Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
smac97

Ordain Women Group Publishes "six Discussions" To Proselytize For Its Agenda

Recommended Posts

"But they can be just like Heavenly Mother."

And as soon as we know what that is this will be quite helpful.

Absolutely agree.  I think that is the solution right there.

Share this post


Link to post

Absolutely agree.  I think that is the solution right there.

Another thing I am joyously anticipating.

Share this post


Link to post

What's DOM?

David O Mckay

Share this post


Link to post

Interesting experience in SS ... We were in the Book of Judges and the discussion came around to Deborah. The instructor (a man who stands 10 feet tall in MY eyes) did not refer to her as a prophet(ess) or judge but rather as a "good friend" to Barak. Being in repentance mode, I stifled any desire for correction/criticism. However, a sweet little old lady spoke up and reminded the instructor Deborah was more than Barak's friend, she was a prophetess and the judge of Israel. She then laid the BOOM by saying something like, "This should serve as a reminder to the mn in this Church that when HF appoints women to positions of authority you should listen to them and when they speak at GC, you shouldn't use the occasion to go make yourself a sandwich!" The instructor deftly lightened the tension with a light-hearted comment and abruptly fast forwarded to Gideon.

After class, I sought out my new BFF and introduced myself (her and her husband are new to the ward). I expressed my appreciation for her comments and then she said ... and this is the point of the story ...

"I'm starting to realize that I don't have much time left and SOMEONE needs to start speaking up for the women around here."

When I think of the OW movement, I usually think of a young "radical" women bucking the "establishment." But I wonder how many older women are just as frustrated the status quo and whether they aren't the ones who would have the most impact. Sister BFF is new to the ward so I doubt anyone but me still even remembers her comment. But if she was Sister Stake President's Wife or SIster Been There 30 Years, it might have caused quite a stir.

I have no thoughts or conclusions, just an interesting Sunday at the home ward.

 

In my ward, the instructor solicited input on what the story of Deborah teaches us, "other than women's rights and stuff like that".

Share this post


Link to post

In my ward, the instructor solicited input on what the story of Deborah teaches us, "other than women's rights and stuff like that".

 

Send me your meeting house address and I'll send my new BFF over to straighten him out ;)

Share this post


Link to post

"Evidently, some people have trouble thinking outside the box and positioning things within the greater context of the entire gospel and real life."

Yes, some people do (there are a lot of devotional LDS books out there being published to help people do just that so it should hardly be surprising, I found it shocking that Believing Christ ended up a best seller and people were talking about how it changed their lives when I thought what he said was the simplest part of the gospel, but then I am sure there are areas where I am clueless) ..so why the need to assume that there is something else behind their motivation, something else that they want?

I heard a lot of people saying that they had never viewed the relationship of women to the Priesthood in the way it has been recently taught in conference. People learn line upon line. Those not so understanding in the Priesthood area might be decades ahead in the faith, hope or charity field. Why waste time in suspecting or even condemning others when we could be testifying of the good things of the gospel instead and adding light to others' lives rather than contention and darkness?

 

If that's all OW was about, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

Yet when you demand that women be ordained to the priesthood and state that it's non-negotiable, and when you embrace an apostate in your organization, that puts things in a very different light.

 

FWIW, I acknowledge that there are women's issues that need to be addressed in the church. While it can be claimed that OW has moved the discussion along on women's issues, it can also be claimed that they have also hindered progress with their demands and methodology. I compare the Genesis group before 1978 to OW now and see a world of difference between the two. I've expressed some of my concerns about OW on this thread. I think they're valid concerns. But it needs to be remembered that valid concerns about a group need to be expressed when that group publicly agitates against the church as OW has done.

 

I don't believe for a minute that ignoring them or not questioning what they do is a good thing. Their demands and agenda need to stand up under scrutiny, just like the church has had to do.

