How Many Women Are Leading Service at Home?

[Bernard Gui]

3 hours ago, JamesBYoung said:

What you guys believe about any of this is immaterial to me or to the sisters who believe as they do.

Have you and the sisters made provision to follow these canonized instructions, approve of ordination by vote of the members, and provide a certificate of ordination? Or does this not matter in your opinion? If not, to what authority are you appealing?

Quote

D&C 20 

60 Every elder, priest, teacher, or deacon is to be ordained according to the gifts and callings of God unto him; and he is to be ordained by the power of the Holy Ghost, which is in the one who ordains him.

61 The several elders composing this church of Christ are to meet in conference once in three months, or from time to time as said conferences shall direct or appoint;

62 And said conferences are to do whatever church business is necessary to be done at the time.

63 The elders are to receive their licenses from other elders, by vote of the church to which they belong, or from the conferences.

64 Each priest, teacher, or deacon, who is ordained by a priest, may take a certificate from him at the time, which certificate, when presented to an elder, shall entitle him to a license, which shall authorize him to perform the duties of his calling, or he may receive it from a conference.

65 No person is to be ordained to any office in this church, where there is a regularly organized branch of the same, without the vote of that church;

66 But the presiding elders, traveling bishops, high councilors, high priests, and elders, may have the privilege of ordaining, where there is no branch of the church that a vote may be called.

67 Every president of the high priesthood (or presiding elder), bishop, high councilor, and high priest, is to be ordained by the direction of a high council or general conference.

 

Edited March 25, 2020 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

13 minutes ago, Calm said:

The only problem I see is the breaking of the bread being done by the priest. I assume there is no reason that can’t be done with gloves?

They already use hand sanitizer before breaking the bread. That and the use of disposable gloves should be sufficient. Where there is a will, there is a way, as we say.

[smac97]

18 minutes ago, JamesBYoung said:

There is a mighty majority here that do believe that whether the Brethren approve is the end all be all, right?

No.  The Lord is running the show.

Quote

Cheryl L. Bruno's upcoming book out next month from Kofford Books and Melvin C. Johnson's article in the John Whitmer Historical Association Journal last September give plenty of examples of the Brethren doing endowments and ordinances outside of the temple environment.

Sure.  Nothing new about that.  Ensign Peak was dedicated as a temple for a day.  And then there's the Endowment House, in which temple ordinances were performed for many years.  

But AFAIK, there are no known instances of women being ordained to the priesthood.  This is what you have asserted, relying on triple-hearsay-sourced gossip.

I don't believe you.

-Smac

Edited March 25, 2020 by smac97

[smac97]

20 minutes ago, Calm said:

The only problem I see is the breaking of the bread being done by the priest. I assume there is no reason that can’t be done with gloves?

Our ward's bishop addressed this.  He said that the family could break up the bread and situate the water, so that the visiting priest or elder need not touch anything.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Bernard Gui]

4 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Our ward's bishop addressed this.  He said that the family could break up the bread and situate the water, so that the visiting priest or elder need not touch anything.

Thanks,

-Smac

There are numerous ways to gitt'er done without resorting to heretical actions.

Edited March 25, 2020 by Bernard Gui

[smac97]

1 minute ago, Bernard Gui said:

There are numerous ways to gitt'er done without resorting to heretical actions.

Agreed.

I think James is blowing smoke.  Stirring the pot.  Telling tales.  Pick your metaphor.

I don't believe him.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Calm]

24 minutes ago, smac97 said:

He said that the family could break up the bread....so that the visiting priest or elder need not touch anything.

I know some who have argued that is wrong. I haven’t studied it to see if this is a consistent teaching or interpretation of scripture.  Unless the Church comes out and corrects that, perhaps it is the symbol of broken bread that matters more than who does it. 

Edited March 25, 2020 by Calm

[Bob Crockett]

1 hour ago, Bernard Gui said:

Will their offices be consecrated and dedicated for this work like the temples are? Will non-members or members without recommends be allowed to come into their offices at other times?

I don't know.  It's been done before.

[smac97]

7 minutes ago, Calm said:

I know some who have argued that is wrong. I haven’t studied it to see if this is a consistent teaching or interpretation of scripture.  Unless the Church comes out and corrects that, perhaps it is the symbol of broken bread that matters more than who does it. 

I imagine soldiers in the field have used makeshift stuff like crackers for the sacrament, such that no actual "breaking" is necessary.

Also, I understand that in the early days of the Church, the elders and priests held the trays, rather than allowing the tray to be passed along in a pew as is customary now.

