In this three-part series we interview Neil Ransom (Kate Kelly’s husband, and Ph.D. candidate in anthropology) and we speak with Kate about her excommunication and the aftermath. Some of the fascinating tidbits we explore:
- Neil’s early years growing up in Africa
- How Neil’s mission, along with his attending BYU-Idaho, actually turned him into a progressive Mormon
- How Kate and Neil met (their love story), and what Neil loves most about Kate
- What Neil is researching for his Ph.D. (hint….it’s super cool)
- Has Neil experienced a faith crisis?
- Who “wears the pants” in Kate/Neil’s marriage…also what are the traits of a “real man” according to Neil and Kate :)
- Are Kate/Neil planning to have kiddos?
- Kate’s detailed account of her interactions with church leaders prior to her excommunication (in response to allegations of dishonesty on her part)
- A deep dive into Kate’s beliefs re: Mormonism, Book of Mormon historicity, etc.
- Kate’s plans for Ordain Women post-excommunication
- Is Kate going to start her own church?
- And most importantly….Why does Neil wear that funky hat? :)
Episode Transcript
Full text · 41,300 words · 19 chaptersHost: John Dehlin · Guests: Kate Kelly, Neil RansomRead transcriptHide transcript
This transcript is machine-generated and lightly edited for readability. The audio is authoritative. Please excuse occasional errors in names and spelling.
Introduction and Episode Overview
Part 1 of 3 · Ep. 488
John Dehlin [00:00:00] 1, 2, 3. Mormon Stories Podcast is a production of the Open Stories Foundation. All donations to Mormon Stories are fully tax deductible and go directly towards keeping the podcast alive and towards building a community of support for Mormons like you. To support the podcast or to join the community, please become a monthly subscriber today@mormonstories.org.
John Dehlin [00:00:29] hello, and welcome to another edition of Mormon Stories Podcast. I'm your host, John Dehlin, and today I am as excited as I have ever been or always am to have two very special guests. One is reappearing on Mormon Stories. Her name is Kate Kelly. I imagine a few of you have heard of her.
John Dehlin [00:00:55] Kate, this is the. This is the Mormon Stories interview with Kate after her excommunication. And, you know, I've been friends with Kate in at least some way for probably, I don't know, eight or nine years, I'd say. So it's always really exciting, and I'm always pleased to have Kate on.
John Dehlin [00:01:17] But also something that's something I'm very excited about is that we're also having Kate's husband, Neil Ransom, on. And when I talked to Kate about this interview, this was her idea. She's like, hey, we need to interview Neil. And I jumped on it. I thought that was a great idea.
John Dehlin [00:01:36] So we're gonna hear from Neil first, and then we're gonna talk to Kate and then maybe end talking to both of them. But, Kate Kelly, welcome back to Mormon Stories.
Kate Kelly [00:01:47] Hi. Thanks for having us.
John Dehlin [00:01:49] And Neal Ransom, welcome to Mormon Stories.
Neil Ransom [00:01:51] Thank you for having me.
Neil's Upbringing and Background
John Dehlin [00:01:53] All right, well, Neil, I thought it'd be fun to start with you just because no one's really heard from you before. So I guess I wanted to begin. And many people are wondering just a bit about your background. So just tell us a bit about your background. I learned from our lunch before this interview that it's not a typical Mormon story in some ways.
Neil Ransom [00:02:17] Sure. So I guess what's kind of unique about me, I grew up overseas. My dad was doing agricultural research in Mexico and Kenya and Nepal. And so I did all of my formative years in Kenya, kindergarten through 12th grade. And so I graduated from there and actually came to Urban or went to Rick's college halfway through my senior year because my family was moving to Nepal. So I did a year at Rick's, went on a mission to Sacramento, California. And then upon returning from Sacramento, I transferred to byu, where I did a degree in anthropology. Was at byu, I met Kate, and. Yeah.
John Dehlin [00:03:07] What was it like growing up in Kenya?
Neil Ransom [00:03:09] I was. I mean, when I was living there. It was kind of, you know, to me it seemed very normal because everyone I knew was living in a similar. All my friends were living in a
John Dehlin [00:03:18] similar situation, like this huge, gated, sort of expatriate community where everything. Armed guards and, you know, servants and sort of a luxurious upbringing, in a way.
Neil Ransom [00:03:31] Yeah. So in some regards, yes, we lived in a. A house that had a fence around it, but that. That was typical of anyone who has a house in Nairobi has a fence around it. We also had a guard. My. My mother doesn't really like having. Or anyway, we. We.
John Dehlin [00:03:52] Domestic help.
Neil Ransom [00:03:53] Yeah, she didn't really like having domestic help. And so we had someone come in and help with cleaning every once in a while. But. But we did have a gardener. My mom really liked having a huge. She had a huge garden, so we had a gardener. And so in that regard, very different from living here in the US but, you know, just everyday life was similar, I guess. We went to school. I went to the International School of Kenya, which was a school that does.
Neil Ransom [00:04:22] It follows a US Curriculum. So very similar to the curriculum that you would have found at any US School. The only difference is that we had a huge diversity of people there. From. Our student body was about. When I graduated, our student body was about 550 people. I think we had 56 different nationalities represented in that small body, kindergarten through 12th grade.
Neil Ransom [00:04:45] And so for me, I think that actually influenced me quite a bit in my perspective. My perspective on race and gender and other issues like that was having so much diversity and being, you know, everyone was a minority in that setting in some way. Yeah. And so it was.
Neil Ransom [00:05:03] It was impossible for someone to exert a dominance of their point of view over someone else. At least that's how I felt. And so I think for me, it was like a great experience and great opportunity to kind of realize that there's much more to the world than. Than what I think I would have found if I had grown up in a Mormon community in Idaho, where my folks are from now.
John Dehlin [00:05:29] Are your parents, like, pioneer ancestry kind of thing?
Neil Ransom [00:05:33] Yes, both my parents. Both my parents were born into the church, and I think their parents were born into the church, and I think. I'm not exactly sure, but I. I do believe that at least on my mother's side, there were pioneers who crossed the plains.
John Dehlin [00:05:47] Right. And how many siblings?
Neil Ransom [00:05:51] I have three younger brothers.
John Dehlin [00:05:52] You're the oldest of four brothers?
Neil Ransom [00:05:54] Yes.
John Dehlin [00:05:55] Okay. And so was it a traditional, believing, conservative, Idaho Mormon upbringing then, for you?
Neil Ransom [00:06:07] In our home, it was very Much that way. Both my parents are very devout, and, you know, and I think we were brought up like, you know, we were brought up in the way a traditional Mormon family would be brought up today in Idaho or elsewhere.
John Dehlin [00:06:29] So family home evening.
Neil Ransom [00:06:30] We had family home evening. I mean, we also struggled to have it just like, you know, which is the norm.
John Dehlin [00:06:35] It turns out family home evening isn't the norm. Struggling to have family home evening is the norm. Okay.
Neil Ransom [00:06:42] And all of my brothers, you know, we've all, you know, my. My father baptized all of us. He ordained all of us to our different stations in the priesthood, except for one time, for one reason. He was on a trip. And the Bish, the branch president, had me because I was a priest. Nice. Had me set my brother apart to a teacher, and my dad was really mad when he got back, but otherwise. Yeah. And all my brothers have served missions, and we've all been married in the temple. And I think a very traditional Mormon family that was at our home. But I think growing up in Kenya as a foreigner and also in, you know, going to the school that I went to, that was a, I think, a very different or very unique experience because I didn't really associate with, you know, once I left home or church on Sunday, I didn't really have any friends.
Neil Ransom [00:07:42] I had no friends who were Mormon. You know, they were from many different other types of religions. And so in that regard, it was, I think, unique.
John Dehlin [00:07:55] So definitely conservative upbringing. Then, in terms of religion, would you say that you graduated from high school as a progressive?
Neil Ransom [00:08:12] I guess when I graduated, I would consider myself apolitical. I had never really. Was never really concerned about being progressive or conservative. I don't think I could distinguish the two if someone had asked me. I do know that I had opinions about issues on poverty in the environment that I had developed that I would now account as being probably that would fit more in with a progressive perspective, but it wasn't. It was just from my own observations of that I was making there, not because anyone was telling me one way or the other. My parents were actually very apolitical as well.
John Dehlin [00:08:52] So probably not pro LGBT as you're graduating from high school. Probably not self identifying as a feminist. Is that right?
Neil Ransom [00:09:01] Correct.
John Dehlin [00:09:02] Okay. Okay. All right.
Kate Kelly [00:09:05] So.
John Dehlin [00:09:06] And you served a mission?
Neil Ransom [00:09:07] I did.
John Dehlin [00:09:07] In Sacramento, and that's where my brother served his mission, by the way.
Neil Ransom [00:09:11] Oh, really?
John Dehlin [00:09:12] Yeah, way back in the day. And then you went to byu, Idaho, which was rich at the time.
Neil Ransom [00:09:19] Yeah. So it was Rick's when I. Just before. So I went January 99 to December 99. And. Excuse me, it was Rick's college then. And then halfway through my mission, they transitioned to BYU Idaho. So when I returned, I actually did a year at BYU Idaho before transferring to byu.
John Dehlin [00:09:38] Okay, so were you. You know, I met Kate at these study. I don't know if they're called study nights or discussion discussion nights. Ashley Sanders, you know, who's Neal A. Maxwell's granddaughter. You know, she was kind of leading those up. This was all around the alternative commencement kind of time. Like, there was a real energy in that group. Some really amazing people. A few of them I've had on Mormon stories. Were you a part of that before you met Kate?
Neil Ransom [00:10:10] A little bit. So before I met Kate, many of my close friends were also friends in that. In that circle. And so Kate's best friend at the time, who's named Amy, I was good friends with her through a feminist class I had taken at BYU and another friend, Adriana, who's also attended discussion night. And so they invited me to attend discussion night, and that's how I got plugged in with that group. And then, in fact, I had attended a few discussion nights before the same discussion nights that Kate had attended. We had just ever. Never actually crossed paths until a year later. So.
John Dehlin [00:10:54] Okay, okay.
Neil Ransom [00:10:55] In fact, I have this distinct, distinct memory that Kate. Kate's boyfriend, was presenting at this discussion. We didn't realize this until long after we'd been married, and he had come and presented at discussion night about why recycling was bad. And then. And then Kate gave an anecdotal example of when she was in middle school. She was like the recycling club, and they followed the recycling bus or the recycling truck, and the truck just dumped it into the garbage instead of taking it to a recycling center. And that's why she didn't think recycling was good either. And then they both just stormed out. So I always remember that there was this, like, this weird girl who didn't like recycling, but then we didn't realize that, you know, it was her until later.
John Dehlin [00:11:44] So I don't want to make any assumptions, but, you know, that was a pretty progressive group discussion night. There probably were some conservatives there or some traditionalists, but for the most part, the vibe was very, very progressive, from my experience. And so I don't want to paint your history for you, but would you have said that you had some type of progressive awakening at some point that would have made you want to attend something like discussion night?
Neil Ransom [00:12:12] Sure.
John Dehlin [00:12:13] Talk about that. Like, what was that awakening like?
Neil Ransom [00:12:15] I mean, there was A gradual process that started with me going on my mission because at. I mean, I was completely apolitical before I went on my mission. And.
John Dehlin [00:12:25] Okay, wants to say something.
Kate Kelly [00:12:27] I was just going to say that when Neil, he grew up in Kenya, let's keep in mind, but when he went to Rick's, he saw signs that said Bush Gore, and he thought it was a person named Bush Gore, first name Bush, last name Gore.
John Dehlin [00:12:42] And that's. And that's at least part because you grew up outside of the States, probably didn't follow the history here, the news.
Neil Ransom [00:12:48] And we didn't have. We had international CNN that you could get in with like a fuzzy. A fuzzy image on the tv. So I was basically like, oh, so
John Dehlin [00:12:57] you didn't have, like, network news, msnbc, Fox News, nothing? Okay, okay. I mean, even network news. Abc, NBC, cbs.
Neil Ransom [00:13:05] Yeah, we just, like, didn't watch tv. I mean, we had movies like. Like, yeah, of course, Batman, VHS movies, but you just couldn't get a good signal on tv. And if you wanted to get real channels, you had to get satellite dish, and we just didn't watch TV hardly at all.
John Dehlin [00:13:20] So, yeah, okay.
Neil Ransom [00:13:21] So, yeah, so I was kind of
John Dehlin [00:13:22] came in apolitical, not because you're apathetic, but just you didn't have a background like a.
Neil Ransom [00:13:28] What's it called? The blank stone?
John Dehlin [00:13:30] Blank slate.
Neil Ransom [00:13:31] Yeah. Clean slate.
John Dehlin [00:13:32] Okay, okay.
Neil Ransom [00:13:33] Or something.
John Dehlin [00:13:34] So Bush Gore was a person.
Neil Ransom [00:13:37] Yeah.
John Dehlin [00:13:38] All right, got it.
Kate and Neil's Early Beliefs and Politics
Neil Ransom [00:13:38] I was very confused.
John Dehlin [00:13:40] Why would anyone name their child Bush? Yeah, okay.
Neil Ransom [00:13:44] Well, it was when I first arrived in the mission after being in the mtc, and I saw the signs that said Bush Gore, and I thought it was just like a local politician running. His name was Bush Gore. So.
John Dehlin [00:13:55] So.
Neil Ransom [00:13:55] But on my mission, because I think in my mind up to that point, I had very much put Mormons as a certain type of people who behaved a certain type of way and everyone else in this other category and because most of the Mormons, like, who I would consider true Mormons were people like my parents and my relatives in Idaho, you know, who weren't vegetarians, who didn't do yoga, like, you know, you ate meat and potatoes and went fishing.
Neil Ransom [00:14:29] And so on my mission, I actually had companions and started to meet people who were Mormons, but with a little broader, like, who had different beliefs or a broader perspective. You know, specifically, I had one companion who just had a completely different upbringing than me and. And kind of helped me realize that there's a lot more to Mormonism and, you know, it's more complicated than how I had perceived it previously.
Neil Ransom [00:14:58] And so when I had gotten back from my mission, I had, you know, I think that had kind of, like, opened me up to. Prepared me to. To have to start learning. I don't know how you say it, but, like, had prepared me to be led. Not led, but been open to the idea. Progressive ideas.
John Dehlin [00:15:21] Sure. Would you say that you. Your closest friends in Kenya were LDS and you kind of were in a Mormon bubble?
Neil Ransom [00:15:28] No, none of my friends were lds.
John Dehlin [00:15:30] Okay. So this is strange because the story is he goes from. He has to leave Kenya and go to a LDS mission in the States to begin to plant the seeds of progressive sensibilities. Right. I'm not making fun of you, but.
Neil Ransom [00:15:44] No, no. Yeah, it's funny. And in fact, like, I would say this, when I started going back to byu, Idaho, at the time, I had two professors, one an anthropology professor and one a. He was teaching Christian history, actually.
Neil Ransom [00:15:59] And both of them started talking about these issues of poverty and unfairness and injustice in the world that I had never heard in a Mormon setting before. And for some reason, they just, like, rang very true to me. I think because of my experience growing up in Kenya and being able to observe the poverty and the, you know, the injustice and the inequality that you could just see on the street, which is. Is hidden, I think, from us in many ways, you know, when we live in affluent areas in. In the US and so that rang true to me. And so I took another class from my professor who's teaching.
Neil Ransom [00:16:41] I don't remember the title, but it was something about modern politics. And he was the first person. It was just before. It was after 9, 11 and just. And as the country was discussing the war in Iraq, and he was the only person I ever heard say that the war in Iraq was a bad idea because I still. I wasn't. I wasn't like, really a news consumer or a media consumer. And it just made a lot of sense to me what he was saying and the readings that he was having us read in class. And so from, like, that class was what got me interested in politics.
Neil Ransom [00:17:14] And. And so then I became a voracious reader of news and started to look for all these different issues who was addressing these issues in our political. In the US Politics and was very much led to the left in that regard.
Neil Ransom [00:17:35] And so from day one, I was never for the war in Iraq. And being at Rexburg at the time and not being for the war in Iraq was an awkward position to have. And so when I would try to engage my Roommates in discussing these topics, it kind of further radicalized me because I would hear their arguments for the war or their arguments for, you know, so many other issues that I was learning I didn't agree with, like immigration and gender issues. And so that was kind of just like a. Like being in the midst of this uber conservative place kind of made me not want to be like that again.
John Dehlin [00:18:15] I'll just mock the fact that a progressive awakening happens at byu, Idaho. I'm sure that happens all the time. Right. But I'm just making fun of you a little bit.
Neil Ransom [00:18:26] No, I think it's very funny because I think it's.
John Dehlin [00:18:29] Yeah. So tell us about meeting Kate.
Neil Ransom [00:18:34] So, Kate. So at the time when I was at byu, I. I would consider myself very far left. I actually campaigned for Ralph Nader in 2000. Yay for and. And all on. Mostly on issues of. Of on his consumerism issues and anti war issues and environmental issues.
Neil Ransom [00:18:56] And so I was very interested in kind of our consumer culture in the US and. And this documentary was coming out called about Walmart, called the High Cost of Low Prices, which talked about kind of the exploitive methods that Walmart used to keep the prices low for the consumer. And the film couldn't find any distribution outlets, I think, because of the content. And so they did a free distribution. Not a free distribution, but anyone could buy the DVD and get the right to show the dvd. And so Kate, unbeknownst to me, had bought the DVD online and they had like arranged for a room in BYU to show it under the name of some cultural club or something.
Neil Ransom [00:19:41] Yeah. And so I just looked on there on this film's website and saw that there was a showing at byu. And I went and Kate was standing out front handing out flyers. We started talking and we had both been in Thailand that summer. She was doing humanitarian aid and I was doing my. I was doing my senior thesis research in India, but I had taken a break to Thailand for.
John Dehlin [00:20:02] And your. Your bachelor's was in anthropology. Okay.
Neil Ransom [00:20:06] And a minor in international development.
John Dehlin [00:20:08] Okay.
Neil Ransom [00:20:08] And so we just kind of talked about how we had both been to Thailand and how that was fun. And then we started to realize that we had all the same group of friends who was involved in discussion night. And I said we should make Thai food, which we have never actually made together to this day. And so I don't. Were you dating someone at the time? I don't think so.
John Dehlin [00:20:31] Yeah.
Neil Ransom [00:20:33] Anyway, so a few months later we went on a date to a pizza place and I was telling her about this trip I had planned with some friends to drive to the bottom of Baja California over Christmas. And so she invited herself.
Kate Kelly [00:20:48] Whoa.
Neil Ransom [00:20:49] Yeah, it was very funny because she had proceeded like before.
John Dehlin [00:20:53] Okay, wait, wait. Pause. Kate, what were you thinking? Why were you. Why'd you invite yourself? Kate? You said, this guy's hot and I want to be with him. And you just never been to Baja before.
Kate Kelly [00:21:03] We were just in college. College is, like, the best time ever. Especially byu because it's, like, so cheap and there's so many kids, and, like, you're all doing fun stuff. So he's like, yeah, I'm driving to the bottom of the Baja. And then I'm, like, looking at him very anxiously, and he's like, you want to come? And I was like, yes.
John Dehlin [00:21:20] Were you loving on him, or were you loving on the idea of a trip?
Kate Kelly [00:21:23] No, I had a crush on Neil. He thought I had a crush on his friend who was also going, but that wasn't true. And so we drove to the bottom of the Baja. It was, like, three days to get there.
Neil Ransom [00:21:34] The day after Christmas.
Kate Kelly [00:21:35] Yeah, we left the day after Christmas. I had no money, so I had my parents, in lieu of presents, give me money to go to the Baja with three strangers.
John Dehlin [00:21:43] Wow. Boys, huh?
Kate Kelly [00:21:46] All boys. And we camped in the middle of the Mexican desert, and coyotes surrounded us in the night. And then we got to the Baja, and we slept on Lovers Beach.
Neil Ransom [00:21:57] Ooh.
Kate Kelly [00:21:58] That was our first kiss with two other.
John Dehlin [00:21:59] What?
Neil Ransom [00:22:01] So at the very bottom, who kissed who?
John Dehlin [00:22:03] Who kissed who?
Neil Ransom [00:22:04] I don't remember.
John Dehlin [00:22:05] I don't remember.
Neil Ransom [00:22:07] I'm. I'm assuming it was Kate kissing me, because I'm pretty shy in that regard, and Kate's not a shy person.
How Kate and Neil Met and Married
John Dehlin [00:22:15] All right. All right. So. So was it kind of like, was it. Was it like a match made in heaven from then on, or.
Neil Ransom [00:22:23] I mean, I think we both. Yeah, we both had very similar political ideas. For some reason, I had always wanted to be. Like, when I would, like, fantasize about my wife, my future wife, the only person I could think of was someone who was interested in pursuing a career. Like, I wasn't interested in having. Getting married to someone who wanted to be a stay at home mom.
John Dehlin [00:22:49] Even though your mom had been a stay at home mom?
Neil Ransom [00:22:51] Even though my mom had been a stay at home mom. And I think it's because all of my friends who were girls growing up in Kenya, all of them were planning on pursuing careers. And so that's, I guess, just who I knew. And so I found that very attractive. About Kate is that she had planned to become a legal. Like to go into law and. And pursue a career in law doing human rights issues. So I found that very attractive. And. And so in that regard, I think we were very. Anyway, yeah, I think we were very compatible. But, like,
Kate Kelly [00:23:26] what he's trying to say is we broke up like seven times or like, maybe even nine. Like a really excessive.
John Dehlin [00:23:33] Who's to blame? Who's to blame for the breakups?
Kate Kelly [00:23:35] Oh, my.
John Dehlin [00:23:35] Was somebody uncertain, indecisive.
Kate Kelly [00:23:38] No, we were just, like, drama filled and like, we were working out a lot of issues. And I think a lot of people in Mormon culture, I will give us credit that we did counseling before we got married.
John Dehlin [00:23:50] At the counseling center.
Kate Kelly [00:23:51] No, Goodness, no. Not at byu.
John Dehlin [00:23:54] Hey, BYU is good counselors.
Kate Kelly [00:23:55] No offense, but we felt like we should step away from that. We not. I'm sure they do have good counselors, but we. We did counseling. Like, we worked through a lot of issues. Like, I think a lot of Mormon people just get married and then they work through those issues later.
John Dehlin [00:24:12] Right.
Kate Kelly [00:24:13] I think we went through, like, a very tumultuous time in deciding to get married. But once we did, it, like, worked and we had, like, no problems. I mean, our first year of marriage was awesome. Like, you know, like everyone. I'm sure we did have some difficulties, but, like, we worked through a lot of those things before we got married.
John Dehlin [00:24:30] So how long did you date? We were.
Kate Kelly [00:24:32] We dated for a year.
John Dehlin [00:24:33] Okay. And that's huge. That's so long. Like, that's obscenely long.
Kate Kelly [00:24:38] If any non Mormons are listening to this, they're probably like, that's absurd.
Neil Ransom [00:24:42] If you took out the time you were broken up, maybe it was only.
Kate Kelly [00:24:44] Yeah, yeah. But my mom. Actually, this is a good story. My mother loved Neil and we broke up. And I was like, I'm done with him. I don't even remember. Something very dramatic, I'm sure. And my mom got his phone number from my sister and called him and invited him over and was like, neil, we still want you to come over. Like, it doesn't matter if you guys broke up. And I found out about it and I was, like, furious. I'm like, mom, how dare you? Like, blah, blah, blah, blah. I'm never gonna see him again. And then, of course, we ended up getting married.
John Dehlin [00:25:17] So we have mom to thank.
Kate Kelly [00:25:19] Yeah.
John Dehlin [00:25:19] All right, all right. So you did it a year. And by then, were you done with school, both of you?
Neil Ransom [00:25:27] Yeah, we both finished that. I think we had finished classes in the spring, but not in time to graduate in the spring. So we graduated that fall in August. Yeah, we, I mean, we didn't. Neither of us walked. We just got our diplomas in August and then we decided to get married in late October.
John Dehlin [00:25:47] Yep.
Neil Ransom [00:25:47] And then got married in on Mormon New Year's, which was. Okay, the 30th because the 31st was on a Sunday. So. So you got married December 30th.
John Dehlin [00:25:59] That's. That's my anniversary with Margi. We were married in the D.C. temple. 1993, December 30th. So what year were you guys?
Kate Kelly [00:26:07] 2006.
John Dehlin [00:26:09] Six. So, all right, 13 years later. Okay, so. All right, so you said you wanted, you always wanted to marry someone who wanted a career. Right. Were you a feminist? Were you a kind of self identified feminist by the time you married Kate?
Neil Ransom [00:26:28] I mean, I don't think I had the. I definitely did not have the vocabulary and I don't think I would have called myself.
John Dehlin [00:26:34] So you hadn't studied first, second, third wave feminism and all that stuff, really?
Neil Ransom [00:26:38] Yeah.
John Dehlin [00:26:38] Had you, Kate? Kate hadn't either. Okay. Yeah, yeah, I know, I know. Yeah. BYU, post 1993. Yeah. Okay.
Neil Ransom [00:26:48] And so, I mean, I think I was, I think I was keenly aware of many of those, many of the issues of gender inequality globally and at BYU and in the church, but I didn't have a vocabulary to really describe them. Yeah. So I did take a class from Valerie Hudson my senior year and maybe my senior year. And the political, Political Economy of Women, which did, I mean, which was my first feminist class. And I think I was one of two men in the class.
John Dehlin [00:27:24] Yeah.
Neil Ransom [00:27:26] And Kate would actually attend with her friends sometimes, even though we hadn't met at that time. So I think there I, I was able to put words to some of those feelings I had. And you know, I just don't think I had ever in my life considered, considered that there was a substantial difference between men and women or anything like that. And I think it primarily from just growing up in Kenya where we had all boys at home, so there was no like sister who was treated differently to see. And I wasn't really very attentive in church. And so I didn't notice that there and then all of my friends in school were, you know, as smart and as ambitious as any of the boys in school. And so I had just always thought in my mind that, you know, men and women are equal and equally capable as well.
John Dehlin [00:28:23] Right, right. So was it a. Was it. And Kate, just really quickly. So you had not studied classical feminism?
Kate Kelly [00:28:32] No.
John Dehlin [00:28:32] What's up with that?
Kate Kelly [00:28:33] No, I went to byu.
John Dehlin [00:28:35] Yeah.
Kate Kelly [00:28:35] Yeah, yeah, yeah, I did. There was a women's studies minor at byu, and I took a women's studies. I think it was called a colloquium, that did a little bit of, you know, like a roundtable of different feminist theory. But there was no. From my. I was a polysa major, and from my perspective, there was no feminist theory. There was no. Valerie Hudson was really the only feminist I knew of, and she was, like, very much a gateway drug feminist to a lot of the women I knew and my friends. I went to her class, but I didn't take it.
Kate Kelly [00:29:10] I wasn't enrolled in the class, but I went with my friends because it was like, ooh, there's this woman who has ideas about women that are different. And so everyone was super interested. You know, as a college student, I audited a class voluntarily just because I thought it was interesting, but I definitely never, like, was exposed to, like, this is first wave. This is second wave. This is, like, political theory or, like, feminist theory. This is. That just doesn't exist.
John Dehlin [00:29:36] And did you have any. Like, was Alice Paul a model role model for you? Did you even know who she was?
Kate Kelly [00:29:41] Nope.
John Dehlin [00:29:42] That's awesome. Like, isn't that. And it's crazy because we think of. We think of the world sometimes as, like, getting more progressive all the time. But when I was at byu, Gail Houston was there. Cecilia Kanchar Farr was there. Like, you know, Voice was this feminist group that was raging. Joanna Brooks was leading that up.
Kate Kelly [00:30:01] Nope.
John Dehlin [00:30:02] And it's like, BYU got, like, way more conservative. Yeah, yeah.
Kate Kelly [00:30:06] I mean, the one thing I will say is we did have our own thing, which was the discussion nights. So we did our own thing where we exposed ourselves to different ideas, like, progressive ideas. And, you know, we had Soul. Was it called Soul Train? No, that's something else. Soul Peace.
John Dehlin [00:30:25] Soul.
Kate Kelly [00:30:26] Dang it. Anyways, there's an lgbti, a activist group that traveled around to all the different.
John Dehlin [00:30:31] Oh, right. Soul Force. Soul Force. Yeah. Yeah. I remember that. When they came to BYU campus.
Kate Kelly [00:30:37] Okay, sorry, Edit that out. Soul Force.
John Dehlin [00:30:41] I think that's what they're called.
Kate Kelly [00:30:42] Byu. And we had. We invited all those kids to come over to our discussion night. Like, we exposed ourselves to those ideas, but that was not provided anywhere in the curriculum any. Like, the clubs were very tightly controlled. Like I said, we had to. We had to, like, furtively screen the Walmart film at byu, because stuff like that was not permitted or allowed.
John Dehlin [00:31:02] Okay.
Early Activism and Feminist Awakening
Kate Kelly [00:31:03] And we, like, one of our first things that Neil didn't mention. But we planned a protest at byu, and that's one of the first things we did together, organizing wise. It was a free speech protest. And we were protesting the lack of free speech on campus. And I had a professor tell me at BYU that I was going. He knew for sure that I was going to get expelled and that I should plan to apply to the University of Utah, even though it was my senior year.
John Dehlin [00:31:29] Wow.
Kate Kelly [00:31:29] And so it was. And this was a free speech protest. We're just like, hey, we should have free speech.
John Dehlin [00:31:35] What year was this?
Kate Kelly [00:31:36] That was in 2006. So that was the, like, early, early, early in 2006. We planned that protest.
John Dehlin [00:31:44] And you guys graduated when?
Kate Kelly [00:31:46] 2006, the August. So that was like our senior year.
John Dehlin [00:31:49] Okay. All right.
Kate Kelly [00:31:51] Yeah. That protest was awesome. It was. I think there were a hundred people, which is, like, gigantic for byu. We had a faculty member come. We drew little chalk circles around ourselves, and we said, we give our word that we will not leave these chalk circles until this protest is over. It was amazing.
John Dehlin [00:32:12] And that would have been Ashley Sanders and Anne Marie Whitaker and C.J. whitaker and all those people.
Neil Ransom [00:32:18] And I think that process, because we were all involved in planning that protest, I think for many of us, that was, you know, our first step in being interested in activism. And many of those same people planned
John Dehlin [00:32:31] the alternative commencement where they wanted to bring Dick Cheney. Right? Was it Dick Cheney? Dick Cheney. And so they brought Ralph Nader. Yeah. Yeah. That was awesome. Okay. I just want to throw it down right here. Like byu. If you guys don't have something like discussion night, I'm gonna give, like, a hundred dollars worth of pizza. I will fund dinner for the people that start a new discussion night at byu. It's just like once a week, like a fam home, evening topics get picked, and in someone's house, 30 people show up and have a cool discussion about something progressive. If it's not. If it's already existing, I'll pay for the meal there. If it isn't existing yet, I'll pay for the meal. For those who started, that's just. I'm just throwing that down. All right, so moving on. So you guys graduate and you guys both pursue graduate school.
Graduate School, Career Paths, and Name Change
Neil Ransom [00:33:26] Yeah. So I had always planned on. I mean, I didn't necessarily know which field I was interested in, but I, in my mind, had always. I had, like, decided when I was a kid that I was going to get a PhD like my father had, and it was going to be something to do with either Anthropology or environmental issues. In fact, when I was a kid, I always wanted to be an entomologist, a bug scientist.
John Dehlin [00:33:50] Bugs, yeah. But. But.
Neil Ransom [00:33:55] So when we both got married, we worked for a year because neither of us had applied for graduate school. But we had decided during that time. Oh, yeah, we went and lived in Mexico, in San Cristobal, which is in Chiapas, the southernmost region. I was working for a BYU professor there at an archaeology foundation, and Kate was a translator and a volunteer and
Kate Kelly [00:34:21] in the Young Woman's presidency. Oh, sorry. I. I also was. I had, like, three callings, I think, at that ward that were extended to me the first Sunday in the ward. So I was in the Young Women's presidency. I was a Sunday school teacher, and I was like an activities coordinator.
John Dehlin [00:34:41] So real quick, what was it like when Kate told you she was going to keep her name and not take yours? Was that weird for you? Did it make you feel sad? Be honest.
Neil Ransom [00:34:51] I had actually not. No revisionist history I had not thought of. Like, it seemed a little bit funny when she said it, but I had never, like, thought about that being an issue. So when she said, I'm not taking your name, you know, at first I was like.
Neil Ransom [00:35:07] I kind of was, like, thrown off that we had to have this conversation to begin with because I had never just thought about it. But then I had no problem with it. And in fact, as we were engaged and getting ready to get married, Kate's brother was like.
Neil Ransom [00:35:20] For some reason, this was an issue he just couldn't handle. He kept on saying, like, how can you be a family if you don't have the same last name? And, like, multiple times accosted us to try to convince Kate to change her name. But I didn't feel any attachment to my last name particularly, or to Kate taking my last name.
John Dehlin [00:35:41] So for you, it wasn't a big deal?
Neil Ransom [00:35:42] Not a big deal.
John Dehlin [00:35:43] All right.
Neil Ransom [00:35:44] I didn't take any convincing.
John Dehlin [00:35:45] What'd you love most about Kate?
Neil Ransom [00:35:50] I mean, I think I loved her, like, adventurous spirit.
John Dehlin [00:35:53] Her.
Neil Ransom [00:35:55] I think for me, I have always been a pretty mild mannered person. And Kate has always spoken truth whenever she's confronted with a situation like that.
John Dehlin [00:36:05] More candidate?
Neil Ransom [00:36:06] Yeah, she's much more candid than I am.
John Dehlin [00:36:08] And.
Neil Ransom [00:36:08] And I still admire that a lot. And so to see someone who was motivated and didn't back down when she thought she was right, and also who was interested in having adventures and pursuing big things like becoming a human rights attorney, things like that, I found that very. You know, I thought. I thought Those were great qualities. So. And, and yeah.
John Dehlin [00:36:41] Any other lovey dovey stuff? Her eyes, lips?
Neil Ransom [00:36:48] I mean, she's hot.
Kate Kelly [00:36:49] So.
John Dehlin [00:36:50] Okay.
Neil Ransom [00:36:51] Yeah.
John Dehlin [00:36:51] Do you like.
Neil Ransom [00:36:52] That helped?
Kate Kelly [00:36:52] Okay, let's please edit that out.
John Dehlin [00:36:56] All right. Okay, so so just really briefly, just give like the 22nd version of how graduate school went. So you both went.
Neil Ransom [00:37:09] So Kate. So I had. Kate went. She got into law school first because I hadn't really figured out what I wanted to do yet in San Diego. So she had applied to American in D.C. and she applied to the University of San Diego in San Diego. She didn't get into dc, which was her first choice, or she didn't get into American. So we went to San Diego for a year. During that process, I applied to a university there and didn't get in, but she had also applied for transfer to American University.
John Dehlin [00:37:37] So she transferred.
Neil Ransom [00:37:38] So she transferred.
John Dehlin [00:37:39] Okay.
Neil Ransom [00:37:39] So I basically paid for her to go or I worked while she went to school for the first two years of law school. And then while we were there in D.C. i applied for graduate school at a couple universities in the D.C. area and got into the program I'm in now.
John Dehlin [00:37:53] Which is what?
Neil Ransom [00:37:54] That's an environmental science and policy at George Mason University.
John Dehlin [00:37:58] Okay.
Neil Ransom [00:37:58] Which is in Fairfax, Virginia.
John Dehlin [00:38:00] And that's an anthropology kind of thing.
Neil Ransom [00:38:02] So, yeah, my advisor is an anthropologist and my research methods will be anthropology, but yeah, it's policy and environmental issues. You had to do science coursework. Yeah, interdisciplinary. All right, so.
Gender Roles and Egalitarianism in Their Marriage
John Dehlin [00:38:16] So, you know, I'm trying to note the kind of cutesy ways that this, this interview right now is sort of traditional gender roles in reverse. Right. Like Kate's kind of the. Instead of it being the male that's out there getting the publicity, in this case it's the female. Right. And. And in those cases, if the spouse is interviewed, it's usually the wife and she's asked questions about her husband. Right. And now I'm kind of doing that to you. Right. And I'm kind of doing that intentionally. But also, like, what it brings up for me is the fact that, well, you know, there's a primary song about families that the church came out with a couple years ago.
John Dehlin [00:39:00] And, you know, how the father is to preside and to provide and the mother is to nurture and teach love and whatever those things are. And. And I'm just. I'm just noticing that maybe it's not an artificial construct, but maybe for you guys, those gender roles just didn't quite fit. Is that true, like, for both of you? Not just. Not just Kate, who was an aspiring attorney.
Neil Ransom [00:39:26] But, yeah, I think. I mean, even before I got married, and I think the same for Kate, I. I was not interested in those type of gender roles. I was interested in having someone, like, I remember thinking in my mind, I want to marry someone who will. Who I can put through school, and then they can put me through school, so we can both equally pursue those things we're interested in. And so that's how we have.
John Dehlin [00:39:54] Have lived.
