Kate Kelly was excommunicated

[Ratbag]

Well, the inevitable happened. I wonder if she really thought out her position.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/8656 ... under.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/8656 ... ation.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Ratbag]

I think her position was very well calculated.

I agree. As I read over the letter from her bishop, I can see where she did this will malice aforethought. Not too bright in my not-so-humble opinion.

[boo]

What a tragedy both for her and the church. I don't agree with her but this typical bureaucratic ,authoritarian, reflex to mild dissent tells me that the COB has learned nothing since the Sept 6 in 1993. That ended poorly for the institution and the individuals and so will this I fear.

[BroJones]

She is asking people to STAY (with that I agree!)

I love the gospel and the courage of its people. Don’t leave. Stay, and make things better."

KSL:

SALT LAKE CITY — A verdict was given by a local leader in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Monday afternoon to excommunicate the founder of Ordain Women.

Ordain Women founder, Kate Kelly, learned about the decision through an email from Bishop Mark Harrison of the Vienna Virginia Ward of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, according to a press release from an Ordain Women spokeswoman.

Kelly was called to a disciplinary council Sunday, but she chose not to attend and was instead in Salt Lake City with between 300 and 350 people at a vigil held outside the LDS Church Office Building and at a nearby park.

She released a statement in regards to Monday's decision.

"The decision to force me outside my congregation and community is exceptionally painful," the statement read. "Today is a tragic day for my family and me as we process the many ways this will impact us, both in this life and in the eternities. I love the gospel and the courage of its people. Don’t leave. Stay, and make things better."

[BMC]

Makes me think of this song...



I guess there will be some singing this tonight...

In all of this, regardless of anyone's position, the missionary effort among women converts will be hurt in some fashion or another.

I wonder what the OW next move will be, I personally think they will grow in numbers because of the attention, and wouldn't be at all surprised if legal action is taken for discrimination based on gender as absurd as some might say this may be, I wouldn't be surprised.

I never knew Kate, I was in a different ward but was in the same Stake as her for a time a few years ago. Never knew of the OW movement until several weeks ago. There are a lot of heavy weights in that Stake, son of a now deceased Apostle and others who are directly related etc... also lots of attorneys too. My old Elders Quorum had at least 10 attorneys. Many work for non-profits in DC, do corporate law, International law etc... Many are progressives and very wealthy.

Alexandria VA, is not far from there and Crystal City is nicknamed as little Provo, as it is the fastest growing city in the USA for Mormons outside of Provo Utah. There are many liberal Mormons there as well.

[Ratbag]

She is asking people to STAY (with that I agree!)
Kelly was called to a disciplinary council Sunday, but she chose not to attend and was instead in Salt Lake City with between 300 and 350 people at a vigil held outside the LDS Church Office Building and at a nearby park.

She released a statement in regards to Monday's decision.

"The decision to force me outside my congregation and community is exceptionally painful," the statement read. "Today is a tragic day for my family and me as we process the many ways this will impact us, both in this life and in the eternities. I love the gospel and the courage of its people. Don’t leave. Stay, and make things better."

This is deceptive. She was given the opportunity to attend via Skype and refused. She is doing nothing more than trying to portray herself as "the victim" of men. That is unmitigated male bovine fecal matter! She was told that she could have her own beliefs in this regard, but was warned repeatedly to stop publicly spreading her beliefs. She refused. She has the free agency to chose what she wants to do with her life and what she wants to believe. She does not have the freedom to choose the consequences of those acts. It was her choice to be excommunicated.

[notjamesbond003.5]

I think it was Jack Bauer's fault :

Jack-Bauer-badass.jpg (58.9 KiB) Viewed 2717 times

njb

[Benjamin_LK]

She is asking people to STAY (with that I agree!)
Kelly was called to a disciplinary council Sunday, but she chose not to attend and was instead in Salt Lake City with between 300 and 350 people at a vigil held outside the LDS Church Office Building and at a nearby park.

She released a statement in regards to Monday's decision.

"The decision to force me outside my congregation and community is exceptionally painful," the statement read. "Today is a tragic day for my family and me as we process the many ways this will impact us, both in this life and in the eternities. I love the gospel and the courage of its people. Don’t leave. Stay, and make things better."

This is deceptive. She was given the opportunity to attend via Skype and refused. She is doing nothing more than trying to portray herself as "the victim" of men. That is unmitigated male bovine fecal matter! She was told that she could have her own beliefs in this regard, but was warned repeatedly to stop publicly spreading her beliefs. She refused. She has the free agency to chose what she wants to do with her life and what she wants to believe. She does not have the freedom to choose the consequences of those acts. It was her choice to be excommunicated.

She doesn't have any authority over policy for the church either. She does have agency to believe as she chooses. However, when she decides to act and push herself into the spotlight and pretend like her beliefs are those of the church as a whole, sorry but, she doesn't have a right to everyone agreeing with her. For all I care, she's being a petty narcissist.

[Benjamin_LK]

I think it was Jack Bauer's fault.

njb

But I thought James Bond was the better womanizer?

