Something New

[JLHPROF]

Since there is no revelation I am aware of as to who can collect fast offerings from homes to help the Bishop I see no issue.
The only scriptural words of the Lord on Deacons (primarily in D&C 20) does not mention Fast Offerings at all.

[JLHPROF]

9 minutes ago, Buckeye said:

Your god sucks. The real God is no respecter of persons. Race, gender, etc. - he does not limit people based on these things like fallen men (and women) are wont to do.

Pretty sure this has been discussed before.  The scriptural evidences do not agree with the God you describe.  Not a respecter of persons is not the same thing as making everyone equal in all things.

[bluebell]

3 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Who said anything about a participation trophy?

I'm honestly pretty shocked though that you don't see value in allowing people to have the same kinds of opportunities instead of restricting them based on gender. Why should gender prevent a beehive from collecting fast offerings if she wants to help? Would it be better to tell my 12 year old daughter that she can't help because she's a girl? I don't get it.

I think the best answer to such a question would probably be "you can't help because it's not your responsibility."  Because i think it's o.k. that we all don't get to have the same responsibilities and it's o.k. to acknowledge that sometimes boys and girls have different responsibilities.  

But to be honest, sometimes 'because you're a girl' is a valid answer, like when she asks you why she gets to deal with all the horrors of having her period every month and none of the boys she's knows has to suffer like that.

And from my perspective (and i know for a fact that i am not the only woman who sees things this way), being given men's responsibilities by men for no other reason than 'so you can participate' can come across kind of like 'well, you're here, I guess we'll find something for you to do...' 

Which is about as gratifying as a participation trophy is.

[Buckeye]

1 minute ago, JLHPROF said:

Pretty sure this has been discussed before.  The scriptural evidences do not agree with the God you describe.  Not a respecter of persons is not the same thing as making everyone equal in all things.

Of course, that's not what I said. People may be inequal due to their choices. God doesn't make everyone equal in that regard. But He gives equal opportunity to all. He denies none who seek after something good. The scriptures clearly point toward that God.

[Buckeye]

5 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Since there is no revelation I am aware of as to who can collect fast offerings from homes to help the Bishop I see no issue.
The only scriptural words of the Lord on Deacons (primarily in D&C 20) does not mention Fast Offerings at all.

So would you agree that women can prepare and pass the sacrament too, since those things are not mentioned in the priesthood duties of D/C 20? Women couldn't 'administer' the sacrament, sure, but neither can deacons or teachers.

[RevTestament]

3 hours ago, bluebell said:

Probably part of my personality and also some assumption on my part, but i think it's dumb when someone thinks that the way to make women equal in the church is to give them some of the men's responsibilities.  

I don't see making the young women more like the young men (not in the physical sense, of course) is any kind of an answer.  From my perspective, it assumes that women only gain equality as they move into men's spheres because men's sphere's are inherently superior.

Now there is an awesome attitude and perspective!

[JLHPROF]

4 minutes ago, Buckeye said:

Of course, that's not what I said. People may be inequal due to their choices. God doesn't make everyone equal in that regard. But He gives equal opportunity to all. He denies none who seek after something good. The scriptures clearly point toward that God.

Again, scripture disagrees.

[bluebell]

13 minutes ago, Buckeye said:

Your god sucks. The real God is no respecter of persons. Race, gender, etc. - he does not limit people based on these things like fallen men (and women) are wont to do.

God limits people based on gender all the time.  Just try giving birth.  You'll find your God-given limitations fairly quickly.  

[bluebell]

21 minutes ago, Buckeye said:

So why did you assume that the ward in the OP was acting for a dumb reason rather than because it's the right thing to do? That's where the condescension started. 

WAYYYY back when I first answered the question, i plainly said that one of the reasons that i thought it was dumb was probably based on assumption.  Not sure how that's condescending, but regardless, probably time for us to just agree to disagree.  This conversation is quickly devolving to Junior High levels of maturity.  

 

[JLHPROF]

2 minutes ago, Buckeye said:

So would you agree that women can prepare and pass the sacrament too, since those things are not mentioned in the priesthood duties of D/C 20? Women couldn't 'administer' the sacrament, sure, but neither can deacons or teachers.

No, I'm actually of the belief that allowing Deacons and Teachers to pass the sacrament is incorrect...that that is part of "administering" it.
For the first nearly 100 years of the Church only Priests, Elders, and above could assist with sacrament.
Then as we often do we changed how an ordinance is performed but recorded no revelation to justify the change.
During the world wars girls did pass the sacrament.  It wasn't until around that time or slightly earlier that Deacons and Teachers began passing sacrament as well.

Just one of those things that will eventually be fixed.

[RevTestament]

15 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Pretty sure this has been discussed before.  The scriptural evidences do not agree with the God you describe.  Not a respecter of persons is not the same thing as making everyone equal in all things.

