General Women's Meeting (And What About 8-11 Year Old Boys?)

[Buckeye]

Someone has to start a thread on this:

 

The First Presidency of the Church announced November 1 that beginning in 2014, a semiannual general women’s meeting will replace the general Relief Society and general Young Women meetings held annually since 1993.

 

The general women’s meeting will be held the Saturday before each general conference and will be conducted by the general presidencies of the Relief Society, Young Women, and Primary organizations. All women, young women, and girls age eight years old and older will be invited to attend.

 

“As the women of the Church gather together—sisters, mothers, and daughters—they, their families, and the Church will be strengthened and blessed,” the First Presidency letter states.

 

Since 1993, general meetings have been held for the Relief Society and the Young Women in September and March, respectively. The meetings have included addresses from a member of the First Presidency and all three members of the respective auxiliary general presidency. From 1984 to 1993, a general meeting was held for all women and young women.

 

http://www.lds.org/church/news/first-presidency-announces-new-general-womens-meeting

 

 

I'm not old enought to remember General Women's meetings for both RS and YW.  Apparently this is a move back to those meetings.  However, now 8 year old + Primary girls are also invited.  I'm really curious about why that is.  For those in the Eastern Time Zone (like me), a meeting that ends at 9:30 pm is pushing bedtime.  (Yes, I know I have nothing to complain about compared to saints in Australia, Europe, etc.).  But I do wonder how much this move is about (i) bringing the young girls into the meeting vs. (ii) providing a space for the General Primary Presidency to be the meeting. 

 

To the degree it's about the former, then one would expect that 8-11 year old boys would also be invited to the Priesthood session (so far no announcement).  But that could cause questions as to whether the General Primary Presidency should attend Priesthood Meeting.  On one hand, that's very unlikely since they are not priesthood holders (and because of the recent OW movement).  But on the other hand, the General Primary Presidency does preside over all 8-11 year old boys in the church and one would expect they would have messages for the boys as well as for the girls.   

 

So does this mean that one of the results of excluding women from the Priesthood Session is that 8-11 year boys will also be excluded?  That would be a little ironic.  I guess it's part of the challenge of an organization where, by and large, only women are allowed to preside over boys (primary presidencies), but apart from that, boys and men are never presided over by women. 

Edited November 5, 2013 by Buckeye

[bluebell]

I could be wrong, but perhaps the meeting includes 8 and up year old girls, not as part of a primary function, but that it includes them as part of a 'female' function (if that makes any sense).

 

In other words, it's likely that the meeting is meant to be specifically female-centric (something that does not have an age limit on it, like the priesthood does) and that some primary aged girls are invited because it pertains to them as females and divine daughters of God, and not because the primary general presidency might speak.

 

If that's the case, then it's irrelevant that boys of the same age aren't invited.  The purpose of the meeting is not for the primary general presidency to present a message to primary aged children, but the purpose is for girls (primary age or otherwise) and women to meeting together and hear 'female' specific instruction.

 

Given that boys ages 8 to 11 generally have weekly cub and scout meetings, I don't think they boys are being shortchanged in the least (and yes, I know that girls have activity days but the scope and depth of the programs, including the time involved, do not at all match up).

 

I guess we'll have to see how everything plays out to see how it's actually going to function in the real world though.

[BCSpace]

I would tend to split off and have the RS with their own meeting and the YW down the eight year olds in another.  But the likely thinking imho is that girls are maturing at a much faster rate than in the past, both physically and mentally because of all the things they are exposed to at an early age in society and so there's less of a difference in maturity if you will between 8 and 20 than there was just a few decades ago.

 

One could say the same for the boys as far as exposure, but perhaps it is a Priesthood thing but not in the way you put it.  Could be the boys don't need it but the girls do to combat priesthood demanding feminism.

Edited November 5, 2013 by BCSpace

[Buckeye]

Thanks for the responses.  It's always fun to speculate.  And I love how every change quickly leads to new questions that weren't there before.  The more I think about this, the more I believe the General Primary Presidency is included because the church wants all the women in a meeting.  That's great.  But I don't think the primary (sorry, pun) motive is bringing in the 8-11 year old girls.  If that were the case, they'd do the same for the boys.  I can't believe the church views the need to speak to 8-11 year old girls as more important than for the same age boys.  It just doesn't make sense.  The only reason I can come up with for not including boys in the Priesthood session is that, obviously, they don't have the priesthood yet.  They could be included as "prospective," but that opens up questions about others who would like to attend who do not have priesthood; namely, some good sisters we all know.  The rational thing to do would be to bring the boys into Priesthood, but that would just again emphasize that priesthood is a "men-only" meeting - a topic we'd really rather not bring up.

