Watershed Moment in General Conference?

[zerinus]

I would say Comedy of Errors but I reserve that description for threads with more red ink.

I like Paul's best:

1 Corinthians 14:

34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.

[LeSellers]

The Taming of the Shrews ?

Actually, I was thinking of "Much Ado about Nothing."

Or, possibly, As you Like It, or not.

Lehi

[mercyngrace]

I like Paul's best:

1 Corinthians 14:

34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.

I didn't know there was a Shakespearean comedy by that name...

Par for the course, your response does not match the query. We're talking about William Shakespeare, Zerinus, the one who penned this line:

Men of few words are the best men.

[USU78]

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.

JSJr's greatest teaching regarding organizational governance was that of governance by councils. No Prophet or Stake President or Bishop governs without councilors. No First Presidency or Stake Presidency or Bishopric governs without councils: The Council of the Twelve Apostles, the Stake High Council, and the Ward Council (and its subsidiaries, the Welfare Council, etc).

Every member of those councils is called to a position in the councils to provide counsel to the governing body. Each is entitled to revelation in connection with that calling.

Councils rarely make errors individuals might make. Councils glean the collective wisdom and revelatory acuity of numbers of people before making decisions.

How is this story disturbing or even remarkable, other than as a "just so" story for when things work in council the way they're supposed to work?

[mfbukowski]

I didn't know there was a Shakespearean comedy by that name...

Par for the course, you're response does not match the query. We're talking about William Shakespeare, Zerinus, the one who penned this line:

Men of few words are the best men.

For some reason this reminds me of an old joke

A ghetto kid goes to war.

He has always carried a straight razor in his boot, and now that he is in battle, he has made it extra sharp.

Soon he finds himself in a tight situation- his position is over run by the enemy and soon he is engaged in hand-to-hand combat.

He is rushed by an enemy with a fixed bayonet- the enemy misses, and the kid pulls out his razor, and makes a few swipes at the enemy's neck.

The enemy steps back, a little dazed, but then says in broken English: "Aha American! You miss!"

The kid shoots back: "Oh yeah? Just wait til you shake your head!"

[ERayR]

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

Or perhaps he was illustrating that the Relief Society Presidents stewardship included all ward members. Or perhaps that a ward council should act as a ward council instead as a group of individual organizations.

[USU78]

Again, priesthood-led councils with female members have been a part of Church administration long before the publication of the new manuals.

This thread makes me think of the title of a famous Shakespeare comedy.

Henry V.

Loved the newer movie with Branaugh.

Olivier always makes my kidneys sore.

[russianwolfe]

Here is my take on this.

First, the RS Pres. did receive revelation for the council. She was entitled, being a member of the councile. She did not receive revelation for the Stake Pres. That she was not entitled to. But being a member of the council and receiving revelation and presenting it to the council was right and proper. Only the Stake Pres. had the keys and authority to implement what the council decides. I think this is where some people are mistaken. Any member of council can receive revelation for the council. Why else would they be called to the council? I don't think the Lord calls anyone to be a yes man.

Consider, for a moment, a council made up of 4 people: Stake Pres., High Councilman, Bishop, and RS Pres. Each will consider the problems that the council is there to discuss. Each will have their own ideas based on their experience and knowledge of how to solve the problem. I don't believe God will confine the revelation to just the council leader. But I do believe that revelation will come to the one prepared to received it but it will only be for the council. It is up to the council to decide what to do and then it will be up to the Priesthood authority over the council to decide if it will implement what the council has decided.

It is the privilege and some say the duty of members to receive revelation for the callings that they are serving in. If they are serving on a council they can receive revelation as it pertains to that council. As someone pointed out, the church is governed by councils.

That is my take. Your mileage my differ.

Marvin

[mfbukowski]

Here is my take on this.

First, the RS Pres. did receive revelation for the council. She was entitled, being a member of the councile. She did not receive revelation for the Stake Pres. That she was not entitled to. But being a member of the council and receiving revelation and presenting it to the council was right and proper. Only the Stake Pres. had the keys and authority to implement what the council decides. I think this is where some people are mistaken. Any member of council can receive revelation for the council. Why else would they be called to the council? I don't think the Lord calls anyone to be a yes man.

Consider, for a moment, a council made up of 4 people: Stake Pres., High Councilman, Bishop, and RS Pres. Each will consider the problems that the council is there to discuss. Each will have their own ideas based on their experience and knowledge of how to solve the problem. I don't believe God will confine the revelation to just the council leader. But I do believe that revelation will come to the one prepared to received it but it will only be for the council. It is up to the council to decide what to do and then it will be up to the Priesthood authority over the council to decide if it will implement what the council has decided.

