Women are given priesthood power and authority

[Calm]

16 minutes ago, JAHS said:

they believe it enhances the spiritual experience of the meeting

Since it’s their worship service, it makes sense for them to adopt what enhances the spirit for them.  

[sunstoned]

From the SLTrib:

Quote

They came fast — though not furious — nearly 8,000 comments, the majority from current and former Latter-day Saint women, pushing back against what was clearly intended to be a positive message of female empowerment.

 

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2024/03/20/lds-church-responds-social-media/

That is a lot of comments.  I do hope that the Q15 takes this seriously.  There are a lot of people who are unhappy with the status quo.

 

 

[mfbukowski]

6 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

So if a non covenant individual acts with God’s power are they exercising priesthood power?

What could this mean?

What is power?

How do we know what is God's power anyway?  Lightning bolts?

[Rain]

1 hour ago, Smiley McGee said:

And even when women do speak in conference I’m not sure their talks are esteemed as highly as the boys. No one is running to Deseret Book to buy the collected works of Belle S. Spafford. Not likely that you’ll hear someone quote a woman’s talk to support a doctrinal argument. 

Awhile ago I wondered about this.  I asked on the board what thing in conference had most influenced them in their actions in some way.  It didn't have to be the current year. If I remember right, none of the talks mentioned were given by women.

Though if you look at the content of the talks given by women that has changed over the last few years. They are more doctrine and scripture based than they used to be - I hadn't noticed the difference in men's and women's talks till @juliann mentioned it at some point.

1 hour ago, Smiley McGee said:

My wife and I talking were about this today; wondered if greater deference would be given to female leaders if the church had a more developed theology of the divine feminine or Mother in Heaven. In a religion with such an anthropomorphic deity, I think it’s easy to associate men with authority when we emphasize the fatherhood of God. Would be interesting to see the effect of a well developed theology of God the Mother. Or maybe I have the direction of causality backwards. Perhaps if the church tilts toward gender equity the doctrine will follow. 

I looked at that instagram post linked above and there were comments along these lines so you're not alone. 

[Smiley McGee]

17 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

How do we know what is God's power anyway?  Lightning bolts?

Please let it be lightning bolts 

Edited March 21, 2024 by Smiley McGee

[Rain]

1 hour ago, JAHS said:

But it's not for show or outward appearance. It has a spiritual purpose and meaning. 

I think the only ones who can say whether it is for show or outward appearance are the people themselves and God. If you look at their hearts I think you will find just as many who do it for spiritual purpose and meaning as you find in this church. 

[The Nehor]

4 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

How do we know what is God's power anyway?  Lightning bolts?

Considering Yahweh’s history as a storm deity that would be fitting.

[MiserereNobis]

9 hours ago, JAHS said:

I wouldn't like too much seriousness and decorum. That's seems more for outward appearance than true gospel substance and Christlike living. But to each his own.

This is quite the judgement of the heart and intentions of people who attend high church services. I’m calling you out on it. 

[MiserereNobis]

9 hours ago, JAHS said:

But it's not for show or outward appearance. It has a spiritual purpose and meaning. 

And you get even worse. Non LDS ritual is for show and outward appearance and doesn’t have spiritual meaning or purpose?

Who are you to judge what non LDS ritual means to those who participate in it?

You must have liked that “playing church” comment guy. 

Edited March 21, 2024 by MiserereNobis

[webbles]

9 hours ago, Smiley McGee said:

No one is running to Deseret Book to buy the collected works of Belle S. Spafford. Not likely that you’ll hear someone quote a woman’s talk to support a doctrinal argument. 

I was hoping that after we finished the series on the prophets, we would switch to a series on the Relief Society presidents.  I think it would be pretty cool to have a book for each of the Relief Society presidents.

[Tacenda]

22 minutes ago, webbles said:

I was hoping that after we finished the series on the prophets, we would switch to a series on the Relief Society presidents.  I think it would be pretty cool to have a book for each of the Relief Society presidents.

This!!!! 

Those former RS Presidents rocked! Hopefully something will change and this will happen one day! 

[MiserereNobis]

From the article in the OP:

“The Relief Society — one of the world’s oldest and largest service organizations”

Can I CFR this? I don’t see the Relief Society on any list I’ve googled, including top 100 lists. 

[SeekingUnderstanding]

8 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

What could this mean?

What is power?

How do we know what is God's power anyway?  Lightning bolts?

