Bernard Gui Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 6 minutes ago, ALarson said: Oh, of course, members went over at their own expense. But how many traveled over that were paid for by the church? That would be interesting to know, (but there may be some who also paid their own way in that group). Body guards....and so on.... What did the newspapers call them...the "entourage"? I do find it disappointing of some women leaders weren't included in that and hope that some were. Why is it our business to know whose trip was paid for and whose was not? Just curiosity? I would suppose that any large group of leaders traveling abroad would have an entourage. I once played in the orchestra for a big event in Seattle with Desmond Tutu and the Dalai Lama. They certainly didn’t come alone. 2
ALarson Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: Why is it our business to know whose trip was paid for and whose was not? Just curiosity? As a member who contributes quite large sums of money each year, I'd say that it's my business. Or are you saying the funds came from somewhere other than member's contributions? Do you believe they paid their own way using their own individual stipends? Trips to Italy are exorbitantly expensive (as I'm sure you know)....especially if there are first class tickets involved and nice hotels, etc. I just hope some of those who were allowed this luxury were women....leaders of general auxiliaries. Edited March 18, 2019 by ALarson
bluebell Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 10 minutes ago, MustardSeed said: Thank you bluebell for your thoughtful response. I was talking with my husband about this at the church as I said that the women really need to be whipped into shape and start participating. My husband disagreed in part, And pointed out that the teacher caters to the man in his style of teaching and question asking. He also held responsible the guys who apparently feel a need to be visible week after week. Your hubby could be right, but I would probably still agree with you that the women need to step up. Sometimes we put ourselves in boxes of our own making. Your ward might be set up so that the momentum favors male participation, but women could change that the moment they decided they were going to make their voices heard. The general church leadership is constantly begging women to speak up. I think they realize that there is an element to women equality that women must grasp for themselves. We can’t wait around until the men around us to decide to make it easier (though I know we appreciate it when they do). 😊 3
Robert F. Smith Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 11 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: If they are the best qualified persons for the position, more power to them, in all meanings of the word. Most of my school principals over 42 years as a teacher were women. Some were great, some weren’t. Same with the men. Yes, and the current president of UVU is a woman. Could we ever imagine a woman being pres of BYU? To me that should go without saying, but I have my doubts that it will happen. 2
Bernard Gui Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 Just now, ALarson said: As a member who contributes quite large sums of money each year, I'd say that it's my business. Or are you saying the funds came from somewhere other than member's contributions? Do you believe they paid their own way using their own individual stipends? There are sources other than tithing. What sources were used? I don’t have a clue, do you? As a member who has also contributed large sums over the years and one who has seen the care the funds are treated with at the local level, I don’t have any reason to suspect there was any skullduggery involved in the trip. I don’t wish to get into yet another derailing debate about Church funding.
Bernard Gui Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 3 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said: Yes, and the current president of UVU is a woman. Could we ever imagine a woman being pres of BYU? To me that should go without saying, but I have my doubts that it will happen. That position seems to have defaulted to become involved with a Priesthood calling, unless I am not up to current practices.
pogi Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 14 hours ago, MustardSeed said: I have to admit, when in Sunday school today a picture of the general authorities in the Rome temple was passed around, zero female presence in the picture, I thought to myself, it’s really no wonder women rarely contribute in Sunday school (for one). I for one feel I’m really along for the ride.... unless there’s a personal service to fill or a children’s class to be taught. It never bothered me that there is a seeming imbalance, til today. Seeing that picture seemed to have a profound impact on you if the seeming imbalance never bothered you before. That is interesting. What changed? To be fair, this is the first time the apostles have all been invited to anything like this - so I don't think that is why women rarely contribute in your local Sunday School. It doesn't seem to be a church wide problem from my experience however. I think the apostles were invited to symbolically tie the old church to the restored church in a historic city with ancient apostolic presence. Why did Jesus only call men as apostles? He may have been radical in some regards, but he is not radical to the extent that he will go rogue and cross God's will. The ancient and modern apostles were foreordained to those positions for reasons known to God, just as Christ himself was foreordained. I don't think God has anything against women, but for whatever reason, they have been foreordained to different (not lesser) roles. Equality of roles is a man made ethic. 4
ALarson Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 (edited) 9 minutes ago, pogi said: Why did Jesus only call men as apostles? How doe we know he only called men to be apostles? Many believe that Mary Magdelene was one of his apostles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Magdalene Quote Mary Magdalene, sometimes called simply the Magdalene, was a Jewish woman who, according to the four canonical gospels, traveled with Jesus as one of his followers and was a witness to his crucifixion, burial, and resurrection. She is mentioned by name twelve times in the canonical gospels, more than most of the apostles. The Gospel of Luke 8:2–3 lists Mary as one of the women who traveled with Jesus and helped support his ministry "out of their resources", indicating that she was probably relatively wealthy.....In all four canonical gospels, she is a witness to the crucifixion of Jesus and, in the Synoptic Gospels, she is also present at his burial. All four gospels identify her, either alone or as a member of a larger group of women, as the first witness to the empty tomb, and the first to testify to Jesus's resurrection. For these reasons, she is known in many Christian traditions as the "apostle to the apostles". Edited March 18, 2019 by ALarson 1
ALarson Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 12 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: There are sources other than tithing. IMO,. all the resources stem back to members' contributions. I know there are investments, etc....but the money for those investments trace back to contributions. I believe it is my business to know how the money is spent when I'm a contributor. You can disagree (and I'm fine with that), but I have every right to give my opinion.
