Recent Developments In "ordain Women" Movement

[Calm]

So when someone like Sister Kelly publicly agitates against the Church, I think church members who disagree with her agitation need to step up and speak out. Properly. Poignantly. Thoughtfully. But speak out. That's not unrighteous judgment.

 

I am open to that possibility. But sincerity and thoughtfulness do not carry the day. There are many people who engage in improper behavior based on sincere belief. That does not excuse their improper behavior.

Thanks,

-Smac

We need to---in my opinion---differentiated between those who turn the conversation into agitation (not a good thing as it leads directly to confrontation and contention in my opinion) and those who need to speak up about feeling they are missing something in the Church, something that perhaps they have not identified yet and will not be able to identify until others share their experience and ideas.....

 

And it won't be identified either by locking onto the first likely possibility and insisting that is it.

[Duncan]

Now that's just got my curiosity bubbling over! :-D

 

 

When I was in Tiny Tots my Mum hosted Avon Parties and I was the Guiniea pig for the cosmetics and heaven knows what all else, I have a pic of me in a dress as well...my Mum had barbarians as friends

[Calm]

 

So why less than 30 years later did another prophet open his heart to the possibility that the ban could change

My memory says it was not because members were publicly agitating or appealing to news media to carry their demands to their brethren.

 

Margaret Young in her blog says it was in good part because three black men went to the leadership and told them they had a problem with their sons and asked for their help.

 

I think this is the best way to begin the dialogue that likely needs to take place so everyone can get on the same page on what is needed...I think we need to appeal to both the Lord and the brethren in this way..."I am troubled by what is happening with my daughters (or with the youth and young adult women in general in the Church), I see many expressing a feeling that they are missing something and I don't have the answer for them.  It is an answer that I believe will only come from the Lord, both on an individual level and on a church level through his chosen spokesmen.  Please, can you help us?"

 

And I think we need to appeal to our sisters to help us figure out what is going on and to do so in faith, hope and most of all charity....not by drawing lines and saying 'faithful women would never say or want ________" as some have done.  If we don't even allow discussion---whether by the mistake of focusing solely on one aspect that is so obviously at this point a nonstarter or by not allowing any discussion of the institution or the culture possibly contributing to some women's sense of loss or bewilderment or even in extreme cases betrayal, then we will never be able to get to the core of the problem, whatever that is, and be able to accept God's solution for those problems.  He may be even now offering us the solution, but if we don't understand the problem we won't make the connection and be able to apply the solution in the right way, just as if someone is not aware of having cancer, not even the surgeon would know what to do if offered a surgical knife to cut it out.

 

Personally I believe that it is natural for everyone to feel like something is missing simply due to the presence of the veil as well as the promise of more revelation, more light and knowledge, the promise of ways to seek out greater righteousness and ways to serve others (see Abraham for why some assume that Priesthood is the way to do this), but this sense of something missing seems to have grown over the years....for some few it has moved beyond their ability to balance it with their sense this is the right place for them to be, for most it has not but it is growing and that alone is causing them concern.

Edited September 26, 2013 by calmoriah

[jwhitlock]

Smac,

 

On my mission I taught primarily mexicans.  I learned to love the people and the culture.  In many ways I still identify with them today.  But at the same time, in a very real sense, I will never be mexican.  Likewise, many men love and want the best for women.  Men's voices are important.  But men are not women.  In some ways, they will never fully understand women's issues.  So while men's voices should be part of the discussion, the most important voices for women's issues are the voices of women. 

 

Since this is not solely a "women's issue" it is misguided to insist that men be relegated to a secondary position in the discussion.

 

However, you and those who claim to find some empathy for OW also fail to understand that this is ultimately the Lord's issue - and His decision.

 

Not ours.

[jwhitlock]

 

http://thehairpin.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Suffrage1915.jpg

 

 

Interesting image in many ways including the appeal to the 90%.

 

Sorry for the slight derail...

 

It appears the you and those who like this "parallel" seem to think that when the majority speaks, they're almost always wrong - at least on so-called "progressive" issues.

[Calm]

Women's ordination will harm families in the same manner that women's voting harmed families  In other words, not at all.  

I don't see how this conclusion can be drawn.  Voting is a significantly different action than is receiving and practicing the Priesthood.  Significant enough that I find it very naive to hold this position.  Voting might be said to be closer to holding decision making offices that require the Priesthood, such as bishop on up, in that being able to vote gave women the ability to then move into making laws themselves and holding office....thus being part of the decision making process....but that is not all there is to Priesthood and having power to influence the government is not the same thing as being given the eternal authority to act for God.

