And they came to pass...the sacrament?

[SettingDogStar]

So the Salt Lake Tribune (not always friendly to the Church) published this article a weeks ago. This is just a portion of it but it got me thinking about women’s role in church/priesthood and if maybe this would become church wide? Or maybe it would just stay isolated?

Im not opposed to the idea by any means but I’m curious if it would ever get expanded or not. 

 

“They don’t have the priesthood, but who says they can’t carry the sacrament trays?

Not the bishop. And not church headquarters.

Turns out, a Hyde Park congregation in Chicago is assigning teenage girls to pass the bread and water — which count as Communion in Latter-day Saint services — to the women in the mother’s lounge, where male priesthood bearers can’t enter.“It is appropriate for a sister to assist by carrying the sacrament tray into the mother’s lounge,” church spokesman Eric Hawkins said in a statement, “just as it is common for members to pass the sacrament tray to one another in the chapel.”

It only makes sense, says Neylan McBaine, author of “Women at Church: Magnifying LDS Women's Local Impact.”

“In the sacrament, the prayer said over the bread or water is scripturally mandated. Who then holds the tray and passes it around the congregation is not,” McBaine said. “This seems like an appropriate area to examine whether or not we have needlessly overextended the necessity of the priesthood.””

 

[Robert F. Smith]

Makes sense to me.

[Avatar4321]

I have no problem if the Lord wants to extend understanding in this matter

[Doctrine 612]

Chi 2 sec 20

Under the direction of the bishopric, priesthood holders bless the sacrament and pass it to members of the congregation during each sacrament meeting. Aaronic Priesthood holders usually perform these duties. Under the direction of the bishopric, the deacons quorum president has the privilege and responsibility to invite others to help pass the sacrament. When there are not enough deacons, he counsels with a member of the bishopric to determine who may be asked to assist.
Generally, teachers and priests in the Aaronic Priesthood should be invited to pass the sacrament before Melchizedek Priesthood holders are invited to do so. Where there are enough Aaronic Priesthood holders, Melchizedek Priesthood holders should not be invited to bless and pass the sacrament on a regular schedule.

[SettingDogStar]

3 hours ago, Doctrine 612 said:

Chi 2 sec 20

Under the direction of the bishopric, priesthood holders bless the sacrament and pass it to members of the congregation during each sacrament meeting. Aaronic Priesthood holders usually perform these duties. Under the direction of the bishopric, the deacons quorum president has the privilege and responsibility to invite others to help pass the sacrament. When there are not enough deacons, he counsels with a member of the bishopric to determine who may be asked to assist.
Generally, teachers and priests in the Aaronic Priesthood should be invited to pass the sacrament before Melchizedek Priesthood holders are invited to do so. Where there are enough Aaronic Priesthood holders, Melchizedek Priesthood holders should not be invited to bless and pass the sacrament on a regular schedule.

I was familiar with that policy. However it seems that this ward is allowed to let a sister/young woman to bring it into the mothers lounge (which makes sense). Women even pass the sacrament technically when the plates are passed down the rows. While I agree with that specific policy it seems that it could be (not that it should be) updated if the leadership decided it was appropriate after counciling with the Lord.

Edited October 13, 2018 by SettingDogStar

[Scott Lloyd]

Didn’t we already have this discussion?

 

[Maidservant]

I feel it is crucial--not 'nice'--but crucial to have 12 and 13 year old boys have a concretely outlined duty that is an outgrowth of their brotherhood (male group), a sign (and actuality) of their participation and identity in that brotherhood.  While passing the Sacrament may not have to be that thing, and it may not be a 'priesthood' thing properly, it does have to be something that is a sign of the brotherhood and not something shared with their sisters.  Passing the Sacrament may not be priesthood, but again, I find it crucial to the psychological and spiritual growth of a young man of that age.  If you permit girls to participate, you will need to find something else for the boys to do that can outline their maleness/brotherhoodness/contribution to the greater community, then.  As in, we NEED you, 12 and 13 year old boys--you are NECESSARY to the upholding of our community--without you, we [fill in the blank/wouldn't have a complete Sacrament service].  This kind of contribution is more crucial now in our times than ever before when this age of boys are not only 'falling through the cracks' but 'tumbling through the chasm'.  It may be easier to allow it to continue to be passing the Sacrament.

Young girls of that age actually have a different psychological need, and it is not particularly contribution.  They actually need to be somewhat free from contribution.  Young girls of that age are receiving their purpose in life internally, and it is either being cultivated, nourished, and allowed to express; or it is in the process of becoming supressed because there is no room for it in the world, or their corner of it, and the people around them don't know how to help them.  Their initiation into sisterhood is a different track than a young man's initiation into brotherhood.  Passing the Sacrament (and other concrete duties) are a young man's initiation into the maleness of the community, and if you remove that as a sign of maleness, you will need to supply another, or there will be a detriment to both the young men and thereby to the communities they are supposed to be a part of.

