Dan Peterson on the family proclamation

[jkwilliams]

Just now, consiglieri said:

I believe that even Dan Peterson is on record as admitting that Joseph Smith's prophecy of obtaining treasure in Salem, Massachusetts as recorded in D&C 111 did not come to pass.

Should we factor that into the calculus?

Neither did the Canada copyright thing. 

[consiglieri]

1 minute ago, jkwilliams said:

Neither did the Canada copyright thing. 

Some revelations are of God, some are of men, and some are of devils.

 

Isn't that where that saying sprang from?

[jkwilliams]

Just now, consiglieri said:

Some revelations are of God, some are of men, and some are of devils.

 

Isn't that where that saying sprang from?

Yep. 

[consiglieri]

Just now, jkwilliams said:

Yep. 

Why is it disaffected Mormons tend to know more about their religion than the faithful?

[Scott Lloyd]

3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

No. The Brethren rarely, if ever, include me in the loop before they make their major pronouncements.

I also asked, rhetorically, why they didn't consult the general Sunday School presidency first. Any thoughts on that?

That's closer example to theoretically consulting the Relief Society presidency than was my tongue-in-cheek example of them consulting my wife and me before lowering the ages of missionary eligibility.

 

3 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

Well, that's my point: the Relief Society has no more standing than any of the auxiliaries, which tells me something about the position of women in the church. 

The only thing it tells me is that you undervalue the other auxiliary organizations in the Church. And that's your problem and no one else's.

Newsflash: the Relief Society is not an autonomous organizations. There is meaning in the word auxiliary.

[jkwilliams]

2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

The only thing it tells me is that you undervalue the other auxiliary organizations in the Church. And that's your problem and no one else's.

Newsflash: the Relief Society is not an autonomous organizations. There is meaning in the word auxiliary.

I don't undervalue the others. They are auxiliaries, as you note, which just makes my point. 

[consiglieri]

5 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Newsflash: the Relief Society is not an autonomous organizations. There is meaning in the word auxiliary.

Yes, and that meaning is synonymous with patriarchy.

[Scott Lloyd]

3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Women weren't shut out, any more than I was shut out because I wasn't consulted beforehand.

As far as I know, the general Sunday School presidency wasn't consulted in advance. I attend Sunday School. Every week. Should I now be fussing about having been "shut out"?

 

3 hours ago, stemelbow said:

Sheesh...either women are part of the leadership of the Church or not.  I see it as a good thing the Church has changed.  You seem to be sticking to your guns for no reason but to stick to your guns.  Let's reason together. 

The Relief Society is an auxiliary organization under the leadership and direction of the priesthood -- just like the Young Women, Young Men, Primary and Sunday School organizations.

If you harbor the notion that it has autonomy that puts it on a status with the Council of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles such that the prophet and apostles cannot make a move without having the Relief Society general presidency sign off on it, you are laboring under a misconception regarding the administration of the Church.

Edited May 18, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

5 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I don't undervalue the others. They are auxiliaries, as you note, which just makes my point. 

Makes what point?

Were you laboring under the notion that the Relief Society is not an auxiliary?

How on earth could you have gotten that idea, having worked for Church curriculum?

 

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Scott Lloyd said:

Makes what point?

Were you laboring under the notion that the Relief Society is not an auxiliary?

How on earth could you have gotten that idea, having worked for Church curriculum?

And they say I'm snarky. 

[Jeanne]

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Well, I've seen a deal of grumbling since last November, but I'd scarcely call that galvanization.* Maybe he -- and you -- need to define your terms.

*Murmuring would be the scriptural term I might apply to it.

People leaving the church and suicides are not just grumbling and murmuring.  It is not just "good riddance" to those who have sparked a  conversation in the most life changing..and life ending ways.

[Scott Lloyd]

3 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

And they say I'm snarky. 

No snark intended. It's an earnest question: Did you think the Relief Society was something other than an auxiliary organization functioning under the direction of the priesthood?

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Scott Lloyd said:

No snark intended. It's an earnest question: Did you think the Relief Society was something other than an auxiliary organization functioning under the direction of the priesthood?

Obviously not. But then you knew that already. 

[Scott Lloyd]

Wikipedia has a pretty good entry for "Auxiliary organization (LDS Church":
 

Quote

 

An auxiliary organization is a secondary body of church government within The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) that is "established for moral, educational, and benevolent purposes."^[1] As their name suggests, LDS Church auxiliary organizations are ancillary to the governing power of the priesthood in the church. The five auxiliary organizations of the LDS Church are Primary, Relief Society, Sunday School, Young Men, and Young Women.