[notjamesbond003.5]

I think it was Jack Bauer's fault.

njb

But I thought James Bond was the better womanizer?

My ppl privately tried to work w her, but could get no movement.
We then sent Jack in
and
she
spiraled
down
from
there.

njb

[kathyn]

I think everything Kate Kelly did was calculated. She knew what would happen. She's a human rights lawyer, so I figure she believed she could force her opinion on the Church and she tried to do it by recruiting willful followers. That is truly apostasy. And it smacks of pride, rather than humility. I'm sorry, but we women in the Church have always had leadership roles and responsibilities. I, for one an grateful that we don't have to be bishops or stake presidents. I don't know what she feels has been denied her all these years. This was set up by Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ, not the Brethren. It's hard to "kick against the pricks". She absolutely knew what the outcome would be. She'd have to be blind not to know how this would end. And she's no dummy. So she knew what was at stake. If she really loved the Church as she proclaims, she would not have done this in the first place.

Someone who truly loves the Church would not use the Church for her own ambitions. And she certainly wouldn't want to be the cause of scorn for it.

[Ratbag]

In all of this, regardless of anyone's position, the missionary effort among women converts will be hurt in some fashion or another.

I wonder what the OW next move will be, I personally think they will grow in numbers because of the attention, and wouldn't be at all surprised if legal action is taken for discrimination based on gender as absurd as some might say this may be, I wouldn't be surprised.

I never knew Kate, I was in a different ward but was in the same Stake as her for a time a few years ago. Never knew of the OW movement until several weeks ago. There are a lot of heavy weights in that Stake, son of a now deceased Apostle and others who are directly related etc... also lots of attorneys too. My old Elders Quorum had at least 10 attorneys. Many work for non-profits in DC, do corporate law, International law etc... Many are progressives and very wealthy.

Alexandria VA, is not far from there and Crystal City is nicknamed as little Provo, as it is the fastest growing city in the USA for Mormons outside of Provo Utah. There are many liberal Mormons there as well.

I think these statements about “liberal Mormons” (an oxymoron) put it rather succinctly:

In my judgment, there is a vast difference between broad-mindedness and heresy, and I sometimes think that often well-disposed members of the Church do no inconsiderable harm…when they advocate a departure from some of the established rules, regulations and traditions of the Church, upon the principle of liberality of view and broad-minded-ness. It is one thing to be compassionate and sympathetic with him who sins; it is another thing to compromise with or to sin, in the least degree, or tolerate sin. A marked distinction should always be drawn between our ideals and the weak human beings who try to live them. (Elder Stephen L. Richards, CR, Oct 1922, Pg. 66)

A part of the propaganda is that there is no warrant for official interpretation of the doctrines and standards of the Church, that everyone may read and interpret for himself, and adopt only so much of the doctrine as he chooses, and that he may classify the revelations as essential or non-essential. These propagandists are either ignorant of or ignore the Lord's declaration that "no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation." (II Peter 1:20.)
They disparage orthodoxy as such and pride themselves on liberal thinking. Many of them maintain their loyalty to the Church, and some may honestly believe they are doing the Church a favor and a service in advocating their so-called broad-minded concepts. Unfortunately, some people within the Church subscribing to these views do not realize that they are falling into a trap themselves. They are giving aid and comfort to the foe; they are undermining their own testimonies and those of others. (Elder Stephen L. Richards, CR, Oct 1951, Pgs. 116-117)

There are those in the Church who speak of themselves as liberals who, as one of our former presidents has said, "read by the lamp of their own conceit." (Joseph F. Smith, Gospel Doctrine [Deseret Book Co., 19391, P-373.) One time I asked one of our Church educational leaders how he would define a liberal in the Church. He answered in one sentence: "A liberal in the Church is merely one who does not have a testimony."
Dr. John A. Widtsoe, former member of the Quorum of the Twelve and an eminent educator, made a statement relative to this word liberal as it applied to those in the Church.
This is what he said:
"The self-called liberal [in the Church] is usually one who has broken with the fundamental principles or guiding philosophy of the group to which he belongs.... He claims membership in an organization but does not believe in its basic concepts; and sets out to reform it by changing its foundations….
"It is folly to speak of a liberal religion, if that religion claims that it rests upon unchanging truth."
And then Dr. Widtsoe concludes his statement with this: "It is well to beware of people who go about proclaiming that they are or their churches are liberal. The probabilities are that the structure of their faith is built on sand and will not withstand the storms of truth." ("Evidences and Reconciliations," Improvement Era, vol. 44 [1941J, p. 609.) (Elder Harold B. Lee, CR April 1971, Pg. 91)

[Benjamin_LK]

I think it was Jack Bauer's fault.

njb

But I thought James Bond was the better womanizer?

My ppl privately tried to work w her, but could get no movement.
We then sent Jack in
and
she
spiraled
down
from
there.

njb

Don't worry, you really made me chuckle, thanks.

[Benjamin_LK]

In all of this, regardless of anyone's position, the missionary effort among women converts will be hurt in some fashion or another.

