Bazooka wrote:Excerpt from the letter Kate Kelly submitted to the disciplinary hearing as her defence.
I was in your ward for over three years and faithfully served in callings for that entire period. While we interacted frequently in passing, none of you know me well. I am saddened by the fact that you never took the time to ask me questions or get to know my heart while I was living in your ward. Despite the fact that I emailed you in March 2013, August 2013, October 2013 & again in April 2014 regarding my Ordain Women activities, you never bothered to respond or follow-up on my repeated invitation to engage in an open dialogue in person.
From the same letter, Kate confirms that she did have a meeting with her Stake President, following which she was placed on probation.
I want to communicate with perfect candor, as I have always done. As I made clear to President Wheatley when we met on May 5th, I will continue to lead Ordain Women, the group I founded. I will not take down the website ordainwomen.org. I will not stop speaking out publicly on the issue of gender inequality in the church. These things President Wheatley instructed me to do, I cannot do in good conscience. I cannot repent of telling the truth, speaking what is in my heart and asking questions that burn in my soul.
Equality wrote:So she says she emailed him four times. Did he produce his email responses to her emails? If he did that, it would show she was lying. That he didn't seems to support her contention that she emailed him but he did not timely respond.
I suspect that the bishop did not email back, as each writing would have to be very carefully vetted by church officials, knowing it could well become public. So I tend to believe that Ms Kelly sent the e-mail, but did not receive a reply.
For the bishop to have mentioned specific dates and meeting with named individuals, I suspect that such meeting did occur, but there was never 'open' discussion about the Ordain Women topics. I suspect that each meeting was to convey the warnings the bishop describes, and Ms Kelly was cut off when she might have raised substantive questions about the Ordain Women topics.
Tobin wrote:Yes. That is pretty much how I feel too. I really don't have a problem with female leaders in the LDS Church. My view is if that is what God wants to have happen, then do it. And I also don't buy Kate's comments. She should have realized this would have been the outcome.
I can understand Kate thinking (and wishing and hoping and praying) that the outcome would have been in her favor; even though most everybody else could see that it was a fait accompli.
That is because she is so close to the situation it makes it hard for her to see objectively.
Been there. Done that.
I can also understand Kate thinking that maybe, just maybe, the church would actually allow her into the Priesthood General Conference Session if she stood in line and asked pretty-please.
Once again, that is because she is so close to the situation.
Then, like I said in other threads, she was being naïve.
consiglieri wrote:But the fact she is so close to the situation also gives her access to facts relating to the process; in this case, facts relating to her meetings and discussions with her bishop and stake president in Virginia.
These historical facts which she (and only a very few others) have personal knowledge of are what I must take issue with.
I don't like what the church did. I don't like the way the church handled this.
But I also don't like Kate being disingenuous with me. (That is, if she was indeed disingenuous.)
The way I see it, Kate knew this wasn't about just her; but about the thousands of people who support her and her goals.
I am one of them.
I have a profile up at Ordain Women.
To me this is personal.
Kate Kelly owed it not just to the public; not just to the "cause of truth" (whatever that may be); not just to her sense of honor; to tell the truth.
Above all, she owed the truth to those thousands of admirers and supporters who have put serious skin in the game and stuck their necks out for her and her cause.
I still hold out hope she has not let us down in this regard.
I know it may sound like I am asking for a perfect messenger of a cause in which I believe.
I am not asking for perfection.
Just honesty.
All the Best!
--Consiglieri
I understand that. However, let me point out a few things. You and I both know the outcome and you have to admit that was going to be the only outcome here (unless God appeared and set things right). My issue with Kate is I don't think God told her to do this. Now I fully recognize the truth of the matter here. That the LDS Priesthood is a man-made Ecclesiastical authority only and has little to nothing to do with the "real" priesthood which is the power or authority of God. I would counsel Kate to seek that "real" priesthood instead (and you can only get it from God). And then use it to bless the lives of the people around her.
Now does that mean she should say that men alone should have this Ecclesiastical authority in the Church? Of course not. But I would simply and firmly state the truth of the situation and then let God deal with these men as he sees fit. And if they want to excommunicate me for it? Then so be it. I would still attend the LDS Church. Still firmly state the truth to those that ask and leave it at that.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
Despite the fact that I emailed you in March 2013, August 2013, October 2013 & again in April 2014 regarding my Ordain Women activities, you never bothered to respond or follow-up on my repeated invitation to engage in an open dialogue in person.
