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

[Zakuska]

I find the vitriol shocking when they are in the position of needing to continually point out how respectful OW has always been. They know now that blogs are read by PA and it is a free for all. (Ironically, as they introduce "violence" to describe excommunication, I read the SP is getting death threats now.) That it has been directed towards the female PA rep who went on the radio show is even more disheartening.  She was in a no win situation but handled herself with dignity. They are even making fun of her supposed "primary voice" which is bizarre but shows the extent of the unbridled rage. I understand the upset, but, again, this is so self-defeating.  It is almost as if they wake up every morning and say "what Mormon official can we hate today?"  But it makes it easy to see why OW is in the situation it is in. And it also demonstrates how self-destructive those are who only want to throw the same thing back at them.

 I haven't done a word search but spiking in the 60s makes sense...that is when "women's lib" emerged.  I sense another correlation with the RS Magazine, as well.  Setting aside the cultural baggage (which at this distance can appear almost cute), we were talked to like complete people. Working, influencial (and often non-LDS) women were lauded each month, women's achievements in the world were laid out with pride. One of the more striking things I saw was extended exhortation for women to be able to support themselves, then it was going to vocational school rather than college. Notice was taken of women's rights advancement...like the first woman to be on a jury in England. Motherhood was not pounded into us as our real purpose in life, it was just taken for granted while they talked about other things. Housekeeping advice were more common than motherhood stuff, the emphasis was on homemaking. 

 

So while society forced women into the home, the church didn't need to put on the pressure, and provided a more expansive and free wheeling church life. But when society allowed them into the workplace into higher paying jobs, the church picked up the role society had provided to put limits on women's purpose.  

 

Joseph smith wrote...

 

D&C 121

39 We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.

 

It seems that like the priesthood ban on blacks imposed purportedly by Brigham Young after Josephs death. The ban on women and the restrictions on their priesthood has fallen into this same category since Joseph Smith did indeed give Priesthood to both Groups. And it makes sense to have spiked in the 60's to keep all the Womens movements of the time in control.

 

Im beginning to wonder if we are seeing the commencement of the day when both father and mother can give their children priesthood blessings together?!

Edited June 18, 2014 by Zakuska

[Zakuska]

Again, I fail to see the relevance. She was not rebuked based on her gender. 

 

I don't think Deborah was rebuked.

 

Judges 4:4

Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was judging Israel at that time.

She was rebuked for claiming God prophesied through her and Aaron and thus they were on par with Moses who had apparently gone astray (in their eyes) by marrying outside the covenant.

Edited June 18, 2014 by Zakuska

[juliann]

She was rebuked for claiming God prophesied through her and Aaron and thus they were on par with Moses who had apparently gone astray by Marrying outside the covenant.

 What is your point? This is unresponsive to the point that there is no claim of Miriam being rebuked because of her gender.

[Zakuska]

Juliann.  Calm down. After reading the signature books where Joseph Smith gave Priesthood to the relief Society I've changed teams. It changed my whole outlook on how I view the Numbers episode.

 

Please, See my post to you above that.

Edited June 18, 2014 by Zakuska

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I don't think it is Gray who is inserting current priesthood structure into the OT.  That tends to be the position taken by those claiming the Bible proves only men can have it.  

Except there is not one scriptures that says "And so and so, being a women was ordained to the priesthood". The only thing you guys got is a strained interpretation that women at some point held held the priesthood IE, that Phoebe was a deacon. And we know she is a deacon the same way men are a deacon today because those ancient writers knew what they were talking about.

 

I mean there is no precedent set any were in scripture any were for women to hold the priesthood or in GC talks. It has never been talked about like the priesthood ban on blacks, that they one day would get it. But there are things in the scriptures that tell us that men are to hold it. And we have been over this so many times I don't wish to rehash it.

 

 

So yeah, Gray is inserting his ideas of what deacon means from a modern day stance. As I recall you did it too.

[busybee]

i'll ignore all the personal attacks and insinuations as to my motives im getting right now and ill quote.

"We must have priesthood authority to act in the name of God when performing the sacred ordinances of the gospel."

Does not a woman, without the accompanyment of the temple president, stand in a booth with another sister dressed only in a sheet and perform an ordinance for the other sister?

We arn't talking about the prayer circle, we are talking about a bonified ordinance with concecrated oil here. And dont give me the "well the temple president has the priesthood" bit because that distorts the plain and simple meaning of gospel principles manual beyond all recognition.

