Watershed Moment in General Conference?

[consiglieri]

After some reflection, I think a watershed moment may have been achieved in the Saturday morning session of general conference in Elder Cook's talk.

He spoke of a relief society president who received revelation for the priesthood holders in the ward and shared it with the bishop who ran with it and brought so many of the priesthood holders back into activity.

This was remarkable.

First, it completely undermined the tropes we have heard for years about revelation being appropriate solely for those people over whom one has stewardship. Under this view, only the bishop (or possibly elder's quorum president) would have authority to receive revelation for reactivating priesthood holders. The relief society president was completely out of line in the revelation she received under this view and should have been reprimanded accordingly.

But Elder Cook not only sanctioned her revelation, but canonized it in a general conference talk.

I think it possible that this talk will be looked back on in future years as a turning point in women being allowed to hold the priesthood.

Any thoughts?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[BookofMormonLuvr]

After some reflection, I think a watershed moment may have been achieved in the Saturday morning session of general conference in Elder Cook's talk.

He spoke of a relief society president who received revelation for the priesthood holders in the ward and shared it with the bishop who ran with it and brought so many of the priesthood holders back into activity.

This was remarkable.

First, it completely undermined the tropes we have heard for years about revelation being appropriate solely for those people over whom one has stewardship. Under this view, only the bishop (or possibly elder's quorum president) would have authority to receive revelation for reactivating priesthood holders. The relief society president was completely out of line in the revelation she received under this view and should have been reprimanded accordingly.

But Elder Cook not only sanctioned her revelation, but canonized it in a general conference talk.

I think it possible that this talk will be looked back on in future years as a turning point in women being allowed to hold the priesthood.

Any thoughts?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

It seems from other comments given in conference, that this revelation by this bold RS President, and the resultant program that was put into practice in her Stake, is being implemented church wide.

[Hamba Tuhan]

We haven't received broadcasts of Conference yet in my part of the world, but, for as long as I've been attending them, both local and worldwide leadership training meetings have encouraged all members of ward and stake councils to speak up in counselling together for the greater good, and leaders have been reminded that revelation usually does not occur in a vacuum.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

After some reflection, I think a watershed moment may have been achieved in the Saturday morning session of general conference in Elder Cook's talk.

Any thoughts?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Did you catch Elder Uchtdorf comments in Preisthood? For some odd reason I thought of you when he was talking.

[mercyngrace]

I think it possible that this talk will be looked back on in future years as a turning point in women being allowed to hold the priesthood.

Any thoughts?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Or perhaps it show that women don't need the priesthood to receive revelation...

[LDS Guy 1986]

I think it possible that this talk will be looked back on in future years as a turning point in women being allowed to hold the priesthood.

I think whatever will happen is up to the Lord to decide and to reveal to his prophet Thomas S Monson, and any insinuation about it will only bring harm and not help.

After some reflection, I think a watershed moment may have been achieved in the Saturday morning session of general conference in Elder Cook's talk.

He spoke of a relief society president who received revelation for the priesthood holders in the ward and shared it with the bishop who ran with it and brought so many of the priesthood holders back into activity.

First, it completely undermined the tropes we have heard for years about revelation being appropriate solely for those people over whom one has stewardship. Under this view, only the bishop (or possibly elder's quorum president) would have authority to receive revelation for reactivating priesthood holders. The relief society president was completely out of line in the revelation she received under this view and should have been reprimanded accordingly.

But Elder Cook not only sanctioned her revelation, but canonized it in a general conference talk.

I do not think that this is the "watershed" moment you try and make it be, as Relief Society President that Sister does have a responsibility to look out for the spiritual well being of every person that resides within the ward boundaries. Also if these brethren are less active and married to sisters who are in here relief society her revelation is about those under her watch since it is her responsibility to look out for the spiritual progression of here sisters in Relief Society. Inactive husbands harm the eternal progress of here sisters so receiving revelation to help reactivate inactive priesthood, so receiving revelation to reactivate these brethren is not only helping the priesthood but also helping here married Sisters in need.

Also I think of the single brethren that were reactivated through this revelation, these men once again worthy of a temple marriage, provide here single sisters the chance to receive eternal marriages and continue to spiritually progress. We here counciled several times in General Conference to stop procrastinating marriage, that single Brethren who wait to get married are not obeying the will of the Lord, that waiting to get married hurts the spiritual progression of both single men and women. So it looks like this revelation fit perfectly with the will of the Lord to see his worthy sons and daughter marry in the temple as well.

So ultimately this sister was receiving revelation about those she is assigned over, without this revelation dozens of married and single sisters would be without the blessings of a worthy Melchizedek Priesthood holder in there household. Her efforts effected the Priesthood, but the revelation was focused on the Sisters in here Relief Society most I feel.

[bluebell]

I loved elder Cook's talk. I thought it was an essential message.