Neil Ransom [00:39:54] And we've. And also, when we're presented with those traditional. Like, those situations where you have a traditional role, we always try to. Like, we make a conscious effort to try to flip them if we can. So, for example, whenever we speak at church, Kate won't be speaking anytime soon, but when we did speak at church, we would always ask that. Kate went. Was the last speaker, and I would be the middle speaker, so that. And I would introduce the family and tell the life story and all that and have the shorter.
John Dehlin [00:40:27] I had you tell the love story,
Neil Ransom [00:40:28] by the way, exactly like this. And, you know, just because I think. I mean, for us, we kind of thought of those type of things as. As. I don't know, like, silly or. I mean, specifically the one in church. Yeah. Expendable. And.
Kate Kelly [00:40:48] Yeah.
John Dehlin [00:40:49] Okay. Has it ever. And this is gonna. This is one of those questions where it's gonna sound offensive. Little bit, maybe. Like, have you ever, like, said, what about my manhood? What about my, you know, machismo? Like, this woman, she's so strong. She's a lawyer, and she's the outspoken one, and maybe I'm a little bit more quiet, and, like, do I need to assert myself or. Have you ever felt confusion or depression or sadness about your role and your identity and your masculinity, even being in a relationship with such a strong woman? Now, you guys, no one can see this, but they're, like, laughing at me. Like, they're working hard to control their laughter and suppress it. They're laughing through their nose, noses at me. Why are you guys laughing? What's so funny? Like, I'm kind of playing this tongue in cheek, but why are you laughing, Kate?
Kate Kelly [00:41:40] I just. It's. It's so absurd, right? Like, to think about why having, like, a outspoken, spoken woman would be at all a threat to that. And if it is, it's just so funny to me to think, like, if my wife speaks up, that threatens my identity.
John Dehlin [00:41:57] So is it a dumb question, or do you. Can you understand where it comes from?
Kate Kelly [00:42:00] No, I think it's just funny to me to Think about that. Like, oh, how strong are you if having your wife be able to speak her mind threatens your identity? It's funny because you're asking, like, does that make you feel weak? And to me, the thing that demonstrates weakness is like, oh, I'm threatened by the fact that my wife also has ideas like, that demonstrates, like, absolute fragility and weakness.
John Dehlin [00:42:22] Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Kate Kelly [00:42:23] And so I think Neil is, like, extremely strong in that. He's totally. Like, that's absurd. Like, he's totally unthreatened by that. He just, like, we're just, like, laughing because that's an absurd idea. And I think that demonstrates strength. So it's just a funny question.
John Dehlin [00:42:41] Well, just help me. Help, help support me. That. That's a question that maybe many traditional Mormon men would. Would wonder. Right?
Neil Ransom [00:42:48] Sure.
John Dehlin [00:42:49] Because I, I'm not feeling that way, but I, I'm just kind of trying to represent questions that some people who aren't as progressive might.
Neil Ransom [00:42:56] Sure. I think some people might feel that having. I mean, let's. Especially with ordained women, Kate has been in the spotlight, and I have not been in the spotlight, even though I have been involved in ordained women. And, you know, I, I think to me, it doesn't, it doesn't take away from another person if someone in that companionship, you know, shines in some way or is. Is outspoken or has a strong position because I like it. It doesn't prevent me from achieving whatever goals I have or becoming a strong person myself or doing those. You know, being a visible person if I want to be. Like.
John Dehlin [00:43:39] Right. It's not a zero sum game.
Neil Ransom [00:43:41] Right, Exactly. It's not like one person being the. Like, yeah, Kate, being a strong person in our relationship doesn't make me not a strong person.
John Dehlin [00:43:52] Right.
Kate Kelly [00:43:53] Well, and I think there's a lot of, like, I think for Mormon people or Mormon men, they feel like women are bossy. Like, if. Oh, I've heard a lot online or like, just comments. I don't know, never read the comments. But that Neil must just be, like, bossed around by me and like, blah, blah, blah. But I think those people don't have a view of what parody is. And they can't see, like, a collaborative relationship. Like, the relationships they've been modeled are one person is in charge, one person, quote unquote presides. So if the person who's not presiding is not Neil, it must be me.
Kate Kelly [00:44:27] Right, but so they just flip that gender paradigm. But for us, our relationship is a collaboration, and so there's not one person in charge it doesn't mean I'm in charge. It means that we collaborate. And Neil puts me through school, and now I'm moving to Kenya because he wants to do his research, and so I'm supporting him.
John Dehlin [00:44:47] And it's a little bit of a sacrifice to your career, I'm guessing, at
Kate Kelly [00:44:49] least initially, I had to quit my job, which was a great job. And, you know, I can still do my field because I'm international human rights. So it'll be very relevant. And we made the decision together. But it's a sacrifice for me. Like, we make sacrifices for. For each other. So I think people asking that question. I think you're right. A lot of people probably would ask that question and have asked that question. Just can't comprehend a paradigm which. In which one person's not in charge.
John Dehlin [00:45:16] So, Kate, would you characterize your relationship as egalitarian?
Kate Kelly [00:45:20] Yeah, totally.
John Dehlin [00:45:20] Okay. And Neil, is that how you would characterize it as well?
Neil Ransom [00:45:24] Yeah, for sure.
John Dehlin [00:45:25] Okay.
Neil Ransom [00:45:26] And I'm. I think for me, it's been a. You know, I think for both of us, it's having relationship that's egalitarian and based on consensus is kind of amazing because I know that I can make a sacrifice for Kate and that down the road she'll make a sacrifice for me so that I can pursue my goals like I don't have. I don't feel like I'm gonna give up any of my goals or dreams for Kate to pursue her goals or dreams.
John Dehlin [00:45:53] And I.
Neil Ransom [00:45:53] And she doesn't think the same way either. And since we have this egalitarian, consensus relationship, we can both pursue, you know, find ways to pursue our goals together. So.
John Dehlin [00:46:03] And I'm. And you'll have to forgive me, I'll push this just a tiny bit further. Okay. So. So, like this, you know, I think this is in the proclamation of the family, but it's also in this little Primary song that I learned when I was teaching Primary. It's like, well, no, there needs to be like, kind of the strong leader figure which we have put on the men, and then the nurturer, which is the woman. And, Neil, you know, Kate, this is saying nothing about your personality, but, Neil, you have this kind of. Kind of a sweeter, kinder, gentler kind of demeanor, at least to me. Right. Not sweeter than Kate. I'm just saying. Than, like the average man.
Neil Ransom [00:46:41] Sure.
John Dehlin [00:46:42] Right. And so some would want to say I have a view of what a man is, and I have a view of what a woman is. And, you know, they would want to Say, well, you're playing more of the feminine role. And I know this is completely insulting to people who've actually thought this through, but I'm going to lay it out there because I know it's things people are thinking and I want to, I want to help them understand what things are really like.
Neil Ransom [00:47:05] Well, right.
John Dehlin [00:47:06] I think you see what I'm saying.
Neil Ransom [00:47:07] Sure.
John Dehlin [00:47:07] Like Neil's the nurturer type and Kate's the, you know.
Neil Ransom [00:47:09] Sure.
John Dehlin [00:47:10] Rules reversed.
Neil Ransom [00:47:11] And I think if you, if, yeah, if you have a mindset that you have to have those two sides to a coin, then then maybe that's the perception that someone might have. But to me, what that demonstrates is that those qualities that we try to assign to each gender don't have to be assigned. They don't belong with gender. It's a cultural based thing. Right. Like Kate is not very good with children for some reason. I'm very good with children. Like, you know, that's just a characteristic I have. That doesn't mean I'm, you know, any less of a man than I am or anything like that. But what I think it does demonstrate is that like, men have the ability to be nurturers and women have the ability to be leaders and, and you can develop those characteristics if you're interested in developing them.
John Dehlin [00:48:07] And both can lead and both can nurture.
Neil Ransom [00:48:09] Both can nurture.
John Dehlin [00:48:10] Okay. Do you take umbrage with the characterization that you're not as good with children?
Kate Kelly [00:48:14] No.
John Dehlin [00:48:14] You laughed a little bit. Oh, you don't?
Kate Kelly [00:48:16] That's accurate.
John Dehlin [00:48:17] That's accurate. Okay. All right.
Kate Kelly [00:48:20] I don't. I mean, I never even, you know, young women in the church are really focused on having kids, which I think is just absurd. But I think it's very absurd to teach like a 10 year old girl about being a mother or like, you know, a myopic focus on that for very young girls, especially given that the focus is not the same. Like you don't teach a 10 year old boy like you're gonna be a father and like fatherhood is the best thing ever and blah, blah, blah, blah.
Kate Kelly [00:48:51] But I think I never wanted to be a mother. I never, you know, even as a young girl, like Mormon girls, like check out books about babysitting in the library and like learn about babysitting and like obsessed, you know, I hated babysitting. I didn't like babysitting my brothers and sisters. I wouldn't do it for money. Like people in the ward would ask me to babysit and I would, they would say, some, you know, $10 an hour or whatever, some low rate. And I was like, nope, not worth it. Like, I did not. I never liked taking care of kids.
John Dehlin [00:49:22] That's just who you are.
Kate Kelly [00:49:24] Yeah.
Choosing Not to Have Children
John Dehlin [00:49:24] And I had this plan for the end, but do you plan to have kids at all or no plans or plan to never or what?
Kate Kelly [00:49:31] We're not having kids ever? Nope.
John Dehlin [00:49:34] Okay.
Kate Kelly [00:49:34] Yeah. We're childless by choice.
John Dehlin [00:49:36] Okay. Okay. And that's for sure.
Kate Kelly [00:49:39] Well, that was the contract.
John Dehlin [00:49:41] That was the deal.
Kate Kelly [00:49:44] Yeah. I mean, we always leave the. We're very process oriented people. So I leave open that maybe someday we might change our minds because I might change my mind about everything in life. But that seems extremely unlikely now.
John Dehlin [00:49:58] How much of that, like, if there's a pie chart, how much of that's Kate not loving kids versus Kate wanting to have. Kate and Neil wanting to have careers that aren't, you know, encumbered by children versus just.
Kate Kelly [00:50:10] I mean, there's a lot of successful people having kids. And like, my mom is an attorney and she worked and we had a happy family and like, so it's not career. You know, I think a lot of people, especially if they're in a workplace that supports families, you know, not just women, but families, I think that's totally feasible. So it's not. I don't think it's career at all. I think we just don't want to have kids. And I think it's really. If there's anything that's more controversial than ordained women in the church is probably someone saying they're childless by choice.
John Dehlin [00:50:41] Yeah, absolutely.
Kate Kelly [00:50:43] So glad we just dropped that bomb. But.
John Dehlin [00:50:48] Sorry.
Kate Kelly [00:50:48] I think it's important for Mormon women to think it through, especially young Mormon women. And I find a lot of people really enjoy, you know, mice. My sister, for example, all she ever wanted to do was have a kid. She has kids and that's what she does. And she loves it. And that's a calling for some people. But I think for a lot of Mormon women I've encountered, they're very dissatisfied with being solely child bearers and rearers. And I find a lot of resentment from Mormon women who don't feel like they chose it. They feel like it was imposed upon them.
John Dehlin [00:51:26] So.
Kate Kelly [00:51:26] So if you choose it, I think it's a wonderful thing. If you don't choose it and you do it because it's imposed upon you, it can be very, very. It can damage your mental health in a lot of ways and that of your children. And so I think Mormon women should really think through that and decide on their own. And so when I went through that process of, like, it's not because, you know, when I separated, it's because you're supposed to. From what I wanted to do it. The choice was very clear.
John Dehlin [00:51:54] Right.
Kate Kelly [00:51:55] But that's hard. I mean, I'm not saying that's easy. For Mormons, that's probably the hardest thing you could possibly do, but for us, it's been the best choice.
John Dehlin [00:52:07] So, Neil, was this something that you came to independently of Kate that she, you know, talked to you about?
Neil Ransom [00:52:15] I mean, I. I don't think at any time in my life I had ever felt a desire to have children. I had thought about it before as, you know, what would all. What would I do when I do have children? Because I thought that's what happened. Yeah, I didn't know anyone who didn't have children, but kind of like what Kate was saying, when I kind of like, took that apart and looked at it, what was, you know, my upbringing as a Mormon, being kind of told how. How I. Or what was expected of me versus how I really felt inside, I realized that I had never in my life had a desire to have children.
Neil Ransom [00:52:55] And, you know, and so when Kate and I had this conversation, it seemed. I mean, it was easy for us to come to this consensus because it didn't seem appropriate for, you know, I mean, unless, like, if Kate would. Wanted to have children, I would have been, you know, we were in this together, so I would have. Have put myself full, Full fully into being a father. But when we both realized that neither of us had really had a desire, then that seemed like the appropriate course to take.
John Dehlin [00:53:30] So you feel good about that, too?
Neil Ransom [00:53:32] Yeah, absolutely.
John Dehlin [00:53:34] Fascinating. All right, that's good. No, I, you know, this is just personal thing, but Oprah turns out Oprah's one of my heroes. You know, I've loved Oprah for a long time, like, 20 years. My wife. And I know Oprah's got a bad rep, but my wife introduced me to Oprah very early on, and I just thought she was amazing. And. Yeah, when. When I learned that she was with Stedman but they weren't gonna have kids. Like, I'm like, what that. But look how much good she's done in the world.
Neil Ransom [00:54:04] And anyway, well, and. And to that point, I think that many people believe that the only way that you can leave. The only thing that you can leave on Earth is, you know, of you. Is that your. Your DNA, Right? Like, the only way to leave a legacy is through your DNA. Yeah, but that's not true. You can leave a legacy through so many other ways. And Kate and I have decided to, like, pursue. Pursue a life that will leave a legacy. Not from our DNA, from other reasons, from the work that we do throughout our life kind of stuff.
John Dehlin [00:54:35] And, Kate, I'll throw this back at you, just one last thing. Fifteen years ago, I studied Malcolm X, I studied Gandhi, I studied Churchill, John F. Kennedy, the Roosevelts. Something they all had in common was that they were awful parents. I mean, maybe that's not a totally fair characterization, but their kids had serious problems. Maybe that had nothing to do with their parenting. But what I can say is as being maybe a tad bit of an activist within Mormonism. It's been really hard on my kids. Like, that's been the hardest part by far. Not what they've done to me or the criticisms or, you know, on my marriage.
John Dehlin [00:55:15] It's like, wow, my kids are suffering quite a bit. And do you ever think about that? About how, you know, at least you're. Whatever you do or whatever decisions you make, if they're challenging, they don't have to, you know, others don't have to suffer for it. Sort of.
Kate Kelly [00:55:31] Yeah. I mean, we talked about Nader.
John Dehlin [00:55:35] Yeah, right. Yeah. The hardcore. Right.
Kate Kelly [00:55:37] He talks about Nader, says you're either hardcore or you're kidcore spouse, core. Yeah, sorry. Nader's also not.
John Dehlin [00:55:44] You know, I hate that. You know, I hate that. Right. Because I don't want to have to choose.
Kate Kelly [00:55:48] I love Nader. He's such a grump, of course. But I think there's probably a lot more to it than that. But I think you can make anything work. And there's a lot of really amazing, talented activists and courageous people who are also good parents.
Kate Kelly [00:56:08] And their kids are very inspired by what they do, and they also contribute a lot to social justice. So I don't think that no one can have kids and be the feminist Mormon Housewives is a great example. All those ladies are really, really dedicated wives and mothers, but they're also amazing, talented activists, and they contribute. They're, you know, contribute a lot to the body of thought in Mormonism.
Kate Kelly [00:56:36] I think it's just a personal decision, and you have to decide. You know what I mean? Someone once described it in an article I read as having, you know, in the airplane, when you have the oxygen mask, you have to secure your own oxygen mask before you can secure it for other people.
John Dehlin [00:56:53] Yeah.
Kate Kelly [00:56:54] And I think for me, that's just. I'm not, you know, I have other things I want to do. I don't think I'm in the place where I could dedicate as much as I think it requires to be a good parent to parenting. And I also just don't want to have kids.
Kate Kelly [00:57:11] So I think people who don't want to have kids are the last people on earth who should have them. And so if you're, you know, a single person out there or a childless person out there, and you really, you're struggling with that decision, that should say something to you. And I think you should be able to listen to your heart above dogma or ideology.
Kate Kelly [00:57:34] So if, if you want to have kids, you should, and you'll, no matter what you want to do, I'm sure you'll have a fruitful life and you'll be able to balance that if you're well supported. But if you don't, you shouldn't feel forced into it.
John Dehlin [00:57:46] Right.
Kate Kelly [00:57:47] And a lot of Mormon women do a lot more than you think, and it's super depressing.
John Dehlin [00:57:53] And you, and you hear about high divorce, high depression rates amongst LDS women in Utah. I don't, I don't have that data,
Kate Kelly [00:58:00] but yeah, I mean, that's complicated. It's not just because they have kids, but yeah, sure, I just, I just, I wish for everyone to be able to free themselves, to make the decision on their own.
Neil's Research on Sustainable Energy in Africa
John Dehlin [00:58:14] Neil, just to close out this segment, just talk a bit about your research. This is just as good a place as any. Just talk a bit about what you study and what you're hoping to.
Neil Ransom [00:58:25] Sure. So I'm particularly interested in kind of the intersection between climate change issues and sustainable development issues. So trying to find ways that we can simultaneously enhance people's living quality of life in developing countries while also addressing climate change problems. And so one of the ways that we can do that is with fuel efficient cook stoves because they reduce the air quality or they improve the air quality in households that use open fires. So for example, in Kenya, there are still millions of households that still cook with open fires in their homes. And they're unventilated. And so the smoke and the residual particles cause really bad health impacts on women and young children under the age of five because they're indoors so much. And because it's so efficient to just use an open fire, women and young girls especially spend a large percentage of their day collecting firewood.
John Dehlin [00:59:30] Yeah, inefficient.
Neil Ransom [00:59:31] Inefficient firewood. So if they can get a fuel efficient cook stove, not only does it reduce the amount of greenhouse gases emitted by the open fires, which in the grand scheme of things is nothing. But it reduces deforestation. But it also enhances, more importantly, enhances the quality of life for women and children at the age of five, improves their health, also allows them to spend less time collecting wood and use it for other things. So for me, that's kind of one example of a way that you can address a climate change issue and solve a development issue or help address a development issue. So I'm going to go to Kenya and kind of look specifically at this group that makes these fuel efficient cookstoves and why they've been so successful in disseminating that cook stove while other countries have had a hard time doing it.
John Dehlin [01:00:18] Kenya's more successful at it than they
Neil Ransom [01:00:19] are because they, they make a locally produced stove that's very inexpensive to make. It's like five or six dollars with stone or adobe. They use recycled metal and clay. And many of the other programs in other developing countries use stoves that might be made in China or might be made in a factory that still cost about $50 or $60. And for very poor people who live on less than a couple dollars a day, even a 30 or $40 stove is way out of reach for them, whereas a three to five dollar stove would be much more affordable. So kind of look at why that's been so successful and how that could be replicated in other countries with similar situation.
John Dehlin [01:00:56] Nice. And do we know how those stoves, how someone got the idea and how they caught on?
Neil Ransom [01:01:02] Yeah, so that was actually, the stove was developed by a professor, a Kenyan professor who.
John Dehlin [01:01:09] Homegrown.
Neil Ransom [01:01:09] Homegrown. He was, he had some seed money from USAID and the Kenyan government specifically tasked with designing a stove that they could make. And they, they're called Jewakali workers. They're like artisan, artisan metal workers and, and woodworkers. And they're the ones who make these stoves. So he, he designed this stove that was super cheap to make and about 50% more efficient than open fire. And also it used charcoal. And so it actually has even more, even better air quality than, you know, anyway, better air quality as well. And so he, for the first couple of years he got these dual workers to make them and you know, help.
John Dehlin [01:01:51] What's that word you're saying?
Neil Ransom [01:01:52] Jewakali? It's like a, it's a Swahili word that means under the sun.
John Dehlin [01:01:57] Okay.
Neil Ransom [01:01:57] Because these jwakali workers, they work like in an open field or with no roof over the head. And so that's why they call themselves that.
John Dehlin [01:02:06] Okay.
Neil Ransom [01:02:07] So anyway, he, like, through this funding, they kind of got this idea going, but then after about two years, the funding stopped. But by then, so many people had been trained and there was a demand for the stove, and they were so, so much more efficient and cheap that it. There has been no funding since then. And it's just spread like wildfire through a lot of East Africa.
John Dehlin [01:02:29] What a success story. Yeah.
Neil Ransom [01:02:30] So it's a great. Yeah. Oh, and my brother, when we were growing up in Kenya, the professor,
John Dehlin [01:02:38] what
Neil Ransom [01:02:38] was his first name? Anyways, last name's Kenyan Jui. His son was good friends with my brother, and so we interacted them with a lot, and we've been family friends with their family for many years. So I'm going to be working with his son, who now runs that. That company that his dad started.
John Dehlin [01:02:54] Nice. So, and is your goal to be a tenure track professor someday or. Yeah, not necessarily.
Neil Ransom [01:02:59] I mean, I'm teaching courses. I've taught. I've taught courses at. With a graduate teaching assistantship for the last two years, and I'll be teaching online courses while I'm in Kenya. I really enjoy teaching. It's great to work with, with, you know, young. I guess not really kids, but young adults who are. Yeah. Work with students who are kind of exploring new ideas and be a part of that. I really enjoy that. So I could see myself doing. Becoming a tenure track professor, but I'm also interested in doing field work and. And if, you know, doing some policy work. So if that opportunity presents itself, if there's a way I could do both, I'd. Yeah, that's what I do.
John Dehlin [01:03:40] All.
Neil Ransom [01:04:02] Come, come, ye saints.
John Dehlin [01:04:05] No toil nor labor,
Neil Ransom [01:04:09] but with joy.
Kate's Faith Journey and Evolving Beliefs
Part 2 of 3 · Ep. 489
Kate Kelly [00:00:00] 1, 2, 3.
John Dehlin [00:00:07] Mormon Stories podcast is a production of the Open Stories Foundation. All donations to Mormon Stories are fully tax deductible and go directly towards keeping the podcast alive and towards building a community of support for Mormons like you. To support the podcast or to join the community, please become a monthly subscriber today@mormonstories.org all right. Hello and welcome again to Mormon Stories.
John Dehlin [00:00:33] I'm your host, John Dehlin. We're here part two, in our interview with Kate Kelly, founder of Ordained Women and recently excommunicated from the church. We're going to be talking to her. We've been talking to her, but we've also been talking to her wonderful husband, Neal Ransom, and we've been talking about his life and his.
John Dehlin [00:00:55] His falling in love with Kate and his academic pursuits. And that was episode one. And we're going to keep going. So I'm going to try and kind of merge these interviews a little bit because I like the collaboration. But, Neil, I'm going to bring it back to you.
John Dehlin [00:01:16] So I want to talk about your faith just for a bit. So, you know, I imagine that you would have considered yourself a traditionally believing Mormon for at least some large stretch of time. Is that how you see yourself now? Or was there some point where you started to question and doubt and either go through some type of crisis and then reconstruction or crisis and unraveling? Talk a bit about if and when things might have started to change for you and. And what that's led to in terms of your beliefs about the church?
Neil Ransom [00:01:54] I think I've always kind of. I'm just not a very believing person if it's not something, you know, like with metaphysical things or spiritual things, things I can't see. And so I've always been like a hopeful believer for most of my life, but I wouldn't say I ever had a very strong faith.
John Dehlin [00:02:21] Like certainty or something.
Neil Ransom [00:02:22] Yeah. In certainty or like, I mean, I. I wouldn't even really say I had a very strong confirmation of, of knowing if the church was true or I had enough to. To go on a mission and I had enough to, you know, get married in the temple and things like that, but never, never so strong. I don't know why. I just. I'm not that type of person.
John Dehlin [00:02:47] No, it's very common, actually. Did you. Did you bear your testimony or mission in terms of. I know this church is true every day. Right.
Neil Ransom [00:03:00] Sure. Yeah.
John Dehlin [00:03:00] Was there and I had
Neil Ransom [00:03:03] a long time in the office.
John Dehlin [00:03:04] You're in the office a lot.
Neil Ransom [00:03:05] I mean, I think I yeah, apologize. No.
John Dehlin [00:03:08] Office Elder. I remember like this point in my early mission where I'm like, wow, I've got actually bear testimony now. I really don't know, but it sounds lame to say I hope or I think or I believe. And so I'm like, well, I guess I'm just gonna say no because they teach me that that's what you're supposed to do and then hopefully the faith will come. Right. Did you have a moment like that or.
Neil Ransom [00:03:31] Yeah, you did. It was in the MTC where, you know, I had like been praying and praying and praying for this, like to have a confirmation that the Book of Mormon was true, that Joseph Smith was a prophet. And like when we go to the temple and I would just pray and you know, like just wasn't getting an answer that I was expecting. And so basically I kind of said to myself, I guess I must have always known or I guess I, I
Kate Kelly [00:04:02] like,
Neil Ransom [00:04:04] you know, maybe I don't need that confirmation, I'll just have to kind of go without it. And, and so I mean I'm not a very like thoughtful person, like self reflective person generally. But yeah, I kind of had to make that. I, I struggled with that on my mission of saying like, if I know without a shadow of a doubt. But I would try to bear, I mean I would bear testimony to things that I knew were true. That the church, you know, can bless people's lives and that it does offer happiness for, for many people. Yeah. I just don't remember what I did.
John Dehlin [00:04:46] No, it's okay. And so never really a certainty about the church.
Neil Ransom [00:04:50] Yeah.
John Dehlin [00:04:51] But a hope and a faith.
Neil Ransom [00:04:52] Right.
John Dehlin [00:04:53] And, and I'm guessing that's half the membership, but that's just my guess, you
Neil Ransom [00:04:57] know, and I, I mean just, I'm not a very like organized religion is just not, not really like sitting in the pews and listening on Sunday has never really been a spiritual experience for me, but I've had spiritual experiences in other ways, you know, especially with interacting with people, being in nature, like doing service and things like that. And so anyway, like so far I've kind of, I don't know, like a passive participant in church, but I have always, you know, as much as I think I was able to believe, I believed that if there was a true church, this was probably it. And if Mormonism wasn't the true church, then no religion was true. That's how I used to believe.
John Dehlin [00:05:50] Yeah.
Neil Ransom [00:05:51] And, and then kind of congruently with Kate starting ordained women a little bit before that I started.
John Dehlin [00:05:59] So we're talking a year ago.
Neil Ransom [00:06:00] A year ago, I started to have, like, a deeper faith crisis as I started to study things about early church history and kind of felt very confused about the way the church was spending its money. And so.
John Dehlin [00:06:12] The mall.
Neil Ransom [00:06:13] Yeah, the mall. And. And other things like that where, you know, I couldn't just. I felt like I couldn't just participate as I had been participating as a, you know, someone with. With medium faith. And. And so for me, it's been like this whole journey with Kate and ordained women has been very interesting and challenging for me because it's also been, you know, follows my. My. This experience of me having a faith crisis as well.
Neil Ransom [00:06:52] But Kate has always. Kate has never had a faith crisis, and. And she has always loved going to church. And so, you know, before any of this excommunication stuff, I mean, maybe. Maybe shortly after the. Anyway, as I was going through this crisis, I would talk to Kate about these issues and be like, I just don't know if I can go to church anymore. And she would just say, I want you to keep coming to church with me.
Neil Ransom [00:07:22] And finally. And this kind of all came to a head last semester because I was preparing for my qualifying exams, and I was just feeling, like, an unnatural amount of stress in my life. And I didn't really know what it was from. I thought it was because I had these qualifying exams coming up and my proposal due, and it just felt like things were just slipping away from me. And so I went to one of the counselors or I sought counseling on campus. And as part of that process, I came to realize that the stresses were with. I felt like I was living kind of a.
Neil Ransom [00:08:01] Or I felt I. I realized that I was living an inauthentic life with the way I actually believed about Mormonism and the way I was portraying myself and, you know, the. The expectations I was putting upon myself or that I felt like the church was putting on me.
Neil Ransom [00:08:23] And so through that counseling, I kind of worked through many of these issues and was able to kind of reframe some of the ways I had thought about my participation in Mormonism and came to a place where I was before Kate's excommunication came to a place where I decided, you know, used my agency to decide that I can still participate in Mormonism, I can still attend in church, and I can still hold my calling as an elders quorum teacher, even if I have my doubts or if I have this. If I don't believe certain things about the church, and I'll just live Authentically, by not bearing my testimony, if I don't believe something's true, if there's, like, a lesson I can't teach, I'll tell the elders quorum president that I can't teach that lesson, and I'll make a conscious effort to engage with Mormonism the way that healthy for me.
Neil Ransom [00:09:18] And so that's where I was at until, like, I thought. And I think participating in ordained women and having, you know, that. That also opened up an opportunity for me to. It kind of created a space for me to believe that it was okay to be a Mormon in that situation. You know, I believe I could be doubting and I could have questions, but still, you know, seek fellowship with my.
Neil Ransom [00:09:42] With other brothers and sisters at church. And even if I had these questions or doubts, and that's what ordained women kind of made me believe was available.
John Dehlin [00:09:51] Right? Yeah. Yeah. So a quick question about Kate. There's this sort of Michael Quinn phenomenon of, like, someone who, you know, does something extremely bold, gets excommunicated, maybe knows a lot more about church history than the average member.
John Dehlin [00:10:10] In Michael Quinn's case, he's also gay. Like, there's no way this guy believes. Right. And yet he claims to believe that there were literally golden plates and this is the literal restoration of the one true church. And I think people are kind of divided. Like, some think he's just. It's all a game. Like, it's all a show that. That just helps him get maximum effect for whatever agenda he has. And then there's other people that are like. And, you know, I've interviewed him, and I have no reason to believe he's not totally the real deal. Right. And I think a lot of people have these questions about Kate.
John Dehlin [00:10:42] It's like she's gaming this. This is just. She's. She's assuming the posture of a literal believer and never questioning, just to have maximum impact on her cause. And the fact that she's an attorney, bright, aware of all the issues, someone would go, how in the world could she be a literal believer in the truthfulness of the church, especially given how defiant she's been, by some perspectives, to the leadership of the church.
John Dehlin [00:11:13] So if I were to ask you to bear testimony as to whether or not her beliefs are legit, You've lived with her. You know, can you bear testimony to that?
Neil Ransom [00:11:22] Yeah, absolutely. I mean, I think, you know, Kate's not ignorant to some of the questions that there is about church history or things like that. And for me, kind of, you know, sent me through a loop but for Kate, when she saw that there was, you know, there was evidence that our early Mormon founders had flaws to her, that actually just reinforced in her mind that Mormonism is capable. You know, Mormonism is, Has room for people with flaws and it has wiggle room to make bold changes and do things like that. And so, yeah, I think Kate, or I know that Kate has never doubted the church or the truthfulness of it. And in fact, when, like I said, when she learns, you know, if she learns about questionable things from early church history, that just reinforces her view of how the church is as being a very pliable, like, accepting organization.
John Dehlin [00:12:26] And as you've studied and had your doubts, have you studied the Book of Mormon historicity, the anachronisms, the questions about the gold plates, the Book of Abraham and the translations, and I mean, all the things, the DNA, you know, all the things that would make someone an anthropologist, an archaeologist, you know, sort of say this book, this Book of Mormon, this Book of Abraham, they are 19th century fabrications. Right. So you studied all that, right? Yeah. So, yeah. Did you ever talk to Kate about that stuff?
Neil Ransom [00:12:58] Sure, I would bring some things up.
John Dehlin [00:13:00] Okay. And so. So those stuff, those things have been concerns for you?
Neil Ransom [00:13:04] Yeah. And I. And I mean, I guess I kind of came to the conclusion through this process that, that either I would have to, like, if I accept kind of the. Like, to me, it seems like there's a lot of mysticism in Mormonism, especially in the founding, and a lot of, a lot of these, like, grand events that founded Mormonism, similar to all the other religions in the world. And that personally, as saints, we are asked to seek a spiritual confirmation that what we've learned is true. But that is, you know, other churches also have.
Neil Ransom [00:13:47] Also seek spiritual confirmation that they're. That their religion is true. And so I kind of came to a point that said either if I have to, If I can accept that Mormonism is a true religion and is a path to get back to God, then I have to accept that all religions are that way because they share so many of those similarities.
Neil Ransom [00:14:09] Or if I say that only Mormonism, like, if I can't accept other religions as also being a path to God because they have the same characteristics of Mormonism, then I would have to reject, then there's no God. I have to accept atheism in my mind.
John Dehlin [00:14:23] Right.
Neil Ransom [00:14:23] And so I have kind of decided to, to choose the former and say that Mormonism is one path to God and other religions are another path to God. And, you know, it's Up.
John Dehlin [00:14:35] It's.
Neil Ransom [00:14:36] It's big becoming of an individual to find the way that is going, you know, for them, to find the way that works for them.
John Dehlin [00:14:45] So kind of a universalistic impulse, right? Yeah, which I totally. Oh, go ahead.
Neil Ransom [00:14:50] And so that has allowed me to. I mean, that was kind of the. When I came to that conclusion, that allowed me to kind of re. Re. Engage myself in Mormonism, you know, and join Kate.
John Dehlin [00:15:03] Right.
Neil Ransom [00:15:03] Like, participate more with Kate and Mormonism, because I. I figured it was a one.
John Dehlin [00:15:09] One of many ways, many paths of Mount Fuji. But. So have you come to a conclusion about the historicity, the Book of Mormon, the Book of Abraham, the. The absolutist kind of truth claims, or are you suspending judgment or.
Neil Ransom [00:15:23] I mean, some things I have and some things I haven't. You know, I, I worked for a BYU archaeologist for. For five years doing graphic design. And, you know, I, you know, he never tried to like, mix church and, and his work together until he was kind of forced to. And, and I guess, you know, from that perspective, I always had hope that there was like, going to be this strong evidence that Nephites and Lamanites lived on the American continents and we were going to find something to prove, you know, to prove that that happened in reality, that that literally happened. And, you know, no such evidence presents itself.
Neil Ransom [00:16:12] And, and so in my mind, I've had to conclude that, that, you know, if I, like, I can still accept the Book of Mormon to be a spiritual book that provides spiritual guidance for people, because I've seen that in my life when I was on my mission, when I would read the Book of Mormon in the morning, I would have a better day than when I didn't.
Neil Ransom [00:16:31] But I don't. I don't have to accept the, like, historicity or the literature, like, accepted as a literal document for that to be the case.
John Dehlin [00:16:40] And that, that doesn't lead you to say Joseph Smith was a bad guy.
Neil Ransom [00:16:43] Right.
John Dehlin [00:16:44] It leads you to think what?
Neil Ransom [00:16:46] I mean, I think for, for fooling people, sure.
John Dehlin [00:16:48] But instead, Joseph Smith was.
Neil Ransom [00:16:50] I mean, I, I kind of think of people who do big things kind of. You know, sometimes you kind of have to. I don't know. You know, it makes me think that nobody's perfect. You know, I don't know if. Yeah, I don't know. I can't conclude if Joseph Smith was like, intentionally. Intentionally misguiding people or if he believed it himself.
John Dehlin [00:17:12] We don't know. Right.
Neil Ransom [00:17:13] We don't know.
John Dehlin [00:17:13] Okay.
Neil Ransom [00:17:14] You know, crazier things have. People have done crazier things and believes crazier things and believe crazier things. And, you know, and I think it boils down to his intentions would obviously be, you know, like, kind of key to that, that whole argument.
Neil Ransom [00:17:32] But what it does. Yeah, what it. What it does make me believe is that if Mormonism, if we can have a founding, if our founder can be flawed and we can still create a church that has good in the world, then we should also have space in the church for each of us to be flawed and we can accept each other, accept each other's imperfections. And unfortunately, that just hasn't been my experience in the church. And I think one of the reasons I've never really engaged as much as I could have is because I felt it was just too judgmental or of me and everyone else, and I was expected to be too judgmental of other people.
Neil Ransom [00:18:16] And, you know, like, you hear talks in church, like, when I was at byu, Idaho, you hear talks about modesty or, you know, chastity or where they would say, if you, like, what do they call masturbation now?
Kate Kelly [00:18:31] Self abuse. Yeah.
Neil Ransom [00:18:32] If you self abuse, you're going to hell. But then you hear stories of Joseph Smith with all of his wives, and if he gets to go to heaven, why would. Why would any of that matter for. Yeah, for me or anyone else to get to heaven. And so we. If we can have. I believe that if we can have. If we can give Joseph Smith a break, we can give each other a break, and that would make a much better environment for us all in the
John Dehlin [00:18:57] church, but the culture is not necessarily reflecting that right now. Yeah, Kate, So accepting that you have been and remain a literalistic, absolute true believer. Okay, did you have the typical. What I would say is the typical response to a spouse struggling in their faith, which is, oh, my gosh, what's wrong with you? Like, are you sinning? How dare you. This is. We got married under this, you know, the typical. You know, and then fear for a soul and, like, go crying to the parents or the bishop or his parents. Like, I'm worried about Neil. No, now, explain that. Explain how you've avoided that.
Kate Kelly [00:19:40] And I just said, all right, I'm not gonna go by myself, but I'm gonna go. So you're coming with me. You can bring your iPad, but you're coming with me.
John Dehlin [00:19:52] But what about his soul and, you know, his status of God, and I just don't.