I wonder what the OW next move will be, I personally think they will grow in numbers because of the attention, and wouldn't be at all surprised if legal action is taken for discrimination based on gender as absurd as some might say this may be, I wouldn't be surprised.

I never knew Kate, I was in a different ward but was in the same Stake as her for a time a few years ago. Never knew of the OW movement until several weeks ago. There are a lot of heavy weights in that Stake, son of a now deceased Apostle and others who are directly related etc... also lots of attorneys too. My old Elders Quorum had at least 10 attorneys. Many work for non-profits in DC, do corporate law, International law etc... Many are progressives and very wealthy.

Alexandria VA, is not far from there and Crystal City is nicknamed as little Provo, as it is the fastest growing city in the USA for Mormons outside of Provo Utah. There are many liberal Mormons there as well.

I think these statements about “liberal Mormons” (an oxymoron) put it rather succinctly:

In my judgment, there is a vast difference between broad-mindedness and heresy, and I sometimes think that often well-disposed members of the Church do no inconsiderable harm…when they advocate a departure from some of the established rules, regulations and traditions of the Church, upon the principle of liberality of view and broad-minded-ness. It is one thing to be compassionate and sympathetic with him who sins; it is another thing to compromise with or to sin, in the least degree, or tolerate sin. A marked distinction should always be drawn between our ideals and the weak human beings who try to live them. (Elder Stephen L. Richards, CR, Oct 1922, Pg. 66)

A part of the propaganda is that there is no warrant for official interpretation of the doctrines and standards of the Church, that everyone may read and interpret for himself, and adopt only so much of the doctrine as he chooses, and that he may classify the revelations as essential or non-essential. These propagandists are either ignorant of or ignore the Lord's declaration that "no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation." (II Peter 1:20.)
They disparage orthodoxy as such and pride themselves on liberal thinking. Many of them maintain their loyalty to the Church, and some may honestly believe they are doing the Church a favor and a service in advocating their so-called broad-minded concepts. Unfortunately, some people within the Church subscribing to these views do not realize that they are falling into a trap themselves. They are giving aid and comfort to the foe; they are undermining their own testimonies and those of others. (Elder Stephen L. Richards, CR, Oct 1951, Pgs. 116-117)

There are those in the Church who speak of themselves as liberals who, as one of our former presidents has said, "read by the lamp of their own conceit." (Joseph F. Smith, Gospel Doctrine [Deseret Book Co., 19391, P-373.) One time I asked one of our Church educational leaders how he would define a liberal in the Church. He answered in one sentence: "A liberal in the Church is merely one who does not have a testimony."
Dr. John A. Widtsoe, former member of the Quorum of the Twelve and an eminent educator, made a statement relative to this word liberal as it applied to those in the Church.
This is what he said:
"The self-called liberal [in the Church] is usually one who has broken with the fundamental principles or guiding philosophy of the group to which he belongs.... He claims membership in an organization but does not believe in its basic concepts; and sets out to reform it by changing its foundations….
"It is folly to speak of a liberal religion, if that religion claims that it rests upon unchanging truth."
And then Dr. Widtsoe concludes his statement with this: "It is well to beware of people who go about proclaiming that they are or their churches are liberal. The probabilities are that the structure of their faith is built on sand and will not withstand the storms of truth." ("Evidences and Reconciliations," Improvement Era, vol. 44 [1941J, p. 609.) (Elder Harold B. Lee, CR April 1971, Pg. 91)

Most of what is identified as liberalism wouldn't qualify as liberalism in the classical sense. True, classical liberalism would be more live or let live regarding what some private organization does, and would respect the right of an organization to do what it deemed fit with its own membership. If you don't act as a team member to the group, they wouldn't be required to keep you on board, and you also wouldn't have to stay, but would have the full option to quit if you so please. I do have to give it to Widstoe, he recognized the modern liberalism for the fraudulent use of the name that it really was.

Liberal in the sense of politics is not neccessarily liberal in the sense that the Lord discusses it.

[Benjamin_LK]

Makes me think of this song...



I guess there will be some singing this tonight...

In all of this, regardless of anyone's position, the missionary effort among women converts will be hurt in some fashion or another.

I wonder what the OW next move will be, I personally think they will grow in numbers because of the attention, and wouldn't be at all surprised if legal action is taken for discrimination based on gender as absurd as some might say this may be, I wouldn't be surprised.

I never knew Kate, I was in a different ward but was in the same Stake as her for a time a few years ago. Never knew of the OW movement until several weeks ago. There are a lot of heavy weights in that Stake, son of a now deceased Apostle and others who are directly related etc... also lots of attorneys too. My old Elders Quorum had at least 10 attorneys. Many work for non-profits in DC, do corporate law, International law etc... Many are progressives and very wealthy.

Alexandria VA, is not far from there and Crystal City is nicknamed as little Provo, as it is the fastest growing city in the USA for Mormons outside of Provo Utah. There are many liberal Mormons there as well.

It always has been, but Kate has her 15 minutes, like the rest of them. Over time, and in a worldwide situation, it really isn't going to matter. Why should some dirt floor living poor people in the section of Brazil where my sister is serving a mission, where you would be asking Kate who? Should Kate Kelly really matter all that much?