(Although contribution is also a human need, and a specific personality need; but it is also a deeply male need in other regards.)

I will say that if women's priesthood ever becomes conflated with men's priesthood, will be the last day I participate in this church.  I say that because I value my priesthood endlessly and it is not a man's priesthood.

Edited October 14, 2018 by Maidservant

[Maidservant]

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Didn’t we already have this discussion?

 

Was the OP here for it?

[katherine the great]

50 minutes ago, Maidservant said:

 

Young girls of that age actually have a different psychological need, and it is not particularly contribution.  They actually need to be somewhat free from contribution.  Young girls of that age are receiving their purpose in life internally, and it is either being cultivated, nourished, and allowed to express; or it is in the process of becoming supressed because there is no room for it in the world, or their corner of it, and the people around them don't know how to help them.  Their initiation into sisterhood is a different track than a young man's initiation into brotherhood.  

This is less about the young women needing to pass the sacrament and more about nursing mothers needing to receive the sacrament. 😊

[Scott Lloyd]

54 minutes ago, Maidservant said:

Was the OP here for it?

No. It was several days ago. Somebody linked t a SL Trib column by Peggy Fletcher Stack. Discussion ensued about whether it is that revolutionary a change to have girls or women take sacrament trays into a mothers’ room when rank-and-file members pass the tray down the row ordinarily.  Eric Hawkins of Public Affairs was saying it was not inappropriate. Surely somebody here besides me remembers it. 

Edited October 14, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[Rivers]

Dr. Daniel Peterson talked about this in his blog:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2018/10/in-which-i-endorse-the-ordination-of-women.html

He makes the point that passing the sacrament is not even a priestly ordinance.  Only the blessing of the bread and water is.  

[JAHS]

I know in the 40s during the war the young women sometimes prepared the sacrament table and in some cases even passed it when there were not enough priesthood holders avaliable.
 

[Storm Rider]

I don't really see a difference between this and when members simply pass the tray down the row to other members. I don't see why it needs to be a young sister - the point is to have nursing mothers receive the Sacrament.

On the other hand, if, and it is a BIG "IF", nursing mothers are uncomfortable having a deacon pass them the Sacrament, then I don't see a problem with just having someone outside the door to pass it one mother and then make the circle back to the door.

However, if this is some effort on behalf of an agenda, then I could easily understand a bishop saying, "no thanks" - if you don't feel comfortable allowing a deacon to pass the Sacrament then you probably aren't really interested in the Sacrament. I don't really think it matters whether a mother covers up or not. I personally would like to see a world where nursing mothers feel comfortable nursing wherever they are and their infant needs to be nursed.

The more I think about this the more it smells bad. 

[rockpond]

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

No. It was several days ago. Somebody linked t a SL Trib column by Peggy Fletcher Stack. Discussion ensued about whether it is that revolutionary a change to have girls or women take sacrament trays into a mothers’ room when rank-and-file members pass the tray down the row ordinarily.  Eric Hawkins of Public Affairs was saying it was not inappropriate. Surely somebody here besides me remembers it. 

I remember it but I seem to remember it being a tangent in another thread (presumably not seen by the OP here)... perhaps I'm mistaken on this. 

I think it's okay to have it as a topic in its own thread.

Edited October 14, 2018 by rockpond

[rockpond]

2 hours ago, Maidservant said:

Young girls of that age actually have a different psychological need, and it is not particularly contribution.  They actually need to be somewhat free from contribution.  Young girls of that age are receiving their purpose in life internally, and it is either being cultivated, nourished, and allowed to express; or it is in the process of becoming supressed because there is no room for it in the world, or their corner of it, and the people around them don't know how to help them.  Their initiation into sisterhood is a different track than a young man's initiation into brotherhood.  Passing the Sacrament (and other concrete duties) are a young man's initiation into the maleness of the community, and if you remove that as a sign of maleness, you will need to supply another, or there will be a detriment to both the young men and thereby to the communities they are supposed to be a part of.

(Although contribution is also a human need, and a specific personality need; but it is also a deeply male need in other regards.)

I'm not seeing this in the case of my oldest daughter (10 years old).  Several years ago she began making unsolicited comments asking my wife/her mom and I why God liked boys better.  We've been working quite hard in the intervening years to help her see her valued place in the church.  But, she still sees her older brothers as having more important roles and given greater opportunities.

I'm not sure that my daughter needs to feel free from the need to contribute.

This is not to say that I don't find value in your comments.  I tend to agree with the need for the young men to have these activities with which to bond.  I'm just not sure that the young women don't need them.

[rockpond]

12 hours ago, SettingDogStar said:

It only makes sense, says Neylan McBaine, author of “Women at Church: Magnifying LDS Women's Local Impact.”