Kate Kelly [00:19:56] I. I don't. I think what helps me maintain. Well, okay, excommunication aside, I think what helps Me maintain, you know, participation in Mormonism is that I'm not an absolutist in that way, really, in any way in my life, but particularly in that way. I don't think people who aren't Mormon are going to hell. Particularly not my spouse. But, you know, I think my beliefs are evolving. I mean, I don't. I just don't think men who are called to lay leadership positions have the authority decide who goes to hell and who doesn't. Particularly since now they've said that I'm going to hell.
John Dehlin [00:20:41] And when you say hell, you mean not celestial Kingdom, not with your family.
Kate Kelly [00:20:45] Right, right. That I'm. That I'm going to outer darkness or whatever, that I'm. I guess I'll be in the two Lestral Kingdom according to them. So I think. But I never thought that I wasn't like, oh, no, he's going to hell. I'm like, I think. I'm like, he's being authentic. You know, he's. He's having, like, severe emotional distress over having to teach an elders quorum lesson about something he doesn't believe. That doesn't seem right. You know, someone shouldn't have to do that to be able to participate in a religion. So, no, I just. I don't know.
Kate Kelly [00:21:21] I was really. I kept insisting, like, all right, when we go to Kenya, things will be different. Like, it won't be as orthodox. Like, people won't be as judgmental. You know, I just kept thinking, oh, maybe in a different environment, he'll feel more comfortable. But I think. And that stressed him out a lot.
Kate Kelly [00:21:38] So I was just insisting, like, things are going to get better. Things are going to get better. But I think we came to a good place where it was like, we're both. It's funny because we're on these parallel tracks of, like, me trying to be authentic with gender issues and ordained women and Neil trying to be authentic with, like, historicity of the Book of Mormon and all those other questions he had.
Kate Kelly [00:22:00] And so I, you know, I just came to a place where I was like, well, he's just trying to do the same thing I'm trying to do, which is be authentic and is how
John Dehlin [00:22:08] much of your Mormonism is similar to his in sort of a Many Paths up Mount Fuji. You know, we don't have a monopoly on truth. And.
Kate Kelly [00:22:18] Yeah, no, I definitely don't think we have a monopoly on truth.
John Dehlin [00:22:22] Or what about on access to the Celestial Kingdom? You know, the Mormon ordinances? I mean, that's very Mormon.
Neil Ransom [00:22:29] Right?
John Dehlin [00:22:29] You have to have the Mormon baptism, the Mormon endowment, the Mormon ceiling to be able to make the social kingdom.
Kate Kelly [00:22:37] No, I don't believe that. And I. And it's not just because mine have been all voided.
John Dehlin [00:22:44] Okay, so this is like, huge because, like, that's what most Mormons believe, right?
Kate Kelly [00:22:49] Yeah, I don't know. I. I don't think that's true.
John Dehlin [00:22:52] Right, right.
Kate Kelly [00:22:53] I don't think that's true. I don't think most Mormons believe that.
John Dehlin [00:22:56] Talk about that. Because I think you're right.
Kate Kelly [00:22:58] I don't think most Mormons look at their Hindu neighbors or their Catholic neighbors or their, what, you know, any other. Their atheist neighbors and think like, oh, those people are going to hell, too bad for them.
John Dehlin [00:23:10] No, they think terrestrial or terrestrial, they don't go to celestial.
Kate Kelly [00:23:13] Right. Like, those people aren't going to he. The like super VIP heaven, as Brother Jake would say. Like, those people aren't going to super VIP heaven because they didn't make the right decision. Like, some people believe that, but I don't think the majority of. Especially when you think about, okay, like all of India, all of China, all of most of the African continent, like, all of these places where people have not and never will hear about Mormonism. Are all those people going to be relocated to different kingdoms? No, I don't think that's true. I don't think that will ever be true. I think the Mormon conception that I find most true is, like, people will choose to be where they're happiest.
Kate Kelly [00:23:57] And so at its core, I think that's true. Well, a lot of Mormons would say, like, that involves, like, getting a literal ordinance done and like choosing to be Mormon in the afterlife. But I think I feel more expensive about that. I think, like, you'll choose to be where you're most happiest and.
Kate Kelly [00:24:15] Or where you are happy. Happiest. Most, not most happiest. I think that makes a lot of sense to me that, like, people who are good people who make good choices and people who want to be with their families will be.
John Dehlin [00:24:30] It's kind of the everything will work out in the end sort of perspective, which I think a lot of Mormons have. Right?
Kate Kelly [00:24:36] Yeah, I think. I honestly think that's the most common belief that Mormons have.
John Dehlin [00:24:41] Yeah, I think, I think you're right.
Kate Kelly [00:24:43] If we don't understand it, it'll work out in the end.
John Dehlin [00:24:46] That's right.
Kate Kelly [00:24:46] Like you got 17 wives. It'll work out in the end. Like, those people never got baptized. It'll work out in the End, like, I think I'm just being more, like, candid about what I think. I think that's probably what a lot of people think.
John Dehlin [00:25:02] I think you're right. Neil, were you gonna say something really quick?
Neil Ransom [00:25:04] Well, I was just. To me, one of the ways that I thought of. Of how the relationship with ordinances to your faith is that, you know, because I believe that you can get to heaven regardless of the religion. But for some people, participating in those ordinances does have great spiritual significance and does help them become a better person. Right. So if you.
John Dehlin [00:25:26] So they're not the key, but they can be important.
Neil Ransom [00:25:30] Like, if you decide that Mormonism is your way to get to heaven, then you participate in the ordinances because they'll.
John Dehlin [00:25:36] Right.
Neil Ransom [00:25:37] They're part of the process. But if you're Hindu and you decide that's the way you get to heaven, other ways you participate in those ordinances as well.
Proxy Work, Ordinances, and Theological Doubts
John Dehlin [00:25:44] So, Kate, So the third mission of the church is all this proxy work for the dead and for the. For the, you know, the way that Mormons are often taught, it's like, yeah, we're doing all that work. A thousand years of millennial work. It's because, like, without those literal ordinances, those people aren't making it. Does this mean that you've had less of a conviction about the literality of proxy work in terms of it being, you know, essential for salvation?
Kate Kelly [00:26:13] Yeah. I mean, I served a mission, and there's a lot of emphasis on baptism, and I think there's a lot of value in, like, a rebirth, and I find a lot of value in ritual. Do I think that, like, literally every person that's ever lived on the earth is literally going to have a proxy baptism performed by them and in the millennium? I don't know. Again, maybe, you know, if. If they choose that or if that's necessary, but for me, I just don't believe in a God that would be so vindictive as to block someone from, like, celebrating an eternal existence with their family because, like, Brother Jones and Manti forgot to have their name on the roll or printed it wrong or, you know, whatever prevented them from having that ordinance performed.
Kate Kelly [00:27:05] And I guess a lot of people would say, well, you're just saying it's all going to work out in the end. And I'm like, yeah, it is. I feel very confident that it's going to work out in the end. And I don't know, I just don't think that separates me from most Mormon people.
Kate Kelly [00:27:24] I think there's a lot of trust in like a parental relationship. And that's not something a parent would do. Particularly not a good parent.
John Dehlin [00:27:34] Okay, well that's, you know, that's interesting. So I think you do have kind of a expansive, I don't want to say non literal in some instances, but you. I'd say it's a progressive view on Mormon doctrine and theology.
Kate Kelly [00:27:50] And I think that's, I mean, I think for me, you know, like there's all these conferences for like people having a faith crisis and like I went to one of them that the Givens, like Fiona Givens and Terrell Givens put on and I just super didn't belong. Like there were a lot of people in a lot of angst and turmoil over. And I'm not saying that's wrong. I'm just saying I wasn't in that place. And I'm not like, you know, wringing my like tear worn handkerchief over polygamy or like, you know, is. Do I want to find, like study all of the archaeological evidence? Is the Book of Mormon literally true or not?
Kate Kelly [00:28:28] And um, I don't worry about those things as much. Um, I feel like my lived experience is the most important thing for me. Um, and so I don't do like, it's, it's not that I like the CES letter thing that Neil, you know, read. I didn't read it. I don't really. It doesn't speak. Those questions aren't the questions that I have as much as like, how does this impact the lived experience of 50% of Mormons today? And like, so for me those questions are much more urgent. Like, do I think, you know, I think a lot of this, I think this is particularly true of Mormon men.
Kate Kelly [00:29:08] It's like, well, did you know, Oliver Cowdery do this and this thing and did he say this and this and thing and was this written and like blah, blah, like they get into the really esoteric minutia of Mormon history. And that's just not something that speaks to me or is important to me because my lived experience is so tortured that that's the most urgent.
John Dehlin [00:29:31] Sure, sure. But you can, I mean people who have those questions. So for example, what did or didn't happen with the Melchizedek priesthood? Like, it's kind of not unimportant to realize that there's no record of a Melchizedek priesthood ever really being obtained when it was claimed to have been obtained and that that was kind of by some people's account inserted like five or eight years later than when it was claimed to have actually happened. And if you couple things like that with the Book of Mormon historicity, Book of Abraham historicity questions, as a lawyer, you know, there's a credible question here which is just like, what if Joseph was just making it all up? Yeah.
Kate Kelly [00:30:14] I mean, again, for me, I don't know if people feel like this is a cop out, but for me that question isn't as important to me as the fact that I, and no other woman has the Melchizedek priesthood as is currently practiced. How does that affect us negatively? And so for a lot of people are like, they're like, so are you, you know, in your arguments, do you go back and say women had the priesthood and there's all these scriptural and you're trying to restore it? You know, for me, like, I'm in some ways a very forward looking person. And so for me to say, like, okay, did it literally happen in the way they said it happen or did they insert it later?
Kate Kelly [00:30:47] All these different things. I mean, I'm not saying that's, that's wrong to think about that. But for me, I'm like, if we're Zion and we're supposed to build Zion here on earth and we're all coming together to like perfect, perfect the Saints, which is also one of the missions of the church, what does that look like going forward? What can that be? Why don't I have the Melchizedek priesthood? Why does anyone that's female not have it? So those kinds of questions, like, are just more pressing, but it's all built
John Dehlin [00:31:16] on the foundation of whether it really happened or not. Right?
Kate Kelly [00:31:19] Yeah.
John Dehlin [00:31:20] But for you, I mean, you've kind of answered it. You've just said you dwell in the now, not in the past.
Kate Kelly [00:31:29] Yeah. And I'm not saying like, I don't. That doesn't make or break it for me.
John Dehlin [00:31:35] So for you there's a possibility the Book of Mormon was a 19th century work of fiction and if you were to find that out, it would kind of like, not important. Yeah, yeah, okay. Or if Joseph Smith made up that he received the Melchizedek priesthood, which is what you're kind of asking for. You're kind of like, ah, right, it's where are we now and what are people experiencing now and how do we make now better and the future? Yeah, but it all does rest on these truth claims. Right, but you're just saying that's not valuable to you.
Kate Kelly [00:32:08] Yeah, I mean, it's just not the most important thing to me. I don't, I Find, I mean, I feel like in Mormonism, when a lot of people go through some sort of faith crisis or transition or perspective, you know, paradigm shift, they, they tend to throw out the baby with the bathwater and they tend to say like, well, this thing that is causing me much consternation is like, means it's all not true. And I'm throwing away everything and I'm walking away. And I think a lot of people have good reasons and, and for their own emotional well being and, and mental health should, should find a safe place. And if that's not the church, then I understand why they leave. But for me, I don't, I don't know, maybe Neil can explain this.
John Dehlin [00:32:58] No, it's okay.
Kate Kelly [00:32:59] But I, I just, I'm not, I don't, I don't. I find a lot of value in Mormonism. I find a lot of value in the things I've learned. It's, it's introduced me to the most passionate, interesting people like Neil that I've ever met.
Kate Kelly [00:33:15] It's, it's, it's made me like a big thinker. It's made me a truth seeker. It's not the only way anyone on earth can be a truth seeker, but that's how it's shaped me. And so I think my, like, rigid adherence to truth seeking and my like, extreme dedication to authenticity are products of Mormonism and are products of being raised in Mormonism. And so I think one of the things that I do really well is like, I'm able to keep both things intact. And I always was. So when I, when Neil's like, well, what about, you know, the Book of Abraham? Or what about this? Or what about this?
Kate Kelly [00:33:53] What about this? Then I don't say, oh, that's not true. I'm not, I'm not denying that there are. For example, the church recently came out with a statement saying that the Book of Abraham is not a literal translation, which many people knew far before that.
Kate Kelly [00:34:08] But for me, I was like, I'm glad we finally came clean on that, or are in the process of coming clean on that. I think that's another step in the direction of Zion. So for me, I don't know, I just don't get hung up on things like that.
John Dehlin [00:34:25] Yeah, I mean, one of the early podcasts I did was with a good friend, Dave Christian, and he sort of put up the validity versus utility dichotomy. Some people are validity Mormons, where it's got to be valid or invalid. Some people are utility Mormons where it's like, does it work? Is it working? Is it useful? Is it good? And does it do good things? And it sounds like you're leaning towards the validity over the utility over the validity, right?
Kate Kelly [00:34:51] Yeah, when you put it like that, is that fair? That makes. That makes sense.
John Dehlin [00:34:54] Yeah. And I love this idea that. And it's stereotypically, it is men more than women, in my experience, that focus on the validity. But I love what you're saying in that it's very easy to ignore other ways of knowing, like spirit, like feeling, like lived experience. And it let validity trump everything. And I think that's really important. So I love that you're getting that message across.
Kate Kelly [00:35:24] It's at the core of Mormonism. Right. Like, when we read the Book of. When we taught the Book of Mormon to investigators, we weren't like. And look at this, like, archaeological evidence and look at this. You know, we're like, pray about it. How does it make you feel? And so I think it's at the core of Mormonism. And some people would say that's a manipulation tactic, but for me, like, for sincere truth seekers, it does. It is about feeling. It is about, you know, the beautiful, the valuable, the. The. The things that you find, you know, that are. That are most important. And I'm not saying you can only get that from Mormonism, but for me, that's Mormonism. And. And so I choose to. To keep those things. I just have. I know I said this before, but I just have so much more, like, compassion for Joseph Smith these days.
John Dehlin [00:36:19] Yeah, yeah.
Kate Kelly [00:36:21] Like, as a founder, I'm not comparing myself to him, but as a founder of something, people just want you to be perfect or evil, the worst thing ever, and there's nothing in between. You know, it's people who love you and revere you and say everything you're doing is wonderful and perfect. And there's people who hate you and despise, despise you and think everything you're doing is like a calculated move to deceive. And there's very few people in between.
John Dehlin [00:36:47] Yeah.
Kate Kelly [00:36:48] And so that's. I'm like, you gotta give the guy a break, man. He did, like, some really big things. He did some really big bad things and some really big good things, and he just did really big things. He was a huge dreamer. He was just an incredible person who made things out of nothing. And some of those things were good, and some of those things were bad. I fully reject polygamy as a doctrine. I think it was wrong.
Kate Kelly [00:37:14] I think a lot of the practices that were made were to take advantage of women and were very discriminatory against women in the early church. All you have to do is read diaries of women who were in the practice of polygamy to understand how detrimental it was to them. But in other ways it freed them. You know, if you were the 27th wife, then you go become a doctor. Yeah, you could become a midwife. You could do a lot of things. So there's a lot of nuance in everything. And you can't say it's like, completely bad or completely good.
Kate Kelly [00:37:47] You have to be able to separate out and cull the things that are good. For me, that's easy. And for other people, it's really hard. And so even after my excommunication, when people are just expecting me to be crying in the basement, I guess forever, for the rest of my life, I'm not. I mean, I cried for, like, I don't know, an afternoon.
Kate Kelly [00:38:11] And that. That pain was very real. But I was able to move on because I. I'm able to process that emotion and I'm able to separate what I did and say, you know, I acted with integrity. And there are a lot of great things that I can keep moving forward.
John Dehlin [00:38:29] And. And just to close out this little section, what is typical of many who go through a faith crisis, they would have said before the faith crisis. I've had experiences that I cannot deny where the spirit has borne witness to me that this is true and emotional and hair standing up and tears. And they often feel like they need to reinterpret those experiences as being emotional manipulation or just what happens to you when you're in that setting, or true. But other experiences are also valid. Have you had those types of experiences where you felt strong witness as the foundation of your faith? And what do you do with those now? Do you choose to reinterpret them or are you sticking with them?
Kate Kelly [00:39:17] Well, sure, I've had those experiences like most Mormons have. But again, I don't think I've ever. I don't know, it's hard to describe. I don't think I've ever said, like, oh, was that true or wasn't that true? I'm just like, yes, that was a wonderful experience that confirmed, like, whatever the experience was.
Kate Kelly [00:39:36] And again, I don't think I'm, you know, I don't think I ever had a confirmation like Mormonism, like, supremacy, you know, like, Mormonism is the only thing, like, everyone else is not going to make it to super VIP heaven. And. And, you know, I don't Think I ever had a confirmation of that.
Kate Kelly [00:39:57] But I did have, you know, and continue to have spiritual experiences along the way, and I value those. So I don't. Again, I think that's why I say I never had a faith crisis. Cause I never felt I was at a crossroads where I had to choose between that and moving forward.
Testimony, Validity, and the Case for Women's Ordination
John Dehlin [00:40:13] So your testimony, the witnesses that you have have borne, testimony of what, that this is good or this is where you should be?
Kate Kelly [00:40:19] Yeah. And I'm very certain that on my mission, I said, like, this is the true church and. Etc. But I was much more orthodox in the want to talk about my mission? I was extremely orthodox and very, very, very, extremely obedient. But I think as I've grown, and not just from ordain women, but as I've matured as an adult person, I think Mormons have like, a maturation process that's much later than most people. I think you don't really begin to explore until probably your late twenties a lot of times in Mormonism. And I don't. I'm not saying that's good or bad. That's just the way it is for me and for most people I know. And so I think that, you know, I just, I. I think life isn't so black and white.
John Dehlin [00:41:12] Yeah. Okay. While we're. I was going to cover this later, but let's just talk about it while we're still on beliefs. One of the criticisms levied at you is that what's more central to Mormonism than obedience to the prophet? Right. And so I've heard somebody just say right there, she's not a believer because she doesn't believe in obeying the prophet. And that's like what Mormonism is at its core.
Kate Kelly [00:41:40] Mm.
John Dehlin [00:41:42] How do you respond to that?
Kate Kelly [00:41:43] Apparently that person got a memo that I never got, which is that Thomas S. Monson said that women will never be ordained. Well, no, that's not true. The First Presidency issued a statement that didn't say anything about whether or not women would be ordained. In fact, I think that statement left it wide open. They said men are ordained to priesthood offices, which is a factual assertion about present practice.
Kate Kelly [00:42:07] And they never said anything about women in the priesthood really, in that statement. And they said that people can continue to ask questions. So I think that left a lot open, and people should take that tiny crack and open it much wider.
Kate Kelly [00:42:22] But I think this is a really, the most fundamental difference I have with most people is not about women's ordination. It's about revelation, and it's about the Process of revelation. So for those type of thinkers, they think Thomas S. Monson is just gonna have like a Paul on the Road to Damascus experience. He's gonna be struck down by something he's never thought of before. And like, he'll write it down on tablets of stone and that's how it will be or whatever. That's a compilation of like seven stories. But so, but the way I see Revelation working is it's very participatory. It's again back to this concept of Zion where we're all Zion.
Kate Kelly [00:43:04] You know, it's like the city of Enoch. Every single person in that city was without sin and without guile, and they all got there together. So for me, that's what the Church is. We're all part of it. And revelation is something that we participate in together. Like Emma asking Joseph Smith about use of tobacco and other substances. He goes to the Lord and he gets a revelation, and now we have the word of wisdom. So I see revelation as very participatory. And so I see myself as participating in that.
Kate Kelly [00:43:33] And I just, I think church history and scriptures and pretty much every example we have is not, you know, there are very few isolated examples like Paul on the Road to Damascus. But for the most part, revelation is a participatory thing.
John Dehlin [00:43:50] And it's particularly interesting time wise to. To get the Church's essay on the Book of Abraham, because what was that if it's not some way to create a very expansive view of what revelation is? I mean, that's the outcome of that essay. It's that, yeah, we said it was a literal translation, but really revelation is really complicated and it's expansive and that's what they're saying on the one hand. And that's. It sounds like that's what you're saying as well.
Kate Kelly [00:44:16] Yeah. And I mean, I think the Book of Abraham is different in that Joseph Smith said it was a literal translation and now they're saying that's not the case.
John Dehlin [00:44:25] Right, right.
Kate Kelly [00:44:27] And so those. That's contradictory. That's not just like. I mean, they're trying to massage it in a way that is. Yes. Creates more room, but they just have to say it, you know, like he said it was translation. It's not. We have the drawings. Those aren't correct. And, and they did say that. I mean, they said Mormon and non Mormon, Egyptologists agree that this is not a translation. But now they're saying, well, he looked at those and received completely different revelation about a completely different time. And that had actually nothing to do with those. It just inspired him. Yeah, essentially. And so, yeah, that's different.
John Dehlin [00:45:12] But the way that the church is trying to get out of it is by talking about revelation being more complicated, more nuanced.
Kate Kelly [00:45:17] Right, but that's what I'm saying, like, okay, that's how I think revelation is.
John Dehlin [00:45:21] That's why I'm saying it's ironic that you're both kind of saying similar things.
Kate Kelly [00:45:25] Yeah. Like it's not just like God handed it down and Joseph Smith translated it word for word.
John Dehlin [00:45:29] Wasn't that.
Kate Kelly [00:45:30] It's like, I looked at it, I felt inspired and I came up something totally different.
John Dehlin [00:45:33] Totally different.
Kate Kelly [00:45:35] And so revelation can involve multiple people, multiple sources. It's much more nuanced. And I think if people read that essay on Abraham, they have to accept that that is true.
John Dehlin [00:45:48] Right.
Kate Kelly [00:45:48] And they need to incorporate that.
John Dehlin [00:45:50] But something that I think. I don't know if you're avoiding it or if I'm not asking it. Right. But there's a degree to which, you know, there are leaders and it's clear that the leaders were telling you no or not yet, or please stand down.
Kate Kelly [00:46:08] Well, I think if you include the Public affairs department as leaders, then yes, that's true. But when I look at the leadership
John Dehlin [00:46:16] chart, have they communicated anything? Have the apostles or first presidency. No, never communicated anything.
Kate Kelly [00:46:22] No, no.
John Dehlin [00:46:24] It's church by pr.
Kate Kelly [00:46:25] If you, if I'm looking at the leadership chart in the ensign, I do not see the Public affairs department. And so no church leader has said, you know, you can't ask questions. You can't even. Ally Isom, when she came on the radio show, she said it's not that ordained women is asking these questions. It's the tone, which of course is very problematic. But I think they're starting to be forced into a corner of saying it's okay to ask questions.
Kate Kelly [00:46:55] They're sort of trying to chop that up and say like you can't ask certain questions or you can't ask them in the cert in a certain way. But again, I think we're getting there. I think we're. I think the way I see this conversation is like the tip of the iceberg and like the church PR department is getting out like industrial sized blowtorches, trying to blow away the ice that's dipping away the surface and then. But they don't realize, like that's the tip and there's a huge iceberg under the sea that's going to surface.
Kate Kelly [00:47:25] And so I see this as the very beginning of a conversation, I mean, with Complete honesty, I can say I don't think in any way what people who are participating in ordained women is going against the prophet or going against leaders. I mean, the only thing people could say is I was specifically going against my local leaders, which again, the church insists and has continued to insist it was a local decision.
Kate Kelly [00:47:48] So my stake president told me to take down the website, and I didn't do it. That's the only leader I think I was contradicting.
John Dehlin [00:47:54] But the. Oh, so when the PR department said, please don't, you know, come to General Conference and be disruptive, you're saying, didn't they issue some statement like that?
Kate Kelly [00:48:04] They issued a statement that I think was signed by Cody Craner.
John Dehlin [00:48:09] Right.
Kate Kelly [00:48:10] Who I've never sustained.
John Dehlin [00:48:12] You're saying that's not the apostles. Now, what if they say the PR department is led by an apostle? I'm sure there's a committee. A couple apostles are on the PR committee.
Kate Kelly [00:48:22] That's fine. Then they should sign the statement. I mean, that's what other organizations do. You know, the PR department writes it, and then whoever is giving the directive or under whose authority is signing it signs it.
John Dehlin [00:48:36] What about the statement? How does it feel to have the first presidency in the quorum of the 12 issue a statement that was largely had your name on it?
Kate Kelly [00:48:44] I think it's really incredible to be part of an organization a pretty small group of women have organized in just over a year, a movement that has not only worldwide impact, but has affected and gotten a response from the highest leaders in that organization. So, like, think about the United States government, for example. That would never happen. Like, it's. It's just too big. It's, you know, in other organizing that I've done, like, it's very difficult to get a response. So I think it's funny that Mormonism, like, things happen so fast in Mormonism and people still say, like, this could never happen. I'm like, one year, one year, two actions, 500 profiles. And we got a response from the first presidency of the Church that did not say what we're asking for won't ever happen.
John Dehlin [00:49:33] Yeah, yeah. And did you like what they wrote in that?
Kate Kelly [00:49:37] I mean, yeah, I mean, it was very generic, and I could tell it was very carefully parsed. But again, it did not say that women will never be ordained. It didn't actually even address women in the priesthood. It said that men hold priesthood offices. Again, factual assertion. That's true. Men hold priesthood offices. I agree.
Kate Kelly [00:49:57] But I think people need to have a little more optimism or maybe they may would say I need to have a little less. But I think in some ways, again, this is the beginning of conversation. A lot of people see my excommunication as the end, like the apocalypse of, I don't know, progressive Mormonism or feminism at least.
Kate Kelly [00:50:20] But I see it as the very beginning. And I think we need to have that mentality that, like, there are going to be a lot of setbacks along the way. There are going to be. And this is every movement ever in the history of time, like there. There are setbacks, there are. There's a period where they ignore you, there's a period where they fight against you, and then there's a period where you achieve your goals. And.
Kate Kelly [00:50:48] And so we're already past the ignore. We're well past the ignore stage. And so I think it's important to remember that this is a process and that no change happens without this process happening.
John Dehlin [00:51:04] Martin Luther King said, no power relinquishes itself voluntarily. It must be forced. Yeah, probably the number one question that we received was, and this is something I think I asked you before my last interview with you, long before this all went down, what if the prophet. And there was even a report, I think that Ballard and Clayton went to Virginia and told people that the brethren have asked and that the answer was no. Did you hear that report as well? And then there's a bigger question which is how do you know that they haven't said no? They just haven't told us. How do we know the Lord hasn't said no? And you know, isn't it the. Aren't you kind of forcing the brethren to make revelations when that's really their job to do?
Timeline and Prospects for Change in the Church
Kate Kelly [00:51:50] Well, no, I haven't heard that. That's what Ballard and Clayton's. From what I heard that they did, they gave a sort of like priesthood training and someone asked about ordering women and then they. I wasn't there and I haven't seen like a transcript of what they said, but they sort of. And this was in my stake President was there that people involved with ordain women. I don't know exactly what they said, but something about how they, you know, were on the slippery slope to apostasy or something.
John Dehlin [00:52:21] Well, what about that question that if President Monson came to U. K. Kelly and said, I prayed God said no, this is until the millennium, this ain't changing.
Kate Kelly [00:52:33] Well, wow, that would be a lot of progress because he would agree to meet with us and no leaders have agreed to meet with us or reply or respond to us Directly. But I. We've gotten that question since the beginning of ordained women. And I think in the scriptures it says, and Joseph Smith himself said that we're to weary the Lord unceasingly until he blesses us.
Kate Kelly [00:52:58] And I think maybe they are getting a little wearied at this point, the leaders of our. Of our, you know, continuous requests. But that's how you get blessings. That's how you get change. That's how you get things to. To move forward. And so I, you know, if Thomas S. Monson and I sat down, that would be wonderful. I think he would be able to see me as a person and not as a problem, which I think in some ways the leaders have been responding to us and as a daughter of God.
Kate Kelly [00:53:34] But I think, you know, there's an example of a man who ordained a black man, Mark Barnes, who's one of our male allies, his grandfather, I believe it was, or his uncle, ordained a black man seven months before men got black men got the priesthood. In 1978, he was excommunicated. In the end, he was right, but he was never reinstated.
John Dehlin [00:54:03] Some would say he was wrong because he went outside the authority.
Kate Kelly [00:54:06] Right. So it's a question of loyalty, not of, you know, correctness, or it's a
John Dehlin [00:54:13] question of God's timing, not man or woman's timing.
Kate Kelly [00:54:16] Right, right, right. But I think it's just so interesting to think about that. Like, someone was so committed to the idea, and if it weren't for him and other people like him, I don't think the leaders would have considered it so seriously. And it wasn't just him. It was, you know, people were writing letters to leaders, working through back channels. You had to have all these black members who were also agitating and a lot of outside pressure. So there were a lot of things that made that change happen. And I. The way that I describe it is because, again, I've been asked the question a lot is when you think about Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, and they went into the fiery furnace, they said they had absolute faith that they would be saved.
Kate Kelly [00:55:00] And then they said, but if not, we will continue to serve the Lord. So that doesn't mean they were like, well, maybe, maybe not. They said, like, I know that this will happen, but if it doesn't, I'll just keep on keeping on. And so I think that's the way I think about it. Like, I know that women will be ordained. Like, as sure as they were that they would be saved from the fiery furnace. Like, I know that it's going to happen, but if it doesn't, I'll just keep going.
John Dehlin [00:55:28] Any. Any thought on a time frame, like, I don't know, 10 years, 20 years, 50 years.
Kate Kelly [00:55:33] Yeah, I have no idea. I think people are feeling very pessimistic right now, and I understand because there's a lot of, like, anguish in the Mormon community. But I feel very optimistic. I think, like, wow, that happened in one year. Like, I never, never. When I started ordain women, I thought it would be literally a handful of close friends and, like, other people I could convince to do this with me. And, you know, Margaret Toscano said that she could count on one hand people who would publicly support ordination. And that's gone in one year versus the entire history of Mormonism to hundreds and thousands. And it's.
Kate Kelly [00:56:11] It's just such a sh. Like, I think people really need to step back and have a larger view of how fast this is happening and how quickly things can change. I think. I mean, I don't know. I'm a. I'm a delusional optimist, but I think it'll happen soon.
John Dehlin [00:56:27] And do you have sympathy for the argument that if every. Every. Let's say everyone has a pet issue. My neighbor may be a true believer, but maybe he's mad about how fast offerings are used, or maybe this guy or woman down the road doesn't like, you know, the way that a primary decision happened or whatever. Right. If everybody agitated the way that you've agitated for every possible issue, it would be complete chaos. Right?
Kate Kelly [00:56:54] Slippery slope.
John Dehlin [00:56:55] No, no, no, no. It's just totally unruly. Right. No, it would be. If everybody did. Right. Well, no one would be obeying. There'd be no, you know, it'd be chaos. No rule of law. Dogs and cats sleeping together.
Kate Kelly [00:57:08] Well, I think it's interesting because dogs and cats leaving.
John Dehlin [00:57:13] That's a Chevy Chase Fletch reference. Sorry. It shows my age.
Kate Kelly [00:57:19] So I think people. People are doing that. I mean, a lot of people are speaking on different issues. There's groups organizing around temple ceilings. There's. And family members being excluded from those. There's groups organizing around garments for women and how they're not designed by or for women.
Kate Kelly [00:57:41] There's, like. I mean, I can think of a lot of things right now that are happening, but I don't see that as chaos again. I see that as Zion. Like, those people are part of Zion. If they want something to change, then they should speak up. Maybe it won't, but I think why shouldn't we all have a seat at the table, why shouldn't we be able to participate, particularly in a group that is designed not to have, you know, like, dictatorial leaders over them, but people who are leaders who are called servants?
Kate Kelly [00:58:11] If you're a leader, you're called a servant. And so we should all be able. Like, if their position is to serve us as sheep, like, if the shepherd's job is to respond to the needs of the flock, then we should be able to voice those concerns.
John Dehlin [00:58:27] But come on, you have to acknowledge, if everybody was causing a stir, we wouldn't be doing the actual work of the church. We would be, you know, kvetzing about what's not happening versus actually being a part of what should happen.
Kate Kelly [00:58:40] And I just don't see that as a problem. Like, sometimes when things come up, you know, other people say, oh, well, we should try to suppress that or we should try to distance ourselves from that cause. And I'm like, well, if it's a problem that a huge amount of people happen, it will gain steam. And if it's a problem that, like, Mary Lou down the street has, it will only be voiced by her because she's unique in that problem. So I think, like, legitimate problems that a lot of people, you know, experience or. Or are negatively impacted by will gain a lot of steam and I think will become like, for example, LGTB movement in the church.
Kate Kelly [00:59:19] Like, it will. It will gain a lot of steam because it negatively affects a lot of families. But if it's some lady just randomly whining about a complaint she has, then that will be the end of it. And so I think naturally those things will suss themselves out.
Kate Kelly [00:59:35] A cause that affects over 50% of the population of the church, like ordained women, will gain steam because it affects every family in Mormonism.
John Dehlin [00:59:46] Last question, this segment. Some people are speculating that there's a power vacuum in the church right now, that during the 19.
Kate Kelly [00:59:57] A lot of people on NPR are
John Dehlin [00:59:59] speculating, yeah, well, you know, early 1990s, my cousin, Ezra Toff Benson, was incapacitated. His grandson, Steve Benson, acknowledged this publicly. And many say that it was during this vacuum where he was sort of an invalid, that Boyd K. Packer asserted himself and began excommunicating people.
John Dehlin [01:00:25] I've probably talked to 50 people who work directly with the church in some significant capacity who all confirm that President Monson has some form of dementia and that he's. Unless he's got handlers around him and unless he's reading a speech, he's unmanageable and incoherent. And, you know, and that doesn't mean he can't be friendly to a child or wink to a crowd or wiggle his ears or read a teleprompter. But in terms of, like, really managing the church, he's over 90. It's, like, past his capacity given dementia. Do you. Do you ever think about that kind of stuff and that. That might be why there's been no, you know, if the prophet's not speaking, it can't be Boyd K.
John Dehlin [01:01:09] Packard that responds to you. But if the prophet's not able to even think about it, let alone really respond to it, thus we don't have statements from the brethren, and thus we get statements from pr. And is it possible that it's this power vacuum where someone like a Ballard or a Clayton might feel empowered to come after a you or a me when otherwise a strong leader wouldn't allow that?
Kate Kelly [01:01:32] Yeah, I mean, I. I don't know. I don't know if that's true. I don't know how much it negatively affects him. I know that people over 90. I mean, people don't live forever. So eventually he will lose capacity. Even if that's not the case now. That's just like, a fact of biology.
Kate Kelly [01:01:50] So no one can argue against that that's going to happen if it's not happening now. So I think the Church needs to be able to respond. I mean, there. There are 15 people who are leading the Church. The prophet is at the head.
Kate Kelly [01:02:05] I, I would hope that that wouldn't create, you know, an opportunity for people to do nefarious things, but that the Lord would continue to direct his work. I think, you know, maybe there should be a way for them to compassionately step down and once they're no longer able, for them to say, you know, like, the Pope. Yeah, the Pope stepped down and said, I can't. I can't do it.
Kate Kelly [01:02:30] And they are human. You know, we know that they're human. Every Mormon knows that the prophet is not infallible and not a superhero. And, and so I, I think there should be a place for them to, to cry out if that's the case. I don't know if that exists, but I don't know. I mean, I think, again, this goes back to my view of the, the, the Zion, that it's not. It's not just one person who, you know, comes up with an idea totally unattached from anything else that's happening in the world. I think, you know, because I think this criticism comes from some people who's like, now is just not the time.
Kate Kelly [01:03:13] You know, maybe later, maybe when President Monson dies and there's a younger person in there, there'd be more of an opportunity. And, you know, you really need to pay more attention to the inner imaginations of the church. But I'm saying now's the time, because now's the time for us, like, women are suffering. And so now's the time when we need to say and. And whether it's going to change after present President Monson dies, I don't know.
Kate Kelly [01:03:36] But the person who's taking over him for him is also going to be very old. And so that's just the way the current structure of the church is. So I'm not sure. I mean, if that's true, I have a lot of compassion for him. He has a huge responsibility and may, if he's. If he's really ill, may not feel up to the task.
Kate Kelly [01:03:58] So I would have a lot of compassion for him. But I don't think that means we need to do anything differently. I think that that just means, like, time, time will tell. Come, come, ye saints. No toil nor labor fear
John Dehlin [01:04:36] but with joy when you're.
The Lead-Up to Kate's Excommunication
Part 3 of 3 · Ep. 490
John Dehlin [00:00:00] 1, 2, 3. Mormon Stories Podcast is a production of the Open Stories Foundation. All donations to Mormon Stories are fully tax deductible and go directly towards keeping the podcast alive and towards building a community of support for Mormons like you. To support the podcast or to join the community, please become a monthly subscriber today@mormonstories.org hello and welcome to part three of my interview with Kate Kelly and Neil Ransom, Kate, the founder of Ordained Women and also recently excommunicated by the LDS Church. We've had a wonderful talk with Neil Ransom, Kate's husband.
