Ny Times Article: Kate Kelly And John Dehlin Threatened With Excommunication

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

 

The only thing that would sound more ironic is saying that it's entirely appropriate to fellowship disfellowshipped members.

Only if you have no clue what disfellowshipping acutally means.

[Damien the Leper]

Yes. I don't know your position on this issue. If I was kidding around, I would include an emoticon or something.

Thanks,

-Smac

 

My question was whether or not excommunication was appropriate for giving out personal information. I believe it to be an extreme case which deserves extreme consequences.

[JAHS]

Another interview today with John Dehlin and a rep from Ordain Women" on Access Utah:

 

http://cpa.ds.npr.org/upr/audio/2014/06/AU6192014_0.mp3

 

John states he doesn't believe in the Book of Mormon, Book of Abraham, D&C 132, and misrepresents Joseph Smith's practice of polygamy, among other things.

Edited June 19, 2014 by JAHS

[Duncan]

Another interview today with John Dehlin and a rep from Ordain Women" on Access Utah:

 

http://cpa.ds.npr.org/upr/audio/2014/06/AU6192014_0.mp3

 

John states he doesn't believe in the Book of Mormon, Book of Abraham, D&C 132, and misrepresents Joseph Smith's practice of polygamy, among other things.

 

see, I think he has changed his mind since like last week on these issues! 

[cdowis]

Pauls "keys" extended to Gentiles. Peters "keys" extended to jews.

 

I guess you are unfamiliar with the keys of the priesthood, as accepted in the LDS church.  I'm sure you can get educated on that doctrine.

 

 

Peter and other church leaders were preaching one thing and doing another. Paul aired the dirty laundry, and recruited others to his cause with the blogernacle of his day. Its very a propos.

 

We are on very different planets here.  I see this in the context of the organization of the church, priesthood authority and the keys of the kingdom, of which Paul was an apostle, a member of the Q12.   He was not an outsider, not trying to "shout down" the leaders, attempting to change the church thru dissent and a grassroots effort.

 

I won't even pretend to give your prospective.

 

[SeekingUnderstanding]

see, I think he has changed his mind since like last week on these issues! 

I don't think so. John like most of us are complicated. John is agnostic. He hopes there is a God. He finds some type of spiritual value in continuing his church membership, but strongly disagrees with many of the churches positions. 

 

Per John's Mormon Stories profile:

 have deep love for the LDS church, for its members, and for its former members.  At present, I consider myself to be an unorthodox, unorthoprax Mormon.  I believe in many of the central, non-distinctive moral teachings within Mormonism (e.g., love, kindness, charity, forgiveness, faith, hope), but either have serious doubts about, or no longer believe many of the fundamental LDS church truth claims (e.g., anthropomorphic God, “one true church with exclusive authority,” that the current LDS church prophet receives privileged communications from God, that The Book of Mormon and The Book of Abraham are translations, polygamy, racist teachings in the Book of Mormon, that ordinances are required for salvation, proxy work for the dead).

 

I do not believe that anyone has any idea what God and/or the afterlife are really like (if these things, indeed, exist at all).  And so, while I respect non-judgmental forms of religious belief, I believe that believers walk by hope/faith alone (not knowledge), and that non-believers are to be respected for their courage to disbelieve.  I believe that when science and religion collide, science almost always wins and religion retreats, and that this historical fact should lead religious people to respect/embrace, and not fear/reject science and reason.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

Loved this from a fellow ward member of Kate Kelly at fmh:

 

 

I have tremendous respect for Kate’s courage and authenticity. Sitting beside her in Relief Society, there were times when I felt very cowardly and lazy by comparison. I think sitting a thousand miles away and only reading about her, I might have assumed she was fierce and thick-skinned, and never suspected her to be the tender-hearted woman with an abiding and often teary love for Christ and His church that I saw each week.

 

I have known Bishop Harrison for years, primarily as a stalwart bass in my choir, and soon as a neighbor three doors down from me. I have never faced disciplinary action from him, so my experience is different than Kate’s, but to me personally, he has always seemed universally loving and kind as well as particularly respectful of individual agency and diversity of opinion. I can only imagine that the prospect of nullifying Sister Kelly’s baptismal and temple covenants is agony to him. Only the most callous, spiritually bankrupt soul could rejoice to see a fellow Mormon excommunicated, and in my ward I have seen no rejoicing. I have seen the gamut of reactions from outrage, hurt, disbelief and despair to grim resignation and grim approval–but no rejoicing.

