Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Female Apostles in Early Church


Recommended Posts

Posted
36 minutes ago, 2BizE said:

I think Freedom is implying that there is precedent for a female apostle and ordination of females to the priesthood.  Sorry, Freedom, this is a man’s church… but the church has made great strides in allowing women to participate:

1978: Women allowed to pray in sacrament meeting (well, all meetings they attend…sort of)

https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=56026380&itype=CMSID

2013: women allowed to pray in general conference.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2013/04/08/176604202/a-womans-prayer-makes-mormon-history

2017: women allowed to hand out towels.

https://www.deseret.com/platform/amp/2017/12/19/20624416/op-ed-why-last-week-s-lds-church-announcement-is-about-much-more-than-towels

2019: women allowed to be witnesses.

https://midutahradio.com/news/local-news/women-and-children-are-now-allowed-to-act-as-witnesses-to-lds-baptisms/
 

Freedom fails to see the great strides the church has made to include women in the church.  Perhaps in another 500 years there will be women Sunday School presidents?…..

Like tipping a waiter/waitress .05 cents, it's a slap in the face, kind of. 

Posted
17 hours ago, Calm said:

It happened back when I was a kid.  I had to crochet and knit in Young Women’s and maybe Primary…I am trying to remember when I made that deformed crochet covered hanger, seems like grade six (bringing sewing machines to church was too cumbersome, but we definitely talked about the advantages of making our own clothing and we were pushed to learn to do so, camping was only focused on at Girls’ Camp, which I never went to, from what I heard they mainly did womanly crafts and skits and one hike each year…my dad took us backpacking most years, so I guess they didn’t see a need to send us to Girls’ Camp if we didn’t want to go).  I had to take Home Ec in high school instead of Workshop. I heard a couple of guys complaining they couldn’t do the reverse (because they wanted to eat the Baked Alaskan and other stuff).  Not only did I have to sew in junior high and high school, we had to do a fashion show with what we made. It was humiliating to me. 

Thank you for your response. I did home ec in high school as well. I know that things happened in the past where girls and boys were pushed in certain directions but I do not see that happening today. I think that was the point I very poorly was trying to make. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, Nacho2dope said:

Thank you for your response. I did home ec in high school as well. I know that things happened in the past where girls and boys were pushed in certain directions but I do not see that happening today. I think that was the point I very poorly was trying to make. 

Interesting.  I took both Home Economics and trades classes, even though I was in the college preparation program.  I had girls and boys in both.

Posted
4 hours ago, 2BizE said:

 

Freedom fails to see the great strides the church has made to include women in the church.  Perhaps in another 500 years there will be women Sunday School presidents?…..

add to that ward and stake clerks, and ward and stake executive secretaries. 

Posted
7 hours ago, CV75 said:

Well, it can conveniently be made to appear that way some 3 or 4 posts after my initial observation, so I am not responding to this.

I said "More and more we find the role improving in the church but we still have decisions being made for women by men." and provided a quote from a former member of the general relieve society who expressed concern that the proclamation was made without womens input as support that this is a genuine concern. From this you draw without justification the conclusion that I believe this person supports allowing women to be apostles. 

Posted
50 minutes ago, Freedom said:

I said "More and more we find the role improving in the church but we still have decisions being made for women by men." and provided a quote from a former member of the general relieve society who expressed concern that the proclamation was made without womens input as support that this is a genuine concern. From this you draw without justification the conclusion that I believe this person supports allowing women to be apostles. 

Nope, that's not the one. but keep trying! Or maybe just confabulate at this point!

Posted
11 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Nope, that's not the one. but keep trying! Or maybe just confabulate at this point!

oh give me a break. 

Posted
21 hours ago, sunstoned said:

Excellent point.  For untold centuries women have been treated unequally (to say the least). I believe that sexism is as much of a social construct as gender.  

I think that sexism exists because of the social contract of gender. Women have a certain role so we can therefore block them from certain privileges because they are not meant for women. 

Expressions  such as 'you fight like a girl',  'be a man', 'who wears the pants in that household' 'man up', 'don't be a sissy', and 'boys will be boys' are just a few examples of engrained sexism that is a produce the gender constructs. A man is applauded for being a womanizer, a women is called a slut for even being implicated with such behavior. 

Posted
On 12/21/2021 at 5:26 PM, Bob Crockett said:

Paul didn't really grasp this in his writings.  He considered himself an apostle along with the 12.  He seemed to assume there could be more than 12. 

I do believe that we had apostles in this dispensation who were not members of the Q12. These include Joseph Angell Young and Alvin R. Dyer. Two others were ordained apostles but were not immediately called into the Q12, Sylvester Q. Cannon and Brigham Young, Jr.

So Paul could easily have been one of those non-Q12 apostles.

Posted
20 minutes ago, Freedom said:

A man is applauded for being a womanizer

Only by other womanizers. IMHO.

Posted
1 hour ago, Freedom said:

I think that sexism exists because of the social contract of gender. Women have a certain role so we can therefore block them from certain privileges because they are not meant for women. 

Expressions  such as 'you fight like a girl',  'be a man', 'who wears the pants in that household' 'man up', 'don't be a sissy', and 'boys will be boys' are just a few examples of engrained sexism that is a produce the gender constructs. A man is applauded for being a womanizer, a women is called a slut for even being implicated with such behavior. 

Agreed.  These are micro messages that have become ingrained in our society. It takes a conscious effort to reverse them.

Posted
7 hours ago, Freedom said:

add to that ward and stake clerks, and ward and stake executive secretaries. 

My home ward I grew up in many years ago had a woman as the ward clerk…

but the church is going to have to choose between having members and equality….

Posted
2 hours ago, Stargazer said:

Only by other womanizers. IMHO.

Perhaps applauded was too strong a word but certainly men can get away with very troubling behavior compaired to women. 

Posted
10 hours ago, Stargazer said:

I do believe that we had apostles in this dispensation who were not members of the Q12. These include Joseph Angell Young and Alvin R. Dyer. Two others were ordained apostles but were not immediately called into the Q12, Sylvester Q. Cannon and Brigham Young, Jr.

So Paul could easily have been one of those non-Q12 apostles.

Jedediah M. Grant was never a member of the quorum despite being ordained an apostle and called to the First Presidency.

Also, Paul could have been a Seventy.  Seventies in the early days of the Church were often referred to as apostles and had the specific calling like Paul to travel and proselyte.

Posted
8 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Jedediah M. Grant was never a member of the quorum despite being ordained an apostle and called to the First Presidency.

Also, Paul could have been a Seventy.  Seventies in the early days of the Church were often referred to as apostles and had the specific calling like Paul to travel and proselyte.

the question that arises is, do we consider the present church structure more correct and continually evolving to its ideal or is it just different.  

Posted
1 hour ago, Freedom said:

the question that arises is, do we consider the present church structure more correct and continually evolving to its ideal or is it just different.  

Just different imo. Size and range dictates changes happen for Saints far from Salt Lake not to be forgotten. 

Posted
On 12/22/2021 at 6:37 PM, Stargazer said:

I do believe that we had apostles in this dispensation who were not members of the Q12. These include Joseph Angell Young and Alvin R. Dyer. Two others were ordained apostles but were not immediately called into the Q12, Sylvester Q. Cannon and Brigham Young, Jr.

So Paul could easily have been one of those non-Q12 apostles.

BY ordained two sons as apostles when they were 10 years old.  One later became a member of the FP.  Opposition was mounted to his membership in the Q12 as he was a notorious rake and unbeliever.  See Arrignton's book on Brigham's letters to his sons. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...