If there is some correction on the particulars, we'll see it.  Otherwise, I think the Lord will ratify our efforts during these difficult times.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Bernard Gui]

28 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I imagine soldiers in the field have used makeshift stuff like crackers for the sacrament, such that no actual "breaking" is necessary.

Also, I understand that in the early days of the Church, the elders and priests held the trays, rather than allowing the tray to be passed along in a pew as is customary now.

If there is some correction on the particulars, we'll see it.  Otherwise, I think the Lord will ratify our efforts during these difficult times.

Thanks,

-Smac

Quote

Calm said: I know some who have argued that is wrong. I haven’t studied it to see if this is a consistent teaching or interpretation of scripture.  Unless the Church comes out and corrects that, perhaps it is the symbol of broken bread that matters more than who does it. 

This seems to me to include breaking the bread as an essential part of the ordinance, but I may be wrong. After all, it is in remembrance of his broken body. But I suppose somewhere, someplace, someone in Church history may have served the bread without breaking it...

Quote

3 Nephi 18: 

1 And it came to pass that Jesus commanded his disciples that they should bring forth some bread and wine unto him.

2 And while they were gone for bread and wine, he commanded the multitude that they should sit themselves down upon the earth.

3 And when the disciples had come with bread and wine, he took of the bread and brake and blessed it; and he gave unto the disciples and commanded that they should eat.

4 And when they had eaten and were filled, he commanded that they should give unto the multitude.

5 And when the multitude had eaten and were filled, he said unto the disciples: Behold there shall one be ordained among you, and to him will I give power that he shall break bread and bless it and give it unto the people of my church, unto all those who shall believe and be baptized in my name.

6 And this shall ye always observe to do, even as I have done, even as I have broken bread and blessed it and given it unto you.

7 And this shall ye do in remembrance of my body, which I have shown unto you. And it shall be a testimony unto the Father that ye do always remember me. And if ye do always remember me ye shall have my Spirit to be with you.

Quote

With torn and broken bread, we signify that we remember the physical body of Jesus Christ—a body that was buffeted with pains, afflictions, and temptations of every kind, a body that bore a burden of anguish sufficient to bleed at every pore, a body whose flesh was torn and whose heart was broken in crucifixion.

Elder James J. Hamula of the Seventy, “The Sacrament and the Atonement,” Oct. 2014 general conference.

Granted, Elder Hamula is sadly no longer of the Seventy.

Quote

1 Corinthians 11:23–25 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:  And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

 

Edited March 25, 2020 by Bernard Gui

[JamesBYoung]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Agreed.

I think James is blowing smoke.  Stirring the pot.  Telling tales.  Pick your metaphor.  I don't believe him.  Thanks,  -Smac

Good on you, Smac.  Believe as you wish.

[Amulek]

1 hour ago, JamesBYoung said:

There is a mighty majority here that do believe that whether the Brethren approve is the end all be all, right?

Not exactly. I have quoted the plain language contained in canonized scripture - namely, the Doctrine & Covenants of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. @Bernard Gui has done the same. 

Contrarily, all you have done is stated that you "agree with the women," yet you have offered nothing in the way of substantive discussion or argument to justify your position (and that of your sister's friends'). 

You are certainly welcome to do so though. In fact, I would encourage it - lest the 'troll' moniker be one that sticks and lingers in association with your postings. 

 

[smac97]

.

Edited March 25, 2020 by smac97

[rodheadlee]

I forget, what was the point of the OP?

[smac97]

38 minutes ago, JamesBYoung said:

Good on you, Smac.  Believe as you wish.

You aren't doing yourself any favors with this stuff, James.

If you are sincere, you need to do more than dangle taunts and unsubstantiated gossip.

If you aren't sincere, then just keep on doing what you're doing now.  The trolling will become more manifestly obvious, and we will all know not to take you seriously.

-Smac

[JamesBYoung]

Smac, you are not the arbiter of what is appropriate here, not in the slightest.

 

[smac97]

12 minutes ago, JamesBYoung said:

Quote

You aren't doing yourself any favors with this stuff, James.

If you are sincere, you need to do more than dangle taunts and unsubstantiated gossip.

If you aren't sincere, then just keep on doing what you're doing now.  The trolling will become more manifestly obvious, and we will all know not to take you seriously.

Smac, you are not the arbiter of what is appropriate here, not in the slightest.

You're not helping yourself here.  You are providing nothing of substance.  You are not interacting with anyone.  You are just purveying gossip.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Bernard Gui]

15 minutes ago, JamesBYoung said:

Smac, you are not the arbiter of what is appropriate here, not in the slightest.