 

http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?locale=0&sourceId=ab839daac5d98010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&vgnextoid=bbd508f54922d010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD

 

The priesthood is the eternal power and authority of God. Through the priesthood God created and governs the heavens and the earth. Through this power He redeems and exalts His children, bringing to pass "the immortality and eternal life of man" (Moses 1:39). God gives priesthood authority to worthy male members of the Church so they can act in His name for the salvation of His children. Priesthood holders can be authorized to preach the gospel, administer the ordinances of salvation, and govern the kingdom of God on the earth.

 

Downplaying the eternal and immediate significance of possessing the Priesthood does nothing for the credibility of those who do so, whether they are arguing for women receiving the Priesthood...claiming it doesn't have a potential negative impact to the family or the Church or the world if it happens...or against it...that the Priesthood is only good for those that the holders serve and does not hold magnificent spiritual blessings for the Priesthood holder).

 

I would assume that all agree there is something significant happening both spiritually and socially when a man is sought out so that he can offer ordinances and blessings to others?  And that this may be a strong contributor to a relationship (just ask women whose husbands habitually refuse to exercise this aspect of their Priesthood or some reason or women whose husbands don't have the Priesthood at all if it makes a difference in their relationship)?

 

Removing the need of women to seek out the help of men may have a significant impact on the social dynamics...it may not, but due to the potential change of dynamic I don't believe it is wise to be dismissive of the change that would take place if priesthood was open to all worthy members.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

It appears the you and those who like this "parallel" seem to think that when the majority speaks, they're almost always wrong - at least on so-called "progressive" issues.

Not at all. My thinking is just that the majority isn't always right.

[jwhitlock]

Not at all. My thinking is just that the majority isn't always right.

 

Given the responses to your post, the message was rather clear: the majority also isn't right in the matter of whether women should hold the priesthood.

[Stone holm]

Given the responses to your post, the message was rather clear: the majority also isn't right in the matter of whether women should hold the priesthood.

The majority? On what planet would you be able to take an accurate poll when a group is taught that even suggesting the possibility would make them appear spiritually deficient, if not outright subversive?

[smac97]

The majority? On what planet would you be able to take an accurate poll when a group is taught that even suggesting the possibility would make them appear spiritually deficient, if not outright subversive?

Oh, so LDS women are predominantly dishonest. Is that how you choose to characterize the poll results? That LDS women lie in anonymous polls as a matter of course?

What a strange way to advocate for women!

Thanks,

-Smac

[Calm]

Oh, so LDS women are predominantly dishonest. Is that how you choose to characterize the poll results? That LDS women lie in anonymous polls as a matter of course?

What a strange way to advocate for women!

Thanks,

-Smac

If women are taught (and I am not saying they are officially but the attitude of some members do convey this message) that it is fundamentally wrong to even feel that a woman being given the Priesthood would be a good thing, shame and guilt and fear of being unfaithful or unrighteous, ungrateful to God, etc. may cause them to change their mind...they may buy into the message that what they are feeling is wrong.  Thus they wouldn't be lying.

[smac97]

If women are taught (and I am not saying they are officially but the attitude of some members do convey this message) that it is fundamentally wrong to even feel that a woman being given the Priesthood would be a good thing, shame and guilt and fear of being unfaithful or unrighteous, ungrateful to God, etc. may cause them to change their mind...they may buy into the message that what they are feeling is wrong.  Thus they wouldn't be lying.

Sorry, but I'm not buying this line of reasoning. I am more inclined to conclude that when LDS women respond in a poll that they are opposed to women being ordained to the priesthood, that they actually mean what they say. A 90% polling number cannot be explained away by suggesting that LDS women are, en masse, too afraid to say what they really think.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Calm]

Sorry, but I'm not buying this line of reasoning. I am more inclined to conclude that when LDS women respond in a poll that they are opposed to women being ordained to the priesthood, that they actually mean what they say. A 90% polling number cannot be explained away by suggesting that LDS women are, en masse, too afraid to say what they really think.

Thanks,

-Smac

I am talking about a possibility, not making a statement or prediction that it is for certain in this case.

 

I would agree based on my own conversations and the conversations reported by those I know well enough to know how they approached those conversations that the majority of active LDS women don't want the Priesthood as it is now for men, but I think if a different question was asked...perhaps "do you believe there are ways that women's involvement in the organizing aspects of the Church could be improved" or "do you believe that it is important to find more ways for young women to be actively involved in the Church" or "would you like to have a way to participate more often and more widely in sacred ordinances for our faith", you would get large numbers of 'yes'.  In my experience and in the experience of those I trust to convey the conversations accurately, when it is recognized by an LDS woman, including ones that are very active or in leadership, that there will not be criticism forthcoming for expressing a negative opinion, it is very common for there to be a sense of relief conveyed and an expression of "something is missing" whether for the woman herself or for someone she is very concerned about.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

Given the responses to your post, the message was rather clear: the majority also isn't right in the matter of whether women should hold the priesthood.