Yep, no respecter of persons means that all must abide the law equally. It means justice is no respecter of persons. It doesn't mean women should be made to do men's work, go to war, and to do priesthood responsibilities, and it doesn't mean God made a mistake in only allowing women to have multiple (oops), bear children and suckle children.

Edited January 10, 2017 by RevTestament

[SeekingUnderstanding]

41 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I think the best answer to such a question would probably be "you can't help because it's not your responsibility."  Because i think it's o.k. that we all don't get to have the same responsibilities and it's o.k. to acknowledge that sometimes boys and girls have different responsibilities.  

But to be honest, sometimes 'because you're a girl' is a valid answer, like when she asks you why she gets to deal with all the horrors of having her period every month and none of the boys she's knows has to suffer like that.

And from my perspective (and i know for a fact that i am not the only woman who sees things this way), being given men's responsibilities by men for no other reason than 'so you can participate' can come across kind of like 'well, you're here, I guess we'll find something for you to do...' 

Which is about as gratifying as a participation trophy is.

Can you help me understand what the Beehives' official responsibilities are? 

Edited January 10, 2017 by SeekingUnderstanding

[SeekingUnderstanding]

26 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

No, I'm actually of the belief that allowing Deacons and Teachers to pass the sacrament is incorrect...that that is part of "administering" it.
For the first nearly 100 years of the Church only Priests, Elders, and above could assist with sacrament.
Then as we often do we changed how an ordinance is performed but recorded no revelation to justify the change.
During the world wars girls did pass the sacrament.  It wasn't until around that time or slightly earlier that Deacons and Teachers began passing sacrament as well.

Just one of those things that will eventually be fixed.

Don't we all pass the sacrament every Sunday? Or do you think that the Priests should be the only ones to touch the tray?

[Oliblish]

19 minutes ago, Buckeye said:

So would you agree that women can prepare and pass the sacrament too, since those things are not mentioned in the priesthood duties of D/C 20? Women couldn't 'administer' the sacrament, sure, but neither can deacons or teachers.

In the past young women have prepared and passed the sacrament in church.  (I think the example I saw was back in the 1930's or You are right that the only thing that requires priesthood is saying the sacrament prayer.

[Oliblish]

It looks like there is precedence for this.

[bluebell]

26 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Can you help me understand what the Beehives' official responsibilities are? 

When a young woman reaches age 12, the bishop interviews her. She advances from Primary to Young Women and begins attending Young Women meetings during Primary sharing time (see 11.4.3). She is a member of the Beehive class.

For the early pioneers of the Church, the beehive was a symbol of harmony, cooperation, and work. When the young women of the Church were first organized as a group, they were known as Beehives.

As a member of a Beehive class today, a young woman strengthens her faith in Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ and learns to work with others in harmony and cooperation. This is a time for her to stand for truth and righteousness and “arise and shine forth” (D&C 115:5).

And just to be clear, it's not that i think that collecting fast offering is doctrinally outside of the duties of the beehives.  My point was that if a ward leader does not believe beehives should collect fast offerings, that's o.k. in my opinion.

[pogi]

3 hours ago, Buckeye said:

FWIW, having served with YM for many years in wards with very large boundaries, I tend to look down on deacon fast offering collection as a net waste of time and money. Generally speaking, the bishop doesn't have much need for deacons to assist here (or YW). And the cost in gas and time is significant, especially since at least half the time the members aren't home. Many times I've seen a member ready to pay FO at church, but then be told they need to wait for the deacon to come to their house later that afternoon, but then there is a mixup and the schedules don't work and everyone is frustrated. FO collection really is a make work assignment. There's so many other better places we could put the youth - YM and YW - to work. Just my 2 cents.

Agreed!  We have basically done away with fast offering collections in our ward, hallelujah.  We only visit a few members who have difficulty getting to church and who are not tech savvy enough to pay online.  It is a total "make-work" assignment.  

[SeekingUnderstanding]

16 minutes ago, bluebell said:

When a young woman reaches age 12, the bishop interviews her. She advances from Primary to Young Women and begins attending Young Women meetings during Primary sharing time (see 11.4.3). She is a member of the Beehive class.

For the early pioneers of the Church, the beehive was a symbol of harmony, cooperation, and work. When the young women of the Church were first organized as a group, they were known as Beehives.

As a member of a Beehive class today, a young woman strengthens her faith in Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ and learns to work with others in harmony and cooperation. This is a time for her to stand for truth and righteousness and “arise and shine forth” (D&C 115:5).

And just to be clear, it's not that i think that collecting fast offering is doctrinally outside of the duties of the beehives.  My point was that if a ward leader does not believe beehives should collect fast offerings, that's o.k. in my opinion.

