Kathryn Skaggs, runs a blog called, “A Well Behaved Mormon Woman” In her latest post, I struggle with her self-anointed title as well as her trademark “Just trying to Do More good one day at a time tDMg” Is this really how a well-behaved Mormon Woman acts and writes about a fellow member of the Body of Christ?
For me personally, the issue with the OW sect has never been about members who may struggle with understanding the doctrine of the Church, question it, or might even disagree with parts of Mormonism; certainly some do, in private ways. Rather it’s the ongoing, blatant disregard under the guise of faithful membership to advocate publicly and contrary to the official position/doctrine of the Church and its leaders whom we sustain as prophets, seers, and revelators. In my opinion, such actions do nothing for the building up of the kingdom of God and instead serve as an attempt to publicly shame the male leadership of the Church in hopes of submission and to create division among members.
When you accuse fellow members of your faith of faux faithfulness, belonging to a “sect,” the dissemination of false doctrine, and attempting to shame Church leadership, how exactly does that “try to Do More good one day at a time?” Kathryn’s words appear to be words of glee and condemnation rather than empathy and concern for fellow saints–despite her protestations to the contrary.
Without the benefit of the formal hearings that have been scheduled but not yet held by those whose calling it is to administer such hearings, Skaggs has unilaterally blogged and convicted both John Dehlin and Kate Kelly of apostasy and spreading false doctrine. End of story. According to Skaggs:
I feel this is a good opportunity for each of us to observe what modern-acts of apostasy look like and so that we can be more aware in the future of what to avoid — or perhaps even turn away from, right now. We can do this, we must do this, and it is not unbecoming of a Christian, in the least, if done with the proper spirit.
Frankly, it’s surprising to me the Church even feels the need to go forward with disciplinary hearings given Skaggs identification and warning to the world of the of such apostate and disingenuous conduct. They should simply mail in the excommunication orders directly to Skaggs to post on her website, enabling her to continue to Do More good one day at a time.
Kathryn, yes, it is true you are a Mormon. Yes, you are also a woman; however, your condescending tone, your insensitivity, your unilateral and unrighteous judgment confirms that you are far from well-behaved.
Posted From Nipomo, CA
June 15, 2014 at 1:49 pm
I don’t know Kathryn Skaggs, but her assessment of the OW group is completely accurate. Time and time again, the founder of OW has been caught contradicting her own self-proclaimed standards. Do you really think she was being honest when she told the media that she was “shocked” to receive the disciplinary hearing invite, considering she had been place on probation a few weeks before (a common precursor to the hearings), and had been warned by pretty much everyone that this would eventually happen if she continued with the publicity stunts?
June 15, 2014 at 2:30 pm
All I know, “nobody important” is that I would not presume to judge another person’s fitness for membership in The Church, not even Sister Skaggs. While I don’t care for her in your face theology, she certainly has every right to promote it, as well as other have a right to call her out on it. Still, that’s a far, far cry from judging another person’s righteousness in terms of apostasy and/or spreading false doctrine. You and Sister Skaggs apparently are far more comfortable doing that, perhaps even to the point where you feel qualified in doing that . . .
June 15, 2014 at 4:34 pm
I did not “presume to judge another person’s fitness for membership in The Church”. Just like you, I don’t have the authority to do that. That’s what the disciplinary council is for.
June 15, 2014 at 3:18 pm
Sister Skagg’s assessment of OW is spot on. Kate Kelly is a shameless self promoter, she’s dishonest about the events around her disciplinary council, she threw accusations and name calling at her bishop as well. She cries crocodile tears and in my opinion is dishonorable and not worthy of the blind support she gets from her minions.
June 15, 2014 at 3:33 pm
Same response I gave above . . .
June 15, 2014 at 3:34 pm
Public statements and actions may in turn be publicly commented upon and analyzed.
Sister Skaggs is not making judgements, she is making commentary and analysis of another’s public acts and speech. She has a right to publish her opinions and analysis.