The Bishop wrote in the excommunication letter that the SP, himself (Bishop) and KK met in December 2013 and they urged her to stop what she was doing with Ordain Women. In March and April the SP reminds KK to stop (no mention that this was a meeting).
There seems to be only one meeting, which was not to have a dialogue re: OW but just to instruct KK to stop what she was doing. And the other communication was just to remind her of those previous instructions.
I'm going to have to give Kate Kelly the benefit of the doubt.
M.
I'd rather be a could-be if I cannot be an are; because a could-be is a maybe who - is reaching for a star. I'd rather be a has-been than a might-have-been, by far; for a might have-been has never been, but a has was once an are. - Milton Berle
She has the right to expect whatever the “F” she wants. Whether she was surprised at the outcome or not, and whether she expressed surprise doesn't matter. A 12-yr old boy has more administrative authority than a 60-yr old RS President. That is a problem that should be questioned openly without threats.
Can you imagine white males going through this kind of circus? Good god!
Oh for shame, how the mortals put the blame on us gods, for they say evils come from us, but it is they, rather, who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given... Zeus (1178 BC)
I was in your ward for over three years and faithfully served in callings for that entire period. While we interacted frequently in passing, none of you know me well. I am saddened by the fact that you never took the time to ask me questions or get to know my heart while I was living in your ward. Despite the fact that I emailed you in March 2013, August 2013, October 2013 & again in April 2014 regarding my Ordain Women activities, you never bothered to respond or follow-up on my repeated invitation to engage in an open dialogue in person!
Her gripe is that they never agreed to "engage in open dialogue."
The implication of her statement you quoted is that they never paid her any attention at all. She paints a portrait of her repeatedly trying to talk to them and their silence until after April 2014. I don't think this accurately reflects what was going on if they counseled her in December 2013 to stop her activities with Ordain Women. Is she wants to play a game of "they talked to me but it wasn't a 'dialogue'" then it appears to me she's playing word games, which I don't like.
Instead, she should have painted a clearer picture; something like "They talked to me in December, but rather than discussing the issues they just told me to stop Ordain Women with no attempt to address the historical and doctrinal reasons why I believe women should be ordained to the priesthood." If that's the way it happened, that's what she should have said rather than implying radio silence from the leaders until after April 2014.
Oh for shame, how the mortals put the blame on us gods, for they say evils come from us, but it is they, rather, who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given... Zeus (1178 BC)
Chalk it up to this pig-headed characteristic I have of wanting to get to the bottom of apparent discrepancies.
I am not saying it is a big deal.
I am not saying it justifies what the church did to Kate.
I am not saying it vitiates Kate's message.
And above all, I am not trying to victimize the victim here.
It's just that, when the victim and the alleged perpetrator give conflicting stories about what happened during the crime, I want to do the best I can to see first if there is a real conflict; and if so, to do my best to find out who is telling the truth.
Take care.
--Consiglieri
You prove yourself of the devil and anti-mormon every word you utter, because only the devil perverts facts to make their case.--ldsfaqs (6-24-13)
Gotto go with Zee on this one. Whether or not KK is accurately portraying her meetings with local leadership or misrepresenting it to attract greater negative attention to her own excommunication, the bottom line is the Church just excommunicated someone because she refused to shut up.
They are attempting to silence a dissident.
Any of us who disagree with the church are now one step closer to that kind of attention whether we want it or not.
Like Zee, that pisses me off.
For the first time in my life I have considered resignation.
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."
Maureen wrote: I'm going to have to give Kate Kelly the benefit of the doubt.
M.
I want to give her the benefit of the doubt, but it looks to me like she could have been much more clear about the way things happened. Someone as intelligent as she is knows whether her telling of the events was painting an accurate portrayal or not of the way things happened. If they met with her in December 2013 and told her to "stop, or else" then I don't think she should give the implication that they ignored her until she was notified of her disciplinary council. Instead, she should have said just what happened. "They told me to stop or else and I chose 'or else' because..." rather than "it came completely out of the blue and I was surprised I was being discipined."