It is the privilege and some say the duty of members to receive revelation for the callings that they are serving in. If they are serving on a council they can receive revelation as it pertains to that council. As someone pointed out, the church is governed by councils.

That is my take. Your mileage my differ.

Marvin

Absolutely right. That is the way councils work. Even in the last Worldwide training, they mentioned the fact that in the Ward Council the bishop is to listen to the council of every person there and then make the final decision. Everyone contributes. It is commonplace in wards I have been in to have women come up with outstanding ideas which are then implemented.

Bottom line is that there is no "watershed" here, in my experience. It is the way things are always done, except now perhaps it is being acknowledged more clearly and explicitly.

[Hamba Tuhan]

Bottom line is that there is no "watershed" here, in my experience. It is the way things are always done....

No way, dude. Clearly you and I and everyone else, except for Consiglieri and possibly Cinepro, have just been living and serving in apostate wards and branches, stakes, districts, and missions our entire Church lives. (In my case, I've lived on three different continents and in five different islands, and every single time I've had the misfortune of ending up in an apostate ward/branch.) Go back and check your old CHI. Women were to keep silent in all Church meetings and were understood to be beneath spiritual gifts such as the receipt of revelation. Therefore, Elder Cook's talk was an obvious watershed, with the ordination of women just around the corner. We just can't see it because we've been blinded by cumulative decades of experience in renegade congregations and councils.

[USU78]

No way, dude. Clearly you and I and everyone else, except for Consiglieri and possibly Cinepro, have just been living and serving in apostate wards and branches, stakes, districts, and missions our entire Church lives. (In my case, I've lived on three different continents and in five different islands, and every single time I've had the misfortune of ending up in an apostate ward/branch.) Go back and check your old CHI. Women were to keep silent in all Church meetings and were understood to be beneath spiritual gifts such as the receipt of revelation. Therefore, Elder Cook's talk was an obvious watershed, with the ordination of women just around the corner. We just can't see it because we've been blinded by cumulative decades of experience in renegade congregations and councils.

Anybody else here suspect that consig has been pulling our collective leg?

[bookofmormontruth]

No way, dude. Clearly you and I and everyone else, except for Consiglieri and possibly Cinepro, have just been living and serving in apostate wards and branches, stakes, districts, and missions our entire Church lives. (In my case, I've lived on three different continents and in five different islands, and every single time I've had the misfortune of ending up in an apostate ward/branch.) Go back and check your old CHI. Women were to keep silent in all Church meetings and were understood to be beneath spiritual gifts such as the receipt of revelation. Therefore, Elder Cook's talk was an obvious watershed, with the ordination of women just around the corner. We just can't see it because we've been blinded by cumulative decades of experience in renegade congregations and councils.

ROFL! That was classic, thanks!

[Kenngo1969]

Again, priesthood-led councils with female members have been a part of Church administration long before the publication of the new manuals.

This thread makes me think of the title of a famous Shakespeare comedy.

I bet I know which one it is ... or, I mean, I would bet I know which one it is, if I were a betting man!

If it wouldn't cast undue aspersions on Consiglieri's intelligence, I might liken this thread to an utterance of one of Billy Shakespeare's characters (scroll down to MacBeth's third exchange with Seyton), part of which Billy Faulkner took as the title to one of his novels.

[Kenngo1969]

Anybody else here suspect that consig has been pulling our collective leg?

Noooo, whatever gave you that idea???

[Kenngo1969]

The Taming of the Shrews ?

[sigh!]

[sigh!]

[Tears roll ...]

[sigh!]

[mfbukowski]

Anybody else here suspect that consig has been pulling our collective leg?

I think not.

I guess he thinks our computers will not be able to watch his antics at the trailer park. He earlier summarized this thread over there this way:

I will have to run over there momentarily and see what is going on.

From what I read before I headed out for lunch, though, I shared the same view that many posters are determined to read nothing into any talk that does not challenge their previously held ideas.

I find especially creative the idea that the Relief Society President was actually receiving revelation for the benefit of the sisters who were married to these inactive priesthood holders.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

They are taking the idea of a "watershed moment" quite seriously over there.

But you know what?

I really don't care any more. I finished High School, uh, let's just say several....... DECADES ago.

[mfbukowski]

Another gem from "over there":

I just hope Salt Lake had a clue what they were doing when they included sisters on the council.

They have elevated them to a status they never had before and have given them authority over people they never had before.

Surely somebody could see this coming . . . ?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[USU78]

I bet I know which one it is ... or, I mean, I would bet I know which one it is, if I were a betting man!

