Women are given priesthood power and authority

[bluebell]

49 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Or (hear me out)...

Perhaps, the Priesthood powers associated  with women are of such sublime magnificence they can't be contained in a manual designed for the eyes of the world.

Perhaps, they can only be communicated by the One who holds all those powers within Herself to those who have been endowed and received and exercised the gifts of knowledge on how to part the veil and ask for, and receive, Divine communications given in the House of the Lord.

The wisdom books are (in our Bible and the Apocrypha) are filled with praise for the Divine feminine (Wisdom). The tree of life in Lehi's vision who surpasses all beauty and from whom Messiah comes is representative of the Divine feminine. There are type, shadows, hints, clues everywhere. Pres. Nelson (who has 9 daughters) has been dropping hints for those who will listen and obey his counsel.

As a woman you are more special, unique, awesome, surpassing in beauty, holiness and wisdom than you can possibly imagine. No manual, class, talk designed for us thick-headed men can hope to communicate the magnificence that lies within you. That can only be found by following the instructions found in the Endowment.

We men need you to rise up to the unsurpassing magnificence of who you are because we are struggling to get this whole mortality thing right. As Pres. Nelson has said (paraphrasing)- if we lose the righteousness of our women this world is doomed.

I know you mean this sincerely, and as a compliment and I thank you for trying to help.

But a lot of women find this idea that women are inherently better in someway offensive. Especially those of us trying to raise sons in an environment where others sometimes try to teach them how second class they are.

The Savior was male and yet there is none greater.  I don’t think the answer to men sometimes being treated or believing they are above women is to teach women it’s actually they who are superior.

[Rain]

58 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Or (hear me out)...

Perhaps, the Priesthood powers associated  with women are of such sublime magnificence they can't be contained in a manual designed for the eyes of the world.

Perhaps, they can only be communicated by the One who holds all those powers within Herself to those who have been endowed and received and exercised the gifts of knowledge on how to part the veil and ask for, and receive, Divine communications given in the House of the Lord.

The wisdom books are (in our Bible and the Apocrypha) are filled with praise for the Divine feminine (Wisdom). The tree of life in Lehi's vision who surpasses all beauty and from whom Messiah comes is representative of the Divine feminine. There are type, shadows, hints, clues everywhere. Pres. Nelson (who has 9 daughters) has been dropping hints for those who will listen and obey his counsel.

As a woman you are more special, unique, awesome, surpassing in beauty, holiness and wisdom than you can possibly imagine. No manual, class, talk designed for us thick-headed men can hope to communicate the magnificence that lies within you. That can only be found by following the instructions found in the Endowment.

We men need you to rise up to the unsurpassing magnificence of who you are because we are struggling to get this whole mortality thing right. As Pres. Nelson has said (paraphrasing)- if we lose the righteousness of our women this world is doomed.

This is the thing where women are put on a pedestal because the men aren't worth much idea. It is not true and it is harmful.

Please quit putting down the men I love. The men I have worked with at church and in other places. My husband is my equal. My sons are my daughter's equal. We raise each other up. 

And stop putting us on a pedestal.  We are not just a pretty thing to look at.  

[ZealouslyStriving]

17 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I know you mean this sincerely, and as a compliment and I thank you for trying to help.

But a lot of women find this idea that women are inherently better in someway offensive. Especially those of us trying to raise sons in an environment where others sometimes try to teach them how second class they are.

The Savior was male and yet there is none greater.  I don’t think the answer to men sometimes being treated or believing they are above women is to teach women it’s actually they who are superior.

This medium absolutely sucks for trying to get across ideas. 

I am not saying women are inherently better/superior than men, just that the full realization of what it means to be a woman is paramount to the work in these last days. Men are currently lost, I  think anyone can see that.

The importance and glorious nature of womanhood has traditionally been obscured, first by fallible men and more recently be extreme feminism. Only faithful endowed Latter-day Saints women can receive the true knowledge of the power of a woman and communicate that to others.

