Dehlin and Kate Kelly Face Possible Excommunication - Page 3 - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

ChinoCoug · 06-16-2014, 07:41 PM

Fair enough.

BTW, we've had group discussions wherein many OW members participated, including a co-founder. They completely destroyed every traditionalist argument. They've been sharpening their swords for a long time.

I still think Kate Kelly is a #$%^ for calling Fiona Givens a mercenary.

MikeWaters · 06-17-2014, 01:11 AM

I haven't heard their arguments, but I suspect based on our theology and prior events, that there is a strong argument for the feminine divine that includes some concept of the priesthood.

The question is when we are going to get to something that more empowers women. But I think that provocation was always bound to end badly. At least for one or two of them.

Archaea · 06-17-2014, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I haven't heard their arguments, but I suspect based on our theology and prior events, that there is a strong argument for the feminine divine that includes some concept of the priesthood.

The question is when we are going to get to something that more empowers women. But I think that provocation was always bound to end badly. At least for one or two of them.

Leadership does not like to be challenged. OW may actually have the effect of delaying the ordination of women.

It is sad to see the same pattern as occurred for the priesthood ban forty years ago. It is likely we will be very old men before women receive the priesthood.

The leadership is stubborn and proud.

MikeWaters · 06-17-2014, 02:52 PM

I'm somewhat ambivalent (appropriate, I think) about church discipline against Dehlin and Kelly. My primary concern is that we not lose another cohort of persons that feel like outcasts in the church. And these events make that harder. Because the most conservative voices feel empowered to lash out against non-conservative members.

Anyway had a facebook exchange where a few very conservative members were expressing their happiness about these current events, and using reasoning which I didn't think really stood up. So as I sometimes do, I innocently took a pin out of my pocket and popped the balloon. You guys know that when I am "on" and pissed, I can be somewhat formidable with my rhetoric (is that overstating my abilities?). But I had no interest in that, and was soft-pedaling my brief replies.

I didn't really think much of it. But then I got a facebook private message from a woman that I don't know thanking me for my replies and how many of the LDS women in their congregation were dismayed by this thread and appreciated my replies.

Okay.

But there is a lesson here. Dehlin has probably gotten thousands of such messages. It takes real strength of character to not let this inflate your ego. To not adopt some kind of hero-complex. Being a hero is a powerful drug and I think that's what we have with Dehlin. Someone that started like many of us, just poking around and saying "maybe someone should discuss this." And then fast-forward a few years and he sees himself as a counter balance to the church hierarchy and a leader of a burgeoning movement, even fancies that his efforts will save or reform the church. He's like Frodo gone bad. And I'm not sure he even realizes it.

ChinoCoug · 06-17-2014, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I'm somewhat ambivalent (appropriate, I think) about church discipline against Dehlin and Kelly. My primary concern is that we not lose another cohort of persons that feel like outcasts in the church. And these events make that harder. Because the most conservative voices feel empowered to lash out against non-conservative members.

The repercussions begin....

http://alwaysandeverything.blogspot....blic-exit.html

Funny he also thought Dehlin was a self-promoter.

MikeWaters · 06-17-2014, 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChinoCoug

The repercussions begin....

http://alwaysandeverything.blogspot....blic-exit.html

Funny he also thought Dehlin was a self-promoter.

Is this just some random person? Or someone we know?

Yes this is the thing that makes me unhappy about all of this, that there are some/many that have one foot in and one foot out, and will now have both feet out. And that some of the remaining will be disillusioned and lacking morale.

Archaea · 06-19-2014, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Is this just some random person? Or someone we know?

Yes this is the thing that makes me unhappy about all of this, that there are some/many that have one foot in and one foot out, and will now have both feet out. And that some of the remaining will be disillusioned and lacking morale.

The impact will be smaller than we believe, those of us who watch such things. For the core members, they are mostly unaware of these persons and will heed the description by the leaders that such persons are deniers of the faith. They will be called Korihors.

To your point, yes those with doubts and struggles will be disheartened by the conduct of the leaders.

My primary concern is that the leaders seem to be missing a chance to evolve and to catch the hearts and minds of the younger generations. There is plenty of fragments to justify evolving. The David Stewart blogs show that we are falling behind in our missionary efforts, the mass building projects abroad may have been poorly timed and we not doing well compared to competitive brands such as the Seventh Day Adventists and the Jehovah Witnesses. Frankly, for all the years during which we have been proselyting we have now more than leveled off, reaching more than 300,000 per year. We had those numbers in the late 70s or 80s. The Seventh Day Adventists attract now more than One Million per year.

Where is our vision?

SeattleUte · 06-20-2014, 05:27 AM

I think it could be highlighted more in this OW dialogue, particularly in discussions with LDS who are vilifying Kate, that patriarchy and sexism even in a religion are just wrong. You hear me Red Headed Gal and Farrah Waters? Patriarchy is wrong; it's evil.

This dispute should be causing any thoughtful LDS to think about the source of their beliefs they have simply taken for granted. If LDS approach this in a thoughtful way, eventually they ask themselves: Since when has the priesthood been limited to men anyway and why has it been that way? Why have women been treated differently? In monotheism? in any walk of life? Why is this situation different from blacks and the priesthood? If you want to evaluate a custom or belief, it's sometimes useful to look at origins.

It's clear to me that patriarchy, like slavery, is a vestige of medieval and ancient mores. Wikipedia offers this theory, which is more plausible than God is sexist: "James DeMeo argues that a specific initiating event [for patriarchy] does exist: the geographical record shows that climate change around 4000 BCE led to famines in the Sahara, Arabian peninsula and what are now the Central Asian deserts which then resulted in the adoption of warlike, patriarchal structures in order to secure food sources: 'Famine, starvation and mass-migrations related to land-abandonment severely traumatised the originally peaceful and sex-positive inhabitants of those lands, inducing a distinct turning away from original matrism towards patristic forms of behaviour.'"

