Nyt's "growing Role For Women"

[Calm]

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.

And yet you stated:

 

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.

Even if you meant "inspirational ideas and inspirational ideas only", given that not everything taught in the manuals of the Presidents are revelations and some of them may even be opinions (though usually based on good common sense and experience so I am not saying they aren't worth paying attention to), your separation of the importance of RS Presidents' teachings from Church Presidents' based on inspiration vs. revelation doesn't work.

[Calm]

Kirkland 

Please..."Kirtland".  I don't know why but this common mistake/typo really annoys me.

Edited March 3, 2014 by calmoriah

[Calm]

 I just don't think that the relief society presidents would carry much weight. 

Because without the Priesthood, their inspiration isn't as valuable?

 

My guess is that they wrote about women's issues in the church and their gender roles.

 

So you don't have much of a clue about what they wrote, but you know it 'wouldn't carry much weight'.

Edited March 3, 2014 by calmoriah

[Calm]

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

And if a President of the Church wrote this, do you think it would be appropriate for a priesthood lesson?

[bluebell]

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.

 

I don't think it has anything to do with the priesthood.  

 

I agree that the women's words probably don't carry as much weight, but that is just sexist cultural tradition and not doctrinal.  

[why me]

And yet you stated:

 

Even if you meant "inspirational ideas and inspirational ideas only", given that not everything taught in the manuals of the Presidents are revelations and some of them may even be opinions (though usually based on good common sense and experience so I am not saying they aren't worth paying attention to), your separation of the importance of RS Presidents' teachings from Church Presidents' based on inspiration vs. revelation doesn't work.

I think that the problem comes from perception. Since the leaders are men and they have the priesthood, it would seem that their ideas or opinions carry more weight when it comes to following their counsel. I am not sure if any relief society president ever had a revelation or an inspiration for the entire membership of the church or claimed to receive a revelation about what the members should do. Or did they receive revelations about the relief society and about the women involved. .

[why me]

Because without the Priesthood, their inspiration isn't as valuable?

 

So you don't have much of a clue about what they wrote, but you know it 'wouldn't carry much weight'.

I am all in favor of manuals about the teachings of relief society presidents, studied in priesthood. I just don't think that their ideas would carry as much weight as the teachings of the prophets. But I could be wrong.

[Calm]

http://bycommonconsent.com/2013/11/26/eliza-r-snow-and-the-inclusivity-of-the-gospel/

[why me]

I don't think it has anything to do with the priesthood.  

 

I agree that the women's words probably don't carry as much weight, but that is just sexist cultural tradition and not doctrinal.  

I think that the problem is rather simple. Most of the relief society presidents spoke to women and their roles. We see this in their talks at conference. So, their teachings or inspirations tend to be women specific. And that would be a problem for a priesthood year of study. But I do think that the sisters do get the teachings of relief society presidents. But I am not sure about this.

[Calm]

I think that the problem comes from perception. Since the leaders are men and they have the priesthood, it would seem that their ideas or opinions carry more weight when it comes to following their counsel. I am not sure if any relief society president ever had a revelation or an inspiration for the entire membership of the church or claimed to receive a revelation about what the members should do. Or did they receive revelations about the relief society and about the women involved. .

And how will that perception ever change if an effort is not made to share the inspirational teachings of women as well as men to priesthood holders?  If it is relevant to women to quote talks given to the Priesthood (and I have heard such talks quoted in RS), then why wouldn't it be relevant to share teachings given to women?  It is not like we are two completely different species on two different worlds and have nothing to do with each other.

 

Disregard the need to spend a whole year on one person.  Why not simply have a lesson on a woman's talk in conference both in Priesthood and in RS.  If women can adapt Priesthood talks for RS, then men can adapt women's talks in General Conference.

Edited March 3, 2014 by calmoriah

[why me]

http://bycommonconsent.com/2013/11/26/eliza-r-snow-and-the-inclusivity-of-the-gospel/

As we can see, this talk with some of Eliza's ideas do seem to be gender specific. Which was my point.

 

To me, Christ reversed the social order, lifting up those that others had cast aside because of their poverty or sins. It’s not a coincidence to me that so many of those He ministered to in this way were women, given the gross historic oppression of women in virtually every society. With the theme, Charity Never Faileth, the Relief Society is to me the most natural restoration of Christ’s mission. Built up by remarkable foremothers like Eliza R Snow, I’m so happy to be a member of that organisation which does nothing but lift and support our ward and community members without judgment. I think about all the Relief Society congregations I’ve been privileged to be a part of since I turned 18, and think President Snow would be proud to see what the organisation she worked so hard to build had become in these days.

