Nyt's "growing Role For Women"

[juliann]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/02/us/a-growing-role-for-mormon-women.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytimes&_r=1

 

This is an excellent ..and long...article.  And the most surprising quote is from Pres. Burton of the Relief Society...

 

"The church will benefit as "men's vision of the capacity of women
becomes more complete," as Sister Linda K. Burton, president of the
Relief Society, the church's auxiliary for adult women, put it. "

 

I think It was a very fair and even sympathetic treatment.

 "Yet the church's attempt to rethink the place of women promises to
be one of the most sensitive gender experiments of coming years, with
Mormon authorities running simultaneous risks of going too far and not
far enough."

 

I also liked this.  It states the need while giving credit where credit is due.

 

"Does Mormonism make women leaders? Unequivocally, yes. But it does
not know how to use them. " Joanna Brooks

 

 

[omni]

I just read the same article and had to read the quote by Pres Burton three times to make sure I understood it correctly. I originally thought she was the Relief Society President of a local ward.

[canard78]

"The church will benefit as "men's vision of the capacity of women becomes more complete," as Sister Linda K. Burton, president of the Relief Society, the church's auxiliary for adult women, put it.

Any idea where this quote is from?

Is it from an interview with the NYT? It seems a passing comment without context but is such a profound statement.

It suggests that she feels that the brothers in the church currently have an incomplete vision of the capacity of women.

[BlueDreams]

I especially like the comments for once. They're surprisingly robust and diverse in thought with 3 focused questions to answer from. Overall I thought it was pretty comprehensive. Though watching the discomfort or light answers by the sister missionaries made me aware of how teaching the younger gen more about this topic is still necessary. 

 

 

With luv,

BD

[readstoomuch]

I thought it was a great article. Is it really 2 single men per 8 single women in utah over a certain age? I could expect that number in 90 and over. Women just live longer than men, but in the middle age group? I hate to say it, but that is the kind of statistic where plural marriage starts sounding like a good idea. I don`t think it is surprising that women are going on missions and furthering there education. In fact too many men seemed to be lost in not educating themselves and going forward with their lives. It is changing the dynamics of marriage and how women (and men) think of themselves.

I have wondered why women couldn`t be given keys to run their organization, including setting apart their counselors once they were approved by the bishopric or supervising leader. The keys could always be taken back after the calling was rescinded. Women act under the priesthood in the temple, so obviously it can happen. I think women should be part of the financial decisions. The Relief Society, Young Women`s and Primary Boards need to be there when financial decisions are made. I bet they would have a positive impact on the process at all levels of the church. I think giving the keys for auxiliary organizations and having women taking part in councils would go along way and would not have to destroy the organization of the church as we know it now. I do know that depending upon the organization and location that women can and do have a significant say in how things are done, but I don`t think it is enough.

[CV75]

“I teach them correct principles [doctrine], and they govern themselves [culture].” The leaders deliver doctrines that the saints can use to govern a Zion culture, or to redefine according to the filter of a lesser culture. In either case, the keys and covenants yield the blessings according to the heed and diligence given to the doctrine and/or culture—but since these are not always congruent…

 

There are three statements in the article which, to me, show the importance of discerning and managing the difference between culture and doctrine:

 

“Church leaders have been forced to reassess their views because Mormon women are increasingly supporting households, marrying later and less frequently, and having fewer children… More and more, the church is being forced to consider the demands of women who question the guidance of their male religious leaders.”

 

I recall over 20 years ago we were counseled to use our councils to yield better results through the participation of sisters in leadership positions. Where would we be today if a) that counsel were heeded (which from the perspective of this article would have run counter to broader cultural norms of the time), and b) Mormons chose not find fulfillment in culturally-defined endeavors that would  require or lead them to marry later or at all and have fewer children. I think we would have realized the importance of women’s roles much sooner, along with a greater advancement of the doctrines of marriage, family and home in sisters’ and brothers' personal lives. In other words, the roles would have been more Zion oriented just as each member’s role should be.