Share this post


Link to post

The capacity to serve and feel a different means of the blessing of the spirit.  A personal example: I've been serving in the temple as an ordinance worker for 2 yrs. I'm also a grad student, who's extremely busy. I have gotten multiple migraines over the last year from the level of stress and tension. And yet I still am going. Why? A part of that is because the temple is the only legitimate place where I can lay my hands upon a sister's head and bestow the blessings of Christ over her. Now, do you need priesthood ordination to do that? Apparently in the past you didn't. But today you do outside of the temple. When someone sits there and tells me that bearing the priesthood is hard and such a burden and almost a curse, it smacks of ingratitude for what God has given. I won't deny that being a patron in the House is a different but just as spiritual blessing as giving the ordinance rites to them...the spirit enriches all that are there to receive. I love the distinctive experience of acting in the name of the Lord in this fashion and it keeps me where I'm at because I realize that if I leave I will lose a blessing that I cannot have in any other way.  

 

Now, I think most of these things that OW mentions can be given without necessarily giving the priesthood. Participation and greater decision making can and is changing to incorporate and place greater value of the input of female leaders. There's nothing, doctrinally, that states a woman couldn't give a blessing in the name of Christ....it's been done before and fell out of favor....but it could come back. You can begin showing women in priesthood/church roles as more active and dynamic than what's often the norm of receiving and more domestic in emphasis. Etc. But I can't blame them for seeing the same disparity that I see and hope for an immediate solution. To them the easy answer is ordain the women too. I don't agree. I think it's over-simplified and inadvertently loses much of the distinct contribution and power women have to give.  I may think that their understanding, logic, and reasons are inherently flawed. But I see no reason to question why they would want the priesthood. Who wouldn't want a new capacity to experience the hand of the Lord?

 

With luv,

Bd

As an ordinance worker on the own endowment team on my shift, I often get to hear the temple president discuss the endowment with those to be endowed that day, and I find that a huge blessing.  In doing so, he discusses the Oath and Covenant of the Priesthood and discusses that the power of the Priesthood (as distinguished from the authority) is indeed the Holy Spirit.

 

Indeed, if one studies having one's calling and election made sure, the Holy Spirit of Promise is what seals that up for eternity.

 

Sisters who seek it and understand it, have full access to the Holy Spirit, and therefore the complete power of the Priesthood.  In fact, when you perform those ordinances, yes, you are set apart and therefore have the authority to do the ordinances delegated to you, but the power itself is purely your own, based upon the Holy Spirit acting in you.

 

Guess what?  The same thing is true when I perform the ordinances.  It is not MY Priesthood- it is the Lord's priesthood.

 

ALL of God's authority to perform ordinances is delegated authority.  In fact the church publishes one's Priesthood line of Authority - which PROVES that point should anyone doubt it.

 

With this in mind, saying that women do not "hold" the priesthood in the temple, is to me, a distinction without a difference.  BOTH men and women are conduits for the power of God through delegated authority.   The words "having authority" are identical on both sides of the temple.

 

Edited by mfbukowski

Share this post


Link to post

Another thing I am joyously anticipating.

As should we all!!

Share this post


Link to post

The capacity to serve and feel a different means of the blessing of the spirit.  A personal example: I've been serving in the temple as an ordinance worker for 2 yrs. I'm also a grad student, who's extremely busy. I have gotten multiple migraines over the last year from the level of stress and tension. And yet I still am going. Why? A part of that is because the temple is the only legitimate place where I can lay my hands upon a sister's head and bestow the blessings of Christ over her. Now, do you need priesthood ordination to do that? Apparently in the past you didn't. But today you do outside of the temple. When someone sits there and tells me that bearing the priesthood is hard and such a burden and almost a curse, it smacks of ingratitude for what God has given. I won't deny that being a patron in the House is a different but just as spiritual blessing as giving the ordinance rites to them...the spirit enriches all that are there to receive. I love the distinctive experience of acting in the name of the Lord in this fashion and it keeps me where I'm at because I realize that if I leave I will lose a blessing that I cannot have in any other way.  