However, i didn't see the inspiration of the RS pres. to be going against the grain of receiving revelation only for those for whom we have stewardship, as the RS pres. mentioned specifically the wives of these men and how their activation would benefit those for whom the RS pres. had stewardship and would hopefully allow such families to eventually go to the temple.

In my understanding, the activation of those men was as much a part of the RS stewardship as it was the bishop's or anyone else in a priesthood leadership calling because it directly impacted many women as well as men.

If anything, i think the watershed moment was not on the order of revelation but on the reality that women should be equals in ward council and not treated guests. I'm sure this has been the case in many wards already but i've been in a couple where the women leaders were treated as second class citizens within the meeting (never within the ward but only within the meeting itself). In such cases, i think it's awesome that the Apostles are reminding the men AND the women of the equality of their roles in such matters.

[bluebell]

Or perhaps it show that women don't need the priesthood to receive revelation...

Exactly. I think it's good for both men and women to be reminded of that.

[LDS Guy 1986]

If anything, i think the watershed moment was not on the order of revelation but on the reality that women should be equals in ward council and not treated guests.

I don't think you can call this something news since the Church has been putting a strong emphasis this in there leadership training and Church administration manuals.

I know that there will always be a few stubborns ward councils out there but they are operating, against the accepted policy of the Church not with it. So this is not a change of policy only a reinforcement of current policy, IMO.

[LDS Guy 1986]

Or perhaps it show that women don't need the priesthood to receive revelation...

I agree, and I think that there are thousands of LDS single mothers out there at agree with you as well!

[bookofmormontruth]

After some reflection, I think a watershed moment may have been achieved in the Saturday morning session of general conference in Elder Cook's talk.

He spoke of a relief society president who received revelation for the priesthood holders in the ward and shared it with the bishop who ran with it and brought so many of the priesthood holders back into activity.

This was remarkable.

First, it completely undermined the tropes we have heard for years about revelation being appropriate solely for those people over whom one has stewardship. Under this view, only the bishop (or possibly elder's quorum president) would have authority to receive revelation for reactivating priesthood holders. The relief society president was completely out of line in the revelation she received under this view and should have been reprimanded accordingly.

But Elder Cook not only sanctioned her revelation, but canonized it in a general conference talk.

I think it possible that this talk will be looked back on in future years as a turning point in women being allowed to hold the priesthood.

Any thoughts?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

The only thing "remarkable" is that you were awake during conference. Or were you?

For this is what Elder Cook really said in regards to a stake conference in Tonga and the miracle of the reactivation of 63 men and their ordination to the priesthood.

She received no revelation - she was only stating a fact. She asked if it would be appropriate to say something during a stake reactivation meeting and as she spoke the Spirit confirmed to the stake president that what she was saying was true. She then explained what was going on with these men and then it was thoroughly discussed in the meeting and an action plan was made in reactivating them - all under the guidance of the priesthood and Spirit.

We should be paying attention to the simple and inspired messages instead of looking for "watershed moments". Just a thought.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

The only thing "remarkable" is that you were awake during conference. Or were you?

For this is what Elder Cook really said in regards to a stake conference in Tonga and the miracle of the reactivation of 63 men and their ordination to the priesthood.

She received no revelation - she was only stating a fact. She asked if it would be appropriate to say something during a stake reactivation meeting and as she spoke the Spirit confirmed to the stake president that what she was saying was true. She then explained what was going on with these men and then it was thoroughly discussed in the meeting and an action plan was made in reactivating them - all under the guidance of the priesthood and Spirit.

We should be paying attention to the simple and inspired messages instead of looking for "watershed moments". Just a thought.

Why would her insight, given though the Holy Spirit, into the condition of inactivity in her Stake, not be considered revelation? How is her insight any less a revelation then Pres. Hinckley sitting in a taxi cab realizing that building smaller, less expensive Temples would make them more accesible to the general membership?

[LDS Guy 1986]

We should be paying attention to the simple and inspired messages instead of looking for "watershed moments". Just a thought.

I think this was one of those simple and inspired moments you were talking about!

[bookofmormontruth]

Why would her insight, given though the Holy Spirit, into the condition of inactivity in her Stake, not be considered revelation? How is her insight any less a revelation then Pres. Hinckley sitting in a taxi cab realizing that building smaller, less expensive Temples would make them more accesible to the general membership?

It was revelation, but she didn't receive revelation for others out of her stewardship as the OP was falsely implying.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

It was revelation, but she didn't receive revelation for others out of her stewardship as the OP was falsely implying.

Apparently, though, she did. It seems the Priesthood leaders, up to that point, had been failing miserably to reactivate their own. Finally, the Lord had to use this humble women to tell the Priesthood what they were not seeing. IMHO, she did recieve revelation for the Priesthood leaders of her Stake.

