Kate Kelly Verdict Is In...

[Zakuska]

It was a protest.  That it was non-violent does make it something other than a protest.

 

As for comparing Kate Kelly to Jesus Christ . . . well, I have nothing to say to that.

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

Not comparing her with anyone smac. Just drawing a Parallel.

 

I see all of this as History Repeating itself with people in the "in crowd" of the Establishment (Saducees and Pharasees) fighting against voices in the wilderness.

 

Ever been In a ward who has a missionary club?

 

Where a member who didn't go on a mission is looked down upon and silenced in EQ from expressing themselves because those in the "Club" Served a Mission and know better than he does?

 

Happens to my Bro-IL all the time.

Edited June 25, 2014 by Zakuska

[ELF1024]

Ever been In a ward who has a missionary club?

 

Where a member who didn't go on a mission is looked down upon and silenced in EQ from expressing themselves because those in the "Club" Served a Mission and know better than he does?

 

Happens to my Bro-IL all the time.

 

I'm by no means an RM....

 

Having lived in and participated in Church in the following: Utah (twice), ID, WI, TN, AL, and now AZ. I haven't run into that. However, I'm the stubborn type who honestly doesn't give two cents what much of the other Elder's think and am more than happy to give my opinion on something, welcome or not.

 

 

Less and less of this is about Doctrine, but about Culture.

[CV75]

Well, if our current society still has vestiges of sexism, do you think that it might be possible that these men might be in error with regards to, say, the justifications for restricting the priesthood to men (if not the restriction itself)?

The article doesn’t say they erred, it says the racist customs and practices are unfamiliar and disturbing to us today and that the theories, explanations and justifications once widely accepted for them are not accepted today as the official doctrine of the Church.

 

The idea that only men are ordained because it is held that they are intrinsically superior to women isn’t well-founded: CFR (in counter to scripture and prophetic instruction to the contrary) that this is the theory, explanation and justification that is accepted today.

 

People can argue over whether the brethren are stuck in sexist behaviors or mentality that they are unaware of, but that has nothing to do with the doctrine we are given, For example: Elder Oaks’ recent General Conference talk on the subject (“…all keys of the priesthood are held by the Lord Jesus Christ, whose priesthood it is. He is the one who determines what keys are delegated to mortals and how those keys will be used.”) and Brother Otterson’s open letter (“I suppose we do not know all the reasons why Christ did not ordain women as apostles, either in the New Testament or the Book of Mormon, or when the Church was restored in modern times. We only know that he did not, that his leaders today regard this as a doctrinal issue that cannot be compromised…”)

[ksfisher]

Not comparing her with anyone smac. Just drawing a Parallel.

 

 

 

I'm not sure how you can draw a parallel between the person to whom the temple is dedicated (Christ) expelling people who were using the temple inappropriately and OW deciding to hold their protest on temple grounds after the church that Christ restored to this earth through Joseph Smith asked them not to.  Christ had every right to do what he did.  OW had none.

 

Big difference.

[gtaggart]

Not comparing her with anyone smac. Just drawing a Parallel.

 

I see all of this as History Repeating itself with people in the "in crowd" of the Establishment (Saducees and Pharasees) fighting against voices in the wilderness.

 

Ever been In a ward who has a missionary club?

 

Where a member who didn't go on a mission is looked down upon and silenced in EQ from expressing themselves because those in the "Club" Served a Mission and know better than he does?

 

Happens to my Bro-IL all the time.

 

Is his perception the reality or just his perception? 

[smac97]

Here's a news item: http://www.trust.org/item/20140625210014-g8saj

 

An interesting excerpt (emphasis added):

 

Kate Kelly was stripped of her membership in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on Monday after a three-man disciplinary council ruled she had violated the "laws and orders" of the faith and that her actions amounted to apostasy.

 

"I don't think they made the right decision," Kelly told Reuters in Salt Lake City. "I didn't do anything wrong."

 

Under church rules she has 30 days to appeal. The petition will be considered by some of the same regional church leaders in Virginia, where Kelly previously lived, who held the council that excommunicated her. Those councils are sometimes referred to as church courts.

