacent to Temple Square, which have long been established for those wishing to voice differing viewpoints."

...

In October, more than 100 women sought to gain entrance to the all-male LDS priesthood meeting, held in the Conference Center across the street from Temple Square. They approached the Tabernacle door, where standby tickets were distributed. One by one, they asked for admittance. One by one, they were turned away — as news cameras captured the episode.

"We faithfully, responsibly and quietly gathered and asked to go in, wanting to demonstrate to the Lord that we are ready for the priesthood," Kelly says. "We are going to go there again."

In defiance of the Church's express instruction to the contrary. This is not cool.

And she does not expect to be barred from the attempt.

Yes, she does. She has been advised that she cannot attend, so she cannot credibly expect to be admitted. She is simply setting up an "Oh, I was so distraught, I thought I would be admitted" schtick which she will play up for the cameras and the media after she is turned away. And she will do so in an attempt to make the Church look bad. Not cool.

It would be "unprecedented to deny a group of faithful women entrance to Temple Square, a place that we consider holy ground," Kelly says. "It would be extremely disconcerting."

Except that her group is not comprised of only "faithful women." Margaret Toscano, one of the key players in the OW group, is an excommunicated apostate. She was there last year, and she will likely be there this year.

I am becoming less and less impressed with Kate Kelly.

Thanks,

-Smac

Share this post


Link to post

 

A few more bits about how the OW group has aligned itself with an apostate:

1. http://ordainwomen.org/resources/ - The OW website includes an article by Margaret Toscano, an excommunicated apostate.

2. http://ordainwomen.org/project/hi-im-margaret/ - The OW website includes a profile for Margaret Toscano.

3. https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/update-issue-171/ - This article includes a photo of women described as "the force behind Ordain Women." The group includes Kate Kelly and . . . Margaret Toscano.

4. http://mormonfem.wordpress.com/2013/04/21/priesthood-ordination-for-women/ - This includes a photo of the panel at last year's "Priestesshood Session," at which Kate Kelly shared the stage with, among others, Margaret Toscano.

Toscano's participation in the OW group is entrenched and top-tier. She is a person who was excommunicated for apostasy.

Thanks,

-Smac

Please share with us all the smear you can, so that the choice will be clear to vilify our Sisters in Christ. And by context, anyone recommend holding member who supports the OW group, needs to turn in their recommend because they associate with an apostate.

Share this post


Link to post

 

Please share with us all the smear you can, so that the choice will be clear to vilify our Sisters in Christ. And by context, anyone recommend holding member who supports the OW group, needs to turn in their recommend because they associate with an apostate.

 

Supporting an apostate group could be considered sympathetic.  Supporting their apostate beliefs would make one an apostate.

Either way, not a good thing.  And they are only our "Sisters in Christ" if they remain "in Christ".  If they fight against what Christ has established for his Church they no longer merit our support.

Share this post


Link to post

Too bad the Church letter didn't give a PS that included the names and addresses of a half dozen religious organizations that would entertain the notion that they be ordained.

Share this post


Link to post

Supporting an apostate group could be considered sympathetic.  Supporting their apostate beliefs would make one an apostate.

Either way, not a good thing.  And they are only our "Sisters in Christ" if they remain "in Christ".  If they fight against what Christ has established for his Church they no longer merit our support.

And, if they bring divisions into the body of Christ -- and protest movements tend, by nature, to be very divisive -- they bring about what Christ expressly and stringently forbade when He said, "If ye are not one, ye are not mine."

Edited by Scott Lloyd

Share this post


Link to post

So if the other protesters tried to move from the designated area onto church grounds, what would happen?

Share this post


Link to post

And, if they bring divisions into the body of Christ -- and protest movements tend, by nature, to be very divisive -- they bring about what Christ expressly and stringently warned against when He said, "If ye are not one, ye are not mine."

 

Sure... but its a double edged sword...

Share this post


Link to post

So if the other protesters tried to move from the designated area onto church grounds, what would happen?

 

One would hope they would be arrested.  Trespassing, private property etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...