 

Now, I think most of these things that OW mentions can be given without necessarily giving the priesthood. Participation and greater decision making can and is changing to incorporate and place greater value of the input of female leaders. There's nothing, doctrinally, that states a woman couldn't give a blessing in the name of Christ....it's been done before and fell out of favor....but it could come back. You can begin showing women in priesthood/church roles as more active and dynamic than what's often the norm of receiving and more domestic in emphasis. Etc. But I can't blame them for seeing the same disparity that I see and hope for an immediate solution. To them the easy answer is ordain the women too. I don't agree. I think it's over-simplified and inadvertently loses much of the distinct contribution and power women have to give.  I may think that their understanding, logic, and reasons are inherently flawed. But I see no reason to question why they would want the priesthood. Who wouldn't want a new capacity to experience the hand of the Lord?

 

With luv,

Bd

 

There's quite a bit that I agree with here. But let me ask my question again, with the proper emphasis:

 

 If someone is demanding the priesthood, what is it that they actually want?

Share this post


Link to post

David O Mckay

AH!  Ok!  lol.

Share this post


Link to post

"But they can be just like Heavenly Mother."

And as soon as we know what that is this will be quite helpful.

 

You've just asked a question that has been plaguing me recently.  What reward do sisters expect to receive in the hereafter for their good and faithful service?

 

For men, we get to be like HF.  This means that we get to engage in unlimited procreation (the easy non-pregnancy part of it and possibly, with multiple wives).  We get to create worlds and inhabit them with our children.  From time to time, we step in and awe our children with miracles.  They will build monuments to us and pray to us.  And while it's not a job that I would want, I can certainly see its appeal.

 

But what's in it for the sisters?  Eternal pregnancy?  To give birth to children who don't so much as utter your name in public?  For the life of me, I can't figure out why anyone would be as faithful as our dear sisters are for THIS reward?

 

Of course, that's because I'm obviously missing something.  Maybe in seminary, girls camp or RS, they give some explanation as to the role of HM in eternity.  Anyone care to share?

 

NOTE: I apologize for what will be read by some as flippancy in my description of the role of HF and HM.  As is obvious, I don't have the writing skills of a calmoriah or BD and therefore, could not even come close to expressing God's Glory.  However, rather than spending hours (and still failing miserably), I just jotted down my thoughts as they sloppily came to mind.  It was not my intention to be "light minded" (in this one case).  I simply wanted to provide some contrast between what I perceive to be a great disparity in the roles of men and women in eternity.

Edited by mormonnewb

Share this post


Link to post

There's quite a bit that I agree with here. But let me ask my question again, with the proper emphasis:

 

 If someone is demanding the priesthood, what is it that they actually want?

 

I'll state it again: The same thing I want. They're just more impatient and jumping the gun and have more of a democratic post-modern flare. Again their problem is not their intent, it's their execution and assumptions that's leaving them "kicking against the pricks."

Share this post


Link to post

There's quite a bit that I agree with here. But let me ask my question again, with the proper emphasis:

If someone is demanding the priesthood, what is it that they actually want?

I'm guessing the Priesthood.

On the few occasions I actually demand stuff, it is always because I think it is something essential and I have no other agenda (it is wise to use demands in a limited way if you want them to actually work, people know I am serious and mean it if my asking is a demand level).

Edited by calmoriah

Share this post


Link to post

You've just asked a question that has been plaguing me recently. What reward do sisters expect to receive in the hereafter for their good and faithful service?

For men, we get to be like HF. This means that we get to engage in unlimited procreation (the easy non-pregnancy part of it and possibly, with multiple wives). We get to create worlds and inhabit them with our children. From time to time, we step in and awe our children with miracles. They will build monuments to us and pray to us. And while it's not a job that I would want, I can certainly see its appeal.

But what's in it for the sisters? Eternal pregnancy? To give birth to children who don't so much as utter your name in public? For the life of me, I can't figure out why anyone would be as faithful as our dear sisters are for THIS reward?

Of course, that's because I'm obviously missing something. Maybe in seminary, girls camp or RS, they give some explanation as to the role of HM in eternity. Anyone care to share?

NOTE: I apologize for what will be read by some as flippancy in my description of the role of HF and HM. As is obvious, I don't have the writing skills of a calmoriah or BD and therefore, could not even come close to expressing God's Glory. However, rather than spending hours (and still failing miserably), I just jotted down my thoughts as they sloppily came to mind. It was not my intention to be "light minded" (in this one case). I simply wanted to provide some contrast between what I perceive to be a great disparity in the roles of men and women in eternity.

