Establish An Organization For Women Equal To The Priesthood

[CV75]

Correct me if I am wrong, but D&C 107 speaks only of men. The rights of women are completely ignored. Organization of the Relief Society corrected some, but not all, of this inequity. Are you someone who is unwilling to share equal authority with women? As the article I gave a link too states, women's rights in the Church eroded during the 20th century. How can this downward spiral be corrected? I suggest that the path lies in increasing the authority of Relief Society and making Relief Society leaders responsible for establishing women's rights, especially when it comes to girls and women being interviewed for possible sexual indiscretion. 

I think 107:5 can be read to include all the auxiliary authorities and offices, but if not, the interests of all members are covered in this section of D&C. Of course anything can be analyzed in terms of one’s favored distinctive practice, system, or philosophy, ideology or movement, but the Gospel helps us become whole.

[CV75]

Thanks. Try to have a woman along with you to provide balance to the conversation.

This is the purpose and function of councils.

Or why not be creative and find a meaningful way to share responsibility? Don't need to throw the baby out with the bath.

This is the purpose and function of councils.

Mainly how correlation has diminished the role of women in the Church.

When councils are used properly, one effect is that the extensive role of women in the Church is more fully realized.

[tld]

I don't see anything in the scripture I cited that indicates that it is only applicable to men.  "All other authorities..." would seem to mean everything in the church, including bishops, nursery leaders, scout leaders, primary presidents, etc. 

 

Your charge that I'm unwilling to share equal authority with women would be disputed by my wife.  Your inference here is almost insulting.

 

As I said, the pdf you linked to is 34 pages long.  Do you have any relevant points that you'd like to bring out?

 

I believe that the changes made in the role of ward councils actually give women more authority in the church now than they ever have had.  Other inspired adjustments will probably be made in the future.

Sorry if I seemed to insult you. I suspect that recent changes that have taken place are from outside pressure, but they are encouraging. Regarding my spouse, if she did not put pressure on me, there are lots of things I would not do that I should and lots of things I have fortunately stopped doing (or something like that). The leaders of the Church are men and like most men they are probably resistant to change. The pressure in the cooker is building up. I don't envy them.

[CV75]

Smac97,

 

Some good questions. Mainly I started this thread as a topic of conversation. I don't have the answers. But I do see problems with the status quo. The leaders of the Church may need to come up with some innovations solutions to the gender problems confronting the Church, however they may go about doing this. Fortunately, for me, I am out of the loop.

This is why I asked, how is “women not holding the priesthood (as in receiving not priesthood conferral and office)” in itself a problem? More specifically, a gender problem?

[tld]

This is the purpose and function of councils.

This is the purpose and function of councils.

When councils are used properly, one effect is that the extensive role of women in the Church is more fully realized.

This is commendable as far as it goes. And women's involvement in the conducting of Church courts? And interviewing of girls and young women over possible sexual indiscretions?

[stemelbow]

Why is “women not holding the priesthood (as in receiving not priesthood conferral and office)” inherently a problem (I know some would make it a problem)?

It presents a problem in a few ways.

1. Holding the priesthood is to be earned and to hold it is to eternally bless the holder. Women will never be able to experience the blessing of holding the priesthood.

2. Women have less of a voice and influence as men because they don't hold the priesthood. Nearly all leadership positions are set aside for men. Therefore women can't aspire, even if so skilled, to lead in the same way as men.

 

Relatively-speaking, how is Relief Society not equal in responsibility and authority for women as the priesthood quorums are for men, since both organizations receive their responsibility and authority from God?

Equal in responsibility and authority? While men visit all members of the ward RS is to visit only women. And what authority from God do women have?

 

“Whom the Lord calls He qualifies” – I think this means that callings and spiritual gifts are not necessarily about who can do what, better.

Sadly, I think it's true that many women could do better jobs as Bishops and stake presidents as some of the men who are so called end up doing.

[tld]

This is why I asked, how is “women not holding the priesthood (as in receiving not priesthood conferral and office)” in itself a problem? More specifically, a gender problem?

Priesthood is historically a male thing, although there have supposedly been priestesses, whatever that means. Let men do their thing. What I am suggesting is that we elevate women in the Church (not put them on a pedestal) to the point that they are truly equal with men. This, it seems to me, can only occur if they have there own organization that exists in true unity and equality with the priesthood, such as should exist in a meaningful marriage relationship, where one member of the relationship does not dominate the other or try to make all the decisions.

[ksfisher]

 The leaders of the Church are men and like most men they are probably resistant to change.

 

This statement is baffling.  Is the ability to change gender based?

 

And I don't like to idea of all this being broken down into women vs men.  Are we not all God's servants?  All of us have different labors to perform in the vineyard, but our labor is under His direction and for the building up of His kingdom.  If one man is called to be a bishop and another a clerk should one complain that his labor has no value?  Or the same with a relief society president and activity days leader.  All labor in the same vineyard and all will receive the same reward.

 

14 For the body is not one member, but many.

 15 If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?

 16 And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?

 17 If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?

 18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.

