The "Ordain Women" Website

[bluebell]

What if you're a single mother and don't want to call your home teacher, bishop, neighbor everytime your child needs a blessing. The women use to annoint other sisters and give blessings. This changed when it was decided that you didn't need to annoint the specfic area that was a problem and changed to annointing the head for everything. That's when they no longer needed women to annoint other women. I recently learned about this... pretty interesting and explains alot.

As I understand it, even when women performed healing blessings they did not use the priesthood to do so.

I also think i remember reading that there were apostles who did not agree with women doing such blessings.

[Brenda]

What if you're a single mother and don't want to call your home teacher, bishop, neighbor everytime your child needs a blessing. The women use to annoint other sisters and give blessings. This changed when it was decided that you didn't need to annoint the specfic area that was a problem and changed to annointing the head for everything. That's when they no longer needed women to annoint other women. I recently learned about this... pretty interesting and explains alot.

I can understand not wanting to make that call, possibly because you don't want to bother people. But there will always be things we cannot do for ourselves, when we need to reach out for help. This is one of those times, and it is an opportunity for blessings for all involved. Your home teacher, or bishop will be blessed for coming. His family, believe it or not -- and I speak from experience -- will be blessed for the sacrifice of his time. You will be blessed by knowing that you are an important part of your ward family, and your child will be blessed as he learns about charity and serving others.

[Thankful]

I can understand not wanting to make that call, possibly because you don't want to bother people. But there will always be things we cannot do for ourselves, when we need to reach out for help. This is one of those times, and it is an opportunity for blessings for all involved. Your home teacher, or bishop will be blessed for coming. His family, believe it or not -- and I speak from experience -- will be blessed for the sacrifice of his time. You will be blessed by knowing that you are an important part of your ward family, and your child will be blessed as he learns about charity and serving others.

But your child will also receive FEWER blessings. I speak from experience. You will call a neighbor and everyone will be blessed for the service experience sometimes.

But there will be many times when it is 2 am and you won't call. When you are at breaking point and asking for help is hard. You'll decide even if it feels like a crisis for you, your child is not facing imminent death, and it's "just" a comfort blessing. You won't feel like you can bother the home teacher at 2 am for that reason, even when you are not ok. And you and your child will miss out on the blessings that could come from the priesthood.

It is hard to be responsible for accessing priesthood help for your family, but not having the ability to do so in some situations when it's needed. Yes, we mothers use our faith and our prayers, and that's powerful. But if faith is all we need, why even have the priesthood? If it's something more, there are people who have less access to the blessings of it, I assure you.

[Calm]

And what happens in cases where the home teacher or bishop or closest priesthood holder is an hour or more away? Can't get there that day even? Or doesn't have a car and must rely on public transit? Or is at work? Not all home teachers in the world are neighbours or easily available. Not all home teachers will respond to a call for help with a "yes, be there as soon as possible" even.

There is also the cases that occur when one is traveling.

Edited March 25, 2013 by calmoriah

[Senator]

Yes, I realize that. Why does it matter whose hands are on their head? It's not about her. It's not about you. It's about the miracle of faith, and the power of God to heal. Just as it's not about who blesses or passes the sacrament. It's about the ordinance and how it affects the lives of those who receive it.

Shouldn't we stop focusing on ourselves and instead focus on the blessings?

Exactly!

[Tacenda]

Exactly!

Then women can bless their own children since it doesn't matter who lays their hands on the head?

[Brenda]

But your child will also receive FEWER blessings. I speak from experience. You will call a neighbor and everyone will be blessed for the service experience sometimes.

But there will be many times when it is 2 am and you won't call. When you are at breaking point and asking for help is hard. You'll decide even if it feels like a crisis for you, your child is not facing imminent death, and it's "just" a comfort blessing. You won't feel like you can bother the home teacher at 2 am for that reason, even when you are not ok. And you and your child will miss out on the blessings that could come from the priesthood.

It is hard to be responsible for accessing priesthood help for your family, but not having the ability to do so in some situations when it's needed. Yes, we mothers use our faith and our prayers, and that's powerful. But if faith is all we need, why even have the priesthood? If it's something more, there are people who have less access to the blessings of it, I assure you.

And what happens in cases where the home teacher or bishop or closest priesthood holder is an hour or more away? Can't get there that day even? Or doesn't have a car and must rely on public transit? Or is at work? Not all home teachers in the world are neighbours or easily available. Not all home teachers will respond to a call for help with a "yes, be there as soon as possible" even.

There is also the cases that occur when one is traveling.

