Ny Times Article: Kate Kelly And John Dehlin Threatened With Excommunication

[frank_jessop]

deleted

Edited June 18, 2014 by frank_jessop

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Official statement of the LDS Church "Approaching Mormon Doctrine":

"Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine."

 

You are right, however when it is repeated over the pulpit and put in print and is found in manuals, looking at how you interpret it, would think it OK to toss aside as mere opinion. The statement also tells us that there are statements that are made that are doctrine. So you can't have your cake and eat it too.

[Tacenda]

I remember a time when in the middle of the night my daughter had croup and couldn't breath well. I was so embarrassed to get someone out of bed to help my husband give the blessing, that I said some things that made my husband think I didn't believe in the PH. For a long time he wouldn't use it and blamed my reaction that night. What if I were able to place my hands on my daughter's head instead, or pour the oil? Such a simple thing, but since Eve ate the fruit we pay for that? According to someone's post on here? What happened to we're not condemed for Adam's transgression...oh wait, women are because of Eve's transgression? In an out there way, IMO?

Is JS rolling in his grave (figure of speech) to see this, since in his day women were given that authority? Maybe it does stem from BY.

[Zakuska]

But the personal attacks and insinuations were the best part.

As to the Gospel Principles manual of course it is wrong. It is basic. It speaks in generalities. In one portion it speaks about how all will die. Well, technically that is wrong. Some are translated and some twinkle resurrected. Still the general case is correct and putting in all the exceptions in would only confuse the target audience.

Ah yes.. there's the ticket the General populous of the church is too dumb to understand. Gotcha.

[Zakuska]

 

Jonathan Stapley and Kristine Wright have a very good article available here: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1754069

 

Changes to policy regarding female ritual healings and anointings began at the beginning of the 20th century. By the 1950's to 1960's they had all but ceased. 

 

The last official word on the matter is summarized as follows:

 

 

Also related is this story from Edward Kimball (son of Pres. Spencer W. Kimball)

 

ETA: I find this loss particularly sad and look forward to a day when it's practice is reinstated.

 

Me TOO!

[The Nehor]

Ah yes.. there's the ticket the General populous of the church is too dumb to understand. Gotcha.

Uhhhh.... Gospel Principles is for investigators and recent converts. I know. I taught that class for 3 years and am subbing for it on Sunday.

But yes, the general memberships of the church is quite dumb. Look at how many followed "Embraced by the Light" and read "Twilight".

[Zakuska]

I remember a time when in the middle of the night my daughter had croup and couldn't breath well. I was so embarrassed to get someone out of bed to help my husband give the blessing, that I said some things that made my husband think I didn't believe in the PH. For a long time he wouldn't use it and blamed my reaction that night. What if I were able to place my hands on my daughter's head instead, or pour the oil? Such a simple thing, but since Eve ate the fruit we pay for that? According to someone's post on here? What happened to we're not condemed for Adam's transgression...oh wait, women are because of Eve's transgression? In an out there way, IMO?

Is JS rolling in his grave (figure of speech) to see this, since in his day women were given that authority? Maybe it does stem from BY.

That was my post. I've since changed my stance.  Its high time that women in this church were not required to use veils when praying and behold openly and for Eve to be redeemed from her predicament.

Edited June 18, 2014 by Zakuska

[Zakuska]

Uhhhh.... Gospel Principles is for investigators and recent converts. I know. I taught that class for 3 years and am subbing for it on Sunday.

But yes, the general memberships of the church is quite dumb. Look at how many followed "Embraced by the Light" and read "Twilight".

Taught it for five.

 

And thanks for revealing your disdain for your fellow church members.  :thumbsup:

Edited June 18, 2014 by Zakuska

[Rain]

Priesthood leaders can only feel inspired about people they are willing to consider for priesthood roles. If you are praying about either Bob or Dave as next Bishop of Ward X, you'll only feel inspiration about Bob or Dave, not about Jane, who you haven't even thought about. 

Often that is the case, but it is not the case 100% of the time. I've found that when I have been doing what I can to stay in tune with the Spirit then I have inspirations that I never would have thought of on my own.  As a bishop with responsibility for everyone in his ward, member and not it is entirely possible that he can have inspiration over someone he isn't praying about.  In cases, like "Jane" here, then it would be very wise to pray about it after having that inspiration to make sure it is inspiration. 

 

.... I'm also beginning to come to a personal belief that what this looks like is a very partnered work within the priesthood of male and female parts to create a whole tapestry. Apart of that, may be preliminary to receiving those other keys that Oaks pointed out. But they're still growing thoughts that could use greater development. 

 

 

That's kind of how I feel about it.  I've felt to such a strong degree that this is a partnership that I sometimes have a rough time with the idea of women being given the priesthood/given keys/ordained/whatever you want to call it. The way I understand it now is women and men work together as a whole/one.  I think there is great power and strength in that oneness and by trying make everyone have the same responsibilities the whole loses power.  It's really difficult for me to explain.