Post 2 made a big deal about how the 90% is being ignored. I'd seen that argument before.

To make my position more clear: I am a man. I have no daughters and my wife doesn't care. I sympathize with those women who feel a call to the priesthood. I disagree with their tactics used but I also sympathize with those women because the church doesn't have any formal way to petition the brethren. We are discouraged from writing letters to GA's and if we do those letters are sent back to our bishop.

Ultimately I don't see women getting the priesthood in my lifetime. I do hope to continue to see expanded roles and chances for their voices to be heard and valued.

Edited September 26, 2013 by SeekingUnderstanding

[smac97]

I am talking about a possibility, not making a statement or prediction that it is for certain in this case.

 

I would agree based on my own conversations and the conversations reported by those I know well enough to know how they approached those conversations that the majority of active LDS women don't want the Priesthood as it is now for men,

That would be my anecdotal observation as well.

but I think if a different question was asked...perhaps "do you believe there are ways that women's involvement in the organizing aspects of the Church could be improved" or "do you believe that it is important to find more ways for young women to be actively involved in the Church" or "would you like to have a way to participate more often and more widely in sacred ordinances for our faith", you would get large numbers of 'yes'.

I don't follow. We would get a more accurate sampling about how LDS women feel about female ordination by ... obscuring the issue and asking ambiguous questions rather than straightforward ones?

In my experience and in the experience of those I trust to convey the conversations accurately, when it is recognized by an LDS woman, including ones that are very active or in leadership, that there will not be criticism forthcoming for expressing a negative opinion, it is very common for there to be a sense of relief conveyed and an expression of "something is missing" whether for the woman herself or for someone she is very concerned about.

Okay. Perhaps I just have an unusual sampling, but the LDS women of my acquaintance are quite free with their opinions.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Calm]

I don't follow. We would get a more accurate sampling about how LDS women feel about female ordination by ... obscuring the issue and asking ambiguous questions rather than straightforward ones?

 

I am not talking about female ordination.

 

I am talking about how women perceive their place in the Church in general and if they sense that "something is missing" at this point, even though they may not be able to identify satisfactorily what that "something is".  Instead they are judging from the results (lack of interest in going to Church among many young women, lack of interest in attending RS among older women, a growing number of women even talking about female ordination---which is a distraction, imo, from whatever the real solution will be---women investigators refusing to consider a faith where they see an inherent imbalance being ignored, growing concern over sealing differences and what they imply for women, etc.)

Edited September 26, 2013 by calmoriah

[smac97]

Post 2 made a big deal about how the 90% is being ignored. I'd seen that argument before.

To make my position more clear: I am a man. I have no daughters and my wife doesn't care. I sympathize with those women who feel a call to the priesthood.

To be frank, I have a hard time sympathizing. I do not think it is appropriate to pursue status in the Church. And it is flagrantly inappropriate to do so in an antagonistic and adversarial way, such as what we are seeing with the OW folks.

 

I disagree with their tactics used but I also sympathize with those women because the church doesn't have any formal way to petition the brethren.

I would like to agree with you here. The problem is that

A) I think it is scripturally inappropriate to seek after ("petition" for) the priesthood - see Hebrews 5:4;

B) There is a way to voice concerns about the Church;

C) The OW folks have specifically said, many times, that they want women ordained, and that "nothing less will suffice." That being the case, then the OW folks have abandoned any pretext in believing in revelation (since they have determined what they want, and what God has to say about it is irrelevant, since "nothing less" than what they want "will suffice"), and their petition is therefore singularly inappropriate.

 

We are discouraged from writing letters to GA's and if we do those letters are sent back to our bishop.

Since we are supposed to work through the priesthood hierarchy, and since we are now a worldwide church will millions of members, I understand and support the Church's policy in this regard. Ignoring local leaders and trying to go "straight to the top" simply doesn't work in large organizations. Moreover, we are supposed to be a "house of order." What the OW folks are doing is antithetical to that.

 

Ultimately I don't see women getting the priesthood in my lifetime. I do hope to continue to see expanded roles and chances for their voices to be heard and valued.