The existence of church auxiliary organizations as a means of assisting the priesthood is based the Apostle Paul's statement that God has established "helps" and "governments" in the church to assist the apostles and prophets who lead the church.^[2]Apostle Harold B. Lee taught that "an auxiliary is to be an aid to the priesthood in watching over the Church and also an aid to the home, under the direction and ... cooperation [of] the priesthood."^[3] The purpose of the auxiliary organizations is to help "plant and make grow ... a testimony of Christ and of the Gospel."^[4]

According to Joseph F. Smith, church auxiliary organizations are temporary organizations which may be created and discontinued as the needs of the church and the priesthood hierarchy change.^[5] While serving as the church's president, Smith further stated:

We expect to see the day, if we live long enough ... when every council of the Priesthood in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will understand its duty; will assume its own responsibility, will magnify its calling, and fill its place in the Church, to the uttermost, according to the intelligence and ability possessed by it. When that day shall come, there will not be so much necessity for work that is now being done by the auxiliary organizations, because it will be done by the regular quorums of the Priesthood.^[6]

In the LDS Church today, each auxiliary organization is headed by a "general president" and two counselors; the three individuals together form the "general presidency" of the auxiliary. These individuals are not general authorities of the church, but are referred to as "general auxiliary officers" or "general officers" of the church. Like general authorities, general officers are "accepted and sustained" by the members of the church as leaders in their respective areas of jurisdiction, which are set out by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles.

Additionally, each auxiliary organization exists at a local ward and stake level, with presidencies formed to direct the work of the auxiliary in that particular region. Auxiliary presidencies work under the direction of the local priesthood leaders, which in most cases are the bishop and the stake president.

 

Somehow, some here seem to have gotten away from (or perhaps they never did understand) the concept of the Relief Society being one of the auxiliary organizations of the Church and, as such, being "ancillary to the governing power of the priesthood in the Church" as the above article explains.

Edited May 18, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

19 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Obviously not. But then you knew that already. 

Then I repeat the question: What point were you trying to make? Why does it bother you that the Relief Society is comparable to the other Church auxiliaries in administrative status?

Edited May 18, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[jkwilliams]

2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Then I repeat the question: What point were you trying to make? Why does it bother you that the Relief Society is comparable to the other Church auxiliaries in administrative status?

It doesn't bother me. Didn't say it did. You seemed to find it petty that the Relief Society wished they had been consulted. You suggested that was akin to demanding that you and your wife be consulted. I think that is a telling comparison. Your reiteration of the auxiliary nature of the Relief Society just reinforces the subordinate position of women. 

[CV75]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

Committed gay marriage can and does lead to lasting, real happiness, whatever scoffers might say. 

Not in my book. And I’m not scoffing gay marriage, sin, or the methods by which sin is posed, introduced and perpetuated in societies as “lasting, real happiness,” which is the most insidious kind of perversion. So I do condemn these things in the context of the greater light shed on this topic by the Lord’s servants as His teachings.

Some secular traditions are supportive of the Gospel or Zion tradition and should be perpetuated and improved upon; in this instance, marriage. Others do not. Traditions that are closer in line with eternal laws contribute to the spiritual, emotional, social and overall well-being of the individual, couple and family as detailed in “The Family: A Proclamation to the World.”

Naturally traditions evolve through negotiation within a society, and the more secularized a society becomes, that which is not necessarily in society’s or the Gospel’s best interests becomes recognized as "good." For example, same-sex marriage, gender homogenization and the like is not a healthy foundation for any society (you cannot show me one human society that was ever built upon such things) and it is also inconsistent with Gospel ideals. LDS accept that the family is the foundation of society, with all that entails gender- and marriage-wise.

The prophets have every right and reason to keep the Lord's standards front and center. Those who stand in holy places can see holy things. Believe it or not, some might scoff at that!

[rockpond]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

I am beginning to think one has to have a very selective memory in order to continue to believe in the church.

His statement: "strong LDS effort to afford homosexuals of every civil liberty in access to jobs, housing, etc.," is absolutely hilarious.  

 

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, rockpond said:

His statement: "strong LDS effort to afford homosexuals of every civil liberty in access to jobs, housing, etc.," is absolutely hilarious.  

 

I have to admit to giggling at that, too. 

[consiglieri]

56 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

And they say I'm snarky. 

