- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
The story of Kate Kelly’s excommunication made lots of national news outlets: http://abcnews.go.com/US/mormon-church-%20…%20d=24264440 ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://abcnews.go.com/US/mormon-church-%20…%20d=24264440 http://fox13now.com/2014/06/22/vigil-su%20…%20y-council/ ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://fox13now.com/2014/06/22/vigil-su%20…%20y-council/ http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mor%20…%20ed-n138746 ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mor%20…%20ed-n138746 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/24/us/Ka%20…%20under.html ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/24/us/Ka%20…%20under.html Plus lots of local news…
Many of my nonLDS friends and acquaintances have been following this. I received an invitation to come to someone’s Episcopalian Church. I’m really somewhat surprised, not by the excommunication, but by the reactions I read here. There is no doubt that this constitutes negative PR for the Church but I hear this criticism levied as though this were a PR decision. It isn’t. This decision was made without any consideration for the public relations aspect and the Church will just have to deal with whatever publicity comes its’ way. If the Church is what it claims to be then negative PR isn’t going to sink it. I’m also very surprised at how many people are willing to pass judgement. I’ve heard lots of Mormons insist that Kate doesn’t belong in the Church, that she should have been excommunicated long ago, that she should go start her own Church. And this from people who have never even met the woman. I’ve heard an equal number who have taken it upon themselves to judge and concluded that Kate Kelly has done nothing wrong and they condemn the Church for all sorts of things. I’ve heard the terms “boundary maintenance”, “cleaning house”, and “suppression of critical thinking”.
None of us is in a position to know enough to pass judgement, and even if we felt we had all the facts, none of us has the
authorityto pass judgement. Mark Harrison is her Bishop and the responsibility is his. I pray he got it right, and if he didn’t, I pray that God protects and comforts those he may have wounded. Though I don’t have all the facts and I have no authority to pass judgement, here are the judgements I choose to make:
Kate Kelly is sincere in her belief that women lack equality in the Church, that ordination has been unfairly denied them, and that this must change.
Whatever unnamed General Authority approached her Bishop (Mark Harrison) and pushed for a disciplinary council did so thinking he was doing the right thing (probably, in his view, protecting the Church).
Mark Harrison (remember this is my own judgement based on zero authority and insufficient information) acquiesced to the council out of respect for the authority of the one who asked him but insisted that the judgement of the council would be determined by the Spirit through revelation. The excommunication was as much a surprise to him as it was to everyone else.
I have heard criticism of Thomas S Monson for not resolving the entire issue. “Since he’s the prophet he could easily settle the whole matter once and for all. Just give us a revelation Yes or No.” Pres Monson doesn’t have the power to dictate to God what revelations He must hand down and when. Also, there are roughly 4000 disciplinary counsels per month. Though this one is particularly high profile, Pres. Monson can’t allow himself to become personally involved in them.
(still more of my own judgements)
Kate Kelly is absolutely correct that women lack equality. I think that the Church agrees with her as evidenced by the tiny incremental changes that we’ve seen over the past year. What Kate didn’t understand is that campaigning for change is a secular model and we don’t follow that model. For those activities she was excommunicated.
Who needs anti mormon rhetoric. The church is it’s own worst enemy. Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
afterall: The Anglican evensong is a must. I haven’t been to an Episcopal service per se, but if they do evensong like their English counterparts, it’s definitely better than ward choir. I thought I would share what I believe about he excommunication of Kate Kelly. One thing I have gained from my experience at StayLDS is a sense of necessity in determining what I really think about issues the church places in front of me. It has helped me find peace enough to be able to stay — there is peace in deciding what you really believe and then adapting to it. Feel free to read the Abstract since the detail I wrote originally is longer than some people might read.
AbstractThe Church was within its rights to hold a disciplinary council for Kate. Church members don’t have the same rights in the church as citizens do in American society. The church’s perogative to deal with its membership as it sees fit (within he bounds of the law) is a feature of all organizations in a free society.
However, trying Kate in her former Ward and moving to swift excommunication lacked mercy and regard for Kate, the individual. I believe the local leaders didn’t exhibit the kind of patience and longsuffering that continued meetings and formal probation might have achieved. Also, in excommunicating Kate so quickly, the church may
nothave preserved the long-term purity of its doctrine, which was the stated purpose of the disciplinary council. The leaders who decided to excommunicate may have created a public figure who is now the face of Mormon Feminism in our time — a person who now has nothing to lose in furthering the cause of OW. The leaders who excommunicated may have also confused recent attempts to portray the church as a kinder, gentler, inclusive church because they imposed heavy discipline so quickly. The timing of Kate’s council and threats of discipline to John Dehlin also raise questions about whether these events are truly locally driven as the church PR department has indicated. And this has the potential to reinforce the church’s image as an authoritarian institution that uses command and control to manage its membership. hawkgrrrl wrote:afterall: The Anglican evensong is a must. I haven’t been to an Episcopal service per se, but if they do evensong like their English counterparts, it’s definitely better than ward choir.