[bookofmormontruth]

Why would her insight, given though the Holy Spirit, into the condition of inactivity in her Stake, not be considered revelation? How is her insight any less a revelation then Pres. Hinckley sitting in a taxi cab realizing that building smaller, less expensive Temples would make them more accesible to the general membership?

Unrelated to the thread.

If you believe Pres. Hinckley received revelation in regards to smaller temples, why are you not then a member of the Lord's Church? I can arrange for missionaries to be there today!

[BookofMormonLuvr]

Unrelated to the thread.

If you believe Pres. Hinckley received revelation in regards to smaller temples, why are you not then a member of the Lord's Church? I can arrange for missionaries to be there today!

You, apparently, have misunderstood.

[LDS Guy 1986]

Apparently, though, she did. It seems the Priesthood leaders, up to that point, had been failing miserably to reactivate their own. Finally, the Lord had to use this humble women to tell the Priesthood what they were not seeing. IMHO, she did recieve revelation for the Priesthood leaders of her Stake.

But that revelation was about her Sisters needing to have worthy Priesthood leaders in there homes, so ultimately the source of the revelation was the desire to see her fellow sisters receive the full blessings of the Priesthood in there homes, which is here direct responsibility as RS Pres.

She simply receive revelation for her fellow sisters benift, that needed to be addressed by the priesthood leadership.

[LDS Guy 1986]

Unrelated to the thread.

If you believe Pres. Hinckley received revelation in regards to smaller temples, why are you not then a member of the Lord's Church? I can arrange for missionaries to be there today!

I don't think BookofMormonLuvr was saying he believed that President Hinkley received revelation, only that how can a member of the LDS Church believe Hinckley received revelation and not this Relief Society President.

What it comes down to is many will not take the talk into the proper context that the revelation was received because the President had concern for the welfare of here fellow sisters who's husbands were inactive.

She wasn't receiving revelation for the Priesthood Leadership, she received revelation for her fellow Sisters that needed the assistance of the priesthood leadership.

[bookofmormontruth]

Apparently, though, she did. It seems the Priesthood leaders, up to that point, had been failing miserably to reactivate their own. Finally, the Lord had to use this humble women to tell the Priesthood what they were not seeing. IMHO, she did recieve revelation for the Priesthood leaders of her Stake.

That is definitely not fair to say about the priesthood leaders, but yes a humble women is always needed to bring insight to the priesthood for a man and a woman are equal in the eyes of the Lord.

She did not receive revelation for the priesthood leaders. Please watch and listen to the talk before coming to that conclusion.

In addition, that is not how it works in the Lord's Church with revelation - a man with the priesthood can't receive revelation for his priesthood leaders either. There is an order of all things, including revelation.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

But that revelation was about her Sisters needing to have worthy Priesthood leaders in there homes, so ultimately the source of the revelation was the desire to see her fellow sisters receive the full blessings of the Priesthood in there homes, which is here direct responsibility as RS Pres.

She simply receive revelation for her fellow sisters benift, that needed to be addressed by the priesthood leadership.

I didn't hear that in the talk, I am hearing that here from people who don't seem to want to acknowledge that a woman recieved revelation for men higher in rank. Elder Cook was clear that she gave insight into why many of the men were not more involved/active.

We need to examine to text of the talk when it comes out.

[bookofmormontruth]

You, apparently, have misunderstood.

I know, but still you are more than welcomed!

[BookofMormonLuvr]

I know, but still you are more than welcomed!

I am sure my Mom has people on speed dial in case I show interest in returning. Thanks for the offer though.

[Anijen]

If she received revelation as some as pointed out that undermined the priesthood keys of the Bishop. I say so what! How is that threatening? I mean she went before her leaders and discussed it. IMO she did not undermine them in anyway. She has right to receive revelation like we all do she then went before her priesthood leaders and discussed it. From my perspective it was pleasing to the Lord and is what she was suppose to do in our Ward Council meetings.

[cinepro]

Here is how the Church teaches about the scope of revelation in regards to our stewardships:

Explain that every worthy Church member has the right to receive revelation, but each of us is given revelation based on our responsibilities and stewardship.

Who has the right to receive revelation for the whole Church? (The prophet.)

For the ward? (The bishop.)

For the ward Primary? (The ward Primary president.)

For your family? (Your father and mother.)

For you individually? (You.)

Emphasize that each class member, if he or she is trying to live righteously, has the right and privilege to receive personal revelation.

I'm not sure the liberal interpretation being promoted in this thread has any basis in Church teachings.

If a Relief Society President is able to receive revelation on what the Priesthood leadership should do because of the relationship between the Relief Society sisters and their husbands, then why shouldn't I, as a parent, be able to receive revelation for the Primary since my kids are part of Primary? Why can't the parents of teenagers receive revelation for the Youth programs, since it affects their children and families?

I didn't hear Elder Cook's story, but based on what has been said in this thread, it does seem to have broadened the principles of revelation and stewardships beyond what has been traditionally taught in the Church.