John Dehlin [00:00:45] We're going to welcome Neil to jump in at any time, but we're grateful for him sharing a bit about his background and his faith and everything. I am going to ask you more questions, Neil, so you're not off the hook at all, but it's time to talk about what I think has been the most well, we want to kill two birds with one stone because on the one hand I want to archive what happened with you. You've talked about it in other places, but this is Mormon Stories and I think of it as a repository of history in some ways. So I just want to talk about the process of what happened to you, from starting ordained women to the excommunication in terms of your interactions with leadership.
John Dehlin [00:01:29] But then there's a huge dust up and this is something that I personally loathe, having tried to do a few things here and there and having just so many people come out of the woodworks and want to attack your motives and make false assumptions and accuse you of things.
John Dehlin [00:01:44] Not that any of us are perfect, but just people are so fast to want to accuse you of things and assume the worst and malign you and your motives. And when I say you, I mean us and other people like us. So it's a chance to talk about since the timeline has been one of the issues that's sort of been seen as most controversial.
John Dehlin [00:02:05] Some say that you haven't been fully honest about the extent to which you've had interactions with your leaders. I just figured we'd do the timeline. You can, if you could, probably advocate better than I could, although I have some quotes that reference what people feel like the discrepancies are between the stories of your bishop and in your stories. But you know, let's just see where it goes. So talking about what led to discipline, what have your interactions with your leaders been and how have you proceeded?
Kate Kelly [00:02:36] Well, first of all, I just want to say that this is a time for a lot of Mormons to question their assumptions in a lot of ways. So I think when people say that there is or see a discrepancy and they say, well, she's lying, that's an assumption. That means they're assuming because they saw the letter that my bishop wrote that he's telling the truth. Why are they assuming that?
John Dehlin [00:03:03] Yeah.
Kate Kelly [00:03:04] So I think they need to question their assumptions about men in power and men in general, and why, in a situation where there's a discrepancy between what a woman says and what a man says, the man would be right.
Kate Kelly [00:03:17] So I think it's important for them to think about that. What is it about your experience that makes you jump to that conclusion? And you need to rethink that. Another point is they only have one thing to go on, which is really the letter that my bishop signed and sent to me for my execution or my excommunication. Freudian slip. My excommunication.
Kate Kelly [00:03:47] And in that letter, he said, like, this has been a process of multiple months, or I can't remember the exact quote, but it was something like that. So that's the one thing they had to go on from what he said and what he, you know, allegedly wrote but signed and sent to me. Whereas, like, multiple interviews, multiple things that I've said, multiple things that I've sent, multiple emails, like, multiple ways in which I have gone over and over and over what has been my experience. So, again, doubting from what one letter sent from a man, doubting, like, a woman's entire experience. So I think this is like a teaching moment for those people, and they need to look in the mirror.
John Dehlin [00:04:31] Okay.
Kate Kelly [00:04:32] That's what I would say about that first. So, secondly, I would say I started ordaining women with a lot of apprehension about what my leader's response would be.
John Dehlin [00:04:45] I remember talking to you about it.
Kate Kelly [00:04:47] Yeah. Because it was like a huge unknown, you know, like, what are they going to do? How are they going to respond? I don't know. Nobody knows. You know, it's like the 90s, nothing until now. I mean, Margaret was excommunicated in 2000, but it was largely like, an extension of that first process.
Kate Kelly [00:05:05] And so I didn't know it was going to happen. But we launched ordained women on March 17th of 2013. I emailed all of my leaders, like the bishop, his counselors, the stake president, my Relief Society president, all of them. And I said, like, this is what I'm doing. This is what it's called.
Kate Kelly [00:05:27] You know, if you have any questions, let me know, because I want the Questions to come to me and not to other people and not, you know, second, third, fourth, seventh hand sources. And so they basically said, all right, we'll let you know if we have any questions. But didn't.
Kate Kelly [00:05:46] And so we proceeded with ordained women, you know, gain steam. We did the action in October. We. The only meeting that my bishop or stake president ever had with me was on December 12.
John Dehlin [00:06:02] Now, communication before that or meeting or no. Okay, so you launched in March. March. So from March to December, radio silence, bishop and stake president.
Kate Kelly [00:06:15] Yeah. Nope.
John Dehlin [00:06:16] And you communicate with them once, twice.
Kate Kelly [00:06:20] I emailed them several times and would just be like, this is happening. Just so you know.
Neil Ransom [00:06:27] Okay.
John Dehlin [00:06:28] And no respons.
Kate Kelly [00:06:29] No.
John Dehlin [00:06:29] Okay.
Kate Kelly [00:06:30] And so they never. I just thought, oh, things are different.
John Dehlin [00:06:35] Right, right.
Kate Kelly [00:06:36] Like, I was so apprehensive at the beginning, but I was wrong. Like, things have changed. For whatever reason, they're not punishing me or reaching out to me, you know, I don't know why. Maybe it's because of the publicity. Maybe it's because they really don't care. Maybe they, you know, whatever it is, they didn't. So my stake president, after the October action, my stake president asked to meet with me in December. I met with him in December.
John Dehlin [00:07:03] He said, so wait, if bishops are the ones who have authority over you, why is your stake president reaching out to you? Why not the bishop?
Kate Kelly [00:07:10] I don't know. He said in that letter he was going to invite the bishop to come as well. But essentially it was going to happen either way whether or not the bishop came. I don't know why. I don't. I don't think my bishop wanted to punish me. When in that meeting, he seemed very uncomfortable. He did come. So it was me, stake president and bishop. He did come. He seemed like, not interested. He kept saying, like, okay, that's enough. Like, you know, and then I'd launch off into some like, what about this? Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And he seemed to not want to be there. That was my impression. I mean, you'd have to ask him how he felt, but that was my impression that he was just like, okay, let's wrap this up. And the stake president is not a very skilled interpersonal communicator.
Stake President Meetings and Escalating Church Pressure
John Dehlin [00:08:04] Right.
Kate Kelly [00:08:07] And it was almost like he was just like he had a paper and it was almost like he was, you know, reading like, points that maybe he had told himself to say before. I'm not sure. And I, I approached it as like we're peers discussing an issue, like. And I took the opportunity to say, like, okay, what about, you know, what about this? What about this? The Stake president said that he thought I was literally, not figuratively, literally, the only woman in the stake with problems with gender inequality in the church. Not just female ordination, gender inequality in the church.
Kate Kelly [00:08:45] I said, that is not consistent with my experience. You know, I've been approached by lots of women who say they appreciate what I'm doing, who. They agree. Yeah. Oh, yeah. In my ward, who don't necessarily want to put up a profile, but they, like, agree and they, you know, are proud of what I'm doing. And, you know, kind of like this sat the, like, quiet hallway talks or like, you know, someone inviting us over to dinner or saying like, you know, so definitely lots of support. I mean, I didn't take, like, a survey, but more than two? More than two people? Well, there's one other person in our ward who has a profile, so definitely more than two.
Kate Kelly [00:09:31] And so I said, you know, that's inconsistent with my experience. And that says more about you than it does about the women, because that says you're not approachable. They can't come to you, you know. And so I said, why don't we.
Kate Kelly [00:09:46] This is an actual suggestion I made in that meeting. Why don't we have a conference in our stake about gender inequality in the church? This is right after the Terrell and Fiona Givens fireside about faith crisis. So I was like, then they knew about that.
Kate Kelly [00:10:01] And I was like, why don't we do a similar thing for women? And if I'm the only one that shows up, you'll know it's just me. And if I'm not, you'll know it's a more widespread issue that people have. And they said, no, no, no, we're not gonna do that.
Kate Kelly [00:10:18] But I was presenting ideas like that, like, why don't we do a conference? Why don't we, like, you should talk to other women, you know, blah, blah. So at the end of that meeting, basically, it was. From my perspective, the result of that meeting was like, we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Kate Kelly [00:10:39] And that was said verbatim, like seven or eight times. We'll just have to agree to disagree. One of the things we disagreed about is the Stake president, he said that all women are mothers. And I disagreed. And I said, that's not even doctrine. You know, that's. That's just not.
Kate Kelly [00:10:54] That's something that Sherry Dew says that's not doctrine. And so he said, well, we'll just have to agree to disagree. So after that meeting, I was frustrated
John Dehlin [00:11:05] so did he ask you to take down ordained women at that time, according to your memory?
Kate Kelly [00:11:14] Yeah, I actually can't remember because again, I felt like it was more of a conversation, like he was saying something, that I was saying something, but it didn't seem like they were really listening to me or they really wanted to hear. My bishop really didn't say much of anything at all. This was like on the little agenda that the stake president was reading. He did read to me the definition of priesthood that was on like lds.org and we talked about that. I honestly, I can't remember if he said, like, take down the website. But.
John Dehlin [00:11:52] Neil, Neil, Neil, what's your, what's your memory? Because I'm, I'm one who realizes that timelines run together, events are hard to remember. So, you know, people are going to want to nail people down, but we're just going to do the best we can to remember.
Kate Kelly [00:12:08] Right.
John Dehlin [00:12:08] So, Neil, what's your memory?
Neil Ransom [00:12:09] Well, I, what I remember is Kate saying that, that they had said that she would not be punished. Like they weren't going to take any. Nobody was taking action against anyone for ordained women, but that it was like his duty to advise her to take it down. So he, he didn't say take it down. He said, I'll advise you to take it down and that nobody was going to be punished for she wasn't going to be punished, nor was anyone else going to be punished in ordained women, as far as he knew, for their involvement.
John Dehlin [00:12:38] Okay, so Kate, does that, does that sound like what you remember?
Kate Kelly [00:12:41] Yeah, I mean, I guess it's the difference between, like, you should take the website down and I disagree, which was my impression. And like the, the antithesis of the impression would be, you have to do this or I'm going to discipline you.
John Dehlin [00:12:57] Right. And you didn't walk away with that impression?
Kate Kelly [00:13:00] No, no, no, no, no. Not at all. Not at all.
John Dehlin [00:13:02] No ultimatum.
Kate Kelly [00:13:03] No, no, no, no.
John Dehlin [00:13:04] Okay.
Kate Kelly [00:13:05] It was like, yeah, basically. I mean, I'm sure people would say this is naive, like, well, that's his personal opinion. And they would say, well, they don't have personal opinions. If that's their opinion, that's your opinion and you have to do it.
Kate Kelly [00:13:23] But again, I was approaching this of a place of, like, we're peers and like, you're telling me what you think I'm telling what I'm explaining myself and like, will agree to disagree was sort of what I came away and I blogged about it on FMH right after that.
Kate Kelly [00:13:41] And, and he agreed in the meeting that I could blog about that, like, and talk about it. Like, these are the things we. And he asked me at the beginning of the meeting if it was being recorded, which I thought was strange for him to ask, but it wasn't. And, and then at the end of the meeting, he. At the beginning of the meeting, he said, well, we'll agree on, like, what, what we can say, you know, publicly or basically they won't talk about, obviously, but what I can say publicly. And I said, okay, that's fair, you know, and one of the things we agreed was that I wasn't going to be punished, that I could tell people, like, there's no crackdown. There's no. Nothing like that is happening. So that's what I. That's what I blogged about.
John Dehlin [00:14:19] So that was December. Okay, then what came next in terms of leadership interaction?
Kate Kelly [00:14:25] Nothing. I mean, I. We did the April action. I emailed them about the April action.
John Dehlin [00:14:33] Nothing between December and April.
Kate Kelly [00:14:35] I asked for tickets because one of the things he said, well, you never came for. To me and asked for tickets because we. That's what we did in October. And I said, okay, well, I'll ask you next time. So I emailed him and I said, you know, I'm going to pre. I'm going to the General Conference in Utah. I want tickets to the priesthood session because I think, blah, blah, blah, I think women should have begun, considered as prospective priesthood holders. And then I said, and any other session of conference, because I'm going to be there and I want to go to conference, even if you're not going to give me the tickets to the priesthood session.
Kate Kelly [00:15:07] So he said, no tickets of any type. No tickets of any type? No, he said, no tickets to the priesthood session because I disagree and I don't have any other tickets is what he said. Okay, so I don't know, probably.
Kate Kelly [00:15:22] Apparently General Conference is very popular in Northern Virginia. So he said, no, like, no tickets and I disagree with what you're doing. And I was like, okay, well, you wanted me to ask. So I asked. And you know, at every opportunity, I'm just like, giving all leaders. I was like, I just want to give them the benefit of the doubt and, like, give them a chance to do the right thing. You know what I mean? I'm like, let's have a conference about gender inequality in the church. Let's get ahead of this issue. And I said to another counselor who's full time, he was a counselor in the bishopric, my bishopric.
Kate Kelly [00:16:00] He works for the church full time. And I Told him. I was like, what about in Washington D.C. at the temple Visitor center? We should have a conference about gender inequality. I don't have to present. It could be anyone. And we get. The church could get ahead of this issue. Like we could begin like a real dialogue with the church participating. Like, let's do it. You know, again with full like thinking this was an actual very legitimate, very good idea. No, nothing.
John Dehlin [00:16:28] Would you bring up gender inequality in Relief Society? No, because there's some people that I think that wrote in that you were disruptive in, in church. Like talking about female ordination and gender inequality. No, at church and making everybody. You know, I think what they wrote
Kate Kelly [00:16:44] is maybe my presence, you know, they comfortable.
John Dehlin [00:16:47] No, they say you talk about wanting a safe space, but if you were disruptive in your ward, you weren't allowing others to have a safe space for their ward.
Kate Kelly [00:16:55] I totally agree with that, that church should be a safe space. And that's why I didn't talk about it. Like, that's actually one thing my bishop and stake president both said that they really appreciated is that I didn't talk about it in, in church, like in the day to day Sunday worship. I didn't bring up ordained women. I never, I really hate it when other people use church as like a place to talk about Glenn Beck or like whatever political thing they want to talk about. Like, I think we should focus on the things we agree with. It's not a place for political agenda. Like, I just didn't really, I didn't feel like that was a productive use of anyone's time.
Kate Kelly [00:17:33] So if it was like extremely relevant, like we were talking about women in the priesthood, in Relief Society. Yeah, I would say. Hey, did you have you read the original Relief Society minutes and read where Joseph Smith said that he wanted it to be a kingdom of priests, as in Paul or Enoch's day, as an example.
Kate Kelly [00:17:54] But I never. That's actually one thing they like praised me about, was not bringing it up, which I think is fair. Like if I don't want people to bring up other things that are there, you know, potentially divisive issues, then I shouldn't, I should reciprocate.
John Dehlin [00:18:13] So by April, if I, if my memory is correct, they're broadcasting the priesthood session publicly, which was, that was in October. That had happened in October. But by April that was going strong. Women were praying in church. Sorry, women were praying in General Conference. And by April, women were sitting in a more prominent place, you know, in the middle of all the, all the, all the brethren.
John Dehlin [00:18:41] And it Just seemed like the church was kind of almost responding to you and to your, you know, to other. Your fellow workers that ordained women and whoever else was involved in those types of things. So, I mean, I wonder. I speculate. I wonder if they were like, saying, look, we'll give them some things, but we're gonna have to draw the line somewhere. And I just wonder whether the second action, plus the six discussions that you guys started rolling out, maybe to them was a signal, like they're not interested in a reasonable pace. They're pressing too hard, too fast for too much. We've made accommodations, and they're not even happy. Have you thought about that?
Kate Kelly [00:19:28] Well, first of all, we had discussed. We had announced publicly that we weren't doing another action after April. So we said, we're not going to repeat this in October. We said that in March. So everyone knew we weren't going to do it again. Most especially the public affairs department, because I think they follow us very closely. And so I think everyone knew we weren't going to do it again. My stake president mentioned the six discussions when I met with him on May 5, but they hadn't been. They didn't exist. Like, they hadn't been rolled out. Just like the idea that we were doing that was threatening. But if you read the six discussions, it's 95% of it is church materials, church talks, leaders, you know, books. So it's not actually original content.
John Dehlin [00:20:22] There was a patriarchy bingo, though, right?
Kate Kelly [00:20:24] Patriarchy bingo was an excellent pedagogical tool, in my opinion, to assess how patriarchy affects your life. So there were a lot of things, I think, that were very effective, but nothing that was sacrilegious, nothing that was doctrine. If there was doctrine, it was from Scripture that was quoted directly in the discussions, and it wasn't, you know, the naming at the six discussions was sort of just a play on something that was familiar to Mormons. It wasn't meant to be like, a recruitment tool because we don't have a baptism for ordained women. Like, there isn't. There's no way to pay tithing to ordinary women. There's no.
Kate Kelly [00:21:03] Like, we don't have an official affiliation or way for people to join. It's just kind of a space for everyone to tell their own story. So just like on Mormon stories, you don't tell people what to say. We don't tell people what to say in their profiles. They write them themselves. So, yeah, they were upset about that, but I think unreasonably and far too soon, because it wasn't they hadn't actually analyzed the content.
John Dehlin [00:21:29] Okay, so it was the April. There was an April meeting with your stake president.
Kate Kelly [00:21:33] So we did the April action.
John Dehlin [00:21:35] Okay, do the April action.
Kate Kelly [00:21:36] We came back. We just. We announced that we would be doing the six discussions. And he. It was the first weekend of March. March 5th is when we actually met. He said he wanted to meet with me.
John Dehlin [00:21:54] March. March, before the action.
Kate Kelly [00:21:57] Sorry, May.
John Dehlin [00:21:58] May.
Kate Kelly [00:21:58] Also an M. Month. Okay, sorry. It was May as. After the action and when we were moving. So we met on May 5. It was only the stake president, not the bishop and his counselor. One of his counselors. I don't know why he. He never met. Well, we met twice. In both of those times, I was not alone.
John Dehlin [00:22:20] Yeah, they do that with me, too. The president always has a counselor with them.
Kate Kelly [00:22:24] I don't know. Is that normal?
John Dehlin [00:22:25] It has been with me, but, like,
Kate Kelly [00:22:26] in regular Mormon life?
John Dehlin [00:22:28] I don't think so.
Kate Kelly [00:22:28] I don't think so either. I think they.
John Dehlin [00:22:30] But they started doing that with me last year. The year before.
Kate Kelly [00:22:33] Yeah. Like, they wanted a witness, but I don't get one somehow.
John Dehlin [00:22:37] No, I brought my wife. I bring Margi now. To everything.
Kate Kelly [00:22:40] Yeah. They wanted Neil to come. And I said, does this have anything to do with his actions or behavior? And they said no. And they said that he wouldn't need to come.
John Dehlin [00:22:48] So.
Kate Kelly [00:22:50] And I think, like, just, again, fundamentally, I'm treating them as peers, like we are equal. I don't need someone to defend me against you. I don't need my husband to be there when I'm talking to you. Like, we can just have a discussion. And I'm not intimidated by you.
John Dehlin [00:23:08] Which, by the way, is very shocking to the average Mormon mentality. Right. It's like, they are your leaders and you should be respectful and. But I understand. I understand.
Kate Kelly [00:23:17] Well, I mean, sure, I should be respectful, but they're my leaders in that they're called by God for that period. But that doesn't mean that they should treat me as less than or they should expect less from me, because that's not the way I see things.
Kate Kelly [00:23:33] So we met again. He asked me if I was recording the conversation again. I literally showed him my phone and I was like, I'm not recording. So he was very concerned about, like, what was being recorded, what was going to be said.
Kate Kelly [00:23:50] And again, I mean, I'm meeting with two adult men, you know, under much duress, because I told him we're moving. Like, we literally have no furniture. Like, we're packing up our car. Not just, like, Moving down the street, but moving across the country. Like, getting rid of everything we have and preparing to go to Utah before we leave.
Kate Kelly [00:24:13] And I said, no, I can't meet with you. I'm gone. Like, I'm leaving. This is my last Sunday. Like, I can't meet with you.
John Dehlin [00:24:21] You were packing.
Kate Kelly [00:24:22] And yeah, I mean, I could have met with you a month ago when I emailed you, but I can't meet with you now because after the April action, I knew they'd be hearing a lot about it. And I emailed them and said, I have, like, I have a lot of footage of what actually happened on Temple Square and what the public affairs representatives actually said to us. If you want to see that footage, I can give it to you so you can know firsthand, like, what happened.
Kate Kelly [00:24:48] And so we met on May, May 5, and it was he again. He had a piece of paper in front of him, but it was much more like reading this time. And we agreed to an agenda before we met because I said, like, at first, you know how it is. The secret. The secretary emails you and you say, why does he want to meet? And the secretary's like, I don't know.
John Dehlin [00:25:13] I don't know. He doesn't tell me.
Kate Kelly [00:25:15] And then you say, well, I'm not going to meet unless I know what it's about. So we went back and forth, back and forth. I said, you know, I don't agree to meetings where I don't know what the agenda is. I feel like that's like a very common courtesy.
John Dehlin [00:25:27] Yep.
Kate Kelly [00:25:28] And he's like, well, when can you meet? And I again, I was like, I'm not going to agree to a time until I agree to meet, which I have not done. So he kept insisting and insisting and at a certain point he, I said, okay. He said, I'll meet with you anytime, day or night at a certain point, saying, like, literally any, any time in a 24 hour period, he would come. So he was getting more and more desperate because I wasn't responding in the way that he wanted me to respond. Um, and I said, you know what? I'm moving. Like, I just can't do this and I'm not. I'm literally never going to see you again. Like, I'm moving and, and why not?
John Dehlin [00:26:11] Why not just go ahead and do it? I mean, it's an hour. Have the meeting.
Kate Kelly [00:26:14] I just, I honestly was like super, super packed time. Like, it was like a very stressful period. I was all over the place, I was visiting, all these different, like, I just that was. And I didn't see it as an ongoing relationship.
John Dehlin [00:26:27] Like, it's ending.
Kate Kelly [00:26:28] Why? Like, I'm. I'm literally never.
John Dehlin [00:26:30] Were you also fearful that there might be an action and that you wanted to avoid it?
Kate Kelly [00:26:34] No, because until that time, I was like, why? Why would he do it? Like, the last 24 hours of my. Like, how. I didn't even know people could do that. Actually, at the time, I knew very little about the disciplinary process. So he said he was putting. He asked the bishop to put a move restriction on my records, but we had to look up move restriction. Like, we didn't even know what that was.
Kate Kelly [00:26:57] So we looked up move restriction. I'm like, what does that even mean? Like, he's saying this as. As though this is a term people use and understand. And I had never heard it before. So he puts the move restriction on my records, and I'm like, okay, fine. Like, this is when I can meet with you. I said, I can meet with you at 4pm and that's it. Like, that's the only time I can meet with you. And he's like, okay, so. So we meet. And that was. We agreed to an agenda. I was like, I'm only going to meet with you if we agree to agenda.
Kate Kelly [00:27:28] The things that he said were on the agenda were the fact that I spoke at the Barlow center, which is a BYU extension in Washington, D.C. which he learned about from an Instagram photo of me. So, like, the level of surveillance is very, very minute at this point. Like, he's monitoring my Instagram account.
Kate Kelly [00:27:49] And he said, the six discussions and the action, the April action. And I was like, I'm more than happy to talk about those things. I've said I've been happy to talk about those things all along. So we agreed, okay, those are the things we're going to talk about. This is the time we're going to meet. I go in, the first thing he says is, I'm placing you on informal probation, which was not part of the agenda we had agreed to.
Kate Kelly [00:28:15] And he went through, you know, the six discussions and the action and the Barlow Center. Like, for some reason, that was, like, a really big sticking point for him. And I said, wait a minute, are you following me on Instagram? Like, I just. This whole thing was like, what is happening? Like, my perception was like, we're gonna agree to disagree, and you clearly very strongly disagree with, but that I wasn't going to be punished. And then, like, what changed? Like, I couldn't. I was. I just didn't get what the change was. And the. He kept focusing on this Barlow center thing. And I was like, they.
Kate Kelly [00:28:54] A couple of girls at the Barlow center invited me to come and we talked. That was it at the Barlow Center. And I Instagrammed it, which was apparently my. My error. I have since made my Instagram private, so.
John Dehlin [00:29:11] So
Kate Kelly [00:29:13] again, I feel like a lot of people are going to say, well, this just shows how naive you are. You just didn't know. You know, you should have known that he was going to punish you. But, like, how are you going to know you're not doing anything wrong?
Kate Kelly [00:29:26] Like, how are you going to know that's leading, especially after a year had passed and nothing had happened? Like, nothing changed. I didn't do anything different. I didn't change my profile. I didn't, you know, and the six discussions, I was like, they haven't even come out yet. So he just wants to talk about, like, what they're going to be. Because he has had no content to analyze.
Kate Kelly [00:29:47] So, yeah, put me on informal probation, which meant what? You can't take the sacrament. You can't. You literally can't speak in church, even if spoken to. Like, if someone asks you a question you can't answer. This is my informal probation. I don't know if it's the same for everyone.
Kate Kelly [00:30:09] You can't hold a calling, which, again, I was already gone, so I had already finished my last day of the calling. And you. But you can continue to wear garments
John Dehlin [00:30:20] and pay tithing, and your records are frozen. So that probation was in force by him. By him?
Kate Kelly [00:30:28] Yep, by him.
John Dehlin [00:30:30] Did you tell everyone when this happened after you got back, or did you.
Kate Kelly [00:30:34] I requested that he keep it confidential because I was still, like, so unclear, like, what was happening. Like, I am literally never going to see this man again. How can he enforce? Like, I. You know, normally in informal probation, you would meet with them and, like, you would go through the process of repentance and he would. You would go back and forth. But I can't meet with him again. Like, I'm not going to be there anymore.
John Dehlin [00:31:04] It sounds like they were just. They wanted to take care of this, and by having it, who knows what ward you'd be going to, who the bishop and stake president would be, whether or not they'd be sympathetic and they wanted this taken care of, so they needed to freeze it to be able to take action quickly.
Kate Kelly [00:31:20] Yeah, I mean, typically, I've learned since then that a move restriction is put on someone who's in the process of discipline and. And like, for Example, if there's a pedophile and they're disciplining this person, they wouldn't want them to just be able to move to another ward like Catholic priests do, to, like, continue to hurt other people. So I think there are legitimate uses of the move restriction. But in my case, there was nothing already in process. The move restriction was put on me before I was disciplined.
John Dehlin [00:31:52] Right. So, okay, so you're disciplined and then you move. Right. And you move to Utah. Right. Okay. And that's when you start the discussions. And then what. What happened from there?
Kate Kelly [00:32:07] I requested my records be moved to Provo because I thought, okay, if God is choosing to punish me through this person, that person, like the same spirit that inspired him to that proceed, could
John Dehlin [00:32:22] also inspire your new bishop.
Kate Kelly [00:32:25] Right. Or I could. He could even tell the new bishop, like, I put her on informal probation, and I could work out, work it out with my bishop. Like I said, the normal process where you meet with them and you go through a process. So I requested that my records be moved, and they weren't. And that's the same week that my parents got hold in by their bishop. So essentially what happened is when a move restriction is placed, the old bishop has to call the new bishop and say why they won't move the records. And so he told the new, my provost bishop, she's being punished.
John Dehlin [00:32:59] And you didn't want to tell the ordained women people?
Kate Kelly [00:33:02] No, no, I told people in ordained women right away.
John Dehlin [00:33:04] Okay.
Kate Kelly [00:33:06] But again, I was moving, so I was driving across the country and like, all this other things, so.
John Dehlin [00:33:13] But you didn't blog about it, did you?
Kate Kelly [00:33:15] No, no, no, no.
John Dehlin [00:33:16] And was part of that because you didn't want to, like, hurt the movement or scare people?
Kate Kelly [00:33:20] Well, I wanted to know what was going to happen. Like, I didn't want to just say, like, this is a total unknown. And I am very confused about why this is even happening. Because then, like, my point in telling people about my interactions with my leaders has been to communicate risk for people involved with the movement. So I don't. I don't think that it's my responsibility to report everything about what happens to me just for the heck of it. I think it's my responsibility to communicate risk. So if I'm being punished, and I think that means they're also at risk, then I think I should tell them, which is why in December, I said, hey, I'm not being punished.
Kate Kelly [00:34:01] He said explicitly that I'm not being punished. Like, that communicates less risk to other people. Yeah, but when I was moving, and I was put on this informal probation. I still thought, oh, well, maybe it'll just end. Like, I'll meet with the new bishop in Provo. I'll explain things to him because my parents are in his ward and have been for a year. So he understands ordained women and is familiar with it. Maybe I'll meet with him and it'll be over.
Neil Ransom [00:34:24] Yeah.
John Dehlin [00:34:26] Okay. So don't alarm the troops unless you feel like there's cause to alarm them. There's too much uncertainty.
Kate Kelly [00:34:34] Like, I. I had no information.
John Dehlin [00:34:35] Yeah.
Kate Kelly [00:34:36] I was like, I don't know what I'm gonna tell you.
John Dehlin [00:34:37] Well, you knew you were on probation.
Kate Kelly [00:34:39] Yes, yes, yes. But I didn't. He said he was sending me a letter because I said, well, I'm not going to be able to meet with you again. I don't think it's fair of you to impose all these restrictions and not, like, clearly outline them or be able to meet with me again. So he said he was going to send me a letter, but he didn't send the letter till several weeks later.
John Dehlin [00:34:56] Yeah.
Kate Kelly [00:34:57] And I did release that letter when I got it.
John Dehlin [00:35:00] And I'll just say, just as a side note, I was called in in February by my bishop, and ordained women was one of the first things that he mentioned, but he also mentioned other things, and it wasn't clear to me whether that was the main thing or just one of many things or so I can understand, like, being confused about what it's about. Right.
Kate Kelly [00:35:21] Well, I mean, I knew it was about ordained women.
John Dehlin [00:35:23] Yeah, I know.
Kate Kelly [00:35:24] But I don't know. I just, like. And I requested confidentiality from him. I said, like, I think this is my information to share, and I want. I'm requesting, like, confidentiality from you. Because he had said things like, I'm prepared to be the face of the church on this issue. Like, very ominous. But, like, what does that mean? Exactly. He seemed to be very focused on, like, his role in all of this. And so I said, like, I'm requesting confidentiality of you. And he replied and said, no, like, because you have taken this beyond the bounds of our stake, I may feel the need to correct the public record, not just leaders, public record. And he said, I do not agree to confidentiality. So at that point, I was like, okay, it's not really a choice of whether or not this comes out. It's a choice of how, if I'm able to tell my own story.
John Dehlin [00:36:24] And I had the same thing. People really came at me because I went to the media, but My letter said, resign or we're going to hold a court. And if you choose to resign, I will be informing all the adult members of the stake. And when they leave you no choice, then you're either going to be a result of the story or help give your side of the story ahead of time. So I can relate to that. So what's the hubbub about? The people who accused you on rational phase of being dishonest or deceiving, what are they saying you were deceptive about?
Kate Kelly [00:36:58] Oh, well, I think that was because of the letter. Like he said in the excommunication letter, the bishop said, this is the result of months of. I can't remember what the exact quote was, but something about this is the result of months of, I think he said interactions or something neutral. So he could. He didn't say meetings because meetings would be very easy for me to prove that it didn't happen. But. And then I said, well, we met once in December and once in May. That's it. But that's what happened. Like, you can't. You. You can't just. What are you gonna say?
Neil Ransom [00:37:35] Well, the strange part to me is that the. The letter said that the bishop had had these interactions with Kate, and all he had ever said to Kate or I about ordained women was in that meeting where he sat in with the stake president and was. It was not an active participant.
John Dehlin [00:37:51] The December meeting.
Neil Ransom [00:37:52] The December meeting. And he has. He never once said one word, at least when I was with Kate at church every Sunday. He never once approached us, never once said one word to us about ordained women ever. And didn't attend that other. Other meeting with. In May.
John Dehlin [00:38:09] The May meeting.
Neil Ransom [00:38:10] The May meeting. And in fact, like the. The. Our last day in the ward, we had dinner at a friend's house who happens to live, like, next door to the bishop. And the bishop showed up, just like, by happenstance, to bring some strawberries to our friends and then again just wished us to have a happy life and a good trip to Kenya. And then.
John Dehlin [00:38:31] Yeah, okay, so we've talked about the process, the accusations. You don't feel like you've been dishonest, misleading people? I mean, you don't feel like you've misrepresented the leaders?
Kate Kelly [00:38:46] No, no, not at all. I think I've been rather charitable given what's happened. I mean, you can't just make up things that didn't happen. Like, they can't just say we met if we didn't meet. They can't just say they, you know, they can't say they emailed or called or like Neil said, like, they never approached us in church. Like, you can't make that up.
John Dehlin [00:39:15] And was ever. Was there ever a take your sight down, you know, specific request?
Kate Kelly [00:39:22] No. I mean, yes. May 5th, when we met, that was part of my own informal probation.
John Dehlin [00:39:27] Okay. So as part of the probation, it was take the site down and you
Kate Kelly [00:39:30] take the site down and disassociate yourself from the group boarding women.
John Dehlin [00:39:34] And you're on probation.
Kate Kelly [00:39:35] Yes, informal probation.
John Dehlin [00:39:37] After you said no or before you said no?
Kate Kelly [00:39:39] Before I said no.
John Dehlin [00:39:40] Okay.
Kate Kelly [00:39:40] The first thing he said was, you're on informal probation.
John Dehlin [00:39:43] So that's probably what that might be. What happens to me when I meet with my sick President August 7th is he'll lead with, you're on probation, and then make the request that I can't accept.
Kate Kelly [00:39:53] Do these things or, you know.
John Dehlin [00:39:55] And you immediately said no?
Kate Kelly [00:39:57] I immediately said no.
John Dehlin [00:39:58] Okay.
Kate Kelly [00:39:58] I looked him in the eye and I said, I have spoken with Kander this entire time. I have reached out with you. I am telling you right now, I am not going to take down the site. I am not going to disassociate myself with the group, from the group. Like, that's not going to happen. I don't know where that leaves us, but I am telling you right now that's not gonna happen.
Kate Kelly [00:40:20] And again, I think people might say that was a little naive of me to say, but I just wanted to tell the truth, like, it's not going to happen. And I. And I told him, you know, it's not because I'm defying you. It's not because I refuse to do what you say. It's because I can't. Like, what you're asking me to do is live an inauthentic life. To lie, to say I no longer agree with the group that I started. And. And I. I can't do that. Like, you're asking me to live in an authentic life, and I cannot do that.
Apostolic Involvement and the Disciplinary Process
John Dehlin [00:40:52] Is it true that Ballard and Clayton came to your stake prior to those meetings?
Kate Kelly [00:40:57] I think so. I'm, like, very foggy on all those details about when they met and what they said, but ordained women, according to some other people, was discussed at that meeting.
John Dehlin [00:41:11] So M. Russell Ballard, L. Whitney Clayton came. Ordained, ordained women was discussed. Do you think that they had any influence on your stake president?
Kate Kelly [00:41:22] Maybe. I don't know. There's no way for me to know that. Like, there's no way for me to confirm that. I asked him. Point. You know, I'm an attorney, and so is he. So I said point blank, has anyone, any line leader, anyone above you, influenced your decision to meet with you, instructed you to meet with me, you know, in any way? Like, influenced or coerced you into meeting with me? And he said no to my face.
John Dehlin [00:41:51] Wait, we'll give him the mic.
Neil Ransom [00:41:54] I remember you telling me he didn't say no. He said all he would say is, I am the, like, sole person who gets to make this decision.
John Dehlin [00:42:01] No. Yeah, right.
Kate Kelly [00:42:03] Like, I made this decision. The spirit. But he said, I reported to them that I'm meeting with you, but not that they told me to meet with you. He said, no one told me to meet with you, but I told them because it's so. You know, because it's in the media and because all these other things, like, I told my line leader that I'm meeting with you. And he didn't stop me. But he didn't. He said to me, he did not instruct me to meet with you.
John Dehlin [00:42:30] And I'm speculating when I bring up Ballard and Clayton myself, but I know for a fact that. That Clayton was behind Denver snuffers excommunication. I know that he. He called two state conferences in my stake during the summer and fall. That sort of preceded a very significant tone change in my interactions with my stake president.
Kate Kelly [00:42:53] Yeah.
John Dehlin [00:42:54] I mean, and then he shows up at yours a couple weeks before you get your letter.
Kate Kelly [00:42:58] Right. So maybe that's the case, maybe it's not. I don't know. And honestly, I guess this goes back to, like, I don't care. I don't care if it's a conspiracy. I don't care if Elder Boyd K. Packer himself ordered my excommunication. Because they have responsibility, even if they didn't order it. So above my stake president. The priesthood line of responsibility isn't just like a sort of ephemeral thing. It's very strict. It's very controlled. There's a person above him. In my case, that's. His name is Elder Hallstrom. I contacted him before I went public, and he knew about it. And Elder Hallstrom reports directly to the Quorum of the twelve Apostles. So even if they didn't order it, they still have responsibility for what's happening.
John Dehlin [00:43:45] And they can stop it at any time.
Kate Kelly [00:43:46] Absolutely.
John Dehlin [00:43:48] And to string some stake president out or bishop is where the buck stops. If the church is being impacted worldwide. I almost worry that it's irresponsible for the leaders above not to be involved. They should be involved, even if they're saying they're not. They likely potentially are involved through influence anyway. And I don't like the idea of a single bishop, rogue or rogue stake president, tarnishing the image of the church. Like, that's messed up. And it's funny. One of the first things I did when I got my letter. It's right here. One of the first things I did when I got my letter was I.