I am open to the possibility. But I strongly disagree with the tactics being deployed against the Church.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited September 26, 2013 by smac97

[jwhitlock]

The majority? On what planet would you be able to take an accurate poll when a group is taught that even suggesting the possibility would make them appear spiritually deficient, if not outright subversive?

 

I see. LDS women are, from your viewpoint, misinformed and propagandized to the point that any viewpoint they have consistent with church leadership must necessarily be suspect.

 

I'm sorry that you have such a low opinion of women in the church. It doesn't match my experience with them.

[smac97]

I am not talking about female ordination.

 

I am talking about how women perceive their place in the Church in general and if they sense that "something is missing" at this point, even though they may not be able to identify satisfactorily what that "something is".

I guess I'm still not seeing it. If this "something" is so vague and nebulous that it cannot even be identified, let alone quantified and explained, then is this a defect in the Church, or in individuals' perception of the Church? Are people projecting expectations onto the Church which emanate from societal expectations? Is there dissatisfaction about women not being ordained to the priesthood because the denomination down the road allows such a thing?

This discussion is getting rather fuzzy for me. I don't even understand the nature of the "something is missing" concept.

Instead they are judging from the results (lack of interest in going to Church among many young women, a growing number of women even talking about female ordination---which is a distraction, imo, from whatever the real solution will be---women investigators refusing to consider a faith where they see an inherent imbalance being ignored, growing concern over sealing differences and what they imply for women, etc.)

Who is "they?" What is it in the Church that is leading to the undesirable "results" you reference here? And since we are no longer talking about ordaining women to the priesthood, what are we talking about?

I love ya, Cal. I've known you online for several years now. I hope you see my questions as a sincere attempt at dialogue. I'm not trying to set you up or pin you down. I am just trying to understand the point you are trying to make.

Thanks,

-Smac

[jwhitlock]

Post 2 made a big deal about how the 90% is being ignored. I'd seen that argument before.

To make my position more clear: I am a man. I have no daughters and my wife doesn't care. I sympathize with those women who feel a call to the priesthood. I disagree with their tactics used but I also sympathize with those women because the church doesn't have any formal way to petition the brethren. We are discouraged from writing letters to GA's and if we do those letters are sent back to our bishop.

Ultimately I don't see women getting the priesthood in my lifetime. I do hope to continue to see expanded roles and chances for their voices to be heard and valued.

 

I don't sympathize with these women because, as smac has so ably pointed out, their ultimate motivations are suspect and inconsistent with the true nature of Christian discipleship. The voices of these particular women are divisive and self centered;. They want what they want, and not what the Lord wants.  This demand for ordination to the priesthood diverts attention from real issues confronting women in the church, and is nothing more than an attempt to impose the standards of the world on the church. Such things do not end well.

[Garden Girl]

I am a strong, opinionated Latter Day Saint woman, who loves the gospel and sustains the priesthood as it now operates.  The very small but vocal OW movement does not... repeat, not... represent me or my perspective (nor any of my ward sisters that I'm aware of).  Additionally, I do not feel guilt nor shame, or whatever. if the thought of women in the priesthood crosses my mind.  What a nonsensical idea that I would feel that way.

I am not adverse to such a happening under the right circumstances... and that is revelation which would become Official Declaration 3 in the D&C...

This agenda of the OW movement and the comments by their leaders has completely turned me off  because based on their comments it is evident they really don't care about anything except their own agenda of 1) humiliating our leaders and the Church, and 2) coercing the Brethren into their desired outcome which is priesthood ordination of women because they have already stated that anything less is unacceptable.  As if that would happen.  (So much for the will of God).

I cannot believe that the Brethren aren't very much aware and concerned about this issue, and I believe they are seeking guidance and revelation. 

 

GG

 

[smac97]

I see. LDS women are, from your viewpoint, misinformed and propagandized to the point that any viewpoint they have consistent with church leadership must necessarily be suspect.

 

I'm sorry that you have such a low opinion of women in the church. It doesn't match my experience with them.

Here's an opinion letter to the editor from one of those misinformed/propagandized LDS women. We'd better ignore what she says - she clearly can't be trusted to tell us what she really thinks because . . . shut up.

http://news.hjnews.com/opinion/article_c147d56c-2631-11e3-9561-0019bb2963f4.html

 

Don’t get a ticket for me.

I understand that a couple hundred members of a group called “Ordain Women” are planning to try to crash the Priesthood Session of the General Conference of the LDS Church coming up next week. According to a report by the Salt Lake Tribune, the group has announced that it intends to wait in the standby line at the Conference Center, hoping that some tickets will become available.

