Kate's reaction to the news

http://ordainwomen.org/excommunication/

Interesting that they are doing it in her "old ward."

"Hey, now that she is gone we can Ex her!"

She has done absolutely nothing wrong, and doesn't need the label of "excommunicated" hanging around her neck.

Coward move. But how can her old ward do it that way? Doesn't her new bishop have "jurisdiction"? Her old bishop should have to be the one to travel to Utah to "give evidence." This is so disgusting!

She should become Episcopalian. Happiness and more simple theology all around.....

I'm not religious at all, but I still want that for my mom bcsus she's someone who needs a church.

Catholic light, all the ceremony, non of the guilt.

I think she recently moved to Kenya or Nigeria, or was planning to. Maybe there is no ward there.

So was this her husband posting here, or are others on her board getting hanged too?
http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1287880,1288043#msg-1288043

My wife is someone else on the leadership board of OW.

Wow, so put up and shut up or we'll punish you? Wow, just wow.

I think though, this will be a victory for the exmos. If and when they ex her, it will really piss off A LOT of the Ordain Women people. I think there will be a lot of people that will reconsider their membership in the one true church.

It is really trashy that her old bishop is doing this. Where did she move to? Maybe her records haven't moved yet and that is why the old bishop is doing this?

You ant hod a calling in ward you don't live in, but we can sure as hell excommunicate you for a ward you don't live in. Like ever other rule in Mormonism...completely arbitrary, full of bullshit, nonsensical, and un Christlike.

As mentioned above, she was going to work in Kenya. I think about now.

The only thing she's done "wrong" is question. This is a witchhunt.

Kate knows its all bullshit. One look at her statement about the case let's you know that.

She's running it up the mormon church's rump because she knows its a fraud. She's fighting on the inside.

She should get her records moved to her new ward before they can have the meeting. As long as she keeps moving they would never have authority long enough to ex her.

""excommunicated" hanging around her neck."
EXCOMMUNICATED IS A BADGE TO PROUD OF. It is like admitting to having a high IQ.

absolutely !!!! us high IQ's are good people!!!

I had three family members excommunicated as teenagers, for doing nothing wrong other than being teenagers. My sister should have been in psychiatric care, not being excommunicated and slut shamed by an old man who didn't have any training, and was nothing more than a pharmacist in regular life.

The TSCC may not have any authority, but they can still ruin people's lives.

In this case it is something to be proud of. She has made a difference by speaking out. The signs are small - prayer in conference, pictures, women on the stand. But OW has started something.

If they ex her in such a weak, cowardly way - while in the middle of a move - it says a lot to anyone watching about who in this scenario is showing sincerity and integrity.

Go Kate!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/11/2014 07:43PM by vh65.

Shouldn't excommunication from the Klan (LDS) be considered a badge of honor these days? I mean really.

I don't know about badge of honor but you do get a 10% raise

They don't have to worry about her having one of those pesky recording devices at the court to end up broadcasting it on Mormon Stories or Mormon Expression!

This is what happens when women do what they know is considered apostasy in the LDS Church. She is no dummy. She is playing this for all it's worth as she knows she can get others to leave over their indignation!
Interestingly, she is doing just what the LDS Church says will happen "in the last days" so she is fulfilling their prophecy! :-)

I am of the opinion that she did all of this knowing full well what she is doing (she's a lawyer!) and knew the result. She continued to push and push until the Brethren had enough.

It was a forgone conclusion when she started organizing against the core doctrines of the LDS Church - aka apostasy! That's a big no no, and if the women and men don't know that --- they do now!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/11/2014 07:20PM by SusieQ#1.

With this particular issue - equality of the sexes - nothing short of "organizing against the core doctrines" will get significant attention. In my mind, Kate Kelley is akin to all the strong women across the globe who have had enough of patriarchal privilege and patriarchal arrogance and have chosen to 'stand for something'....equality and justice!

braindead Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> With this particular issue - equality of the sexes
> - nothing short of "organizing against the core
> doctrines" will get significant attention. In my
> mind, Kate Kelley is akin to all the strong women
> across the globe who have had enough of
> patriarchal privilege and patriarchal arrogance
> and have chosen to 'stand for
> something'....equality and justice!


The LDS Church has core doctrines in their belief system concerning the roles of men and women in their Plan of Salvation, Eternal Life and attaining the Celestial Kingdom. If women don't understand them, or don't like them, then they have a couple of choices: live with it, learn to deal with it, or leave. Women who understand and live those doctrines have no quarrel with what they believe the Lord has chosen for his "only true" church.

This is not a democracy in the LDS Church. The roles are separate, and very clear in the doctrine in many ways.

Remember: the women wear the SAME Holy Garment of the Melchizedek Priesthood as the men with the same markings and symbols and covenants in the temples concerning their eternal lives.
Women only officiate or do ordinances for other women in the temples, otherwise they are all done by men.

