Kate Kelly Verdict Is In...

[Robert F. Smith]

Certainly for the orthodox position which won out. Not sure about the Jewish Christian communities who's voice appears to have been lost!

Eric Werner and others have found the voice still there, if in muted and disguised form (Hellenized Christians and Hellenistic scholars no longer recognized the Jewish background):

 

Barker, Margaret, “The Temple Roots of the Liturgy,” at http://www.marquette.edu/maqom/roots , as part of theme 14 of the Marquette University (Milwaukee) Seminar on the “Jewish Roots of Christian Mysticism” (March 2002 -      ).  Also online at http://www.margaretbarker.com/Papers/TempleRootsofChristianLiturgy.pdf .

Gavin, F., The Jewish Antecedents of the Christian Sacraments (London: SPCK, 1928/ reprint, N.Y.: KTAV, 1969).

Oesterley, William O. E., The Jewish Background to the Christian Liturgy (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1925/ reprint Gloucester, Mass.: P. Smith, 1965).

Oesterly, William O. E., ed., Judaism and Christianity, vol. I, The Age of Transition (Sheldon Press, 1937).

Saldarini, Anthony J., "Rabbinic Literature and the NT," in D. N. Freedman, ed., Anchor Bible Dictionary, 6 vols. (N.Y.: Doubleday, 1992), V:602-604. 

Werner, Eric, The Sacred Bridge: Liturgical Parallels in Synagogue and Early Church (N.Y.: Columbia Univ./London: D. Dobson, 1959/1963/Schocken, 1970/KTAV, 1984).

 

I love these comments of Anthony J. Saldarini, "What Price the Uniqueness of Jesus?" Bible Review, 15/3 (June 1999):17, subheading/teaser: "To wrench Jesus out of his Jewish world destroys Jesus and destroys Christianity."

 

"A Christian Jesus is a parochial, self-serving myth and an Aryan Jesus a perverse one.  But why then have Christians so persistently thought of Jesus as a Christian and resisted admitting the obvious, that Jesus was a Jew?  Answer: the pervasive problem of uniqueness."

 

". . . many Christian scholars, . . seek to make Jesus dissimilar from the Judaism of his day and from the Greco-Roman world in which it was set."

 

[Ferdinand] "Baur argued successfully that early Christianity had originated historically within Judaism . . . ."  His enduring, basic point was "the Jewish matrix of Christianity" . . . .

 

"A Jesus who taught like a Jew and an early Christian community that looked like a Jewish sect troubled many 19th-century German Lutheran scholars, who preferred to envision a Jesus who taught a new and unique doctrine that overthrew the established tradition."

 

"To wrench Jesus out of his Jewish world destroys Jesus and destroys Christianity, the religion that grew out of his teachings.  Even Jesus' most familiar role as Christ is a Jewish role.  If Christians leave the concrete realities of Jesus' life and of the history of Israel in favor of a mythic, universal, spiritual Jesus and an otherworldly kingdom of God, they deny their origins in Israel, their history, and the God who has loved and protected Israel and the church.  They cease to interpret the actual Jesus sent by God and remake him in their own image and likeness."

Edited July 4, 2014 by Robert F. Smith

[Abulafia]

Checking links now. Thankyou.

Edited to add...wow...she makes a lot of jumps and leaps on the flimsiest of evidence...hmmm

Edited July 3, 2014 by Abulafia

[Abulafia]

Robert, I should add that I was writing specifically of James the brother of Jesus. He and the other family members.

Reading some of the current debate on Paul, he was also far more Jewish than he is often given credit for.

By Jewish I mean those rituals and practices that could arguably be seen as core. Circumcision, the law, the festivals, the dietary laws, the temple, the sabbath etc

I appreciate that for the time period in question it is a complex issue.

[Abulafia]

Middle English apostasie, from Late Latin apostasia, from Greek, literally, revolt, from aphistasthai to revolt.Ms Kelly's organisation is revolting. (You may take that however you like.) 

I don't think we're going to see a "witch hunt." For a start, I don't think very many of the OW people are actual Church members who attend often enough to be known to their local leaders. 

FWIW, I agree with you; that crowd should be tossed out.However, these matters are handled locally (despite the speculations of the conspiracy theorists) and since they ended up with egg all over their spotty faces, it's probably more of a punishment to let them stew in their own apostate juices.Regards,Pahoran

Well, in terms of the dictionary definition rather than the etymology of the word it appears to include a renunciation of the faith. But whatever, as I said the church leadership gets to define apostasy any way they want.

On your second point, I disagree on both counts.

There are many active faithful women that are a part of OW, though I am sure not all. I won't add my profile because I am inactive and no longer a believer in many (but not all) of the truth claims. I know there are many women who won't add their profile for the same reason.

There is already a witch hunt going on. Many are being called in by local leaders because of their sympathy with the OW movement or because they posted something supportive of them,or gay rights, on facebook or twitter for instance. They are being 'ratted on' by well meaning members no doubt. I'm watching it from the sidelines as it happens.