 

I'm also intrigued by the challenge from having one of the three "women's" presidencies oversee males as well as females.  For them, they now have two hats.  Most of the time (in the Friend, at stake conference and in general conference) they are speaking to all the children.  But twice a year they speak only to the girls.  And there is no corresponding time when they speak only to the boys.  It seems weird.  Like if the General Sunday School Presidency only spoke in Priesthood Session. 

[BCSpace]

Sorry.  Had to edit previous post.  Had YM instead of YW.

[David T]

Based on some of the ways the recent GA visit for our Stake Conference was talking, and with news of this adjustment, I nearly EXPECT 'Priesthood' meeting to be renamed 'General Men's Meeting', and likely include the primary boys 8+. Rather than just not being surprised if it does happen, to me I'd actually be surprised if it doesn't happen.

 

I also see this as further supporting evidence that my prediction will still come true, respecting the YW and RS organizations *grin*.

[cinepro]

I'm glad I'm not a child aged 8-11 in the Church.  Good grief.

[BCSpace]

I'm glad I'm not a child aged 8-11 in the Church.

 

Not a child aged 8-11 or not in the Church or both?

 

Edited November 5, 2013 by BCSpace

[Buckeye]

Based on some of the ways the recent GA visit for our Stake Conference was talking, and with news of this adjustment, I nearly EXPECT 'Priesthood' meeting to be renamed 'General Men's Meeting', and likely include the primary boys 8+. Rather than just not being surprised if it does happen, to me I'd actually be surprised if it doesn't happen.

 

I also see this as further supporting evidence that my prediction will still come true, respecting the YW and RS organizations *grin*.

 

That makes a lot of sense from the angle of Ordain Women's request to participate in the Priesthood session. By re-branding the meetings to just "women's meeting" and "men's meeting" you take away the priesthood angle. It becomes harder for women to ask to attend a "men's meeting" when they have an equal "women's meeting." There would still be quibbles over whether the women's meeting is part of GC (easy fix - just say it is and treat it accordingly). Also concerns over why one meeting is a week before conference rather than the middle of it (relatively easy fix; just alternate - this would have a side benefit of helping BYU and USU schedule other football games that weekend). But the priesthood question would not be entangled with the meeting.

 

The only thing I can think cutting against such a change is that the church would not want to take an action that lowered the importance of the priesthood. A change from "priesthood session" to "men's session" could be seen as a step in that direction.

[David T]

 

The only thing I can think cutting against such a change is that the church would not want to take an action that lowered the importance of the priesthood. A change from "priesthood session" to "men's session" could be seen as a step in that direction.

 

The GA who visited said there is a strong concern with the confusion and misunderstanding that comes with the association of using the term "The Priesthood" to mean "The Men", and there is a greater effort  coming from SLC to acknowledge that 'obtaining the Priesthood' as mentioned in the Oath and Covenant is not the same as "Ordained to the Priesthood". There will be a greater push to show that (and how) men and women access the Power of the Priesthood, and how that is different from a priesthood officer.

 

Hopefully, this can also begin to remove the confusing rhetoric of a priesthood officer being called a 'priesthood holder'.

Edited November 5, 2013 by David T

[BCSpace]

Hopefully, this can also begin to remove the confusing rhetoric of a priesthood officer being called a 'priesthood holder'.

 

I think it all boils down to refreshments.  Wherever refreshments are present, the priesthood is not.

[bluebell]

I wonder if the inclusion of 8 year old girls in a general women's meeting has anything to do with the fact that girls are, on average, beginning puberty around the age of 8 1/2 right now.

 

Not that the church equates puberty with being a woman, but that they might believe that girls who are going thru that change have more in common with YW, and need guidance similar to that given to YW, long before they actually are eligible to attend that meeting.

 

I haven't read anything that said that boys are entering puberty anywhere near that age, but I could have missed it.

[Buckeye]

The GA who visited said there is a strong concern with the confusion and misunderstanding that comes with the association of using the term "The Priesthood" to mean "The Men", and there is a greater effort coming from SLC to acknowledge that 'obtaining the Priesthood' as mentioned in the Oath and Covenant is not the same as "Ordained to the Priesthood". There will be a greater push to show that (and how) men and women access the Power of the Priesthood, and how that is different from a priesthood officer.

 

Hopefully, this can also begin to remove the confusing rhetoric of a priesthood officer being called a 'priesthood holder'.

 

We've had the same training in our stake.  After the sacrament, our bishopric is careful to "thank the holders of the priesthood" rather than "thank the priesthood."  If the change in meeting name were explained as a way to include all men, regardless of whether they hold the priesthood, then yes, I think I could envision a change of name to "General Men's Meeting." 

