The June 1

[Maximus]

Of course not necessarily unfair but obviously it would be more likely to be fair if both genders are represented, especially if a woman is being judged and sentenced.

You can't envision yourself in a similar situation having to appear before three or four middle-aged women who will decide your eternal fate. And if you wondered why men can't be part of the team that judges you that's considered faithless and just lack of spirit? Like I said, oh brother...

At least get the consequence of the action right. no one is "deciding" her eternal fate. nor is anyone attempting to.

[wuapinmon]

She's been excommunicated -- a damn shame.

These church courts really should have some female representation on them, especially for women but obviously for both women and men.

I had a really difficult time working for and being subordinate to female residents who were my superiors when I was a medical student and resident. I just felt like I didn't have much in common with them and always got awesome evaluations from any male superior and fair to poor evaluations from any female. Gave me a little taste of what it must be like to be judged by all opposite gender people.

I hated working for women in my minimum-wage service jobs. My male bosses were always more fair and rewarded me with better raises than their female counterparts (at least that was my perception at the time). I have had the opposite feeling in academia--my female colleagues and superiors are great to work with and for. Most of that is me probably growing up and maturing, but it also might have to do with the class of people involved in my field. A sense of social justice is pretty common among humanities professors.

[Portland Ute]

Well, there has now been "agitation for that" and the apparent answer is, "Don't agitate or ask us to pray about it or we will reply through our P.R. department and have our local leaders excommunicate you."

No comments from the General Authorities regarding the question at hand. No revelations (at least no public admission of any revelations).

Just shut it down.

Disappointing although not unexpected.

[Topper]

it seems it must depend on if you actually believe what the church you are a member of teaches in terms of the spirit. does she think them being men means they have less chance of being guided by the spirit in their decision? she has sustained them as leaders after all.

One can only believe in accordance with one's experience with the Spirit. I believe leadership overstates their power to interpret what the Spirit is saying.

Men will make judgments in accordance with their upbringing, training and biases. It explains how Brigham Young mistakenly took away the priesthood privileges from certain races. BY was a 19th century man with 19th century biases. He believed and taught, by virtue of his position of authority, if he wanted it, he could order women to have a blue ribbon in their hair.

So men gather together with a preconceived notion, will feel good about those biases being confirmed and can say "they were led by the Spirit." In terms of logical fallacies, they are stating, you must believe us by virtue of the authority which we claim to hold. It is still possible that they have some authority from God and misuse or misunderstand it. Of course, if they have no authority because God does not empower men, that is another argument.

It is quite possible and likely that God does not intervene much or even do anything other than let us struggle.

[ERCougar]

Maybe you just intended to make a passing reference and all this analysis is unnecessary.

yes. unnecessary.

I actually respect the church for making a real decision here. There is (almost) no doubt in my mind that future generations will see this as a mistake, but they at least are owning it.

[Blueintheface]

Disappointing but not unexpected. I think when the church does change its stance many members (certainly not the Church itself) will point to her as a pioneer. Too bad that by that time she will have long since moved into the bitter Ex-mo crowd.

[Topper]

Well, there has now been "agitation for that" and the apparent answer is, "Don't agitate or ask us to pray about it or we will reply through our P.R. department and have our local leaders excommunicate you."

No comments from the General Authorities regarding the question at hand. No revelations (at least no public admission of any revelations).

Just shut it down.

Disappointing although not unexpected.

Kelly is sad about it, but the result should not be startling. If a person privately believes or bemoans something, that would not cause problems for the leadership. Doing so publicly while seeking others, is the institution's definition of apostasy. It is not necessarily fair, but it is the manner in which the institution elects to operate. It is a manner in which you can carefully control membership and its beliefs.

[ERCougar]

Today's version of withering church opposition: "don't leave. Stay and make it better" (Kate Kelly, 6/23/14)

It is truly the last days. We are all under assault!

[wally]

Now what happens if Dehlin doesn't get exed? Would that drive a wedge between John and Kate? Will there be any chance for Kate plus 8?

[Blueintheface]

Today's version of withering church opposition: "don't leave. Stay and make it better" (Kate Kelly, 6/23/14)

It is truly the last days. We are all under assault!

Good for her. I mean that sincerely. I suspect that feeling will change in the weeks and months to come.

[wuapinmon]

That really sucks. I need to consider whether or not I can still claim to sustain the leadership and be worthy of a recommend. I don't think I can, but I will have to spend some time considering what I feel and the ramifications of that decision.

[Pheidippides]

Good for her. I mean that sincerely. I suspect that feeling will change in the weeks and months to come.

I hope not. She's not like me. She believes, or so I'm convinced. I hope she is still believing in 20 years and is vindicated when women are ordained.

The church has now created a public martyr. May they now reap the consequences.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Not surprised in the least. I also don't think she really cares about being able to take the sacrament as much as she cares about her name in the paper. She'll be just fine in that regard.

If you ever end up in a similar situation, I hope people don't judge you this harshly.

[Commando]

Disappointing but not unexpected. I think when the church does change its stance many members (certainly not the Church itself) will point to her as a pioneer. Too bad that by that time she will have long since moved into the bitter Ex-mo crowd.

Well... I know that excommunication is only appropriate in a couple of different scenarios: one being when the Church needs to disassociate itself from somebody and the other being when a person needs to have a fresh start in the church through thorough contrition and repentance. This is why they don't bother with folks like SU who no longer believe in the Church and present neither a threat to the Church nor a candidate for repentance.

I believe this one falls under the first group. Clearly she was never going to let this go no matter what explanation she got from Church leaders and loves to make a stink about it, loves to go to the press, etc. She likes everything about the Church except its basic structure, so she is hoping they'll reboot it for her? She's not quitting until they receive the revelation that suits her? Wow- she is barking up the wrong tree. The Community of Christ sounds more her speed, to be honest.

[Commando]

If you ever end up in a similar situation, I hope people don't judge you this harshly.

Be honest- no, you don't.