[Ratbag]

I think everything Kate Kelly did was calculated. She knew what would happen. She's a human rights lawyer, so I figure she believed she could force her opinion on the Church and she tried to do it by recruiting willful followers. That is truly apostasy. And it smacks of pride, rather than humility. I'm sorry, but we women in the Church have always had leadership roles and responsibilities. I, for one an grateful that we don't have to be bishops or stake presidents. I don't know what she feels has been denied her all these years. This was set up by Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ, not the Brethren. It's hard to "kick against the pricks". She absolutely knew what the outcome would be. She'd have to be blind not to know how this would end. And she's no dummy. So she knew what was at stake. If she really loved the Church as she proclaims, she would not have done this in the first place.

Someone who truly loves the Church would not use the Church for her own ambitions. And she certainly wouldn't want to be the cause of scorn for it.

Here are some quotes from Brigham Young about lawyers. I don’t think he liked them. =))

“You may think my remarks are severe upon the lawyers here, but the most of them take a course which is highly censurable, and you may see grey headed men running after them, and asking, " Can you call me up as a witness, or put me on the jury? " -- in order that they may get a dollar or two. Would I go there for money?”

"To observe such conduct as many lawyers are guilty of, stirring up strife among peaceable men, is an outrage upon the feelings of every honest, law abiding man. To sit among them is like sitting in the depths of hell, for they are as corrupt as the bowels of hell, and their hearts are as black as the ace of spades."

"I am not very partial to…lawyers, I can see no use for them unless it is to raise grain or go to mechanical work."

"As for lawyers, if they will put their brains to work and learn how to raise potatoes, wheat, cattle, build factories, be merchants or tradesmen, it will be a great deal better for them than trying to take the property of others from them through litigation."

"You recollect the story of the lawyer and the two farmers. The farmers had quarreled about a cow, and they went to law, and the result was the farmers held the cow and the lawyer milked her. I never see law going on much without the lawyer getting the milk and the cream, while those who go to law hold the cow for him to milk. I know you think my esteem is not very high for lawyers. I will say it is not for their evil practices; but as men and gentlemen I have known many who never dabbled in dishonesty. I have marveled many times at the oath that is required of a lawyer with regard to his client; it gives him license to make white black, and black white."

"And to see our streets lined with lawyers as they are! Why they are as thick as grogshops used to be in California. What is the business of a lawyer? It is the case with too many to keep what they have got, and to gather around them wealth, to heap it up, but to do as little as possible for it; to give a little counsel here, and a little counsel there. What for? To keep their victims in bondage."

"I feel about them as Peter of Russia is said to have felt when he was in England. He saw and heard the lawyers pleading at a great trial there, and he was asked his opinion concerning them. He replied that he had two lawyers in his empire, and when he got home he intended to hang one of them. That is about the love I have for some lawyers who are always stirring up strife. Not but that lawyers are good in their place; but where is their place? I can not find it."

"How many lawyers are there who spend their time from morning till night in thinking and planning how they can get up a lawsuit against this or that man, and get his property into their possession? Men of this class are land sharks, and they are no better than highway robbers, for their practice is to deceive and take advantage of all they can."

"...almost every man, every Elder, or member that has undertaken to study or practice law was in a very short time on the high road to apostasy and destruction; and every member of this Church who has undertaken to practice law as a profession has gone neck-and-heels to the Devil.”

[Benjamin_LK]

I think everything Kate Kelly did was calculated. She knew what would happen. She's a human rights lawyer, so I figure she believed she could force her opinion on the Church and she tried to do it by recruiting willful followers. That is truly apostasy. And it smacks of pride, rather than humility. I'm sorry, but we women in the Church have always had leadership roles and responsibilities. I, for one an grateful that we don't have to be bishops or stake presidents. I don't know what she feels has been denied her all these years. This was set up by Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ, not the Brethren. It's hard to "kick against the pricks". She absolutely knew what the outcome would be. She'd have to be blind not to know how this would end. And she's no dummy. So she knew what was at stake. If she really loved the Church as she proclaims, she would not have done this in the first place.

Someone who truly loves the Church would not use the Church for her own ambitions. And she certainly wouldn't want to be the cause of scorn for it.

Here are some quotes from Brigham Young about lawyers. I don’t think he liked them. =))

“You may think my remarks are severe upon the lawyers here, but the most of them take a course which is highly censurable, and you may see grey headed men running after them, and asking, " Can you call me up as a witness, or put me on the jury? " -- in order that they may get a dollar or two. Would I go there for money?”

"To observe such conduct as many lawyers are guilty of, stirring up strife among peaceable men, is an outrage upon the feelings of every honest, law abiding man. To sit among them is like sitting in the depths of hell, for they are as corrupt as the bowels of hell, and their hearts are as black as the ace of spades."

"I am not very partial to…lawyers, I can see no use for them unless it is to raise grain or go to mechanical work."