June 15, 2014 at 5:19 pm
Nobody said she could not publish her opinions. She absolutely can. That she is making judgments; however, is beyond question. But, you also are entitled to your own opinion even on that. Any fair understanding of the concept and any fair reading of her posts clearly indicate her belief that OW is a sect, is opposed to the Church leadership, in is apostasy, and those summoned should undergo Church discipline.
June 15, 2014 at 4:52 pm
All questions of righteousness aside, Sis. Skaggs writes horribly. Some gentle correction from a talented editor might help with that problem. As to her judgment, that’s a completely different matter.
June 15, 2014 at 5:19 pm
An editor would help . . .
June 15, 2014 at 7:39 pm
I’d volunteer 😉
June 16, 2014 at 3:31 am
I’d love to be the fly on the wall there . . .
June 15, 2014 at 5:08 pm
I enjoy good humor, Bookslinger, C. Rider, and nobody important. What Kathryn Skaggs and you three post or comment here about the subject matter is hilarious; it’s also terribly uninformed and ignorant. That’s why it’s so funny.
June 15, 2014 at 5:20 pm
Humor is a good adjective here . . .
June 15, 2014 at 5:57 pm
I find nothing humorous about any of this. Care to enlighten me?
June 16, 2014 at 3:32 am
Probably just that it’s so off the wall, it’s funny . . .
June 15, 2014 at 6:01 pm
This post is far more judgmental and critical than anything Katherine has written. In her efforts on her Blog and elsewhere, she has attempted to clearly explain the flaws in the efforts of ordain women. She is representing countless faithful members who are tired of being besieged by radicals who seek to represent the membership and fight against the prophets of God.
June 15, 2014 at 7:05 pm
Of course . . .
June 15, 2014 at 6:45 pm
Can you not see the irony in your own post? By your own logic, YOU have more to repent of, going around questioning Kathryn’s righteousness and faithfulness as a member of the Church. Your post is quite condescending and judgmental towards your fellow members of the Church. Kathryn is a sister in Christ, and a sinner like you, me, and everyone else. So cut out your public, gossipy, mean-spirited condemnation of those who you think are sinners (like Kathryn).
June 16, 2014 at 3:32 am
Guess not . . .
June 15, 2014 at 6:47 pm
There does seem to be this attitude going around that says that ALL sins should be tolerated except the sin of “judgmentalism.” For THAT sin we can publicly drag people through the mud, and be as judgmental towards them as we want.
It’s hypocrisy, pure and simple. You can’t get all self-righteous about self-righteousness without a lack of self-awareness.
June 16, 2014 at 3:33 am
All Sins? Really? Sounds as though you have your stone at the ready . . .
June 15, 2014 at 8:05 pm
The fact remains that while you can privately disagree with church teachings, you cannot actively campaign for change the way OW has done without running afoul of church discipline. On the one hand, OW claims to support the church, but on the other the openly bring the church into ridicule to achieve their desired ends. Its quite clear change comes from the top down in the LDS Church, not from the bottom up. If that’s a problem for you, find a good protestant church.
June 16, 2014 at 3:37 am
Actively campaign for change the way OW has? You mean like asking the leadership to inquire about a revelation, in a Church with an open canon and ongoing revelation? Sounds pretty orthodox to me. Don’t you think enough people already leave the Church without you inviting more to leave? . . .
June 16, 2014 at 6:11 am
“You mean like asking the leadership to inquire about a revelation”
Oh come on! I don’t know you personally, but I know you’re smarter than that. If what you say was true, then nobody would be receiving disciplinary action. This has been the most pervasive lie of all.
Lots of people ask questions, but not all demand change to their way of thinking. Kelly’s “nothing less will suffice” sure doesn’t sound like sincere questioning, not to mention their title.
