Women And Priesthood Essay

[Zakuska]

Oh they're askin... in droves... and getting excommunicated for simply asking. Ala Kate kelly.

What's the difference of using the gifts and power of the priesthood in private vs in public? If they can do it in private, the only difference is a man made policy that they can't do it in public.

Edited October 24, 2015 by Zakuska

[Jeanne]

Well..I guess because I didn't receive the fullness of the priesthood because I was not married in the Temple..was the reason my father in-law and Bishop both told my son who was a Teacher that he was the head of the home.  It was a heavy thing to place on a teenager..that he was responsible for the spiritual well being of his sister and I.  Go figure..I had to fix that real fast.

[CV75]

Oh they're askin... in droves... and getting excommunicated for simply asking. Ala Kate kelly.

What's the difference of using the gifts and power of the priesthood in private vs in public? If they can do it in private, the only difference is a man made policy that they can't do it in public.

I mean to say that the Handbook is for those who feel the need to ask permission and answers from their leaders. No one else has the need for it.

 

Excommunication is for those in public opposition to the Church, for example when not given permission. People are not excommunicated for asking. But that business about Ordain Women and its founder(s) is all very old news well hashed out in now defunct threads. Let’s not be bitter. And who says the policy is man-made?

 

Evidently there is difficulty discerning the difference between private and public religious practice just as there is difficulty discerning the difference between genders, an unfortunate characteristic of this generation that has been addressed from the Proclamation 20 years ago right up through this article. But here is how I see it: those who cannot think for themselves generally need to be told how to practice religion in private, which may be a valid developmental step but long-term is not a good thing. The public practices are defined for the sake of establishing a house of order for those who are able to think for themselves and function as a community.

 

There is also a difference between the gifts and power of the priesthood, the gifts ad power of priesthood office and the gifts and power of the priesthood order, and the gifts of the Spirit. But that is also for those who can think for themselves and can discern between public and private religious practice and between the genders.

[Zakuska]

Excommunication is for those in public opposition to the Church, for example when not given permission.

And here I thought excommunication was for grave sinners. At least thats what the Lords tells Alma in the BOM. You know of any scripture which says we should excommunicate some one for doing something with out permission?

Is the Lord really that petty that we have to ask permission to do anything? Peter was astounded when the spirit fell on the gentiles. I think if we released our petty sexism and trying to limit by whom the Lord can work just because they have the correct gender or office. That the Spirit would realy start flowing more in this church.

And who says the policy is man-made?

You're actually implying that the "handbook of instructions" are dictated from the lips of God and each instruction is prefaced with a "thus sayeth the Lord"? Really? some how I don't see the Lord being such a petty micromanager as you pretend.

Church policy originates with man on how we do things in the church except in a very few instances such as certain ordinances, sacrament blessing for example. Man can adapt and change church policy as the need arises. here's an example... our comission from the Savior is to preach the gospel to everyone where ever they may be. However a new "policy" was put in place half way threw my mission that we couldn't teach anyone of muslim descent because the gulf war had just begun and the edict from slc came out that we could no longer do that. Months later that policy was again changed. Some how I do not see the Lord micromanaging his prophet on the earth pulling the strings and telling him to put this policy in place here, then here, now remove it.

The public practices are defined for the sake of establishing a house of order for those who are able to think for themselves and function as a community.

I agree order in the house is important. However here again I don't see the Lord micro managing things and saying that because she's a woman she is some how unworthy or lacking authority to baptise. Especialy if she is a "priestess" in the order of the Melchezidek Priesthood.

Notice how this is gender neutral as pertaining to the person doing the baptism.

d&c 20

73 The person who is called of God and has authority from Jesus Christ to baptize, shall go down into the water with the person who has presented himself or herself for baptism, and shall say, calling him or her by name: Having been commissioned of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

If I'm not mistaken Christs comission to go and baptize was given to the whole church reguardless of gender.

A Melchezidek priesthood priestess also has authority to lay her hands on someone and confer the holy ghost or to heal by the laying on of hands. She herself has the holy ghost and thus has the qualifications and comission of Christ to be able to do it.