John Dehlin [00:44:26] I scanned it and I sent it to Elder Holland, because I got Elder Holland's email address, and I just wanted to say, look, you know about this. I hope you know about this. And if you don't, I'm letting you know now because things are about to evolve, and if you want to stop this or respond, here's your chance. And there was no response.
Kate Kelly [00:44:43] Oh, yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. And I think that's, you know, part of my responsibility to say, like, that's why I contacted Elder Holstrom. You know what I mean? Because I want to say, like, if this is some rogue decision and this is going to negatively impact church members or the church in any way, they should have a heads up. They should know they should be able to be responsible. And they were. And so. And they still are. I mean, I'm appealing. So they still are responsible for this decision. I'm appealing. First I have to appeal to the stake president, which I did, and then I can appeal to the first presidency of the church. So at any end, they have responsibility for what's happening, whether or not this was a rogue decision.
John Dehlin [00:45:29] Right, right. So you got the letter, the excommunication letter, the day before I did. June.
Kate Kelly [00:45:37] I got mine on June 8th.
John Dehlin [00:45:38] June 8th. And mine was either that day or day before or after. Okay.
Kate Kelly [00:45:47] So.
John Dehlin [00:45:51] And a lot of people are really confused and concerned about why you didn't appear in video.
Kate Kelly [00:45:56] Oh, yeah.
John Dehlin [00:45:57] You know, they just feel like that was your chance to plead your case.
Kate Kelly [00:46:00] Okay.
John Dehlin [00:46:00] You just kind of ignored that whole process.
Kate Kelly [00:46:02] Well, they should read my appeal letter. The appeal letter is available on routinewomen.org the Bishop sent me the letter on June 8th saying that I could either appear or I could participate in writing. So he's. He said right up front, written participation is an option.
Kate Kelly [00:46:21] So I just. I decided to participate in writing. I started writing, you know, my submission and gathering letters on my behalf. And later he then said, oh, well, if you want, I can look into setting up a secure video link at a church property.
Kate Kelly [00:46:45] But in that same email where he said I could do a secure video link, he said, I'm also still open to receiving a written submission. So he said, again, re emphasizing that was a legitimate way to participate. There were lots of reasons why I didn't participate via video link. One is I don't think it's fair. I think it's fundamentally unfair to convene a council in absentia and ask me to return at my own cost to a place thousands of miles away where I no longer live.
Kate Kelly [00:47:12] Two is I don't think they were really interested in hearing what I had to say. Otherwise they would have asked me when I lived there at any time in this entire process. You know, if you look at my appeal letter, they never asked me any questions. They never said, like, why do you think women should be ordained? What has your experience been as a woman? Why do you feel unequal? Why do you, you know, no questions like that were ever asked of me.
Kate Kelly [00:47:39] And so I don't. I didn't feel like this was a conversation. It wasn't about really listening to what I had to say. Another reason which I think is probably the most like the reason that why I didn't participate in the closed video link at church headquarters is because they would have been able to record it, but I wouldn't.
Kate Kelly [00:47:58] So they would have a copy. My stake president had already said that he was willing to disclose confidential information. In an email to me, he said, I refuse to grant you confidentiality. So any. I couldn't trust that any process that we went through that they would be able to record would be considered confidential. They could edit it, they could share it, they could do anything. Like they would have control over that. And I wouldn't be able to have a copy where I could say or compare and say that's not true.
Kate Kelly [00:48:30] And again, it wasn't just that I distrusted them. It was. He had explicitly said, I'm prepared to make this part of the public record. So to me that that information would not have been safe. And the other reason, I mean, okay, there's like a million reasons. This is the last reason I'll give as to why I didn't participate in the video link.
Kate Kelly [00:48:51] The other reason is there is a real added benefit. Like there's a reason that you don't have trials in courtrooms via video. Like just keep everyone in jail and have them participate via try via video link. There is an added benefit to someone being there in, in person that is not.
Kate Kelly [00:49:08] Is not the case via video. There's a lot of benefit to being able to testify, being able to interact, that there's no added benefit. So I felt like A written submission really was my best chance.
John Dehlin [00:49:22] Right.
Kate Kelly [00:49:23] To say exactly what I thought and the only way for. You know, I had over a thousand letters of support, and I felt like that was the only way. A written record was the only way to get those people also on the record.
John Dehlin [00:49:34] And just as an interesting side note, my stake president refused any letters from outside his own boundaries. So he said, if you can't find people within your stake who come forward and talk, I don't want any letters from outside. So that's how they're approaching it now.
Kate Kelly [00:49:50] Yeah. I mean, my. Some of them were from people in my stake.
John Dehlin [00:49:53] Yeah.
Kate Kelly [00:49:55] But, yeah, I think they have to acknowledge that this affects people outside of their own boundaries. I think yours should, too.
John Dehlin [00:50:03] Yeah. Yeah. So you're excommunicated. We probably don't have time to. I mean, just, you know, were you expecting it? Like, I know you've talked about saying up until the day I talked to you the day of your vigil, you're like, I'm the only one here who thinks I'm going to be exonerated. Is that right?
Kate Kelly [00:50:25] Yeah. I mean, I talked to Janice Allred that night, and I said, janice, I'm. You know, maybe you're the only one who can really understand me at this point. Janice also was executed communicated. You know, I just don't.
John Dehlin [00:50:39] I just.
Kate Kelly [00:50:40] I don't think they're gonna do it. And she said something that was very prescient. She said, you know, that's exactly what I thought. I thought, it's just so wrong. Like, I just have faith in humanity. Like, it's so wrong. It's so manipulative. It's so violent to me as a person. Like, I just don't think they are capable of doing it. And that's what I thought.
John Dehlin [00:51:08] And so when the news came, what was it like?
Kate Kelly [00:51:11] I was actually at a board meeting of ordained women. We had planned, like, months ahead of time. People flew in. Like, we had this retreat. So I was sitting at a table with all of the executive board of Ordained Women around me.
John Dehlin [00:51:27] And what'd you do?
Kate Kelly [00:51:28] I got a letter via email. So I opened the email, and I. Like, even to this moment, I was still optimistic. And I thought, okay, great, we know the news. Like, I'll open the email. And I saw that the letter was several pages long, and I thought, okay, that's not. Just, like, we decided we're gonna let you off. And, um, so I immediately just started. You know, I think a lot of people think I'm a super calculated person. But I just immediately, like, collapsed into a pile of tears. I was crying. I was, like, sobbing so much that I couldn't even see the email. Like, people all around me wanted to hear what it had to. What it said, but I, like, couldn't even read it. I was just, like. Just. I couldn't even read.
The Excommunication and Its Immediate Aftermath
John Dehlin [00:52:20] Right, okay. Couldn't read it. You were sobbing. Were you there? Was Neil there? Neil wasn't there.
Kate Kelly [00:52:27] He's not on the board.
John Dehlin [00:52:28] Okay, okay. So you're sobbing. Didn't expect it. So you felt heartbroken.
Kate Kelly [00:52:36] I just felt so betrayed by just, like, justice. Like, how can something so, so, so wrong happen to someone who's so sincere, you know, How. How could this happen? Why. Why are they doing this? And I just didn't think they would.
John Dehlin [00:53:00] And in your mind, you were being led by the Spirit. Is that true?
Kate Kelly [00:53:03] Yeah, absolutely. And I told them that, you know, like, I feel very. I feel like I'm doing what I'm supposed to do. So I called Neil. I don't know. What did you think?
Neil Ransom [00:53:21] Well, when you first called me, I asked if you wanted me to come up, and you said no. But then you called me back, like, half an hour later and said, come up. I mean, I kind of. I mean, I guess maybe I have less faith in humanity than you did, but I kind of felt like when they forced you to meet, or when the stick president was so calculated in trying to meet with you before we left the ward and put you on informal probation, in my mind, I. Like, in my heart of hearts, I knew that that was just a step he was taking on a process to excommunicate you.
Neil Ransom [00:54:01] And so when you got that letter saying that they're holding a council, I just knew that, like, I had your. I think your optimism made me think that maybe I was wrong, but I kind of had prepared myself that you would be excommunicated. Like, I had already come to that conclusion. Like, that's what was going to happen. So I don't think I was necessarily. I wasn't surprised when you read it. I was just really, really sad for you
John Dehlin [00:54:31] and Neil. What did it do to your faith? What does it do to your faith in the church, to your commitment to the church?
Neil Ransom [00:54:39] I mean, for me, it was like. Like I had mentioned earlier, I had felt like their ordained women had demonstrated that there was space in the church for people like me who have doubts. Right. And, I mean, I would say, like, the ordination of women, like, observing that women are unequal in the church and seeking a solution to that problem is a way to engage and improve the church. And I felt like my doubts were stronger than that because I was doubting foundational claims about the truthfulness of the church. And so for me, if, like, this space that I had thought was opened up for people with doubts or truth seekers like me, that disappeared as soon as Kate was excommunicated.
Neil Ransom [00:55:27] Because if they're going to excommunicate Kate for asking the. Asking our leaders to seek a revelation, which is their job, to address something that's so fundamental to the lived experience of everyone in the church, and especially more than 50% of the church, then, like, what room is there for me who. For someone who doubts the validity of the Book of Mormon, or if Joseph Smith was really a prophet or things like that.
Neil Ransom [00:55:54] And so, yeah, this had a very strong, chilling effect on me and has made me reconsider. Like, what kind of place is there for me? How do I engage in a church that has no space for people who have doubts like me? I mean, that's how I feel.
John Dehlin [00:56:09] So you're not sure your future of the church is. Your future with the church is what, Unknown? Unknown, yeah. But not looking good right now.
Neil Ransom [00:56:18] Not looking good.
John Dehlin [00:56:19] Okay.
Kate Kelly [00:56:22] I'm still appealing. Let's keep in mind.
John Dehlin [00:56:24] Yeah. What's the timeline for that? So you sent it to your stake president?
Kate Kelly [00:56:29] I sent it to my stake president and my bishop, and the. They. It's. I had 30 days to submit the appeal, but they didn't say when. What the time, length of when they would respond. The only thing he said is it will be considered by the state, the stake president, and the high council.
John Dehlin [00:56:47] Okay.
Kate Kelly [00:56:48] Who hasn't been involved at all up to this point.
John Dehlin [00:56:50] Right. So I imagine a couple weeks to a month or two. They say no, then what happens?
Kate Kelly [00:56:57] If they say no, then I can. According to Doctrine Covenants 121, I can appeal to the first presidency of the church and have a trial de novo, which is a totally new proceeding.
John Dehlin [00:57:13] But does it say de novo?
Kate Kelly [00:57:15] No, sorry, that's like a legal term, but that you can have a trial, a new trial. So I'm not. I'm not aware of any other instance where that has happened.
John Dehlin [00:57:28] None of the September Six appealed there.
Kate Kelly [00:57:31] No, Janice appealed. I think the only one I'm aware of is Janice. And Janice Allred did appeal all the way to the first. First presidency. They responded, but just essentially confirmed the decision below. So it's like the Supreme Court.
John Dehlin [00:57:43] Right. Upholding.
Kate Kelly [00:57:45] Upholding a different circuit's decision.
John Dehlin [00:57:47] Yeah. It would look so bad if they overruled a bishop or stake president, that sends the message that, you know, bishops and stake presidents can be wrong, which we all know. But we.
Kate Kelly [00:57:59] Not only do we know, but it's inherent in the appeals process, that they can be wrong. Because if there was no appeals process, if there was a no appeals process, then that would say, okay, they're infallible and they can make decisions and make no mistakes. But inherent in the process is that mistakes can be made and rectified because they have an appeals process.
John Dehlin [00:58:16] But the weird thing in Mormonism is past prophets can be wrong, but it's evil to. To criticize or question current prophets.
Kate Kelly [00:58:22] Right. Like that Brigham Young, past bishops and
John Dehlin [00:58:25] stake presidents can be wrong, but we don't want to, you know, indicate that now.
Kate Kelly [00:58:30] Right?
John Dehlin [00:58:30] Yeah.
Kate Kelly [00:58:31] I mean, and I think at this point, and at every point, they have all the control. I have none of the control. I obviously don't get to say whether or not I'm reinstated, but I just want to give them the chance to do the right thing at every turn, and I want them to be held accountable. So I think, like I said, I think they are accountable, but it's explicit if I appeal to the first presidency, that they at some point, had something to do with the decision.
John Dehlin [00:58:58] Right, so you'll appeal, and they'll probably say no, and it's probably gonna stand.
Kate Kelly [00:59:04] We'll see.
John Dehlin [00:59:04] And so does any of this affect your beliefs, your testimony, your commitment? Like, are you gonna become Lavina Feeling Anderson and never.
Kate Kelly [00:59:15] No. No.
John Dehlin [00:59:15] Never miss a Sunday, for, bless her heart, 20, 30 years after the excommunication?
Kate Kelly [00:59:20] Someone asked me this the other day, and I'm like, you know, at this point, I'm just not committing to being a Lavina or a Margaret. Like, I'm just gonna be me.
John Dehlin [00:59:28] Margaret, meaning Margaret just kind of the dissenter.
Kate Kelly [00:59:31] Yeah.
John Dehlin [00:59:31] Who's, you know, vocal and who doesn't go to church?
Kate Kelly [00:59:34] You know, like, she. She's excommunicated and, like, no longer affiliates herself with Mormonism. But I'm just gonna make my own path. I don't know. It's only been a month, so. And we're making, like, a very drastic, huge movement very soon to a place where no one's gonna know us. So I don't know.
John Dehlin [00:59:56] Are you thinking about going to the ward there?
Kate Kelly [00:59:58] Yeah. I mean, the funny thing is, Neil, the most or a lot of the friends he has there are Mormon because his parents were really integral to the church in Kenya for a lot of years. And so the people we're staying with actually are members of the church when we first get there. So it's not like we'll have a break from Mormon people or like a clean break. I think we'll still definitely associate with Mormons there. I don't know.
John Dehlin [01:00:26] Okay, we'll see. So no decisions yet. You're open to going. But you. Yeah, yeah. A lot of people were like, why, like did you go out? And a lot of people were making a big deal about. You showed your shoulders like the next day.
Kate Kelly [01:00:39] Ah, yes, shoulder.
John Dehlin [01:00:40] Now, the letter said you can't wear your garments. Right. So it's not like you were doing it to flaunt them. It's just.
Kate Kelly [01:00:45] Well, and I think that's again, an opportunity for Mormons to re evaluate something about themselves and the way they see things. I mean, they, A lot of people are very harsh and quick to judge me for doing that, but another interpretation of that is I'm being obedient.
John Dehlin [01:01:03] Right? Yeah. So did you have those clothes already or did you go out and buy them?
Kate Kelly [01:01:07] Yeah, I mean, every Mormon woman has a dress that she wears a cardigan with probably closets full of them. I did not go out and buy the dress. I had. Okay, Yeah, I had it.
John Dehlin [01:01:17] And you were trying to be smart alecky or.
Kate Kelly [01:01:20] I mean, I just got dressed that day again. Okay, this is another thing.
John Dehlin [01:01:24] Was it weird to not wear your garments?
Kate Kelly [01:01:26] Yeah, not that weird. Like, I don't know, they're not that comfortable.
John Dehlin [01:01:31] But had you worn your garments up to that point or. Yeah, okay.
Kate Kelly [01:01:35] Up to that day.
John Dehlin [01:01:36] Okay.
Kate Kelly [01:01:38] But I think like Mormonism, where we talk about underwear.
John Dehlin [01:01:43] Underwear.
Kate Kelly [01:01:44] All right, world, glad we're getting into this. But I think it's another opportunity for Mormons, especially Mormon men and like super judgy Mormon women to reevaluate. Like, why are they even talking about this? Like, why are they talking about.
John Dehlin [01:02:00] And behold, Christ saith unto the multitude, showeth not thine shoulders.
Kate Kelly [01:02:05] Like, why are you even talking about this? Why are you discussing this? Why are you, like, when women's opinions, you know, that's, that's part of the reason. Like I said, you know, you said, do you want to do a video thing? And I'm like, no, I don't want the thing people to talk about in the comments is what I was wearing and what I looked like and what my haircut is and you know, all these different things. Like, with women, people tend to be like, extremely analytical about what they're wearing and what they look like. And that's another opportunity for people to reevaluate what they're thinking.
Kate Kelly [01:02:35] But no, I did not do it on purpose. Despite everyone in the world, I just got dressed and I was like, oh, I don't have to wear a cardigan with this. Moving on. You know, I mean, it's just a fact. Like, I don't wear garments anymore. They told me not to in the letter.
John Dehlin [01:02:52] So is there any evidence that there are any other leaders of ordained women that are being threatened with the disciplinary council? No, no one. What is up with that? How can all your co founders have no action? No. What do you speculate, like, what's going on there?
Kate Kelly [01:03:10] I mean, in the New York Times, you saw that Hannah Wheelwright, who founded Young Mormon Feminist, was put also on informal probation, but she also moved. So it was like she moved to D.C. and I moved to Utah.
John Dehlin [01:03:22] Yep.
Kate Kelly [01:03:23] But it looks like her, she's working things out with her leaders there. Kind of like what I hoped would happen.
John Dehlin [01:03:29] Yeah.
Kate Kelly [01:03:29] That I would be able to move my records and work things out in person.
John Dehlin [01:03:32] Yep.
Kate Kelly [01:03:32] With my new leaders, it seems like that's what's happening with her. So that's kind of what the aspiration I had that didn't come to fruition.
John Dehlin [01:03:40] But why councils with you and not them?
Kate Kelly [01:03:44] I don't know. It's not fair.
John Dehlin [01:03:47] Yeah.
Kate Kelly [01:03:47] I mean, I'm not saying they should be punished. I'm saying I shouldn't be. And why councils with me and not Neil?
Impact on Neil, Their Marriage, and Ordain Women
John Dehlin [01:03:54] So, Neil, you know, a lot of people loved what you wrote. What's your concern about, you know, councils as it relates to you versus Kate?
Neil Ransom [01:04:02] Well, I just think that, I mean, I have also. I mean, Kate brought the original idea to me about starting ordained women or something with.
John Dehlin [01:04:12] To,
Neil Ransom [01:04:14] like, ordained women. And I, you know, was very supportive of her throughout that entire process. And, you know, I've helped her. Like, I made the website. I have a profile on the website. I've had a profile on there for a year. I, like, made the video of Kate on her profile. So I've been an integral part as much as I can be, and I've spoken to media and things like that. I didn't go to the first two actions only because I had my qualifying exam. I had finals during one, I think, and then I had my qualifying exams during the next one. So I. School prevented me from going. But, yeah, nobody has ever spoken a word about ordained women to me. Not one word. The bishops never said a word. The stake president's never said a word.
John Dehlin [01:05:04] And you're in good standing, right?
Neil Ransom [01:05:05] I'm in good standing.
John Dehlin [01:05:06] And yet Kate's parents have had.
Neil Ransom [01:05:08] It doesn't make any sense.
John Dehlin [01:05:09] Their temple recommends taken over.
Neil Ransom [01:05:10] Elders Quorum president has never said anything, not even our home teachers has said anything to me about my involvement in ordained women. And so I think it just demonstrates that. I mean, obviously Kate's the, like, the poster child of the ordained women movement. She's the visible one. But if her. If her. Her sin in ordained women is for, you know, like having a profile up and associating herself with the website, that's what I've done. And so I think that just demonstrates that there's like, inherent sexism in the process where it's easier for them to. To discipline women than. Than men, maybe, or that, that. I don't know, maybe they valued Kate's membership less or. Or didn't even consider. I mean, anyway, either whatever situation it was, that they didn't also call me in for something just demonstrates that this process is rotten to the core.
John Dehlin [01:06:15] Right. And you know, my speculation is that what they've done with you and what it seems like they might do with me, they're thinking cut off the head and the animal dies. Right?
Kate Kelly [01:06:27] Yeah. I mean, it's so sinister, though. Like, that's just. Just a horrible thing for them to do. Like, from my perspective, I feel very unaffected. My eternal salvation, I do not think is tied to these three men in my case and the decision they made. But that's what they think. Like, from their perspective, it's not just like taking away my card. It's literally separating from my family forever right now.
John Dehlin [01:07:01] You don't believe that?
Kate Kelly [01:07:01] No.
John Dehlin [01:07:02] So many people want to know whether you believe that.
Kate Kelly [01:07:04] No.
John Dehlin [01:07:05] God's nullified your marriage.
Kate Kelly [01:07:07] No, I don't accept their authority over me. There's a lot of reasons. One of them is in Doctrine Covenants 102. If what you're doing is trying to coerce someone by authority with your priesthood, you don't have authority. And amen to that priesthood. And.
John Dehlin [01:07:22] And they haven't been long suffering and gentle and meek and all those virtues.
Kate Kelly [01:07:26] They didn't try to persuade me at all, ever. They just said, do this or we're going to punish you. And then they put me on informal probation and said, take down the website or else.
John Dehlin [01:07:38] Yeah.
Kate Kelly [01:07:38] You know, so it's using it as a stick. Even meeting with me. Like, he put the move restriction on my records in order to coerce me into meeting with him before I was being punished. And so it. The whole process has been them trying to coerce me into submitting to what they're saying. And so I just don't think that's the way in the Doctrine and Covenants it says explicitly that's not the way the priesthood works.
John Dehlin [01:08:07] Neil, do you. Do you feel like everything's been invalidated? Your marriage, your salvation?
Neil Ransom [01:08:13] No, I don't. And I. Yeah, I mean, I. I think part of that is because I have a broader perspective on how you get to heaven and all those kind of things. And I could never actually, growing up, like, fathom this idea of, like, why some people get eternal marriages and why some don't. Because if you just, like, if you don't get to be with your family because you're not in the celestial kingdom and you're all just there in the what other what? Whatever other kingdom, can't you just all hang out as a family anyway, you know, forever?
John Dehlin [01:08:49] No, they're gonna keep you each in a separate corner. Yeah. No family togetherness in the terrestrial kingdom. Everyone to their corner.
Neil Ransom [01:08:56] There's always something I was confused about, so. But no, I don't think it'll affect our. Our eternity together in any way.
John Dehlin [01:09:04] Now, this is. This is a total sequitur. Why the hat? So I'm just gonna go ahead and. While you got the microphone, we talked about shoulders. Everyone wants to know why you wear that. What is it, a real salt. Like, real Salt Lake soccer hat? Yeah.
Neil Ransom [01:09:18] I mean, the. The primary purpose was because I'm bald and we were going to be standing out in the sun all day. Yeah. Like, I've got sensitive skin to those types of things. So when I'm in the sun, I wear a hat. So that was it.
John Dehlin [01:09:31] And that's the hat you love or that you have, or that's the one that I like.
Neil Ransom [01:09:35] The fit. I mean, maybe to some extent, like the traditional clothes that we wear to church, like, the business clothes, I've never liked because of my. My distrust of, like, court, the corporate world and the connection there. So I've often, like, you know, I'll wear jeans instead of slacks or sandals instead of shoes. So maybe there. So that was part of it, but mostly it's just because I didn't want to get my head sunburned.
John Dehlin [01:10:05] Okay. Kate, how did you feel having this kind of lumped, Having your story lumped with my story and then Rock Waterman's. Was that an annoyance? Did you feel like there was a connection?
Kate Kelly [01:10:21] Yeah.
John Dehlin [01:10:22] Did you feel like it was important because it helped raise the visibility because, you know, you can't have a line until there's two dots.
Kate Kelly [01:10:28] Yeah, I think. I mean, you know, we talked about it leading up to this all coming out, but I think if there's a larger story to be told, the story is Mormons with questions are punished. And it's not just women. It seems to be, to me, to be a much larger story to be told. So I think that that's an important angle. And so I just. I don't really know that much about Rock. I know you, but I don't know him, and I don't know much of what he does. But it seems to me that he's also being targeted because he asks very serious questions. So I think that's an important story to be told. So I'm fine with it.
John Dehlin [01:11:16] Okay. And. Okay, that makes sense. Do you feel like this is an important turning point moment? Is this, like, blips, or do you feel like this is the beginning of something really big? Like, which one? Or neither?
Kate Kelly [01:11:32] I think what I feared, and I think this shows my lack of optimism or faith as I feared, like, as soon as I get excommunicated, people are gonna take down their profiles in droves. Like, we're gonna go from 500 to 50, you know, and people are gonna leave and totally, like, say, like, okay, that's it. I'm not doing this anymore. But the opposite has been true. We've had tons of new profiles coming in from active Mormons, not just from post Mormons.
Kate Kelly [01:12:03] And we have had, like, a huge up spike in activity. We've only had maybe five people take their profiles down. And that's just people who are essentially just, like, psychic damage has forced them to say, I just can't be part of this controversy because I'm being harassed or whatever it is.
Kate Kelly [01:12:22] So that's really just, like, an emotional decision for them. It's not like they changed their minds about women in the priesthood. So I was very. I think Mormon people are deciding what this movement, where this movement will go and what it means. And it's looking like to me that the opposite of what I feared is true, that people will stick by their convictions, and that this will become something much bigger.
John Dehlin [01:12:45] Are you. How committed. Do you. How committed are you to ordain women? Especially now you're moving Africa. Is your involvement going to taper down? Is it?
Kate Kelly [01:12:55] I'm still on the board of Ordain Women. We've been trying to spread out the leadership for a year, not just recently, because it's important. And I need to emphasize that it's not just me that we have an executive board of 10 people. We have a planning committee of over 30 people. We have a huge group that makes everything with ordained women happen. And all of those people are extremely talented and dedicated.
Kate Kelly [01:13:21] But I think for me, the next step for ordained women is international, like spreading languages and our outreach. Because a lot of the people who are most negatively affected by women not having the priesthood are in areas where there are very few Melchizedek priesthood holders. And that happens in a lot of areas. For example, in Spain, there would be a congregation, there'd be like two total Melchizedek priesthood holders in the congregation. And so they had to do everything. Like, if they didn't show up, there wouldn't be sacrament or whatever it was, you know. And in one of the areas I was in, there's no elders, it was just sisters.
Kate Kelly [01:13:59] So it's not even like the elders could do the sacrament. It was, if those guys didn't show up, nothing happened. And so I think our next step is really increasing our international component, which I think it will be very useful for me to be in another place.
Kate Kelly [01:14:16] So I'm just going to continue to be involved. I think we made a very important step early on. We had to make a decision whether or not to allow people like Margaret Toscano to put up profiles. And that was a very heated debate because we wanted to make a space for active, believing Mormons to speak out. And the church did a very good job of making people like Margaret and others outsiders and branding them in a certain way. So I think we made a great decision early on to include all voices and put up profiles of people who had been excommunicated, people who are post Mormon, people on all ends of the spectrum.
Kate Kelly [01:14:57] And we continue to encourage profiles from all kinds of people. So in retrospect, I'm glad we made that decision because now I'm part of that. You know what I mean? Like, I'm glad we chose in the very early stages to include people like me
John Dehlin [01:15:15] and future actions. Like, it's obvious that what brought this to a head is the actions that brought so much publicity to the church and that were so controversial. So if you choose actions in the future that are low key, under the radar, they don't cause a stir, my guess is nothing's going to happen. And my guess is that you'll just keep doing this until you either burn out or nobody pays attention and things just go on as they are. If I were a strategy guy, I would say that your only hope of taking this to the next level is to do more really bold, controversial actions. Is that something that you're thinking about, not thinking about? Not sure yet.
Kate Kelly [01:15:59] No, definitely. Like, we. We've always been from day one, very committed to, in person, direct action. We said that we're no longer going to be doing the priesthood session action for a lot of reasons, but we don't want to. We don't want the question to be about whether or not we get into the priesthood session. We want the question to be whether or not we get the priesthood.
Kate Kelly [01:16:22] And so I think we're going to continue. I know that we're going to continue to do direct actions, and I think, again, we're going to try to make them big enough that people worldwide can participate. So far, they've been very focused on Utah.
Kate Kelly [01:16:38] But we, again, I think we need to step back and I give us some slack. We've only existed for a year. So I think the next step for us is to be more inclusive of people everywhere and make actions. And we, and we have one planned on August 26th. We're doing equal in Faith, which is a worldwide fast for gender justice in all faith traditions.
John Dehlin [01:17:03] But other bold actions to come?
Kate Kelly [01:17:04] Oh, yeah, definitely.
John Dehlin [01:17:06] Okay. All right. I'm not gonna ask you what they are.
Kate Kelly [01:17:08] I don't know. So.
John Dehlin [01:17:09] Okay. Is it hard to be a public leader in something so controversial?
Kate Kelly [01:17:16] I think the thing that's hard for me is I feel when this was just me on my own thinking like it would be me and a handful of peep friends or close, you know, family members, I felt less responsibility. Now I feel like a huge weight of responsibility to not only represent myself and my point of view, but other, you know, the beehive who puts her profile up, the currently serving Relief Society president, the, you know, stay at home mom of five in Lehi, Utah, you know, all these other people who have affiliated themselves with ordained women or put up a profile or said, you know, boldly. I also think that women should be ordained. I feel a responsibility to those people.
John Dehlin [01:17:58] And what about, what about people who have said, Kate bungled it, she was too strident, she was too angry, she responded in negative ways, she bungled her moment and she got what she deserved. And I've even heard progressives, and I'm not saying a lot, but I mean, is it, you know, part one is, is it hard to be criticized even by progressives, to be nitpicked and torn apart? And two, what, what do you say to those people who say you were too strident, you were too angry, you pushed too hard, Too fast. You should have taken a more moderate approach.
Kate Kelly [01:18:30] Well, I mean, those people are free to do what they think is right. Like, ordained women isn't the only thing that's ever going to exist. And those. You know, every movement has different facets to it. So I think those people should. If they think I did the wrong thing, they should do what they think is right. And I can only really be accountable to myself in that regard. But I. I don't think I was ever angry. I think when they say tone was the problem, I agree for them, like, tone was the reason we were so effective, because we were respectful, because we spoke the language of Mormons, because we affirmatively and proactively controlled our narrative and said, we are Mormons, you know, because I was able to say, I'm a returned missionary. I got married in the temple, I graduated from byu, and I think women should be ordained.
John Dehlin [01:19:18] I'm a believer.
Kate Kelly [01:19:19] Yeah. And I think women should be.
John Dehlin [01:19:20] I respect the process.
Kate Kelly [01:19:22] I think women should be ordained. I think that was our most effective way forward, and I think it is our most effective way forward. And that's still true of 95% of the people who have profiles up. They're still members of the church.
Kate Kelly [01:19:34] And so I think we need to continue that track and not let this become a discussion of, you know, I think we need to not let the public affairs department of the church or other people let this become a conversation about excommunication or discipline. I think it's important to really acknowledge ecclesiastical abuse of women, particularly. But that. And that's an important conversation to have. But Ordained Women is about the ordination of women and how we can make that happen and how we can, you know, continue to petition our leaders to ask the Lord for revelation. And so I think everyone's gonna have their opinion, in retrospect, about what happened.
Kate Kelly [01:20:20] But I think no one else has been able to create a worldwide conversation in the way that I have, and no one else has been able to. No other group has brought such an accelerated dialogue in the way that ordained women has. So whatever people want to say about tone or about, you should have done this. You shouldn't have done this. You shouldn't have been so angry. You shouldn't have been wearing a tank top. Whatever it is, I think they can't take away from us that we created this conversation.
John Dehlin [01:20:53] There are. You know, I remember listening to Nyla McBain when she was interviewed by Doug Fabrizio, and she's working for Bonneville, and there's Maxine Hanks, who Has, you know, spoken at fair. And there's sort of this narrative now that kind of, you know, Kate Kelly is the Malcolm X or the Alice Paul kind of the radical. And then there's. That's the bad feminist, and then there's the good feminists, the ones who worked within the system, who were patient, who didn't push for too much too soon, who. You know, who maybe. And maybe some of them even give the inference that a lot of these changes that have happened weren't because of you and ordained women, but that they've been tirelessly working behind the scenes for a lot of people and it all
Kate Kelly [01:21:36] coincidentally happened at the same time.
John Dehlin [01:21:38] Yeah, yeah. No, I mean, what do you think about this narrative of the good feminist versus the bad feminist? People working within the system versus being more radical?
Kate Kelly [01:21:46] Yeah, I mean, that's every movement. That's a description of every movement that's ever happened, that there are people. I think there have to be a variety of tactics and people who are willing to be more bold and people who are more conciliatory and more, you know, working within the system. The problem with Mormonism is women don't have a place in the system. Like, they can make suggestions to the public affairs department, I guess I don't know what it is that they're doing behind the scenes, but they don't have a seat at the table. None of those people that you just mentioned.
John Dehlin [01:22:17] Do they have private conversations, though?
Kate Kelly [01:22:20] Sure, maybe they talk to, like, Elder Uchtdorf's wife at a brunch. But, like, that isn't what I'm talking about. And so I think it's. To me, it's not about private conversations or back channels. It's about accountability. And so our leaders now are accountable for the fact that they can no longer say that no women in the church want the priesthood. That is just, like, quantifiably not true.
Kate Kelly [01:22:45] And so I think it's about accountability. I think it's about getting our message to where it needs to be. I think it's about working together, and I value the work that other people do. I think a lot of stuff needs to change and a lot of stuff needs to happen, but I categorically reject that. Ordained women has moved the conversation backward. I don't think that's true. I think that, you know, what we've done is really move the conversation forward into a new place. And that also, you know, some of the people who are saying these things have a new space that we've created for them where they're in the middle, whereas before they were on the vanguard.
Kate Kelly [01:23:24] And I don't think that ordain women is the most radical thing that's ever going to happen in Mormonism. I think someday there'll be young whippersnappers who are saying, like, ordain women's totally weak sauce, you know, what sellouts. And then we'll just be shaking our fists at them, saying, you. You don't know how hard we had it.
Kate Kelly [01:23:43] You know, that happens with every generation. That happens with every movement. I'm sure that will happen with us. I hope it happens with us. I hope there are young Mormon girls who are just starting to think about these issues, and now that ordained women is out there, they'll know there's something more that they can do. And I hope that happens. I don't know what it'll be, but someday I'm sure people will say, I'm a cello and I'll be happy.
Community Response, Future Plans, and Closing Reflections
John Dehlin [01:24:06] How does it make you feel, you know, is it your understanding that people have resigned their membership over the church's treatment of you? I was at a picnic last night, and some random woman in Logan, you
Neil Ransom [01:24:20] know,
John Dehlin [01:24:23] said that she was sort of hanging on by her fingernails, and much like Neil, for her, this was the breaking point. And now she's done. How does it make you feel to hear that this is causing lots of people or some people to leave the church?
Kate Kelly [01:24:38] Yeah, I mean, I know that there's been talk of resignation designations, and I just, I. I think people, and I've said this repeatedly, people just need to find a safe space for them. And if that's not Mormonism, that's fine. Like, I think this is consistent with what I've said. Like, I think our journeys, whether that's in or outside of Mormonism, like, our part of our journey is to, you know, become what Mormons would say, more Christ. Like, it's. It's to perfection, perfect ourselves.
Kate Kelly [01:25:09] And for some people, that's just not in Mormonism. It's not a safe place. It's not, you know, and that's fine. Like, I think people who are doing that are making a very, you know, they're making an emotional calculation that works for them, but I don't think they should put that on me.
Kate Kelly [01:25:26] Like, I don't think they should say they're doing it because of me. That's the only thing that concerns me when people say they're doing in my name or for me. I think Mormons, people coming out of Mormonism really want, tend to gravitate to charismatic leaders. And I don't. Like. I think that's a new skill we need to develop. You know, don't.
John Dehlin [01:25:47] Individual responsibility.
Kate Kelly [01:25:48] Don't. Don't do it because of me. Do it because you decided on your own that it wasn't a safe place for you. But you.
John Dehlin [01:25:54] Do you want people to leave? Does it make you sad that you're a spark that that leads to people leaving?
Kate Kelly [01:26:01] I mean, I don't think. Again, I think this is like, well, why are you making the church look bad? I'm like, I'm not making the church look bad. If they look bad, that's on them. I'm not making people leave. If people leave, it's because they acknowledge that there is opportunity for ecclesiastical abuse, which happened to me. And they're. They're saying, like, that's not an organization I want to be a part of. So that's not on me. That's on the church for what they did to me. People are reacting to what the church did to. To me, not to what I'm doing.
Kate Kelly [01:26:27] But I think that makes me sad. Like, the thing that makes me sad is, like Neil said, I realized there isn't a place for me, like, imagine the potential, like, you know, from the highest high of ordained women, we thought, like, there. This is wonderful. There is a place for us in the church. Like, look at this expansion. Look at this progression. Look at how great it is. And then that for many people came crashing down when they excommunicated me. That place we thought we had created for ourselves was no longer there. And so I think that's a shame. I think it's sad. I don't think.
Kate Kelly [01:26:59] Again, I don't think it. I don't think it's a negative or a positive if people leave the church, as long as they make the decision for themselves based on their own circumstances. If people can stay, I think they should stay.
