Ordain Women Group Prohibited From Protesting On Church Property

[Kenngo1969]

It's not a real protest until someone's arrested.

 

[rockpond]

Well, I'm certainly not going to tie myself to any statement by Brigham Young -- on this or any other topic -- that has subsequently been shown to be unwise.

True. But the fact that those statements were quoted, by prophets and apostles, throughout the years shows that it was an official teaching and was promulgated for at least a century that there would be a millennial restoration of the priesthood to blacks. Some prophets and apostles stated that it would be "someday" but the teaching from the man who instituted the ban, the teaching that was being put forward by the prophet in his official capacity as late as 1949 was that the blacks would receive the priesthood in the millennium.

Why is this important? Because some choose to keep repeating the falsehood that what happened in 1978 was what was expected from the beginning. When in fact, the OD2 revelation wasn't a fulfillment of prophetic teachings, it was a reversal of them.

Similarly, future revelation therefore could reverse past and current prophetic teachings... Including ordination of women.

[Scott Lloyd]

True. But the fact that those statements were quoted, by prophets and apostles, throughout the years shows that it was an official teaching and was promulgated for at least a century that there would be a millennial restoration of the priesthood to blacks. Some prophets and apostles stated that it would be "someday" but the teaching from the man who instituted the ban, the teaching that was being put forward by the prophet in his official capacity as late as 1949 was that the blacks would receive the priesthood in the millennium.

Why is this important? Because some choose to keep repeating the falsehood that what happened in 1978 was what was expected from the beginning. When in fact, the OD2 revelation wasn't a fulfillment of prophetic teachings, it was a reversal of them.

Similarly, future revelation therefore could reverse past and current prophetic teachings... Including ordination of women.

Was 1949 the last time Brigham Young's statement was referenced in any First Presidency message? That was five years before I was born.

 

President McKay and the Twelve considered lifting the restriction in the '60s.

 

And President Kimball went to the Lord in prayer repeatedly in the '70s, before the revelation finally came in 1978.

 

So, if I don't consider Brigham Young's statement about "all of Adam's posterity" as having had binding effect, apparently I am in good company.

 

What was consistent throughout, however, was that the foregone conclusion that it would one day be lifted.

 

Again, that has never been the case with regard to the ordination of women.

[Tacenda]

http://www.chroniclesofshe.com/2014/03/womens-ordination-in-lds-church.html

 

My very TBM niece commented on this post on FB.  I think you'd be proud, she said what most on here would have said.  But just wanted to share that another very TBM gal joined OW.  Maybe some of you can read what she posted in her blog.  She has some great points. 

[juliann]

It is hard to believe that a practicing human rights attorney (from Washington DC, no less) would be either naive or non-politically astute.

 

Just sayin'...

 

-Allen

 

She really does have an impressive background! But I didn't see her using her international work with women at all which is unfortunate. I think it could have really added to the discussion.  There is just a bit of tone deafness in some statements....

[juliann]

I suspect she has chosen to sell her soul to achieve her objectives. 

Ironically, this is what Kelly accused McBaine and Young of doing. It was really unfortunate coming from an advocate for women.  But we all need to stop the personal attacks.  It makes it impossible to claim the higher ground.

[juliann]

 

 

You indicated, when challenged about your assertion that women were ordained to the priesthood in Biblical times that we could "start" with Romans 16. Is this the best example you have?

I don't think this is a point worth arguing. There is evidence for and evidence against, depending who you are. When combined with the archaeological evidence of office holding women, a case can be made. And we do have to remember that there is also no solid evidence that Paul, who is called apostle,  was one of the 12. The fact that women had to be told to shut up also indicates they once had an active part in affairs...which we do know because women's space was the household and that is where church was being held.

[mtomm]

http://www.chroniclesofshe.com/2014/03/womens-ordination-in-lds-church.html

 

My very TBM niece commented on this post on FB.  I think you'd be proud, she said what most on here would have said.  But just wanted to share that another very TBM gal joined OW.  Maybe some of you can read what she posted in her blog.  She has some great points. 

 

 

This is the part the struck me as significant:

i posted not to ask or beg leaders for ordination, but to let them know, i am out there. the church has not provided me the avenue to share my opinion on this topic with church leaders, and this group is being heard. and i guess when the church says that the overwhelming majority of women do not want ordination, i just need to share that i am not part of that group.

[Scott Lloyd]

I don't think this is a point worth arguing. There is evidence for and evidence against, depending who you are. When combined with the archaeological evidence of office holding women, a case can be made. And we do have to remember that there is also no solid evidence that Paul, who is called apostle,  was one of the 12. The fact that women had to be told to shut up also indicates they once had an active part in affairs...which we do know because women's space was the household and that is where church was being held.

It's not a question of whether they played an active part in the affairs of the Church. Women do that today.