 19 And if they were all one member, where were the body?

 20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.

 21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.

- 1 Corinthians 12

[ksfisher]

 

Sadly, I think it's true that many women could do better jobs as Bishops and stake presidents as some of the men who are so called end up doing.

 

Why is this sad?  No one is saying that women do not have talents and abilities. 

 

And since when are bishops and stake presidents called based on their abiltiy?

 

5 We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.

[Carebear0411]

Correct me if I am wrong, but D&C 107 speaks only of men. The rights of women are completely ignored. Organization of the Relief Society corrected some, but not all, of this inequity. Are you someone who is unwilling to share equal authority with women? As the article I gave a link too states, women's rights in the Church eroded during the 20th century. How can this downward spiral be corrected? I suggest that the path lies in increasing the authority of Relief Society and making Relief Society leaders responsible for establishing women's rights, especially when it comes to girls and women being interviewed for possible sexual indiscretion. 

This is a question that has been itching at the back of my mind since Kate Kelly threw this whole thing open for public consumption.

 

If women were supposed to fill the role of PH authority and if there should be no distinction between PH and RS, as far as that authority is involved, then why did God not inspire Joseph to do just that? Why would God have gone half measure with revealing RS but not make it independent from PH oversight?

 

See, this whole question rests on the idea that God is either fallible or completely disinterested. The restoration of all things would have been the perfect time and place to fix what, according to OW, has been wrong with the Church since its beginning with Adam and Eve. So either God doesn't intend for women to hold the PH, or He's been distracted for a few millenia.

 

People who think like OW can't have it both ways. Either God is in control or He isn't. If He is, and there is every to be time when women hold the PH, then He will see to it. If He isn't, then this is not His Church and we are all being misled.

[BCSpace]

see http://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V37N03_75.pdf

 

It seems to me that tld would disagree with the conclusion of this article.

[tld]

This statement is baffling.  Is the ability to change gender based?

 

And I don't like to idea of all this being broken down into women vs men.  Are we not all God's servants?  All of us have different labors to perform in the vineyard, but our labor is under His direction and for the building up of His kingdom.  If one man is called to be a bishop and another a clerk should one complain that his labor has no value?  Or the same with a relief society president and activity days leader.  All labor in the same vineyard and all will receive the same reward.

 

14 For the body is not one member, but many.

 15 If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?

 16 And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?

 17 If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?

 18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.

 19 And if they were all one member, where were the body?

 20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.

 21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.

- 1 Corinthians 1

If things were reversed and only women were in charge, I think the same would probably apply to them. We see marriage relationships in which both apply.

 

I agree that we should all be working in unity, each of us doing that which we do best. Unfortunately, this is not the way it is in the Church. I think that in most instances women can best counsel other women regarding sexual indiscretions, especially when men have not been professionally trained to handle these situations. Each, men and women, may be guided by the spirit, but for women working with other women there is an added understanding of the situation that is not available to men. 

[Darren10]

If you take the Relief Society out from under the control of the priesthood you take it out of the church.  The President of the Church is the presiding High Priest, everything in the church is under his stewardship.  Every organization in the church traces it's leadership, eventually, back to the church's presiding High Priest.  We would, in effect, have two churches.  One for men and one for women.

Yup and that would be quite discriminatory.

[Carebear0411]

Sorry if I seemed to insult you. I suspect that recent changes that have taken place are from outside pressure, but they are encouraging. Regarding my spouse, if she did not put pressure on me, there are lots of things I would not do that I should and lots of things I have fortunately stopped doing (or something like that). The leaders of the Church are men and like most men they are probably resistant to change. The pressure in the cooker is building up. I don't envy them.

The changes that have come about, whether in connection with women's issues or any other issues, have come about because of the Church's rapid and increasing growth. RS used to be much more politically involved at it's inception as the original community was predominantly LDS and welcomed such RS intervention. As the Church became world wide, the wards and branches became more of the focus. Eventually, RS was integrated into the block system.

 

Every change that has taken place, though wrongly credited to aggitation, had mostly to do with the expanding LDS population. Even the revelations concerning blacks and the PH came about because of the growth in the Church in Africa and because the time was right (keeping in mind please, that there was precedence of blacks holding the PH in Church history, there is NO precedence of women being ordained).

[Darren10]

Because 15 men say that it isn't going to happen. The Relief Society could be removed from the oversight of the priesthood. This would require only a policy change. Ward Relief Society Presidents could start interviewing girls and young women for possible sexual indiscretions. These, just for starters, could be easily done, and then move on from there.

Just a suggestion: God *could* or *may*want to have a say in the matter.

[mnn727]

Because 15 men say that it isn't going to happen. The Relief Society could be removed from the oversight of the priesthood. This would require only a policy change. Ward Relief Society Presidents could start interviewing girls and young women for possible sexual indiscretions. These, just for starters, could be easily done, and then move on from there.