I think what happens in those situations, is that Heavenly Father, who loves your child even more than you do, will not withhold blessings because the priesthood is not close by. He understands your plight. IMO, a mother's prayer over her child, has direct, take-the-fast-lane access to God. I am a mom too. My most powerful and profoundly spiritual experiences have come during my prayers for one of my kids. The Lord has never let me down. That, and going to the temple .... have been my greatest helps in raising children.

So I do understand the question of -- why do we need healing blessings if we can just pray? I've wondered this too. And I don't have a great answer. I guess we should utilize the priesthood whenever possible. And when it is not possible, the Lord will not penalize us. It's really all about knowing and accepting the Lord's will, and above all, faith.

[bluebell]

Then women can bless their own children since it doesn't matter who lays their hands on the head?

I think Brenda's point is that it shouldn't matter to US who's hands are used.

Obviously it has always mattered to God who uses his authority, He just hasn't told us why.

[Stone holm]

The lines of protestors were rather long and were carrying placards and signs -- most were directed at our anti-feminist viewpoints, I remember at St. Louis they had even hired a plane to fly overhead carrying a banner. One of the speakers, I believe at the St. Louis Area Conference was George Romney, Mitt Romney's father, and I remember my wife reacting badly to his talk (she was definitely not a feminist and wouldn't have dreamed of questioning the Brethern on anything) because she felt he was way too political. In that same era the Church had designated George Romney's wife to be its spokesperson in the anti-ERA fight on the various talk shows that covering the subject. I believe she was specifically called in to combat some apostate woman from Florida, as I recall, who was attacking the Church over its anti-ERA stance. Its been so long ago that it is hard to remember the details. But to say that the Church was not being subjected to pressure from the feminists, I think is a bit hard to swallow. Sorry if this is considered an insufficient CRA

[Tacenda]

I think Brenda's point is that it shouldn't matter to US who's hands are used.

Obviously it has always mattered to God who uses his authority, He just hasn't told us why.

Bluebell my mother told me long ago (during the ERA movement) why the men hold the Priesthood and women don't. I never understood why she was telling me since I didn't care one way or the other. Really never felt jealous of or less than a man. So didn't understand. Now looking back on it, maybe she was one to have questioned why and maybe this is what she was told. She said that men have the Priesthood because women have the babies, and they need something that important in their lives or to have accomplished too. More or less something for them to feel good about, since women gave birth. I now am understanding how she may have heard this, especially since reading a paper by Sonia Johnson, the ex'ed Mormon feminist. This is about the time my mom told me this, it's all coming together now if true. Here is an excerpt from Sonia's paper.......

But perhaps the image of greatest terror crawled from the psyche of Hartman Rector, one of the General Authorities of the Church, in response to my testimony before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights:

In order to attempt to get the male somewhere near even, the Heavenly Father gave him the Priesthood, or directing authority for the Church and home. Without this bequeath, the male would be so far below the female in power and influence that there would be little or no purpose for his existence. In fact, [he] would probably be eaten by the female as is the case with the black widow Spider. (

Or this......

Letter to Teddie Wood

… The very belligerent tone of Sister Johnson’s remarks will do little to win the favor of the Brethren or the Lord. He who made them made them both Male and Female and there is a difference. The female has the greatest influence on the children of our Heavenly Father, because she prepares their earthly body and then nurtures them during the most formative period of their life. Therefore there is no power on earth as strong as mother love and mother influence.

In order to attempt to get the male somewhere near heaven the Heavenly Father gave him the Priesthood or directing authority for the Church and home. Without this bequeath the male would be so far below the female in power and influence that there would be little [119] or no purpose for his existence in fact would probably be eaten by the female as is the case with the black widow Spider.

Therefore the Lord has made plain by revelations both ancient and modern that the male rules over the female but always with love and great respect … —HARTMAN RECTOR, JR., Mission President, California San Diego Mission, August 29, 1978 http://signaturebookslibrary.org/?p=1296

Pretty sad if he truly said this. I don't feel men are lower than a woman. Everybody is unique. Men can possess and do have all the qualities that women have and sometimes more. I don't like the analogy my mother gave me. Just because men don't give birth doesn't make them less than. They are usually protectors, make wonderful fathers, provide and also give a great sense of adventure to life. They are definitely the spice in my life. I'm too worried about the small stuff in my world. Men.. brothers, sons, husbands don't usually harbor over things, they may squabble or fight with another but they get over it and are back to the usual. Women sometimes hold a grudge longer or are sometimes catty about things. Men are the great balance in that. I don't mean to pigeon hole. Women aren't all catty. Just saying that men don't need a title, when they are just "being" is good enough for me.