[bluebell]

This is the part the struck me as significant:

i posted not to ask or beg leaders for ordination, but to let them know, i am out there. the church has not provided me the avenue to share my opinion on this topic with church leaders, and this group is being heard. and i guess when the church says that the overwhelming majority of women do not want ordination, i just need to share that i am not part of that group.

I'm wondering if some people believe that the number of women who want the priesthood will affect whether or not they get it?  Do they believe that if the majority of women wanted it, then they would get it?

I'm not suggesting that they don't have a reason to let church leaders know they want it, especially if some church leaders are going to make the number of women who want the priesthood an issue.

 

I'm just wondering if that is the only reason they believe it is important for church members to know?

[rockpond]

Was 1949 the last time Brigham Young's statement was referenced in any First Presidency message? That was five years before I was born.

 

President McKay and the Twelve considered lifting the restriction in the '60s.

 

And President Kimball went to the Lord in prayer repeatedly in the '70s, before the revelation finally came in 1978.

 

So, if I don't consider Brigham Young's statement about "all of Adam's posterity" as having had binding effect, apparently I am in good company.

 

What was consistent throughout, however, was that the foregone conclusion that it would one day be lifted.

 

Again, that has never been the case with regard to the ordination of women.

 

I don't know if BY's teaching about a millenial restoration was ever officially taught after 1949 -- as far as I can tell, the quote has been removed from the database of teachings on LDS.org... not surprising since other BY teachings have also had to be sanitized.

 

My guess is that, having appeared in a First Presidency letter, it was probably repeated for some years after 1949.  You are definitely in good company in believing differently.  But BY's teaching was promulgated through the vast majority of the time that the ban was in place.  To say "What was consistent throughout, however, was that the foregone conclusion that it would one day be lifted." is an oversimplification that allows you to casually dismiss the fact that multiple prophets were wrong about when the ban would be lifted.  Why were they wrong?  That's the important question to attempt to understand as it could help us understand other issues.

 

And if they were wrong about something of that significance, they could also be wrong about the ordination of women.

[mtomm]

I'm wondering if some people believe that the number of women who want the priesthood will affect whether or not they get it?  Do they believe that if the majority of women wanted it, then they would get it?

I'm not suggesting that they don't have a reason to let church leaders know they want it, especially if some church leaders are going to make the number of women who want the priesthood an issue.

 

I'm just wondering if that is the only reason they believe it is important for church members to know?

 

That is a good question and I bet it varies for each woman for whom this issue is significant.  Would the brethren have even considered praying about it (if they have or will) if some women didn't voice a desire for it?  

 

I think the even more important part of her comment was the fact that she felt she had no other way of voicing her feelings that she was willing and ready to receive the priesthood.  

[Stone holm]

I'm wondering if some people believe that the number of women who want the priesthood will affect whether or not they get it?  Do they believe that if the majority of women wanted it, then they would get it?

I'm not suggesting that they don't have a reason to let church leaders know they want it, especially if some church leaders are going to make the number of women who want the priesthood an issue.

 

I'm just wondering if that is the only reason they believe it is important for church members to know?

I find the whole reference to a majority of the women really odd. First we have prophet, seers, and revelators make it clear that women are not entitled to the Priesthood, and that the role of women is not to be in the governing lines of authority in the Church, and then we reference oh by the way they really don't want it anyway? Does this not jangle anyone else's ears?

[rockpond]

I'm not suggesting that they don't have a reason to let church leaders know they want it, especially if some church leaders are going to make the number of women who want the priesthood an issue.

 

The church leaders just made it an issue by using that (% of LDS women wanting ordination) as a defensive point in their letter to the OW group.  They effectively kicked that door wide open.

 

There are so many parts of that letter that surprise me.

[rockpond]

I find the whole reference to a majority of the women really odd. First we have prophet, seers, and revelators make it clear that women are not entitled to the Priesthood, and that the role of women is not to be in the governing lines of authority in the Church, and then we reference oh by the way they really don't want it anyway? Does this not jangle anyone else's ears?

 

Yes -- ears are definitely jangling.

 

I think that the PA dept, in this case, should have remained silent on the issue.  Primum non nocere.  Instead, they have elevated the media attention and made a point of saying:  we're tracking the percent of women who feel similarly.  Wow!

[Stone holm]

Yes -- ears are definitely jangling.

 

I think that the PA dept, in this case, should have remained silent on the issue.  Primum non nocere.  Instead, they have elevated the media attention and made a point of saying:  we're tracking the percent of women who feel similarly.  Wow!

And really, how meaningful are those statistics, most faithful Latter Day Saints would feel they are not sustaining the Brethren if they were to ask for the Priesthood, and then turn around and say, "See we told you they didn't want."

[awyatt]

And really, how meaningful are those statistics, most faithful Latter Day Saints would feel they are not sustaining the Brethren if they were to ask for the Priesthood, and then turn around and say, "See we told you they didn't want."

