Mormonism In The Next Five Years

[bluebell]

I guess there is no problem if you think women should be subordinate to men.

Personally I find that repressive,...

With Christ being male, how will women ever not be subordinate to a male in the church? How can the gospel ever not be "repressive " as you define it?

[Gray]

 

There is no such thing as true equality.

Abraham 3.

8 Howbeit that he made the greater star; as, also, if there be two ^aspirits, and one shall be more intelligent than the other, yet these two spirits, notwithstanding one is more intelligent than the other, have no beginning; they existed before, they shall have no end, they shall exist after, for they are^bgnolaum, or eternal.

  19 And the Lord said unto me: These two facts do exist, that there are two spirits, one being more intelligent than the other; there shall be another moreintelligent than they; I am the Lord thy God, I am ^amore intelligent than they all.

 

 

Are you trying to apply this by gender? I hope not. 

[Gray]

With Christ being male, how will women ever not be subordinate to a male in the church? How can the gospel ever not be "repressive " as you define it?

 

Christ's mother is female. Presumably He would be subordinate to Her.

 

But that doesn't really speak to the issue at hand - women are made subordinate by current church policy. Not based on their abilities or spirituality or righteousness, but based on their gender. 

Edited August 6, 2015 by Gray

[bluebell]

 

 

But that doesn't really speak to the issue at hand - women are made subordinate by current church policy. Not based on their abilities or spirituality or righteousness, but based on their gender. 

 

First, i think you would have to prove that it's church policy, and not doctrine, that women are not ordained before you can state that as a fact.

 

Second, men are made dominant over women (what the heck is the opposite of subordinate anyway?  Ordinate??  I don't think that's a word... ) for the exact same reason.  Not based on their abilities, spirituality, or righteousness but based on their gender.  In that regard, men and women are actually treated completely equal.  

 

But what I'm asking is, does it matter?  Are women being treated unjustly simply because they are not ordained?  Is the act of having a male in a position of authority an inherently unjust act?

[Gray]

First, i think you would have to prove that it's church policy, and not doctrine, that women are not ordained before you can state that as a fact.

 

As there is no basis in scripture for a ban against women having the priesthood, I think policy is the best word. 

 

Second, men are made dominant over women (what the heck is the opposite of subordinate anyway?  Ordinate??  I don't think that's a word... ) for the exact same reason.  Not based on their abilities, spirituality, or righteousness but based on their gender.  In that regard, men and women are actually treated completely equal.  

 

That's not what equality is. Are you willing to also say that slavery/Jim Crow laws treated whites and blacks equally using the same reasoning?

 

But what I'm asking is, does it matter?  Are women being treated unjustly simply because they are not ordained?  Is the act of having a male in a position of authority an inherently unjust act?

 

Yes, it's inherently unjust, not in accordance with broader scriptural principles, and a detriment to the health of the church. 

[rodheadlee]

Are you trying to apply this by gender? I hope not. 

No but just as soon as I can bare a child then we can talk about true equality.

[Gray]

No but just as soon as I can bare a child then we can talk about true equality.

 

No one is intentionally stopping you from doing so. Women can't impregnate anyone either. But it's really a red herring, because spirituality and leadership ability are not determined by gender. 

[BlueDreams]

If she isn't as Christ centered as us all, I would certainly invite her to become so. I just don't appreciate her acting as tthough my faith in the Lord isnt geniune or central to my life or the life of those I go to church with every week when i know Christ is the center of all of our lives.

 

I think you're reading into things that she doesn't mean at all. I've met margaret and talked to her on a number of occasions. She too soft and gentle to presume that she knows your relationship in Christ or anyone else's for that matter. I think she just means in general church focus. There's still a tendency for people to get caught up in a specific act in the church and miss the reason why we do those (ie. building a relationship with Christ).

 

DJbrown

Am I being too harsh? 

 

Yeah, probably. None of the things you mentioned would describe her in the least and I barely know her. For example, considering I would see Margaret from time to time in the temple, I doubt she would insist on less temple in her christ focus....she may state teaching more blatantly as to how the covenants are tying us to Christ's nature or something (but that would be me juxtaposing my thoughts on her as well).  

 

With luv,

BD

[bluebell]

As there is no basis in scripture for a ban against women having the priesthood, I think policy is the best word. 

We'll have to agree to disagree on that.  I don't personally think that Jesus didn't ordain any women because of a policy.

 

That's not what equality is. Are you willing to also say that slavery/Jim Crow laws treated whites and blacks equally using the same reasoning?