[JAHS]

9 hours ago, Rain said:

"Maybe."  Can you see how hard it might be for some women to wait for a "maybe"? Some women hurt and struggle so much and the best that can be said is maybe in the next life she will get it?   

I don't see how that is implied.  We are told "There is no other religious organization in the world, that I know of, that has so broadly given power and authority to women"  and "How I yearn for you to understand that the restoration of the priesthood is just as relevant to you as a woman as it is to any man. Because the Melchizedek Priesthood has been restored, both covenant-keeping women and men have access to “all the spiritual blessings of the church”.  As if there is some kind of equal footing with men now.  What makes you think the next life will be any different when women are called Queens and Priestesses?  Added power doesn't mean equal.

 Our time is not God's time. Patience is required. It may be hard for some women but not most of the women who understand their God-given responsibilities in this life. In this life there is equal footing as far as the blessings of the priesthood are concerned. The only difference now is the act of ordination to leadership positions. We are told it is not appropriate to aspire to specific callings in the Church. Isn't that what some of these women are doing?

[ZealouslyStriving]

8 minutes ago, Rain said:

This is the thing where women are put on a pedestal because the men aren't worth much idea. It is not true and it is harmful.

Please quit putting down the men I love. The men I have worked with at church and in other places. My husband is my equal. My sons are my daughter's equal. We raise each other up. 

And stop putting us on a pedestal.  We are not just a pretty thing to look at.  

If that is what you got out of my post, you obviously weren't reading it for understanding.

[Rain]

3 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

If that is what you got out of my post, you obviously weren't reading it for understanding.

You're right. I wasn't reading for understanding. I entirely reacted to an idea that has been around for decades and has really bothered many women. 

But I'm big on listening for understanding. I've talked about it a lot on this board. It's something I learned from 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. What if we both listen for understanding? In the end we may not agree, but at least we would understand each other.

 

[ZealouslyStriving]

1 hour ago, manol said:

Interesting concept! 

In your view, are there any official teachings or practices of the church today that support this? 

Can you get into specifics about "the Priesthood powers associated with women [which are] of such sublime magnificence"? 

Can you give examples of these hints President Nelson has been dropping? 

"The heavens are just as open to women who are endowed with God’s power flowing from their priesthood covenants as they are to men who bear the priesthood. I pray that truth will register upon each of your hearts because I believe it will change your life."

"My dear sisters, you have special spiritual gifts and propensities. Tonight I urge you, with all the hope of my heart, to pray to understand your spiritual gifts—to cultivate, use, and expand them, even more than you ever have. You will change the world as you do so."

"We see faithful women who understand the power inherent in their callings and in their endowment and other temple ordinances. These women know how to call upon the powers of heaven to protect and strengthen their husbands, their children, and others they love. These are spiritually strong women who lead, teach, and minister fearlessly in their callings with the power and authority of God"

1 hour ago, manol said:

Do you think the church is RIGHT not to openly teach any of this, not to let the sisters manifest who they really are, forbidding even women giving blessings except under rare circumstances? 

I think the Church woul do good to reexamine the current policy of women administer in blessings in light of Joseph's teachings on the matter. I think as they continue to dive into the Joseph Smith papers policy changes will come. The Church is a little slow to readjust sometimes.

1 hour ago, manol said:

Or do you think the church has room for improvement, even a great deal of room for improvement, in this area?

In this mortal world where we "see through a glass dimly" there is always room for improvement.

1 hour ago, manol said:

If what you describe was the actual doctrine and practice of the church today, there is an excellent chance I would still be a member. 

I don't know how much they are permitted by the Lord to share about certain subjects. The scriptures cite several examples of prophets not being permitted to communicate deeper truths. Faith and patience are major keys of the Gospel.

[Rain]

32 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

If that is what you got out of my post, you obviously weren't reading it for understanding.

So question. Are you willing to listen for understanding as well? 

[ZealouslyStriving]

8 minutes ago, Rain said:

So question. Are you willing to listen for understanding as well? 

Although I may not agree with the conclusions, I always try to.