What I'm really trying to say is, men don't need the Priesthood to validate their significance, nor do women. IMO, we all have the "Priest" in Priesthood, and that is our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. But men, by all means can use His power for good anytime they wish.

[Stone holm]

Bluebell my mother told me long ago (during the ERA movement) why the men hold the Priesthood and women don't. I never understood why she was telling me since I didn't care one way or the other. Really never felt jealous of or less than a man. So didn't understand. Now looking back on it, maybe she was one to have questioned why and maybe this is what she was told. She said that men have the Priesthood because women have the babies, and they need something that important in their lives or to have accomplished too. More or less something for them to feel good about, since women gave birth. I now am understanding how she may have heard this, especially since reading a paper by Sonia Johnson, the ex'ed Mormon feminist. This is about the time my mom told me this, it's all coming together now if true. Here is an excerpt from Sonia's paper.......

But perhaps the image of greatest terror crawled from the psyche of Hartman Rector, one of the General Authorities of the Church, in response to my testimony before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights:

In order to attempt to get the male somewhere near even, the Heavenly Father gave him the Priesthood, or directing authority for the Church and home. Without this bequeath, the male would be so far below the female in power and influence that there would be little or no purpose for his existence. In fact, [he] would probably be eaten by the female as is the case with the black widow Spider. (

Or this......

Letter to Teddie Wood

… The very belligerent tone of Sister Johnson’s remarks will do little to win the favor of the Brethren or the Lord. He who made them made them both Male and Female and there is a difference. The female has the greatest influence on the children of our Heavenly Father, because she prepares their earthly body and then nurtures them during the most formative period of their life. Therefore there is no power on earth as strong as mother love and mother influence.

In order to attempt to get the male somewhere near heaven the Heavenly Father gave him the Priesthood or directing authority for the Church and home. Without this bequeath the male would be so far below the female in power and influence that there would be little [119] or no purpose for his existence in fact would probably be eaten by the female as is the case with the black widow Spider.

Therefore the Lord has made plain by revelations both ancient and modern that the male rules over the female but always with love and great respect … —HARTMAN RECTOR, JR., Mission President, California San Diego Mission, August 29, 1978 http://signaturebook...ary.org/?p=1296

Pretty sad if he truly said this. I don't feel men are lower than a woman. Everybody is unique. Men can possess and do have all the qualities that women have and sometimes more. I don't like the analogy my mother gave me. Just because men don't give birth doesn't make them less than. They are usually protectors, make wonderful fathers, provide and also give a great sense of adventure to life. They are definitely the spice in my life. I'm too worried about the small stuff in my world. Men.. brothers, sons, husbands don't usually harbor over things, they may squabble or fight with another but they get over it and are back to the usual. Women sometimes hold a grudge longer or are sometimes catty about things. Men are the great balance in that. I don't mean to pigeon hole. Women aren't all catty. Just saying that men don't need a title, when they are just "being" is good enough for me.

What I'm really trying to say is, men don't need the Priesthood to validate their significance, nor do women. IMO, we all have the "Priest" in Priesthood, and that is our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. But men, by all means can use His power for good anytime they wish.

Oh my...did Hartman Rector really say that....lol...amazing.

[Calm]

Without this bequeath the male would be so far below the female in power and influence that there would be little [119] or no purpose for his existence in fact would probably be eaten by the female as is the case with the black widow Spider.

And yet there is no evidence of this in the greater society where men lack the priesthood, not even during the years of the Great Apostasy where we believe there was no priesthood power present on the earth (except perhaps the three Nephites and John).

[Stone holm]

And yet there is no evidence of this in the greater society where men lack the priesthood, not even during the years of the Great Apostasy where we believe there was no priesthood power present on the earth (except perhaps the three Nephites and John).

Well as I understand Cherokee ancient customs, the women kind of treated the men like we do women -- and the men more or less accepted it, don't recall anything being said about a high suicide rate. I am afraid that some women really take offense to this kind of rhetoric since it suggests that their sole purpose in life is to deliver babies and raise children, which I can understand better the anguish of barren women if they actually soak up and take this kind of stupidity seriously.

[Tacenda]

And yet there is no evidence of this in the greater society where men lack the priesthood, not even during the years of the Great Apostasy where we believe there was no priesthood power present on the earth (except perhaps the three Nephites and John).

I know, it's ludicrous! But this was one man's idea, not all and definitely not all in church leadership, feel this way.