 

Church officials say the purpose of disciplinary action is not punishment, but rather it is aimed at encouraging those who have made mistakes to repent. No comment on Kelly's appeal decision was immediately available from the church on Wednesday.

 

If the petition is rejected, which Kelly says she expects, the 33-year-old former human rights lawyer can then escalate her appeal to the church's First Presidency in Salt Lake City. Such appeals are rare, church officials say.

 

Kelly said she plans to exhaust the appeals process. It was not clear how long that might take.

 

"I'm going to press and press and hold them accountable," she said. "I have nothing to lose, I have nothing to be ashamed of and I have everything to gain."

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

[why me]

And some people think that the Brethren are synonymous with God and that they KNOW His will. Given that they don't always agree with each other, I don't see how that can be the case. As holy as they are, they are still MEN who have been molded and shaped by their life experiences.

The race and the priesthood article says as much. It readily it admits that the justifications for the ban were the result of prevailing mores and customs. As a result, they ERRED in knowing God's will in regards to the justifications (if not the ban itself).

Well, if our current society still has vestiges of sexism, do you think that it might be possible that these men mighOt be in error with regards to, say, the justifications for restricting the priesthood to men (if not the restriction itself)?

Of course, active members of the church  can constantly challenge the GAs about issues that they do not agree with. Active members can claim that the GAs are prejudice, sexist, old-fashioned,  etc. Why not? However, if an active member is constantly questioning decisions by the church leaders and doubt that they are receiving revelation and inspiration from god and are victims of their cultural norms, well, I don't know....it seems that the church will have a problem because its own members do not believe the leaders. This doesn't send a good message to any investigators who are getting a church that has revelation by a living prophetf from the missionaries.

 

I think that we are all victims of society norms both on a cultural level and on the level of social norms. But when it comes to revelation and inspiration about this public excommunication case, active lds do not have much room for critical remarks when it comes to doubting church  leaders. My friends wonder why I bother with it all but they know I believe in the leaders but I don't think that they are perfect. However, if I would say to my friends that the leaders of the lds church are sexist,  racist, and patriarchal etc, my friends would be wondering why I bother at all. And they would have a point. Either the church is run by god or it is not. Every lds will eventually have to make a decision between the two based on testimony and their spiritual experiences.

[smac97]

Kate Kelly's mother (I think) is going public: http://www.blogher.com/my-daughter-was-excommunicated-asking-equality-women-our-church?from=pop

 

It ain't pretty:

On Monday, I sat in a state of quiet panic waiting for the news I feared most, dreading the ringing of my phone. And then it came: My daughter, Kate Kelly, was excommunicated from the Mormon church for “conduct contrary to the laws and order of the church” after publicly advocating for the ordination of Mormon women to the church’s priesthood. The life was sucked out of the room. I sat in stunned silence—speechless and immobile.

Yes, this is just days ago, though I know it may be hard to believe. After all, this is 2014, not the Middle Ages.

In 2014, women are still banned from holding the priesthood in the Mormon church and other churches around the globe.

This sounds like she fails to grasp the basic nature and character of the LDS Church.

In March 2013, my daughter started an organization called Ordain Women and opened a space for people to put up profiles and state their own reasons for their belief that women should be ordained. I was one of a handful of women who proudly posted my profile. Now, there are more than 400 profiles posted, and thousands of women and male allies who are openly asking in other forums for women to be allowed to hold the priesthood and be allowed to participate in the general leadership of the church. Who will be the next to be trashcanned by the church? Time will tell. I may be the next in line.

Well, when you public talk about the Church "trashcanning" you, you run the risk of such rhetoric becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.

My son put it this way: “They want to kick you and Kate out of the church because you love the church and want to do more for the church. Are they crazy?”

"They" being . . . the Church.

In the name of religious freedom, there are religions throughout the world which openly and proudly discriminate against women.

The Church's doctrines originate with God, not from people acting "in the name of religious freedom."

And too many of us, including myself, have tolerated and affirmed this practice with our silence.

This dichotomy plays out in the daily lives of Mormon women in hundreds of ways. Just a few examples illustrate this.

