Jump to content

Rain

Contributor
  • Content Count

    4,755
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5,884 Excellent

4 Followers

About Rain

  • Rank
    Brings Forth Plants

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    AZ

Recent Profile Visitors

3,066 profile views
  1. Because we teach that as we do the things through the empowerment of the atonement we become worthy to receive the best and most clear spiritual reception. We learn through scripture stories of how prophets were cleansed and now speak, sometimes face to face, with God. We assume that means they must be more righteous than the rest of us, but I think often it means they just have a different calling. We can all look at our lives and see times when we were more in tune and sometimes that lines up with callings because we need more help so we do what we can to grow closer to the Lord. We assume that means the prophet works the hardest at it because he is responsible for the whole church, but I think if you look around you can find people in callings with lesser scope or with no callings you may find people who are close to being angels and are just as close to God. And that's really where the difference lies - specific callings don't mean you are closer to God. They mean you have different authority and calling to magnify.
  2. Those responding to Tacenda's very long post - unless you are responding to specific points in it will you please consider shortening it some way in the quote? There's a whole lot of scrolling going on to get to the reply portion of what you are quoting and it is easily missed.
  3. Mustard created a thread . Just linking here so everyone can easily find it.
  4. What kind of circumstances might make a need to withdraw?
  5. Yes, everything I have been thinking about in the last 10 pages or so is exploring the possibility of the roles of women opening without having to be ordained. Not advocating for anything specific. Not saying that women have to be ordained. Just trying to see, "Is there room for women to do some of these things without requiring that they be ordained?" I wasn't even making it a matter of prayer. I just wanted to study it out. There have been so many assumptions I have had about gospel and church matters over the ages that haven't held true. What assumptions do I have about the role of women and their use of priesthood authority now that don't hold true? I'll tell you a real eye opener for me was when President Oaks said "women having the authority of the priesthood in their Church callings". I had always made an unspecified assumption that women didn't use that authority before he said this. Yet strangely as I learn more and more it has been there all along - I just didn't understand it.
  6. That was my understanding as well. So saying that a person had to have keys wasn't enough for me since we have examples of men presiding without keys. With everything that I have up until this point I wasn't seeing anything that said a bishop's wife/co bishop couldn't preside by delegation as well. Please keep in mind that I am NOT saying that I want there to be symmetry with co presidents etc. I was just trying to find out if there was anything that said it wouldn't work. I'm not understanding. You are saying that because he has keys over his quorum, he can be delegated to preside in the ward sacrament meeting? I get the delegation part. If you add keys to it then it seems to be going against pattern. Could a stake president delegate his keys to a bishop to preside in stake conference? I wish quotes within quotes would show up. Copying, (bolding for visual clarity) and pasting what you quoted; "The bishop oversees ward meetings. He presides at these meetings unless a member of the stake presidency, an Area Seventy, or a General Authority attends. His counselors may conduct ward meetings and may preside if he is absent. Presiding authorities and visiting high councilors should be invited to sit on the stand. High councilors do not preside when attending ward meetings. If the bishop and his counselors are all absent, the stake president designates who presides at sacrament meeting." That is interesting. I always thought it was the bishop. " Normally he designates the elders quorum president, but he could authorize another priesthood holder instead. " Thank you. This at least answers for me by a source how the church has directed it to be at this time in sacrament meetings. Still doesn't answer if you have to have keys to preside or if you have to be ordained to the priesthood to hold keys, but it does answer the question of if the bishop/stake president could delegate a woman to preside. So this makes sense, and I actually talked with my husband this earlier tonight, that you need a priesthood holder to preside at sacrament meetings as there our priesthood ordinances taking place. But what about a ward council or even a ward party? Or like I haven't seen in a long time, where after a ward or church fast you come to the chapel to pray together? None of these have ordinances. "The stake president oversees stake meetings. He presides at these meetings unless an Area Seventy or General Authority attends. His counselors may conduct stake meetings and may preside if he is absent. Handbook 18" This goes along with my question above 'Could a stake president delegate his keys to a bishop to preside in stake conference? ' it doesn't say he can't ask a bishop, but I personally would assume he couldn't. Trying to figure out how to word this. If we go with area of authority: General authority has authority over several stakes. Stake President over several wards Bishop over his ward EQP his quorem So why can a stake president delegate someone down the line EQP to preside in sacrament in the absence of the bishopric, but someone up the line would have to preside in stake meetings in the absence of the stake presidency?
  7. No, not each mention. Just one clear mention. If you felt it was moot for those reasons then you didn't understand my question. I'm sorry I didn't clearly communicate it. I didn't want an implication. Many people infer or assume things are implied. While sometimes they are correct, sometimes they are wrong - especially if there are things that they haven't had experience with or understanding of. I wanted it clearly said. Please don't tell me I don't have a valid concerns. I don't try to invalidate your feelings. Edited to add: it wasn't a concern. Just a question. It is similar to a math problem for me. I'm really glad it isn't a concern at this point. Yes, as it does to others. It is not to me. It seemed self evident to my husband as well until I talked with him and he saw where I was coming from. I wish that could be easier on message boards. I don't know any either so maybe there are none. And maybe there are some that we don't know about yet. If we assume that each of the men you had a scripture for were ordained, and I'm willing to assume they were even though I'm not sure we actually have been told they were ordained, then there is definitely a pattern. Patterns in the gospel are great, but they are not everything. There was a pattern of only men saying conference prayer - until there wasn't. So a pattern of only ordained men receiving keys wasn't enough to be clear to me. Right, but we are not talking about you. We are talking about me. Until this thread I would have thought it was clear as well, but as I thought about it through the thread I realized I didn't actually know of anywhere that made it clear. I just assumed. It definitely has brought something to help me search the scriptures. I suspect this topic will stay on my mind for a few years. I don't know if that is good or scary - it's hard to have questions that long, but good to be searching.
  8. You have inferred that from what I've said, but that is not what I said or meant.
  9. A member of the stake presidency? Saying it that way it sounds like it was not the stake president himself - is this correct? If it was one of the counselors, do the counselors have keys in the stake? My understanding is that they don't have keys either. And thinking more about it - does the EQ have keys to preside in a ward? How are those different, but the same than a bishop?
  10. To add to this - if keys are required to preside then what are RS, YW and Primary president doing, when someone with keys isn't with them? If they are just, say leading, what is the difference in presiding and leading in a group where you have authority delegated to you to lead? To all the men. These are not points we are making. They are real questions.
  11. I agree. But this isn't at all what I have been talking about.
×
×
  • Create New...