Edited November 5, 2013 by Buckeye

[Buckeye]

I wonder if the inclusion of 8 year old girls in a general women's meeting has anything to do with the fact that girls are, on average, beginning puberty around the age of 8 1/2 right now.

 

Not that the church equates puberty with being a woman, but that they might believe that girls who are going thru that change have more in common with YW, and need guidance similar to that given to YW, long before they actually are eligible to attend that meeting.

 

I haven't read anything that said that boys are entering puberty anywhere near that age, but I could have missed it.

 

If that were the case I would expect to see different primary lessons for 8-11 year old girls than the boys.  Or at least an emphasis in activity days on more "mature" topics.  I don't see it.  In this case, the most simple answer is the correct one.  The change is so that the General Primary Presidency has someone to speak to. Not because 8-11 year old girls need more conference sessions than their brothers.  If David T is correct, sometime before the next conference we should hear that 8-11 year old boys are also included in their session.

[bluebell]

If that were the case I would expect to see different primary lessons for 8-11 year old girls than the boys.  Or at least an emphasis in activity days on more "mature" topics.  I don't see it.  In this case, the most simple answer is the correct one.  The change is so that the General Primary Presidency has someone to speak to. Not because 8-11 year old girls need more conference sessions than their brothers.  If David T is correct, sometime before the next conference we should hear that 8-11 year old boys are also included in their session.

 

I wouldn't be surprised at all if David is correct.

 

However, this change is really really new.  I don't know that we can compare it to programs or lessons that haven't changed in years or decades.

[Calm]

Activity days are pretty much determined by the leaders, we could have gotten into more mature stuff if we had wanted to easily enough...however, the particular group I was involved in, out of the 11 girls, probably only two would have benefitted from such.  i can see if there were larger numbers, perhaps splitting the group on occasion for different lessons.

[Buckeye]

Activity days are pretty much determined by the leaders, we could have gotten into more mature stuff if we had wanted to easily enough...however, the particular group I was involved in, out of the 11 girls, probably only two would have benefitted from such.  i can see if there were larger numbers, perhaps splitting the group on occasion for different lessons.

Ok.  But the same could be done for 8-11 boys.  In fact, the cub scouts are forced into different age groups (Wolf, Bear, Webelos) even if there are few numbers to support it. 

[cinepro]

Not a child aged 8-11 or not in the Church or both?

 

 

An open letter from the children of the LDS Church, aged 8-11, to the Ordain Women Movement:

 

 

Dear Ordain Women Movement,

 

Thanks a lot!  Keep it up and maybe they'll bring back Thursday afternoon Primary too.

 

Next time you have a big fat good idea, why don't you keep it to yourself?

 

Signed,

 

The Children of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Edited November 17, 2013 by cinepro

[cinepro]

Ok.  But the same could be done for 8-11 boys.  In fact, the cub scouts are forced into different age groups (Wolf, Bear, Webelos) even if there are few numbers to support it. 

 

I was Cubmaster in a ward with a small Primary for three years, and we just had one "den".  And I ran all the den meetings and pack meetings.  

 

And the Primary was actually combined with a neighboring ward too.

[Calm]

Ok.  But the same could be done for 8-11 boys.  In fact, the cub scouts are forced into different age groups (Wolf, Bear, Webelos) even if there are few numbers to support it. 

Wasn't in my group when I was Akela and we had large numbers.

Edited November 5, 2013 by calmoriah

[Calm]

Ok.  But the same could be done for 8-11 boys.  In fact, the cub scouts are forced into different age groups (Wolf, Bear, Webelos) even if there are few numbers to support it. 

 

 

Then your previous post in regards to activity days is irrelevant it would seem since it is local leaders that choose the level of maturity of lessons, not SL.

 

[Scott Lloyd]

Someone has to start a thread on this:

 

The First Presidency of the Church announced November 1 that beginning in 2014, a semiannual general women’s meeting will replace the general Relief Society and general Young Women meetings held annually since 1993.

 

The general women’s meeting will be held the Saturday before each general conference and will be conducted by the general presidencies of the Relief Society, Young Women, and Primary organizations. All women, young women, and girls age eight years old and older will be invited to attend.

 

“As the women of the Church gather together—sisters, mothers, and daughters—they, their families, and the Church will be strengthened and blessed,” the First Presidency letter states.

 

Since 1993, general meetings have been held for the Relief Society and the Young Women in September and March, respectively. The meetings have included addresses from a member of the First Presidency and all three members of the respective auxiliary general presidency. From 1984 to 1993, a general meeting was held for all women and young women.