Patriarchy is everywhere in religion, but that doesn't make it right. On the contrary. Because religion is old, really a relic of ancient times, it's a major source of much that is wrong with society.

I should make it clear, however, that I don't care per se about the LDS Church. What I care about is the collateral damage that patriarchy has caused and causes LDS women in terms of their images of themselves and ability to function effectively and meaningfully in our larger society.

ChinoCoug · 06-20-2014, 12:24 PM

Jehovah's Witnesses turn over every generation.

MikeWaters · 06-20-2014, 03:07 PM

Now that it appears that the crackdown is more widespread than previously thought, one begins to wonder where this will go.

Obviously there are stake presidents and bishops who are electing NOT to initiate discipline. But the ones that are, they are the ones who are driving the conversation.

I'm afraid that when this is said and done there will be no clarification and what is acceptable and what is not.

I mean I've read by some that talking about testimony doubts publicly (like on a blog) is grounds for excommunication. Brother, if it has come to that then we are headed for a sad place. I surely hope that is not the case.

06-20-2014, 05:27 AM	#28
SeattleUte fairlds.org Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 10,665	I think it could be highlighted more in this OW dialogue, particularly in discussions with LDS who are vilifying Kate, that patriarchy and sexism even in a religion are just wrong. You hear me Red Headed Gal and Farrah Waters? Patriarchy is wrong; it's evil. This dispute should be causing any thoughtful LDS to think about the source of their beliefs they have simply taken for granted. If LDS approach this in a thoughtful way, eventually they ask themselves: Since when has the priesthood been limited to men anyway and why has it been that way? Why have women been treated differently? In monotheism? in any walk of life? Why is this situation different from blacks and the priesthood? If you want to evaluate a custom or belief, it's sometimes useful to look at origins. It's clear to me that patriarchy, like slavery, is a vestige of medieval and ancient mores. Wikipedia offers this theory, which is more plausible than God is sexist: "James DeMeo argues that a specific initiating event [for patriarchy] does exist: the geographical record shows that climate change around 4000 BCE led to famines in the Sahara, Arabian peninsula and what are now the Central Asian deserts which then resulted in the adoption of warlike, patriarchal structures in order to secure food sources: 'Famine, starvation and mass-migrations related to land-abandonment severely traumatised the originally peaceful and sex-positive inhabitants of those lands, inducing a distinct turning away from original matrism towards patristic forms of behaviour.'" Patriarchy is everywhere in religion, but that doesn't make it right. On the contrary. Because religion is old, really a relic of ancient times, it's a major source of much that is wrong with society. I should make it clear, however, that I don't care per se about the LDS Church. What I care about is the collateral damage that patriarchy has caused and causes LDS women in terms of their images of themselves and ability to function effectively and meaningfully in our larger society. __________________ Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster

06-16-2014, 07:41 PM	#21
ChinoCoug Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: NOVA Posts: 3,005	Fair enough. BTW, we've had group discussions wherein many OW members participated, including a co-founder. They completely destroyed every traditionalist argument. They've been sharpening their swords for a long time. I still think Kate Kelly is a #$%^ for calling Fiona Givens a mercenary.

06-17-2014, 01:11 AM	#22
MikeWaters Demiurge Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 36,365	I haven't heard their arguments, but I suspect based on our theology and prior events, that there is a strong argument for the feminine divine that includes some concept of the priesthood. The question is when we are going to get to something that more empowers women. But I think that provocation was always bound to end badly. At least for one or two of them.

06-17-2014, 02:52 PM	#24
MikeWaters Demiurge Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 36,365	I'm somewhat ambivalent (appropriate, I think) about church discipline against Dehlin and Kelly. My primary concern is that we not lose another cohort of persons that feel like outcasts in the church. And these events make that harder. Because the most conservative voices feel empowered to lash out against non-conservative members. Anyway had a facebook exchange where a few very conservative members were expressing their happiness about these current events, and using reasoning which I didn't think really stood up. So as I sometimes do, I innocently took a pin out of my pocket and popped the balloon. You guys know that when I am "on" and pissed, I can be somewhat formidable with my rhetoric (is that overstating my abilities?). But I had no interest in that, and was soft-pedaling my brief replies. I didn't really think much of it. But then I got a facebook private message from a woman that I don't know thanking me for my replies and how many of the LDS women in their congregation were dismayed by this thread and appreciated my replies. Okay. But there is a lesson here. Dehlin has probably gotten thousands of such messages. It takes real strength of character to not let this inflate your ego. To not adopt some kind of hero-complex. Being a hero is a powerful drug and I think that's what we have with Dehlin. Someone that started like many of us, just poking around and saying "maybe someone should discuss this." And then fast-forward a few years and he sees himself as a counter balance to the church hierarchy and a leader of a burgeoning movement, even fancies that his efforts will save or reform the church. He's like Frodo gone bad. And I'm not sure he even realizes it.

06-20-2014, 12:24 PM	#29
ChinoCoug Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: NOVA Posts: 3,005	Jehovah's Witnesses turn over every generation.

06-20-2014, 03:07 PM	#30
MikeWaters Demiurge Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 36,365	Now that it appears that the crackdown is more widespread than previously thought, one begins to wonder where this will go. Obviously there are stake presidents and bishops who are electing NOT to initiate discipline. But the ones that are, they are the ones who are driving the conversation. I'm afraid that when this is said and done there will be no clarification and what is acceptable and what is not. I mean I've read by some that talking about testimony doubts publicly (like on a blog) is grounds for excommunication. Brother, if it has come to that then we are headed for a sad place. I surely hope that is not the case.