A Mormon woman gives birth to a son, and when that son turns 12, he will be ordained to the priesthood and will hold more power and authority in the church than she will ever have, no matter how faithful, dedicated or righteous she is.

At a Mormon history site, a woman’s young sons are called up out of the audience and those sons are told how ”special” and “valiant” they are because they will soon hold the priesthood. All the while the woman’s young daughters are sitting next to her looking at the ground.

A young woman is told by her male leader while serving a full-time mission for the Mormon church that she is the most outstanding missionary in the district and he wishes he could give her a leadership position, but she is only a woman.

I will no longer remain silent. I will continue to speak up for people, who through no fault of their own, were born female. The cost may be horrific – devastation, shunning and exclusion from the church I have loved and to which I dedicated my life – but the alternative is worse: to continue to silently speak the lie that women are not worthy.

Wow. A lot of anger and resentment here. And a lot of failing to grasp or rejecting the basics of the Restored Gospel.

Sad.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Calm]

Well, for me, I think the deeper issue is whether her leaders should be telling her or even had the right to tell her, to disassociate herself from the OW movement or to take down the website.

I've watched the OW movement since it's inception, and personally I can see nothing there that is damaging to the faith of any member.

have you read the first discussion? Edited June 25, 2014 by calmoriah

[ELF1024]

Wow. A lot of anger and resentment here. And a lot of failing to grasp or rejecting the basics of the Restored Gospel.

Sad.

Thanks,

-Smac

 

I think that's alot of what it boils down to, misunderstanding the doctrine, and jealousy caused by the misunderstanding.

 

It seems to be they miss something very very basic about the Priesthood. That being, it absolutely cannot be used selfishly. In and of itself, you cannot use it to do anything for yourself. You can't put your own hands on your own head and give yourself a blessing.

 

The entire focus on the Priesthood is outward, focused on others, assisting others, it's focus is service.

 

These poor sisters seem to think that it is some kind of crown, or power, when it is not. It seems to be a very basic misunderstanding.

 

In any case, if anyone here hasn't read the wonderful article up on LDS.net, Open Letter to Kate Kelly, Ordain Women, & Questioning Onlookers, I believe it hits the nail on the head.

Edited June 25, 2014 by ELF1024

[why me]

 

 

"I'm going to press and press and hold them accountable," she said. "I have nothing to lose, I have nothing to be ashamed of and I have everything to gain."

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

 

And this one sentence speaks volumes. 'I have everything to gain' shows just a little narcissism and self-.centered behavior. Of course it is all about her and her own gain. It is only natural that publicity can go to the head.

[mormonnewb]

Of course, active members of the church can constantly challenge the GAs about issues that they do not agree with. Active members can claim that the GAs are prejudice, sexist, old-fashioned, etc. Why not? However, if an active member is constantly questioning decisions by the church leaders and doubt that they are receiving revelation and inspiration from god and are victims of their cultural norms, well, I don't know....it seems that the church will have a problem because its own members do not believe the leaders. This doesn't send a good message to any investigators who are getting a church that has revelation by a living prophetf from the missionaries.

I think that we are all victims of society norms both on a cultural level and on the level of social norms. But when it comes to revelation and inspiration about this public excommunication case, active lds do not have much room for critical remarks when it comes to doubting church leaders. My friends wonder why I bother with it all but they know I believe in the leaders but I don't think that they are perfect. However, if I would say to my friends that the leaders of the lds church are sexist, racist, and patriarchal etc, my friends would be wondering why I bother at all. And they would have a point. Either the church is run by god or it is not. Every lds will eventually have to make a decision between the two based on testimony and their spiritual experiences.

I really don't get this idea that the Church must be run by God to have any value. We all acknowledge that our local leaders make mistakes. They are MEN. Yet, for most of us, the vast majority of our interaction with the Church is on the ward, stake and branch levels, which are lead by imperfect men. Should we stop attending sacrament meetings and the like because they aren't be run by God?

Why is imperfection acceptable among everyone but the 15? And by the way, where did they come from? That same group of imperfect (but sincere) local leadership. So when did the "infallibility switch" get pulled?

And if the keys of the priesthood come with such infallibility, then why don't they get passed down to the local level where they could do the most good?