[The Nehor]

I remember a time when in the middle of the night my daughter had croup and couldn't breath well. I was so embarrassed to get someone out of bed to help my husband give the blessing, that I said some things that made my husband think I didn't believe in the PH. For a long time he wouldn't use it and blamed my reaction that night. What if I were able to place my hands on my daughter's head instead, or pour the oil? Such a simple thing, but since Eve ate the fruit we pay for that? According to someone's post on here? What happened to we're not condemed for Adam's transgression...oh wait, women are because of Eve's transgression? In an out there way, IMO?

Is JS rolling in his grave (figure of speech) to see this, since in his day women were given that authority? Maybe it does stem from BY.

Why did he just not give the blessing himself? I know it is preferred to have more but it is not mandatory. I have given four blessings in he last month and was the only administrator in three of them.

[The Nehor]

Taugh it for five.

 

And thanks for reveailing your disdaine for your fellow church members.

:thumbsup:

I do not have disdain for them. I am just recognizing that there are a lot of idiots amongst them. A lot of them are fat too. Why do we have to tiptoe around these facts?

[juliann]

I am for the revelation and restoration too. But the reality is that you really don't need it. Is that really a good answer for not giving it to women? No. And that is not my position. If women are to receive it I won't have an issue with it. I just thought there had been a president set. And as far a I knew the specifics of women not getting the priesthood in the same capacity as men was not cultural. Somethings that you have brought up definitely are cultural though and those will change and I doubt anybody will make a fuss about them.

 

I think really the issue I have is the same as Smac, that the "less than nothing will suffice". That really is a poopy attitude to have.

 

And unfortunately feminism has been hijacked by radicals and so it has gotten a bad rap. And I have a hard time sometimes telling the difference between classical feminists and the 60's radical feminist.

But what if the only the rhetoric was revised to sound welcoming and positive?  So rather than saying, I'm for it but you really don't need it, acknowledge the blessings the gift of the priesthood has given you personally, make the priesthood look like something beyond wonderful. Then acknowledge that of course everyone should want that, it is a righteous desire to want everything God has to give.  But there is a process and it must be very hard for many to be patient given the stakes.  The inequities can be acknowledged and the hope that women will be restored, even though it may not be the priesthood.

 

OWites have been making a concerted effort to deny that any such ultimatum was given. But it is too easily cut and pasted for that to fly.  I am seeing more reasonable blogging now but still too much demonization of the church. Which again, can easily be cut and pasted. They are currently engaging in every behavior they have been sometimes unfairly accused of. I find it astonishing.  

 

But that stands aside from the underlying issues and when this becomes all about the women themselves instead of those areas where there is agreement with the moderates that more inclusion is needed, it reflects very poorly on those who represent the church.  I don't mind airing gripes about what they are doing, I certainly have a few, but this no no no no no stuff prevents the kind of study and seeking Ally Islom said we are to be doing.

Edited June 18, 2014 by juliann

[Zakuska]

Why did he just not give the blessing himself? I know it is preferred to have more but it is not mandatory. I have given four blessings in he last month and was the only administrator in three of them.

He probably grew up in the 70s and 80s like I did and was taught that that was a big no no.

[The Nehor]

He probably grew up in the 70s and 80s like I did and was taught that that was a big no no.

I grew up in the 80s. Maybe I am being rebellious? But God still inspires me when I give them? Hmm...

[Zakuska]

I grew up in the 80s. Maybe I am being rebellious? But God still inspires me when I give them? Hmm...

No I was saying that we were taught that it was a mandiatory  thing for 2 or more.  It seems that the church has come out in the recent manuals and soften and corrected that stance. 

[The Nehor]

No I was saying that we were taught that it was a mandiatory  thing for 2 or more.  It seems that the church has come out in the recent manuals and soften and corrected that stance.

Really? My entire family was breaking the rules all the time then. Ooops.

[juliann]

I remember a time when in the middle of the night my daughter had croup and couldn't breath well. I was so embarrassed to get someone out of bed to help my husband give the blessing, that I said some things that made my husband think I didn't believe in the PH. For a long time he wouldn't use it and blamed my reaction that night. What if I were able to place my hands on my daughter's head instead, or pour the oil? Such a simple thing, but since Eve ate the fruit we pay for that? According to someone's post on here? What happened to we're not condemed for Adam's transgression...oh wait, women are because of Eve's transgression? In an out there way, IMO?

 

I think recent talks have made it very clear that women can give blessings through faith, we also have gifts of the spirit. When my husband was dying, there were many times that I got results from prayer. I don't consider myself handicapped in the least when it comes to that sort of thing.  As Elder Oaks said, we should speak with authority. We have it.

 

This is where women have to start taking some responsibility for discovery. The discussions that Sis. Islom said should be happening in RS, will make a huge difference... if the self-righteous condemnation of those who don't follow the unwritten rule book will just stop.

[BlueDreams]

What a sec. The issue is that what women can do vs what men can do. It very much is the same thing here. And though child bearing is painful, the point is that you experience a certain bond with your kids that your husband never will. That is what I am talking about. Not every thing is equal all the time. I am sorry you think these 2 things are not related. I see them as very much related in terms of specific roles. We will just have to agree to disagree on this.