[bluebell]

Bluebell my mother told me long ago (during the ERA movement) why the men hold the Priesthood and women don't. I never understood why she was telling me since I didn't care one way or the other. Really never felt jealous of or less than a man. So didn't understand. Now looking back on it, maybe she was one to have questioned why and maybe this is what she was told. She said that men have the Priesthood because women have the babies, and they need something that important in their lives or to have accomplished too. More or less something for them to feel good about, since women gave birth. I now am understanding how she may have heard this, especially since reading a paper by Sonia Johnson, the ex'ed Mormon feminist. This is about the time my mom told me this, it's all coming together now if true. Here is an excerpt from Sonia's paper.......

But perhaps the image of greatest terror crawled from the psyche of Hartman Rector, one of the General Authorities of the Church, in response to my testimony before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights:

In order to attempt to get the male somewhere near even, the Heavenly Father gave him the Priesthood, or directing authority for the Church and home. Without this bequeath, the male would be so far below the female in power and influence that there would be little or no purpose for his existence. In fact, [he] would probably be eaten by the female as is the case with the black widow Spider. (

Or this......

Letter to Teddie Wood

… The very belligerent tone of Sister Johnson’s remarks will do little to win the favor of the Brethren or the Lord. He who made them made them both Male and Female and there is a difference. The female has the greatest influence on the children of our Heavenly Father, because she prepares their earthly body and then nurtures them during the most formative period of their life. Therefore there is no power on earth as strong as mother love and mother influence.

In order to attempt to get the male somewhere near heaven the Heavenly Father gave him the Priesthood or directing authority for the Church and home. Without this bequeath the male would be so far below the female in power and influence that there would be little [119] or no purpose for his existence in fact would probably be eaten by the female as is the case with the black widow Spider.

Therefore the Lord has made plain by revelations both ancient and modern that the male rules over the female but always with love and great respect … —HARTMAN RECTOR, JR., Mission President, California San Diego Mission, August 29, 1978 http://signaturebookslibrary.org/?p=1296

Pretty sad if he truly said this. I don't feel men are lower than a woman. Everybody is unique. Men can possess and do have all the qualities that women have and sometimes more. I don't like the analogy my mother gave me. Just because men don't give birth doesn't make them less than. They are usually protectors, make wonderful fathers, provide and also give a great sense of adventure to life. They are definitely the spice in my life. I'm too worried about the small stuff in my world. Men.. brothers, sons, husbands don't usually harbor over things, they may squabble or fight with another but they get over it and are back to the usual. Women sometimes hold a grudge longer or are sometimes catty about things. Men are the great balance in that. I don't mean to pigeon hole. Women aren't all catty. Just saying that men don't need a title, when they are just "being" is good enough for me.

What I'm really trying to say is, men don't need the Priesthood to validate their significance, nor do women. IMO, we all have the "Priest" in Priesthood, and that is our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. But men, by all means can use His power for good anytime they wish.

People have been expressing their opinions about who holds the priesthood and why for years and years.

But since God has not revealed those answers to us as doctrine, it's all just someone's guess.

Given that, it's probably better for us not to add to the speculation. We've seen, with the priesthood ban for Africans in the past, the problems that such guesses can cause later generations.

[Tacenda]

People have been expressing their opinions about who holds the priesthood and why for years and years.

But since God has not revealed those answers to us as doctrine, it's all just someone's guess.

Given that, it's probably better for us not to add to the speculation. We've seen, with the priesthood ban for Africans in the past, the problems that such guesses can cause later generations.

I'm not speculating, I know with conviction that the last paragraph in my post is true. I bear testimony of it.

[bluebell]

I'm not speculating, I know with conviction that the last paragraph in my post is true. I bear testimony of it.

I was referring to the reasons your mother gave, as well as the other people you quoted.

[Tacenda]

I was referring to the reasons your mother gave, as well as the other people you quoted.

Thanks for clarifying, I tend to be defensive on this board, so my apologies bluebell.

[Stone holm]

I'm not speculating, I know with conviction that the last paragraph in my post is true. I bear testimony of it.

This is in accordance with general first rule of spin, which is if you don't have a revealed reason for a practice in the Church you make stuff up. And when GAs make stuff up, you aren't supposed to question it, even if it is bigoted, stupid, or otherwise questionable.

[BlueDreams]

After listening to a number of podcasts by those who feel discontent about women's roles in the Church, I sense a theme. It seems to express a ME attitude.

I just went through about 2/3 of the ordainwomen profiles and bullet-pointed all of the major points that I could find for why they believed women should be ordained. If you want you can see them for yourself, though it's not well edited Most of them would not fall under the ME attitude category.

There is plenty to disagree about, IMO on their various reasoning. But I think it's very important to understand why they believe in female ordination. Better understanding opposing views means a better understanding of our own and more concrete reasoning to where are own views may fall short. And they most certainly do.