As has been argued elsewhere the leaders tend not to go for inactives, which covers your last point and is the only understandable reason why Tom, Chris, and Steve are not being excommunicated.

[Calm]

A witch hunt is a pejorative in part because no one believes there are real witches. Thus those found are and always will be innocent or deluded. What is the alleged fantasy being hunted now?

Edited July 3, 2014 by calmoriah

[Abulafia]

A witch hunt is a pejorative in part because no one believes there are real witches. Thus those found are and always will be innocent or deluded. What is the alleged fantasy being hunted now?

Agreed, and sexist also. It's a term that has been used often in on line discussions.

Is there a better word? I'm up for suggestions and will amend my post.

[Abulafia]

I have an extremely articulate and intelligent friend who supports the aims of OW. She is being hounded by her local leadership. It's really, really worrying.

[Sleeper Cell]

Well, in terms of the dictionary definition rather than the etymology of the word it appears to include a renunciation of the faith. But whatever, as I said the church leadership gets to define apostasy any way they want.

On your second point, I disagree on both counts.

There are many active faithful women that are a part of OW, though I am sure not all. I won't add my profile because I am inactive and no longer a believer in many (but not all) of the truth claims. I know there are many women who won't add their profile for the same reason.

There is already a witch hunt going on. Many are being called in by local leaders because of their sympathy with the OW movement or because they posted something supportive of them,or gay rights, on facebook or twitter for instance. They are being 'ratted on' by well meaning members no doubt. I'm watching it from the sidelines as it happens.

 

 

“Ratted on” impugns the motives of the reporting party.  A “well meaning member“ is acting out of genuine concern, rather than a desire to get someone in trouble. For that matter, how can anyone be said to have “ratted  out” someone who has already "gone public” by posting something online.  Reporting private conversations to the bishop is, of course, a different matter.

 

BTW, what would you suggest that a local leader should do when one member “rats out” another?  

Edited July 3, 2014 by Sleeper Cell

[stemelbow]

“Ratted on” impugns the motives of the reporting party.  A “well meaning member“ is acting out of genuine concern, rather than a desire to get someone in trouble. For that matter, how can anyone be said to have “ratted  out” someone who has already "gone public” by posting something online.  Reporting private conversations to the bishop is, of course, a different matter.

 

BTW, what would you suggest that a local leader should do when one member “rats out” another?

Depends on what is being ratted. If the ratting out is essentially saying he/she support OW, I'd say ignore it. If the ratting out is saying he/she is a murderer, I think it'd be wise to look into it.

[Abulafia]

Sleeper Cell, how one defines a private conversation is somewhat of a grey area in terms of online postings.

It is happening though, and it is happening a lot to good members whose allegiance and faith in the church is being called into question because they support equal rights whether that be for women or for SSA individuals.

[awyatt]

I have an extremely articulate and intelligent friend who supports the aims of OW. She is being hounded by her local leadership. It's really, really worrying.

 

In such a scenario, I'm curious what constitutes "hounding."

 

-Allen

[Sleeper Cell]

Sleeper Cell, how one defines a private conversation is somewhat of a grey area in terms of online postings.

It is happening though, and it is happening a lot to good members whose allegiance and faith in the church is being called into question because they support equal rights whether that be for women or for SSA individuals.

 

Actually, it is not such a grey area.  Ten years ago, our city attorney advised all of us (members of the public merely opining on city issues, as well as elected and appointed city officials) to never put something online that we wouldn’t want to see posted on a billboard.  One might argue that one has a reasonable  expectation of privacy for one’s    e-mail communications with another individual.  But for a profile posted on an “open-to- the-public” advocacy website?  

 

BTW,  what about the good members of the church whose commitment to “equal rights” is being questioned, merely for an honest disagreement over just whether something is really a “right?”   

[Abulafia]

Awyatt - Being asked to disassociate herself from OW and its aims. Having her partner approached and telling him that she needs to disassociate herself from OW, with the threat of church sanctioned punishment if she does not comply.

She's almost ready to throw in the towel. You may think that's a good thing? I don't.

Edited July 3, 2014 by Abulafia

[Abulafia]

Sleeper Cell, what about a closed fb group?

[USU78]

 Having her partner approached and telling him that she needs to disassociate herself from OW, with the threat of church sanctioned punishment if she does not comply.

 

Business partner?

 

Living in same ward partner?

 

Living in same house partner?

[Abulafia]

Business partner?

Living in same ward partner?

Living in same house partner?

Sorry, husband. Temple married. Edited July 3, 2014 by Abulafia

[Sleeper Cell]

Depends on what is being ratted. If the ratting out is essentially saying he/she support OW, I'd say ignore it. If the ratting out is saying he/she is a murderer, I think it'd be wise to look into it.