[ERayR]

I really don't get this idea that the Church must be run by God to have any value. We all acknowledge that our local leaders make mistakes. They are MEN. Yet, for most of us, the vast majority of our interaction with the Church is on the ward, stake and branch levels, which are lead by imperfect men. Should we stop attending sacrament meetings and the like because they aren't be run by God?

Why is imperfection acceptable among everyone but the 15? And by the way, where did they come from? That same group of imperfect (but sincere) local leadership. So when did the "infallibility switch" get pulled?

And if the keys of the priesthood come with such infallibility, then why don't they get passed down to the local level where they could do the most good?

 

Your error is in thinking that just because leaders make mistakes the Church isn't run by God. 

[ELF1024]

So when did the "infallibility switch" get pulled?

 

I guess you've never been in a heated discussion about "the 1978 Priesthood Revelation and how it was all Brother Brigham's fault..." Infallible? When did we get the Pope?

 

 

And if the keys of the priesthood come with such infallibility, then why don't they get passed down to the local level where they could do the most good?

 

Uh... Bishop? Stake President? Isn't that examples of keys being delegated for the greater good?

[Calm]

So, in that sense KK is espousing a change to policy rather than doctrine.  Is that really an excommunicable offence?

It is not the questioning or espousing a change, but her methods in doing so that led to her excommunication according to the bishop.

[USU78]

Why is imperfection acceptable among everyone but the 15?

 

In what universe are KK's actions not actionable?

 

In any case, imperfect humans acting in concert as a priesthood council rarely make mistakes, though each of the 15 individually might make whoppers.

[Zakuska]

I'm not sure how you can draw a parallel between the person to whom the temple is dedicated (Christ) expelling people who were using the temple inappropriately and OW deciding to hold their protest on temple grounds after the church that Christ restored to this earth through Joseph Smith asked them not to.  Christ had every right to do what he did.  OW had none.

 

Big difference.

 

I agree Ksfisher. There is a Huge Difference.

 

Christ - Protested. (There is now Doubt)

Paul - Rioted and was Arrested.

Kate Kelly - Dared step toe on Temple Square, Sing a Song, and say a Prayer

 

Oh, the HORROR!  You'd think the world had coming to an end with all the hoopla all the unglued people on the internet are making about it.

 

PS. Many of the people in KKs group are faithful tithing payers of the LDS church.  They have every right to go to Temple square to sing and pray. I guess they were't praying about the right things is the problem.

 

Is his perception the reality or just his perception? 

 

 

I was talking to him just last night and was surprised when he expressed that. I'm sure its partially perception, but I'm also sure, that knowing him and the way he is, a burly brick layer Union Boss by trade and not very eloquent with words (kinda like me) people really do do it.

 

I know our Bishop last week shut down several people and corrected them. One Elder in particular, it will be instresting to see if he comes again next week.

 

 

In what universe are KK's actions not actionable?

 

In any case, imperfect humans acting in concert as a priesthood council rarely make mistakes, though each of the 15 individually might make whoppers.

 

 

Jewish Councils in Jesus time made some pretty huge whoopers, and they had 70 people on them.

 

It is not the questioning or espousing a change, but her methods in doing so that led to her excommunication according to the bishop.

 

Agreed.

Edited June 25, 2014 by Zakuska

[awyatt]

Straw Man Alert!

 

(Insert appropriate sound effect here.)

[Abulafia]

Calmoriah, yes, I have read the first discussion.

For me, OW has always been upfront about their aims and what they are advocating for. Ordain Women is a pretty clear title.

[Mystery Meat]

I really don't get this idea that the Church must be run by God to have any value. We all acknowledge that our local leaders make mistakes. They are MEN. Yet, for most of us, the vast majority of our interaction with the Church is on the ward, stake and branch levels, which are lead by imperfect men. Should we stop attending sacrament meetings and the like because they aren't be run by God?

Why is imperfection acceptable among everyone but the 15? And by the way, where did they come from? That same group of imperfect (but sincere) local leadership. So when did the "infallibility switch" get pulled?