 

“Culturally there’s an understanding that women’s roles are going to be more and more important, but doctrine is not going to be changing,” said Michael Otterson, who directs the church’s public affairs efforts worldwide. The new wave of returning female missionaries, he added, would amount to an “injection of really theologically well-trained women” and enrich the church “if they can make the transition back.”

 

I think the transition back has everything to do with our being able to govern ourselves (individually and collectively) correctly, where we recognize and leverage the importance of women’s roles in Zion’s councils and the obligation to live the doctrines of marriage, family and home according to the pattern of Zion.

 

Of course we have to start “somewhere,” and that “somewhere” is defined by the self-governed (for better or worse).

Edited March 2, 2014 by CV75

[why me]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/02/us/a-growing-role-for-mormon-women.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytimes&_r=1

 

This is an excellent ..and long...article.  And the most surprising quote is from Pres. Burton of the Relief Society...

 

I think It was a very fair and even sympathetic treatment.

I also liked this.  It states the need while giving credit where credit is due.

The article was rather secular in tone. I do think that Maxine Hanks came back not because of the changing roles of women in the church but for other reasons more related to spiritual experiences. But how to say this in an article? Also, it seems from the comment section that many mormon women are fulfilled in the church and consider the church a good church for giving women educational and leadership responsibilities. Also, what is missing from the article is the role of god in the lds church. Major changes would need some kind of revelation, especially when it came to women and the priesthood. 

[firepatch36]

For a simple change; I think that the third hour manuals should alternate between presidents of the church and Relief Society presidents. 

[Bikeemikey]

This is an excellent article.

[readstoomuch]

Manuals from the life RS Presidents. What an awesome idea.

[Calm]

I doubt that many of them have extensive writings given the length of service and opportunities to speak are much less, but there could definitely be an increase of using talks from women in both RS and PH.

Edited March 3, 2014 by calmoriah

[readstoomuch]

Famous Mormon women during the period of each prophet (if there are not enough teachings for each RS president)?

[wenglund]

Manuals from the life RS Presidents. What an awesome idea.

 

Men need to be careful when they say they want to see more of women.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited March 3, 2014 by wenglund

[readstoomuch]

Wade,

Sarrcasm? Serious? I hope you not implying that a Mormon male could not learn from the teachings of a General Relief Society President.

[Buckeye]

Men need to be careful when they say that want to see more of women.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

 

My ward has followed the recent counsel from general authorities to purposefully include female leaders in ward council discussions and decisions.  It's been a very good experience.  I have every expectation that additional good would result by including women in the clerk's office, sunday school presidency, and the bishopric. 

[Gray]

I hope this signals a willingness to begin considering equality for women in the church. 

[wenglund]

Wade,

Sarrcasm? Serious? I hope you not implying that a Mormon male could not learn from the teachings of a General Relief Society President.

 

Not in the least.

 

But, evidently my humor was more than a wee bit too subtle. To get the gist of it, losen the tight windings of your sensative reaction to women's issues and think benignly of my comment in terms of modest dress. Do you get the harmless joke now?

 

The interesting thing about humor is how the reactions to jokes often tell us more about the reactor than the joker.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund.

[wenglund]

In all seriousness, one of the most profound gospel principles I can think of was instilled gently and persistently withn me by the many dear women in my life.

 

From them I learned of the transcendent power of humility and unobtrusive service.

 

They taught me the higher meaning of Christ's teaching in Mark 10:35-45 (particularly verse 43).

 

They helped me understand that our role in the gospel isn't so much to seek to sit in lofty seats, or stand at pulpits, or head up congregations, but to quitely kneel to wash dirty feet and wipe away tears, tenderly touch and give comfort and heal pain, smile and spreading beauty so as to brighten people's day, non-complaintently carrying the future of the world on their hips, wisper enlightening profundity in the ear, and so much more.

