Female "Priesthood Session" Held At University Of Utah Saturday Night

[CASteinman]

I find it highly offensive when a person is denigrated based on their membership status.

I did not see her denigrated based upon her membership status. Are you just letting people know what sorts of things bug you -- or are you making an accusation of that having happened here?

[Nathair/|\]

Poor choice of wording since the church of satan is the only church I know that have priestesses.

Many non-Abrahamic religions have priestesses.

[Stone holm]

Okay, I had previously been unaware of these people until they were denounced in this thread so I spent the afternoon googling them. Some in fact do appear to me to have since been expelled from the Church to have become apostates. However, having in general the majority having some connection to the September 6 or by some accounts the September 7 , this strange feeling came over me that I was reading an account of modern martyrs, so you will have to excuse me if I don't join the condemnation based on association.

[Nathair/|\]

"Druids" (so called), Wicca, some tribal religions.

Why do you use the scare quotes and the "so called" modifier for Druids?

[Stone holm]

Why do you use the scare quotes and the "so called" modifier for Druids?

"Druids" (so called), Wicca, some tribal religions.

Define "tribal religions" is that like religions that divide people up into like 12 tribes?

[CASteinman]

Why do you use the scare quotes and the "so called" modifier for Druids?

Because real Druids were scary folk. Modern Druids... not so much.

[CASteinman]

Define "tribal religions" is that like religions that divide people up into like 12 tribes?

Not usually. More like "My tribe" vs the world. I was thinking of some tribes like the Acuna.

[Stone holm]

Because real Druids were scary folk. Modern Druids... not so much.

So were colonial Puritans, modern Congregationalists not so much.

[Nathair/|\]

Because real Druids were scary folk. Modern Druids... not so much.

Hardly, you've either been reading too much Julius Caesar or too much Jack Chick.

[Damien the Leper]

I answered your question. Read my response again.

Citing issues with Toscano and Johnson is not answering my question. You made a claim that the situation was not of God. Back up that claim.

[CASteinman]

Hardly, you've either been reading too much Julius Caesar or too much Jack Chick.

What? You're scary?

[CASteinman]

Citing issues with Toscano and Johnson is not answering my question. You made a claim that the situation was not of God. Back up that claim.

What exactly is the kind of proof you are looking for? Seems you are looking for something he already addressed. Unless you are trying to get to the point that apostates fighting the Church are actually with God?

[Damien the Leper]

What exactly is the kind of proof you are looking for? Seems you are looking for something he already addressed. Unless you are trying to get to the point that apostates fighting the Church are actually with God?

I'm not looking for proof. Jwhitlock made a claim, obviously based on opinion rather than fact. I find it odd that you label those feminists as apostates. If advocating for a truly pluralistic and egalitarian society and culture is apostasy...then I'm an apostate.

[Nathair/|\]

What? You're scary?

I find my ancient predecessors no more scary as a group (Unless you are a Roman invader on Celtic/Gaulish soil--then you should be afraid. Be very, very afriad) than any modern professional class and less so than Roman augures or modern lawyers.

[CASteinman]

I'm not looking for proof. Jwhitlock made a claim, obviously based on opinion rather than fact. I find it odd that you label those feminists as apostates. If advocating for a truly pluralistic and egalitarian society and culture is apostasy...then I'm an apostate.

They are apostates. Excommunicated on that charge.

Edited April 8, 2013 by CASteinman

[jwhitlock]

Citing issues with Toscano and Johnson is not answering my question. You made a claim that the situation was not of God. Back up that claim.

It absolutely answers your question; you're just tap dancing around the obvious - which is that who a group associates with and the methods they endorse says quite a bit about where they're coming from. Do you really think that God would inspire a group such as this to use such tactics as they do, and people such as Toscano to function as standard bearers, to effect change in His church? He might use them in other ways, but they certainly aren't doing what they do because of direction from Him.

That God doesn't work in such a divided manner is simply common sense - and also a principle embodied in the scriptures.

However, since your sympathies evidently lie with them, I doubt that you're going to want to see them for what they really are.

[jwhitlock]

I'm not looking for proof. Jwhitlock made a claim, obviously based on opinion rather than fact. I find it odd that you label those feminists as apostates. If advocating for a truly pluralistic and egalitarian society and culture is apostasy...then I'm an apostate.

I don't really care how society is trying to mold itself; it is anything but pluralistic and egalitarian. However, the concept of egalitarianism was addressed directly in General Conference, and I agree with the principles we were taught there concerning equality. Those principles are not what is being espoused by this group.

As for pluralism in the church, God is in charge and gives the direction on how things are to be run. Period. This group seems to think that God should take their direction as they try to mold doctrine and the church in their own image. I think that's a particularly poor choice to make.

[MorningStar]

Obviously we're talking from a perspective that the Church is true and run by prophets, so of course this behavior wouldn't be inspired from that standpoint.

[Stone holm]

They are apostates. Excommunicated on that charge.

Well a person can be excommunicated for apostasy, which means teaching false doctrine and not repenting of it. I tend to think of an apostate as someone who completely turns away from the Church and starts attacking it as being untrue. From what I have read that does not necessarily apply. Although it might to some.

[Damien the Leper]

They are apostates. Excommunicated on that charge.

That is a matter of opinion and the stake presidents would agree with you. However, I do disagree with the decision to excommunicated Toscano. Considering how Packer was gunning for her prior to her husband's excommunication, the entire situation is very unfortunate.

[Damien the Leper]

It absolutely answers your question; you're just tap dancing around the obvious - which is that who a group associates with and the methods they endorse says quite a bit about where they're coming from. Do you really think that God would inspire a group such as this to use such tactics as they do, and people such as Toscano to function as standard bearers, to effect change in His church? He might use them in other ways, but they certainly aren't doing what they do because of direction from Him.