In addition to the nonsensical (for a 12 year old) duties a deacon has scripturally, the deacons in our ward are responsible for setting up chairs, taking out garbage, collecting fast offerings, and passing the sacrament. To my knowledge the beehives have no assigned responsibilities. We tell these young men (I am the deacons quorum advisor) that these responsibilities prepare them for adulthood, missionary work, and life in general. I believe this. I don't think we do the young women any favors by sparing them church assignments and responsibilities. If a male church leader sees this and wants to help develop the young women's sense of responsibility in his stewardship, I have a hard time condemning him. 

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Oliblish said:

It looks like there is precedence for this.

That is pretty cool. 

[bluebell]

36 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

In addition to the nonsensical (for a 12 year old) duties a deacon has scripturally, the deacons in our ward are responsible for setting up chairs, taking out garbage, collecting fast offerings, and passing the sacrament. To my knowledge the beehives have no assigned responsibilities. We tell these young men (I am the deacons quorum advisor) that these responsibilities prepare them for adulthood, missionary work, and life in general. I believe this. I don't think we do the young women any favors by sparing them church assignments and responsibilities. If a male church leader sees this and wants to help develop the young women's sense of responsibility in his stewardship, I have a hard time condemning him. 

I just think it would be awesome to be able to develop their sense of responsibility without looking to the deacons for the standard on how to do it. 

 

[SeekingUnderstanding]

19 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I just think it would be awesome to be able to develop their sense of responsibility without looking to the deacons for the standard on how to do it. 

 

Fair enough. 

[Rain]

 

4 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Can you help me understand what the Beehives' official responsibilities are? 

 

3 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

In addition to the nonsensical (for a 12 year old) duties a deacon has scripturally, the deacons in our ward are responsible for setting up chairs, taking out garbage, collecting fast offerings, and passing the sacrament. To my knowledge the beehives have no assigned responsibilities. We tell these young men (I am the deacons quorum advisor) that these responsibilities prepare them for adulthood, missionary work, and life in general. I believe this. I don't think we do the young women any favors by sparing them church assignments and responsibilities. If a male church leader sees this and wants to help develop the young women's sense of responsibility in his stewardship, I have a hard time condemning him. 

I agree pretty much with bluebell. I don't think we should be doing the same as men.  I think we should be doing our own responsibilities  - and this is the whole problem: we don't know what a lot of them are.  

Instead of asking the Lord why we don't have the priesthood or could we get permission to do some priesthood responsibilities, I think we should be asking what the Lord would have us do. 

And maybe that is setting up chairs or passing the sacrament, but maybe we are not the same and God has something else in mind for us.  Put us there for the right reasons, not just to make us "equal".

Edited January 11, 2017 by Rain

[Calm]

6 hours ago, Buckeye said:

So if a ward has baby changing tables in the women's bathroom, you would oppose the installation of the same tables in the men's restrooms? 

 

If the only reason men got them was because women had them and not because they would actually need them, yes.

In that case it would simply be to make whoever feel good to be able to point to equal treatment, not actually changing any behaviour, just appearance.

----

It might be useful in a ward that only had a few deacons, but if what it does is lessen opportunities for the young men by sharing them with the young women, I think more thought should be taken to find something that adds to the ward and not just take the easy solution of splitting the work equally.

For one thing, what happens when the young men become teachers and priests?  Would they plan on having the young women help there or just leave them without any calling?

Edited January 11, 2017 by Calm

[Calm]

6 hours ago, Buckeye said:

FWIW, having served with YM for many years in wards with very large boundaries, I tend to look down on deacon fast offering collection as a net waste of time and money. Generally speaking, the bishop doesn't have much need for deacons to assist here (or YW). And the cost in gas and time is significant, especially since at least half the time the members aren't home. Many times I've seen a member ready to pay FO at church, but then be told they need to wait for the deacon to come to their house later that afternoon, but then there is a mixup and the schedules don't work and everyone is frustrated. FO collection really is a make work assignment. There's so many other better places we could put the youth - YM and YW - to work. Just my 2 cents.

It works nicely in small town Utah where the ward is in a three block area.  Nice way for the young men to get to know neighbours and the ward to get to know the young men.  In my ward, the Church newsletter was also delivered at the same time so even if you paid later, it wasn't a useless effort by the YM.  It would be nice to have something equally connecting for the young women to do.  Perhaps a monthly ward humanitarian project the Young Women are responsible for where Beehives go around and collect, Mia Maids prepare for shipping, and Laurels do the promoting and reminding.

Edited January 11, 2017 by Calm

[rongo]

Who needs baby changing stations in any of the restrooms? I always just changed our babied on the floor of an empty classroom. We had changing mats in our diaper bag, so it could have been on a concrete slab or wherever. 

I think too often things like "changing stations and bathrooms" becomes more of a symbol in culture wars than a practical need. 

Edited January 11, 2017 by rongo