The only thing all these sisters are lacking to be able to perform these ordinances is the authorization to do so. Can you Imagine how much more capacity to do ordinance work we could have if every member were able to perform and officiate over every ordinance!?

It seems so petty and childish to discriminate against them just because of their lady parts.

There is also a difference between the gifts and power of the priesthood, the gifts ad power of priesthood office and the gifts and power of the priesthood order, and the gifts of the Spirit. But that is also for those who can think for themselves and can discern between public and private religious practice and between the genders.

Are you insinuating in all this that I'm too dumb or inept to be able to discern any of this? Edited October 25, 2015 by Zakuska

[carbon dioxide]

If I'm not mistaken Christs comission to go and baptize was given to the whole church reguardless of gender.

 

I will just focus on this comment.  If we take what you say and really mean it, then not only gender but age should also not matter.  So perhaps 8 or 9 year old should be able to baptize?   Since they are part of the Church as well they should be able to baptize.  I say give the Aaronic Priesthood at age 8 and ordained to "priest" and the Melchizedek at age 14. 

Edited October 25, 2015 by carbon dioxide

[sunstoned]

I'm surprised they didn't attempt to address the issue of women prophets, apostles and deacons in the Bible. 

Yes, but then again this would complacate their current position. In a few years this will change. As our society continues to progress into a more accepting culture, the church will soften their position. They will first do this first for the LGBT community, and then for women. They will have to do this to survive and to maintain relevance in people's lives.   

[carbon dioxide]

It seems so petty and childish to discriminate against them just because of their lady parts.

 

What makes a man a man and a woman a woman is much more than particular body parts.  The sons and daughters of God were determined long before they gained physical bodies.

[sunstoned]

So we can quote the Bible when it come to defending polygamy but not when it comes to women & priesthood?

+1000

[Zakuska]

I will just focus on this comment. If we take what you say and really mean it, then not only gender but age should also not matter. So perhaps 8 or 9 year old should be able to baptize? Since they are part of the Church as well they should be able to baptize. I say give the Aaronic Priesthood at age 8 and ordained to "priest" and the Melchizedek at age 14.

Sounds good to me. Aren't we told that the children who Christ laid his hands on and blessed "prophecied"? Who are we to put limits on the spirit of God? If he wants to work through a child... lets say an uneducated 14 year old farm boy, who are we to object?

They recently Lowered the age for fultime missionaries. Why not lower other ages as well?

My son and my nephew have been going with me, my brother and my dad to priesthood session of conference since they were 8. we started them early so as to not let the world get its grimmy grips into them too soon. He turned 11 today. He'll get to pass the sacrament next year and is so exited. On a few rare occassions he's even doubled as my HT companion. Because I couldn't get anyone else. It was nice because he played on the floor with the kids and kept them quiet while us adults talked.

Edited October 25, 2015 by Zakuska

[carbon dioxide]

Yes, but then again this would complacate their current position. In a few years this will change. As our society continues to progress into a more accepting culture, the church will soften their position. They will first do this first for the LGBT community, and then for women. They will have to do this to survive and to maintain relevance in people's lives.   

Better for the Church to die then dilute itself into a social club that keeps up with society.   If the Church does go that route, I guess I will have to search for the true church of God rather than a church that simply caters to please man.  I think the Church only has to look at the Community of Christ Church and how it is stagnated for decades even after watering down their doctrines to keep up with pleasing Babylon.  The Church will always be small and it strength is being different than the world.  That is the only way it can survive or else it really is no different than any other church out there.

Edited October 25, 2015 by carbon dioxide

[sunstoned]

I thought churchistrue had a really interesting take on it

 

 

 

 http://www.churchistrue.com/blog/lds-priesthood-for-women/

 

When you’re opening the door for future change, you do exactly what the church did.

1. Plant a seed that male priesthood might have cultural and not doctrinal foundations, following the lead of other Christian churches in America.
2. Set doctrinal precedent for the change.  Joseph encouraged females to give blessings.
3. State the current position is due to practice not doctrine.