Probably less meaningful to members who do (for the most part) have at least a concept of authoritative statements by the Brethren not being domineering or oppressive. For those outside the Church, however, "what the majority feels" does have significance.

Any statements by "the Church" (or, if you prefer, "Public Affairs") must be made with a bifurcated audience in mind.

-Allen

[ERayR]

 

Please share with us all the smear you can, so that the choice will be clear to vilify our Sisters in Christ. And by context, anyone recommend holding member who supports the OW group, needs to turn in their recommend because they associate with an apostate.

 

My such hyperbole.  Don't hold back so please tell us how you really feel.  Oh by the way you are also very good at constructing straw men.

[bluebell]

The church leaders just made it an issue by using that (% of LDS women wanting ordination) as a defensive point in their letter to the OW group.  They effectively kicked that door wide open.

 

 

 

Yes, i agree.

 

I'm not sure if the letter meant to let the rest of the world know (since i'm sure they knew it would be public) how most Mormon women feel, or something else.  It doesn't bother me that they mentioned it.

[bluebell]

I find the whole reference to a majority of the women really odd. First we have prophet, seers, and revelators make it clear that women are not entitled to the Priesthood, and that the role of women is not to be in the governing lines of authority in the Church, and then we reference oh by the way they really don't want it anyway? Does this not jangle anyone else's ears?

I know i just mentioned this but i'll say it again in reference to this post-

 

If i had to guess, i would guess that the church said that for the benefit of the public, to let outsiders know what is really going on for most Mormon women.  If you have a group of people telling the public that Mormon women are suppressed and unhappy, then it seems very reasonable for that organization to counter that.

 

However, unless they tell us exactly why the numbers matter, it's all just speculation.

[bluebell]

Yes -- ears are definitely jangling.

 

I think that the PA dept, in this case, should have remained silent on the issue.  Primum non nocere.  Instead, they have elevated the media attention and made a point of saying:  we're tracking the percent of women who feel similarly.  Wow!

 

To be fair though, OW (and others) has sometimes implied that the church doesn't care how women feel.  It seems valid for the Church to let the public know that that is not true.  It also seems valid for the church to track such in the first place, especially if a group of women start to proclaim that the women in the church want the priesthood.

 

This kind of seems like one of those issues where the church just can't win:  They are jerks if they don't care what women want, but they aren't allowed to try to find out what women want or share the results with the public.

[bluebell]

And really, how meaningful are those statistics, most faithful Latter Day Saints would feel they are not sustaining the Brethren if they were to ask for the Priesthood, and then turn around and say, "See we told you they didn't want."

 

Last one I promise!  

 

If we are supposed to respect the women who tell us they want the priesthood, and to take them at their word, then we also have to respect the women who don't want it and to take them at their word.

[rockpond]

To be fair though, OW (and others) has sometimes implied that the church doesn't care how women feel. It seems valid for the Church to let the public know that that is not true. It also seems valid for the church to track such in the first place, especially if a group of women start to proclaim that the women in the church want the priesthood.

This kind of seems like one of those issues where the church just can't win: They are jerks if they don't care what women want, but they aren't allowed to try to find out what women want or share the results with the public.

Yes, I think that writing the letter, almost regardless of content, was a no win situation.

It's surprising considering how effectively they handled the Monson-Phillips case.

[juliann]

And really, how meaningful are those statistics, most faithful Latter Day Saints would feel they are not sustaining the Brethren if they were to ask for the Priesthood, and then turn around and say, "See we told you they didn't want."

It is meaningful because it comes from Pew. That is why it was such an effective response, it is bullet proof.   The church can't be attacked for it...all that can be done is to try and diminish highly respected pollsters.  I am also seeing the claim that it would come out differently if done today or that the questions asked were faulty. But none of that has anything to do with the church.  The only rescue from this is another poll.

[Calm]

What i find hard to believe is that she keeps doing it.

 

We all say dumb stuff sometimes-that's a given.  But when you are functioning as a spokesperson for a group, you would think that you would start to learn from your mistakes and get the hang of it. Especially because so much rides on your words alone and you are not speaking only for yourself.

 

But some of the things you have pointed out, where she said something that really was not a good thing to say, have been said just in the last couple of months, or even weeks.  

 

I wonder (and this is pure speculation) if maybe she just doesn't care.  I think we've all met people who consistently stick their foot in their mouths because they like that part of their personality and don't want to change it.  They consider it 'just being honest' or 'being brave enough to say what's on your mind', etc.  Perhaps Kelly is one of those people who believes that her honest reactions and words, however it is received, is always best?

Her mother said she has always been able to get what she wanted, if it was available she would put in the work to make it available. She talks about doing things her way on her mission. No mention iirc of her ever having to compromise. If it has worked for her so far...yeah, I can see this as possible.