You forget that mortality is a very, very small part of eternity. We were with Heavenly Mother in the Preexistence and will be in the eternity that comes after mortality. In terms of eternity, mortality is like sending your kids off for a play date at a neighbour's house...or maybe a better analogy would be with their dad and eldest brother which was something my daughter loved doing, including the part where she would fill me in on all the details.

Perhaps in the Preexistence our Heavenly Mother played a much greater role than Father up to the Council where we made the decision to come to earth and now it is his turn for some quality time.

I think of Heavenly Mother in much the same way as I do Father, where he is all the best qualities of men and fathers rolled into one times a million or more improvement. I see Mother as being the embodiment of everything I have ever admired in a woman but way beyond my current comprehension on what that really means.

For me it comes down to trust. Do I trust that my Father and Mother love me? Since I do, I don't worry about the details even if I indulge in speculation at times just for fun.

Edited by calmoriah

Share this post


Link to post

I'll state it again: The same thing I want. They're just more impatient and jumping the gun and have more of a democratic post-modern flare. Again their problem is not their intent, it's their execution and assumptions that's leaving them "kicking against the pricks."

 

Demands and the way they are made are woven together such that you can't consider them separately. I know of no examples in the scriptures where demands are made of God that turn out well. It is one thing to want something, and to submit humbly to God in the matter. It is another thing to demand something and have the nature of that demand reflected in your execution and assumptions.

 

There appears to be a world of difference between what you've expressed and what OW is doing, and that is true all the way down to the level of intent. And that is manifest explicitly by their execution.

Share this post


Link to post

You've just asked a question that has been plaguing me recently.  What reward do sisters expect to receive in the hereafter for their good and faithful service?

 

For men, we get to be like HF.  This means that we get to engage in unlimited procreation (the easy non-pregnancy part of it and possibly, with multiple wives).  We get to create worlds and inhabit them with our children.  From time to time, we step in and awe our children with miracles.  They will build monuments to us and pray to us.  And while it's not a job that I would want, I can certainly see its appeal.

 

But what's in it for the sisters?  Eternal pregnancy?  To give birth to children who don't so much as utter your name in public?  For the life of me, I can't figure out why anyone would be as faithful as our dear sisters are for THIS reward?

 

Of course, that's because I'm obviously missing something.  Maybe in seminary, girls camp or RS, they give some explanation as to the role of HM in eternity.  Anyone care to share?

 

NOTE: I apologize for what will be read by some as flippancy in my description of the role of HF and HM.  As is obvious, I don't have the writing skills of a calmoriah or BD and therefore, could not even come close to expressing God's Glory.  However, rather than spending hours (and still failing miserably), I just jotted down my thoughts as they sloppily came to mind.  It was not my intention to be "light minded" (in this one case).  I simply wanted to provide some contrast between what I perceive to be a great disparity in the roles of men and women in eternity.

Far too literal, these are fairy stories.

 

We are creating worlds now as we speak-.  I like mine better than yours  ;)

We do not see things as they are, we see them as we are.

 

-Blue Dreams

Edited by mfbukowski

Share this post


Link to post

I'll state it again: The same thing I want. They're just more impatient and jumping the gun and have more of a democratic post-modern flare. Again their problem is not their intent, it's their execution and assumptions that's leaving them "kicking against the pricks."

:rofl:

Share this post


Link to post

 

I don't believe for a minute that ignoring them or not questioning what they do is a good thing. Their demands and agenda need to stand up under scrutiny, just like the church has had to do.

I for one wouldn't be criticising if people limited their responses to the way the Church reps have approached it. But many are going beyond that.

Share this post


Link to post

I for one wouldn't be criticising if people limited their responses to the way the Church reps have approached it. But many are going beyond that.

 

Do you think smac has gone beyond that?

Share this post


Link to post

Smac iirc has been generally careful at identifying specific behaviours he finds troublesome. I don't recall him engaging in mind reading or condemning them as individuals as opposed to their actions. Nor do I remember him suggesting they leave the Church.