So i ask again these sisters standing in these boths "officating" in the place of God for these other sisters either have the Priesthood or they dont. Its as simple as that.

1) if they dont, then the gospel principles manual needs a revision and some exception handling put inplace.

2) but if they do, then all the flak im getting right now for simply daring to ask a question and try and make other posters be consistant in their argumentation is uncalled for.

Priesthood authority =/= Priesthood Keys.

 

The sisters in the Temple act with Priesthood Authority which is conferred on them by the Temple president who holds the keys to do so.

 

Read Elder Dallin H. Oaks' talk from the April 2014 General Conference.

Edited June 18, 2014 by busybee

[juliann]

So the Trib has an interesting article today: Mormon HQ could halt Kelly, Dehlin censures, but will it?

Peggy Fletcher Stack reporting speculation and rumors. Again. Sigh. She's an uneven reporter.

I agree with Mauss about LDS leaders "attempting to draw a line between public commentary ... and organizing a pressure group." Regarding whether Kate Kelly "crossed this line" and whether "excommunication would be a harsher outcome than is necessary or useful," I think these delve into matters of ecclesiastical jurisdiction and discretion.

I think that's right. This is why the conspiratorial speculations being presented by Kate Kelly, John Dehlin and some of their supporters do not carry much weight with me.

I think "grammatical ultimatum" is a reference to the "and nothing less (that female ordination) will suffice" and "unequivocal call for complete equality and the ordination of Mormon women."

Hmm. I wonder if that will placate the speculations being proffered by Kelly and Dehlin. Probably not.

This thread has included accusations that the Church has been inflexible with Kate Kelly. Apparently not.

Wow. Kate Kelly continues to publicly demean priesthood leaders. This just ain't cool.

So Kate Kelly is rejecting the claim that she is "recruiting people," while at the same time soliciting 800+ letters supporting her position and coordinating 50 vigils in 17 countries on her behalf.

Thanks,

-Smac

I always appreciate your transcriptions (which don't show up in the quote function.)  I'm pretty sure I heard the PA rep on Radio West disclose that KK has been offered a Skype conference that she can do in the comfort of her home. KK has not been acknowledging that. It is problematic because of the narrative she has built of the church being punitive and unreasonable. (And I agree that telling her she must leave what she is doing and make that kind of trip to be unreasonable.)  So if she does not accept a Skype conference, I think it fair to say her intent all along was to avoid having a conversation with her bishop, thus, making any attempt to improve the situation.

[halconero]

She was rebuked for claiming God prophesied through her and Aaron and thus they were on par with Moses who had apparently gone astray (in their eyes) by marrying outside the covenant.

I think you mean Miriam.

[Avatar4321]

An interesting thought. This whole issue would be moot of people remembers the Lord's counsel to not seek for offices but for the gifts of the Spirit that are given to all equally.

[BlueDreams]

She was rebuked for claiming God prophesied through her and Aaron and thus they were on par with Moses who had apparently gone astray (in their eyes) by marrying outside the covenant.

 

This has the same fault as assuming that judge is the exact same thing as bishop now, that prophet = priesthood office, the cain's curse entails skin color/19th century racial assumption, that the women who held "male" role in the OT were exceptions because the men sucked in their day, that Phoebe was a deacon in the same sense that a deacon is a deacon today, that JS was alluding to priesthood ordination for women in the same way men were in the RS minutes, etc.  It's reading out modern day assumptions into the texts of the past. There is nothing in there that states something along the lines of and thus it was because Miriam, being a woman, got extra punishment because not only did she want to usurp Moses she wanted to have the priesthood too. Thus God cursed her mightily for not knowing her place.  If you can find that in there without your assumptions as a basis that that's why she was extra-punished....then, by all means, show me. But I read that text 3 times over the first time that explanation was floated in a SS class and I couldn't find it then as a definitive explanation or even the best explanation. And I doubt it'll work now.

 

Again. You have to assume that that's what is meant for it to be there. It's not just written out there in black and white.

 

And Deborah was never rebuked. She has a victory song extolling her necessary role. 

 

With luv,

BD

Edited June 18, 2014 by BlueDreams

[halconero]

Technically even we don't equal prophecy as being equated with priesthood. We call President Monson The Prophet, but that's not the name of His office. His Office is Apostle with a specific calling to be President of the High Priesthood. In their callings, the First Presidency and Twelve as sustained as Prophets, seers, and revelators.