"As for lawyers, if they will put their brains to work and learn how to raise potatoes, wheat, cattle, build factories, be merchants or tradesmen, it will be a great deal better for them than trying to take the property of others from them through litigation."

"You recollect the story of the lawyer and the two farmers. The farmers had quarreled about a cow, and they went to law, and the result was the farmers held the cow and the lawyer milked her. I never see law going on much without the lawyer getting the milk and the cream, while those who go to law hold the cow for him to milk. I know you think my esteem is not very high for lawyers. I will say it is not for their evil practices; but as men and gentlemen I have known many who never dabbled in dishonesty. I have marveled many times at the oath that is required of a lawyer with regard to his client; it gives him license to make white black, and black white."

"And to see our streets lined with lawyers as they are! Why they are as thick as grogshops used to be in California. What is the business of a lawyer? It is the case with too many to keep what they have got, and to gather around them wealth, to heap it up, but to do as little as possible for it; to give a little counsel here, and a little counsel there. What for? To keep their victims in bondage."

"I feel about them as Peter of Russia is said to have felt when he was in England. He saw and heard the lawyers pleading at a great trial there, and he was asked his opinion concerning them. He replied that he had two lawyers in his empire, and when he got home he intended to hang one of them. That is about the love I have for some lawyers who are always stirring up strife. Not but that lawyers are good in their place; but where is their place? I can not find it."

"How many lawyers are there who spend their time from morning till night in thinking and planning how they can get up a lawsuit against this or that man, and get his property into their possession? Men of this class are land sharks, and they are no better than highway robbers, for their practice is to deceive and take advantage of all they can."

"...almost every man, every Elder, or member that has undertaken to study or practice law was in a very short time on the high road to apostasy and destruction; and every member of this Church who has undertaken to practice law as a profession has gone neck-and-heels to the Devil.”

You know that's a good point, why not be a part-time farmer, mechanic, or some other job in addition to being a lawyer? Sounds like a nice experience to me, sounds like a better balance in how you earn a living too!

[Shay]

I think it was Jack Bauer's fault :

Jack-Bauer-badass.jpg

njb

Thanks for making me LOL!

[BMC]

In all of this, regardless of anyone's position, the missionary effort among women converts will be hurt in some fashion or another.

I wonder what the OW next move will be, I personally think they will grow in numbers because of the attention, and wouldn't be at all surprised if legal action is taken for discrimination based on gender as absurd as some might say this may be, I wouldn't be surprised.

I never knew Kate, I was in a different ward but was in the same Stake as her for a time a few years ago. Never knew of the OW movement until several weeks ago. There are a lot of heavy weights in that Stake, son of a now deceased Apostle and others who are directly related etc... also lots of attorneys too. My old Elders Quorum had at least 10 attorneys. Many work for non-profits in DC, do corporate law, International law etc... Many are progressives and very wealthy.

Alexandria VA, is not far from there and Crystal City is nicknamed as little Provo, as it is the fastest growing city in the USA for Mormons outside of Provo Utah. There are many liberal Mormons there as well.

I think these statements about “liberal Mormons” (an oxymoron) put it rather succinctly:

In my judgment, there is a vast difference between broad-mindedness and heresy, and I sometimes think that often well-disposed members of the Church do no inconsiderable harm…when they advocate a departure from some of the established rules, regulations and traditions of the Church, upon the principle of liberality of view and broad-minded-ness. It is one thing to be compassionate and sympathetic with him who sins; it is another thing to compromise with or to sin, in the least degree, or tolerate sin. A marked distinction should always be drawn between our ideals and the weak human beings who try to live them. (Elder Stephen L. Richards, CR, Oct 1922, Pg. 66)

A part of the propaganda is that there is no warrant for official interpretation of the doctrines and standards of the Church, that everyone may read and interpret for himself, and adopt only so much of the doctrine as he chooses, and that he may classify the revelations as essential or non-essential. These propagandists are either ignorant of or ignore the Lord's declaration that "no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation." (II Peter 1:20.)
They disparage orthodoxy as such and pride themselves on liberal thinking. Many of them maintain their loyalty to the Church, and some may honestly believe they are doing the Church a favor and a service in advocating their so-called broad-minded concepts. Unfortunately, some people within the Church subscribing to these views do not realize that they are falling into a trap themselves. They are giving aid and comfort to the foe; they are undermining their own testimonies and those of others. (Elder Stephen L. Richards, CR, Oct 1951, Pgs. 116-117)

There are those in the Church who speak of themselves as liberals who, as one of our former presidents has said, "read by the lamp of their own conceit." (Joseph F. Smith, Gospel Doctrine [Deseret Book Co., 19391, P-373.) One time I asked one of our Church educational leaders how he would define a liberal in the Church. He answered in one sentence: "A liberal in the Church is merely one who does not have a testimony."
Dr. John A. Widtsoe, former member of the Quorum of the Twelve and an eminent educator, made a statement relative to this word liberal as it applied to those in the Church.
This is what he said:
"The self-called liberal [in the Church] is usually one who has broken with the fundamental principles or guiding philosophy of the group to which he belongs.... He claims membership in an organization but does not believe in its basic concepts; and sets out to reform it by changing its foundations….
"It is folly to speak of a liberal religion, if that religion claims that it rests upon unchanging truth."
And then Dr. Widtsoe concludes his statement with this: "It is well to beware of people who go about proclaiming that they are or their churches are liberal. The probabilities are that the structure of their faith is built on sand and will not withstand the storms of truth." ("Evidences and Reconciliations," Improvement Era, vol. 44 [1941J, p. 609.) (Elder Harold B. Lee, CR April 1971, Pg. 91)

