Recent Developments In "ordain Women" Movement

[changed]

I have not read all 17 pages, just in case no one else posted it:

There is another event planned for the priesthood session:
https://www.facebook.com/events/169738246557372/

"We support our Priesthood holders!" event, created by LDS women.  Aparently, some LDS women are getting together, to make sure every last seat in the priesthood session is occupied by a priesthood holder.  ... which would be a good thing to see happen anyways. 





 

[Calm]

Well that is a genuine problem, no question about it.  Ask any bishop you know very well and he will tell you.  People deny it, but it is a problem, if not for women, then for men.

 

But that is also a reason women should not have the priesthood, so you can't have it both ways.

Since I've had two bishops who were excommunicated due to affairs they had with members, I know it is a real problem though in neither case was the woman someone they would need to be meeting with except to counsel.  And for one of those women, the fact that he was a bishop played a large part in her attraction to him or rather her wanting him to be in love with her.

 

I don't see why sexual attraction would be a reason for women not to have the Priesthood though.

Edited September 29, 2013 by calmoriah

[Stone holm]

Since I've had two bishops who were excommunicated due to affairs they had with members, I know it is a real problem though in neither case was the woman someone they would need to be meeting with except to counsel.  And for one of those women, the fact that he was a bishop played a large part in her attraction to him or rather her wanting him to be in love with her.

 

I don't see why sexual attraction would be a reason for women not to have the Priesthood though.

Nevertheless, it is considered an issue.

[Calm]

Nevertheless, it is considered an issue.

Yes, I know I was agreeing with that part...it is an issue that needs to be remembered when calling men and women to callings and by the men and women themselves to avoid getting into situations they regret later (or even worse do not regret but should).  What I was wondering is why mfb said it was be a reason for women not to have the Priesthood.

[mfbukowski]

Guess I should have been a little clearer. What my unfettered speculation is is the Church will start changing leadership positions and instead of just calling a male priesthood holder to a position, they will start calling husband and wife teams. It is fairly common when considering a person for a calling to also take into consideration their spouse. On occasion when a Bishop is called he will be told to consider his wife as a counselor. We are already doing this in many callings.

Yep, I was told to do that, and of course the sp called both of us into the office.  Between this fact and the fact that women bestow the highest blessings in the church by laying on hands in the temple, I really don't understand the problem I guess.  Couples are one in the gospel and must be sealed to receive exaltation.  We have complimentary roles and callings, not competing roles and callings.

[mfbukowski]

Since I've had two bishops who were excommunicated due to affairs they had with members, I know it is a real problem though in neither case was the woman someone they would need to be meeting with except to counsel.  And for one of those women, the fact that he was a bishop played a large part in her attraction to him or rather her wanting him to be in love with her.

 

I don't see why sexual attraction would be a reason for women not to have the Priesthood though.

Well the problem would be working closely with someone else's spouse- humans definitely have hormones.

 

But any bishop who does not look like Quasimodo has probably had some experience with a lonely sister who was attracted to him.  Of course I am fortunate because I look quite like Quasimodo, actually.

[EllenMaksoud]

I just need say that there are so many issues connected with this that I had not even thought of.  Maybe, and this is from the point of view of a complete neophyte, almost an outsider.  I had never even considered the possibility that a Bishop would have an affair, no really? Now I am wondering how Bishops ever stayed out of trouble?  So, what is it about women that would prevent the same problem, speaking as a woman who has failed.

 

So, does the future will of Heavenly Father include couples as Priesthood holders?

 

Personally, from the view of an outsider, not being born to the covenants, I always felt a little uncomfortable sharing with a Man ALONE !

 

Where is this going?

[Calm]

Well the problem would be working closely with someone else's spouse- humans definitely have hormones.

 

But any bishop who does not look like Quasimodo has probably had some experience with a lonely sister who was attracted to him.  Of course I am fortunate because I look quite like Quasimodo, actually.

But not all Priesthood holders have to work together, one could just continue to have the same requirements as they do now so I don't see this as inherently eliminating women as candidates for Priesthood.  IOW, it is not an inherent quality of either Priesthood or women that would eliminate them.

[changed]

... the fact that women bestow the highest blessings in the church by laying on hands in the temple, ...

the highest blessing? Do't men do initiatories in the temple too?

[mfbukowski]

Yes, I know I was agreeing with that part...it is an issue that needs to be remembered when calling men and women to callings and by the men and women themselves to avoid getting into situations they regret later (or even worse do not regret but should).  What I was wondering is why mfb said it was be a reason for women not to have the Priesthood.

Actually it was you who brought it up out of a clear blue sky.   

 

We would just have to get past the prejudice of allowing men and women to frequently work close together.

I was just saying that they are not "prejudices" but but a real issue, and then you seemed to acknowledge that in a later post.

 

Oh well.

[Storm Rider]

I should just ignore this ugly hateful rant.    But it is so hateful and ugly I can't.   Everyone got along just fine before you came along as well, Erin.  But telling you that hardly advances dialogue on a topic where it is so badly needed.  Women do not speak their minds in RS, we have no opportunity.  It is bad form to express negative thoughts for one reason.  The fact that there are so many faithful and active LDS women online saying things that we would never hear in church is proof enough that something is changing to anyone willing to look past their prejudices.

This is an interesting POV, but it is also narrow in perspective. You may want to review who is participating in these threads and the great number of those who are not. There are reasons why some do not participate. Those who do so protect their own. I for one don't feel good about contributing for a variety of reasons.

No, everyone was not getting along just fine. Yes, some do like to run rough shod over others. A "hateful" rant is a matter of perspective.

Please never tell my wide she doesn't speak her mind. You have no idea what you are talking about and I would appreciate you not speaking for all LDS women.

I guess that is the end of my hateful rant.