[Rain]

6 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Although I may not agree with the conclusions, I always try to.

OK, in all honesty I'm rather ticked off right now so I'm going to take a little bit of time to get me to a place I can listen and be listened to plus I have several things I need to do today.  

So let's start with this. In case you have missed this, I no longer consider myself a faithful member. I'm a member in name, I have a calling (ward bulletin). I attend church with my husband for him and because I feel called to have loving connections with all people including members.  I just don't believe in many of the faith ideas and don't believe the church is the only true and living church. My views about women in the church were there before I found out I didn't believe and they have nothing to do with why I don't believe. So some of what I say here is how I felt as a faithful member and now and some are recognizing how many faithful women still feel. 

Second, there were a lot if topics here rolled into one. They are related, but not the same.  What topic did you feel I wasn't listening to for understanding?

 

[ZealouslyStriving]

4 minutes ago, Rain said:

OK, in all honesty I'm rather ticked off right now so I'm going to take a little bit of time to get me to a place I can listen and be listened to plus I have several things I need to do today.  

So let's start with this. In case you have missed this, I no longer consider myself a faithful member. I'm a member in name, I have a calling (ward bulletin). I attend church with my husband for him and because I feel called to have loving connections with all people including members.  I just don't believe in many of the faith ideas and don't believe the church is the only true and living church. My views about women in the church were there before I found out I didn't believe and they have nothing to do with why I don't believe. So some of what I say here is how I felt as a faithful member and now and some are recognizing how many faithful women still feel. 

Second, there were a lot if topics here rolled into one. They are related, but not the same.  What topic did you feel I wasn't listening to for understanding?

 

Thanks for sharing. Sorry you are mad right now. I hope your day gets better.

I was specifically referring to your initial reaction my post wherein you accused me of putting down men, and making women an object to look at.

[Amulek]

18 hours ago, Calm said:

I didn’t have to look for it to be there. It jumped out at me. 

I think that might be the issue. Those who don’t feel a lack or don’t care to care won’t see it unless it’s pointed out. Those who feel the need are more likely to see a lack there.

Well, Sister Dennis is the one who made the statement. Which category do you think she falls under? 

 

18 hours ago, Calm said:

But if the intent is to help those who feel undervalued in the Church, then trying to look at what is said in the way they see it would be wise. 

I agree. But I also think there needs to be some grace for those who say things in a way that can be interpreted in ways they didn't actually intend. 

 

Edited March 29, 2024 by Amulek

[Amulek]

15 hours ago, Rain said:

Calm did a good job on answering the other questions.  I just wanted to add here. I know of very few women who want to be ordained with what men have in the way they have it.  We have been told that women have power and authority etc. but somehow that is supposed to magically happen perhaps when you are 18, perhaps when you go to the temple etc, but there is no ordination for all these women and there are no responsibilities or blessing specifically with it that women have been told about other than for callings, but having a calling is not the same thing as being ordained to the priesthood.  So many women would like to know more about this power and authority that compliments what the men have and they want to know how and why it is different than being ordained as men do.  Until they understand that then talking about the priesthood that women hold? (do they hold it?  what exactly is their relationship with it?) feels kind of like empty words to many.  

So talks in General Conference from Apostles, like this one from President Oaks, are just empty words?

 

15 hours ago, Rain said:

I get it that it was a joke for you and you were trying keep things lighter, but know that for many it may be making a wound because women are told so often that they shouldn't be so prideful as to aspire to holding the priesthood or having callings like a bishop when usually what they are really asking for is often misunderstood.

I genuinely wasn't trying to offend anybody, which is why I made sure to communicate that I was being lighthearted with that particular phrasing, but if anybody was hurt by my comment, I sincerely apologize. 

And, for the record, I don't believe that women who would be willing to serve in any capacity the Lord calls them are being prideful in saying that they are willing to do exactly that, for that is what everyone ought to be willing to do. 

 

Edited March 29, 2024 by Amulek

[manol]

2 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

"The heavens are just as open to women who are endowed with God’s power flowing from their priesthood covenants as they are to men who bear the priesthood. I pray that truth will register upon each of your hearts because I believe it will change your life."