@ Benjamin_LK / Ratbag
I understand the classical terminology of liberalism, I think ETB said he would be a liberal if it were in its true sense of the word. However, I am not referring to the classical definition of liberalism but instead of the modern terminology. In my experience in Virginia, DC and Maryland many members are liberals. Support Obama, gay marriage etc... Even with progressive liberals they differ in ideology. One would think that Mormons and Liberals cannot co-exist because of the nature of the gospel and their politics, but it does. No need to look any further than Harry Reid and to declare they are without a testimony of the gospel is just not true in all cases.

[Benjamin_LK]

In all of this, regardless of anyone's position, the missionary effort among women converts will be hurt in some fashion or another.

I wonder what the OW next move will be, I personally think they will grow in numbers because of the attention, and wouldn't be at all surprised if legal action is taken for discrimination based on gender as absurd as some might say this may be, I wouldn't be surprised.

I never knew Kate, I was in a different ward but was in the same Stake as her for a time a few years ago. Never knew of the OW movement until several weeks ago. There are a lot of heavy weights in that Stake, son of a now deceased Apostle and others who are directly related etc... also lots of attorneys too. My old Elders Quorum had at least 10 attorneys. Many work for non-profits in DC, do corporate law, International law etc... Many are progressives and very wealthy.

Alexandria VA, is not far from there and Crystal City is nicknamed as little Provo, as it is the fastest growing city in the USA for Mormons outside of Provo Utah. There are many liberal Mormons there as well.

I think these statements about “liberal Mormons” (an oxymoron) put it rather succinctly:

In my judgment, there is a vast difference between broad-mindedness and heresy, and I sometimes think that often well-disposed members of the Church do no inconsiderable harm…when they advocate a departure from some of the established rules, regulations and traditions of the Church, upon the principle of liberality of view and broad-minded-ness. It is one thing to be compassionate and sympathetic with him who sins; it is another thing to compromise with or to sin, in the least degree, or tolerate sin. A marked distinction should always be drawn between our ideals and the weak human beings who try to live them. (Elder Stephen L. Richards, CR, Oct 1922, Pg. 66)

A part of the propaganda is that there is no warrant for official interpretation of the doctrines and standards of the Church, that everyone may read and interpret for himself, and adopt only so much of the doctrine as he chooses, and that he may classify the revelations as essential or non-essential. These propagandists are either ignorant of or ignore the Lord's declaration that "no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation." (II Peter 1:20.)
They disparage orthodoxy as such and pride themselves on liberal thinking. Many of them maintain their loyalty to the Church, and some may honestly believe they are doing the Church a favor and a service in advocating their so-called broad-minded concepts. Unfortunately, some people within the Church subscribing to these views do not realize that they are falling into a trap themselves. They are giving aid and comfort to the foe; they are undermining their own testimonies and those of others. (Elder Stephen L. Richards, CR, Oct 1951, Pgs. 116-117)

There are those in the Church who speak of themselves as liberals who, as one of our former presidents has said, "read by the lamp of their own conceit." (Joseph F. Smith, Gospel Doctrine [Deseret Book Co., 19391, P-373.) One time I asked one of our Church educational leaders how he would define a liberal in the Church. He answered in one sentence: "A liberal in the Church is merely one who does not have a testimony."
Dr. John A. Widtsoe, former member of the Quorum of the Twelve and an eminent educator, made a statement relative to this word liberal as it applied to those in the Church.
This is what he said:
"The self-called liberal [in the Church] is usually one who has broken with the fundamental principles or guiding philosophy of the group to which he belongs.... He claims membership in an organization but does not believe in its basic concepts; and sets out to reform it by changing its foundations….
"It is folly to speak of a liberal religion, if that religion claims that it rests upon unchanging truth."
And then Dr. Widtsoe concludes his statement with this: "It is well to beware of people who go about proclaiming that they are or their churches are liberal. The probabilities are that the structure of their faith is built on sand and will not withstand the storms of truth." ("Evidences and Reconciliations," Improvement Era, vol. 44 [1941J, p. 609.) (Elder Harold B. Lee, CR April 1971, Pg. 91)

@ Benjamin_LK / Ratbag
I understand the classical terminology of liberalism, I think ETB said he would be a liberal if it were in its true sense of the word. However, I am not referring to the classical definition of liberalism but instead of the modern terminology. In my experience in Virginia, DC and Maryland many members are liberals. Support Obama, gay marriage etc... Even with progressive liberals they differ in ideology. One would think that Mormons and Liberals cannot co-exist because of the nature of the gospel and their politics, but it does. No need to look any further than Harry Reid and to declare they are without a testimony of the gospel is just not true in all cases.