JulieM Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 14 hours ago, MustardSeed said: ...treat women as equals the way I believe He actually sees me? Why not have women as apostles? Would it have been “too” radical , or maybe it’s just that women are indeed not actually designed to be leaders? Or another reason? . If you read the article in the DN (I think Calm posted it), Pres. Nelson said it was a revelation or revealed to him by God who was supposed to travel to Rome. So, if no women were included (leaders), then maybe It was God who wasn’t concerned about whether they were there or not?
Bernard Gui Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 10 minutes ago, ALarson said: IMO,. all the resources stem back to members' contributions. I know there are investments, etc....but the money for those investments trace back to contributions. I believe it is my business to know how the money is spent when I'm a contributor. You can disagree (and I'm fine with that), but I have every right to give my opinion. Of course you do, as do I. I wouldn’t have it any other way.
Bernard Gui Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 26 minutes ago, pogi said: Why did Jesus only call men as apostles? Three times on three continents. Seems like a pattern is emerging.
JulieM Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: Three times on three continents. According to who? (Man’s interpretations or writings?) I actually believe Christ did have at least one woman as an apostle. Why not? Anything wrong with that? Edited March 18, 2019 by JulieM
Robert F. Smith Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 36 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: That position seems to have defaulted to become involved with a Priesthood calling, unless I am not up to current practices. Since Pres Oaks believes that sister missionaries exercise priesthood power, why couldn't a female pres of BYU be called and invested with just such power also? 3
Benjamin Seeker Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 (edited) 9 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: Perhaps it has something to do with the Father/Son/Elder Brother relationship in the Godhead. If there is a bone to pick, it would be with this - the fundamentally male figure relationship in the equations of salvation. If you have some revealed knowledge to support the notion that God doesn’t care about gender-based authority, could you please share it? It’s the lack of revealed knowledge that priesthood holders have to be male. One interpretation is that tenant is an assumption. Besides that assumption can you give any reason why gender is tied to ecclesiastical authority and leadership? Edited March 18, 2019 by Benjamin Seeker 2
Robert F. Smith Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 52 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: Why is it our business to know whose trip was paid for and whose was not? Just curiosity? I would suppose that any large group of leaders traveling abroad would have an entourage. I once played in the orchestra for a big event in Seattle with Desmond Tutu and the Dalai Lama. They certainly didn’t come alone. Billy Graham likely had a major entourage when touring, and that costs money. I see no problem with making all of that public. 1
Benjamin Seeker Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 9 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: Perhaps it has something to do with the Father/Son/Elder Brother relationship in the Godhead. If there is a bone to pick, it would be with this - the fundamentally male figure relationship in the equations of salvation. If you have some revealed knowledge to support the notion that God doesn’t care about gender-based authority, could you please share it? In the temple woman take on the order of the priesthood, so it appears that women can be made priestesses in likeness to the Son of God as well (referencing your Alma scripture here). 3
Robert F. Smith Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 1 minute ago, Benjamin Seeker said: It’s the lack of revealed knowledge that priesthood holders have to be male. One interpretation is that tenant is an assumption. Besides that assumption can you give any reason why gender is tied to ecclesiastical authority and leadership? Even if males must lead the ecclesia, what about secular arms of the Church? Why should they be tied to gender? 1
Robert F. Smith Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 2 minutes ago, Benjamin Seeker said: In the temple woman take on the order of the priesthood, so it appears that women can be made priestesses in likeness to the Son of God as well (referencing your Alma scripture here). Not simply that, but the Temple Matron and female temple workers all perform regular priesthood ordinances -- they exercise priesthood power. 4
pogi Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 39 minutes ago, ALarson said: How doe we know he only called men to be apostles? Many believe that Mary Magdelene was one of his apostles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Magdalene "Apostle to the apostles". Are you suggesting a 13th apostle? I know the names of the 12, and she is not listed. "All four gospels identify her, either alone or as a member of a larger group of women..." If she was an apostle to the apostles, it seems strange that she would only be mentioned alone or as a member of a larger group of women and not identified with that group...ever.
JAHS Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 31 minutes ago, ALarson said: IMO,. all the resources stem back to members' contributions. I know there are investments, etc....but the money for those investments trace back to contributions. I believe it is my business to know how the money is spent when I'm a contributor. You can disagree (and I'm fine with that), but I have every right to give my opinion. I never have considered tithing as MY money. It is always God's money and I am just exercising my faith in His choice of church leaders by turning it back over to Him through them. Once it leave my hands I no longer have any say in how it's used. And so far I have never had a reason to question how it is used. And if my great, great, great grandfather were here who made the original contribution to fund the current investments, I am sure he would feel the same way. 1
Bernard Gui Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Benjamin Seeker said: In the temple woman take on the order of the priesthood, so it appears that women can be made priestesses in likeness to the Son of God as well (referencing your Alma scripture here). Which Priesthood? Aaronic, Melchizedek, Patriarchal? How does Alma 13 relate to the temple ordinances? Was there a 50/50 chance that the Firstborn would have been a woman? Edited March 18, 2019 by Bernard Gui
ALarson Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 4 minutes ago, JAHS said: I never have considered tithing as MY money. That's not what I stated, is it?
pogi Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 24 minutes ago, JulieM said: I actually believe Christ did have at least one woman as an apostle. Why not? Anything wrong with that? Besides the fact that there is little to no evidence to support it? Quote According to who? (Man’s interpretations or writings?) It appears that you suffer from the same dilemma.
JulieM Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 11 minutes ago, pogi said: Besides the fact that there is little to no evidence to support it? I think there’s writings that most definitely support it. Or possibly Mary was his wife. I’m open to both. Why did he appear to her first when he returned? Who would you come to see first?
Recommended Posts