Edited June 19, 2014 by SeekingUnderstanding

[halconero]

/\ Not necessarily true. Paul had a rough relationship with the 12 as evidenced by his epistles. Acts isn't as reliable of a source with regards to Paul as his own writings are.

Furthermore, there's not a lot of evidence that Paul was a member of the council of the 12 apostles. He considered himself somewhat as an independent apostle, while still respecting their position at the head of the Church. I'm actually fine with this doctrinally as the Latter-day Saint priesthood office of an apostle is distinct from a calling in the Quorum. We currently have 15 apostles, and there are past instances where people were ordained to the office, but never called to the Quorum.

[mfbukowski]

I hope for the sake of everyone involved that no violence or harm to the bishop or his family results from this.

This just speaks volumes about the kind of human being we are dealing with here, who would put someone's family in danger.

 

Were I in favor of ordaining women- which of course I am not, I would be absolutely running to distance myself from the organization.  Staying, I think, would be a vote in favor of tactics which put lives in jeopardy.

 

It is a shame for those of good will of the "loyal opposition" who want a rational discussion on the topic.

Edited June 19, 2014 by mfbukowski

[Analytics]

 

I don't follow.  I was using "fellowship" in its social sense ("friendly relationship; companionship: the fellowship of father and son"), not its ecclesiastical one ("communion, as between members of the same church").

Latter-day Saints are supposed reach out and provide love and comfort to those who are under church discipline. We don't do the "shunning" thing found in other religions. We welcome disfellowshipped/excommunicated persons to attend our worship services and participate in a limited capacity.

I am hard-pressed that you would take exception to any of this, Roger. So what is your point?

Thanks,

-Smac

 

No point other than pointing out the irony in the choice of words, "fellowship." You used the word "fellowship" as a verb, and the only dictionary definition I can find for the verb "to fellowship” is "to admit to fellowship, especially religious fellowship."

 

You were using the idiosyncratic Mormon-speak definition of "to fellowship," which means something like: "to be especially nice to somebody who isn’t in the fellowship of fully committed Mormons, with the hope that they’ll be inclined to join the fellowship through conversion or more devotion."  It’s an ironic definition because in general, "fellowship" has connotations of already belonging, being trusted, and being fully accepted.

[sethpayne]

This just speaks volumes about the kind of human being we are dealing with here, who would put someone's family in danger.

 

Were I in favor of ordaining women- which of course I am not, I would be absolutely running to distance myself from the organization.  Staying, I think, would be a vote in favor of tactics which put lives in jeopardy.

 

It is a shame for those of good will of the "loyal opposition" who want a rational discussion on the topic.

 

Bishop,

 

Should we be equally critical of Elder Oaks for calling Mike Quinn a "wolf in sheep's clothing" in public?  Quinn received several threatening letters and calls -- including some death threats.

 

As I see it, folks on both sides often make mistakes during these very emotional and tense episodes.

 

Seth

 

ETA:  Have we confirmed that Kelly posted her Bishop's personal info?  I'm not FB friends with her so I can't see it.  What was the personal info?  Was it is home phone/address or the ward building number/address?  If the latter, then big deal.  You can get that info in the phone book.  If the former, then I think this was a terrible thing to do.

 

But sending letters/calls in support -- or criticism of Kelly to the ward building seems perfectly fine.  I know several SPs and Bishops who have appreciated getting feedback from interested or affected Church members in days past.

Edited June 19, 2014 by sethpayne

[Tacenda]

1. He didn't need to call anyone else in the first place. He could have performed the ordinance himself.

2. A common illness can wait till morning.

Ok, got around to asking my husband. He said the reason we had to call a neighbor is because...wait for it.... one is needed to annoint with oil and another to say the prayer! So huh! He said this very matter of factly. When I shared the article that Frank posted, he was sort of speechless. Probably thinking it was bogus, but he believes it now.

How long is the misinformation going to continue? People on the board, please share with others. I beg of you! No I'm not turning into Kate, just thinking this is significant, it would have saved me alot of guilt. And if the information my husband had was correct in the beginning I might not have had a distaste for the formalities associated with PH. But I have had some awesome setting apart blessings in my lifetime, that I felt the spirit.