In fact, Joseph Smith and countless other prophets and Apostles were trying to get this people to be a people of prophets. We become prophets when we recieve the Spirit of Prophecy. And a Spirit of Prophecy is a testimony of Jesus Christ.

There is a reason the Lord established a School of the Prophets in Kirtland. It was to train. specifically, the priesthood at that time how to be prophets.

If you think about it, the Spirit of Prophecy is very prevelant in the Church. We see it manifested at least once a month on the first sunday of the month during our testimony meeting.

There are no limits on women receiving the Gift of Prophecy. Once they do, they are prophetesses. If a woman can honestly say "I know by the power of the Holy Spirit that Jesus is the Savior, the Son of God who atoned for the sins of the world" that woman is a prophetess because she has recieved the Spirit of prophecy.

Now, there are many of us who need to further develop this gift. The problem we often have is we often confuse being a prophet with being a seer.

I agree, but it is evident that many members still conflate "prophethood" with priesthood.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

WOW! Now this is Good stuff! Gave you a rep for that and would give yo more if I could!

 

I hope the Mods will let me link this here, I think I have my next reading assignment!

 

http://signaturebookslibrary.org/?p=1171

Is this not talking about the endowment?

[Zakuska]

Priesthood authority =/= Priesthood Keys.

 

The sisters in the Temple act with Priesthood Authority which is conferred on them by the Temple president who holds the keys to do so.

 

Read Elder Dallin H. Oaks' talk from the April 2014 General Conference.

So then by your own admission, Women have been given Priesthood Authority to perform a specific ordinance by one holding Keys to do so and thus hold Priesthood Authority

 

So women do indeed have Priesthood.  Now... that that has been established.

 

There should be no reason what so ever that the Holy Key masters could not turn their keys and allow Women to fully execute their priesthood Authority in other capacities other than the Holy Key masters are executing unrighteous dominion over their fellow wo-men.

 

- Content removed -

 

Eve shall be redeemed and her shame rebuked!

 

Do not post Temple content.

~ Mods

[stemelbow]

I always appreciate your transcriptions (which don't show up in the quote function.)  I'm pretty sure I heard the PA rep on Radio West disclose that KK has been offered a Skype conference that she can do in the comfort of her home. KK has not been acknowledging that. It is problematic because of the narrative she has built of the church being punitive and unreasonable. (And I agree that telling her she must leave what she is doing and make that kind of trip to be unreasonable.)  So if she does not accept a Skype conference, I think it fair to say her intent all along was to avoid having a conversation with her bishop, thus, making any attempt to improve the situation.

It sounded like the offer for Skype or conference was just barely ok'd through her bishop or stake president. She might not have gotten the message from them until later, or may have not received that message from them even now.

But I can appreciate that this was offered. Sounded unreasonable to set it up with her moved away and in Utah.

[juliann]

You are not just asserting that we cannot take "too literal a stance on the content"; you are asserting you cannot take anything seriously.  The only logical conclusion is that the OT, the NT, and all other time periods were just unenlightened fools and not nearly as sophisticated as those few individuals that proclaim that gay sex is good and women are the exact equal of man in all ways and in all things.  This is not enlightenment, but sheer lunacy.  I don't care how many times you close you eyes and tell yourself that you are right and you know better than all other generations, races, and peoples, it is still wrong.  

 

As I write that I understand that I am not of the enlightened few that support your righteous, strike that, superior cause.  I guess that I am just an old numskull of limited vision to appreciate the snake oil that is being peddled here.  

Wow, not cool Storm Rider.

 

Except there is not one scriptures that says "And so and so, being a women was ordained to the priesthood". The only thing you guys got is a strained interpretation that women at some point held held the priesthood IE, that Phoebe was a deacon. And we know she is a deacon the same way men are a deacon today because those ancient writers knew what they were talking about.

 

I mean there is no precedent set any were in scripture any were for women to hold the priesthood or in GC talks. It has never been talked about like the priesthood ban on blacks, that they one day would get it. But there are things in the scriptures that tell us that men are to hold it. And we have been over this so many times I don't wish to rehash it.

 

 

So yeah, Gray is inserting his ideas of what deacon means from a modern day stance. As I recall you did it too.