 

 

Equality is the act of being treated equally.  

 

Slavery never claimed to be about equality so i have no idea why you think that slavery is a valid analogy here, but Jim Crow laws were inequitable precisely because blacks were not treated equally to whites.  It was a policy of 'separate and unequal' couched in 'separate but equal' language.  We all know it was a mirage though-they didn't even try to be equal.

 

Yes, it's inherently unjust, not in accordance with broader scriptural principles, and a detriment to the health of the church. 

 

 

Can you give some examples of how it is inherently unjust for a man to be in an authoritative position over a woman in church.  Some ways that the women is automatically being victimized simply by being subordinate to a man with no other variables in play? 

[jkwilliams]

I think you're reading into things that she doesn't mean at all. I've met margaret and talked to her on a number of occasions. She too soft and gentle to presume that she knows your relationship in Christ or anyone else's for that matter. I think she just means in general church focus. There's still a tendency for people to get caught up in a specific act in the church and miss the reason why we do those (ie. building a relationship with Christ).

 

DJbrown

Am I being too harsh? 

 

Yeah, probably. None of the things you mentioned would describe her in the least and I barely know her. For example, considering I would see Margaret from time to time in the temple, I doubt she would insist on less temple in her christ focus....she may state teaching more blatantly as to how the covenants are tying us to Christ's nature or something (but that would be me juxtaposing my thoughts on her as well).  

 

With luv,

BD

 

That's my impression of Margaret, as well, based on my very limited interaction with her. 

[Gray]

We'll have to agree to disagree on that.  I don't personally think that Jesus didn't ordain any women because of a policy.

 

Probably because of social norms. Jesus never  said "thou shalt not ordain women." Neither did any other prophet in scripture.

 

In any case, there are millions of things Jesus is not recorded to have said or done. That doesn't indicate that those things are verboten. 

 

 

Equality is the act of being treated equally.  

 

Agreed. 

 

Slavery never claimed to be about equality so i have no idea why you think that slavery is a valid analogy here, but Jim Crow laws were inequitable precisely because blacks were not treated equally to whites.  It was a policy of 'separate and unequal' couched in 'separate but equal' language.  We all know it was a mirage though-they didn't even try to be equal.

 

Just like women are not treated equally in the church because of their gender. Are we on the same page? 

 

 

Can you give some examples of how it is inherently unjust for a man to be in an authoritative position over a woman in church.  

 

It's only unjust if that difference in authority is determined by gender. It would be similarly unjust if a company decided that black employees can never be a manager over white employees. 

 

 

 

 

[busybee]

 

I don't know how much the RS/YW/Primary presidencies sit in council with the Brethren.  I doubt you do either.  I'm only aware of one public statement and that was Sister Okazaki saying that they weren't really consulted about the Proclamation even though it was originally presented to the world via the women's session of conference.

 

If church headquarters is similar to how things work at the ward level, women do NOT have nearly the voice that men do.  Consider the councils that govern a ward:  Bishopric (3 men, 5 with exec sec & clerk), PEC (9 men, RS Pres may be invited at Bishop's discretion), Ward Council (10 men, 3 women).

I have been RS president in several units in different countries and have always had my input into the areas involved in my stewardship and my opinion respected in other decisions. 

 

And as far as the sisters not being 'consulted' regarding the Family Proclamation, it has been stated that is was a revelatory document. Since when has anyone been consulted on revelation received by the prophet.

 

I'm pretty sure a member of the Twelve is responsible for each of the auxillaries, the same as at Stake level and Ward level, and I would venture to say that they council as much as needed. And then return and report, as set forth in the pattern of leadership.

[jkwilliams]

I have been RS president in several units in different countries and have always had my input into the areas involved in my stewardship and my opinion respected in other decisions. 

 

And as far as the sisters not being 'consulted' regarding the Family Proclamation, it has been stated that is was a revelatory document. Since when has anyone been consulted on revelation received by the prophet.

 

I'm pretty sure a member of the Twelve is responsible for each of the auxillaries, the same as at Stake level and Ward level, and I would venture to say that they council as much as needed. And then return and report, as set forth in the pattern of leadership.

 

CFR on the proclamation being a revelatory document. 

[HappyJackWagon]

This is a not so subtle way of complaining or murmuring, in my opinion.

 

 

 

Am I being too harsh?

Is there ANY way a person could question the status quo or make a suggestion for progress or bring a problem to the attention of leaders that would not be murmuring? If so, could you share the appropriate way to do this?

[busybee]

Some people believe that the proper place of women is in a place of equality with men, rather than subordination to men.