It does exist because the rules for the church is that unless someone creates a tremendous uproar, and calls and conspires with those outside of the church against the Church, there is nothing the church is supposed to do, per se, against some absurd beliefs. The same is true for creationists among the church membership, unless someone is trying to intimidate and harass church members and leadership, and calls upon some kind of outside forces to push their Creationist ways on the church, the church has no right in its own rules to excommunicate. Who does and who doesn't belong to the church is a matter to be sorted out with time. I am well aware of the diverse membership of the church, but unless said persons are being publicity whores and conspiring with enemies, or misrepresenting the rest of us as a whole, there's really nothing to be done here.

[BMC]

@ Benjamin_LK / Ratbag
I understand the classical terminology of liberalism, I think ETB said he would be a liberal if it were in its true sense of the word. However, I am not referring to the classical definition of liberalism but instead of the modern terminology. In my experience in Virginia, DC and Maryland many members are liberals. Support Obama, gay marriage etc... Even with progressive liberals they differ in ideology. One would think that Mormons and Liberals cannot co-exist because of the nature of the gospel and their politics, but it does. No need to look any further than Harry Reid and to declare they are without a testimony of the gospel is just not true in all cases.

It does exist because the rules for the church is that unless someone creates a tremendous uproar, and calls and conspires with those outside of the church against the Church, there is nothing the church is supposed to do, per se, against some absurd beliefs. The same is true for creationists among the church membership, unless someone is trying to intimidate and harass church members and leadership, and calls upon some kind of outside forces to push their Creationist ways on the church, the church has no right in its own rules to excommunicate. Who does and who doesn't belong to the church is a matter to be sorted out with time. I am well aware of the diverse membership of the church, but unless said persons are being publicity whores and conspiring with enemies, or misrepresenting the rest of us as a whole, there's really nothing to be done here.

I am not concerned by those who are loud or whose intentions may be obvious. Truth stands for itself, it needs no defense, it only needs us to get out of the way. I am concerned with those we don't see, hear or know about. They are the ones who matter, and I sincerely disagree with the portion I underlined.

D&C 123:

12 For there are many yet on the earth among all sects, parties, and denominations, who are blinded by the subtle craftiness of men, whereby they lie in wait to deceive, and who are only kept from the truth because they know not where to find it—

13 Therefore, that we should waste and wear out our lives in bringing to light all the hidden things of darkness, wherein we know them; and they are truly manifest from heaven—

14 These should then be attended to with great earnestness.

15 Let no man count them as small things; for there is much which lieth in futurity, pertaining to the saints[/u], which depends upon these things.

People like Kate Kelly, John Dehlin, Rock Waterman, Denver Snuffer, Brent Larsen, et al. They themselves do not matter, truth matters, you either agree with their perspectives or you do not, their beliefs are not hidden and available for all to discern for themselves, I do not lump in the names to mean they are all united, or together etc... they may share a similar standing from the Churches perspective. I mention their names to only identify those who recently have been in the public interest.

16 You know, brethren, that a very large ship (MANY PEOPLE) is benefited very much by a very small helm (ONE PERSON) in the time of a storm, by being kept workways with the wind and the waves.

17 Therefore, dearly beloved brethren, let us cheerfully do all things that lie in our power; and then may we stand still, with the utmost assurance, to see the salvation of God, and for his arm to be revealed.

It only takes one person to be brave enough to tell the truth for many people to benefit. It only takes one person to expose the subtle craftiness of men for many people to benefit, it only takes one person to bring to light the hidden things of darkness for many people to benefit.

As a side note, I am not sure when disciplinary councils became a private matter, in the early days of the church it was generally public, the actions of the courts (I think, and I could be wrong) were also sustained by the members? and the charges and decisions were often published in the news paper for all to read.

While some things are sacred, transparency in such matters - especially were past practice has always been to be public and transparent with disciplinary actions, i.e. the budget of the Church, should also remain public information.

Truth, in my mind should not be hidden.

[sevenator]

Her urging to others to "stay and make it better" are an obvious invitation to others to take the same stance she took, and continue with the types of actions that she took.

Actions have consequences. She knew where it was going and pursued it for the attention it would bring her, as well as the negative attention it would bring the Church. It would seem that she got what was after.

[Benjamin_LK]

@ Benjamin_LK / Ratbag
I understand the classical terminology of liberalism, I think ETB said he would be a liberal if it were in its true sense of the word. However, I am not referring to the classical definition of liberalism but instead of the modern terminology. In my experience in Virginia, DC and Maryland many members are liberals. Support Obama, gay marriage etc... Even with progressive liberals they differ in ideology. One would think that Mormons and Liberals cannot co-exist because of the nature of the gospel and their politics, but it does. No need to look any further than Harry Reid and to declare they are without a testimony of the gospel is just not true in all cases.