It is understood in LDS teachings that this is how the Lord organized HIS church for the latter days, which is to prepare for His return.

Strong, believing women know their role and what their place is.

You're doing a lot of preaching Suzie. About how women need to act and what the church is all about.

Black men couldn't hold the priesthood. Now they can. Did Black Suzie run around telling the black men in 1977 that they needed to accept their role?

thingsithink Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You're doing a lot of preaching Suzie. About how
> women need to act and what the church is all
> about.
>
> Black men couldn't hold the priesthood. Now they
> can. Did Black Suzie run around telling the black
> men in 1977 that they needed to accept their role?


I am trying my best to state the position of the LDS Church in their teachings and core doctrine as it's published and how it is practiced and how I have experienced it. Which, I would hope, would explain how they take the positions they do.

These are not emotional issues with me.

And NO, members do not accept their role, either male or female much of the time. But they teach that they are to pray to understand what Heavenly Fathers wants for them "in these last days" as they are members of the tribe of Ephraim and Menesseh who are, in their view, given the responsibility to prepare for the second coming of Christ... (that's part of it,)...

I agree with you, Q. I appreciate that you set it out so squarely. It goes to show that when you try to live your life as a character in a fiction novel, preparing for that great day when all of reality converges with your fantasy--like Jesus comes back and declares you, as a Mormon, really are a member of the correct tribe, and really are to prepare for the second coming (some pretty big if's), you can really run up against reality as it is, before that great, hypothetical (and extremely unlikely) convergence takes place!

These agitators want to re-write the novel as characters of the novel. Because the men in control of the story really are nothing but ordinary men with rather base self-interests, the character-agitators do know that since the actual convergence really is never going to take place, the story needs little teaser-plots thrown in to keep the characters playing their roles. The roles can't get too awfully difficult--asked to abandon your LGBT children, asked to have too many children, asked to force the distance between real-life roles and fiction-character gender roles--or the characters abandon the play-acting. So long as it's all fun and games, like community theater, the characters will don their costumes and play their roles. The agitators, trying to wrest control from the old men, may have gone too far this time. But as Dehlin's pointed out himself, TSSC does change; but first it intimidates its critics with sound and fury, then it quietly adopts the demanded changes, but at its own pace, without fanfare so it can pretend it never changed, and with no apologies to whomever it snarled at in the process. It's a corrupt organization.

MCR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ahh... amen! I'm with you on most of it! :-)

Don't mess with the story line!

Suzie, I was a Gospel Doctrine teacher my whole adult life, starting as an 18 year old in a BYU singles ward and for the next twenty years. I literally studied my way out of the TSCC. I know what the doctrine is, and how it has changed over the years. You don't need to lecture anyone on it. The issue is very real to many women. There is compelling evidence that JS did give women the priesthood. Michael Quinn addresses this issue in some detail in his historical writings, noting that there is a distinction between priesthood power and priesthood office. For nearly 100 years after JS death women were performing priesthood blessings and healings. Why not now?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/12/2014 01:49PM by braindead.

braindead Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Suzie, I was a Gospel Doctrine teacher my whole
> adult life, starting as an 18 year old in a BYU
> singles ward and for the next twenty years. I
> literally studied my way out of the TSCC. I know
> what the doctrine is, and how it has changed over
> the years. You don't need to lecture anyone on it.
> The issue is very real to many women. There is
> compelling evidence that JS did give women the
> priesthood. Michael Quinn addresses this issue in
> some detail in his historical writings, noting
> that there is a distinction between priesthood
> power and priesthood office. For nearly 100 years
> after JS death women were performing priesthood
> blessings and healings. Why not now?

I will point out, what I think is a tiny flaw, in your comments.:-)

The LDS Church is built on Modern Day Revelation.
They follow the current living prophet. Not the old dead ones. Dead prophets, even JS JR is not in charge of this despinsation in their view of how it works.

Yes JS Jr started the whole thing, but there are many ways to make changes, mostly in policy, or how the "gospel" is lived, (not in the core doctrine of the Plan of Salvation - in fact they even clarified part of it and put out an announcement; Family A Proclamation to the World.)

So, regardless of how things were done in the past, the current living prophet speaks for the whole church, and only him.

NOTE:
Women are ordained to do temple ceremonies for women, specifically the washing and anointing part.
Also, remember that both women and men wear the same Garment of the Holy Melchizedek Priesthood.

Also, there is no need or reason for women to be ordained (to do ordinances, for instance for the living and dead) as it is not necessary for their salvation.

Also, remember D&C 132: The New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage is plurality of wives. It is the same covenant that is practiced continually in every temple. That is temple marriage. Plurality of wives has never stopped. Just illegal to practice it with current living wives. But it does happen when a man is divorced and marries another woman... that's just temple stuff! :-)

No Suzieq#1 there is another option, try to bring change from within...

