Activism In The Church: Women And Prayer

[The Grimace]

In two weeks we will find out if women will pray in General Conference. If this comes to pass, is this a sign that activism can change the church? And if so, will we see more activism to push the church in directions it may not have moved without advocacy?

[webbles]

But considering that the assignments were made before the activism happened (if you accept the church's spokesperson's word), I don't see how this particular activism changed the church?

[pogi]

And if so, will we see more activism to push the church in directions it may not have moved without advocacy?

Most definitely. The more questions that are raised from activism (both inside and outside the church), the more prayers are taken to God, and inevitably more answers and new direction.

The word of wisdom and blacks holding the priesthood are two easy examples that come to mind.

[The Grimace]

But considering that the assignments were made before the activism happened (if you accept the church's spokesperson's word), I don't see how this particular activism changed the church?

The movement, "Let Women Pray" was started in January and was well-publicized prior to sending letters to the Church.

[The Grimace]

Most definitely. The more questions that are raised from activism (both inside and outside the church), the more prayers are taken to God, and inevitably more answers and new direction.

The word of wisdom and blacks holding the priesthood are two easy examples that come to mind.

Then it seems the people have power to change the church.

[webbles]

The movement, "Let Women Pray" was started in January and was well-publicized prior to sending letters to the Church.

And the decisions on who was talking and praying was made several weeks before that according to this article dated January 15: http://www.sltrib.co...rence.html.csp. See the statement from Scott Trotter.

Edited March 20, 2013 by webbles

[Wanderer7]

It's truly a sad day if it's the case. I don't think activism has ever changed anything in the church. For instance, Emma didn't tell Joseph it was time for the word of wisdom so he needed to pray about it. She just got tired of cleaning up their mess. And as his wife, she had a right to say so to him. I for one hope the brethren will speak out against activism in conference. My main fear is that activism will become the new religion rather than faith and submissiveness. Regardless of what the brethren say about it or other issues, though, it's important to resolve to uncritically stand by them; a stance I hope activism isn't persuading some from doing.

[Duncan]

It's hard to say, some people will pick and pick and pick about everything and then move on to some other cause. But you can't change what you don't acknowledge either so, I guess we wait. I don't see people seeking revelation as activism though. I don't recall Joseph Smith waving banners and all that stuff trying to get an answer from God, he needed to know and when God wanted to answer, he told him.

[pogi]

It's truly a sad day if it's the case. I don't think activism has ever changed anything in the church. For instance, Emma didn't tell Joseph it was time for the word of wisdom so he needed to pray about it. She just got tired of cleaning up their mess. And as his wife, she had a right to say so to him. I for one hope the brethren will speak out against activism in conference. My main fear is that activism will become the new religion rather than faith and submissiveness. Regardless of what the brethren say about it or other issues, though, it's important to resolve to uncritically stand by them; a stance I hope activism isn't persuading some from doing.

Well said! I agree that there is a right way and a wrong way to bring up issues to the brethren, and ultimately we need to sustain their decisions. I don't see anything wrong however with raising questions of concern in respectful and supportive ways. I have no doubt that cultural atmosphere and pressures have always inspired new questions leading to new revelations throughout history.

Edited March 20, 2013 by pogi

[The Grimace]

And the decisions on who was talking and praying was made several weeks before that according to this article dated January 15: http://www.sltrib.co...rence.html.csp. See the statement from Scott Trotter.

So if women pray in GC, it is merely coincidental?

[Duncan]

So if women pray in GC, it is merely coincidental?

have you ever heard of schroedingers cat?!

Edited March 20, 2013 by Duncan

[Wanderer7]

I don't see anything wrong however with raising questions of concern in respectful and supportive ways. I have no doubt that cultural atmosphere and pressures have always inspired new questions leading to new revelations throughout history.

True. But I'm not sure the issue is asking questions or raising concerns. I think it is--should active, public movements be used to get the brethren's attention? My understanding of church policy and structure is that our concerns ought to be voiced to our local leaders, who will then voice legitimate concerns to the higher authorities. I have nothing against that. And unless the concern involves abuse or something clearly harmful, the local authorities' answers to issues ought to be sufficient. Activist groups, on the other hand, seem schismatic. I know for a fact that Emma had problems with more than just tobacco during Joseph's ministry. However, she didn't organize progressive movements to change the church. That, to me, is a major difference between the church and man-made politics. Further, a changing social environment is not the same as an organized movement within the church. I worry that extra-ecclesiastical organizations that seek to promote changes within the church act outside of the sanction of the Lord's established order. That is dangerous ground to be on. I don't see much of a difference between such groups and the schisms that plagued the early church.

Edited March 20, 2013 by Wanderer7

[Calm]

However, she didn't organize progressive movements to change the church.

“When Emma had the women take a public oath with their hands raised in support of virtue, she caused enough consternation in the men’s councils to stop the Relief Society meetings” (Ibid., 174). Church president John Taylor explained that the “reason why the Relief Society did not continue from the first organization was that Emma Smith the Pres. taught the Sisters that the principle of Celestial Marriage as taught and practiced by Joseph Smith was not of God” (174).

[CASteinman]

The movement, "Let Women Pray" was started in January and was well-publicized prior to sending letters to the Church.

I think the Church spokesman said that the decisions regarding the agenda were made months ago -- and said that in February?

[CASteinman]

have you ever heard of schroedingers cat?!

Is that what I hear inside the box?

Oh wait.. .maybe not..

Oh yes.. there it is again. Or was it?