On the other hand, perhaps had KK discussed her activities with her bishop from the beginning  she would have better understood the boundary line between dissent and apostasy. In that sense, those who didn’t “rat her out” early on didn’t do her any favors.  If, heaven forbid, I were a bishop, I would want to hear any concerns a ward member might have about the church.  If it came to my attention that a ward member was an “OW sympathizer” I would certainly want to talk to her/him about it. Mostly to listen, as it wouldn’t matter so much what OW means to me, but what OW means to that member.

[stemelbow]

On the other hand, perhaps had KK discussed her activities with her bishop from the beginning  she would have better understood the boundary line between dissent and apostasy. In that sense, those who didn’t “rat her out” early on didn’t do her any favors.  If, heaven forbid, I were a bishop, I would want to hear any concerns a ward member might have about the church.  If it came to my attention that a ward member was an “OW sympathizer” I would certainly want to talk to her/him about it. Mostly to listen, as it wouldn’t matter so much what OW means to me, but what OW means to that member.

I think Kate's position is she was open and honest with her bishop but he was disinterested in hearing from her. There was a point that her stake president felt the need to talk to her and her bishop sat in, or something, though.

I'm sure her bishop tried his best. I don't think Kate was exed for apostasy though. So she didn't have to know the line between dissent and apostasy.

[Calm]

Closed Facebook page....I would suggest that would depend on the size and if there is posted a request for confidentiality. Once a group gets past a certain size it seems to me that one should lose expectation of privacy. If you were with that many people at one time in real life, talking on a mic so all could hear, at what number does the sense of being intimate and private get lost?

"for a profile posted on an “open-to- the-public” advocacy website? "

Such profiles are meant to be noticed by the public. That is what they are posted for. In those cases, there should be no expectation of confidentiality anymore than if you posted your name and picture to a full page newspaper promo.

I belong to a few closed email lists (can't read unless a member). For one there is no vetting procedure. I would expect no privacy or confidentiality on that one, even though its purpose is to share some pretty intimate experiences in our lives (deals with health issues, research, how to cope, emotional support). On another list there is a vetting process with a limited number of participants that agree to confidentiality and the expectation is there. Still I write knowing there is a possibility it will be shared because that happens.

If you know it will be problematic if information gets out....especially if it would hurt your loved ones, then it is simple wisdom in my view not to share that information unless necessary. I remember a poster on another board talking about how fat his daughter was and I suggested he edit it just in case though I thought it unlikely. His daughter did show up out of the blue, unfortunately that was not their worst issue in that relationship but it definitely didn't help.

Edited July 3, 2014 by calmoriah

[Calm]

I. I don't think Kate was exed for apostasy though.

What was she exed for then?

[stemelbow]

What was she exed for then?

"conduct contrary to the laws and order of the Church".

Is that apostasy? I guess it could fit in with apostasy but maybe not.

[Rob Osborn]

The whole problem with the OW movement is that it is questioning the church authority and flying in the face thereof to say they do not know what they are doing.  I have my own issues with certain areas of church doctrine and even have posted many of them on my own blog. I have never once been asked about my feelings regarding my views by any church official. I honestly feel that my ideas of heaven and salvation are correct and in time our doctrine will change. The difference is however that I do not picket in front of the church headquarters demanding a change. Nor am I rallying supporters to enforce my position. Neither am I going against counsel given to not teach it contrary to what has been revealed to this point.

 

Women do receive the priesthood powers in the temple- both man and women are endowed and blessed from on high with priesthood powers that will enable them to become both priests and priestesses/ kings and queens in heaven. The sealing ceremony also reinforces to them both that they each will receive the powers of heaven and reign with power in eternity if they are faithful to their priesthood covenants they make and receive. That is all the information we have at this point.

[ERayR]

I think Kate's position is she was open and honest with her bishop but he was disinterested in hearing from her. There was a point that her stake president felt the need to talk to her and her bishop sat in, or something, though.

I'm sure her bishop tried his best. I don't think Kate was exed for apostasy though. So she didn't have to know the line between dissent and apostasy.

 

And this is based on what evidence?

[ERayR]

"conduct contrary to the laws and order of the Church".

Is that apostasy? I guess it could fit in with apostasy but maybe not.

 

Yup that would be one description of apostasy.

[Scott Lloyd]

Awyatt - Being asked to disassociate herself from OW and its aims. Having her partner approached and telling him that she needs to disassociate herself from OW, with the threat of church sanctioned punishment if she does not comply.

She's almost ready to throw in the towel. You may think that's a good thing? I don't.

If my wife were in jeopardy of losing her membership in the Church, I would want to know about it and would claim that right.

And before anyone starts with me on this, if the situation were reversed, I would say my wife would have every right to know if my membership were in jeopardy, whether or not I was disposed to tell her.

The reality is that in the Church of Jesus Christ, neither husband nor wife lives in a vacuum when it comes to ecclesiastical worthiness.

By "ready to throw in the towel," if you mean she's weighing her ideology against her eternal blessings and is seriously considering which is the more precious to her, I'd say that's arguably a good thing.