Lots of people ask questions and seek revelation, but not all stage illegal protests against the church. (Think hard before you respond that nothing was illegal about Kate’s demonstrations)
Lots of people ask questions, but not all lie to the media in order to gain public support and vilify those they’re supposedly asking to get a revelation from.
If you’d like examples of any of these things, feel free to ask.
June 16, 2014 at 6:44 am
I sincerely hope Kate does not get excommunicated, but instead agrees to abstain from actions clearly meant to intimidate the church, such as marches on Temple Square to obtain tickets she knows in advance she will not receive, and web or other lessons or discussions meant to further her interpretation of how priesthood keys are regulated. Clearly you can see its the actions she takes that make her a candidate for church discipline.
June 16, 2014 at 5:20 am
I am sad for Kate’s council. That said, her behavior over the past year or so seems to merit a council. For those of us in the mainstream of the Church, it is fairly easy to spot behavior that leads to apostasy. I’m not saying Kate should or will be excommunicated. That is up to her bishop and the Lord to decide. Personal belief, even when shared with others on Facebook or a blog, do not necessarily denote apostasy. Behavior that bring public criticism to the Church, its doctrines, and its key practices are eligible for scrutiny and possible disciplinary action.
While I would use different phrasing than Kathryn Skaggs, I certainly do agree with the basic concept Kate’s efforts went beyond the bounds.
Whenever a member errs in doctrine, he/she is in apostasy. We are all in some level of apostasy, in that we all err. The Church does not seek out most of those, because they are honest and usually private. However, there is a line that, once crossed, does necessitate a review and a council.
The same goes with sexual sin. The Church does not do much in regards to the activities a married husband and wife do, as long as it stays within the bounds the Lord has set. For others not married, there is a tighter boundary on sexual purity, based on behavior. A council will weigh the person’s understanding, willingness to repent, the level of sin (petting vs adultery for instance), the position of the person, and the public awareness of the sin.
Boundaries are needed, otherwise the Church no longer has any basis of existence. If everything goes, then nothing has meaning. Kate and her OW group have been counseled in the past. They’ve had Church leaders and Michael Otterson make distinct statements in regards to these things. Yet OW continued with its demands and publicity stunts, now doing a series of “missionary discussions” on the evils of patriarchy, etc. These are clearly issues that need to be looked at closely, which is why a council has been called.
June 17, 2014 at 4:27 am
I like this post, you called out the passive agressive behavior of that blogger quite well, thank you!
August 9, 2014 at 7:18 am
I felt pretty bad for Kate’s bishop. She gets to call him cruel and other belittling things, and the media will gladly repeat it. No chance for the man to defend himself. But in some circles, to even suggest he may have a defense and may not be an ogre is an egregious sin, for he’s obviously guilty as charged. Her bold remarks against her leaders and her encouraging her followers in the Church to “raise hell” just doesn’t strike me as consistent with just being a faithful member trying to ask questions.
August 9, 2014 at 10:01 am
OW and Kate in particular are employing techniques and arguments they know their leaders cannot use against them. Exploitation of the media, especially the anti-Mormon SL Tribune, cannot be countered by turning to the Deseret News, for example. The underlying assumption that being male is the core of the problem for church leaders. There is also the assumption that patriarchy, in any definition, is a bad thing. Feminism is really the religious basis for OW, and it runs counter to the gospel, in my opinion. Well of course it would, you say, I”m male.s
August 9, 2014 at 7:22 am
But if Kate was improperly excommunicated, then I certainly hope the decision will be reconsidered and that she’ll be able to come back swiftly. Hope the “raise hell” thing was just a slip on a bad day, or another misunderstanding.
April 8, 2016 at 6:00 am
[…] Research Survival Guide Part 1: The Literature Search […] Click https://twitter.com/moooker1
May 6, 2019 at 9:41 am
Hello,
I would like to use one of your Obama photo for my book. It’s the election night 2008 picture, one in which he is holding hands with his family. What can I do to get your copy right of the picture