"My dear sisters, you have special spiritual gifts and propensities. Tonight I urge you, with all the hope of my heart, to pray to understand your spiritual gifts—to cultivate, use, and expand them, even more than you ever have. You will change the world as you do so."

"We see faithful women who understand the power inherent in their callings and in their endowment and other temple ordinances. These women know how to call upon the powers of heaven to protect and strengthen their husbands, their children, and others they love. These are spiritually strong women who lead, teach, and minister fearlessly in their callings with the power and authority of God"

I think the Church woul do good to reexamine the current policy of women administer in blessings in light of Joseph's teachings on the matter. I think as they continue to dive into the Joseph Smith papers policy changes will come. The Church is a little slow to readjust sometimes.

In this mortal world where we "see through a glass dimly" there is always room for improvement.

I don't know how much they are permitted by the Lord to share about certain subjects. The scriptures cite several examples of prophets not being permitted to communicate deeper truths. Faith and patience are major keys of the Gospel.

Thank you for taking the time to reply and for finding those President Nelson quotes.

To the extent that he is moving in the direction of teaching that there are zero inequalities in power or status or worth or in any other way between men and women in the sight of God, I agree with him.

And to the extent that he is moving in the direction of teaching that what God tells us outranks any ecclesiastical or other authority in our lives, I agree with him.

I'm not claiming that he's actually saying either of these things, but it does look to me like he's leaning in those directions, conceptually at least.

Unfortunately I don't see him dropping any hints that seem to foreshadow actual, substantial change to the status quo. I hope I'm wrong.

Imo the LDS Church falls short in its teachings of who and what we really are, and maybe that's okay; maybe first things first: Imo a bold new paradigm of genuine equality would be a great start. And I realize even this might be too much new wine for the old wineskin to handle.  (BUT, something similar has happened before!)

Edited March 29, 2024 by manol

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Amulek said:

Sister Dennis is the one who made the statement. Which category do you think she falls under? 

 

I don’t think she sees an issue or hasn’t on the past. I hope the thoughts of others will be digested so she will see the need to shift communication enough to avoid misunderstandings where possible more. My guess is the women who achieve top leadership roles in the Church at this time are very comfortable with the current system and know how to work with it well, including expectations of their own and others. 

Edited March 29, 2024 by Calm

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Amulek said:

But I also think there needs to be some grace for those who say things in a way that can be interpreted in ways they didn't actually intend. 

I don’t think anyone should condemn her for this. My only desire is for education (sounds patronizing, but just mean bringing awareness) and hopefully persuasion (to adjust communication to something that better meets needs of some of those they serve) of those who are not aware or don’t think it should matter. 

Edited March 29, 2024 by Calm

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Amulek said:

So talks in General Conference from Apostles, like this one from President Oaks, are just empty words?

I don’t see them as empty words myself, but I can feel left hanging thinking “okay, now what?” (I am at the dentist waiting to get numb so can’t read the talk again to give specific reaction.) And if an answer doesn’t come to me, I can myself feel emptier about it than before. Hope creates desire and expectations in me and not having hope fulfilled when expected can be burdensome.  This happens much more for me with medical treatments (I am often reduced to tears mixed with rage when something backfires again) than the Church as I see the Church as a very long ‘game’ if that makes sense without trivializing it, which I have no intent to do. It is the most serious venture of my life, in fact.  I have much more patience with it than anything else in my life.  I know in my heart the promises will get fulfilled eventually. I don’t have that knowledge for anything else because those have the deadline of my death attached.   But I would love other women and any man affected (we all are to some extent) not to have to suffer when it’s not necessary even if God can turn that to good eventually. Being mortal is hard enough for all the opposition we need for growth imo even if we communicated perfectly with nature being what it is. 

Edited March 29, 2024 by Calm

[juliann]

3 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

This medium absolutely sucks for trying to get across ideas. 