Kate Kelly [01:27:11] But if people stay, I think it's incumbent upon them to speak up and speak out. I think the worst possible decision is to stay and. And sort of like, become an ostrich in the sand and just duck your head and not say anything. That's the one thing I would recommend. Do not do. Don't do it. It's not it. If you do that, you have no integrity. If you do that, you.
Kate Kelly [01:27:34] I don't think it's mentally like Neil said. You know, he was having this real psychological trauma because he wasn't being authentic. I don't think that's a good space for people to occupy.
John Dehlin [01:27:47] So Stay and speak out or.
Kate Kelly [01:27:50] Or make, like, make the calculation. If it's not a safe place for you, you should leave. It shouldn't be a place where it causes you harm. And for me, it wasn't. For me, it wasn't. You know what I mean? I felt great about ordained women. It's the best I felt in years. Going to church, I felt like it opened up. You know, I went to church and I was like, well, everyone knows exactly how I feel.
John Dehlin [01:28:14] Yeah.
Kate Kelly [01:28:14] And I don't have to live a lie.
John Dehlin [01:28:17] Yeah. Yeah. I completely relate to that. And that's. That's what I had to do, too. I had to just go through the process of telling my stake president this is what I believe. Do you accept me or not? And it was only then that I started to feel like I could stay. Neil, any final thoughts before I ask Kate? Maybe one last question?
Neil Ransom [01:28:34] No, not really.
John Dehlin [01:28:35] Is it hard to see your wife getting attacked and suffering and getting punished by the church in this way?
Neil Ransom [01:28:40] She's got pretty thick skin, so I don't. I don't know. I mean, of course it's sad to hear, you know, some of the slanderous things that people said. I mean, if you've read my letter that I joined to Kate's appeal, like, yeah, I have some anger in there against. Specifically towards our local leaders, because what they've done has been so colluding and, you know, they've been obfuscating the way that they've dealt with this entire process. And it just. Like, when I think about the way that they've dealt with Kate and with Kate's parents, like, when you read in the Book of Mormon about secret combinations, like, to me, this is secret combinations just happening in my life with my. With my family. But, like, people on the Internet, anonymous people on the Internet, like, that's just meaningless to me.
John Dehlin [01:29:40] Okay, okay.
Neil Ransom [01:29:41] Like, for example, I. Someone tweeted on my. Anyway, someone on Twitter said, like, they're they. My letter that I sent in conjunction with Kits appeal was just, like, a PR stunt, and that there was a house full of women rolling their eyes at me. And I just, like, thought that was hilarious. That some anonymous person is, like, trying to shame me because there's a house of anonymous people rolling their anonymous eyes at me. But anyway, so no, I. Yeah, I support Kate when I.
John Dehlin [01:30:12] Sorry, go ahead, finish. Okay, so. And do you feel like this has weakened your marriage? Not had any effect in your marriage or strength in your marriage?
Neil Ransom [01:30:24] It definitely hasn't weakened it. I think it has demonstrated the Strength that we already had in our marriage. You know, I don't, I never doubted, and I don't think Kate doubted at any time that this process was going to pull us apart or cause any strife for us. And, you know, I think through this process we, you know, it reaffirmed to us that we had a strong marriage to begin with. So.
John Dehlin [01:30:51] Excellent. So maybe what do you want to be done?
Kate Kelly [01:30:58] No, I was just saying I didn't know who you were gonna ask.
John Dehlin [01:31:00] Okay. Kate. Yeah. So, yeah, this final, final question, I think so you've got this, you've got this choice now about the future. You're going to Africa, you've got to find a job and you've got to advance your career. Are you gonna like, give ordained women as much attention as you have in the past? Is it like full steam ahead? Is it like accelerate your involvement? Or is it like step back but hope the other women and ordained women and men, you know, put forth the effort? Or is it just like you've done your thing and now you're gonna kind of leave it and see what other people do?
Kate Kelly [01:31:39] Well, I think before the whole excommunication thing happened, it was very manageable. You know, when we have the action, it would be very busy. And then, you know, it's a totally volunteer organization, so people would chip in if they could. And it was extremely cooperative. And again, it's not just me planning everything. Like, there's tons, tons of people doing a lot of work.
Kate Kelly [01:32:03] And it's not like I wrote the discussions, like each person took on a different discussion and like collaborated on those. And I didn't write the discussions. So there's a lot of work going on already. That's not me. But this, the time consuming nature of what happened pre and post excommunication, I mean, it just takes up so much time.
Kate Kelly [01:32:28] And so I think that is not possible to sustain is very unsustainable. But in some ways, you know, the coincidental timing, this happened all when I'm not working. And so I was able to devote almost full time to doing this.
Kate Kelly [01:32:45] But that won't be the case going forward. So I'll definitely have to, you know, focus on my career and move it back to a space where it was pre excommunication, which was manageable and working alongside, you know, my career. And again, I don't have kids. You know what I mean? Like, in some ways, when I met with the Stake president, he said, all women are mothers. And I said, well, if all women are mothers, I'm the Mother of ordained women.
John Dehlin [01:33:08] So that's how you still see yourself?
Kate Kelly [01:33:11] Yeah, I mean, I think I'm. You know, in my exponent essay, I said I'm one of the founding mothers. And I think founding mothers is, like, a perfect description of what it is. If there are founding fathers, there should be founding mothers. And I think there. That's one of the things that I've contributed and will continue to contribute because that's what I have to give.
John Dehlin [01:33:35] So you're not stepping back?
Kate Kelly [01:33:37] No. That's a short answer.
John Dehlin [01:33:39] Ordained women's going strong.
Kate Kelly [01:33:41] Yeah. Yeah. Surprisingly, I mean, surprising in that I felt like we would sort of take a big hit, but it seems like that's not gonna be the case.
John Dehlin [01:33:52] And your board's still committed to going forward.
Kate Kelly [01:33:54] Yeah.
John Dehlin [01:33:55] Yeah.
Kate Kelly [01:33:56] And again, I think it's just. It's the. Is this the end of the conversation? In the beginning, I think for me, I take that small step back and get more of a bird's eye view and realize while what's happened to me has been very painful, it's. It's the very first step. I think we're at the precipice of this conversation.
John Dehlin [01:34:18] And you're not. You're not giving up.
Kate Kelly [01:34:20] Nope.
John Dehlin [01:34:20] All right, so I lied the last two questions. How are you doing emotionally, psychologically? Are you okay? And why don't you end with just your beliefs and your testimony, whatever's left of it or whatever shape it's taken?
Kate Kelly [01:34:38] Right. So I'm fine. I mean, I know a lot of people do. People process things in different ways and in different times. I'm a very, like, just in life, a very, like, quick emotional processor. I just, like. I process things real time. If you look at the interview the day of the excommunication and Peggy with Peggy, that was on the Salt Lake Tribune. And then if you look at the. The next day where I'm wearing the controversial.
John Dehlin [01:35:05] Yeah, your porn.
Kate Kelly [01:35:06] Shoulders are millimeter of my shoulders showing, which obviously is totally scandalous. If you look at those two interviews, it's different. So different from just 24 hours. That's the kind of emotional processor I am. So even in that interview, I said yesterday was awful, but today is today, and that's kind of how I am.
Kate Kelly [01:35:31] So this has been a difficult process. But the next week, after I got excommunicated, I went to Disneyland, like, with my family, you know, I think that's the most important thing for people to understand, especially young people, like, what is it that you fear is going to happen? And I talked about this In a. In a different interview. I think biologically or, you know, evolutionarily, we're. We're conditioned to think that when. When we fear something, it feels like death. Like, it feels like the worst possible thing could happen, or, you know, our ancestors faced a saber tooth tiger, and that's what we fear. Like, when we have a fear, it feels so dire.
Kate Kelly [01:36:13] But I've been through what the worst case scenario is in Mormonism, and I've come out on the other side and I'm fine. Life moves on. Especially if the reason your excommunicated is you spoke with integrity and you told the truth. That's.
Kate Kelly [01:36:34] You can't take that back. I mean, that's not something you can do differently. And so for me, I came out on the other end and I'm fine. I'm gonna move on with my life. I know what I did is right,
John Dehlin [01:36:47] and
Kate Kelly [01:36:51] I feel fine about it.
John Dehlin [01:36:52] Do you feel like this has affected your ability to feel the spirit or your relationship with Christ?
Kate Kelly [01:36:57] No, and I don't think that's something they can take away from me. You know, that's. That's, again, maybe in their minds, that's something that they can take away from me, but that's not my experience. I felt, you know, just as moved and just as directed and just as comforted as I ever did by the spirit. And that's how I think things will go moving forward. Like, again, I don't think Mormonism has the monopoly on that. And so I think I'll continue as I did before. I mean, don't get me wrong, that's not to minimize my experience or say it wasn't terrible, it was terrible. But life goes on.
John Dehlin [01:37:50] So your final testimony is.
Kate Kelly [01:37:53] I just. I think that wonderful things are in store not just for Mormonism, but all faith traditions as they become greater, more inclusive places. And I think that's inevitable. I think that is Zion. Zion isn't a place where certain people are excluded because of beliefs they hold or because of how they were born. And so there's nowhere to go but up, I think, and I hope that Mormonism will be part of that. And that's what, when I see heaven, that's what happen is Amen.
John Dehlin [01:38:36] Would you ever consider joining the community of Christ or starting your own church or a Reform Mormonism movement like Judaism's had a Reform movement?
Kate Kelly [01:38:46] Yeah, I mean, I think. I guess in some ways that's what I'm talking about. Like Mormon become Mormonism, becoming a more inclusive place. And as we all, you know, together as the body of Christ. As we move forward and we evolve and as we progress, I think Mormonism will become a more open place. Mormonism will become a place where you can be like Neil and have questions and doubts and still teach elders, quorum and contribute. But I'm definitely not going to start my own church. That's way too much work. Then I'll be a real martyr. So I think. And I'm not going to join Community of Christ, you know, I'm just not. Mormonism is my spiritual home, period.
John Dehlin [01:39:35] The LDS Church. Yeah. Okay. So you're sticking in some way.
Kate Kelly [01:39:41] Yeah.
John Dehlin [01:39:41] I mean, certainly not going elsewhere.
Kate Kelly [01:39:44] Yeah, definitely not. And. And that's for lots of reasons, but it's kind of the house I live in. It's the paradigm I have. It's the way that I grew up. It's, you know, the faith of my parents. And I think I find extreme value. And again, it's. It's not throwing the baby out with the bathwater, you know, for me, because for some people, they say there's only bath water left, but for me, there's not. It's. There's a lot of value. There's a lot of things I learned. I think I've become a better person. I've met the best people I've met. I've. You know, I'm just a really passionate person because I think I was raised in Mormonism, and so I want to keep the good in spite of the bad.
John Dehlin [01:40:37] Amen. All right, well, Neil, thank you so much for joining us today on Mormon Stories. It's been a delight to learn a bit about you and to share in your feelings and thoughts and experiences.
Neil Ransom [01:40:53] Well, thank you, John, for having me. It was great.
John Dehlin [01:40:56] And Kate Kelly, thanks again for joining us on Warmer Stories. And we wish you guys the best of luck in Africa and beyond.
Kate Kelly [01:41:03] Thanks. Thanks for having us. Thanks for sticking with us. If you listen to this whole thing.
Neil Ransom [01:41:28] Come, ye saints, no toil nor labor fear,
John Dehlin [01:41:35] but with joy when you're with.
Transcript © 2026 John P. Dehlin. All rights reserved. Brief quotations are welcome with attribution and a link to mormonstories.org; all other use requires written permission.
120 Responses
1. BYU has fantastic counselors! Of course everyone’s experience is different, but mine was great.
2. John, do you know the Young Mormon Feminists at BYU do a fmh/discussion group type thing? And it looks like it’s spreading! So be careful–that could be lot of pizza.:) https://youngmormonfeminists.org/feminist-fhe/
Monica – I wanna visit!!!!!
Just through part 1, but it is so great to hear from Kate’s equal. What an amazing couple, I am in awe of their goals and aspirations. My oldest son mirrors some of Neil’s direction and drive.
John I was offended by a serious mistake you made in this podcast.
“Dogs and Cats sleeping together” is from Ghostbusters, not Fletch.
I’m truly disappointed in you.
Doh!!!! Got my 80s movies mixed up!!!!
And the quote is wrong it is “Dogs and Cats living together”
And it was Bill Murry, not Chevy Chase! Ha, ha!
Wow. The corporate church probably got more than it bargained for in going after what sounds like a true-blue TMB who happens to be articulate and savvy in the ways of corporate maneuvering. If they thought they could simply cow Kate into silence they appear to have failed spectacularly. Instead, their actions and missteps appear to have introduced her ideas to a vastly larger audience while at the same time revealing a somewhat brittle and inconsistent corporatism at work. As with the stories of John and Rock Waterman so far I pity the bishops and stake presidents tasked with executing these pre-determined verdicts from above while being told to claim it was their own doing. Hopefully you won’t be interviewing some poor ex-bishop someday, John, whose cognitive dissonance over being directed to excommunicate one of you guys led him to part ways with the Church!
I’m glad you included Neal in this conversation, John. I love this guy! Having him in her life is evidence that God loves Kate Kelly. An eternal family still? As long as they persist in mutual love and service to one another–of course.
The account of Kate being snagged by her Instagram photos sounds like the work not of Kate’s old bishop but rather the STMC, whose task is to accumulate clip files on problematic members then share that surveillance with the local leaders.
These interviews are important for those of us still committed to church affiliation but longing for a church led more by Jesus Christ and less by personal whim and corporate infighting. Have a marvelous experience in Kenya, Kate and Neal. May the Force be with you in August, John.
Darren, did you listen to the interview? She doesn’t sound TBM. She said she doesn’t believe its all literally true and she doesn’t care. She doesn’t care that its historically false. She only cares about her “lived experience” of mormonism.
I’ve been wondering how she could believe and I’m glad to find out, she doesn’t. Now it all makes a bit more sense to me. I do think that the historical truth does matter to many people and to those people this interview helps open the door a bit more.
I enjoyed the interview and I wish Ordain Women great success in exposing the truth.
Kate sounds like the majority of active faithful members when talking about the history of the church and its truth claims. Most members don’t scrutinize the churches history. They hear the one side of the story they learn in Sunday school or seminary and that’s good for them. The true history of the church to many members is not as big a deal to them like it is to the many others who view it from an objective stand point. She sounds like she is a progressive thinking TBM.
I am half way threw the interview and find it interesting to learn more about these two people. I found their feelings on having kids fascinating. So far from my views on the subject. But I respect them and their feelings. The world is beautiful because of its diversity, not because of its monotony.
I think Kate’s position is similar to many members, but definitely more progressive as well. I didn’t like her stance that lived experience is the only important part to her. Yes it is a big part, but it is a little bit of a cop out as she says. I think one must imbrace the history full on and then makean informed decision on their beliefs about the church. Until then she is in the same boat of most members who just think that they don’t know, its not important for their salvation, and god will work it out in the end. I’m glad that John drove that point home that the foundation is very important. In my opinion, I think she may eventually have a change of opinion and through the church out all together.
Jay, I have changed my mined on Kate. It has to do with ‘Sincerity!’ I had believed Kate to be a sincere person, but no more. My issue is Polygamy and all that surrounded it in the early church, as it was a direct impact on wormen. I agree with Kate when she said she, “fully rejects polygamy as a doctrine. . . . A lot of the practices were to take advantage of women.” Kate even said that “reading the diaries of the women who were in the practice of Polygamy was detrimental to them.”
History is clear. It is well known that Joseph Smith married Helen Kimball, a fourteen year old, who said in her own words, her diary, “I would never have been sealed to Joseph had I known it was anything more than ceremony. I was young, and they deceived me, by saying the salvation of our whole family depended on it.” (Mormon Polygamy: A History by LDS member Richard S. Van Wagoner, p. 53.)
However, I do not agree with Kate when said that she ”has so much more compassion for Joseph Smith. . . . you have to give the guy a break!”
Does Kate find the practice of what is essentially pedophilia (child molestation) discussing to the point of rejecting polygamy when it involves 14 year old girls, but has so much more compassion for the child molester who stands in public and lies about it? . . . Joseph Smith’s lied ─ he had at least 34 wives when he made the following public address:
“I had not been married scarcely five minutes, and made on proclamation of the Gospel, before it was reported that I had seven wives. This new holy prophet [William Law] has gone to Carthage and swore that I had told him that I was guilty of adultery. This spiritual wifeism! Why, a man dares not speak or wink, for fear of being accused of this… What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one. I am the same man, and as innocent as I was fourteen years ago.” Source: (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, Vol. 6, p.410)
I would hope that Kate is not using the church to further her cause. Sincerity says a lot about the core of the individual. I do wish Kate well in her movement, “Ordain Women,” but hope she will be honest and SINCERE about how she expresses her feelings about the church.
I can say without a doubt that ‘LDS People’ are some of the most wonderful and sincere people, but the structure and leadership of the church is the issue. Those 15 who run the Mormon Church need to learn the meaning of Sincerity! . . . rather than twisting facts and history to maintain control.
“History is clear. It is well known that Joseph Smith married Helen Kimball, a fourteen year old, who said in her own words, her diary…”
You’ll want to check the source of that quote. It’s not Helen’s diary.
Those words were reportedly spoken by Helen to the mother of Catherine Lewis. The quote first became public in Catherine Lewis’ 1848 book. That makes it a 3rd person account, published 4 years after Smith’s death.
After Smith’s death, before Lewis’ book came out, and shortly before departing for Salt Lake, Helen was married “for time” to Horace Whitney and sealed to Joseph Smith for eternity. So an alternate interpretation would still support Helen being influenced by the polygamist movement (not Smith, but including her father) to tell tales supportive of polygamy.
Unfortunately, the history is a lot less clear than many want to make it.
Bob, you are correct — those are Helen’s words — spoken to a close friend, as so recorded. I have no reason to doubt them, as Helen never refuted them. I was in a hurry to tie my idea to the “Diary” train of thought and misspoke about the sourced of Helen’s words when Helen confided to a close friend in Nauvoo.
The following are, however, Helen’s written words which express her feelings: “She [Helen’s Mother] had witnessed the sufferings of others, who were older and who better understood the step they were taking, and to see her child, who had yet seen her fifteenth summer, following the same thorny path, in her mind she saw the misery which was as sure to come as the sun was to rise and set; but it was hidden from me.”
I do not think there is much doubt among researchers that Helen’s words – spoken or written – express depression. Lines from her poem seem to validate this:
And o’er thy sad’nd mem’ries of sweet departed joys
Thy sicken’d heart will brood and imagine future woes,
And like a fetter’d bird with wild and longing heart,
Thou’lt dayly pine for freedom and murmor at thy lot;
Thanks again Bob, for pointing out to me my error! . . . much appreciated.
Thanks Dale.
I couldn’t agree more that polygamy was sickening, and I’m not looking to give Joseph Smith any undeserved breaks.
I just don’t believe Brigham Young’s big lie about Smith being the origin of Mormon polygamy. The idea that Smith was a pedophile or a child molester is part of that lie. I dont’ buy it.
Your quote about Helen’s “fifteenth summer” comes from her 1881 autobiography – 38 years later. By 1881, Helen was not a disinterested third party, nor was she a naive 14 year old. Her father, Heber, had been Brigham Young’s First Counselor until his death in 1868. Her son Orson would later become an Apostle. Helen was highly invested in Brigham Young’s church.
At the time, the church was famously engaged in a battle over polygamy with the federal government. For a variety of reasons, Young wanted to tie the church’s practice of polygamy as tightly as possible to Smith. Helen’s 1881 autobiography (along with memoirs of other women of the same time period) was part and parcel of Young’s bigger propaganda lie.
If you are disgusted by the horror that was polygamy, anger at Smith is misplaced. Blame Brother Brigham.
Now, if Kate Kelly believes Smith really did all those horrible things and still wants to give him a break… wow. Just wow.
Hi Bob,
I couldn’t agree with you more when it comes to good old Brigham. Not only was this guy a pedophile, but if you crossed him, you may end up in a ditch with a bullet in your head. I’m sure he has found his just reward and discovered HELL in ‘The Land of the Dead!’ We have the Church’s statement about the Mountain Meadow Massacre, “Isaac C. Haight, a stake president and militia leader, sent John D. Lee, a militia major, to lead an attack on the emigrant company.” It can’t get more evil than that. Brigham’s scribe, John V. Long, the man who might testify about the communications, was found dead in a ditch.
However, I do not give Joseph a pass. He cornered and got 16-year old Lucy Walker in his mansion – sent Emma off to St. Louis on a shopping mission – so he was alone with this young teenage girl. This is what she [Lucy] had to say, “Oh that the grave would kindly receive me that I might find rest on the bosom of my dear mother…Why – Why Should I be chosen from among thy daughters, Father I am only a child in years and experience. No mother to council; no father near to tell me what to do, in this trying hour. Oh let this bitter cup pass. And thus I prayed in the agony of my soul.” Source: Compton, In Sacred Loneliness
Joseph lied in public about his plural wives – my quote above. I put the whole lot of them in the same “Disgusting Bucket!” – to name a few, Lorenzo Snow was 57-years-old when he married 15-year-old Sarah Minnie Ephramina Jensen (she didn’t have a child by him for about 5 years having five children with him, the last impregnated when Snow was about 82-years-old).
Heber C. Kimball said, “Brethren, I want you to understand that it is not to be as it has been heretofore. The brother missionaries have been in the habit of picking out the prettiest women for themselves before they get here, and bringing on the ugly ones for us; hereafter you have to bring them all here before taking any of them, and let us all have a fair shake. – Apostle Heber C. Kimball, First Counselor to Brigham Young, The Lion of the Lord, New York, 1969, pp 129-130.
All I can say is “Disgusting!” . . . Yeah, Joseph started it – the disgusting practice of molesting young girls, taking other men’s wives and the beat goes on . . . even to day with Warren Jeffs in jail. I just can’t give Joseph a “Break!” as Kate said.
If some “old” self proclaimed prophet came to me and wanted my 14 year old daughter and said he had an angle after him with a fiery sword, I would have called the authorities and would of had him committed.
Dale,
To me it is sad how badly Smith has been treated by history and historians.
I don’t think Smith lied about polygamy. He consistently opposed it. In the legal battles after Smith’s death, the splinter group with the same doctrine as the original church would often be judged to have claim to church property. Thus the Utah church needed to make Smith’s teachings match up with their own teachings to help win legal battles. So there was a constant push by Young et al to paint Smith as a polygamist and fight back Emma’s claims.
Every document I find where Smith appears to endorse polygamy, it turns out to have been altered to give that impression. The women who accuse him of being a child molester turn out to have done so late in life after a lifetime of polygamy when they had their own motives. Contemporary journal entries always turn out to have been back-dated. Folklore dominates and openly defies reality.
I know nothing about Lucy Walker, but I’ll blindfold myself and make a guess: your Lucy Walker quote comes from after 1875? And she was a polygamist wife living in Utah?
Removing blindfold, opening Google… searching… Google says: she married Heber C. Kimball in 1845. (Yes, THAT Heber C. Kimball. Hmm.) Then in 1888 her memoir was published (including your quote) telling of her marriage to Smith. Bingo. Kind of a pattern here, isn’t there?
Google also found this quote from 66 yr old Lucy Walker, in 1892: “It was the principal of plural marriage that we (she and Heber Kimball) were trying to establish, a great and glorious true principle, and if we had established it, it would have been for the benefit of the whole human race, and the race will say so yet. Yes, sir, and the day will come when you will doff your hat to the plural wife system.”
The Lucy Walker you quote was the one pushing polygamy here. Not Smith. And I’m not trying to blame the victim. I’m saying that Joseph Smith WAS the victim.
Hi Bob,
Even the LDS church historian Richard Turley (you can listen to the audio in the “Swedish Rescue”-to hear it straight from the horse’s mouth) confirms that Joseph Smith practiced both polygamy and polyandry.
Hi LS, I would never expect an LDS Church Historian to do anything other than confirm that Joseph Smith had multiple wives. Would you?
During the mid 1800s there was conflict between Young/Utah-church and Emma/RLDS. The Utah church was polygamous and claimed that’s what Joseph had taught and practiced. The Missouri church was monogamous and claimed that’s what Joseph had taught and practiced.
In legal battles, if one group could show their doctrine more closely aligned with the original church it gave them priority in legal disputes over church-owned property.
So the Utah church made it a priority to make it appear that Smith agreed with them on polygamy. They came up with Section 132, modified original documents before adding to the History of the Church, lined up their wives to testify they were also married to Smith, etc. Young’s policy was basically: whatever it takes, make sure Smith looks like a polygamist. If Smith looks like a liar, fine. Whatever it takes. He has to be a polygamist like us.
The current Utah LDS church bases its authority on succession through Brigham Young. If they don’t “confirm” Smith’s polygamy it undercuts the argument they have been making for over 150 years. Disagreeing with Brigham Young on polygamy would create a very real, very HUGE problem for them that could nullify their claims to priesthood authority.
So please don’t be surprised when I don’t grant the church historian much weight on this question. He has a dog in the fight.
Bob, you believe Joseph Smith never lied? Hmmmmm, that’s the position of LDS Church sponsored apologists.
A few bona fide examples:
1844 Sermon given by Joseph
It is clear that on May 26, 1844 Joseph lied about practicing polygamy, despite claims to the contrary:
“I had not been married scarcely five minutes, and made one proclamation of the Gospel, before it was reported that I had seven wives. I mean to live and proclaim the truth as long as I can. This new holy prophet [William Law] has gone to Carthage and swore that I had told him that I was guilty of adultery. This spiritual wifeism! Why, a man does not speak or wink, for fear of being accused of this…I wish the grand jury would tell me who they are – whether it will be a curse or blessing to me. I am quite tired of the fools asking me…What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one. I am the same man, and as innocent as I was fourteen years ago; and I can prove them all perjurers.” (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, Vol. 6, pp. 410-411)
1838 Interview with Joseph (at least 3-5 years after his first plural wife)
In the July 1838 edition of the Elder’s Journal (“Edited by Joseph Smith”) Joseph Smith answered some questions including the following:
“Question 7th. Do the Mormons believe in having more wives than one?
“Answer. No, not at the same time. But they believe that if their companion dies, they have a right to marry again. But we do disapprove of the custom which has gained in the world, and has been practiced among us, to our great mortification, of marrying in five or six weeks, or even in two or three months after the death of their companion.
“We believe that due respect ought to be had, to the memory of the dead, and the feelings of both friends and children.” (Elder’s Journal, Vol 1, No. 3, p 43; reprinted in History of the Church Vol 3, p 38)
1838 Letter written by Joseph
On Dec 16, 1838 Joseph Smith wrote a letter to the church from Liberty Jail which included the following:
“We have heard that it is reported by some, that some of us should have said, that we not only dedicated our property, but our families also to the Lord; and Satan, taking advantage of this, has perverted it into licentiousness, such as a community of wives, which is an abomination in the sight of God.” (History of the Church Vol 3, p 230
1844 Notice in Church-owned Newspaper
“TIMES AND SEASONS. CITY OF NAUVOO, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1844.
NOTICE.
“As we have lately been credibly informed, that an Elder of the Church of Jesus Christ, of Latter day Saints, by the name of Hiram Brown, has been preaching Polygamy, and other false and corrupt doctrines, in the county of Lapeer, state of Michigan.
“This is to notify him and the Church in general, that he has been cut off from the church, for his iniquity; and he is further notified to appear at the Special Conference, on the 6th of April next, to make answer to these charges.
“JOSEPH SMITH,
“HYRUM SMITH,
“Presidents of said Church.” (Times and Seasons, vol. 5, page 423)
1843 Joseph’s speech in front of the Ladies’ Relief Society
By the time Smith had dismissed Bennett in the summer of 1842, Smith had taken the following “spiritual wives” for himself in Nauvoo:
Louisa Beaman, Zina Huntington Jacobs (current wife of Henry Jacobs), Presendia Huntington Buell (current wife of Norman Buell), Agnes Coolbrith, Sylvia Sessions Lyon (current wife of Windsor Lyon), Mary Rollins Lightner (current wife of Adam Lightner), Patty Bartlett Sessions (current wife of David Sessions), Marinda Nancy Johnson Hyde (current wife of Orson Hyde), Elizabeth Davis Durfee (current wife of Jabez Durfee), Sarah Kingsley Cleveland (current wife of John Cleveland), Delcena Johnson Sherman, and Eliza R. Snow. (In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith, Todd Compton, 1997, p. 4.)
That’s twelve women who have been amply documented as JS’ plural wives, during the period in which Smith placed responsibility for the entire polygamy practice on Bennett. In a speech before the Ladies’ Relief Society, on February 21, 1843—–wherein many of his “plural wives” were in attendance—–Smith had the audacity to state the following:
“There is a great noise in the city…and many are saying there cannot be so much smoke without some fire. Well, be it so. If the stories about Joe Smith are true, then the stories of John C. Bennett are true about the ladies of Nauvoo; and he says that the Ladies’ Relief Society are all organized of those who are to be the wives of Joseph Smith. Ladies, you know whether this is true or not.”
Because his “plural wives” in the audience had been sworn to secrecy, Smith felt confident enough to stand before them and lie unabashedly.
Dale,
Joseph was not a polygamist and he consistently opposed it.
After his death, the polygamous faction of the church, led by Brigham Young, made every effort to make it appear that Smith was one of them. 8 years after Smith’s death they even forged a revelation on plural marriage in Joseph’s name and eventually added it to the D&C as Section 132. And they spent the next 150+ years selling the lie that Joseph was a polygamist in order to reinforce their claim to succession and authority and church owned property.
The LDS church owns, markets, and distributes the idea that Joseph was a polygamist. The “sponsored apologists” are there to reinforce that idea. Church scribes went to tremendous effort to rewrite the history so it looks that way.
So, you see, it should come as absolutely no surprise that the church is 100% in favor of the idea that Smith was a polygamist. When you spread the word that Smith was such a horny polygamist that he even married 14(!!!) year olds – guess what? That is exactly the message the church wants broadcast.
Let me say that again, just to be clear: The LDS Church in Utah wants you to believe that Smith was a polygamist. It reinforces their position as rightful heirs to the restoration.
But they have you so confused that you post quotes from Smith consistently denying polygamy and you obediently conclude he was lying. Or maybe you are one of those “sponsored apologists”?
I agree totally with Bob. I don’t believe that Joseph Smith lived polygamy, but that polygamists just said he did to cover for their adulterous deeds, for I believe everyone knows it’s wrong and contrary to the Gospel of Christ, yet most people still seem to fall for it and go along with it.
If the fact that the Church supports & promotes such leaders who committed such vile abominations doesn’t awaken people to the corruptness of the Church, then I don’t know what will. It never ceases to amaze me how anyone can support such vile actions as LDS church leaders did back then and still do today, and believe them to be prophets. They must have never studied or believed in Christ’s teachings and thus blindly follow and fall for the vilest of false prophets, because it’s easier then studying and finding and following light & truth for yourself.
Thank you Bob for defending Joseph. Though I don’t believe he was a true prophet either, I do believe he was innocent of polygamy. If it turns out he wasn’t then unfortunately he was just as vile as the rest of them back then and today, but I give him the benefit of a doubt, for it’s never been proven he lived polygamy. Hearsay, no matter how much, is not proof.
It also would have made no sense for Joseph to lie about polygamy if he thought the truth would have to come out one day, for he would know that he would lose all credibility.
It seems though that most people want to believe that Joseph lived polygamy and committed such vile deeds, for then it gives them a free pass for their own sins or to believe in and look forward to such perks themselves one day.
Nope, Bob, you are the confused one when you say, “Joseph was not a polygamist and he consistently opposed it!” And me . . . Apologist me? That would be the revelation of all time . . . ‘The moon made of green cheese and me an Apologist!”
This discussion had drifted into the realm of ‘Conspiracy Theories,” which makes me run for the hills, so you certainly have your right to believe Joseph Smith did not practice Polygamy, but the facts speak louder than fantasy.
Drifted into the realm of conspiracy theory? This is Warren Commission-level alternative reality type stuff. Forged a revelation on plural marriage? Does forging a revelation actually create a truth in the same way two negatives make a positive?
And Brigham get’s thrown under the bus once more. Maybe he was a detestable human being and he deserves it, I don’t know. From a historical accuracy perspective, I have trouble with the “blame Brigham” approach that seems to have become so fashionable. It doesn’t wash as an explanation for all in Mormon history that needs ‘splainin. Magic rocks, angelic visitations, gold plates, plural wives, curses of dark skin, sacred underwear and self-evisceration rituals … the more you learn the more strange it gets. So, when does the Joseph Smith biopic come out? Should be a blockbuster.
Lilli – thank you.
Dale – show me where I’m confused. Give me ONE unambiguous, contemporary, not back-dated, not a memoir-from-40-years-later, not third-hand, not altered later, document showing that Smith was polygamous or taught polygamy. One. Be prepared to support that document with the original manuscript showing it wasn’t altered. Please. Show me. I’m totally open and willing to change my mind. Really.
David –
To me, claiming Smith was or was not a polygamist says absolutely ZERO about ANY of his other claims, either to support or to refute them.
Dale/David –
This debate is as old as the church itself. Nothing new or particularly strange about it. The LDS and CoC argued back and forth over this until the CoC walked away to focus instead on Stuff That Matters.
You are making the case that the Utah church has argued all along. Dismiss it as crazy. Emma was crazy, right?
I’m just making the case that was traditionally argued by Emma and her sons.
Do you see a Section 132 in the CoC scriptures? No, because it was written after Smith’s death. Eight years after his death. By the polygamist faction of the church to justify polygamy. And they made it look like Smith wrote it so it would be more legitimate. It is a forgery. This has been the argument f-o-r-e-v-e-r. Nothing new.
If Brigham were here, he would pleased to see you dismissing it as a conspiracy theory. Quite pleased.
Hey, Bob. Thanks for sharing your perspective. I don’t necessarily disagree with you. I just don’t know. And I’m not arguing the polygamy issue has any impact on the other aspects of Joseph Smith’s life. To be fair, we should probably evaluate the historicity of the BoM, BoA translation issues, etc.,on their own merits. But you have to concede that the story you’re shopping goes against the mainstream grain. I was not familiar with it until recently. Maybe you are correct, and maybe not. I have nothing to evaluate your assertions by since I am already so dubious about other aspects of Mormon history that I won’t find the time or energy to research Joseph’s supposed polygamy. When is your book coming out so I don’t have to?
Thanks David – Sorry, I’m not shopping a story, not writing a book. If the RLDS couldn’t sell the story in 100 years of trying, why would I expect to do any better? There is just too much weight on the other side pushing relentlessly back. No, I’m just a kid on the parade route hollering that this particular Emperor has no clothes.
Bob, like David, I’ll echo his comments; “Hey, Bob. Thanks for sharing your perspective. I don’t necessarily disagree with you. I just don’t know. And I’m not arguing the polygamy issue has any impact on the other aspects of Joseph Smith’s life.” I go one step further – I have never heard of your theory until now. But all that aside, here are 3 samples of many I could list that cause me to have problems with Joseph Smith telling the truth:
1. According to the LDS Church until just recently, Joseph Smith translated the BOM from golden plates — Nope, roll the clock forward and now according to the LDS Church he used a magic Peepstone in a hat to translate the BOM.
2. According to the LDS Church (for over 150 years) and until just recently, The Church held onto a story of a skeleton found with brass plates in Pike County, Illinois on April 23 1843 that Joseph Smith “translated a portion them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth.” – At first, scientific testing (1960, 1966 and 1969) on one of the Kinderhook plates were inconclusive. So, in 1962, Welby W. Ricks, President of the BYU Archaeological Society, said that the tests proving plate 5 was a forgery put Joseph Smith’s work back to the category as “genuine.” Was Joseph Smith telling the truth? Roll the clock forward to 1980. Nope, destructive methods of scientific testing on one of the Kinderhook plates changed things. Now according to the LDS Church, this was a hoax – Joseph’s story is lost in the shuffle of ‘Heavenly Inspired Translations!’
3. According to the LDS Church – declaration at front of The Book of Abraham, “TRANSLATED FROM THE PAPYRUS, BY JOSEPH SMITH,” Joseph was carrying on his track record of translation. Did that theory last? Nope, roll the clock forward and now according to the LDS Church, we have a Bill Clinton situation where the meaning of the word, “IS” takes on a whole new dimension. The LDS Church is reinventing the meaning of the word, “TRANSLATIOM! . . . Oh wait, I mean the word TRANSLATION!”
So, Bob, having never heard of your theory before, I am left puzzled. The three examples above are just a small sampling of the shams that have been precipitated over the last 175 years. And your theory . . . Who knows where it will all lead?
But, I like what David said, “Mormon history that needs ‘splainin. Magic rocks, angelic visitations, gold plates, plural wives, curses of dark skin, sacred underwear and self-evisceration rituals … the more you learn the more strange it gets. So, when does the Joseph Smith biopic come out? Should be a blockbuster.” I can’t wait for the next Indiana Joseph Movies! The “Zelph” episode will be a thriller!
The thing that really perplexes me is why no blood descendants of Joseph have been found from his polygamous unions. Extensive DNA testing has been carried out on pretty much everyone who was thought to possibly have descended from Joseph’s polygamous wives with no positive results. Everyone who actually claimed to have been told by their forefathers that Smith was their ancestor has been proven NOT to be a blood relation.
