Jump to content

Women recieving the priesthood


Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

It doesn't have to be a circle. As an example, think about the way they used to bless the sacrament.

You mean like in the old days, when young men went up to what was called a rostrum in the front of a building known as a chapel and used what was called a microphone to say the words of blessing?

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, Ahab said:

You mean like in the old days, when young men went up to what was called a rostrum in the front of a building known as a chapel and used what was called a microphone to say the words of blessing?

:)  I'm thinking earlier than that  :) 

 

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, Ahab said:

You mean like in the old days, when young men went up to what was called a rostrum in the front of a building known as a chapel and used what was called a microphone to say the words of blessing?

 

4 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

:)  I'm thinking earlier than that  :) 

 

I'm thinking he means more like this...

1012131231.jpg

Link to comment
1 hour ago, rongo said:

I believe that people at all iterations of the endowment receive the blessings of the endowment; I'm just saddened by the loss. I compare it to knowing about the original covenant with Moses, but being under the Law of Moses given in its place when it was rejected. It's not a perfect analogy, because I don't think we have rejected anything, other than how cultural undercurrents drove the changes. 

People who were under the Law of Moses until the New Testament Church and followed it received all blessings available for them at that time. And yet, there was an original law, and a step down to a a law of carnal commandments. That's sad, no matter how it's sliced. 

If I saw it the same way I would agree.  It would be sad.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, CV75 said:

All of what we post here is subjective: opinion, perception, interpretation, wishful thinking, wise cracks, all of it!

Even providing references is a subjective exercise, used to justify our subjective bias to fulfill the need to unite and connect, drawing on any sliver of similar bias in our interlocutor. (My opinion). People generally look to evidence and rationale to convince them, but I believe they are already convinced on a fundamental level and the evidence and rational explains or justifies why they do what they do. This fundamental level is where our inherited makeup and the Spirit exert their influence on us in our fallen world, perhaps more optimistically referred to as our probationary state, hence our capacity to change for better or worse -- by God’s grace (via the Atonement of Christ) or the devil’s enticements, respectively. (My opinion).

God inspiring (given that inspiration is a form of revelation) more and more people to demand social change gets to answering my question, so here’s your big THANK YOU! (for answering). Personally, I think the relationship between God and His children in and out of His kingdom and by extension the Church and society is a topic I hope somebody might want to start a thread about.

I think someone earlier in the thread teased apart the various distinctions between conscience, the Light of Christ, inspiration, revelation, the Lord moving in mysterious ways, etc., and how these processes tie to Church doctrine, policy and practice (ethos, folk customs, corporate) on one hand and the society within which she functions on the other, and wherever the twain are congruous (we hear in General Conference that society and the Church are drifting further apart). Another distinction made was between formal (priesthood keys and offices) and moral (inborn inclinations) authority and the role of the Restoration in either.

Do you have a couple of examples where you see society heading in a harmful direction, where the Church and a "Zion society" offerthe best alternative for that?

I'm a pretty positive person, so I dont really have any examples for you about society heading in a harmful direction. I've never studied this, but my brother in law says that society functions on a 80 to 100 year loop, sometimes it's more conservative and at times it's more liberal. He thinks over the years the different generations reorient their thinking to ease social problems and I guess at some point it starts all over, maybe, maybe not. 

      As far as a Zion society, our church isnt the only one feeling the pressure. I'm sure there's many, but take us the mormons, the jehovah witnesses, seventh day Adventist. All three think when God returns his government/theocracy or Zion society, will be set up through their organization. Well, we're at year 2021. 21 years past the millennium, alot of people are going to start asking, what's up. To me, that's one of the biggest hurdles for our church and the brethren. Personally, if you've read any of my past post, I think the words "latter day saints" is more of an obstacle for the brethren than the word mormon, a word I love. "Latter Day Saints " has a, I guess you can say, a finality to it,  atleast in my mind. Right now, I'm giving the brethren the benefit of the doubt. I trust them. 

 

Link to comment
4 hours ago, teddyaware said:

And if the change you desire doesn’t come?