If it wouldn't cast undue aspersions on Consiglieri's intelligence, I might liken this thread to an utterance of one of Billy Shakespeare's characters (scroll down to MacBeth's third exchange with Seyton), part of which Billy Faulkner took as the title to one of his novels.

I used to work with the handicapped quite a bit. Still do some, but my body can't stand the exertion any more for anything beyond short stints.

That "Tomowwow and tomowwow and tomowwow!" always reminds me of the sorts of singsongy chants you hear all the time. My own son invented a song he sings about his best friend, Cody: Only one word in the libretto, and the score's kind of indistinct and repetitive, but dang it! It's his and it means something to him. Macbeth's own lack of humanity fails to see that all that "sound and fury" signify something of real value and profound emotional content for the tale-teller. His blindness to the idiot's humanity is of a kind with the moral blindness that brings him down, and not the Wyrd Sisters' fickleness. The dramatic irony in that speech is stunning when staged properly.

USU "There you go again, got me talking Shakespeare -- I hate it when that happens" 78

[mfbukowski]

No way, dude. Clearly you and I and everyone else, except for Consiglieri and possibly Cinepro, have just been living and serving in apostate wards and branches, stakes, districts, and missions our entire Church lives. (In my case, I've lived on three different continents and in five different islands, and every single time I've had the misfortune of ending up in an apostate ward/branch.) Go back and check your old CHI. Women were to keep silent in all Church meetings and were understood to be beneath spiritual gifts such as the receipt of revelation. Therefore, Elder Cook's talk was an obvious watershed, with the ordination of women just around the corner. We just can't see it because we've been blinded by cumulative decades of experience in renegade congregations and councils.

As usual,

[mfbukowski]

I used to work with the handicapped quite a bit. Still do some, but my body can't stand the exertion any more for anything beyond short stints.

That "Tomowwow and tomowwow and tomowwow!" always reminds me of the sorts of singsongy chants you hear all the time. My own son invented a song he sings about his best friend, Cody: Only one word in the libretto, and the score's kind of indistinct and repetitive, but dang it! It's his and it means something to him. Macbeth's own lack of humanity fails to see that all that "sound and fury" signify something of real value and profound emotional content for the tale-teller. His blindness to the idiot's humanity is of a kind with the moral blindness that brings him down, and not the Wyrd Sisters' fickleness. The dramatic irony in that speech is stunning when staged properly.

USU "There you go again, got me talking Shakespeare -- I hate it when that happens" 78

Hey, you is one of them edjumacated mormunz, huh?

[USU78]

Hey, you is one of them edjumacated mormunz, huh?

Nope.

Just talking about consig's thread-making activities.

[bookofmormontruth]

Another gem from "over there":

Wow! I found the "over there" with a google search and I don't even have words for it.

After reading a few topics, I feel like my temple recommend is in jeopardy now.

[Maidservant]

On the matter of women holding priesthood.

I have priesthood. I don't have priesthood in the Church. And I appreciate that.

It might help to realize that the Church is the Gathering of Israel. The Church constitutes the GATE . . . the very, very beginning entrance . . . to the kingdom of God. Thus, those who participate in the church are servants at the GATE . . . not a hierarchy over people. All the things that happen in the Church administratively and and salvifically are the first, or lowest, or weakest step in the covenant . . . not overlords. The Church (and its priesthood) is the INTERFACE between the kingdom of God on the one hand, and the world on the other. In other words, it has the potential to be a battle zone, and there ought not to be a necessity of sending daughters to that interface/battle zone, as a matter of salvific duty (although there may still be opportunities to participate for those who desire).

Obviously both men and women participate in the leadership and responsbility of this great and wonderful matter, for a variety of reasons.

However, it is my understanding that men are responsible for the blood and sins of this generation and this is connected with their priesthood in the Church. You can keep that, thanks. I appreciate the gift I have in not being required to have a (Church) priesthood in order to progress further in the kingdom of God. You brothers give that gift to us sisters by taking it on yourself -- leaving us free, of course, to create life and to create the inner(further, higher, holy of holies) portion of the kingdom of God. Thank you!

[mfbukowski]

However, it is my understanding that men are responsible for the blood and sins of this generation and this is connected with their priesthood in the Church. You can keep that, thanks. I appreciate the gift I have in not being required to have a (Church) priesthood in order to progress further in the kingdom of God. You brothers give that gift to us sisters by taking it on yourself -- leaving us free, of course, to create life and to create the inner(further, higher, holy of holies) portion of the kingdom of God. Thank you!

Wow.

[mfbukowski]

Wow! I found the "over there" with a google search and I don't even have words for it.

After reading a few topics, I feel like my temple recommend is in jeopardy now.

The smell comes off after a few showers.