 

A word to the wise should be sufficient. You have offered nothing in response to legitimate questions and responses, including pertinent quotes from scriptures. You're digging yourself into a credibility hole that will not be possible to fill back up. Maybe that doesn't matter to you?

Please respond to the quote from D&C 20 about certificates and votes. Do your sister's friends have certificates from those who ordained them and were they sustained by their ward/branch? If not, they are practicing contrary to revealed instructions and are in apostasy. 

Edited March 25, 2020 by Bernard Gui

[Navidad]

6 hours ago, smac97 said:

Yep.  Trolling.

-Smac

I am not exactly sure what "trolling" means in this context. Why would someone come here and want to "stir the pot." What does he or she gain from that? It seems to me that some of you are already pretty proficient in stirring your own pot! Ha! I tried to send you a message earlier today to ask you a question about your gg grandfather. It said you aren't or can't accept messages. Sorry, I thought you might be able to clarify something for me. I practiced social distancing by tromping around the Dublan cemetery the other day!

[Raingirl]

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

Our ward's bishop addressed this.  He said that the family could break up the bread and situate the water, so that the visiting priest or elder need not touch anything.

Thanks,

-Smac

This is how it was done when I received the sacrament this past Sunday. I had the bread and water ready prior to the brethren’s arrival. I was asked to break up the bread. Both the bread and water were passed to me by the brethren. 

[JamesBYoung]

Solving others' questions here interest me not at all.

I am not worried about doing myself well here or being in anyone's good graces.

My sister's comments interested me, so I brought them here for your insight as literate individuals.

You have done that.

Thank you.

 

[Navidad]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

I know some who have argued that is wrong. I haven’t studied it to see if this is a consistent teaching or interpretation of scripture.  Unless the Church comes out and corrects that, perhaps it is the symbol of broken bread that matters more than who does it. 

In this regard, but slightly off the point, the other day I was reading the new handbook and noticed that it indicated that the element should be taken with the right hand wherever possible. Isn't that new? I remember we had a discussion about this a year or so ago and apparently back in the mid-19th century it was commonly held that only the right hand should be used. It seems to me that when I mentioned that someone in our ward told me not to take it with my left that most of you agreed that was an old preference that was no longer followed. Does anyone know why, if indeed this is a new addition in the new handbook that it was included? 

[smac97]

13 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Quote

Yep.  Trolling.

-Smac

I am not exactly sure what "trolling" means in this context.

From Wikipedia:

Quote

In Internet slang, a troll is a person who starts quarrels or upsets people on the Internet to distract and sow discord by posting inflammatory and digressive, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses and normalizing tangential discussion, whether for the troll's amusement or a specific gain.

That seems to be what James is doing here.

We occasionally get people who come here pretending to be a member of the Church, only to say outrageous/absurd things to provoke responses, to make the Church look bad, etc.

13 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Why would someone come here and want to "stir the pot." What does he or she gain from that?

Dunno.

13 minutes ago, Navidad said:

It seems to me that some of you are already pretty proficient in stirring your own pot! Ha! I tried to send you a message earlier today to ask you a question about your gg grandfather. It said you aren't or can't accept messages. Sorry, I thought you might be able to clarify something for me. I practiced social distancing by tromping around the Dublan cemetery the other day!

I'll look at my messages.  Not sure what's wrong.  What was your question about good ol' A.F.?

Thanks,

-Smac

[Amulek]

18 minutes ago, JamesBYoung said:

Solving others' questions here interest me not at all.

I appreciate your candor.

I will try to remember this fact when it comes to interacting with you in the future.

 

[Navidad]

16 minutes ago, smac97 said:

What was your question about good ol' A.F.?

As I think you know, I am very interested in his life and legacy, especially here in the colonies. I wanted to mention him in my MHA talk this year (has been postponed 😌) so I wanted to get some photos of his tombstone in the Colonia Dublan cemetery. Lo and behold his gravestone has both birth and death years different than all the literature. The stone is from a design perspective contemporary with the time of his death, so I believe it is original. He had family living there when he died. Why would his family mistake both his birth and death year, especially the latter when they were there to observe it? Is the extant literature wrong or is the gravestone? Both birth and death years are more than a year "wrong" or the literature is "wrong." I found that to be quite interesting and a conundrum! I don't want to hijack the thread, but if you know the answer to this puzzle maybe you would be willing to message me! Also if you don't have photos of his grave, I can send some to you to show your kids. He was a giant of the colonies.