"You guys?"  Those defending the church on this are losing because so few are willing to discuss it dispassionately or step back on anything, even though it puts us in a stronger position. The EVs lost the battle when we leveled the playing field with scholarship. Using the Bible the way it is being used in a lot of these posts can be demolished with well accepted scholarship.  We lose nothing, NOTHING, by accepting certain premises and moving on. Why so many choose to die on a hill before they ever get to the playing field is mystifying.

 

And I have never, ever, ever said a deacon is what it is today. I just finished pointing out that are in hot water when we say our church is exactly like the early Christian.

 

All I see here is that if someone won't attack women at the same hateful level OW supporters are attacking church leaders, they are the enemy.

[busybee]

So then by your own admission, Women have been given Priesthood Authority to perform a specific ordinance by one holding Keys to do so and thus hold Priesthood Authority

 

So women do indeed have Priesthood.  Now... that that has been established.

 

There should be no reason what so ever that the Holy Key masters could not turn their keys and allow Women to fully execute their priesthood Authority in other capacities other than the Holy Key masters are executing unrighteous dominion over their fellow wo-men.

No problem whatsoever.....

Except one. The "Holy Key masters" (rather disrespectful) haven't been instructed to do so by Him who's Priesthood it is.

A small, but quite critical matter,  in my opinion.

I think some people are very presumptive thinking that they have the right to tell God how to administer His Priesthood. 

The tail does not get to wag the dog.

In my view, if someone does not like the status quo they are free to leave and set up their churches in any way they think the Lord would have them do it. That is the blessing of agency.

[BlueDreams]

It sounded like the offer for Skype or conference was just barely ok'd through her bishop or stake president. She might not have gotten the message from them until later, or may have not received that message from them even now.

But I can appreciate that this was offered. Sounded unreasonable to set it up with her moved away and in Utah.

 

It would probably be easier if the media wasn't so much of a middleman for this. I don't think a number of options that Kate has taken after the call for a disciplinary court have made this process any easier. The chance for some flexibility was always on the table, but it was ignored for a more immediate reactive response to this that gave more a message of power entrapment than potential collaboration with a leader. And I don't think that has helped in a lot of way with actually working with the bishop/SP....nor will it continue to help her case with the DC. She'll probably win out with public opinion, especially those that are non-lds or more progressive in the bloggernacle....but they're not the ones to really pull clout with a DC. 

 

With luv,

BD

[Zakuska]

No problem whatsoever.....

Except one. The "Holy Key masters" (rather disrespectful) haven't been instructed to do so by Him who's Priesthood it is.

A small, but quite critical matter,  in my opinion.

I think some people are very presumptive thinking that they have the right to tell God how to administer His Priesthood. 

The tail does not get to wag the dog.

In my view, if someone does not like the status quo they are free to leave and set up their churches in any way they think the Lord would have them do it. That is the blessing of agency.

I agree that they havent been instructed to do so. But perhaps that now the question has come up, they should be doing what President Kimball did and be asking the Lord through Urimm and Thummim as the Prophets of old did, what his will on the matter is. That Joseph Smith Gave women the Priesthood as well as Blacks is not a question its an historical fact. That BY took it away is also a fact. That women are strictly limited in the practice of their Priesthood Authority in today's church is also a Fact.

 

The question remains... why?   And I as Joseph Smith blame it on Unrighteous Dominion.

Edited June 18, 2014 by Zakuska

[stemelbow]

It would probably be easier if the media wasn't so much of a middleman for this. I don't think a number of options that Kate has taken after the call for a disciplinary court have made this process any easier. The chance for some flexibility was always on the table, but it was ignored for a more immediate reactive response to this that gave more a message of power entrapment than potential collaboration with a leader. And I don't think that has helped in a lot of way with actually working with the bishop/SP....nor will it continue to help her case with the DC. She'll probably win out with public opinion, especially those that are non-lds or more progressive in the bloggernacle....but they're not the ones to really pull clout with a DC. 

 

With luv,

BD

I agree. It's probably problematic that I, an virtual nobody, has heard so much about it. It'd be nice if it were just a little personal thing, in a way.

[Gray]

This is ignoring my point.  If God wanted women to hold the priesthood, why didn't he call some by specific revelation (not just inspiration of culturally bias leaders) as he did hundreds of men.  God could easily have said - It is my will that Emma be ordained to the office of High Priest and Eliza be ordained as the Bishop of Nauvoo.