 

http://www.lds.org/church/news/first-presidency-announces-new-general-womens-meeting

 

 

I'm not old enought to remember General Women's meetings for both RS and YW.  Apparently this is a move back to those meetings.  However, now 8 year old + Primary girls are also invited.  I'm really curious about why that is.  For those in the Eastern Time Zone (like me), a meeting that ends at 9:30 pm is pushing bedtime.  (Yes, I know I have nothing to complain about compared to saints in Australia, Europe, etc.).  But I do wonder how much this move is about (i) bringing the young girls into the meeting vs. (ii) providing a space for the General Primary Presidency to be the meeting. 

 

To the degree it's about the former, then one would expect that 8-11 year old boys would also be invited to the Priesthood session (so far no announcement).  But that could cause questions as to whether the General Primary Presidency should attend Priesthood Meeting.  On one hand, that's very unlikely since they are not priesthood holders (and because of the recent OW movement).  But on the other hand, the General Primary Presidency does preside over all 8-11 year old boys in the church and one would expect they would have messages for the boys as well as for the girls.   

 

So does this mean that one of the results of excluding women from the Priesthood Session is that 8-11 year boys will also be excluded?  That would be a little ironic.  I guess it's part of the challenge of an organization where, by and large, only women are allowed to preside over boys (primary presidencies), but apart from that, boys and men are never presided over by women. 

The way it was explained to me on one occasion -- by someone over Correlation review for the Church -- auxiliary presidencies (Young Men, Young Women, Primary, Relief Society, Sunday School) do not preside over people. They preside over programs. 

 

So it's not correct to say Primary presidencies "preside" over boys (or girls, for that matter). Teach them, lead them, yes; preside over them, no.

[Buckeye]

The way it was explained to me on one occasion -- by someone over Correlation review for the Church -- auxiliary presidencies (Young Men, Young Women, Primary, Relief Society, Sunday School) do not preside over people. They preside over programs. 

 

So it's not correct to say Primary presidencies "preside" over boys (or girls, for that matter). Teach them, lead them, yes; preside over them, no.

 

Does that make a difference to issue of having the Primary Presidency only address half the people in their organization?  Seems like splitting hairs. 

 

Also, is the view different for Presidents who hold keys (Bishop, EQP, TQP, DQP, etc.)?  Do they preside over "people" or just a program?

 

And what exactly is your definition of "preside"?  Teaching and leading are pretty much the core parts of what I understand the term to mean. 

[Scott Lloyd]

Does that make a difference to issue of having the Primary Presidency only address half the people in their organization?  Seems like splitting hairs. 

 

You tell me. You're the one who suggested boys should be invited to attend the women's meeting because the Primary presidency "presides" over them.

 

Also, is the view different for Presidents who hold keys (Bishop, EQP, TQP, DQP, etc.)?  Do they preside over "people" or just a program?

 

 

Perhaps you're catching on.

 

Presiding over people is a direct-line function of priesthood officers, not auxiliary heads.

 

 

And what exactly is your definition of "preside"?  Teaching and leading are pretty much the core parts of what I understand the term to mean. 

 

 

It's a matter of authority. The Young Men president in a ward presides over the administration of the Young Men program in that ward, but it is the bishop who presides over the Aaronic Priesthood holders.

[Buckeye]

You tell me. You're the one who suggested boys should be invited to attend the women's meeting because the Primary presidency "presides" over them.

 

Perhaps you're catching on.

 

Presiding over people is a direct-line function of priesthood officers, not auxiliary heads.

 

 

It's a matter of authority. The Young Men president in a ward presides over the administration of the Young Men program in that ward, but it is the bishop who presides over the Aaronic Priesthood holders.

 

Thanks for the clarification.  I'm not agreeing of course, but I understand.  What is the scriptural basis for saying a bishop presides over the members of his congregation rather than just the congregation?  I'm pretty sure the CHI just says he presides over the "ward."  Same for all the other presiding authorities for their respective organzations.  Is there something in the CHI that would support the dichotomoy between presiding over people vs. presiding over organizations?  And what is the bottom-line effect of this difference?  What authority does a bishop have if he presides over the members of his ward rather than if he just presides over the ward?  What is the practical difference?

 

And as to the OP, I was not suggesting that boys should go to General Women's Meeting.  I was just pointing out the issue that the Primary Presidency is only speaking to half it's group.  I don't have a specific solution in mind.  If I had to recommend one, I'd recommed calling a man as one of the counselors in the Primary Presidency and have him speak in the General Men's Meeting.  Get more men into primary. 

Edited November 7, 2013 by Buckeye