The "Ordain Women" Website

[Stone holm]

Fair enough, Wade.

The catalyst for my thoughts on the matter came from the words attributed to Gamaliel in Acts 5:

And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought: But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.

I recognize that there some movements against which we have an obligation to fight. I'm just not entirely sure this particular one rises to that level. Is it a sin for women to desire the priesthood? Are the women sinful for questioning their lot? For wanting what they perceive as more than they've been given? Was the Samarian woman sinning when she asked for scraps from the children's table or did the Lord justify her desires even though to do so was to step outside the order of things at the time? Even if the desire for priesthood ordination is misplaced, could it be out of devotion or misunderstanding, as was Peter's desire to have the Lord wash not only his feet but his head and hands also?

These are not meant to be provocative questions or leading in any way. They are simply the thoughts that have come to mind as I've considered this topic today. And that's why I take, as Smac put it, a laissez-faire approach. If the desire in this women is right, it will be honored by God. If it isn't, it won't and the movement, like so many others, will come to nought.

Do you find it odd that sometimes people point to there having been no discussion, and then tend to say people are ark steadiers , etc when they do discuss it.

[rongo]

You know he can't do that without violating guidelines about discussing Temple Endowments. Of course such occurred in the 1980's just ask an older member next time you are in the Celestial room.

This has nothing to do with the CFR on "massive social pressure" affecting changes to the endowment. By definition, evidence of "massive social pressure" will be found outside of the temple, not in things prohibited here for posting. Especially if they are that "massive."

[why me]

You know he can't do that without violating guidelines about discussing Temple Endowments. Of course such occurred in the 1980's just ask an older member next time you are in the Celestial room.

I think pahoran was referring to 'social pressure' to change it. He didn't see any social pressure in or out of the church. The change was not because of social pressure. You need to back up your claim.

[why me]

What do you mean? There has been discussion out there about women getting the Priesthood at least since the ERA.

I have heard of no public discussion about women receiving the priesthood within church strucures. Not even a hint. I have seen it from lds internet women's groups that are not part of the church organization.

I asked my daughter yesterday and she said to me that she would feel very uncomfortable if women received the priesthood. And she said to me that she would not want it. I think that many women share my daughter's opinion.

The problem is simple: when the lower and higher priesthood were restored, it was restored to joseph and oliver, two men, who then passed it on to other men. Emma was not considered. Did this create a problem for emma? I don't know. Now if emma was included, we would have girls and women with the priesthood. But it did not seem to be part of god's plan.

I think that the catholic and mormon churches are two churches were women can not have the priesthood. However, we can see the priesthood in the Community of Christ. To look at just what the lds church would be if women received the priesthood, one just has to look at their structure. And it is totally different from the lds. Like I said, a massive overhaul of church structure would need to occur if women received the priesthood, inlcuding being members of the quorum of twelve and even someday, being the prophet.

Not sure if members can overcome the shock. Maybe a gradual evolutionary process may help. But the women who contribute to the website would be looking for a rapid change in church organization and structure. And the pressure would then be on having women as general authorities.

[Tacenda]

Wow, the Ordain groups message is being plastered all over the news tonight. I didn't realize that Sunstone had something to do with it. Mary Ellen Robertson was interviewed. She mentions that it's mostly just to get people to talk about it. Especially the unequality in the church. And she mentions the Relief Society. Which IMO, is all we really need to do, just be in charge of some things that men really have no time for, they're busy as it is. What these women want really is more say. It's as I predicted, start out really big to just get something!! Sounds like it's working if women get to pray in conference coming up, especially when it never was a doctrine that they shouldn't pray in conference, it was probably not policy either, just no one noticed until now.

[why me]

I don't think that it made national news. But in utah it would for sure. This is the pressure that some have been referring to on this board. What is overlooked is the role that revelation plays in the lds church. This is not a church that is run by popular demand or what is in vogue. What the women want who are establishing such websites is for the lds church to resemble the Community of Christ. On their homepage we can see women as apostles and in the general presidency etc.

Edited March 22, 2013 by why me

[bluebell]

I'm not sure that wanting to be in charge of something is a very noble reason to desire the priesthood.

Kind of seems like Peter wanting The Lord to point out who of His followers was the greatest in the kingdom-a sign of pride and immature understanding of the gospel.

[mercyngrace]

I'm not sure that wanting to be in charge of something is a very noble reason to desire the priesthood.

I'd say wanting to be in a position of authority represented a fundamental misunderstanding of what the priesthood actually is.

And I'd say that misunderstanding isn't gender exclusive.