 

I learned from them that true leadership may best be found in the way that many women devotedly follow.

 

Said another way, if people feel that they aren't seeing enough of women in the Church, I submit it is because they aren't looking or observing, particularly in the right places. From my perspective, I see women everywhere, doing what I deem greater things than men. And, I am moved less by what they may say in Conference or Sacrament Meeting than by what I see them doing in the classrooms and hallways of Church or in their homes or at the side of hospital beds.

 

But, that may just be me and how I chose to view things.

 

Now, the world may clamor to see more women in business and politics and group leadership and become the same as men in station and roles, etc.. And, that is their right.

 

To me, though, I see that as a step down. To each their own.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[why me]

Famous Mormon women during the period of each prophet (if there are not enough teachings for each RS president)?

Probably not. Also there is a problem with such an idea. For the presidents of the church we have people who basically receive revelation for the entire church. The relief society presidents have no such power. And this creates a problem if we were to study the ideas of these women. Basically, their opinions are ideas and ideas only and no revelation for the entire church. Also, we may not have enough teachings from these women. Who wrote down what they said? Did they save their talks to the relief society? Probably not. But what we do have are several brave women who led women to do great things for the lds community. The bottom line is that they did not mislead the sisters.

[bluebell]

Probably not. Also there is a problem with such an idea. For the presidents of the church we have people who basically receive revelation for the entire church. The relief society presidents have no such power. And this creates a problem if we were to study the ideas of these women. Basically, their opinions are ideas and ideas only and no revelation for the entire church. 

 

This doesn't make any sense.

 

We study the words of people all the time in RS and Priesthood who do not receive revelation for the entire church.  Most of the assigned fourth Sunday lesson topics (which typically come from the last GC) are talks by both men and women who do not have stewardship over the entire church.

 

If it's o.k. to study the opinions and ideas of the presiding bishop for example, or a member of the quorum of the seventy, or the Primary general presidency 1st counselor, or the current RS presidents, then why not past RS presidents?

[David T]

Priesthood Quorums could benefit from Studying a selection from 'Daughters In My Kingdom' once a month or so.

[Calm]

Probably not. Also there is a problem with such an idea. For the presidents of the church we have people who basically receive revelation for the entire church. The relief society presidents have no such power. And this creates a problem if we were to study the ideas of these women. Basically, their opinions are ideas and ideas only and no revelation for the entire church. Also, we may not have enough teachings from these women. Who wrote down what they said? Did they save their talks to the relief society? Probably not. But what we do have are several brave women who led women to do great things for the lds community. The bottom line is that they did not mislead the sisters.

If they were not capable of receiving inspiration to teach, then why in the world are they speaking in Women's Conferences?

[why me]

If they were not capable of receiving inspiration to teach, then why in the world are they speaking in Women's Conferences?

I think that the question was about having a president of relief society manuals with the teaching of relief society presidents. I don't think that we would have enough of their teachings for each to have their own manual. That was my point.

 

I don't think that it is a question of inspiration but of revelation for the entire church. With the GAs there is that point of revelation for the entire church but with the relief society presidents it would be a question of inspirational ideas.

Edited March 3, 2014 by why me

[why me]

 

If it's o.k. to study the opinions and ideas of the presiding bishop for example, or a member of the quorum of the seventy, or the Primary general presidency 1st counselor, or the current RS presidents, then why not past RS presidents?

In priesthood, the GAs are studied, basically the presidents of the church. And one reason for this is because of the priesthood and because of revelation. I just don't think that the relief society presidents would carry much weight. But it would be great to read what they once wrote. My guess is that they wrote about women's issues in the church and their gender roles.

[why me]

For example here is something from Eliza Snow about the Kirkland apostasy. It is an interesting read for a lds history class but for a priesthood lesson? I am not so sure. :

 

http://www.scottwoodward.org/churchhistory_kirtland_apostasy_elizasnow.html