And if the keys of the priesthood come with such infallibility, then why don't they get passed down to the local level where they could do the most good?

 

The Church must ABSOLUTELY be run by God to have any value, otherwise there is no point to the Church. Period.

[Thinking]

According to what I was taught, Emma's concerns about the tobacco habits of the men in the church led to Joseph asking the Lord about it. Some might even say she was complaining about having to clean up the mess. Now we have a woman with concerns about the priesthood. Some might even say she is complaining about not being able to be ordained.

[Abulafia]

It is not the questioning or espousing a change, but her methods in doing so that led to her excommunication according to the bishop.

With so deeply entrenched views about the role of patriarchy in the church, she is a brave woman. She's taken the bull by the horns with absolute confidence that she has God and right on her side.

I genuinely believe that she is trying to push for the church to be a healthier place for women. I do take Juliann's point about proceeding in such a way as to get the masses in.

In fairness to KK, she has tried to meet with leadership on a number of occasions as I understand it, and has been ignored. Until the brethren are receptive I think she is banging her head against a brick wall. Maybe they will pray about it, but I am not holding my breath.

[Scott Lloyd]

According to what I was taught, Emma's concerns about the tobacco habits of the men in the church led to Joseph asking the Lord about it. Some might even say she was complaining about having to clean up the mess. Now we have a woman with concerns about the priesthood. Some might even say she is complaining about not being able to be ordained.

Did Emma demand that Joseph produce a revelation from God on the matter and insist that "nothing less will suffice"?

Edited June 25, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[Mystery Meat]

I really don't get this idea that the Church must be run by God to have any value. We all acknowledge that our local leaders make mistakes. They are MEN. Yet, for most of us, the vast majority of our interaction with the Church is on the ward, stake and branch levels, which are lead by imperfect men. Should we stop attending sacrament meetings and the like because they aren't be run by God?

Why is imperfection acceptable among everyone but the 15? And by the way, where did they come from? That same group of imperfect (but sincere) local leadership. So when did the "infallibility switch" get pulled?

And if the keys of the priesthood come with such infallibility, then why don't they get passed down to the local level where they could do the most good?

 

This whole post misses the point and teachings of Mormonism by a mile. Being a member of the LDS Church because its members are decent people is so far below what the Church is for it is scary. Its a TERRIBLE reason to be a member in fact. There is only one good reason to be a member:

 

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints contains the fullness of the gospel of Jesus Christ AND the authority to teach people how to return to God's presence. That authority includes the ability to perform sacred ordinances. Without God directing the Work it is a man's work and we can have ZERO faith that the leaders, no matter how pure their intent or righteous their lives, really know what it takes for us to become like God. 

 

That doesn't take perfection. Nobody is arguing that they are perfect, so this is the classic example of a strawman. In fact, it seems to me you are trying to say that in order for the Church to be led by God the prophets and apostles have to be perfect and get it right all the time. In actuality, all the Lord needs is for them to get it right when He wants/needs them to get it right. It is not our job to petition, lobby, protest, march, agitate, vote, or form an advocacy group when we think they are getting something wrong. Ever. No exceptions. When it comes to Church leadership and administration, it is our job to trust that the Lord will make sure they get it right when it is imperative that they do. Period. That's it. Pretty simple. 

 

I am not sure there is a place for people who want to do otherwise, and like Kate Kelly will ultimately find themselves on the outside. The Lord doesn't need or want ark steadiers, he is perfectly capable of doing that himself. He wants humble followers. That humility is manifest by trusting not only HIM, but also HIS mortal, fallen, and perfectly fallible anointed. 

 

Doesn't matter how right you think you are.

Edited June 25, 2014 by lvjd66

[jwhitlock]

According to what I was taught, Emma's concerns about the tobacco habits of the men in the church led to Joseph asking the Lord about it. Some might even say she was complaining about having to clean up the mess. Now we have a woman with concerns about the priesthood. Some might even say she is complaining about not being able to be ordained.

 

Lots of people complain about lots of things. Some are valid, some are not. The children of Israel complained to Moses that they wanted to go back Egypt. That didn't turn out particularly well for them.

 

I really don't see any particular connection between the two examples you give.