True. Or more likely, try to reduce the influence of the heirarchy from within, even without bringing changes in policy or doctrine.

Lots of non-TBM Mormons have chosen that approach.

bignevermo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No Suzieq#1 there is another option, try to bring
> change from within...


I'll post my understanding of this situation. Some policy changes can be changed "from within" but not the core doctrine of the eternal family and D&C 132 - and the announcement: Proclamation to the World:

https://www.lds.org/topics/family-proclamation?lang=eng

I maintain that core doctrine ( difficult to define at times) or the fullness of the gospel, or more specifically: the Plan of Salvation won't change, but how it's lived, or policies, for instance, can and do change. Those are more about how the church functions while sticking with the core doctrine.

This is how the LDS Church explains their core doctrine for eternal life.
https://www.lds.org/topics/plan-of-salvation/our-eternal-life?lang=eng

Mormon "core doctrine" is ever changing. The "Plan of Salvation" is changing, ie, "Eternal Life" no longer means becoming Gods. The doctrine of temple marriage/plurality of wives is also changing... remember Hinckley's "I don't know that we teach that." statement? If Eternal Life no longer means becoming Gods then there is no point in plural marriage to populate the worlds of said Gods. It is a core doctrine that is currently being revised to fit more comfortably into main stream Christianity.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/12/2014 02:42PM by braindead.

braindead Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mormon "core doctrine" is ever changing. The
> "Plan of Salvation" is changing, ie, "Eternal
> Life" no longer means becoming Gods. The doctrine
> of temple marriage/plurality of wives is also
> changing... remember Hinckley's "I don't know that
> we teach that." statement? If Eternal Life no
> longer means becoming Gods then there is no point
> in plural marriage to populate the worlds of said
> Gods. It is a core doctrine that is currently
> being revised to fit more comfortably into main
> stream Christianity.

Check this out. I don't think much has changed. The Gospel Principles Manual... it's taught in Sunday School, right? Especially to the new members.

https://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-principles/chapter-47-exaltation?lang=eng

Blessings of Exaltation

2. They will become gods (see D&C 132:20–23).

Susie - Do you not realize that what is taught in Sunday school manuals is not to necessarily be construed as "doctrine"?



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 06/12/2014 03:02PM by braindead.

braindead Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Susie - Do you not realize that what is taught in
> Sunday school manuals is not to necessarily be
> construed as "doctrine"?


I consider the D&C doctrine, and I think the LDS true believers do also. What I quoted is from the D&C.

God doesn't change (for real Christians) and until you bulldoze every ocultic temple and throw out everything other than the bible it doesn't matter. Pre existance, Prophets, necro dunking, becoming god, manditory tithes, magic under wear,DNA BoA, BoM and that's just scratching the surface.

In our court system one can ask for a "change in venue". Send such a request and appeal if x'ed.

rhgc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In our court system one can ask for a "change in
> venue". Send such a request and appeal if x'ed.


This is the LDS Disciplinary Council System. Your records are generally where you lived, until they are transferred to your new address. If you are on assignments, in school, etc. your records in the LDS Church stay in your "home" Ward. This a geographical system. (It's like Wards in Chicago, for instance for the Democratic Party)

I think she may have moved rather recently and not had her records changed.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/11/2014 07:47PM by SusieQ#1.

I am in that stake and it is full of some crazy ass Mormon nazi sh*t. I've posted letters from the cray cray Steak Prezident before. He really is a f*ckin loon.

"I feel like being invited to a council of this sort is akin to being invited to my own funeral. "



So true !

I read that her former bishop is holding the records and not allowing them to be transfered.

There are no "records" to hold. Paper records disappeared long ago. Everybody's info is kept in a centralized database (probably Salt Lake). Each local clerk has limited access to those data file member records assigned to their ward.

The clerks in Salt Lake have final control of member records. They are the server. Local folks, the clients, have a downloaded copy, and have limited information and ability to request changes. HQ can do whatever they want.

For that matter, a local clerk in some other ward can request member information be transferred to their ward. There can be subsequent Tug-of-Wars of member data between ward computers until somebody higher up tells them to stop. But just ones and zeroes move -- no paper moves.

I think if they are going to try her in abstention then maybe a group of folks all get together and show up and to hold a vigil at the ward house while they hold their kangaroo court.

Of course the main apologist shows up to defend the cult...

Giant glaring point made by other posters:
Changes WERE MADE because of this movement. They made several concessions.
But then decided to make an example of her.

THEY MADE CHANGES BECAUSE OF HER. It is hypocritical to say she cannot effect changes within TSCC because SHE ALREADY DID.

The did her a favor......Now Kate write a book and go on the talk show circuit.....If she didn't know it was a CULT then she isnt as smart as she seems .