I remember that the Church doesn’t decide what my callings will be in the eternities. Also, my personal relationship with Jesus Christ is more important than any doubts I might have about policy or even accepted doctrine. Finally, although our Church isn’t perfect, what church is? I believe we have restored truths, so I always come back to the question “where would I go?”

Link to comment
4 hours ago, CV75 said:

To me, this speaks to how we each view the world differently (due to societal norms, innate intelligence, grace), and the more we share our perspectives in good faith and prayer, especially in the Church’s councils, the closer we arrive at the Lord’s will, whatever that may be. I think this process also helps us manage our varying personal tendencies concerning enabling or resisting change (of any kind).

I agree. These are not thoughts I share with just anyone. I’ve discussed them with my family and my Bishop, but I’m careful not to go into detail like this with just anyone at Church. These are my thoughts, my inspirations, and my struggles. I don’t want to hurt anyone’s testimony, but I feel like this board is a place where we are free to express differences in the way we view things in the spirit of learning from each other. 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

It sounds like you think testing is denigrating. I do think he was testing but that was at least in part because he had some level of trust, or at least hope, that what he read was true. Think Alma 32- is testing and looking at the result a bad thing?

No, testing is wonderful, that is why we are here, why we have Alma 32, etc. You sound like trusting "imperfect/inconsistent messengers" is denigrating. You said, "He heard wisdom [but he heard it from "imperfect/inconsistent messengers" -- James and the Bible] and thought he'd give it a try. God knew him and he discovered he could uncover God's will for himself without anyone else telling him [except he followed James' counsel and the Bible to discover that, trying -- or testing -- in good faith something he had not considered before]."

Given Alma 32, even if you trust the "imperfect/inconsistent messengers" and then test the seed, you will find out it is not a good seed. Everyone has different levels of faith and spiritual discernment, but God will guide us in our testing and protect us in our trusting given we are acting in good faith.

Bottom line, Joseph acted in good faith upon hearing and trusting the word from imperfect sources, which word was to ask God. His preexisting faithfulness and spirituality led him to hear and trust those imperfect sources.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

I'm a pretty positive person, so I dont really have any examples for you about society heading in a harmful direction. I've never studied this, but my brother in law says that society functions on a 80 to 100 year loop, sometimes it's more conservative and at times it's more liberal. He thinks over the years the different generations reorient their thinking to ease social problems and I guess at some point it starts all over, maybe, maybe not. 

      As far as a Zion society, our church isnt the only one feeling the pressure. I'm sure there's many, but take us the mormons, the jehovah witnesses, seventh day Adventist. All three think when God returns his government/theocracy or Zion society, will be set up through their organization. Well, we're at year 2021. 21 years past the millennium, alot of people are going to start asking, what's up. To me, that's one of the biggest hurdles for our church and the brethren. Personally, if you've read any of my past post, I think the words "latter day saints" is more of an obstacle for the brethren than the word mormon, a word I love. "Latter Day Saints " has a, I guess you can say, a finality to it,  atleast in my mind. Right now, I'm giving the brethren the benefit of the doubt. I trust them. 

 

I don't attribute harmful or beneficial societal trends to liberal or conservative, but the pendulum does swing.

What is the pressure you are referring to? Presumably you must be referring to one or more harmful societal trends, or other forces in the world that negatively affect society or challenge Zion. The timing of the Second Coming and what we call ourselves can't be the only one!

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, CV75 said:

I don't attribute harmful or beneficial societal trends to liberal or conservative, but the pendulum does swing.

What is the pressure you are referring to? Presumably you must be referring to one or more harmful societal trends, or other forces in the world that negatively affect society or challenge Zion. The timing of the Second Coming and what we call ourselves can't be the only one!

Yes, your right, harmful or beneficial trends definitely makes more since,  I guess I'm just completely tired of all this political B.S. I'm in a bad mood today, I rode in someone's car today and listened to a political show and it always gets my blood pressure up.