It does exist because the rules for the church is that unless someone creates a tremendous uproar, and calls and conspires with those outside of the church against the Church, there is nothing the church is supposed to do, per se, against some absurd beliefs. The same is true for creationists among the church membership, unless someone is trying to intimidate and harass church members and leadership, and calls upon some kind of outside forces to push their Creationist ways on the church, the church has no right in its own rules to excommunicate. Who does and who doesn't belong to the church is a matter to be sorted out with time. I am well aware of the diverse membership of the church, but unless said persons are being publicity whores and conspiring with enemies, or misrepresenting the rest of us as a whole, there's really nothing to be done here.

I am not concerned by those who are loud or whose intentions may be obvious. Truth stands for itself, it needs no defense, it only needs us to get out of the way. I am concerned with those we don't see, hear or know about. They are the ones who matter, and I sincerely disagree with the portion I underlined.

D&C 123:

12 For there are many yet on the earth among all sects, parties, and denominations, who are blinded by the subtle craftiness of men, whereby they lie in wait to deceive, and who are only kept from the truth because they know not where to find it—

13 Therefore, that we should waste and wear out our lives in bringing to light all the hidden things of darkness, wherein we know them; and they are truly manifest from heaven—

14 These should then be attended to with great earnestness.

15 Let no man count them as small things; for there is much which lieth in futurity, pertaining to the saints[/u], which depends upon these things.

People like Kate Kelly, John Dehlin, Rock Waterman, Denver Snuffer, Brent Larsen, et al. They themselves do not matter, truth matters, you either agree with their perspectives or you do not, their beliefs are not hidden and available for all to discern for themselves, I do not lump in the names to mean they are all united, or together etc... they may share a similar standing from the Churches perspective. I mention their names to only identify those who recently have been in the public interest.

16 You know, brethren, that a very large ship (MANY PEOPLE) is benefited very much by a very small helm (ONE PERSON) in the time of a storm, by being kept workways with the wind and the waves.

17 Therefore, dearly beloved brethren, let us cheerfully do all things that lie in our power; and then may we stand still, with the utmost assurance, to see the salvation of God, and for his arm to be revealed.

It only takes one person to be brave enough to tell the truth for many people to benefit. It only takes one person to expose the subtle craftiness of men for many people to benefit, it only takes one person to bring to light the hidden things of darkness for many people to benefit.

As a side note, I am not sure when disciplinary councils became a private matter, in the early days of the church it was generally public, the actions of the courts (I think, and I could be wrong) were also sustained by the members? and the charges and decisions were often published in the news paper for all to read.

While some things are sacred, transparency in such matters - especially were past practice has always been to be public and transparent with disciplinary actions, i.e. the budget of the Church, should also remain public information.

Truth, in my mind should not be hidden.

Disciplinary Councils stopped being publicized to the General in the 1970s, although if you, like Kelly wish to broadcast it, no one's going to stop you, and you, as the broadcaster, have made the information fair game for both the world at large and the general church membership. Nowadays, the bishopric, and ministering priesthood leaders within the ward are made aware and expected to carry proper discretion regarding excommunicated members who still attend. With church membership in the millions, this is a sensible thing to do. Given all the places where the membership is just a small fraction of the overall population, such as Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, this is a sensible thing to do. It's not the business of the town who got excommunicated or disfellowshipped from the church. It's only the business of church leaders to understand how matters should be properly handled given a member's status of discipline.

[creator]

People like Kate Kelly, John Dehlin, Rock Waterman, Denver Snuffer, Brent Larsen, et al. They themselves do not matter, truth matters...

People like Kate Kelly and John Dehlin (New Order Mormons) are promoting things that are contrary to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and so I think it's understandable that they would be excommunicated. However when it comes to the "Old Order Mormons" like Brent Larsen and Denver Snuffer it's not so clear. That bishop's letter regarding why Kate Kelly was excommunicated is very clear, but it was not made very clear why Snuffer was exed and Brent seems to have been excommunicated primarily because he believes that Denver Snuffer is a prophet (excommunicated for believing there can be a prophet outside of the Church heirarchy!!! :ymsick: sorry Samuel the Lamanite )

[shadow]

People like Kate Kelly, John Dehlin, Rock Waterman, Denver Snuffer, Brent Larsen, et al. They themselves do not matter, truth matters...

People like Kate Kelly and John Dehlin (New Order Mormons) are promoting things that are contrary to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and so I think it's understandable that they would be excommunicated. However when it comes to the "Old Order Mormons" like Brent Larsen and Denver Snuffer it's not so clear. That bishop's letter regarding why Kate Kelly was excommunicated is very clear, but it was not made very clear why Snuffer was exed and Brent seems to have been excommunicated primarily because he believes that Denver Snuffer is a prophet (excommunicated for believing there can be a prophet outside of the Church heirarchy!!! :ymsick: sorry Samuel the Lamanite )

We don't really know who Sam the Lamanite was or where he came from.
That said, Snuffer isn't a prophet because he never prophesied of anything. He simply teaches his version of the gospel and church history, an incorrect version. He's just a guy with an interpretation who has garnished a following. He's more of a leader than a prophet. They teach contrary to what the actual Prophets teach.