Edited June 19, 2014 by Tacenda

[cdowis]

Furthermore, there's not a lot of evidence that Paul was a member of the council of the 12 apostles. He considered himself somewhat as an independent apostle, while still respecting their position at the head of the Church. I'm actually fine with this doctrinally as the Latter-day Saint priesthood office of an apostle is distinct from a calling in the Quorum. We currently have 15 apostles, and there are past instances where people were ordained to the office, but never called to the Quorum.

 

"Kate Kelly and John Dehlin are just like Paul in his opposition to the leaders of the church and shouting them down."

 

This is another case of wresting the scriptures.

[smac97]

Here is a good letter to the editor about this issue: http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/58086042-82/church-ordain-women-agency.html.csp

 

I fully agree with the opinions and insights of Ashley Isaacson Woolley ("Changing the church: How Ordain Women gets it wrong," June 15) regarding the manner in which the organization Ordain Women is trying to be heard and have changes made in the church according to their views.

 

I believe that free agency is a God-given gift of utmost importance to everyone. I also believe that the manner in which we use that agency can be very costly depending on the resultant consequences.

 

It is my belief that the organization of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints with apostles and prophets is the same organization that was established by Jesus Christ himself when he lived upon the earth. Revelation beneficial for the church members as a whole will come through the appropriate channels Christ has put in place. Personal revelation, including answers to questions about doctrine, church government, etc., is available to all members who will study, seek, and ask with a sincere heart.

 

If all Kate Kelly and the group Ordain Women want is to have the prophet ask if they may receive the priesthood, then they need to accept the answer, which seems to have been given in several talks over the last couple of conferences.

 

Having once lived a lifestyle away from the LDS Church, I understand how easy it is to begin to rationalize away doctrines and practices that do not keep up with the world’s current view of things. However, truth is truth everlasting, and it is well worth the effort to find it and embrace it for the peace of mind and blessings it brings.

 

Diane Graham

Salt Lake City

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

Edited June 19, 2014 by smac97

[Duncan]

not wanting to thread jack but is this the longest thread ever? it was started a week ago, it's like the Gangnam Style of threads!

[MorningStar]

not wanting to thread jack but is this the longest thread ever? it was started a week ago, it's like the Gangnam Style of threads!

I know!  I'm super proud!    I think I've seen threads longer than this one, but I'm surprised this has lasted so long because things can get nasty easily. 

[sethpayne]

I know!  I'm super proud!    I think I've seen threads longer than this one, but I'm surprised this has lasted so long because things can get nasty easily. 

 

This thread has been surprisingly civil; especially given some of the participants -- including me.

[halconero]

"Kate Kelly and John Dehlin are just like Paul in his opposition to the leaders of the church and shouting them down."

 

This is another case of wresting the scriptures.

 

The above quote? Yeah. I agree. 

 

Although I disagree with her, I think the Kate Kelly comparison is at least a tiny bit more sustainable than John Dehlin.

[MorningStar]

This thread has been surprisingly civil; especially given some of the participants -- including me.

I think it's because I set such a good example.  *snicker* 

[MorningStar]

Also, I'm pretty awesome because I beat Smac to an LDS related news story. 

[smac97]

Also, I'm pretty awesome because I beat Smac to an LDS related news story. 

 

LOL.  By about seven minutes, yes.  Well done!

 

-Smac

[The Nehor]

I know!  I'm super proud!    I think I've seen threads longer than this one, but I'm surprised this has lasted so long because things can get nasty easily. 

 

So you're saying I have not posted enough on this thread? I will get right on it.

[Stone holm]

There seems to be a flurry of bloggers coming out and saying that they have received notices of disciplinary councils charging them with apostasy, there was another article this week naming another handful. Does anybody know what the average number of such councils in a year is, so we would know if this is pretty standard flow or does indicate a crackdown?

[The Nehor]

There seems to be a flurry of bloggers coming out and saying that they have received notices of disciplinary councils charging them with apostasy, there was another article this week naming another handful. Does anybody know what the average number of such councils in a year is, so we would know if this is pretty standard flow or does indicate a crackdown?

 

Excellent. Soon we will purge all of the undesirables.

[Duncan]

There seems to be a flurry of bloggers coming out and saying that they have received notices of disciplinary councils charging them with apostasy, there was another article this week naming another handful. Does anybody know what the average number of such councils in a year is, so we would know if this is pretty standard flow or does indicate a crackdown?

 

probably no one in the church knows how many DC's are handled each year. I would love to know why the NYT was so eager to run this story about Kelly and Dehlin