I have been to Episcopal services, we have relatives who are Episcopal. If you like the Catholic form of worship you will like the Episcopal service. And they do great with the traditional holidays!
SGoodman wrote:
I have heard criticism of Thomas S Monson for not resolving the entire issue. “Since he’s the prophet he could easily settle the whole matter once and for all. Just give us a revelation Yes or No.” Pres Monson doesn’t have the power to dictate to God what revelations He must hand down and when. Also, there are roughly 4000 disciplinary counsels per month. Though this one is particularly high profile, Pres. Monson can’t allow himself to become personally involved in them.
I agree, but I’m curious where you got the figure of 4000 councils per month. Do you have a reference? I know in a church of 15 million there are likely a significant number. There are just over 3000 stakes in the church, 4000 per month is more than one per stake per month or about 1 in every 5 wards per month. If the 4000 figure is accurate, my stake is not meeting its quota by a long shot.SGoodman wrote:Pres Monson doesn’t have the power to dictate to God what revelations He must hand down and when.
First off, I agree.
Second:
Luke 18:1-8 wrote:
And he spake a parable unto them to this end, that men ought always to pray, and not to faint;Saying, There was in a city a judge, which feared not God, neither regarded man:
And there was a widow in that city; and she came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adversary.
And he would not for a while: but afterward he said within himself, Though I fear not God, nor regard man;
Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me.
And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust judge saith.
And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them?
I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?
Who is to say that god hasn’t inspired the OW group to bring about his purposes? Sure, it’s not a conventional channel as recognized by the church… but the church exists because of operating outside conventional channels. Perhaps the church needed a widow to continually come and weary its leaders in order to bring about gods purposes. Perhaps their demonstrations were evidence of faith on the earth.
I’m not saying that’s what’s going on, but I do offer it up as a possibility.
DarkJedi wrote:I agree, but I’m curious where you got the figure of 4000 councils per month. Do you have a reference? I know in a church of 15 million there are likely a significant number. There are just over 3000 stakes in the church, 4000 per month is more than one per stake per month or about 1 in every 5 wards per month. If the 4000 figure is accurate, my stake is not meeting its quota by a long shot.
I have no official source for these numbers. I extrapolated from the number of counsels I see. Disciplinary counsels aren’t limited to High Counsel meetings resulting in excommunication. They also occur at the Ward level and can result in a variety of findings including no finding at all. If your Stake ends up holding a disciplinary Counsel less frequently than once a month, the Stake next door to you is likely much higher. In any case, my numbers represent only my own SWAG.
nibbler wrote:Who is to say that god hasn’t inspired the OW group to bring about his purposes? Sure, it’s not a conventional channel as recognized by the church… but the church exists because of operating outside conventional channels. Perhaps the church needed a widow to continually come and weary its leaders in order to bring about gods purposes. Perhaps their demonstrations were evidence of faith on the earth.
I’m not saying that’s what’s going on, but I do offer it up as a possibility.
Personally, I considered that as a possibility, but I rejected it after looking at the behavior of the opposing sides. The worst that can be said of the Church is that their demeanor can be stuffy and overbearing. On the other hand, the folks at OW have consistently demonstrated that they are willing to sacrifice anything, including Temple Recommends and Church membership, their own and others. Also, the Church has interests in dealing with these issues privately but their is no upside for the Church in continuing to respect the privacy of those already excommunicated. That part is done simply because it’s right. Both sides have been accused of dishonesty but I can only find evidence for dishonesty on one side. I have no doubt that ‘The Church’ approached various Bishops about the Disciplinary Counsels and they publicly announced that such counsels are handled at a local level. Those two statements aren’t irreconcilable. On the other hand Kate Kelly claimed to be taken completely by surprise at receiving notice of her hearing but we have record of her being warned and admonished many times over the course of a year exactly what actions and behaviors would result in a hearing.
I watched a movie recently called “A Time to Kill” about a father murdering the men who abused his daughter and it made me try to place myself in his shoes. If I felt compelled to do a thing that I know carries a punishment I would have to decide to accept the punishment before I was willing to do the thing. ‘The man needed killing so I killed him. I plead guilty, your Honor.’