I would have to go back and reread his stuff to be sure, but my memory is that he has gone a bit further than I feel is appropriate in a few instances but overall focuses on external that is observed rather than internal behaviour that must be guessed if you choose not to take them at their word and is not aggressive.

Edited by calmoriah

Share this post


Link to post

Demands and the way they are made are woven together such that you can't consider them separately. I know of no examples in the scriptures where demands are made of God that turn out well. It is one thing to want something, and to submit humbly to God in the matter. It is another thing to demand something and have the nature of that demand reflected in your execution and assumptions.

 

There appears to be a world of difference between what you've expressed and what OW is doing, and that is true all the way down to the level of intent. And that is manifest explicitly by their execution.

 

What Cal said. 

 

Their execution/assumptions are flawed (i've said that in literally every post I've made here), but who am I to start casting stones and make character assassinations (or assumptions or what have you)? I've definitely had my moments where impatience, pride, misinterpreting the Lord, etc have gotten in my way. My faults are just less publicized.

Share this post


Link to post

Demands and the way they are made are woven together such that you can't consider them separately. I know of no examples in the scriptures where demands are made of God that turn out well. It is one thing to want something, and to submit humbly to God in the matter. It is another thing to demand something and have the nature of that demand reflected in your execution and assumptions.

There appears to be a world of difference between what you've expressed and what OW is doing, and that is true all the way down to the level of intent. And that is manifest explicitly by their execution.

5 And he said unto them, Which of you shall have a friend, and shall go unto him at midnight, and say unto him, Friend, lend me three loaves;

6 For a friend of mine in his journey is come to me, and I have nothing to set before him?

7 And he from within shall answer and say, Trouble me not: the door is now shut, and my children are with me in bed; I cannot rise and give thee.

8 I say unto you, Though he will not rise and give him, because he is his friend, yet because of his importunity he will rise and give him as many as he needeth.

9 And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.

10 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. (Luke 11)

This is what Jesus said when asked how we should pray to HF. Here's how it COULD be read in this context:

Bold ladies, went to The Lord during General Conference weekend, and said, "Let us have the Priesthood."

The Lord said, it is the latter days and I already have men endowed with the priesthood, I cannot reverse Church doctrine and give thee."

I say unto you, although The Lord will not give them because they are His daughters, yet because of their demands, he will give them the priesthood.

I say unto you, Ask for the priesthood and it will be given you, seek the fullness of God and you shall find, and to her that knocketh I will instruct the Brethren to open the door.

And if not this context, when it is appropriate for us to act with importunity with The Lord as Christ Himself encouraged us to do.

Edited by mormonnewb

Share this post


Link to post

In "Discussion One," entitled "See the Symptoms" (the Church has a disease, apparently) is a game called "Patriarchal Bingo." It's essentially an exercise in cherry-picked griping.

 

 

 

Is use of the word "symptoms" always in reference to a disease?  In other words, are diseases the only things that manifest symptoms?

 

Here she is explicitly publicly accusing the Church of behavior on par with Jim Crow laws. That's troubling.

 

 

To whom?  I've read some of Heather's writing.  I agree with some of her views and disagree with others.  Why are her views troubling to anyone, especially someone who is not her Bishop?  

Edited by sethpayne

Share this post


Link to post

I'll state it again: The same thing I want. They're just more impatient and jumping the gun and have more of a democratic post-modern flare. Again their problem is not their intent, it's their execution and assumptions that's leaving them "kicking against the pricks."

What is a democratic post-modern flare? What is the definition of democratic in your description?

Share this post


Link to post

The catholic church also its ordain women organization but it doesn't get much play in the media nor among the members of the catholic church. Why? Because it is old news now. And catholics in general do not give it much support. However, in the lds church such a 'heretic' organization seems to get a lot of traction. Why? Is the pope praying for guidance about ordaining women in the catholic church? I haven't heard anything about it. I kind of feel sorry for active lds. They are getting so much heresy at the moment that I am surprised that anyone stays active.

Edited by why me

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...