The Savior was clear that we should be wary of those who desire the highest seats in the synagogue... (Luke 20:46)

ETA: The only righteous desire I can conceive of for seeking the priesthood is desiring to bless the lives of others.

Edited March 22, 2013 by mercyngrace

[Tacenda]

http://fox13now.com/2013/03/21/feminists-call-for-lds-to-give-women-priesthood/

For those that don't live in Utah, here is one of the networks that announced this. I think it puts the church in an undesirable position. It's as if they are cowing down to these women if they allow the women to pray in the April conference. They really are in a rock and a hard place here. But whatever they do it's no where near the hurdle they've experienced before with change in the church. Or is it? But it's just a prayer.

http://mormonstories.org/mormon-stories-067-linda-king-newell-%e2%80%9ca-gift-given-a-gift-taken-washing-anointing-and-blessing-the-sick-among-mormon-women%e2%80%9d/

I'll bet these women have listened to the above podcast too! It does make one wonder why the women are going backwards instead of forward in this particular instance.

[Stone holm]

I'd say wanting to be in a position of authority represented a fundamental misunderstanding of what the priesthood actually is.

And I'd say that misunderstanding isn't gender exclusive.

The Savior was clear that we should be wary of those who desire the highest seats in the synagogue... (Luke 20:46)

You are always going to have a little overreaching when people are trying to overcome a cultural hurdle -- likewise you are always going to have a little overreaching when you are defending a cultural barricade, it kind of goes with the territory.

[wenglund]

Fair enough, Wade.

The catalyst for my thoughts on the matter came from the words attributed to Gamaliel in Acts 5:

And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought: But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.

I recognize that there some movements against which we have an obligation to fight. I'm just not entirely sure this particular one rises to that level. Is it a sin for women to desire the priesthood? Are the women sinful for questioning their lot? For wanting what they perceive as more than they've been given? Was the Samarian woman sinning when she asked for scraps from the children's table or did the Lord justify her desires even though to do so was to step outside the order of things at the time? Even if the desire for priesthood ordination is misplaced, could it be out of devotion or misunderstanding, as was Peter's desire to have the Lord wash not only his feet but his head and hands also?

These are not meant to be provocative questions or leading in any way. They are simply the thoughts that have come to mind as I've considered this topic today. And that's why I take, as Smac put it, a laissez-faire approach. If the desire in these women is right, it will be honored by God. If it isn't, it won't and the movement, like so many others, will come to nought.

As usual, these are some wonderful thoughts. And, to some extent I agree with you.

However, my concern isn't with the movement coming to naught or not, but with the people leading and following in the movement, and the envy and pride that seems to be the motivating force behind it. I care about the people in the movement who, ironically, may be denying themselves the full blessings of the gospel because they seek to establish, to no small degree, their own will rather than God's, and to follow their own way instead of God's--which way is seemingly both in and of the world. I love these people and wish to be a warning voice, though they seem disinclined to hear, even given the piercing clarity of sarcasm.

As I have mentioned here before, I came of age during the late 60's, when the civil rights movement and the women's movement and the sexual revolution began to reach a feverish pitch. and so I am well acquainted with the allure of joining a "cause" and social revolt and unrest and protests both in and out of the Church, and on a variety of issues, having participated in some myself. I have a very good sense where this is going, and the rocky shoals that may lay ahead.

I am hoping that folks today can learn from those of us who have pridefully traveled far further down the road of dissent, and who have also followed humbly after Christ, and who have a good sense for the divergent end of both paths. But, it appears that each person and succeeding generation has to learn these things for themselves, assuming they ever do.

In short, I will have my little say in hopes that it may be of benefit to some, but then I will apply your wisdom and content myself with "let[ting] them alone."

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

Do you find it odd that sometimes people point to there having been no discussion, and then tend to say people are ark steadiers , etc when they do discuss it.

CFR that people point to there having been no discussion, and then tend to say people are ark steadiers. I am aware of them saying the latter (having done so myself), but not the former. I am just trying to get a sense for whether, or the extent to which, you and I live in alternate universes.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

What these women want really is more say.

...as if women don't say enough.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[smac97]

I don't think that it made national news. But in utah it would for sure. This is the pressure that some have been referring to on this board. What is overlooked is the role that revelation plays in the lds church.

I think you are being charitable in saying that the role of revelation is being "overlooked." I think it's being rejected by these people.

This is not a church that is run by popular demand or what is in vogue.