     I think the Brethren are under an incredible amount of pressure. Society is changing extremely fast and I wouldn't doubt one of their main goals is making sure not to alienate us from the rest of society. Example: Imagine today if the priesthood ban was still in place. Would church membership be at 16 million? I doubt it, I think it would be much much lower. That's why I think priesthood will be extended to women, the brethren will not take a chance on alienating us from society. Yes/no?

Link to comment
17 minutes ago, AtlanticMike said:

That's why I think priesthood will be extended to women, the brethren will not take a chance on alienating us from society. Yes/no?

Yes.  The question is does God care what society thinks of his gospel?

Link to comment
6 hours ago, JLHPROF said:
6 hours ago, MrShorty said:
Quote
46 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

I both agree and disagree with this.
I believe it is a requirement to learn to trust our priesthood head, even when we don't want to.  In fact I think this is a requirement for exaltation.
However, I also believe it is a requirement in life to at some point have to stand on our own testimony even if it disagrees with our head.

That might sound contradictory, but I think the precedents have been clearly set by righteous examples.


IMO, most of the difficult issues (like women and the priesthood) are often rooted somehow in this tension. It also seems to me that we have not really talked about this tension in any substantial way and how to navigate it. For example, I recall a recent face to face with Elder Rasband where he was asked by a Harriet in Wyoming how to deal with this tension. Rather than fully address the question, Elder Rasband merely doubled down on the "follow the prophets because that is the safest way" message. Not that I have any kind of answer to the tension, I'm still trying to figure out how to navigate it myself. It seems like it would be a valuable conversation to have.

Expand  

Polygamy history is actually a perfect example of this.  The post manifesto polygamy between 1890 and 1900 featured many examples of this.  Leaders disciplining members for entering plural marriage that they believed in.  Leaders performing and advising plural marriage despite the policies.

That is a good example. I'm sure there are others that highlight the conflict between some's belief and the official positions of the Church (often ending in some form of estrangement between the member(s) and the Church). In some conservative circles, they argue that these disagreements are the first steps towards inevitable estrangement from the Church. Sometimes, even the examples aren't as perfect, I would like to talk about examples of people who successfully navigate the tension between private belief and the Church's belief and stay in full communion (for lack of a better word).

Link to comment
1 hour ago, rongo said:

Thank you for sharing your thoughts, Peacefully! I always encourage and enjoy open, sincere discussion in a faithful atmosphere. I think we would all be better off if this were more prevalent. 

Like! 

Link to comment

It's been my long experience that women are more likely to be capable at any given task.  If women holding the priesthood translated to women running stakes and wards - give that to me yesterday. Please.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, rongo said:

Thank you for sharing your thoughts, Peacefully! I always encourage and enjoy open, sincere discussion in a faithful atmosphere. I think we would all be better off if this were more prevalent. 

Thank you for listening! I think we all want to be heard and not dismissed just because we may see things a bit differently. I appreciate the fact we can discuss women’s roles in the Church, and how they may or may not change in the future. It seems like the subject is no longer verboten, and I think that is a good sign. I understand that no one on this board, unless Heavenly Father or the Q12 are members(lol), has the power to make these changes, but faithful discussions about them are a breath of fresh air:)

Link to comment
13 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

Yes, your right, harmful or beneficial trends definitely makes more since,  I guess I'm just completely tired of all this political B.S. I'm in a bad mood today, I rode in someone's car today and listened to a political show and it always gets my blood pressure up.

     I think the Brethren are under an incredible amount of pressure. Society is changing extremely fast and I wouldn't doubt one of their main goals is making sure not to alienate us from the rest of society. Example: Imagine today if the priesthood ban was still in place. Would church membership be at 16 million? I doubt it, I think it would be much much lower. That's why I think priesthood will be extended to women, the brethren will not take a chance on alienating us from society. Yes/no?

I think the Brethren are more involved in encouraging us to constructively participate in and contribute to the communities in which we live. Leaven, lights/candles, in the world but not of it, make friends, etc. while showing that we belong in a diverse, tolerant society and have a basic love for our fellow beings -- basic Christianity with all the benefits of the Restoration. I think their attitude or approach is not so much risk avoidance in society but trust in the Lord to influence it with what we have to offer.