SGoodman wrote:DarkJedi wrote:I agree, but I’m curious where you got the figure of 4000 councils per month. Do you have a reference? I know in a church of 15 million there are likely a significant number. There are just over 3000 stakes in the church, 4000 per month is more than one per stake per month or about 1 in every 5 wards per month. If the 4000 figure is accurate, my stake is not meeting its quota by a long shot.
I have no official source for these numbers. I extrapolated from the number of counsels I see. Disciplinary counsels aren’t limited to High Counsel meetings resulting in excommunication. They also occur at the Ward level and can result in a variety of findings including no finding at all. If your Stake ends up holding a disciplinary Counsel less frequently than once a month, the Stake next door to you is likely much higher. In any case, my numbers represent only my own SWAG.
I’m quite aware of how disciplinary councils work and have sat on several over the years at both levels. And, I’m (interestingly enough) pretty connected in the stake and wards – I really can’t say all that I know or why (well, I can, I just don’t feel comfortable doing so). Our stake/wards/branches (8 wards/branches) does not hold anywhere near one a month, or even one every other month, and it has actually been a couple years since a stake level one has been held. Seriously I doubt our neighboring stakes, mostly similar to us, hold that many either. Based on my observation I think that 4000 per month is a huge overestimate. Perhaps you live in an area that does way more than its share (probably due to overzealous leaders and leadership roulette). I’m sure that church headquarters knows how many there are (because there is a report sent on each one), but that’s a number we will never see.
The actual excommunication letter is posted on the OW site. It does appear that the local leaders did meet with her a few times before threatening discipline. I also believe the reason they didn’t announce their decision immediately (as I have seen happen at every disciplinary council I’ve been involved in), was possibly because they wanted to explain/validate the decision, and their letter to the SP and maybe Area Presidency.
I still would have rather seen a more progressive approach to disciplining her, rather than moving directly from informal probation to excommunication. In light of all the press, and the need to appear far less stuffy and proud, I think this would have looked much better on the church. It might have also impressed Katy with the gravity of what she was doing in the eyes of the church. It might have also elevated the church as a more merciful organization than many of us believe it to be.
To Nibbler’s comment regarding Luke 18:1-8. The scripture implies that sometimes the Lord changes his mind to get the persistent people’s agenda off the table….
Given how committed the church can be to ignoring public pressure, I think most attempts at swift change (like demonstrations and active, recruiting movements) are likely to fail. Further, if in response to public pressure groups the church came out with a sudden revelation that women get the priesthood, it would validate every non-profit group that uses the demonstration/recruitment methods to effect change. You would see similar groups spring up for intellectuals, proponents of same sex marriage, or other groups who want certain changes. This would be unacceptable to the church.
You have to give the church a way out. A way out that preserves the claims of prophetic guidance, of “never leading the church astray” and of being above the world — and which does not appear to be flip flopping or giving uninspired leadership that simply goes with the prevailing social thought of the time. In a way, change efforts need to appeal to and preserve the ego of the church.
I think the blogging that happens here and on other sites provides a soft way of gradually encouraging change. There is not formal demonstration or agitation, but there is evidence to the church of those aspects that cause faith crises. The church is an onlooker in the microcosm of faith and commitment crises in these situations. When the leaders see the numbers decline in key areas, and see trends from a wide variety of people who are trying to stay active, but have church stumbling blocks in their way, they likely look at sites like StayLDS to see what is the cause. This can effect inward change to which the church is committed.
Then, unattached to any movement’s demonstration, or any provocation, they can gradually make change, preserve the church ego, while addressing the concerns of members. We’ve seen this lead to several changes
1. Apologies over past mistakes of past leaders by current apostles.
2. Statements there is room for all (a start, anyway).
3. Elevating Ward Council over PEC.
4. Female leaders on the stand at conferences.
5. Articles repudiating past racism that we know former prophets held as doctrine.
6. Statements the church is not a moving service.
The best thing for change in the church of any kind, I believe, is
a) keep on blogging
b) be patient
c) give the church a way out of the corners in which it has boxed itself due to tradition and claims of “never leading the church astray”.
sgoodman, I am smiling as I type this, but don’t extrapolate facts from personal experience into world-wide claims without being completely upfront about how you arrived at your numbers. First, frankly, I believe you are WAY off in your numbers and, second, and most importantly, it’s really bad internet etiquette. SGoodman wrote:…I have no doubt that ‘The Church’ approached various Bishops about the Disciplinary Counsels and they publicly announced that such counsels are handled at a local level. Those two statements aren’t irreconcilable. .’
No. Epic fail.
This is my edited response. It is two words longer than the first one.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.