Calm Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 Comments like that only underscore some of the points that OW is trying to make. I believe gender discrimination in the church subtly reinforces and justifies other forms of sexism in people's minds.And if a majority of members were to express such sentiments, there would be a huge problem.But my experience is nowhere near that. Not saying there isn't sexism, just that there is usually more respect. 2
rockpond Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 If he's trying to imply that they hold authority and power that they do not, he is just plain wrong.Again, "general officers" is a perfectly serviceable term in the Church for what they are, one that has been used for generations. I was not trying to imply any authority and power that they do not hold.
Calm Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) I like the idea of the living art vignettes to depict times in Mormon history when the women had exercised more authority. I guess we'll see how it comes off but I like the idea.Including trepassing on Temple Square during conference?Sorry, got interrupted right at the end...meant that to be a sincere question, not a condemnation as the period probably made it look. Edited August 31, 2015 by calmoriah
Scott Lloyd Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 I was not trying to imply any authority and power that they do not hold.Then you should not object to insistence on a proper and accurate use of terms or resist correction pertaining thereto.
rockpond Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 Including trepassing on Temple Square during conference. Temple Square is open to the public. If they are, however, asked to leave (or not come), they should respect that. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) So general authorities have to be male and hold the priesthood? Among other things. As I said, the Young Men and Sunday School general officers are not General Authorities, even though they hold the priesthood. Neither, for that matter, are Area Authorities, which is why they call them Area Authorities. I guess I have not thought about that distinction. I've always included the members of the general Relief Society presidency and the general Primary presidency too when I thought of general authorities of the church (lower case). Interesting.... You will search in vain through official Church discourse to find the term General Authority being applied to Relief Society or Primary officers. And it doesn't matter whether it's lower-case or upper-case; it's not a proper application regardless. Edited August 31, 2015 by Scott Lloyd 1
rockpond Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 Then you should not object to insistence on a proper and accurate use of terms or resist correction pertaining thereto. Let's make a deal, Scott... When you stop calling gay people "SSA", I'll accept your correction. 2
Scott Lloyd Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 Temple Square is open to the public. If they are, however, asked to leave (or not come), they should respect that.Temple Square is open to the public. If they are, however, asked to leave (or not come), they should respect that.Temple Square is open to the public. If they are, however, asked to leave (or not come), they should respect that.They are trespassing the moment they refuse to comply with a request to leave or not to come.
ALarson Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) <You will search in vain through official Church discourse to find the term General Authority being applied to Relief Society or Primary officers. >Look, it's not a big deal to me and I observed that it was just interesting as I'd not really made that distinction in my mind before (to lower cased general authorities). Edited August 31, 2015 by ALarson 2
rockpond Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 They are trespassing the moment they refuse to comply with a request to leave or not to come. I agree.
HappyJackWagon Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 Correction of falsehood is always in order, whether you think it distracting or not.It has to do with priesthood authority and power. It would be just as wrong to refer to Tad Callister (Sunday School general president) as a General Authority, even though he used to be one. The problem is not with the word "general". As I said, it is fine to refer to them as general officers. But the term General Authority is a very specific appellation denoting certain priesthood power and line authority and is not properly applied to auxiliary heads. Rockpond, please be certain to follow all rules, written and unwritten, to the letter of the law. Failure to comply will result in flogging. Scott, what is the source for differentiating between General Authority and General Officer. Is this distinction derived from the instructions to media? I don't recall ever seeing this distinction in any handbook, but then again I have viewed "Authority" and "officer" as synonymous terms. 1
HappyJackWagon Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 Scott Lloyd, on 31 Aug 2015 - 2:08 PM, said:They are trespassing the moment they refuse to comply with a request to leave or not to come. Rockpond; I agree. So it seems that a restriction would likely be placed on a behavior, not a specific group of people. Is that correct?In other words, members of OW would be permitted on temple square IF they don't engage in activities that would be perceived as protest. But if they engage, they would not be behaving properly, correct?What about other members who are there but participate in the protest by viewing the reenactments? Would they also be tresspassing?