That God doesn't work in such a divided manner is simply common sense - and also a principle embodied in the scriptures.

However, since your sympathies evidently lie with them, I doubt that you're going to want to see them for what they really are.

Again, you're stating an opinion. Personally, I don't agree with the "priesthood meeting". Do I believe people's hearts are in the right place? Some of them. I don't know the people and I wasn't there.

[Damien the Leper]

I don't really care how society is trying to mold itself; it is anything but pluralistic and egalitarian. However, the concept of egalitarianism was addressed directly in General Conference, and I agree with the principles we were taught there concerning equality. Those principles are not what is being espoused by this group.

As for pluralism in the church, God is in charge and gives the direction on how things are to be run. Period. This group seems to think that God should take their direction as they try to mold doctrine and the church in their own image. I think that's a particularly poor choice to make.

What are you talking about?!? If you think that the Restoration Movement or the LDS church has never been or is not influenced by humanity...you have bigger problems to deal with.

[WmLaw]

I did not see her denigrated based upon her membership status. Are you just letting people know what sorts of things bug you -- or are you making an accusation of that having happened here?

I was asking for references that Margaret Toscano 'seeks to tear down the church'. There was also an earlier implication that since she was involved in the conference, that it was obviously 'Not of God'

Because, yes, it does bug me if this conclusion is derived simply because she was ex-communicated.

I was told it was 'pretty obvious'. But to me, its not obvious.

[CASteinman]

That is a matter of opinion

Well... I am of the opinion that the dictionary definition of the word applies.

[smac97]

Here's an interesting interview with Kate Kelly, the founder of the "Ordain Women" website: http://thestudentrev...m-ordain-women/

Some excerpts:

So this is about equality in the Church. Some say that women receive the same exact blessings as men. What’s your response to that?

Women are blessed by their church membership and service in countless ways. I simply want women to be able to have the full range of opportunity of service open to them. I want women to be given the mantle of God, and the chance to take their turn serving and directing others.

Quoth Kelly: "I want women to be given the mantle of God." Compare this to Hebrews 5:4: "And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron."

Is there a limit to what you want to do here? I mean, we’re talking about female bishops, stake presidents, how about a prophet?

The ordination of women would put us on completely equal spiritual footing with our brethren, and nothing less will suffice.

So she wants the priesthood, "and nothing less will suffice."

So much for the concept of revelation from God. So much for prophets leading the Church. What the prophets say about this issue is irrelevant because, for Ms. Kelly, "nothing less (than she getting what she wants) will suffice."

For you, why didn’t Joseph Smith’s original plan to “make of this Society a kingdom of Priests . . .” realized? Where did things go astray?

Note very carefully the last part of the question ("Where did things go astray?") and her response to it:

Not everything that Joseph Smith originally envisioned for the church has come to fruition yet. For example, we are not currently living the law of consecration. I don’t know how or why the priesthood has not been extended to women. But, I do know that we are ready and willing to receive it. We are a church keenly invested in the concept of restoration—we want to see the church restore women to their rightful place as leaders and priesthood holders.

She is now declaring that the Church has deprived, and is currently depriving, LDS women of "their rightful place as . . . priesthood holders."

My unease at this movement is hardening into active dislike. Ms. Kelly is presuming to call the Church to repentance. I don't think this is the way God intends for His kingdom to operate.

Aside from making a profile on your website, what are some things you’d like sympathizers to the cause to do?

The website is the very first step for Ordain Women. We started this group as one committed to thoughtful, faith-affirming strategic action.

What? How on earth can this person speak of "faith-affirming" anything when she just finished accusing the Church of depriving women of their "rightful place" as priesthood holders?

Here is a blog article about the event: http://www.the-expon...sshood-session/

Some excerpts:

While my husband was off at Priesthood Session this evening, I attended the Ordain Women Launch Event, which another attendee charmingly dubbed “Priestesshood Session.”

It sounds like this will become the unofficial moniker of the event.

Margaret Toscano discussed the evidence of priesthood authority among women of the New Testament such as Mary Magdalene, Junia and Phoebe. Joseph Smith’s declaration that he would make the Relief Society “a kingdom of priests as in Enoch’s day— as in Paul’s day” suggests that he shared the view that the ancient women of these times held the priesthood. She closed by testifying that she feels the spirit of God the Mother in the Ordain Women movement.

I have wondered why the OrdainWomen website has not published a summary of the remarks made at this meeting. I think I know why now. Margaret Toscano was not merely an attendee (the Trib article did not specify her role in the event), but was an invited speaker. Inviting an excommunicate to speak at the meeting, and having that excommunicate tie this movement to her gospel hobby horse, is not going to go over well with many observant Latter-day Saints.

The end of the meeting was devoted to questions for the panel. ... What would they do if the first presidency and quorum of the twelve said no? Toscano pointed out that they did say no to the ordination of Blacks–but eventually said yes. This would be a long-term process.

And there's the answer to my previous question about how these folks would respond if the Brethren do not give them the answer they want: the agitation will continue. Revelation is not part of the process. It's a social movement.

Note also that the answer to this question was fielded on behalf of the OrdainWomen group by . . . an excommunicate.

Folks, I think we are looking at the beginnings of something unpleasant. As I have said before, I am open to a revelation giving women the priesthood. I don't think it's part of the plan, but I am open to being wrong about that. But I utterly reject this group, its intentions and its actions. This is not how Church members should behave, particularly about so sacred a subject. I think this group reeks of - yes, I'll say it - apostasy.

-Smac

Edited April 8, 2013 by smac97