Come not between the dragon and his wrath!

[consiglieri]

52 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

No snark intended. It's an earnest question: Did you think the Relief Society was something other than an auxiliary organization functioning under the direction of the priesthood?

I imagine jkwilliams is pretty clued in on the fact that the male church leadership did a power grab over Relief Society as part of Correlation in the 1960's and put it under their dominion and control.

[rockpond]

2 hours ago, CV75 said:

Interesting? This is pretty old, passé

 

stuff. Satan and his dupes have always disguised and peddled their counterfeit substitutes for God’s laws (the dupes without realizing it, of course) but the happiness they bring is sadly temporary. People are lured into all sorts of sin and other well-intentioned but ultimately wicked decisions because of the apparent happiness they seemingly bring. The prophets see through this and warn us from the watchtower, individually and as a society, and they are about as “fearful” as the counterfeits are “real.” Lasting, eternal happiness comes only through Christ and His ways.

 

As far as litigation goes, the Proclamation has consistently served as the basis for Church teachings that have their root in the earliest revelations, and go far beyond political and legal protection applications.

 

I believe I noted that the POTF does provide a doctrinal basis for our teachings.  But it would be naive to not understand the legal purpose that it also serves. 

Similarly, the policy seems to have an application of protecting the church from legal claims.  Or do you feel the Church is not at risk of potential lawsuits from gay couples and/or their children?

Like you, I believe that lasting happiness comes through Christ and His ways.  For this reason I don't believe last November's policy was the right thing to do. I feel that it has no resemblance to Christ's ways. 

[consiglieri]

1 minute ago, rockpond said:

Like you, I believe that lasting happiness comes through Christ and His ways.  For this reason I don't believe last November's policy was the right thing to do. I feel that it has no resemblance to Christ's ways. 

And you are not alone, my friend.

I have an acquaintance up here in my neck of the woods who resigned his membership from his local ward.  The bishop told him that what he normally does is to wait on it and counsel with the member before finalizing the resignation, but in my friend's case he wasn't going to do that because it was obvious my friend had already thought long and hard about it.

The punch-line is that the bishop has only been serving in that capacity for a couple of years.

This is a small ward.  How many members had already resigned during the two years the bishop had been serving?

If this is at all representative of what is happening in the Church world-wide, the resignations are approaching critical mass.

Salt Lake, we have a problem!

[jkwilliams]

2 minutes ago, consiglieri said:

And you are not alone, my friend.

I have an acquaintance up here in my neck of the woods who resigned his membership from his local ward.  The bishop told him that what he normally does is to wait on it and counsel with the member before finalizing the resignation, but in my friend's case he wasn't going to do that because it was obvious my friend had already thought long and hard about it.

The punch-line is that the bishop has only been serving in that capacity for a couple of years.

This is a small ward.  How many members had already resigned during the two years the bishop had been serving?

If this is at all representative of what is happening in the Church world-wide, the resignations are approaching critical mass.

Salt Lake, we have a problem!

I always said we'd know it was becoming a real problem when they started talking about it in conference and in church magazines. I honestly didn't think it would happen so fast. Not that I'm happy about it. Leaving the church is an ordeal I wouldn't wish for anyone to experience.  

[Scott Lloyd]

30 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

It doesn't bother me. Didn't say it did. You seemed to find it petty that the Relief Society wished they had been consulted. You suggested that was akin to demanding that you and your wife be consulted. I think that is a telling comparison. Your reiteration of the auxiliary nature of the Relief Society just reinforces the subordinate position of women. 

What an absurd conclusion!

Recognizing the Church's administrative structure no more puts women in a subordinate position than it does anyone else.

Giving Chieko Okazaki a say in the content of the family proclamation would no more have enhanced the position of women in the Church than not giving her that say diminished it.

Again, I compare it to the Sunday School. I attend Sunday School class each week. What possible benefit would it have been to me as a Sunday School-attending Church member if the Sunday School general presidency were consulted about the family proclamation before it was presented? I feel well-served with the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve having drafted the document, as was every other member of the Church.

By the way, what indication do we have that "the Relief Society wished they had been consulted"? As far as I can tell, the only one to have made a fuss over it was Sister Okazaki, and that was years after the fact, when she had long since been released and was well into her book-writing and speech-making career.

Was Elaine Jack upset over it? She was Relief Society general president at the time. What about Aileen Clyde, the other counselor in the presidency, or the Relief Society general board members?