I am not saying women are inherently better/superior than men, just that the full realization of what it means to be a woman is paramount to the work in these last days. Men are currently lost, I  think anyone can see that.

The importance and glorious nature of womanhood has traditionally been obscured, first by fallible men and more recently be extreme feminism. Only faithful endowed Latter-day Saints women can receive the true knowledge of the power of a woman and communicate that to others.

I cannot tell you how offensive this is. Especially if you are a male lecturing women on their lived experience and knowledge.

[juliann]

3 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

If that is what you got out of my post, you obviously weren't reading it for understanding.

You need to educate yourself. We understand you perfectly. But the understanding stage is over, like years and years ago. It is up to the offender to just stop it. How many women have to tell you this for you to understand?

[juliann]

3 hours ago, JAHS said:

 Our time is not God's time. Patience is required. It may be hard for some women but not most of the women who understand their God-given responsibilities in this life. In this life there is equal footing as far as the blessings of the priesthood are concerned. The only difference now is the act of ordination to leadership positions. We are told it is not appropriate to aspire to specific callings in the Church. Isn't that what some of these women are doing?

That is blatantly false. Nobody is even talking about ordination here. There are critical differences without it, most commonly known as discrimination.  Go read the Instagram comments for this talk until you get it. 

[juliann]

1 hour ago, Amulek said:

Well, Sister Dennis is the one who made the statement. Which category do you think she falls under? 

 

I agree. But I also think there needs to be some grace for those who say things in a way that can be interpreted in ways they didn't actually intend. 

 

Has anyone here faulted Sis Dennis? She said was is expected of her. If you have talked to any former Officers you would know darn well how constrained they are. I'm grateful she put out the expected narrative because for the first time, women responded in mass. Faithful women. All of the so-called feminist organizations have blown themselves up with their anger and nastiness, they alienated the very women they needed to make change. The calm reasoning of most of those comments is astounding. We have turned a corner. And how pathetic is it that we feel encouraged by the statement leadership would see the comments. It means there was never a way to approach them before, thus the gulf that created this talk. (I do think male leadership now knows enough to make the women officers do the heavy lifting on this.)

This is the first time I've been hopeful about change beyond the few changes we get here and there that don't significantly change the bottom line problem.

[JAHS]

4 minutes ago, juliann said:

That is blatantly false. Nobody is even talking about ordination here. There are critical differences without it, most commonly known as discrimination.  Go read the Instagram comments for this talk until you get it. 

Understood, but I think patience is still involved. It can take several generations to completely purge discrimination from a population; specially when the people don't recognize it as discrimination.

[juliann]

1 hour ago, Amulek said:

So talks in General Conference from Apostles, like this one from President Oaks, are just empty words?

 

And what has changed for us since this? As welcomed as this was as a first step, it merely opened Pandora's Box. In the effort to keep women away from ordination, all it has done is muddy the waters about priesthood. The biggest question now is, what IS priesthood? They keep talking about it but don't define it. But they now have to say women's faith based prayer, etc., is equivalent because that is all they are going to allow us.  Then why does anyone need priesthood? What is it, aside from it being paired with ordination and leadership authority through callings that exclude women? 

[juliann]

5 minutes ago, JAHS said:

Understood, but I think patience is still involved. It can take several generations to completely purge discrimination from a population; specially when the people don't recognize it as discrimination.

You are very right about the recognition. But please realize the woman's movement began in the 60s. That is how much patience we have had. How much more will be required...and why, when women are leaving? It needs to be said again and again, the only place a daughter is going to face such institutionalized discrimination is their own church. More and more women aren't willing to put them through that. 

[JAHS]

2 minutes ago, juliann said:

You are very right about the recognition. But please realize the woman's movement began in the 60s. That is how much patience we have had. How much more will be required...and why, when women are leaving? It needs to be said again and again, the only place a daughter is going to face such institutionalized discrimination is their own church. More and more women aren't willing to put them through that. 

With regards to the Church, this seems to assume that God is not aware of it and/or does not want to do anything about it. Or are the church prophets not listening to Him?