It’s not clear exactly how or even whether the women, assuming that they do get tickets, plan to gain entrance to the meeting, which is held exclusively for male members of the LDS Church. If they actually get tickets, perhaps these women believe that they will be able to get in the door simply by demanding entrance as ticket holders. Maybe they’ll threaten to sue. You can guarantee that the news media will be there to provide the attention the women seek, regardless of whether they actually get in to the meeting.

There is much about this little controversy that I don’t understand, but my first question is, “Why?”

...

If the Ordain Women group just wants to see and hear what goes on in the men’s conference session, they’re really wasting their time. For as long as I can remember, the LDS Church has published in the Ensign magazine the text of all of the talks given at General Conference. In the era of the internet, the LDS Church also posts the text of the talks on its website, www.lds.org. Anybody, anywhere in the world can get hold of a print version of the talks given in the conference meetings. The LDS Church has also just announced that the upcoming men’s meeting will be broadcast live on TV, just as is done with the other sessions. If one simply wants to know what is said in the men’s session, there is no need to go to all of this bother and cause a ruckus.

One of the leaders of Ordain Women, Kate Kelly (who is also an international human rights attorney based in Washington, D.C.), said, “... this really isn’t just about going to Priesthood Meeting. This is about the ordination of women to the Priesthood ... This is an important step toward a future where Mormon woman will participate side by side with our brothers in all important areas of leadership and life.”

This actually makes more sense but, at the same time, makes no sense at all. The irony, at least from my perspective, is that if the members of Ordain Women really believe that the LDS Church is of God, then they must also believe that the church is governed under the direction of God and that any changes happen according to God’s will and his timeline (not because of the noisy protests of activists, nor by popular vote). If the LDS Church is not of God, then there really would be no point in either trying to get into a meeting or trying to have women ordained to the Priesthood.

Personally, as a Mormon woman, I am perfectly content and at peace with my role in my faith (apart from a few overly long meetings). Truth be told, it seems to me that outspoken groups of dissenters, like Ordain Women, might well be worked up over nothing and/or might be natural crusaders looking in the wrong place for a cause.

Certainly, our democratic society needs activists. They provide a needed check and balance to the complacent continuation of things that could be improved. But should a religion be compelled to change its doctrine or practices ONLY because of perceptions of political correctness (or the lack thereof) at the moment?

I totally support the right of the Ordain Women group to voice their complaints. I just don’t understand why they are devoting so much time and energy to this particular cause. If they don’t agree with the LDS Church, no one is forcing them to participate. It seems to be not much more than a noisy exercise in futility. As Tori Amos said in The Choirgirl Hotel, “Girls, you’ve gotta know when it’s time to turn the page.”

[jwhitlock]

When changes occur in church policy, it is primarily (in my experience) in response to a specific need to build the kingdom. It removes an identifiable barrier that exists that is hindering the work from moving forward at that particular time. In the cases where the priesthood ban was lifted and polygamy was suspended, the barriers were clear and identifiable and the timing was appropriate for the Lord to direct the policy change.

 

What particular barrier that is hindering the work would be removed by ordaining women to the priesthood?

[Stone holm]

Post 2 made a big deal about how the 90% is being ignored. I'd seen that argument before.

To make my position more clear: I am a man. I have no daughters and my wife doesn't care. I sympathize with those women who feel a call to the priesthood. I disagree with their tactics used but I also sympathize with those women because the church doesn't have any formal way to petition the brethren. We are discouraged from writing letters to GA's and if we do those letters are sent back to our bishop.

Ultimately I don't see women getting the priesthood in my lifetime. I do hope to continue to see expanded roles and chances for their voices to be heard and valued.

I agree with you. I don't think a poll in this instance is of much value, it would take a very strong willed woman to overcome the psychological pressure currently existing against even thinking about it ... to respond positively. Such a woman who actually vocalized such sentiments would fall under condemnation in the eyes of her brothers and sisters, and would probably sustain at least some verbal abuse.

[jwhitlock]

I agree with you. I don't think a poll in this instance is of much value, it would take a very strong willed woman to overcome the psychological pressure currently existing against even thinking about it ... to respond positively. Such a woman who actually vocalized such sentiments would fall under condemnation in the eyes of her brothers and sisters, and would probably sustain at least some verbal abuse.

 

So anyone who disagrees with OW is guilty of verbal abuse. The church exerts significant psychological pressure on its members to not even think about ordaining women to the priesthood. Any discussion of ordaining women to the priesthood would bring immediate condemnation from faithful church members.

 

While I'm very much aware that your allegiance is primarily to the philosophies of the world, and not to the church, this is so far disconnected from reality as to be truly mind-numbing.