 

God isn't influenced by our cultural biases and can call whoever he wants.  But he has never called a woman to a priesthood office.  He has never told a prophet to call a woman to a priesthood office.  God isn't that absent minded or neglectful that he wouldn't call a woman if a woman was the best person for a calling.

 

Priesthood leaders can only feel inspired about people they are willing to consider for priesthood roles. If you are praying about either Bob or Dave as next Bishop of Ward X, you'll only feel inspiration about Bob or Dave, not about Jane, who you haven't even thought about. 

[Gray]

Having recently finished a course in Hebrew Bible at UofT, the term Judge refers to a socio-political station in the confederacy of tribes which existed in Israel at the time.

With regards to her being a prophetess...well you're applying Latter-day Saint concepts to a word that does have any such connotations. Jewish rabbis today, and ancient Israelites back then did not conceive prophecy as being equated with priesthood office. Only the Levites, and more specifically the Coheb held the priesthood to officiate in sacred rites. The ancient Israelites didn't even consider famous prophets such as Elijah, Isaiah, or Malachi to hold the priesthood.

 

Agreed, and LDS concept of priesthood is different than ancient Hebrew concepts. Isaiah almost certainly did not hold the priesthood, but the role is something we associate with priesthood today. It's hard to make a direct comparison. The purpose of priesthood was much different then. 

[JLHPROF]

Priesthood leaders can only feel inspired about people they are willing to consider for priesthood roles. If you are praying about either Bob or Dave as next Bishop of Ward X, you'll only feel inspiration about Bob or Dave, not about Jane, who you haven't even thought about. 

 

Oh, I remember now.  We had this discussion a while back.  You don't believe that God speaks directly (ie, with words).  You only believe that revelations are inspired.  If that is the case, then of course cultural bias could still be there.

However, I believe that when are revelation features "thus saith the Lord" or otherwise identifies the Lord as speaking that the words are actually his, not just inspiration received by the revelator.

 

And if I believe that revelations calling men to priesthood offices are not leaders being inspired but God actually speaking the name of the person called, then the fact that he has never spoken a woman's name negates the cultural bias.  But if you are right that revelation is only who the leaders feel inspired to call then the cultural bias argument is valid.

 

So it comes down to "does God speak actual instructions to man or does he just prompt with inspired feelings?"

[JAHS]

So then by your own admission, Women have been given Priesthood Authority to perform a specific ordinance by one holding Keys to do so and thus hold Priesthood Authority

 

So women do indeed have Priesthood.  Now... that that has been established.

 

There should be no reason what so ever that the Holy Key masters could not turn their keys and allow Women to fully execute their priesthood Authority in other capacities other than the Holy Key masters are executing unrighteous dominion over their fellow wo-men. I look forward for the day when women unveil their faces in the prayer circle during the whole thing!

 

Eve shall be redeemed and her shame rebuked!

 

"So women do indeed have Priesthood.  Now... that that has been established."

 

No. Saying it that way is misleading.  Women have been given authority from the priesthood to perform temple ordinances, just like women missionaries who have been given authority from the priesthood to serve missions and teach people, or serve in other areas of the church.

 

[eddie]

There are no bishops in Judaism, but modern bishops in the LDS church are likened unto judges in Israel

And yet you are likening all of these ancient terms that aren't entirely understood to use as evidence women held the priesthood in that day instead of deferring to modern revelation and 180 years of prophetic doctrine clarifying the issue.

[Gray]

OK, but Handbook 2: Administering The Church explicitly says that Bishops are to actively counsel with all members of the Ward Council when making decisions, the flip side of that counsel being a strong implication that it's not supposed to be subject merely to a Bishop's "whim," to not seek counsel from these leaders simply because he doesn't feel like it (even though I grant you that some Bishops are probably better at seeking and incorporating the counsel of all Ward Council members than others).  The Ward Council includes a Primary President, a Relief Society President, and a Young Women's President.  I don't know how Church councils work on the general level, but I would be surprised (to say the least) if Church leadership gave a directive to the rank-and-file leadership in Handbook 2, yet did not follow a similar pattern with respect to general Church-wide leadership. 

 

I sit in on Stake PEC every two weeks. We don't get any female perspective, or at least haven't in my time. The problem is at best women are brought in as occasional consultants with no real say.