Some people don't. Some people believe that women should be more equal than men. I have never been subordinate to men in all my 52 years in the church.

[Gray]

And as far as the sisters not being 'consulted' regarding the Family Proclamation, it has been stated that is was a revelatory document. Since when has anyone been consulted on revelation received by the prophet.

 

No one involved in its creation has made that claim. One sister in GC used that phrase, apparently without checking for how the church has chosen to describe it officially. 

[Gray]

Some people don't. Some people believe that women should be more equal than men. I have never been subordinate to men in all my 52 years in the church.

 

There is no such thing as "more equal" unless of course you're waxing ironical. 

 

All women are subordinate to men in the church, whether or not they feel that way. 

[busybee]

Subordinate:  a person under the authority or control of another within an organization.

 

Women in the church are most certainly under the authority or control of men.

No one frickin controls me but me!!!

I resent your assumption that women in the church are 'under the control' of men!! That is insulting!!

Do we, as women in the church, recognise Preisthood authority? Yes. It is a huge blessing in my life and I am so grateful to have had the privilege of accessing the blessings of the Priesthood throughout my life.

Does it control us? No way!!

You ask my husband if he or any other man controls me!! UGH!!

[rockpond]

I have been RS president in several units in different countries and have always had my input into the areas involved in my stewardship and my opinion respected in other decisions. 

 

And as far as the sisters not being 'consulted' regarding the Family Proclamation, it has been stated that is was a revelatory document. Since when has anyone been consulted on revelation received by the prophet.

 

I'm pretty sure a member of the Twelve is responsible for each of the auxillaries, the same as at Stake level and Ward level, and I would venture to say that they council as much as needed. And then return and report, as set forth in the pattern of leadership.

 

I'm glad you felt that way.  My experience is that not all women who served in leadership had the same impression as you.

 

"Revelatory" does not mean that it was revelation.  It has certainly not been presented as revelation from the Lord.  And the one time it was called that in Gen Conf it was retracted before being published.

[rockpond]

No one frickin controls me but me!!!

I resent your assumption that women in the church are 'under the control' of men!! That is insulting!!

Do we, as women in the church, recognise Preisthood authority? Yes. It is a huge blessing in my life and I am so grateful to have had the privilege of accessing the blessings of the Priesthood throughout my life.

Does it control us? No way!!

You ask my husband if he or any other man controls me!! UGH!!

 

My apologies.  You're right about "control".  I'll rephrase it as I should have written it the first time:  "Women in the church are most certainly under the authority of men."

 

Now, you may be thinking that women are only under the authority of the priesthood.  True.  But the priesthood is entirely comprised of men.

[CV75]

Is there ANY way a person could question the status quo or make a suggestion for progress or bring a problem to the attention of leaders that would not be murmuring? If so, could you share the appropriate way to do this?

Do you think the article is an effort to question the status quo, make a suggestion for progress or bring a  problem to the attention of leaders?

[busybee]

CFR on the proclamation being a revelatory document. 

Sis. Bonnie S. Oscarson in the last General Conference :  When President Gordon B. Hinckley first read “The Family: A Proclamation to the World” 20 years ago this year, we were grateful for and valued the clarity, simplicity, and truth of this revelatory document.

 

But she's a girl, so maybe it doesn't count   

[jkwilliams]

Sis. Bonnie S. Oscarson in the last General Conference :  When President Gordon B. Hinckley first read “The Family: A Proclamation to the World” 20 years ago this year, we were grateful for and valued the clarity, simplicity, and truth of this revelatory document.

 

But she's a girl, so maybe it doesn't count   

 

Sigh.

[HappyJackWagon]

Sis. Bonnie S. Oscarson in the last General Conference :  When President Gordon B. Hinckley first read “The Family: A Proclamation to the World” 20 years ago this year, we were grateful for and valued the clarity, simplicity, and truth of this revelatory document.

 

But she's a girl, so maybe it doesn't count   

Is Sis. Oscarson claiming to be a part of the revelatory process that yielded the proclamation? No. She's sharing an opinion and/or sharing a 2/3/4th hand account. Many of the key players who were a part of releasing the proclamation are still alive. Wouldn't it be great to hear from them how the "revelation" was received before they're gone? Get it from the horses mouth, so to speak so we don't have to rely on 3rd hand opinion?

[CV75]

As evidenced by most of the discussion thus far, the opinion piece seems to be striking a chord with readers’ values, not because of the predictions per se, but because of the personal assumptions and value judgements the author shares along with them and in introducing them.