Do L D S Sisters Really Have Their Own Organization?

[Thinking]

Many of us are familiar with this quote from President Hinckley.

Women do not hold the priesthood because the Lord has put it that way. It is part of His program. Women have a very prominent place in this Church. Men hold the priesthood offices of the Church. But women have a tremendous place in this Church. They have their own organization. It was started in 1842 by the Prophet Joseph Smith, called the Relief Society, because its initial purpose was to administer help to those in need. It has grown to be, I think, the largest women’s organization in the world... They have their own offices, their own presidency, their own board. That reaches down to the smallest unit of the Church everywhere in the world...

 

Do the LDS sisters really have their own organization given that the selection of the president at every level (ward, stake, general) is finalized by a man?

[BookofMormonLuvr]

Many of us are familiar with this quote from President Hinckley.

 

Do the LDS sisters really have their own organization given that the selection of the president at every level (ward, stake, general) is finalized by a man?

I understand the dilemma here... but how could the LDS ladies possibly pick their own General Relief Society President. They could probably pull it off on the Ward and Stake level, but General Officer level would be difficult.

[Zakuska]

A man must finalize more than just their callings, their healings as well. A power that was taken away after Joseph Smith was martyred.

Edited June 29, 2014 by Zakuska

[Thinking]

I understand the dilemma here... but how could the LDS ladies possibly pick their own General Relief Society President. They could probably pull it off on the Ward and Stake level, but General Officer level would be difficult.

 

More difficult than a group of men picking the General Relief Society President?

[BookofMormonLuvr]

More difficult than a group of men picking the General Relief Society President?

Think this through... who would be the committee making the selection(s)? Who would select who is on the committee? Who would select those who select those who are on the selection committee?

There has to be some type of order in the selection process and with 1.5 million (or so) active RS Women spread throughout the world. that would be a tough process to make orderly...

What would you propose as a procedure for LDS women to choose their own General RS Prez.?

[The Nehor]

Do the LDS sisters really have their own organization given that the selection of the president at every level (ward, stake, general) is finalized by a man?

 

Yes.

 

Also, the callings are finalized by God. He is a man but not a typical one.

Edited June 29, 2014 by The Nehor

[Storm Rider]

Many of us are familiar with this quote from President Hinckley.

 

Do the LDS sisters really have their own organization given that the selection of the president at every level (ward, stake, general) is finalized by a man?

 

You are correct, there is no independent LDS Church that is strictly limited to females.  

 

Are you proposing that men are incapable of leading women?  The flip side of that is that women could also never lead men.  I guess you would also propose that we divide all of society along strict gender lines.  What fun that would be; a real utopia.  

[Traela]

It bothers me more that the Relief Society no longer gets to choose its own curriculum. A while ago, someone posted an account of how the Presidents of the Church was initially imposed on the RS without their input, or even their knowledge until it was completed. Hopefully the RS Presidency has at least some input now for that, but the fourth Sunday lessons are still chosen by the Bishop or Stake President. The corresponding RS president should be involved in the decision.

[Calm]

, but General Officer level would be difficult.

Why would it be any more difficult than for the way it is structured now? Just have the outgoing and board members appoint the ones to follow.

[guerreiro9]

It bothers me more that the Relief Society no longer gets to choose its own curriculum. A while ago, someone posted an account of how the Presidents of the Church was initially imposed on the RS without their input, or even their knowledge until it was completed. Hopefully the RS Presidency has at least some input now for that, but the fourth Sunday lessons are still chosen by the Bishop or Stake President. The corresponding RS president should be involved in the decision.

Does it bother you that the Elders Quorum and High Priests Group does not choose its own curriculum? If not, why?

-guerreiro9

[Zakuska]

Cal, your pm box is full. I shared a pm with tacenda and juliann. Tacenda said it might be better to share with you direcly. Thanks. Carry on.

[Calm]

Does it bother you that the Elders Quorum and High Priests Group does not choose its own curriculum? If not, why?

-guerreiro9

I think it highly likely that given the chance women would choose to include more women as examples and more talks by women for a variety of reasons (for one we learn by example and the closer the example is to our own situation the easier it is to adapt that example's behaviour, attitude, etc into something that works in our own life). It makes sense that men would likely stick with preferring men as the vehicle of teaching a principle because they are likely more comfortable, find it easier to see themselves in similare situations etc as male leaders.

[Calm]

Cal, your pm box is full. I shared a pm with tacenda and juliann. Tacenda said it might be better to share with you direcly. Thanks. Carry on.

Unless it is not something related to discussions, I'll pass. I see the PM system as useful for sharing personal conversations, not for expanding on thoughts in thread discussions. I will clear some space but if it is the latter and not the former, don't expect a response if you choose to send it anyway. Edited June 29, 2014 by calmoriah

[juliann]

Does it bother you that the Elders Quorum and High Priests Group does not choose its own curriculum? If not, why?

-guerreiro9

Because when the current curriculum was chosen, there were no women on the committee. Chieko relates that she was proposing a curriculum for RS, only to be told it was already done for them by men and about men.  Plural wives have been removed, we aren't even told their names. I believe there is one chapter in the current manual about women.

Edited June 29, 2014 by juliann

[Zakuska]

Its very pertinent to all these discussions going on. But I think it might be better coming from you.

[Traela]

Because when the current curriculum was chosen, there were no women on the committee. Chieko relates that she was proposing a curriculum for RS, only to be told it was already done for them by men and about men.  Plural wives have been removed, we aren't even told their names. I believe there is one chapter in the current manual about women.