Yeah....as long as the mother doesn't die. Or have postpartum depression that can make that "certain bond" more difficult to initially establish.

 

And I personally view birth as a form of potential ordinance. You're right, not everything is equal. And this, if viewed as an ordinance, is definitely not equal to having to administer priesthood ordinances. Last time I checked baptizing one's child won't kill the person nor have a long and scary list of potential life altering physical/emotional complications. And I would trade my period any day of the dang week (well month) so I'd have the burden of having to bless the sacrament when called to do so. That doesn't usually leave me flat lined in abject pain after popping pain meds like I was eating out of a pez dispenser and wondering whether pez might have been more effective. 

 

For the record I believe there is an equivalent and mutual role of women that has a current title that doesn't really fit what it actually is to be a Mother in Israel.... the way Deborah used it went far beyond the scope of childrearing which both men and women are called to participate in. 

 

With luv,

BD

Edited June 18, 2014 by BlueDreams

[Scott Lloyd]

Read Quinn  The Releif society was originally given the Priesthood (or should I say Joseph anounced his intentions to give it) and the women were to heal with concecrated oil.  Somewhere between Joseph Smith organizing the RS and the 60s the practice was Kabboshed.

 

http://signaturebookslibrary.org/?p=1171

 

This could have been another hot button topic that got the Prophet killed, or at least played into it like the Slavery issue.

I recognize that there were practices in the early period of the Restoration that didn't get carried forward into modern day.

 

It just struck me as oddly anachronistic that you were speculating that women in the Church were routinely doing blessings with consecrated oil as late as the 1960s. That's the period of my childhood and youth, and I'm telling you the very idea would have seemed alien to those of us who were around then, just as it would to most Church members living today.

[juliann]

No I was saying that we were taught that it was a mandiatory  thing for 2 or more.  It seems that the church has come out in the recent manuals and soften and corrected that stance. 

Women were also told that they could not pray with sisters while visiting teaching, we were to pray with our partner before we entered the home. People find this hard to believe...or don't remember it...but I have seen enough confirmations to know it wasn't just my area.  I would consider that the peak of the loss of respect for women. I still can't figure out what the heck they thought was going to happen if women prayed together.

[Scott Lloyd]

I believe Joseph Fielding Smith put an end to women participating in blessings (just relying on fuzzy memory). Before that they were encouraged to stand in with husbands, so it would seem to put women in no different position than men laying on hands, but only one using oil.  Now that I think about it, the recent emphasis on women "sharing" priesthood of their husband should make this discarded practice acceptable and logical.

Hmm.

 

It wouldn't have been Joseph Fielding Smith. He was Church president in the early 1970s, when I was in high school, and up to then, for quite a while at least, such a thing was pretty much unheard of.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Yeah....as long as the mother doesn't die. Or have postpartum depression that can make that "certain bond" more difficult to initially establish.

 

And I personally view birth as a form of potential ordinance. You're right, not everything is equal. And this, if viewed as an ordinance, is definitely not equal to having to administer priesthood ordinances. Last time I checked baptizing one's child won't kill the person nor have a long and scary list of potential life altering physical/emotional complications. And I would trade my period any day of the dang week (well month) so I'd have the burden of having to bless the sacrament when called to do so. That doesn't usually leave me flat lined in abject pain after popping pain meds like I was eating out of a pez dispenser and wondering whether pez might have been more effective. 

 

For the record I believe there is an equivalent and mutual role of women that has a current title that doesn't really fit what it actually is to be a Mother in Israel.... the way Deborah used it went far beyond the scope of childrearing which both men and women are called to participate in. 

 

With luv,

BD

Fair enough. I think I can agree with you on this. The reality is that I am really saying is not that far off from what most people think. There does seem to be a need of a definitive answer that does not leave room for more questions (Is there such a thing?). When will we get that answer? I suppose when we are all ready to receive it?

[Zakuska]

Women were also told that they could not pray with sisters while visiting teaching, we were to pray with our partner before we entered the home. People find this hard to believe...or don't remember it...but I have seen enough confirmations to know it wasn't just my area.  I would consider that the peak of the loss of respect for women. I still can't figure out what the heck they thought was going to happen if women prayed together.

Well as the saying goes. Families that pray together stay together.  Perhaps they thought that it would galvanize and help organize you to take over the world.

Edited June 18, 2014 by Zakuska

[Calm]

Ah yes.. there's the ticket the General populous of the church is too dumb to understand. Gotcha.

Gospel Principles is primarily for investigators and new converts, it is a reference book for general population save for the two years it was used when it first came out which was IMO to get people familiar with it to help them be better missionaries.

PS: I see Nehor already mentioned this.

Edited June 18, 2014 by calmoriah

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

 I still can't figure out what the heck they thought was going to happen if women prayed together.

Who knows? I wonder what the context was for that policy. One thing I have learned that not every policy is inspired or even correct and sometimes those in positions of authority do very strange things.

Edited June 18, 2014 by Mola Ram Suda Ram