Everything functions under the Priesthood - EVERYTHING

 

I do like this idea: "Ward Relief Society Presidents could start interviewing girls and young women for possible sexual indiscretions"  as long as its under direction of the Priesthood/Bishop (or perhaps the YW Presidency rather than the RS or  the YW and RS President together

[BookofMormonLuvr]

Deborah

Judges 4 & 5

[tld]

It seems to me that tld would disagree with the conclusion of this article.

You are partially right. Belle Spafford, while saddened over the changes, did adapt and try to recognize the positives of correlation. The negative of correlation is that everyone is expected to conform to some standard promoted from Church headquarters, thus stifling individuality. Women have been expected to conform to the standard dictated by correlation, and have probably, thereby, been limited in developing and expressing some of their innate abilities.

[Avatar4321]

First, the very nature of the priesthood makes it impossible to establish an organization equal to the priesthood.

 

Second, if there was an organization independent of the priesthood, it would no longer have any authority from God because the authority of God comes through the Priesthood. Which is precisely why the relief society and other auxilaries derive authority from priesthood.

[tld]

Just a suggestion: God *could* or *may*want to have a say in the matter.

Well, that would be nice, wouldn't it? Just so there is no misunderstanding of what is said because of gender bias, as there may have been at one time because of racial bias.

[Carebear0411]

It presents a problem in a few ways.

1. Holding the priesthood is to be earned and to hold it is to eternally bless the holder. Women will never be able to experience the blessing of holding the priesthood.

2. Women have less of a voice and influence as men because they don't hold the priesthood. Nearly all leadership positions are set aside for men. Therefore women can't aspire, even if so skilled, to lead in the same way as men.

 

Equal in responsibility and authority? While men visit all members of the ward RS is to visit only women. And what authority from God do women have?

 

Sadly, I think it's true that many women could do better jobs as Bishops and stake presidents as some of the men who are so called end up doing.

1. I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "earned". Could you explain that please. As far as being "eternally blessed"...you have an interesting take on what the PH is. It is not a selfish means by which those holding it will find blessings. The PH is purely a means by which to serve. A the wife of a Bishop, I can tell any of you women who think power and position in the Church is something to be sought after because of the prestige or power, being Bishop is just plain hard work, not prestigious. I have seen growth in my husband because of the many opportunites to serve that being Bishop has brought him, but that blessing is available to all who seek every opportunity to reach out and help.

 

2. Again, the idea of leadership as a "better" or more "prestigious" means of serving is a false dichotomy. One does not have to lead to find the blessings that are part of service - which is what the PH is all about (if weilded properly). If such a difference were valid, that would mean for millenia women have been robbed of important opportunities that affected their eternal progression. Do you really think a loving God would have allowed that be and only NOW, at the last hour of the last day, make those changes?

 

"And what authority from God do women have?" Again, the idea that authority from God equal blessings found nowhere else. This is simply not true.

 

Your last point brings up a important point...if the PH authority was given to women tomorrow OW members would still not be happy. They would then agitate for equal representation in all quorums. They would insist on some kind of quota to assure "equality". If that takes place then inspiration (and therefore God's will) would no longer be the means for calling people to positions, it would be all about meeting quotas and political correctness. 

 

God is a God of order and logic. Clearly, since there are two sexes, there had to be distinction between the roles of the sexes or the quarrel over who is to do what would be endless and anarchy would reign.

[tld]

First, the very nature of the priesthood makes it impossible to establish an organization equal to the priesthood.

 

Second, if there was an organization independent of the priesthood, it would no longer have any authority from God because the authority of God comes through the Priesthood. Which is precisely why the relief society and other auxilaries derive authority from priesthood.

This seems like kind of a Catch-22. Priesthood leaders say that it is impossible to have an organization equal to the priesthood, thus no organization equal to the priesthood can exist because priesthood leaders will not allow the existence of such an organization. I can see why some women may be desirous of holding the priesthood, since it is only thereby that they can bring about changes currently not allowed by the priesthood.

[Carebear0411]

 All labor in the same vineyard and all will receive the same reward.

 

14 For the body is not one member, but many.

 15 If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?

 16 And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?

 17 If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?

 18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.

 19 And if they were all one member, where were the body?

 20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.

 21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.

- 1 Corinthians 12

Perfect KS! This scripture should be used often to quell the OW in their quest for "power" and "authority" in the Church.

[Carebear0411]

If things were reversed and only women were in charge, I think the same would probably apply to them. We see marriage relationships in which both apply.

 

I agree that we should all be working in unity, each of us doing that which we do best. Unfortunately, this is not the way it is in the Church. I think that in most instances women can best counsel other women regarding sexual indiscretions, especially when men have not been professionally trained to handle these situations. Each, men and women, may be guided by the spirit, but for women working with other women there is an added understanding of the situation that is not available to men. 

Your suggestion is a good one and RS or YW presidents really should be allowed to weigh in on these sexual issues. They do not need the PH to do so.

[The Nehor]

Your suggestion is a good one and RS or YW presidents really should be allowed to weigh in on these sexual issues. They do not need the PH to do so.

What people who have sinned really want is more people weighing in on the matter.