Exactly. The Relief Society President has a direct, specific stewardship over the women. Her stewardship should be honored by listening to her views on what her sisters need.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

Why would it be any more difficult than for the way it is structured now? Just have the outgoing and board members appoint the ones to follow.

 Now, Cal, you need to go and stop making things so simple.

Good point. Hadn't thought of that.

[BCSpace]

Do the LDS sisters really have their own organization given that the selection of the president at every level (ward, stake, general) is finalized by a man?

 

 

Yes.  That is the official doctrine of the Church and the answer given to Mike Wallace.

 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1996/10/this-thing-was-not-done-in-a-corner?lang=eng

Edited June 29, 2014 by BCSpace

[BCSpace]

A man must finalize more than just their callings, their healings as well. A power that was taken away after Joseph Smith was martyred.

 

Don't you mean to say (if you truly take that position) "long after Joseph Smith was martyred"?

 

Did they do it (pre-martyrdom) because they bore the Priesthood or did they invoke Priesthood authority?  Wouldn't you say that instead of women actually having priesthood authority or 'power' at the time, the healing traditions of the time were ritualized by Priesthood authority (i.e. men)?  Does the Church today teach that one of the gifts of the Spirit, the gift of Healing, doesn't come to women?

[frank_jessop]

Because when the current curriculum was chosen, there were no women on the committee. Chieko relates that she was proposing a curriculum for RS, only to be told it was already done for them by men and about men. Plural wives have been removed, we aren't even told their names. I believe there is one chapter in the current manual about women.

She was told it was almost finished.

“There Is Always a Struggle”: An Interview with Chieko N. Okazaki

Chieko N. Okazaki: I had written a general outline, and the Relief Society presidency approved it. So I talked about it to a man on the Curriculum Committee. He went to his boss, and the boss said, “We don’t need a new manual for the Relief Society.” “Why don’t we need a new manual?” “We already are writing a manual for them.”

So he came back and told me that a new manual was already being prepared. I asked what it was, and he said, “Well, it’s the manual on Harold B. Lee.” It was the f irst one in that series of teachings of the Church presidents. I asked, “Why are they writing a manual for us on Harold B. Lee?” He didn’t know.

I told the presidency, so we went and asked the Curriculum Committee, “What is this all about?” They said, “Well, we’re already almost finished with the f irst book.” We said, “You’re al- most finished with the f irst book, and you didn’t tell us that you were doing this? Why is this is the first time we have heard about it? Chieko has been writing an outline in relation to what women need.” So I asked, “Who is writing this manual?” It turned out to be five men, and the Melchizedek Priesthood quorums and Relief Society would have the same lessons.

I asked, “Why aren’t the women included in this?” Then they sort of got the point and called three women to the committee. I had one of our board members assigned to be the liaison with these three women. They got to the point where they could go through the manual and write questions in relation to the manual. And for the second one, they were part of it.

[Yirgacheffe]

Since men are in charge of who leads it and what is discussed/taught I wouldn't call it women's organization.  It looks more like an organization for women run by the church hierarchy, nothing wrong with a church sponsored program for women I bet lot of churches have them.   But the implication that women have the run of the program by calling it a women's organization is really not accurate.

[Calm]

I would say a women's organization involved with and authorised by male only priesthood holding quorums (is there a better name, serious question as I would like to be precise and informative in labelling but not either overly or underly inclusive). No man is listed as part of the RS. Men are not involved much in the day to day running...at least they shouldn't be, they authorised some major choices yea or nay and may provide information ( these are your possible choices for teachers, etc.) On occasion they take part in teaching (women's meeting, as seen as needed by bishop, etc). So men are involved and essential, but are not members themselves and have or should have a light presence.

Edited June 30, 2014 by calmoriah

[Yirgacheffe]

I would say a women's organization involved with and authorised by male only priesthood holding quorums (is there a better name, serious question as I would like to be precise and informative in labelling but not either overly or underly inclusive). No man is listed as part of the RS. Men are not involved much in the day to day running...at least they shouldn't be, they authorised some major choices yea or nay and may provide information ( these are your possible choices for teachers, etc.) On occasion they take part in teaching (women's meeting, as seen as needed by bishop, etc). So men are involved and essential, but are not members themselves and have or should have a light presence.

I would rearrange your sentence and say, an organization for  women directed and authorized by male only priesthood holding quorums.  I would never call an organization with the oversight by men that has been described as a women's organization.  "Women's" is plural possessive, women do not have possession/control of the organization, men do.  Like I said I bet lots of churches have similar organizations for women, but these are subjected to the church not the women. 

 

"male only priesthood holding quorums"  I would actually never come up with this phrase let alone say   it but I think it conveys who it is that oversees the churches organization for women.

Edited June 30, 2014 by Yirgacheffe

[Calm]

I would rearrange your sentence and say, an organization for  women directed and authorized by male only priesthood holding quorums.  I would never call an organization with the oversight by men that has been described a a women's organization.  "Women's" is plural possessive, women do not have possession/control of the organization, men do.  Like I said I bet lots of churches have similar organizations for women, but these are subjected to the church not the women.

But there are no men as members of it so to suggest it is not a female organisation just seems silly to me.

We don't require a women's clinic to have no involvement with men.

[Bernard Gui]

As per Elder Oaks, the simple answer lies in possession of Priesthood keys and delegation of authority by those holding them. It is the way the Priesthood after the Order of the Son of God functions.

Edited June 30, 2014 by Bernard Gui