Just so. Tactics which are appropriate in other situations (such as lobbying elected politicians or entities) are quite inappropriate for members to use against the LDS Church. These tactics are incompatible with the form and function of the Church of Jesus Christ.

-Smac

[smac97]

http://fox13now.com/...men-priesthood/

For those that don't live in Utah, here is one of the networks that announced this. I think it puts the church in an undesirable position.

Which is exactly what people like Mary Ellen Robertson want. This is a campaign to make the Church look bad. To bring to bear the weight of public opinion against the LDS Church.

-Smac

[Tacenda]

...as if women don't say enough.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Yes, they do need to say alot especially if the men aren't really listening, it's probably garbled and the men are smiling but nothing is getting through. If the men listened the women wouldn't have to repeat!

[wenglund]

Yes, they do need to say alot especially if the men aren't really listening, it's probably garbled and the men are smiling but nothing is getting through. If the men listened the women wouldn't have to repeat!

I get the sense that you speak from considerable experience. And, it seems natural that you would assume the problem rests with the men. Consider, though, the prospect that if there is a listening problem, it may be with the person doing most of the talking. A sage once said, "God gave us two ears and one mouth for a reason."

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited March 22, 2013 by wenglund

[Teancum]

Yesterday it was pantsuits. Today it is the priesthood. I wonder what male-envy protest the female interlopers have in store for tomorrow.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Male envy? How about equailty of treatment?

[Buckeye]

I get the sense that you speak from considerable experience. And, it seems natural that you would assume the problem rests with the men. Consider, though, the prospect that if there is a listening problem, it may be with the person doing most of the talking. A sage once said, "God gave us two ears and one mouth for a reason."

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

The YW in my ward are making plans to shoot crossbows and shotguns. Girl's Camp in going to be awesome.

[wenglund]

Male envy? How about equailty of treatment?

The spin of "equal treatment" in this and most cases is born of envy. You tend not to find people clamoring for equal treatment in things they don't want.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited March 22, 2013 by wenglund

[Damien the Leper]

I know of a YW group who will be learning Krav Maga. I think that's absolutely awesome!

[wenglund]

I know of a YW group who will be learning Krav Maga. I think that's absolutely awesome!

Me too. I envy them, and thus demand equal treatment for the YM and old men.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Teancum]

The spin of "equal treatment" in this and most cases is born of envy. You tend not to find people clamoring for equal treatment in things they don't want.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Wanting equal treatment is certainly desirable. If you as a Mormon are discrimited against it may not set well with you. It is easy for an LDS man to poison the well by calling it envy. You hold the priesthood and have power and rights in the Church that a woman just does not have access too.

[smac97]

Wanting equal treatment is certainly desirable.

I would like to better understand the concept of "equal treatment." What does not mean?

If you as a Mormon are discrimited against it may not set well with you.

I would like to understand the concept of "discrimination" as to the priesthood as well. What does that mean?

It is easy for an LDS man to poison the well by calling it envy.

I'm not sure this is poisoning the well. I think there is some envy going on here.

You hold the priesthood and have power and rights in the Church that a woman just does not have access too.

Your statement demonstrates the existence of envy, which, by definition, refers to a "feeling of discontent or covetousness with regard to another's advantages, success, possessions, etc." It is decidedly odd that you describe envy as the justification for women to feel as they do, but then resent it when envy is identified as what it is.

Thanks,

-Smac

[wenglund]

Wanting equal treatment is certainly desirable. If you as a Mormon are discrimited against it may not set well with you. It is easy for an LDS man to poison the well by calling it envy. You hold the priesthood and have power and rights in the Church that a woman just does not have access too.

It depends on the specific "equality" being desired (see my Equality May Lead to Banality thread).

However, you didn't correctly grasp the point of my comment. I wasn't speaking to whether equality, itself, was desirable, but rather that people tend to clamor for "equality" in things they envy (like the priesthood) and not for things they don't (like cancer). There is no movement, that I am aware of, for equal rights to cancer. Do you now understand the difference? So, all the hubbub about women's ordinations isn't essentially about "equality" (that is the face-saving spin they are putting on it), it is really about envy. Sorry. Those women want what the men have because they envy the men having the priesthood.

The same is true for homosexuals and SSM. They envy heterosexual marriage, and even though, by way of domestic partnerships and civil unions, they now have the same states rights and privileges as heterosexual couples, they aren't satisfied, and want more regardless that it doesn't make sense, and they are going after it under the guise of "equality" even though true equality doesn't occur through SSM, and can't possibly occur.

It is all about envy. That is the white elephant in the room than many wish to ignore.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited March 22, 2013 by wenglund