There is some ambiguity about one person who’s unique genetic makeup lacks some of the markers needed for testing and some blood lines have died off altogether with no more decendents. But seeing as how the unverified decendents of Joseph have been narrowed down to such an incredibly narrow group of people we can already conclude that it is VERY strange there was such a paucity of Joseph’s progeny. Why did the vast majority of his wives have none of Joseph’s children. Sure, some claimed that their children were Joseph’s but we have now PROVEN that most of those claims were false.
Something just doesn’t make sense here…
Of course, it makes perfect sense if there were no polygamous unions. Lex parsimoniae.
But doesn’t she remind you of Joseph Smith in that, Jay? Joseph urges us over and over not to take his word for the gospel he restored but to question and doubt for ourselves. Kate’s loyalty to authenticity seems closer to what Joseph is trying to teach us than simply repeating the doctrines that have evolved and over morphed over time.
Respectfully, no, I don’t think so. She rejects the doctrine of polygamy, which is a rejection of Joseph Smith and other prophets. She acknowledges the church is historically not true but says she doesn’t care. She doesn’t think the church is the one true path to god.
She radically rejects mormon doctrine and historical truth claims, but she embraces the people and “lived mormonism.” I can only conclude she’s trying to help the people and doesn’t care about the institution. Maybe that’s a good thing – there are a lot of people – young girls and boys who are being railroaded into a life not of their own choosing, lgbt individuals who are suffering in the church. I wish Kate success in her attempts to change the people, but I think she’s all about the people and recognizes the institution is false on most levels.
I imagine that in her life journey she’ll move on past mormonism, but hopefully after helping make changes that impact the lives of individuals.
Darren. Strongly agree with your comment. Love the way you write.
You are smart and write so well.
But could you explain this?
“. . . the STMC, whose task is to accumulate clip files on problematic members then share that surveillance with the local leaders. . .”
I’ve read where some members have some kind of check mark on their name, putting them on a black list, which church leaders are instructed not to call on these individuals for any teaching or leadership activity. Is this true?
Would does STMC mean? Need more info on this. Thank you.
STMC
Strengthening the Members Committee
Probably you could use google and find more information.
On another note.
Though I continue to attend church, for me, ordaining women isn’t at the top of my list (but is on “the “list) of issues I have with the Church. My guess is that for most active LDS women it isn’t on the list. But I do think it is of value to open minds to the possibility. Sometimes we are like lab animals who can’t think and are threatened by life “outside the box.” Perhaps Kate was brought up in a broader environment coupled with living in more liberal areas, which may increase her optimism for change?
Great podcast, it was good to here the full story. I agree with John when he said it was irresponsible of the church to allow, basically rogue stake presidents, excommunicate the members. However it is a convienent way to get rid of trouble makers without taking responsibility. However, Kate is right, it ultimately is their responsibility. Another comment I want to make is regarding revelation and church doctrine. It seems that progressive members are basically turning the church into a club or community with everyone’s voice being regarded as potential revelation. Don’t get me wrong, this is great, however it is not what the church itself purports to be. The church is, as it claims, led by the lord through revelation to his prophets. My point is, why are we arguing with the church on what it actually is and why not just take their word for it? Then a person can make the decision to believe or not believe based on the organizations own teachings. Instead, we create our own version of the church, even when it disagrees with us. I remember teaching on my mission that God had to restore his church and would or could not reform another. I know i may be over simplifying but this is what seems to be the case with many new order Mormons.
You said what I was trying to say a lot better than I said it. I completely agree with your comments here.
I actually think that most TBM members would agree with your argument of having members make a decision to believe or not based on what the Church actually purports itself to be today. That’s why, IMO, that most members will end up supporting Kate excommunication.
This, to me, is also the key difference between John’s and Kate’s discipline. John is not trying to get the Church to do anything (other than perhaps be more candid and forthcoming). John is saying, “I don’t know if I believe and I want to explore, with others, what I believe and what the historical records actually support.” John is publicly questioning the veracity of the entire thing whereas Kate is operating as a believer that is publicly questioning whether the leaders are doing it right or not. Not that I think Kate should have been excommunicated, or not. Maybe I just sympathize with John more because I have found myself in the same sort of boat as he has.
Adam, are you really listening? Read the About section on this website. John clearly states he does not believe.
I agree with that. I guess I could have said it better but John has a certain respect for the Church system that Kate does not have, IMO.
Thanks to all involved! Very interesting and I loved the authenticity!
I, too, have a hard time understanding how Ecclesiastical Roulette could be the best way to lead something that leans on correlation.
Pt. 3: Like Kate, I innocently believed that stake (and higher) leadership was honest, trustworthy, and reasonable. Due to this misconception, and my resulting loss of trust in church leadership, I became inactive in 2011.
BTW, D. Hallstrom was also one of the individuals involved in my decision to leave church activity.
John, thanks for your courage and this wonderful interview!
Thanks for sharing this. I loved learning about Kate Kelly’s husband and his journey. I gained so much more respect and understanding for the couple. I’m amazed at the variety of testimonies within Mormonism, and I have deep respect for Kate’s unique approach.
One thing, though – From the interview, it seems as if Kate’s bishop wasn’t very interested in pursuing this process from the get-go, but he his taking a lot of heat for everything that went down. The stake president did everything. Maybe the bishop deserves a break. I also hear he is suffering with cancer. Maybe complaints should be directed only at the stake president.
Best of luck to Kate and Neil!
Having worked in the Confidential Records department of the Church I can say unequivocally that the disciplinary process of the Church is by and large beneficial to thousands of current and former Church members. The priesthood line with regards to matters of discipline is Bishop –> Stake President –> First Presidency. Members of the Twelve or of the Seventy are not decision makers and cannot excommunicate a member.
To those who have already decided that the Church and it’s teaching are not for them:
-If you truly wish to have nothing more to do with the Church, I strongly suggest that you have your name formally removed from Church records. As long as your membership record is active you will be contacted by the Church at some point. Swallow your pride if you have to, but it is the only way to permanently sever the cord.
-If you feel that you need to leave the Church for purposes of your own integrity but are open to the possibility of coming back someday, name removal is the way to go. Leave on your terms. Readmission after name removal is more manageable than readmission after excommunication.
In all sincerity, I did not get the difference:
“truly wish to have nothing more to do with the Church” —> Name removal.
“open to the possibility of coming back someday” —> Name removal.
So the hard-line AND the soft-line are the same way?
ChrisWir:
Becoming inactive without removing your name does nothing if your desire is to be left alone permanently or temporarily. There is no such thing as a Do Not Contact list where you can remain on Church records and not be open to being contacted.
RS, thanks for the info. I am the son of a stake patriarch and would like to have my name removed from the records but cannot see a reason to take that step if it will cause my elderly parents additional pain. Are the families notified in any way when someone decides to remove their name? I would like this to be a private matter between me, the church and omniscient deity, should one exist.
Spaghetti Monster, the answer is not as a matter of course or policy, but the church is a very small world. It might happen just because we are so interconnected.
RS, you obviously have no idea the suffering that the church “system”, officially or not, imposes on families where faith crises becomes an issue. Once upon a time though I would have and did (as a bishop) tell several inactive members the same thing. I have since repented of my lack of compassion and hope you can develop some yourself.
I have to say that this interview by John was really good. I really appreciated, especially during the second segment, where he pushed Kate, and even Neil, on what they actually believed. In a very nice and friendly manner, he would not accept the premise that Kate was a literal believing Mormon and pushed to see what she did believe about the Church. This was much appreciated because it answered a lot of my questions about her motivation with OW.
I started listening to the third segment and went back and listened to the first two. Actually, as I write this, I have about 30 mins left of the second (my third) segment. I had written in with a question of “If the Brethren actually went to the Lord and prayed for an answer, similar to the experience in 1978, and were told ‘No’, would this satisfy you?” I was somewhat irritated (wrongfully so it turns out) initially that this question wasn’t posed, at least in what I have heard thus far, but the second segment really answered all of that for me.
I have spoken with a lot of active men and women about the OW movement and I feel like the irritation they have with Kate and OW comes from the fact that see her as trying to get God to reveal something and that God cannot be coerced. This conversation in the second segment really helps frame the issue for me. She doesn’t really buy all of this, at least not literally. She says in this second segment that she doesn’t really believe that Mormons have a unique claim on the authority to perform mandatory (or even non-mandatory) ordinances. When John sort of pushed the issue about whether the Melchizedek Priesthood is a historical fact, she said “For me, that question isn’t as important to me as the fact that I and no other woman has the Melchizedek Priesthood.” Here, nor when she comments about everyone in the history of the world being baptized, she doesn’t say that she disbelieves but throughout the second segment, she is pretty frank that she doesn’t think the authority within Church is exclusive and even rejects the authority that her Priesthood leaders have to dissolve her membership in the Church.
Now, I feel that I walk away from this interview with a complete different opinion about Kate and the OW movement. There is a mindset that the Priesthood is not really a God given, exclusive, authority given to Joseph Smith with Keys held exclusively by President Monson, current Stake Presidents, Bishops, or even men in the Church in general. The Priesthood is merely the authority, accepted by members of the Church and members of a community, to perform individual and communal rituals.
Personally, with this mindset, I am much more apt to understand their position and reasons for wanting women’s ordination. I agree that there is a lot that women miss out of by not actually performing ordinances. I don’t know that the gender inequality issues are solely the cause of a lack of women holding the Priesthood but I can see where she and others that support OW are coming from if they don’t really believe in the exclusivity, divinity, and historicity of the Priesthood lineage as the Church puts out there to members now. With this mindset, it isn’t so much about trying to get God to reveal that women can be ordained but that the men that lead this Church should institute a change.
On a last note, I am far from a literal believing Mormon and have gone through, and am still going through, my faith reconstruction but I can’t help but say to myself, “What Church is she a member of?” when I hear her or others like her talking about the demeaning of women in the Church. I am a convert (when I was 17), served a mission, married in the temple, and have lived in Idaho, Oregon, Washington (for a short time), and Minnesota and my wife and I feel that the members of the Church absolutely degrading to men. I can’t tell you how many EQ and YW lessons I have been in where I was told that “women are closer to the Spirit”, that “women are the backbone of this Church and are much more efficient and effective and getting things done”, that “men and boys are inherently predisposed to be more sinful than women”, and on and on. I actually think this is a strong ridiculous response by members to sort of counter-balance the patriarchy in the Church but as a man in this Church, I certainly don’t feel that I am given more of a voice or taken more seriously than my wife.
I do recognize that many women and men do have certain demeaning or degrading experiences toward women but that is simply not my, nor really anyone that I know, experience in this Church. When you pull a group people together that have had experiences that are sort of exceptions to the general Church population (through online groups or through other means), it would be easy to think that this mindset is somehow more general than it really is. It is no less valid, I just think that I don’t think it is realistic to think that most active members of this Church think so progressively.
Meant to say YM not YW.
Man, I should have finished the second interview before I posted. John did ask the question and it was perfectly built up to in the second segment. I really, really appreciate these podcasts.
I think John’s style to interviewing is very effective in general. It isn’t argumentative but he gets to where he needs to go. In this interview, he is very respectful and friendly but also finds a way to hammer and hammer until Kate finally hits the issues head on.
Good job John and thank you!
Adam, I appreciate you careful explanation of what you see as Kate’s position and views on the PH. To me it seems to highlight as was discussed in the interviews how women and men often differ in issues of history and teachings/doctrine in the church with men preferring more of a literal, historical, factual focus and women seeming to prefer this less. To me this speaks to the Western man and how we are indoctrinated to view and perceive the world in this way.
I also agree with you that there is a great deal in LDS culture and discourse that is directly demeaning and negative toward men. You gave great examples. I like to consider very carefully what such discourse about men is in the service of. I’m convinced it is actually in the service of patriarchy. It is not in the service of man-hating just to hate men and masculinity. It is in the direct service of patriarchy and defensively maintaining the patriarchal power within LDS culture and ecclesiastical structure.
It’s not surprising that you don’t see or acknowledge the problems with the Church regarding women, past or present, and how they and their full equality & divine God given rights, Priesthood power & authority in both the home and church are (and always have been since Brigham Young) abused and disrespected by all church leaders. For most men & even most women don’t acknowledge or see it, but you know as a man that you wouldn’t be in the church if things were reversed. For Christ’s Golden Rule proves the Church completely false.
But just quietly going along with and supporting the Church and thus it’s abuse of women, is abusive, but few choose to see it, for if they did they wouldn’t stay in the Church, unless they of course support men’s disrespect, abuse and control of women, and men & women many do.
But LDS church leaders themselves have never had any Priesthood Power, authority or rights from God themselves because of their unrighteous dominion from day one.
And all the compliments in the world that some leaders may make about women, don’t make up for the control & abuse the church condones, teaches, encourages, practices and rewards.
One need only look at abusive men like Brigham Young and his treatment of women to see how most of his policies and beliefs are still preached and practiced in the Church.
When the church leaders finally decide to follow Christ (and they will have to one day in the next life) and repent and denounce abusive teachings like past, present or future polygamy, and women’s submission to men/husbands and allowing men to abuse and abandon their wives & families, just to have the red carpet rolled out for him to marry his next victim in the temple, and when the Church repents and respects and recognizes women’s full divine authority, Priesthood power and right & equal voice in leadership in every position in the church, from President to Bishop to Co-Presider in the home, then the Church can say they are starting to respect women.
Until then, ‘actions speak louder then words’ and reveal their true character, no matter how many empty compliments they may lay at women’s feet.
I agree the problem is with the men, not the woman. Priesthood is a calling to serve, not a calling to dominate. They need to learn to respect women and value their opinions. However, if women realized how little authority and independent judgment priesthood holders are actually allowed to exercise, they wouldn’t be so envious.
Wives should submit to their husbands, if the husbands are righteous, and the submission should be voluntary and initiated by the wive, not demanded by the husband. That’s not submission. That’s dominance.
“And all the compliments in the world that some leaders may make about women, don’t make up for the control & abuse the church condones, teaches, encourages, practices and rewards.” Putting women on a pedestal, or putting anybody on a pedestal, for that matter, does not connote respect. It connotes marginalization and disrespect,
John,
While I understand how Bishops & Stake Presidents and even G.A.’s hands are tied in many ways, by prideful men above them, all leaders at every level still have a lot of power over decisions, including how money is spent and what is taught and done in their wards & stakes. Power to help & serve people.
Which if there were female Co-Bishops, female Co-Stake Presidents, female Co-G.A.’s and female Apostles & a female Co-President of the Church,(preferably as husband & wife teams so there would not be a problem working together closely on matters, as I believe Christ & his wife worked together over the Church in their day, much to the dismay of the apostles who weren’t used to women having equal authority or any at all.) for then women could better look after and protect the needs and rights of women and children in the church.
For now it’s a ‘good ol boys’ club and leaders usually support & protect their brothers instead of their sisters and allow men to abuse and abandon their wives & families and just get away with it and far more.
Christ & his disciples taught that the main reason for religion was to teach ‘men’ to love, respect, provide for & protect women and children from abuse, abandonment or any neglect or want. Even Pres. Hinckley admitted that was his and all leader’s 1st responsibility. But the Church leaders have a history of saying the right things to look good but then doing the opposite.
For women, especially single mothers (the fatherless), are not being protected and provided for in the church like they should be, and if they have equal voice over the finances and over what is taught and required, then women could and would make great changes and things would run more righteously in the Church.
But the good ol boys club is not about to give up their power, perks or money and thus repent and start respecting, protecting and taking care of women as they are commanded to by God.
I agree women should submit to their husbands, but ONLY if he is righteous and completely faithful to her and IF he has 1st submitted to her in all things and puts her 1st desires & needs & feelings above his own & all else. Then of course she should do the same for him in return.
But men need to deserve their wife’s submission by submitting 1st to her. The church does not teach that, they only teach that women should submit to men, which is a very abusive and controlling perk that men have held onto since time began.
Husbands and wives should preside equally together over the family and make all decisions jointly, neither one over the other, neither having the last say, both having the right to veto any decision. That is true respect and equality for women in marriage. Most men I personally know already do that in their marriages, but they unfortunately still go along with & support unrighteous dominion in the Church on leadership levels.
It seems you may be still influenced by the evil doctrines in the Church today that came from the pamphlet ‘The Peacemaker’ that Brigham Young liked and taught from, if you believe women should only submit to husbands and not the other way around too.
Also, if there was a female Co-President, Co-Apostles, etc. of the Church, those women could definitely help change things to give women much more voice and power to see to the needs and protection of women and children and also see to the teaching of correct truths instead of letting male leaders continue to teach false doctrine like polygamy (sealings to more then 1 wife) and divorce & remarriage, or the idea that the poor should pay tithing, or the evil that the fatherless are nearly completely neglected in the Church and not taken care of.
Yes, women could and would change the whole church if they were given equal power & voice over finances and decisions & policy making at every level, and I believe they would finally bring it all more in line with Christ’s teachings. And I believe church leaders know this and that’s why they are so adamant against sharing leadership & power with women in the church, for those men don’t want to repent & respect women & do their duty towards them.
This was very eye opening with getting into it much it was clear to me though that underlying it all Kate never had a testimony of the “Gender role” doctrines and it was also telling to me when she confirmed she does not feel the church has a monopoly on God’s authority.
Many times on the OW FB page detractors question the testimonies of supporters and are met with intense derision. I agree it uncouth to question another’s testimony, but we need not question Kate any longer from her own words it is clear she never gained a testimony of what many deem fundamental truths and principles this lack of testimony has greatly influenced her POV and directly relates to the question of why OW and why gender inequality, I also feel the criticism of “she doesn’t understand the different roles but equal value in God’s eyes as explained by the Family Proclamation” is an accurate and valid criticism from a TBM perspective.
I’m sure I’ve poorly articulated some of what I’ve taken away from this interview, but it did strengthen my thoughts that the whole movement is built off misunderstood doctrine and is misguided.
The day before this interview was posted I finished reading Sinclair Lewis’s novel, “Babbitt.” I found in it remarkable parallels between the conflicted inner-life of the conventional, conservative, and codependent George Babbitt living in mid-sized “Zenith” and the conflicted inner-lives of at least some TBM Mormons in their Latter-day “Zion”- which Kate and Neil’s activism and experiences shine light on. These parallels are sustained right to the final page and point, I think, to a hopeful future – notwithstanding all that remains the same nearly 100 years after Babbitt was published.
I loved hearing from Kate’s husband. He seems like a really likable person as well as Kate. I was bothered by Kate’s comment at the end where she basically said if you don’t speak up about this issue or any issue in the church, you have no integrity. She mentioned that women’s issues are the thing that hurts her the most in the church so she consequently puts other questions like church history on the back burner. I would’ve appreciated her allowing other people the space to categorize things that are most important to them and acting accordingly rather than passing judgement on something as meaningful as one’s integrity. Not losing my authoritative voice as an active member of the church with my children is more important to me than speaking up about ordination or a variety of issues. I guess it’s human nature to demand to not be judged for our actions and words, but not to give the same courtesy to others. I was feeling generous in giving Kate the benefit of the doubt concerning her own integrity until she decided to pass judgement on my silence.
This was a great interview and has to be one of my favorites on Mormon Stories. It was so helpful and educational to hear from both Kate and Neil. I didn’t know anything about him prior to this podcast and have a lot of respect for both of them as they try and navigate their way through this difficult situation. I had wrongly assumed Neil would be very TBM and somehow feel comforted that he isn’t.
Something that really rang true to me was the “validity versus utility” comment. I had never really thought about it that way before. My wife and I are currently in a similar situation where I am more concerned with validity while she focuses on utility. I can appreciate the attitudes and feelings from both of these camps, and honestly believe that almost every member of this church with any doubts at all can be placed into either of these two groups.
I found it very interesting when John pressed Kate about the level of her faith in some of the fundamental Mormon teachings (BoM historicity, BoA, ect.) This also comes back to the “utility” idea of Mormonism, but I also felt that Kate picked a side a while ago and is sticking with it. I feel like if you choose to battle the church for progression, you either battle from the inside or the out, not both. It was nice to hear Kate sticking to her guns and remain consistent. Her answers may have sounded like “cop outs” but I believe they are valid.
Anyway, great interview and thank you John, Kate, and Neil for putting this all together. Good luck!
@Tunflog, regarding the validity versus utility argument, I think both prongs require serious consideration. The evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates that the foundational truth claims of mormonism are false. I think what some people do is stop the inquiry there and say, “well, we may not know what is true, but mormonism is good – has utility.
But does it? Should children be taught false historical claims? Should gays be taught to act on gay impulses is a sin? If such teaching results in suicides, is it okay because mormonism is still good for some people? When it comes to the utility argument, I think careful consideration will reveal that the good that mormonism may offer can be found in many other ways without lugging along the bad.
Jay,
I totally agree with you. As I stated before, I myself am safely in the “validity” camp and don’t accept many of the truth claims offered by the church to be accurate.
As far as “utility” goes I think it really depends on the person. It’s true that some of the LDS doctrine, in my opinion, serves very little in terms of utility (modesty, LGBT issues, parts of the WoW, ect.) However, if an individual approaches certain teachings of the church from a productive perspective I believe it is possible to turn some of those teaching into a positive utility-type outcome. It just comes down to whether or not that individual thinks the church is worth it.
You are right when you say “I think careful consideration will reveal that the good that mormonism may offer can be found in many other ways without lugging along the bad.” I am constantly attempting to find those “other ways”. But if you do decide to remain a TBM and try to make things work then there really isn’t any other option; utility is sometimes all you have.
I’d like to add something to the validity vs utility concept: When considering the utility half of the equation, not only should you ask “Is this useful to me and my family?” one should also ask “Is this useful (or at least not harmful) to others within and outside the church?” For me, giving money to an organization that discriminates against blacks and gays, that tells women that they need to have kids or else there is something wrong with them, etc puts the LDS church on the non-useful side.
I was hoping to see the timeline of the letters sent to the church and the corresponding(or not corresponding) communication back from the church. Anywhere that is available?
When I was a TBM, I never considered that revelation is/was a collaborative process that I could be involved in. I never considered that a interview or even an informal chat with the Bishop could be a discussion amount peers. Having now heard Kate’s point of view on these and other issues -it is really quite eye opening and interesting. I’m more validity focused rather than value focused, by the way. I was raised LDS and found myself – a young mother of 4 children, with a failing marriage and a number of responsibilities and callings in this church, extremely overwhelmed. The church just ran me into the ground until I couldn’t take it anymore. Had I considered the notions above, I still might be a mormon. I don’t know. I can tell you that prior to listening to this interview, I thought Kate was wasting her time and everyone else’s. Now I think she is a pioneer in manner of speaking -for today. What’s more – before I listened here, Kate came off to me as an eccentric and a bit annoying. I still see her as eccentric, but I like her now. I really appreciated the interview. Thank you.
Kate on rejecting secure video: “I think they weren’t really interested in what I had to say” (or close to that)
Most true statement she made throughout this entire interview!
The only reason a member is brought before a disciplinary council is to Discipline them. They, bishop and stake pres in this case, have already talked and debated the issue and what the most likely outcome will be before a disciplinary council is called. Only the counselors and clerks walk in with only a summary of what the reason for holding it is.
Also she is mistaken in saying that the move restriction was imposed before she was disciplined because the stake pres had already placed her on probation (ie disciplined her in december) and was only discussing with the bishop how to formalize the process, so the move restriction is normal in her situation. If she complained about this matter in her appeal letters it will be rejected since it is standard procedure in cases like Kate Kelly’s.
Anyways my guess is that the stake president will reject her appeal since it’s obvious that he instigated the process. (remember that only the stake pres is a judge in israel and the high councilmen are there to support him but don’t need to agree with him for his actions to stand) My guess is also that he at very least got an email from the area authority or seventy in HQ asking that he look into this case because (as they would typically write) this sister is in apostasy and should be interviewed etc etc…so the first presidency will also most likely reject her appeal unfortunately. I’d suggest her current optimism is misplaced. Her chances of rejoining after a year are probably the best option but she’d have to at very least stop her actions at general conference and just stick with the webpage, a bit toned down, and a different bishop and different stake may just let her be rebaptized. Also Kenya may be an easier place to rejoining than in the US. jmho though.
Aside from that, maybe mormon stories could do an interview with an ex stake president and an ex bishop on the issue of church discipline (i’d be willing as a ‘john doe’ if they can put up with my accent!) because there seems to be a lot of misunderstandings and straight out myths out there over why, when and how the church disciplines its members.
Charlie,
Kate Kelly was never formally disciplined until she was excommunicated. In May, she was put on “informal probation”, which does not count as formal discipline and does not qualify for a move restriction. Btw, her stake president was incorrect when he stated in the informal probation letter that Kate Kelly could no longer represent herself as a member in good standing, because only formal discipline can impact a member’s standing in the church (this is all per the church handbook of instructions). If Kate is serious about her appeal, she’s got to hit on these procedural irregularities since they show incompetence and lack of sound judgement by her local priesthood leaders.
Lurker, not true! informal discipline does count, it simply doesn’t have any paperwork done for church hq. Also the presiding officer, who should have been the bishop, can put any condition/s on a member like that they need to inform others that they are no longer in good standing as members. It is all very subjective. They can’t take away membership via informal discipline though, but thats it.
And a move restriction is an arbitrary decision made by Bishops whenever they feel the need. The handbook is only a policy guide and not a rule bible by the way.
The appeal will fail if based on what you claim. The first presidency always defends its subordinates, above all else. Church discipline is not a court of law nor does it have things like due process. They do ask that they be fair but if a stake pres wants to excommunicate, believe me, he will get it done sooner or later.
I enjoyed the interview. Like all of the other interviews of the “damned” on MSP, my overall opinion of the interviewee was much improved. She came across as extremely intelligent and endearing. However, I still don’t know what a LDS Church with ordained women would look like or how it would be able to manage that magnitude of a change. I hoped to hear more of how such a change could actually implemented. I think she would say that it is not her call to make but I would have liked to have heard how she would do it if she were in charge.
It would not be hard at all to implement equality into the LDS Church, except for men & leaders bent on power & control, which is apparently most all men in the Church, who seem to support such disrespect & control over women or at least silently go along with it, and thus why the LDS Church will never repent and respect the equality of women in all things.
Sadly even women in the Church go along with such disrespect, for most don’t seem to even want God’s righteous power and authority and a voice over the affairs of the Church that greatly effects them, they have become used to being controlled and told what to do like children and sadly don’t even think they deserve such respect & rights. Many say it’s because they don’t want more responsibility, they are busy enough, but I believe such respect for their true Priesthood authority would mean ‘less’ work for women not more, for self-respecting women would require men to do their fair share of the work load, in the church and home.
While I don’t believe anymore that the LDS Church is true or ever has been, it’s leaders and members could repent and become a righteous church if it wanted to, just like any church could, though the LDS Church would never become ‘Christ’s’ true Church, but at least it could become righteous.
I believe a righteous Church and true prophets would (like Christ) have & respect and share equal power with female prophets & apostles with their full Priesthood power and there would be female leaders in every position down the line. I believe married couples would serve as Co-General Authorities, Co-Stake Presidents & Co-Bishops (him over the men & her over the women generally) with both with equal power and authority in all decision making, neither one over the other.
But this would necessitate a full repentance and a new teaching that husbands don’t rule/preside/have authority over their wives, but that both preside equally over the family & church with equal voice, power, authority & Priesthood.
I believe Brigham Young & Co. loved the idea of men ruling over/controlling over women. It was a popular topic in Nauvoo, because of a pamphlet called “The Peacemaker” that was written and circulated by Udney H. Jacobs, which preached the idea of making wives submit to their husbands and polygamy for men. While Joseph called these ideas evil trash and warned the Saints against such ideas, it seems most church leaders (including BY) and men in the Church loved and quickly tagged onto the idea (especially after Joseph died) and thus incorporated it into the doctrines of the Church in Utah and thus it’s been falsely taught from pulpits and in the temple ever since. So we now have all these sexist abusive teachings about men presiding oveer women in home & church leadership.
I commend Kate in what she has done, even if somewhat unknowingly. She has awakened a sleeping giant of an idea that should have been awakened a long time ago by self-respecting women who should have been asking for full equality in the Church all along and never should have put up with control and domination of women in the home & church, let alone put up with the abomination of polygamy.
I believe all men and women in the Church know that polygamy and the submission of women is wrong, but they don’t want to have to take on the responsibility to repent of it and correct things, so they go along with it and stay in denial about it.
But if we don’t learn from church history then we will have to repeat it and I believe the church will bring back full polygamy as soon as it’s legal nationwide, which it will be soon, then most women will learn by sad experience how wrong submission & polygamy really are.
For it appears the church leaders are still bent on living, preaching, promoting & promising polygamy (past, present & future) and continue to allow men that abusive perk. Even today the church supports, encourages and rewards ‘serial polygamy’ and the abuse of wives and destruction of families by allowing men to abandon their wife and remarry another woman (and even be sealed to her) as many times as he wants. Which is an adulterous abomination according to Christ, if anyone bothers to read his teachings, but the LDS leaders have never followed Christ so that isn’t a concern to them.
I salute Kate’s wonderful ‘actions’ that have awakened many women to a sense of their full equality and rights to the Priesthood, which God has already given them, usually even more then to men, if only women would realize this and that men (especially the one’s in the LDS Church) have no power to give or deny them their Priesthood and power. For God alone gives Priesthood power & authority to all women liberally if they are worthy, just like with men.
And since LDS leaders have never been righteous or worthy of Priesthood power themselves, nor have they ever followed Christ (but fell for & followed wicked men instead), they do not have, nor ever have had, any authority, keys or Priesthood to give or deny.
Kate is just asking the wrong person for Priesthood, for the President of the Church has no Priesthood himself (for unrighteous men who disrespect women can’t hold or maintain any Priesthood).
Kate just needs to ask God for Priesthood power & authority and he will give her all the Priesthood she wants (if she has true charity with is the pre-requisite for God’s power) and a full understanding of her full divine equality with men.
And she will one day realize, if she doesn’t already, that her excommunication has no effect on her spirituality or standing with God, and that actually it was a wonderful blessing to help awaken her & distance herself from a corrupt church of false prophets and abusive teachings.
Lilli, I can’t tell you how much I loved what you just wrote. Amen, sista!
First, so you know where I’m coming from, I do not believe in mormon theology or doctrine. While most mormons I know are good people, I do believe some tenants/beliefs/administrations are racist and sexist in nature.
Listening to Kate’s story, both here and other sites, I feel compelled to comment.
Kate, you mentioned the underlying theme of your story is “those with questions get punished”. That statement makes me want to scream! Please stop playing the martyr card that your questions got you in trouble. It’s your actions. Whether right or wrong, your actions have got you in trouble. John, spoke of this. He even asked if you have more actions, (more dramatic, more attention getting) planned for the future. Your reply was yes. That’s what got you into trouble.
And please, stop saying your actions are respectful. If you try to “crash a party” (priesthood session) to which you are not invited, please tell me how that is respectful. Your intent wasn’t to be respectful; your intent was to expose, thru the media, what you believed to be sexist.
I get your cause; you are trying to stir things up. Bring awareness to a sexist policy. I get that. I can agree with the sexism claim. I can agree with your desire to change that. You just don’t want to ask question, you want to effect change. You’re an activist! Activists show ACTION!
That’s why you got into trouble.
You made your bed, now you must decide if it was worth it.
Winebibber, ‘Two Thumbs Up’ on your comments.
I wouldn’t call it “crashing a party” to ask to be admitted to a men’s meeting (when men can attend women’s meetings – why can’t it go both ways?). These women were respectful and calm. They didn’t crash any party. I have friends that went to these, and they were shocked by the way the church and media portrayed them in such a negative light, telling untruths about them. They asked to go in, and when they were turned away, they went.
Layla,
From Webster…
: to enter or attend without invitation or without paying
That’s the definition of crashing a party. Exactly what they were doing.
Using that definition: If I were to ask the door man for admission to a party for which I had no invitation, and that door man then conversed with the party organizers and decided to have me arrested for even asking, I would consider that a gross overreaction.
Kate Kelly had the audacity to ask for admission. If the elders truly had both love for Sister Kelly AND healthy respect for the power they hold in the minds of believers, I believe the loving response would be to simply, warmly and consistently say ‘no.’
When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. The brethren have a full toolbox, and yet they still grabbed the hammer.
I agree, they used the hammer.
To my point above, she made her bed. She chose the movement over her membership. The mormon leaders weren’t going to let her have both.
Just once more reason not to believe in this religion.
I cant wait until I find I religion that is just about love, period. No BS, no powertrips, no control, no “tithing”, just pure love. If you know of it, please tell.
GREAT interview…Kate you have been an inspiration to me through everything I went through with my Bishop with my temple recommend being taken for not taking down my Ordain Women profile last year…your emails back and forth and having a place to go where it was safe to talk was a balm to my soul.I loved hearing from your husband…after everything I have been through this last year being a faithful Mormon my whole life I am a little bit more on the side of Neil when it comes to what I believe, at least where he said he doesn’t think family will be kept from each other in heaven…(That I had a near death experience at 16 also gives me a different perspective I believe)
A couple near death experiences that are amazing and line up with what I experienced are Anita Moorjanis “Dying To Be Me” (I like her audio book where shes reading and “Proof Of Heaven” I think they both solidify Neal’s thoughts about heaven…
Hi Heidi…and thank you for bringing up your NDE and for mentioning Anita Moorjani’s book, Dying to be Me! It, and other NDE literature—including Eban Alexander’s, Proof of Heaven—present such an expansive, loving and amazing view of the cosmos and our place in it that I would hope everyone interested in spiritual issues would give them a read.
Have you posted your NDE account to the NDERF website? (https://www.nderf.org/) It is one of the best repositories of NDEs on the web and I would personally love reading your story.
And thanks to John and Kate and Neil for a fascinating interview!
I am glad for Neil and Kate’s more progressive views of Mormon doctrine. In my judgement this has made things drastically easier for them in their individual journeys and that as a couple. I am a member undergoing a crisis of faith who believed everything and questioned nothing until recently, and that journey is not one I would wish on anyone.
I do not agree with Kate that most members of the Church share her views about people of other religions being treated the same as those who are LDS in the next life. Nor do many of them feel it is OK to throw out Polygamy. And her belief that all churches are an appropriate route to heaven is certainly not doctrinal and not what the typical member believes.
While I enjoyed the interviews and getting to know them better and gaining insights into who they are and how they make things work, I believe that Kate in particular is extremely out-of-touch with just how strictly most active members of the Church strive to “Follow The Brethren”
I would agree, Don. Most of my fellow Ward members–in various states and wards, believe that no one is going to the celestial kingdom without a Mormon baptism and church membership. I’ve even sat through RS lessons where it was taught that even Mother Teresa would be in spirit “prison” upon death, along with every other deceased person until they are taught and accept the Gospel and Mormon baptism.
On another note,
Kate spoke about “discrepencies” in things her leaders wrote and people assuming “he’s telling the truth.” It is unclear to me on what point(s) Kate thinks her leader(s) were “lying.” But the bigger point is that Kate thinks we should question ourselves as to why we automtically assume “men in power” and “men in general” are telling the truth and discounting women. Kate, maybe everything is not about men vs women. Maybe some of us have learned through experience that usually truth is found somewhere in the “middle” and has nothing to do with male vs female issues. Kate is really the only person speaking out, and releasing various letters, so we only have her version of the situation and her to question if there seem to be discrepencies. At times Kate, being human, displays a defensiveness that could detract from her goals and aspirations. The earlier podcast with Maxine Hanks and others, the comment section was unfortunate.
Finally, I appreciate this podcast and hearing Kate and Neil’s stories. I wish them well in Kenya. Women have so many challenges around the world! I’ve wondered how a more expansive role for women might help/hurt the Church’s foothold in various other countries.
As someone who is living out of the U.S. I would have to wonder about launching Ordain Women internationally. It might not be so easy to do. Given cultural issues are different in Europe for instance. I’ve had conversations with women and viewpoints are different. I would love to see peace and understanding between women come about. WE don’t have that yet. This is a challenging issue and if there is a division in the camp shouldn’t a united front be part of the goal?
John,
The podcast is a significant contribution to Mormon history. Thank you.
I was hoping to hear some more of the specifics of the discipline that Kate’s parents received. When I first heard it as a sub-story to Kate’s story I really felt that it would be as significant as Kate’s discipline because it speaks of the insidious hereditary punishment akin to the purging of bloodlines to send a message of fear. Such punishment coerces family members to police each other and report dissenters within their own family in order to protect themselves from such punishment by relation.
I’m concerned about the use of the term “progressive” in this interview. The idea that everyone gets to heaven (I think it was said “many paths up to Mount Fuji”) in modern Western society is ubiquitous. Thirty years ago it was “many spokes on the wheel all lead to the same central place.” I don’t see any progressive thought in that notion; in fact it’s fairly retrogressive that a Mormon would join the thinking of most protestant religions in the US with that notion.
CE
I think they mean “progressive” relative to other Mormons.
(I was taught that same doctrine in a religion class at BYU so in and of itself I don’t believe it’s a terribly progressive belief.)
I certainly agree that having women priests would be considered “progressive” for Mormons.
CE, it is interesting to me that you singled out the same word whose use I found troubling/confusing throughout this interview, albeit for a different reason.