“In the sacrament, the prayer said over the bread or water is scripturally mandated. Who then holds the tray and passes it around the congregation is not,” McBaine said. “This seems like an appropriate area to examine whether or not we have needlessly overextended the necessity of the priesthood.””

I agree with this.  I understand that the handbook implies that this is an Aaronic Priesthood duty but beyond saying the sacrament prayers, there isn't scriptural support for it being a priesthood-only responsibility.

[JLHPROF]

For me the bottom line is how we define administering the sacrament.

If passing is administering then according to scripture deacons and teachers are not allowed to do it.

If passing is not administering then scripture doesn't define it as a priesthood action or part of the ordinances.  In which case it's not restricted to deacons and other priesthood holders.

Anything else is purely administrative and has no gospel principle backing it.

[Bernard Gui]

3 hours ago, rockpond said:

I agree with this.  I understand that the handbook implies that this is an Aaronic Priesthood duty but beyond saying the sacrament prayers, there isn't scriptural support for it being a priesthood-only responsibility.

Why does there have to be scriptural support?

[Bernard Gui]

16 hours ago, SettingDogStar said:

So the Salt Lake Tribune (not always friendly to the Church) published this article a weeks ago. This is just a portion of it but it got me thinking about women’s role in church/priesthood and if maybe this would become church wide? Or maybe it would just stay isolated?

Im not opposed to the idea by any means but I’m curious if it would ever get expanded or not. 

 

“They don’t have the priesthood, but who says they can’t carry the sacrament trays?

Not the bishop. And not church headquarters.

Turns out, a Hyde Park congregation in Chicago is assigning teenage girls to pass the bread and water — which count as Communion in Latter-day Saint services — to the women in the mother’s lounge, where male priesthood bearers can’t enter.“It is appropriate for a sister to assist by carrying the sacrament tray into the mother’s lounge,” church spokesman Eric Hawkins said in a statement, “just as it is common for members to pass the sacrament tray to one another in the chapel.”

It only makes sense, says Neylan McBaine, author of “Women at Church: Magnifying LDS Women's Local Impact.”

“In the sacrament, the prayer said over the bread or water is scripturally mandated. Who then holds the tray and passes it around the congregation is not,” McBaine said. “This seems like an appropriate area to examine whether or not we have needlessly overextended the necessity of the priesthood.””

 

It’s not clear what is happening here. Do the girls receive the trays from the Priests at the table and carry them to the mothers’ lounge, or do they simply pass the tray into the lounge after being handed the tray by the Deacon?

[Scott Lloyd]

6 hours ago, rockpond said:

I remember it but I seem to remember it being a tangent in another thread (presumably not seen by the OP here)... perhaps I'm mistaken on this. 

I think it's okay to have it as a topic in its own thread.

Just saying I don’t see a lot of new ground being broken here beyond what was already covered in the other thread, tangent or not. 

[Scott Lloyd]

8 hours ago, Rivers said:

Dr. Daniel Peterson talked about this in his blog:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2018/10/in-which-i-endorse-the-ordination-of-women.html

He makes the point that passing the sacrament is not even a priestly ordinance.  Only the blessing of the bread and water is.  

Way to take things out of context. 

What Professor Peterson actually stated was that teachers and deacons of today serve a support function roughly analogous to that of the Levites in ancient Israel, who served a support function to Aaron and his descendants, who were the priests. 

But it’s all there in the link, and those who care to can click on it. 

Edited October 14, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[rockpond]

4 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Why does there have to be scriptural support?

There doesn’t. 

[JLHPROF]

5 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Why does there have to be scriptural support?

Because we are claiming a restriction.  We are limiting who is permitted to perform an act without any justification or correct principle behind it.

[katherine the great]

10 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

On the other hand, if, and it is a BIG "IF", nursing mothers are uncomfortable having a deacon pass them the Sacrament, then I don't see a problem with just having someone outside the door to pass it one mother and then make the circle back to the door.

However, if this is some effort on behalf of an agenda, then I could easily understand a bishop saying, "no thanks" - if you don't feel comfortable allowing a deacon to pass the Sacrament then you probably aren't really interested in the Sacrament. 

 It sounds to me like it’s just a way to get sacrament into the mothers lounge. Many women feel uncomfortable breast-feeding in public because U.S. culture has made them feel uncomfortable. Therefore they retreat into a women’s only room so that people who are uncomfortable with it don’t have to see it.  I agree with you that it’s ridiculous that women have to feel ashamed of breast-feeding their children. But it’s the way it is and if men aren’t allowed in the women’s lounge then the only logical solution is to have a female enter the room to take the sacrament tray to them. 

[Bernard Gui]

3 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Because we are claiming a restriction.  We are limiting who is permitted to perform an act without any justification or correct principle behind it.

The words of current prophets don’t count unless they are also found in scripture? Please explain if I misunderstand.