 

Fasten your seat belts.  I think this is just a start.

I hope and believe this the what is happening.  It needs to happen, and it should happen.

[CV75]

And here I thought excommunication was for grave sinners. At least thats what the Lords tells Alma in the BOM. You know of any scripture which says we should excommunicate some one for doing something with out permission?

 I’m going to stay on topic. Women haven’t priesthood authority to excommunicate.

 

Church policy originates with man

Again, I’m going to stay on topic. The Handbook is good policy. Its study and application will result in “light, understanding, and the long-term blessing of discovering the best way to serve our brothers and sisters.” Please read this article about its source: https://www.lds.org/ensign/2015/09/church-handbooks-the-written-order-of-things?lang=eng

 

I don't see the Lord micro managing things and saying that because she's a woman she is some how unworthy or lacking authority to baptise.

I’ll refer to post #54 for the rest of your questions since I think that gets to the root of your objections to policy and practice.

 

Are you insinuating in all this that I'm too dumb or inept to be able to discern any of this?

I am not making this about you.

[JLHPROF]

Better for the Church to die then dilute itself into a social club that keeps up with society.   If the Church does go that route, I guess I will have to search for the true church of God rather than a church that simply caters to please man. 

 

I think we are closer to that than you think, but there is a setting in order on the horizon and much that has been diluted will one day be restored as it was in the days of Joseph and Brigham.

For now we watch and pray and do our best.

[Zakuska]

I’m going to stay on topic. Women haven’t priesthood authority to excommunicate.

I never said they did hold that particular key. You said that people like Kate kelly were excommunicated because they refused to obey their leaders. And I asked if you knew of any scripture where some one was excommunicated for simply not obeying their leaders. Its not a "grave sin" to disagree with Leaders. I know the BOM teaches us that people who commit grave sins such as murder or adultury should be excommunicated. If the sin also is against the laws of the land these people should be delivered up to the officers of the law. But I know of no scripture where some one was exed for disagreeing with leaders.

Again, I’m going to stay on topic. The Handbook is good policy. Its study and application will result in “light, understanding, and the long-term blessing of discovering the best way to serve our brothers and sisters.” Please read this article about its source: https://www.lds.org/ensign/2015/09/church-handbooks-the-written-order-of-things?lang=eng

Well that just proved my point. The handbook originates from "wise men" and not God and thus does not constitute scripture which originates from God.

Elder Dallin H. Oaks of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles has taught, “While [the] handbooks do not have the same standing as the scriptures, they do represent the most current interpretations and procedural directions of the Church’s highest authorities.”1 President Russell M. Nelson, President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, added that those authorities—the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles—are men of “seasoned maturity, experience, and extensive preparation.”2

Scripture no one, not even the GAs can go against. The handbook can be ammended and changed by the men at the top as needs arise and change. And is really the only reason given in the essay for why "publically" women don't hold eclesiastical offices. Edited October 25, 2015 by Zakuska

[CV75]

wemen

I really think post #54 gets to your underlying complaint. I'm not particularly interested in quibbling about excommunication decisions and the Handbook; it detracts from the thread topic.

[carbon dioxide]

I think we are closer to that than you think, but there is a setting in order on the horizon and much that has been diluted will one day be restored as it was in the days of Joseph and Brigham.

For now we watch and pray and do our best.

If the Church does go that route, I guess I will have to take a vacation from the Church until it got serious again to follow God rather than the wishes of man.

[mapman]

If the Church does go that route, I guess I will have to take a vacation from the Church until it got serious again to follow God rather than the wishes of man.

 

You can always pray about things that the church does to see whether it's God's will or not.

[carbon dioxide]

You can always pray about things that the church does to see whether it's God's will or not.

That is different.  However if the church would be making changes simply because society is moving in a certain direction, that would be easy to tell that it was not God's will.  God does not follow the direction that Babylon is going.  Unless there is a doctrine out there that I don't know about that man can alter the will of God and get God to do things that God would not normally do or want to do.