Edited March 20, 2013 by CASteinman

[CASteinman]

So if women pray in GC, it is merely coincidental?

Women already pray in GC. (Not in the audience either).

[CASteinman]

It's truly a sad day if it's the case. I don't think activism has ever changed anything in the church. For instance, Emma didn't tell Joseph it was time for the word of wisdom so he needed to pray about it. She just got tired of cleaning up their mess. And as his wife, she had a right to say so to him. I for one hope the brethren will speak out against activism in conference. My main fear is that activism will become the new religion rather than faith and submissiveness. Regardless of what the brethren say about it or other issues, though, it's important to resolve to uncritically stand by them; a stance I hope activism isn't persuading some from doing.

I am in agreement.

If, for example, I were the one in charge of the Agenda, and I had selected a sister to pray, and then some activist approach came up, I would have moved that sister's prayer at least one conference and maybe two.

Not out of stubbornness but because I would not want to send a message that the Church jumps and runs to every complaint. The minute that is perceived, its going to be "Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war". The office building will be inundated with petitions from all over the world for every possible odd and strange thing.

Plus, it develops a dysfunctional way for the brethren to communicate with the members.

I have to recognize, at the same time, that the sheer size of the Church must make the two way communication process much harder for them.

Edited March 20, 2013 by CASteinman

[tyler90az]

The future of activism* causing the brethren to be aware of problems and raise it to God or just change policy is not in the brethrens hands. It is, truly, in the activists hands. If those activists who petitioned the brethren and prayed to the Lord want to continue being successful activists, results need to be seen. The activists need to be more dedicated to the Lord and his church then ever. Also, all those who said they would reactivate or join if changes were made should. If nothing happens after the change you can expect future appeals to be tossed out.

*Activism in its purest form is making people aware of problems. The first step to change is awareness.

[EllenMaksoud]

In two weeks we will find out if women will pray in General Conference. If this comes to pass, is this a sign that activism can change the church? And if so, will we see more activism to push the church in directions it may not have moved without advocacy?

I have heard in round about ways that there is a lot of activism on various issues happening in the church. The feeling that our church is alive and able to adapt to new knowledge is one of the factors that convinced me that this is the true church.

[CASteinman]

The future of activism* causing the brethren to be aware of problems and raise it to God or just change policy is not in the brethrens hands. It is, truly, in the activists hands. If those activists who petitioned the brethren and prayed to the Lord want to continue being successful activists, results need to be seen. The activists need to be more dedicated to the Lord and his church then ever. Also, all those who said they would reactivate or join if changes were made should. If nothing happens after the change you can expect future appeals to be tossed out.

*Activism in its purest form is making people aware of problems. The first step to change is awareness.

This is a very interesting post.

One thing though, you say: "all those who said they would reactivate or join if changes were made should. If nothing happens after the change you can expect future appeals to be tossed out."

I really don't think it will work that way. I don't believe this is just a matter of "what is popular". I think its a matter of "what is right".

[Darren10]

Most definitely. The more questions that are raised from activism (both inside and outside the church), the more prayers are taken to God, and inevitably more answers and new direction.

The word of wisdom and blacks holding the priesthood are two easy examples that come to mind.

My understanding is that the brethren always struggled prayerfully over blacks and the priesthood and that the 1978 revelation came at a time when activism counter to the Church died down a bit and began to pick up on women's rights.

Well said! I agree that there is a right way and a wrong way to bring up issues to the brethren, and ultimately we need to sustain their decisions. I don't see anything wrong however with raising questions of concern in respectful and supportive ways. I have no doubt that cultural atmosphere and pressures have always inspired new questions leading to new revelations throughout history.

I would agree with you here. The more I ponder and study the nature of the Spirit, the more I'm convinced that our personal experiences play a key part in how the Spriit is manifested in us / to us.

[webbles]

So if women pray in GC, it is merely coincidental?

That's what it is looking like.

[pogi]

True. But I'm not sure the issue is asking questions or raising concerns. I think it is--should active, public movements be used to get the brethren's attention? My understanding of church policy and structure is that our concerns ought to be voiced to our local leaders, who will then voice legitimate concerns to the higher authorities. I have nothing against that. And unless the concern involves abuse or something clearly harmful, the local authorities' answers to issues ought to be sufficient.

As much as I sustain my local authorities, they simply are not going to make a difference in getting women to pray in conference.

I worry that extra-ecclesiastical organizations that seek to promote changes within the church act outside of the sanction of the Lord's established order.

I do not see this as a threat to the sanctioned and established order of the church. The decisions of the church will continue from the top down.

That is dangerous ground to be on. I don't see much of a difference between such groups and the schisms that plagued the early church.

I suppose it is dangerous if you expect the change you want, and do not sustain your leaders, but these people are in danger anyway. I also believe there is a danger in not voicing your concerns and in not feeling heard.

Edited March 20, 2013 by pogi

[Tacenda]

I have heard in round about ways that there is a lot of activism on various issues happening in the church. The feeling that our church is alive and able to adapt to new knowledge is one of the factors that convinced me that this is the true church.

Sorta makes it like one big family. And our Father & Mother in heaven are trying to hear us out and making changes as we go along. Not everything being set in stone, a living breathing church. Thanks for this insight Ellen. Edited March 20, 2013 by Tacenda

[Darren10]

So if women pray in GC, it is merely coincidental?

first off, it's not going to happen. There will NOT be a woman praying in General Conference this April. If, by the very slim chance it does happen (and I'm perfectly OK if it does) than, yes, it'll be a coincidence.