 

The above was from your link.

[bluebell]

I think that the problem is rather simple. Most of the relief society presidents spoke to women and their roles. We see this in their talks at conference. So, their teachings or inspirations tend to be women specific. And that would be a problem for a priesthood year of study. But I do think that the sisters do get the teachings of relief society presidents. But I am not sure about this.

 

Last week we studied Pres. Eyring's talk that was given at the priesthood session.  It was 'men' specific and about men and their roles.

 

Yet it was taught in RS as no one had any problem translating the teachings and inspiration into their own lives.

 

Maybe i'm giving the men too much credit, but if women can manage to do this (and we do it all the time) then surely men are just as capable.

[why me]

And how will that perception ever change if an effort is not made to share the inspirational teachings of women as well as men to priesthood holders?  If it is relevant to women to quote talks given to the Priesthood (and I have heard such talks quoted in RS), then why wouldn't it be relevant to share teachings given to women?  It is not like we are two completely different species on two different worlds and have nothing to do with each other.

 

Disregard the need to spend a whole year on one person.  Why not simply have a lesson on a woman's talk in conference both in Priesthood and in RS.  If women can adapt Priesthood talks for RS, then men can adapt women's talks in General Conference.

I am all in favor of the priesthood having to study the teachings of relief society presidents for one year as they study the prophets of the church. The priesthood can study a different relief society president each year. I have no problem with it at all. But i don't see it happening anytime soon. Maybe the women and the men of the church can write salt lake about it. If enough members write, it just may happen.

[why me]

Last week we studied Pres. Eyring's talk that was given at the priesthood session.  It was 'men' specific and about men and their roles.

 

Yet it was taught in RS as no one had any problem translating the teachings and inspiration into their own lives.

 

Maybe i'm giving the men too much credit, but if women can manage to do this (and we do it all the time) then surely men are just as capable.

This is because President Eyring can receive revelation for the entire church. I am not sure that relief society presidents have such power. And the priesthood carries some weight for both genders. But i have no problem in learning from relief society presidents. I just don't think that it will happen mainly because relief society presidents are very much gender specific.

 

But here is an interesting part of his talk to the priesthood:

 

He knows whose wife was near the breaking point because her husband was unable to find time to do what she needed done to care for her needs. He knows which children would be blessed by seeing their father go one more time to help others or if the children needed the feeling that they matter to their father enough for him to spend time with them that day. But He also knows who needs the invitation to serve but might not appear to be a likely or willing candidate.

You cannot know all your quorum members perfectly well, but God does. So, as you have done so many times, you prayed to know whom to ask to help serve others. The Lord knows who will be blessed by being asked to help and whose family will be blessed by not being asked. That is the revelation you can expect to come to you as you lead in the priesthood.

 

The rest of the talk was about priesthood service and the work that needs to be done and why. I do think that the message for the women was simple: support your husband in his priesthood calling with compassion and love for he has a great work to do.

[Calm]

I do think that the message for the women was simple: support your husband in his priesthood calling with compassion and love for he has a great work to do.

And how is telling men that supporting your wife in her callings with compassion and love because she has a great work to do not authoritative simply because it is a woman leader speaking it and not a man? Don't you think women leaders have insight and inspiration into what women in the Church need and therefore since men are married to women, are sons and brothers of women they could therefore profit from listening to such guidance?

And again…this attitude that women's words don't carry weight because they lack the priesthood…well, that will never change if they are continued to be neglected. Personally I expect given the other evidences of change including this article, that we will be seeing much more of women speaking to all members of the Church as well as to women specifically in the future and thus perhaps in another generation or two, there won't be anyone saying "women's words don't carry as much weight, etc. etc…".

[wenglund]

Note to Why Me: When you find that you are in a hole...stop digging.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[readstoomuch]

Just to get this out there, I am not for ordaining women. I am very much into making women have an expanded role in our Church. As I said before giving keys over to a calling so someone could be set apart, women`s organizations involvement in financial decisions and others as I mentioned.

These women leaders receive inspiration from the Holy Ghost and I would be tickled pink to have a manual based on Relief Society Presidents teachings. I was just thinking that it was always a woman who taught me the gospel. I don`t remember having a man for a teacher in church until I was 12. If we trust them to be the sole guardians (mostly) of teaching our children, we can sure as heck use their teachings as a manual. They have a lot to add and I am not talking the talk because feminism is in vogue. It is just the plain truth. The same as women`s stories underrepresented in the scriptures, it is time to hear the voice of The Lord as communicated through his servants whatever the organization that they head up. My two bits.