Edited October 25, 2015 by carbon dioxide

[juliann]

This out from Kate Kelly. She makes some fair points before she calls the church a cult that lies.Perhaps her best point is that the essays show that addressing these topics shows that this not just coming from a small group of women, these concerns are coming from throughout the church.  

 

She says she is on the executive board of OW....making her prediction that the church will fade into obscurity if they don't do what she wants equally true for OW. From what I have seen they are already fading into obscurity. Her observation that the concerns raised by OW are no longer coming only from her small group (that continues to unnecessarily demonize the church) ensures that. 

 

Phttp://gephardtdaily.com/local/exclusive-womens-priesthood-advocate-calls-new-lds-church-essays-lies/

[carbon dioxide]

This out from Kate Kelly. She makes some fair points before she calls the church a cult that lies.Perhaps her best point is that the essays show that addressing these topics shows that this not just coming from a small group of women, these concerns are coming from throughout the church.  

 

She says she is on the executive board of OW....making her prediction that the church will fade into obscurity if they don't do what she wants equally true for OW. From what I have seen they are already fading into obscurity. Her observation that the concerns raised by OW are no longer coming only from her small group (that continues to unnecessarily demonize the church) ensures that. 

 

Phttp://gephardtdaily.com/local/exclusive-womens-priesthood-advocate-calls-new-lds-church-essays-lies/

I believe it was not the issue of ordain Women that got Mrs. Kelly and the group in trouble but their methodology.  Rather than discussion and working within the framework of how God established the Church, they made demands and expect the Church to follow those demand or they will never stop until the demands are met.  Who wants to be in a church where outside groups could force change on it.  That is a recipe for disaster where people with their pet issues would constantly demand change to make them happy (at the expense of everyone else.) 

Edited October 25, 2015 by carbon dioxide

[Zakuska]

Are these essays living documents? Because the portion I talked about earlier on this thread where the sentence didn't make sense gramatically has been changed. 8o

[mapman]

Are these essays living documents? Because the portion I talked about earlier on this thread where the sentence didn't make sense gramatically has been changed. 8o

 

Yeah, they updated the race and priesthood essay a few weeks ago, so I expect they will continue to update these as time goes on.

[CV75]

Are these essays living documents? Because the portion I talked about earlier on this thread where the sentence didn't make sense gramatically has been changed. 8o

Of course they are subject to change and improvement to reflect the simple Gospel message which enlivens all things.

 

The Gospel message of course is that Jesus condescended into the world the only way a God can (through a mortal, telestial mother and an immortal, exalted Father), to atone for us (He died, was buried, rose again and ascended into heaven by the power of God, or the priesthood He received of the Father). That single truth is entwined into and illuminates everything.

 

For example, from the Book of Abraham, we learn that on the most fundamental level the power of God is both the seed and the priesthood, and is transferred both physically and spiritually from heaven to earth and from generation to generation. The patriarchal order in any dispensation (in its forms as practiced by Adam, Abraham and today) is simply a reflection of the simple means by which Jesus and His Priesthood is established in this world.

[Calm]

"Scripture no one, not even the GAs can go against"

Since when did the LDS faith teach scripture is infallible and cannot be added to or corrected?

[juliann]

I believe it was not the issue of ordain Women that got Mrs. Kelly and the group in trouble but their methodology.  Rather than discussion and working within the framework of how God established the Church, they made demands and expect the Church to follow those demand or they will never stop until the demands are met.  Who wants to be in a church where outside groups could force change on it.  That is a recipe for disaster where people with their pet issues would constantly demand change to make them happy (at the expense of everyone else.) 

 

Being more inclusive of women in the church is not a "demand." It is a necessity or the church would not be responding. OW has "forced change" (using your choice of words) and that disproves your theory of disaster...unless you think that recent changes and this essay itself are a disaster.

 

The point I was making is that this is not about "outside groups" at all. Women's issues are enough of a concern in and out of the church to require an essay. The church would hardly be responding to one small group's complaints at this level. This is no longer about OW and the existence of these essays prove that.