Priesthood ordination as a tactical device to fit in with or stake a claim in society (as perhaps "Just Serve", "Light the World" and other social media initiatives may have come about -- and cultural celebration events for that matter)? As with the Restoration of the priesthood in the first place, and the lifting of the ban, I think ordaining women would have to tie directly to the selfless purpose of expanding the saving ordinances to God's children, or more of them, and faster, similarly to when we started calling sisters as missionaries (which is accomplished without ordination).

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, CV75 said:

I think the Brethren are more involved in encouraging us to constructively participate in and contribute to the communities in which we live. Leaven, lights/candles, in the world but not of it, make friends, etc. while showing that we belong in a diverse, tolerant society and have a basic love for our fellow beings -- basic Christianity with all the benefits of the Restoration. I think their attitude or approach is not so much risk avoidance in society but trust in the Lord to influence it with what we have to offer.

I love this. And it's part of why I stay mormon. I think Mormonism has alot to offer. As far as the brethren, I think risk avoidance is a big part of what they worry about. 

Edited by AtlanticMike
Link to comment
6 minutes ago, AtlanticMike said:

I love this. And it's part of why I stay mormon. I think Mormonism has alot to offer. As far as the brethren, I think risk avoidance is a big part of what they worry about. 

Of course they worry about safety (COVID-19), financial management, and lawsuits of various kinds, and other moral and spiritual matters affecting the saints  as they expressed at the pulpit (I'm sure you can name a few). Using priesthood ordination as a means to address their worries about conforming with, appeasing or ingratiating us with society so as not to alienate us? I really don't think so. And the exchange of opinion goes! :)

As for me, I am fundamentally irreligious and would have nothing to do with "mormonism" (too much time, effort, sacrifice and distraction from more fun things) except for a deep spiritual witness of one basic, fundamental truth of the Restoration a long time ago, which subsequently led to additional spiritual witness of the other basics. So I've changed quite a bit over the years and after joining the Church.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, CV75 said:

As for me, I am fundamentally irreligious and would have nothing to do with "mormonism" (too much time, effort, sacrifice and distraction from more fun things) except for a deep spiritual witness of one basic, fundamental truth of the Restoration a long time ago, which subsequently led to additional spiritual witness of the other basics. So I've changed quite a bit over the years and after joining the Church.

We are a lot alike in that and there are many others who wouldn't be here were it not for the Spirit.

One spiritual experience can last a lifetime.

 And that is what keeps people in the church. If you have not had that I think it would seem like total non sense.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

We are a lot alike in that and there are many others who wouldn't be here were it not for the Spirit.

One spiritual experience can last a lifetime.

 And that is what keeps people in the church. If you have not had that I think it would seem like total non sense.

This is the only way the early saints could have kept things going given the inexperience, chaos, dysfunction, dissention, various "normal" challenges of frontier life, opposition, persecution, etc. in the early, formative years of the Church, and into the westward migration and even afterward. Can you tell I just got finished reading Saints Vol. 1? :)

 

Link to comment
22 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Wouldn't it be nice if that worked in every ordinance?
Could be baptized without getting wet.  Take the sacrament without eating anything.  Receive the gift of the Holy Ghost without the laying on of hands.
I suppose Joseph did once heal the sick without laying on hands.  Sent a red handkerchief instead....

Once we have been baptised and confirmed we don't repeat these ordinances for ourselves. In weekly partaking of the sacrament we renew them even though nobody gets wet and has hands laid on them. Essentially we are re-baptised and re-confirmed every week if we partake of the sacrament worthily.

The Lord has condoned at many times relaxation of certain requirements for sacred things to be confined only to sacred spaces when situation and proximity do not allow. Think mountains, baptisms for the dead in rivers prior to temple construction, endowments  prior to temple construction or completion. Temples are far more common now and we need to be in them as often as possible. With such blessing well within our reach it makes sense that certain uses are more restricted than they were in Josephs time.

Right now we can partake of the sacrament at home because circumstances necessitate it, once circumstances change things will again revert back to the more restricted norm regarding the sacrament.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...