[bluebell]

This is because President Eyring can receive revelation for the entire church. I am not sure that relief society presidents have such power. And the priesthood carries some weight for both genders. But i have no problem in learning from relief society presidents. I just don't think that it will happen mainly because relief society presidents are very much gender specific.

 

But here is an interesting part of his talk to the priesthood:

 

He knows whose wife was near the breaking point because her husband was unable to find time to do what she needed done to care for her needs. He knows which children would be blessed by seeing their father go one more time to help others or if the children needed the feeling that they matter to their father enough for him to spend time with them that day. But He also knows who needs the invitation to serve but might not appear to be a likely or willing candidate.

You cannot know all your quorum members perfectly well, but God does. So, as you have done so many times, you prayed to know whom to ask to help serve others. The Lord knows who will be blessed by being asked to help and whose family will be blessed by not being asked. That is the revelation you can expect to come to you as you lead in the priesthood.

 

The rest of the talk was about priesthood service and the work that needs to be done and why. I do think that the message for the women was simple: support your husband in his priesthood calling with compassion and love for he has a great work to do.

 

First, I thought that only the prophet could receive revelation for the whole church?

 

Second, RS presidents are no more or less gender specific than Pres. Eyring's talk.  They are no more or less gender specific than the scriptures.  Women are expected to take male-centric lessons and transfer them into their own lives all the time.  And we do it because it's not that hard of a thing to do.    

 

Third, i was in that lesson and i can promise that the 'message' we got from it was not about how to support our husbands.  We took the words of Pres. Eyering and 'likened them unto ourselves,' not unto our husbands.  

Edited March 3, 2014 by bluebell

[cinepro]

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.

 

If anyone disagrees with this, you're delusional.  There is no way we would ever have a Priesthood manual based on the teachings of a female leader.  Obviously, a RS President (including the General RS President) can teach many good, eloquent, inspired and true things.  The problem is that when a Prophet teaches something, it is true because he teaches it.  We would be just as likely to have a manual based on the teachings of non-GA men as we would to have a manual based on the teachings of women leaders.

 

It might be fun to imagine otherwise, but let's not let our imaginations run too wild.

[bluebell]

 

If anyone disagrees with this, you're delusional.  There is no way we would ever have a Priesthood manual based on the teachings of a female leader.  Obviously, a RS President (including the General RS President) can teach many good, eloquent, inspired and true things.  The problem is that when a Prophet teaches something, it is true because he teaches it.  We would be just as likely to have a manual based on the teachings of non-GA men as we would to have a manual based on the teachings of women leaders.

 

It might be fun to imagine otherwise, but let's not let our imaginations run too wild.

 

I disagree.

 

I don't think it will be to long in the future before priesthood lessons will routinely include the teachings of women.

 

As I said in a previous post, RS and priesthood lessons already routinely include the teachings of men and women who aren't the prophet (and therefore, for whom their words are not true just because they taught them), and no one has gone rogue because of it yet.

 

How would a lesson manual based on a non-prophet be any different theologically than what is already routinely happening?

[why me]

Note to Why Me: When you find that you are in a hole...stop digging.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I don't understand what the problem is with what I am saying. Basically, what I am saying is that we will not be having any teachings of the relief society presidents manuals anytime soon for the priesthood lessons. But I am willing to see changes. I have no problem with that at all.

[why me]

 

 The problem is that when a Prophet teaches something, it is true because he teaches it.  We would be just as likely to have a manual based on the teachings of non-GA men as we would to have a manual based on the teachings of women leaders.

 

It might be fun to imagine otherwise, but let's not let our imaginations run too wild.

This was my point too. I think that there could be some ideas from Relief Society GAs. Basically what should be done is to do away with relief society and priesthood meetings and have both genders meet as one after sunday school. Then there could be a mixture of GAs and GA women from the past. A sort of mixture of the priesthood manual and relief society topics.

 

But since relief society presidents generally were very gender specific, one would need a little imagination as a man to find the ideas useful.

[bluebell]

.

 

But since relief society presidents generally were very gender specific, one would need a little imagination as a man to find the ideas useful.

 

Seriously guys, get over it. 

 

Women do this constantly at church.  Constantly.  

 

Men need to man up with this kind of thing.  

[why me]

Seriously guys, get over it. 

 

Women do this constantly at church.  Constantly.  

 

Men need to man up with this kind of thing.  

But much of what the GAs say is for both genders. The priesthood manual can be for both genders because many of the ideas in them are general, for all members of the church and not for one specific gender identity.

[Tacenda]

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.

I think this is the beginnings of a hole being dug... ETA: Oops, Wade beat me to it! Edited March 3, 2014 by Tacenda