Of all the many Mormon Stories podcasts I have enjoyed, certainly this one included, I feel that this episode in particular would benefit from some definition of some of the terms being used. I found, for example, that the usage of the term ‘progressive’ over and over again to be somewhat confusing as its specific contextual meaning was never touched upon.
When Kate or Neil or John say that something is or is not ‘progressive’ are they using the word in a way that I, or you dear reader, or they themselves/each other would agree upon? I find words like ‘progressive’ and ‘diverse’ to have different meanings in different contexts depending upon both content and audience. They are often used as political buzzwords for in-group communication and while this has the ability to facilitate communication between individuals who already agree and may see themselves as being part of a larger group it makes understanding for those not already part of that group somewhat more difficult.
When Kate remarks that some individual or some policy or even doctrine is ‘not progressive’ what specifically does she mean? Progressing towards what?
Or are these buzzwords just part of the rhetorical nature of the ‘activism’ of Ordain Women which seems, at least to me, to be targeting a specific political subset of the society of the church rather than reaching out for greater and more general understanding/acceptance?
I apologize if this comment reads overly critical. I tuned in to this podcast with a sincere desire to understand KK’s perspective as well as in the hopes to gain a greater understanding for the OW movement but now find myself less informed and, quite honestly, less interested.
That is a good point if she believed Mormonism doesn’t have a monopoly on the keys to the gates of Heaven where is the concern with excommunication. I understand it is what she knows but the point of sticking to one path is it provides something no other path can. If many paths lead to Heaven in the end why not take what you must with you and forge your path to God.
The point of Christian living is to emulate with exactness the example of Christ. That is to say give your will entirely over to Him. So it is true and Christ taught all of the desires of our hearts we should be willing to sacrifice for His cause. Included in this would be using an example she gave, to not have children. If God’s command is multiply and replenish the earth it is incumbent upon us if we truly wish to follow Him to sacrifice our desires and natural inclinations, this is the broken heart the contrite spirit. Doing otherwise is to follow our own pride
Revelation Streaming In the RELIGION MAKING BUSINESS
A Chauvinist Theocracy is disposed to protect its Divine Right Rite, that is the Melchizedek Priesthood, a Levitical right stolen from Tribe of Levite. It’s also the only tribe that was allowed more than one wife.
Ask why the Clerical Authorities have made this stuff up. Ask Why Joe Smith returned to an atavist theocracy? Ask Why the apostate status of Kate Kelly is scripted and imutable.
Is this issue waiting for a Priestly Revelation or does this ossification continue to some sexist inexorable end?
In the end, it all will be sorted out to the rights of both, sexes.
and don’t forget about all the little animals not covered by the Divine Right Rite.
Ephima
I’m feeling uneasy about KK and hubby going to Africa with the Ebola outbreak spreading. We need you alive!
Unfortunately, I strongly suspect the optimism Kate expresses for allowing the ordination of women in the near term are slim indeed.
The problem is that giving women the priesthood opens up a Pandora’s box of problems that would force cultural change throughout the entire church. The entire separation of women from men would have to change. There would be an expectation that ALL women receive the priesthood just as there currently is for men. Young men who never receive the priesthood are treated like pariahs and the same would be true of women.
What Kate fails to understand is that allowing the ordination of women would be FAR more disruptive to the existing church culture than almost any of the other reforms being suggested. Accepting LGBT members and gay marriage is nothing compared to the ordination of women. The fact that there is a gay married couple in your ward doesn’t have to change how people think of themselves or their place in the church within your own home. The same thing with granting the priesthood to blacks. The policy change had virtually no impact on most members of the church.
Due to how much of a change the ordination of women would have to the very culture of the church leads me to think that church will accept LGBT members long before it allows the ordination of women.
The real problem Kate is facing is NOT the “brethren”. The issue is the “women” of the church. Yes, I am sure there is a solid undercurrent of women in the church who want more equality, but Kate is very mistaken if she thinks that there is anything approaching a majority of female church members who want the priesthood. Ordination is very threatening to this silent majority. Ordination would, in a VERY real sense, change how all women related to the church. There are lots of people who just aren’t ready for such a change.
But don’t lose hope. Kate’s efforts are helping grow a greater awareness amongst LDS women regarding these issues. Moreover, it is helping lead to numerous small changes in how women participate in the church. In the end, ordination of women will occur after a lengthy process of changing the culture, and expectations, of women in the church. So in that way Kate is having an impact. She is helping with the growing awareness of the need for change that is already being felt in so many small ways.
Decades from now, and a couple generations down the road, we may actually see Kate’s dream come to pass.
Michael,
I don’t believe honoring women’s right to full Priesthood Power and equality in leadership would be that hard of a change for the Church, IF the leaders were humble enough to let it happen, but I don’t think the leaders are, even though most men in the church would probably be fine with it, and those few who still want to control and rule over women would have to repent.
I believe most men and women in the Church today understand and believe in women’s full equality, in the home and society especially, for we now understand spouse abuse much better and how any control or domination is abuse, even church leaders have said as much, though they don’t back up their preaching with practice.
The only reason most men & women put up with disrespect of women & inequality in the Church is because they are told not question their leaders, even if they are wrong, so most just blindly and unthinkingly go along with whatever the Church does or says, no matter how destructive and disrespectful it is and has been all along to women.
I agree that many women say they don’t want the Priesthood, but I believe that’s because they think it will cause them to take on even more responsibility, when they already do most of the work at home and in the church. But actually, it would give women more ‘power & voice’ at home and in the church which they would find they like, for they could then cause change and they would then expect more of men and change things so women aren’t so burdened and disrespected and abused.
So, while I know many LDS women who don’t want more to do in the Church, they do want and would enjoy equal power and voice to change things, which again, would lessen their load.
And I agree that the Church will soon allow same sex marriage in the Church, they are softening on the issue already.
But I don’t believe church leaders will ever humble themselves as a whole & repent from Brigham Young’s prideful abusive false doctrines of polygamy & ruling over women and instead finally respect & honor women’s divine right which God intended all along for them, to hold equal Priesthood power & authority with men in all things and places, in the home, society & church.
The real truth is God already gives righteous women all the Priesthood power and authority they need or want to bless whomever they are inspired to, most just don’t know it yet.
And Church leaders have never had any real Priesthood themselves to give or deny others anyway, for unrighteous men who control, disrespect or dominate women or anyone else, can’t gain, maintain or pass on any true Priesthood keys or authority. That means Brigham Young never had any such power or authority to hand down to anyone either.
Of course though, I agree that someday, in the Millenium, when Christ reigns, women’s full equality will finally be acknowledged, respected and honored in all stations of leadership, as he did when he was on the earth. And I believe that only men and women who respect women’s full equality here and now will be there to see it.
I totally relate to Kate Kelly and her personality. All through Young Women and then in Relief society I felt weird and crushed under guilt because I don’t fit the woman gender role at all. I wasn’t sure what was wrong with me. I’m supposed to be a mother and nurturer but that is not me at all. I’m glad that I’ve learned more things about the LDS Church that has shed light on things that I had no idea about. I no longer feel guilt for not conforming to my “role” and it is very freeing.
Thanks for this interview with Kate and Neil. What integrity and courage! I resigned my membership many years ago, and no longer belong to the tribe. In my opinion, what you’ve done is better. You were excommunicated for your support of high values: truth, justice, equality, goodness…
If life is the canvas and our decisions the paint, you are creating a beautiful masterpiece.
I recall a poem, “freedom begins in your head, if you want to be free, you can’t wait to be led.”
Polygamy (female slavery) is the original sin of Mormonism. After all these years, it is only fitting that the oppressed smash their chains.
Actually, if the accounts of Joseph’s multiple wives are true (about which there is some legitimate dispute), I think it is very progressive to hear that he was a practitioner of polyandry (i.e. where women have more than one husband). In the hands of Joseph, having multiple spouses was an equal opportunity proposition. It was only under the leadership of Brigham Young that polyandry was disowned and the very sexist practice of polygamy became the norm.
I think modern Mormon’s should be thrilled to learn of Joseph’s polyandrous relationships. This makes the principal of plural marriage SO much more fair and even progressive.
“If we can give Joseph Smith a break, we can give each other a break.” Well said. In my experience with the church in Utah, it has become more about perfection and judgement than love. Thanks, Neil.
I have listened to all three interviews. They were well-done, and I certainly learned more about Kate and Neil. I felt a common bond with her when she stated that because of her Mormon upbringing, she had a great desire to learn the truth and a great desire for self-authenticity. I agree, but these traits have lead me in another direction, but I’m sure, she would be OK with that.
Let me sandwich a couple of negative comments in here. She needs to get rid of the upspeak that women have now started using. She is more more intelligent than that, and it takes away from the seriousness of her message. The other point was when she quoted from the D&C about Priesthood, she got her section numbers wrong. Right thought. Wrong reference.
I see the problem as something different. The problem is the way the church has concentrated authority into the central leadership, which happens to be male and hold the Priesthood. Women do have a lot to contribute to the church. So do gays. And, so do other ordinary people like us who will rise to the challenge, when expectations are raised. The church expects far too little of its members. They want to keep us children, even when lots of us are already grown-up.
The problem is the really bright and talented people who want to contribute are unable to do do, and they see the church ordaining women or accepting gays as the solution. We are all told how the valiant spirits were held back to come forth at this time in the history of the world, but the church they were born into or attracted to doesn’t want them to be valiant, and in fact, condemns it. The Gospel wasn’t restored to set up a Smith Family dynasty, or a Salt Lake dynasty. It was restored so that ALL may have the opportunity to speak in the name of God. (D&C 1:20)
The scriptures and the revelations I have received point me toward the idea that the work of the Restoration is far from over; there will yet be many great and important things to be revealed; and, most importantly, it won’t be the work of just one man or group of men. It will involve all of us, and women have a vital role to play as well.
Joseph Smith, in speaking of the great latter-day work spoke of many of the ancient (“these authoritative characters”) returning and “joining hand and hand with us” in establishing this work.
People like Kate have demonstrated leadership ability, and whether one agrees with her or not, she had demonstrated the temporal leadership skills that would stand her well in a position of Priesthood leadership. There is another dimension of spiritual leadership in the Priesthood, which is sadly neglected in the LDS church today, and which few, if any, men or women have had the opportunity to develop or demonstrate.
I was actually among those to ordain the first woman in the Restoration since the early days of the church. I have a very interesting story to tell, and so far it hasn’t been told. I am putting together a video for Youtube, and you can also read about my story on my blog. It’s a “Mormon story” that is different, comes from a completely unique perspective, and needs to be told, along with all the others.
I don’t know how much you know about the Restoration Church of Jesus Christ, but I was one of the co-founders, and I hold the copyright to the book “Hidden Treasures & Promises”. In that book is a revelation from Christ setting out the specifics of sexual morality. He basically says that the main principle is chastity and fidelity within a committed relationship, and the gender of the two parties is a non-issue. This is actually consistent with the 1990 version of the LDS Endowment, and the Law of Chastity, as explained, therein. The LDS Church has had a copy of this volume in their archives since 1990. They have the revelation in their possession, and though they might chuckle at it and discount it, a person acting in the role of Samuel the Lamanite (the hated outsider) has stood on their wall and read it to them.
Incidentally, one teaching of Samuel that has been ignored is the principle that a city or a people (or a church) has ripened in iniquity when they begin to drive the righteous from among their midst. Check it out. (Helaman 13:14)
I am probably the only person you will ever meet who is gay, was excommunicated, received actual communication from God, ordained women, was ordained myself by a woman, and who was involved with the organization of a Restoration church, from the inside out.
I have almost finished listening to the first interview. I have gotten a completely different impression from it than I had before and it is negative. And I am a Mormon who loves my religion but thro study and research have come to believe it’s all lies by J Smith. I can see why she was excommunicated. She can say she has a testimony, but does nothing but mock BYU and Mormon beliefs. She needed to be gone.
I also had not realized that John Dehlin, Kate and Neil, were so liberal. Far left, they appear to me. Outside of a few issues, I’m now seeing I might not have as much common ideology as I thought when listening to his podcasts, which I only discovered a few months ago.
I do enjoy his podcasts and have learned a lot from listening to them. I hope he continues his work. Even tho I find I’m disagreeing with much I hear in the first interview with Kelly and Ransom, I like hearing other viewpoints.
In reply to John Crane’s comment:
“She needs to get rid of the upspeak that women have now started using.”
I am glad he pointed this out, though this vocal intonation habit certainly is hardly restricted to women.
However, it is distracting and at least for me, annoying and saps some strength from of her message. I hope if Kate reads this she’ll take this as constructive criticism.
This is the first time I’ve heard the term “upspeak”(or HRT) though have noticed it since first suffering through a college course with a professor (a man) who displayed the habit. In that case it seemed he was trying to overlay every statement with, “are you following me?” – thereby accomplishing a sort of two-for-one. Pretty economical – but annoying (even insulting) because by not actually pausing to ask us that question explicitly he never gave us room to answer,”No, we don’t understand.”
In Kate’s case I got the impression that this tonal overlay was asking the listener, “do you agree with me?” In addition, it came across as a chronic pleading for affirmation – while, again, not allowing the listener to actually affirm – or, perhaps more importantly, to dis-confirm. As with that professor, as long as the speaker keeps this up they bowl right over potential disagreements. Perhaps this a way of wish-thinking disagreements away – or a preemptive defense of them.
I can certainly understand how this may be the case.
Respectfully submitted – just trying to help.
The upspeak may well be a solicitation for agreement, though I wish we had a less annoying way of doing it. American English doesn’t have a convenient construct for this. Canadian English speakers say “eh”. The French say “n’es pas”. The Germans say “nicht wahr”. The Swedes say “eller hur”.
She sounds so intelligent and authoritative when she doesn’t use it.
…and lose the filler word “like”. I stopped counting after, “like”, 100.
Some Americans do it by interjecting, “You know what I’m say’n” a bit too frequently.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhCP-kosJKg
Cheers
First of all, I don’t understand why there are so many comments about Joseph Smith being a polygamist. The church does not deny this, familysearch website does not deny this. If there were a court hearing to decide whether or not he was a polygamist, I have a strong feeling he would be found “guilty.” I listened to the entire interview and I have to say that listening to these podcasts for hours and hours has truly been a blessing. It also leaves me feeling confused sometimes. It is quite clear that such “revelations” as discontinuing the practice of polygamy and giving black men the priesthood was a calculated decision, or essentially voted upon after the leaders started feeling pressure. I don’t see modern day “revelation” happening the way most church members expect it to. I am also wondering what kind of church the Mormon church is going to be if everyone is picking the things that work for them and throwing the rest away. I can’t even say enough how much to me this makes it seem like there is no way this can be the “one and only true church.” This kind of picking and choosing has never been more prevalent, and it just makes everything sound like a mess to me. The church used to be full of literal believers, and now that the historical and other problems are surfacing, it seems like there could be thousands of new sects of the Mormon church formed. It’s a lot to process…and for me hard to hear that someone says they “believe” in the church when it is obvious that they don’t really. Great interview John!
Great comment, Tangerlacks. Thanks for sharing. I was raised an active church member and only in the last couple of years have I heard that Joseph practiced polygamy. You will find some here who think he didn’t (Hi, Bob.), and that is certainly a conversation worth having, but I think the church both did not actively hide Joseph’s polygamy (assuming it to be true) AND did not actively disseminate that information. (Kind of a chicken poop approach to the whole subject, if you ask me.) As for members picking and choosing what they believe, in my opinion this is the maturation of a newer religion. I don’t think Mormonism is going anywhere. But I also don’t think that the literalism that was so common before the age of the Internet will survive for many, many church members. I think they will see it for what I believe it truly has to offer–community and values, like any other religion.
I have strong suspicions that the many here that don’t think Joseph practiced polygamy are members of the reorganized church. I know Lilli comes from this tradition. So it ought be asked, Bob, Lilli, are you members or have sympathy for the RLDS views?
I love the “Validity vs Utility” articulation. Tangerlacks, I agree. I have a tough time understanding those who see the church for what it truly is, a man made construct, how or why they would chose to hold any belief/faith. I have not yet renounced my membership although I see that day approaching, but I left the belief, the faith, the trust, the value far behind. I strongly believe the church to be false in relation to reality vs the truth claims of the church. I believe the church to be a net negative in the world. Just listen to the fourth installment of Christine Jeppsen Clark’s interview with John. It flowed so well for me as to why we should abandon this faith altogether.
Although there are a lot of folks at this particular pod cast website, I would say the vast majority of folks leaving the church are not picking or choosing what they will and will not accept. Most are rejecting it completely, and half if not more of that crowd become strong agnostic/atheist. Color me there.
I’m active LDS. I was proud to score something like a 95% on the Infants on Thrones Mormon Cred scale a couple months ago. (It’s actually called “Bob’s Mormon Cred Scale”, but no relation.) https://alturl.com/h66ze
If I had sympathies for the RLDS/CoC, that could bias my views and give me a possible incentive to mislead, am I right?
Is the same true of, say, William Clayton? If he had certain sympathies, could that give him an incentive to maybe backdate a journal entry or two?
William Law? He was probably influenced only by the goodness of his heart, right?
I’m probably wrong. Men in the past were probably driven only by Pure Goodness and we should accept their words at face value. Not like us people today who are all conniving and driven by hidden motives and such.
As for “Validity vs Utility” articulation, I point you to 1 Thess. 5:21 “Prove all things and hold fast to that which is good.” The word “prove” is also translated “test” and “examine”. If we claim to follow the “admonition of Paul”, we should question everything. Question it in the light of the Spirit, but question it nonetheless.
“Suppose that the leaders of this people had forsaken the Lord and should introduce, through selfishness, that which would militate against the kingdom of God on the earth, that which would in the issue actually destroy this people, how are you going to detect the wrong and know it from the right? You cannot do it unless you have the spirit of the Lord
“Some may say, Brethren, you who lead the church, we have all confidence in you, we are not in the least afraid but what everything will go right under your superintendence; all the business matters will be transacted right; and if Brother Brigham is satisfied with it, I am. I do not wish any Latter-Day Saint in this world, nor in heaven, to be satisfied with anything I do, unless the spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ, the spirit of revelation, makes them satisfied. I wish them to know for themselves and understand for themselves, for this would strengthen the faith that is in them. Suppose that the people were heedless, that they manifested no concern with regard to the things of the kingdom of God, but threw the whole burden upon the leaders of the people, saying, ‘If the brethren who take charge of matters are satisfied we are,’ this is not pleasing in the sight of the Lord.”
[Journal Of Discourses (JD) 3:44-45]
Testing isn’t a one time exercise for investigators and the Book of Mormon, feel the confirmation of the Spirit, then blindly accept everything else.
Lifelong members who do not receive their own testimony of everything purported to be the word of God are deceiving themselves. God speaks by revelation, and if we do not listen by the same spirit of revelation, who, then, are we listening to? The voice of the flesh.
The Spirit confirms words, principles, doctrines, teachings, and practices that are true. It does not confirm that which is false.
Faith does not begin with the premise that you already know. Faith begins, as it does with a little child, that you do not know, and that you are seeking further light and knowledge.
Perhaps this was easier for me than most, having grown up with half my family in the church, though most not terribly active, and half outside the church. I had to work to gain my own testimony, and in the process, I discovered many great and powerful truths in the church, and many cultural constructs presented as if they were truth.
For example, I know the doctrine and principles presented in the Book of Mormon are true. But, I have never received a confirmation that the history of the Nephites and Lamanites is true, nor have I ever received a confirmation about a translation from gold plates or a peep stone.
I was in the Sacred Grove, and as must as I love the forest, never received the confirmation that this forest was any more “sacred” than any other forest. However, I have also been to Adam-ondi-Ahman, and received a powerful confirmation that this was the real deal, everything JS claimed it was, and more.
Our loyalty and devotion needs to be attached to the truth, to the confirmations we receive from the inner voice of the Spirit, not from the current utterances of some person claiming to be a prophet or apostle, but can’t demonstrate any of the gifts and callings of that office.
to do once with the Book of Mormon, or for “lifers” to never do. It’s something we should do
John,
I totally agree we need to ‘prove, test & question’ all things & persons before putting faith in them.
But the problem is that Satan also speaks to us through revelation, warm fuzzies, confirmations, inspirations, dreams, visions, visitation, etc, which everyone is easily deceived to think it’s from the right spirit, for it can feel the same.
Just look at all the people in every church or religion who are just as sure ‘the spirit’ has confirmed to them their religion or beliefs are true and right. Even in the Church everyone, including Presidents, believe different/opposite things about the same scripture or doctrine, thinking they are right and others are wrong.
So proving all things by the ‘spirit’ is not enough, for we are all too easily deceived and can’t tell by which spirit it comes. The Holy Spirit usually speaks more by giving us ‘pure intelligence & ideas’ then by ‘feelings’, thus so we can take those new ideas and test them against what Christ said to make sure they are true.
So we must prove our revelation or beliefs and anyone else’s (as Joseph Smith and other presidents taught) by a more sure way, by comparing what anyone preaches or practices to what ‘Christ’ said.
And Christ also told us to prove whether a person or prophet is really his true disciple or not by whether they have true charity or not (which is easy to see if you understand what true charity is).
And applying the ‘Golden Rule’ to anyone’s teaching is also a good way to test if it’s true or not, and thus why the idea of ‘polygamy’ proves totally false (As Joseph Smith constantly said it was), for no man would want done to him what men do to or expect of women in polygamy, nor would men even put up with it (to their credit) and stay totally faithful to one wife their whole life and take care of all the children themselves even though they rarely saw their wife cause she was away living with & being wined and dined by countless other men. What I can’t figure out is why so many women put up with it, when men wouldn’t.
Another example is, BY said he would hate being dictated to by a women, yet he expected women to listen to his dictates. Thus he proves he was not a true disciple of Christ or righteous or followed the Golden Rule, which is the basis of proof for all prophets & commandments.
If our revelation or the revelation of any so-called prophet, ancient or modern, or anyone, teaches something contrary to Christ’s words in the scriptures, then we can know for sure that they are wrong.
There are many things in the BoM, D&C, & especially throughout the Bible that are totally contrary to the teachings of Christ. Many things done by so-called prophets even that were contrary to Christ & thus prove them to be false or fallen prophets.
Even Nephi proves he was not a true disciple of Christ, for he didn’t have charity, for no one who has charity & was Christlike would have killed Laban, even for the plates, for even the reason Nephi gave was wrong and in error, for his people would not have dwindled in unbelief even if they didn’t have the plates, for if Nephi was a true prophet he could have easily received all the revelation he needed to replace whatever was on the plates. And being a prophet he would have known by heart the teachings of Christ already. So that is 2 proofs Nephi was not a true prophet, nor was Moroni, or Joseph Smith, etc, for if they had been they wouldn’t have wrote or added that about Nephi. So it appears that Joseph Smith did write the Book of Mormon after all and it wasn’t ancient scripture, for God would never want or expect us to believe in such a book with so many things contrary to Christ.
The Book of Mormon also erroneously teaches us to prove things by the Spirit, by warm fuzzies, which again cannot prove things definitely enough to make sure they are really true, and if Moroni had really existed & been a true prophet he would have never said such a thing, for he would have known how easy it was for everyone to be fooled by the Adversary’s revelation, good feelings & warm fuzzies.
But it’s easy to prove all things & persons when one holds them up to the teachings of Christ.
The Holy Spirit can teach us all things too, but even then we still have to prove what comes to us through the Spirit to make sure it’s from the right Spirit, which it seem hardly anyone does and that’s why we have so many different beliefs in the Church and in the world. For the standard measurement for truth is not the Spirit, but Christ’s teachings.
Everyone is getting different/opposite revelation and thinking it’s true, and even more important, hardly anyone in or out of the Church has true charity, which as Christ taught, is a requirement for righteousness & to discern Christ’s teachings correctly.
I agree with most everything you said with regard to understanding the principles of revelation. I did not intend to give a full discourse on the principle of revelation, only to state that it was an important principle, and the key to discerning which parts of Mormonism, or any religion for that matter, are worth keeping, and which are worth throwing away.
But, what I hear you essentially saying is revelation is worthless and unreliable as a measure of truth. I disagree. Most people, even small children, have an innate sense of truth and justice, as well as common sense. The light of Christ is given to every person who enters the world, and those who keep themselves pure, who perceive that voice, who hone their sense of discernment. AND, couple it with reason and logic will not stray too far off the mark.
I don’t understand the idea of being a “true prophet”, and I think you are setting up your own standards, which are so unrealistic and so impossibly high, that perhaps not even Christ could measure up. Nephi was probably not a real person, but like a real person, and every other person in the Book of Mormon and the Bible, Nephi was not black and white.
I agree that Nephi was not a perfect example of charity 24×7, but he was concerned about his family, and his people loved him so much that they gave their subsequent leaders the title of “Nephi”. He forgave his brothers when they wronged him. Rather than complain, he solved problems that endangered the survival of the family.
On the negative side, he was arrogant and tended to rub people the wrong way.
I don’t recall the Book of Mormon speaking about “warm fuzzies”. It does speak about listening to and feasting upon the words of Christ. It talks about speaking with the tongues of angels. It talks about the Holy Ghost making the truth of all things known. It talks about being led by the Spirit for guidance in how to act. It talks about the Spirit changing hearts and minds to that people “have no more disposition to do evil, but to do good continually”. It talks about the evidence and power of faith, and how you can tell your faith is focused on the right object. It talks about men experiencing the daily ministration of angels and about people having such strong faith that people could not disbelieve their words. It even talks about a man whose faith was so strong that he overcame the effects of the fall.
The Book of Mormon deals a lot with the fruits of the Spirit, such as the joy of experiencing the love of God. The Book of Mormon deals with the gifts of the Spirit and the fruits of faith – namely, miracles. Mormon says that if there are no miracles, there is no faith.
This is just off the top of my head. If I spent time researching, I could give more.
John,
I think we do basically agree on most things and it’s nice to hear of someone who does see these things.
But I do not consider the Holy Spirit ‘worthless’ but yes, unreliable to a certain point, for even though we (especially children) can ‘sense’ good from evil if we are ‘pure’ (there’s the catch), and even though the Holy Spirit can teach us the truth of all things and give us all the revelation we need and want, we still have to take it a step further and test our revelation and good feelings, to make sure it’s really true and in line with what Christ taught.
I believe everyone I know, including me, and everyone in the church has been or currently is being deceived by falsehoods and false prophets that they are ‘sure’ the Spirit has told them is true, good & right, but who is leading them to support or do evil. The scriptures are filled with even most all ‘Prophets’ eventually falling for false revelation & teaching & doing evil.
The Book of Mormon teaches at the end in Moroni that “when we shall receive these things that we should ask God if they are true”….and if it is, he said God would give us a confirmation (warm fuzzies), but such is not entirely reliable for it needs further testing, for people of all religions think they have had such confirmations about their scriptures.
But I agree praying about such things like the BOM, is good advice, but if Moroni had really been a true prophet, and true disciple of Christ, he would have known that that was not enough, for Satan could also confirm that the Book of Mormon is true to us, even if the BoM is false in many areas and not from God & leads people astray in many ways. Satan can confirm that anything is true when it’s not, all the while people thinking it’s God’s confirmation.
So Moroni would have said to not only pray but he would have added, like Paul said, to ‘test’ it against the ‘words of Christ’ also, only then can one see the falsehoods and errors in the BoM.
Most people, especially in the Church, seem to think that if they feel God confirms that the BoM or Joseph or Brigham or the Church is true, then they think that is a sure thing as a whole and they never bother to compare & test those things or people with Christ’s teachings.
I agree also that the Book of Mormon teaches many true and wonderful things, but that doesn’t mean it’s all true or a divine work from God or that Nephi or Joseph Smith was a true prophet (meaning righteous or called of God to lead people).
The Book of Mormon and the Bible & D&C are like countless other books written by men throughout time, they all teach some truth & some error to one degree or another, and we have to discern what parts are true and what are false.
Righteous people know that no book ever written by fallible men or women, even righteous men & women, is going to be ‘all true’, as Moroni seemed to think God would confirm to people if they prayed about the BoM. Thus proving that Moroni wasn’t real or righteous to suggest such a thing, he would have known that the BoM had too many errors in it to be completely confirmed by God as a whole.
Above all we need charity, for without it we are nothing. It is charity that brings us in tune with the Holy Spirit & helps us see & discern rightly. And ‘The Holy Spirit’ + ‘Christ’s words’ together are how we prove & determine truth from error. Without either one we will easily be deceived to think error is truth and false prophets are true prophets and false churches are true churches.
I agree that Nephi did & taught a lot of good and wonderful things and got many people to follow him. But all false prophets do the same. Even people who do evil are usually very nice people most of the time and most people like them.
Joseph Smith even taught that false prophet teach so closely to true prophets and do so many wonderful things that most everyone falls for them. He said only those with Charity don’t fall for falsehoods and false prophets, (at least not for long before they start to see the errors).
In D&C 76 Joseph Smith warned about how easy it was for good honorable people to fall for false prophets and falsehoods and how easy it was for true prophets to be deceived and fall themselves.
But false prophets like I believe Joseph was, never think they are false prophets either, even though they warn of them.
And yes, I agree Christ’s standards of righteousness are very high, next to impossible. But Christ did achieve them and he ask us to try to do so also.
We may not become perfect in this life, but if someone is going to call themselves a ‘prophet’ and expect people to read their writings or follow them, then they need to be pretty near perfect, and have true charity, for Christ warned us how to tell true prophets and righteous people, for they will have charity, which I agree & believe is very rare and hard to achieve. I don’t think I have ever known or heard of anyone with true charity today.
But who is going to follow or put trust in a so-called prophet, G.A, Stake Pres. or Bishop or anyone, who does not have charity or is not near perfect or even as righteous as they themselves are? And why should they?
We are better off to not follow any fallible men or women, but just follow Christ’s teachings, for he said everything that needs to be said.
And I believe we should and must all be ‘prophets’ ourselves, if we hope to achieve eternal life. It takes a true prophet to know a true prophet and not be fooled by a false one, who wears ‘sheep skin’, meaning they do a lot of good to look good.
Rude Dog,
While I have left the Church, I don’t believe in the RLDS Church either. I believe the RLDS Church was/is just another false break off from Joseph’s original Church, but in the beginning at least, the RLDS church was a much closer religion to what Joseph started then Brigham’s church ever was.
I don’t believe any church is a true church today, nor do I know of any true prophets in the world today or since Christ, especially not LDS prophets, who all preach and practice opposite to Christ.
But there are many Christian churches today who teach very close to Christ’s true doctrines. I don’t believe the LDS Church is even a Christian Church, for it’s teachings and practices and temples are so completely contrary to Christ, even though they mention him once in a while and do & teach some good things as all false churches & false prophets do.
But, I believe Joseph Smith did not live polygamy, for he not only constantly preached and warned the Saints against it, warning them that they will be damned if they fall for anyone, even a prophet, who may come teaching it. Joseph even taught that if he himself or any ‘prophet’ or even angel from heaven ever came teaching it then to not listen to him or them.
Joseph was smart enough to know he would lose most members once they found he was lying if he had really been living polygamy behind the scenes. He would have known he would have eventually been found out or would have to confess it and thus would have lost all credibility with good people.
Also, I believe Joseph understood that Christ taught against all forms of polygamy, when Christ taught that no married person can marry another person or it’s always adultery. So Joseph knew enough that he couldn’t preach or practice contrary to Christ or contrary to even his Book of Mormon & D&C scriptures that he wrote, which condemned all polygamy.
Then you have the matter that who would believe in a man who would constantly lie to the whole church and more especially lie to his wife & children and abuse his wife so vilely and run around behind her back with other women? Who would believe such a man was a true prophet? For Christ constantly warned against falling for just such false prophets who did such things.
So either Joseph was innocent and falsely accused by BY & other polygamists to make themselves & their dark deeds look good & justified, or Joseph did lie and was just as vile as BY & Co.
It really doesn’t matter much if Joseph did or didn’t live polygamy, for the LDS Church could not be true or Christ’s Church anyway, for even Joseph without living polygamy did not follow Christ in all things (thus true followers of Christ would never follow him) and if he ‘did’ live polygamy then Christ would have nothing to do with such men and the countless other vile things they preached and practiced then and now.
And I agree that people are leaving the Church today because they are finding out the real truth, hidden for so long, and they reject the whole church and not just a few things here & there.
I also see that many who leave, if not most, are so fed up with religion and being deceived false false prophets, that they become agnostic/atheist. But many are just going back to Christ and on their own following what he taught and not listening to or trusting anyone who teaches more or less then His teachings.
Brother Dehlin,
Are you and your family OK? What is happening with your situation? I hope your guys are OK. I hope you will keep doing the podcasts as you are now. I hope you got the Reece Cup recipe and are enjoying it. I also hope to meet you guys someday. Stay as good as you are.
Sincerely,
Penny Meadows
Kate Kelly seems to be an intelligent person, but she continues to say she was excommunicated for “I don’t know, asking questions”. We all know she is a leader of a group that marches on temple square. That is quite a bit different than “asking questions”.
No word yet on her appeal? Is this painful delay good news or bad news?
The interview made me more sympathetic with Kate in some ways and less sympathetic in others. She’s clearly very intelligent, and telling this story definitely exposes weaknesses in these kinds of proceedings — weaknesses that affect people’s lives profoundly. On the other hand, she seems to reject so much of church doctrine and culture, I guess I’m a little bit baffled as to why she wants to continue to be affiliated. I wish that had been a bit more emphasized in the discussion: what does she believe in (rather than what she does NOT believe) and why does she want to stay.
Also, we got a review of the Ordain Women’s formation and its activities, but not much of a discussion of actual sexism or discrimination in the church. I found myself wishing for a summary of what Kate believes about priesthood and her argument for ordaining women.
Forgive me if these things have already been expressed in other forums and I am just too lazy to go do the searching.
Thanks to John and Kate for taking the time and being willing to put yourselves out there like this.
This was so very interesting. Loved every moment, John, you are very good at getting your guests to talk. That is a great skill. It was also great to hear Neil’s point of view. Kate is lovely, and the more I hear from her…her honesty, sincerity, and candor…the more I am impressed. This is an exciting time to be a Mormon woman. If I could offer one concern, it is that the Savior isn’t mentioned much. He needs to be. Especially when so many are wondering…asking…transitioning, etc. As for the “up speak..” I teach university communication classes and public speaking classes, and “up speak” (we call it up talking) is very common…especially in women (in our culture). Part of the reason people do it is because they are checking for understanding at the same time. Teachers, as a group, can be very prone to up talking. Also anyone in the service industry. Anyone that is used to checking for understanding, or service in some way to another (Would you like fries with that?). This little inflection has serious implications when dealing with the ideas equality. This is what I have had to do, and what I suggest to those who struggle with it. Questions end on an up-note (unless you are making a statement with your question (are you finally off the phone?), and statements end on a down note. Remember that consciously, and it will improve. But beware Kate. When I reduced up talking in my own life, all of a sudden I got back door comments like “she’s bossy,” or “she’s too pushy…” In our society we EXPECT women to have a certain amount of up talking (after all, it’s mom’s job to make sure everyone has everything they need)…but if they use TOO MUCH up talking, they are perceived as less credible, unsure. And not using any, as a woman, and we are bossy and pushy.
I have been intrigued by all the talk about OW and Kate’s “tone.” That idea that asking is ok, but HOW you ask it…that’s a different story? I try really hard to understand that because in the MANY debates I have had with people online and offline, and in the news reports, press releases…even statements made by those in my own ward and stake…the “tone” that is used by what one would call TBM’s is NOT what ANYONE should deem appropriate. The amount of vitriol and plain just MADE UP stuff is unreal. I have NEVER heard Kate be disrespectful or angry or bitter…or ANYTHING besides respectful in her communications. Yet she is criticized for her tone. Kate is assertive, but never disrespectful.
To the last criticism I wish to comment on…regarding Kate’s “not caring” attitude. Anyone that studies history knows that history is subjective. Many of us choose not to subject ourselves to someone else’s view on things…because that could lead us in seriously bad directions. We are blessed with the gift of discernment, and so we spend our lives taking in information, and then decoding it again for our own selves. I don’t think Kate doesn’t care. I think she is saying “I don’t care if Adam had a belly button, it just doesn’t matter.”
I appreciate these podcasts so much. Thank you for bringing the conversations to us.
I really appreciated this interview and was so relieved to hear Kate’s hopeful outlook. Reminded me of the faith of a dear friend who in the 90s in Utah was mistreated by her priesthood leaders and stake when she sought to divorce her husband. Her temple recommend was taken, her job then forfeited, and her ward and stake “took sides.” She left Utah, but maintained faith in her knowledge that if the Savior himself would not have treated her in these ways and it was he that gave her strength to face an uncertain future. While I don’t agree with OW’s strategy, I’m deeply grateful for the conversations they have brought to the forefront and the bravery they have exhibited. No one is perfect and I have been disheartened by all sides, but thank you for this forum to hear directly from those involved.
Perhaps Kate is unfamiliar with the Serenity Prayer.
“God grant me the Serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can, and
Wisdom to know the difference.”
When I initially commented I clicked the “Notify me when new comments are added” checkbox and now each time a comment is added I get four emails with the same comment.
Is there any way you can remove me from that service?
Cheers!