They seem to say that it doesn't matter that someone is receiving an ordinance, only that SHE cannot administer it. That it does not matter that there is a prayer, only that SHE isn't saying it. And that it only matters who is presiding, or leading, or giving counsel, when it isn't a woman.

I find more saying the need for equal participation, full involvement, better utilization of human resources in ward and (especially) branches that could used more priesthood holders, and what they envision for their children and coming generations.

When did the ordinance, or the prayer itself become unimportant? When did it become all about the ones who get to, or don't get to, be the hands or voice?

DC 84:33-38:

For whoso is faithful unto the obtaining these two priesthoods of which I have spoken, and the magnifying their calling, are sanctified by the Spirit unto the renewing of their bodies.

34 They become the sons of Moses and of Aaron and the seed of Abraham, and the church and kingdom, and the elect of God.

35 And also all they who receive this priesthood receive me, saith the Lord;

36 For he that receiveth my servants receiveth me;

37 And he that receiveth me receiveth my Father;

38 And he that receiveth my Father receiveth my Father’s kingdom; therefore ball that my Father hath shall be given unto him.

Where is the profound gratitude that we have these saving ordinances, and they are available to ALL who accept them?

I don't believe that this is solid reasoning for ordaining women. But I'm saying that it has always been about both the one receiving the ordinance and giving it. The spirit sanctifies both in their distinct roles in giving/receiving blessings. On a personal note, there is a definite difference to when I have given the parts of the ordinances I have authority to give in the temple than when I'm receiving/acting as proxy. Both were good and of God and edifying/sanctifying. But there is a difference. I could understand why some women would want a broadened role in such a remarkable gift.

Wtih luv,

BD

[Pahoran]

The lines of protestors were rather long and were carrying placards and signs -- most were directed at our anti-feminist viewpoints, I remember at St. Louis they had even hired a plane to fly overhead carrying a banner. One of the speakers, I believe at the St. Louis Area Conference was George Romney, Mitt Romney's father, and I remember my wife reacting badly to his talk (she was definitely not a feminist and wouldn't have dreamed of questioning the Brethern on anything) because she felt he was way too political. In that same era the Church had designated George Romney's wife to be its spokesperson in the anti-ERA fight on the various talk shows that covering the subject. I believe she was specifically called in to combat some apostate woman from Florida, as I recall, who was attacking the Church over its anti-ERA stance. Its been so long ago that it is hard to remember the details. But to say that the Church was not being subjected to pressure from the feminists, I think is a bit hard to swallow. Sorry if this is considered an insufficient CRA

Clearly we are talking past each other here.

The question at issue is not whether feminists have tried to censor (by way of "protest" ) the Church's public voice over such issues as the ERA; we all know that those who advance leftist political causes always try to silence those they oppose; that is a given. The question is whether the changes to the Temple Endowment ceremony in 1995 were made in response to "massive social pressure."

Note that the ERA failed ratification in 1982. The dates don't match. Sorry.

Also, just IMHO, the idiotic assumption that the Church only ever changes anything in response to "massive social pressure" is a symptom of absolutely terminal cynicism. I've also noticed that those who make this assumption will inevitably support it by seeing "massive social pressure" after the event that was trivial, if not outright invisible, before.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Biz]

I look forward to the day when women are ordained to the priesthood.

[why me]

I look forward to the day when women are ordained to the priesthood.

Why?

[Biz]

Why?

Well lot's of reasons:

They will be able to give priesthood blessings to the sick or otherwise afflicted.

They could bless and name their children in Sacrament meeting if they wanted to and the couple wanted the mother to do it.

They would be able to pass the sacrament.

They would be able to baptize, which would be wonderful for sister missionaries.

They would be able to lead a congregation as its leader.

Would be able to sit and counsel individuals in a pastoral setting.

It would increase the variety of monthly high councilman talks. Might not be so boring!

I think the church would benefit from a woman participating in each one of these settings. Many more settings too!

Edited March 25, 2013 by Biz

[why me]

Well lot's of reasons:

They will be able to give priesthood blessings to the sick or otherwise afflicted.

They could bless and name their children in Sacrament meeting if they wanted to and the couple wanted the mother to do it.

They would be able to pass the sacrament.

They would be able to baptize, which would be wonderful for sister missionaries.

They would be able to lead a congregation as its leader.

Would be able to sit and counsel individuals in a pastoral setting.

It would increase the variety of monthly high councilman talks. Might not be so boring!

I think the church would benefit from a woman participating in each one of these settings. Many more settings too!

What would be the difference between the CoC and the lds church? It would seem that the CoC got it right before the lds church did.