[mfbukowski]

But not all Priesthood holders have to work together, one could just continue to have the same requirements as they do now so I don't see this as inherently eliminating women as candidates for Priesthood.  IOW, it is not an inherent quality of either Priesthood or women that would eliminate them.

So your husband the bishop goes off to prepare for the stake audit with the ward financial clerk, Sister Vava Voom, one on one to go over those boring old financial statements, sitting close to eachother reading off the same page of boring old lines of numbers and expect no hormones whatsoever to kick off.

 

You might not, but many might have a problem with that.  The bishop himself might find that situation tempting or at least highly uncomfortable.

Edited September 30, 2013 by mfbukowski

[changed]

... I always felt a little uncomfortable sharing with a Man ALONE !

 

I agree, I think PPI's are dangerous for all parties involved.

[rodheadlee]

This thread may also help explain why in Mormonism many are married at age 19 and then have to go through this kind of very hard experience.

I'm sorry but we were not baptized in the Church until I was 26. We had one contact at 19 and lessons at 26.

[Calm]

Actually it was you who brought it up out of a clear blue sky.   

 

I was just saying that they are not "prejudices" but but a real issue, and then you seemed to acknowledge that in a later post.

 

Oh well.

Okay, looks like I just misunderstood what you were saying.  

[Stone holm]

So your husband the bishop goes off to prepare for the stake audit with the ward financial clerk, Sister Vava Voom, one on one to go over those boring old financial statements, sitting close to eachother reading off the same page of boring old lines of numbers and expect no hormones whatsoever to kick off.

 

You might not, but many might have a problem with that.  The bishop himself might find that situation tempting or at least highly uncomfortable.

That is not a problem if the wife is sitting there as well. Interviews are a potential problem as well, the BSA had to go with an open door policy during interviews. However Calmoriah is right that should not be grounds for denying an entire gender access to decision making. If members at least start talking about the issues without one side having their faith called into question, then that is progress and who knows it might even cause the spark that inspires the prayer that triggers the answer. Whenever this subject comes up, I flash back to a council of Bishops that I attended where they were discussing mini missions in our Stake for the YM and how we as Bishops should structure the program. I being the newest Bishop there after listening awhile asked why we were not considering the program for the YW. The other Bishops looked at me like I had lost my mind, and finally the senior Bishop said, the Church does not encourage YW to go on missions, and that was the end of that. Well, I somehow don't think a group of Bishops would be startled by that question today. So I think the more discussion the better.

[mfbukowski]

That is not a problem if the wife is sitting there as well.

The wife is at home with 3 kids under 7 and besides, what they are discussing is confidential- who gets welfare and why etc.

 

As a bishop of course you know all this.  Your wife goes with you to all your meetings and interviews, right?

[mfbukowski]

the highest blessing? Do't men do initiatories in the temple too?

What?  That makes them not the highest because men do them too?

[omni]

Well the problem would be working closely with someone else's spouse- humans definitely have hormones.

But any bishop who does not look like Quasimodo has probably had some experience with a lonely sister who was attracted to him. Of course I am fortunate because I look quite like Quasimodo, actually.

Ah, so your avatar is actually your self portrait.

[changed]

 Your wife goes with you to all your meetings and interviews, right?

At first, a couple serving together sounds good... but it seems like it would only work for an older couple with no kids at home that were well-off.  Leadership callings come with a high workload, seems like it would be asking quite a lot from one family to take both mother and father....

 

What?  That makes them not the highest because men do them too?

sorry, for some reason I read it to mean women's blessings were higher than men's...

(Doctrine and Covenants | Section 41:1)

1 HEARKEN and ahear, O ye my people, saith the Lord and your God, ye whom I delight to bless with the greatest of all bblessings,...

I thought the greatest of all blessings was revelation?

 

[omni]

So your husband the bishop goes off to prepare for the stake audit with the ward financial clerk, Sister Vava Voom, one on one to go over those boring old financial statements, sitting close to eachother reading off the same page of boring old lines of numbers and expect no hormones whatsoever to kick off.

You might not, but many might have a problem with that. The bishop himself might find that situation tempting or at least highly uncomfortable.

Would you also recommend men not work on professions where they may have female coworkers?

I love your idea of expanding callings that don't require the priesthood to women, but why not just create a policy where one man and one woman are not to work alone. No need to throw the baby out with the bath water.

[mfbukowski]

Would you also recommend men not work on professions where they may have female coworkers?

I love your idea of expanding callings that don't require the priesthood to women, but why not just create a policy where one man and one woman are not to work alone. No need to throw the baby out with the bath water.

Your two comments seem contradictory.

 

Either you are going to be concerned about it or not.

 

And as far as working one on one- good luck.  Yeah, let's keep a few other people from seeing their families so they can babysit the bishop every time he meets with a female leader.  Not a good idea.

 

I am just bringing up practical considerations for all this.  I don't mean to imply there are not solutions- just that it needs to be thought through carefully.

[mfbukowski]

Ah, so your avatar is actually your self portrait.

No, my nose is much larger and bent more.

[Calm]

Your two comments seem contradictory.

 

Either you are going to be concerned about it or not.

 

And as far as working one on one- good luck.  Yeah, let's keep a few other people from seeing their families so they can babysit the bishop every time he meets with a female leader.  Not a good idea.

 

I am just bringing up practical considerations for all this.  I don't mean to imply there are not solutions- just that it needs to be thought through carefully.

Quite a bit of work could be done via Skype, I would think...

[Stone holm]

The wife is at home with 3 kids under 7 and besides, what they are discussing is confidential- who gets welfare and why etc.

 

As a bishop of course you know all this.  Your wife goes with you to all your meetings and interviews, right?

Was referring to my prior post about calling couples.