PeterPear Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) Give Scott Lloyd a break.The General Authorities are composed of the First Presidency, Quorum of the Twelve, Presidency of the Seventy, Quorums of the Seventy and the Presiding Bishopric. https://www.lds.org/church/leaders?lang=engGeneral Officers:https://www.lds.org/church/leaders/general-auxiliaries?lang=eng Edited August 31, 2015 by PeterPear
HappyJackWagon Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 Give Scott Lloyd a break.The General Authorities are composed of the First Presidency, Quorum of the Twelve, Presidency of the Seventy, Quorums of the Seventy and the Presiding Bishopric.https://www.lds.org/church/leaders?lang=engGeneral Officers:https://www.lds.org/church/leaders/general-auxiliaries?lang=engGive Scott a break for nitpicking authority versus officer? That first link lists them all together- Authorities and Officers The 2nd links to the auxiliaries. Then you have groups like the Presiding Bishopric. They are not an auxiliary but they're also not ecclesiastical leaders. Perhaps one can be a general authority without being an ecclesiastical leader at the general level. 1
The Nehor Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 <You will search in vain through official Church discourse to find the term General Authority being applied to Relief Society or Primary officers. >Hence the comment before General Conference that the speakers will be General Authorities and General Officers of the Church so I assume the latter are the auxiliary leaders. 2
HappyJackWagon Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 Hence the comment before General Conference that the speakers will be General Authorities and General Officers of the Church so I assume the latter are the auxiliary leaders.I've always taken this to mean that the General Authorities are also General Officers.
Russell C McGregor Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 I've always taken this to mean that the General Authorities are also General Officers. Yes, but not all General Officers are General Authorities. Scott is right.
Russell C McGregor Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 Let's make a deal, Scott... When you stop calling gay people "SSA", I'll accept your correction. So before you will agree to use correct terminology, Scott must agree that homosexuals own the once-innocent word "gay," and agree to pretend that they aren't attracted to people of the same sex? Strike a blow for lexical imperialism! 4
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 Let's make a deal, Scott... When you stop calling gay people "SSA", I'll accept your correction.But that is what homosexuals are they are people with same sex attraction. Good grief.
Rivers Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 But that is what homosexuals are they are people with same sex attraction. Good grief.
readstoomuch Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 I hope these women leaders are given more deference. I guess someone is saying that General Authority is a priesthood type of title, but if one of these ladies talks, I`m going to listen.
KevinG Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 I attended a regional conference in Peoria Illinois back in the 90's. One woman saw fit to don colorful feathers and dance in the aisle while the General Authorities were speaking. I wonder if she will be doing a vignette?
rockpond Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 So before you will agree to use correct terminology, Scott must agree that homosexuals own the once-innocent word "gay," and agree to pretend that they aren't attracted to people of the same sex?Strike a blow for lexical imperialism! But that is what homosexuals are they are people with same sex attraction. Good grief. First, I'm not acknowledging Scott's definition of "correct terminology". Second, the comment to him had reference to a previous discussion in which we talked about the fact that being called "SSA" is offensive to many homosexuals and ought not be used. He refused on grounds of defying "political correctness".
Okrahomer Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 I hope these women leaders are given more deference. I guess someone is saying that General Authority is a priesthood type of title, but if one of these ladies talks, I`m going to listen. Haven't you listened to them in the past??? You've been missing out! https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/04/filling-our-homes-with-light-and-truth?lang=enghttps://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/04/the-family-is-of-god?lang=enghttps://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/04/defenders-of-the-family-proclamation?lang=enghttps://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/04/well-ascend-together?lang=enghttps://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/04/returning-to-faith?lang=eng
Scott Lloyd Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) I hope these women leaders are given more deference. I guess someone is saying that General Authority is a priesthood type of title, but if one of these ladies talks, I`m going to listen.I have the greatest of respect for them.One of them, Sister Bonnie Oscarson, Young Women general president, is the wife of my third mission president and the sister-in-law of my second mission president. I have known and loved their family for many years.But I'm absolutely certain that if you asked those women, they would say as I have that the term General Authority is not properly applied to them. And I hope you would listen then. The name denotes priesthood line authority that general auxiliary officers do not possess unless, in the case of the men, they happen to be serving simultaneously as General Authorities; currently, none are.I'm really surprised at the pushback I'm getting on this. It has been elementary knowledge to me my whole life. Edited August 31, 2015 by Scott Lloyd 1
Recommended Posts