Um, I think you meant to respond to @Nofear not me right? They’re the one to introduce the terms. 

[JAHS]

deleted

Edited March 22, 2024 by JAHS

[bluebell]

10 hours ago, Smiley McGee said:

And even when women do speak in conference I’m not sure their talks are esteemed as highly as the boys. No one is running to Deseret Book to buy the collected works of Belle S. Spafford. 

A lot of people don’t realize this, but you can get all of the talks from past relief Society presidents and other sisters right on the gospel library app for free. It’s been there for a few years, but I don’t remember when it was actually released. It’s called “at the pulpit“ and you find it under the adults tab, and then the women’s tab.

I thought it was awesome that the church provided that resource but I wish they would do something with it actually in church. I don’t know what they would do though.

[bluebell]

50 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

From the article in the OP:

“The Relief Society — one of the world’s oldest and largest service organizations”

Can I CFR this? I don’t see the Relief Society on any list I’ve googled, including top 100 lists. 

It just celebrated its 182nd birthday so it’s definitely old. I’m not sure how one would qualify it being one of the oldest in the world, though. And every female member of the church who is 18 years old or older is a member of it so that’s probably where they’re getting the “one of the largest” part.

Because the type of service that relief society sisters do is most often done in the homes of others i’m not surprised it’s not formally recognized as a service organization, even though it does a lot of humanitarian work for the church as well.

Edited March 21, 2024 by bluebell

[bluebell]

25 minutes ago, JAHS said:

Like I said. To each his own. 

I don’t think the issue is in people liking different types of worship services. The reason you’re getting so much flack for that comment is because you stated that you don’t like those kinds of services because you don’t think they are purposeful or sincere.

That’s not a difference of personal opinion that’s a judgment.

[Tacenda]

37 minutes ago, JAHS said:

Like I said. To each his own. 

Well, let's keep that to yourself.

[mfbukowski]

52 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Um, I think you meant to respond to @Nofear not me right? They’re the one to introduce the terms. 

Yes, thanks.  Sorry to just "grab words".

It's like a reflex for me.  I see it, I GRAB IT.

Fortunately though words are the only things that cause that reaction.

Well, mostly.  😳😜

[Teancum]

10 hours ago, sunstoned said:

From the SLTrib:

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2024/03/20/lds-church-responds-social-media/

That is a lot of comments.  I do hope that the Q15 takes this seriously.  There are a lot of people who are unhappy with the status quo.

 

 

Didn't the church take the comments down? Really the idea that LDS women have any priesthood power or authority is gaslighting extraordinaire.  

[bluebell]

7 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Didn't the church take the comments down? Really the idea that LDS women have any priesthood power or authority is gaslighting extraordinaire.  

Instagram stated that they had some kind of an issue with the app and that’s why things were disappearing (as I understand it not just on the church’s post, but on lots of posts). I haven’t been to the post to see if the comments are back or not.

[MiserereNobis]

33 minutes ago, bluebell said:

And every female member of the church who is 18 years old or older is a member of it so that’s probably where they’re getting the “one of the largest” part.

So there’s no difference between LDS women and the Relief Society? I mean, is it possible to be an LDS woman and not be in the Relief Society?

 

[BlueDreams]

I don't how many have had the time to look over the full talk by Pres Dennis. I decided to do so this morning and it both clarified in some ways what she was getting at and was still concerning in other aspects. 

The full quote comes in the context of her talking about how she wasn't really aware of how she utilized P. Authority for decades. The full paragraph that's being summarized goes like this (basically): 

"There’s no org that I know of that has broadly given power and authority to women. There are religions that ordain some women to positions such as priests and pastors. But very few relative to the number of women in their congregations receive that authority that their church gives them. By contrast all women over 18 in the COJOLDS are endowed with priesthood power directly from God. And for whatever calling we have, we’re given priesthood authority to fulfill those responsibilities."

She emphasized "I" in a way that gives space for correction based on the limitation of her knowledge base. This still has somewhat of a misunderstanding of how priesthood is seen in many of those churches (largely protestant) than how we do. There's still a strong belief there in the "priesthood of all believers" with some people "called" based on personal conviction/revelation to be an ordain pastor, priest, or minister. Compared to say a catholic or orthodox view that has a priest class within their church structure. We kinda fit in between. We have both a priesthood available to all covenanted believers that is semi-organized and can sometimes include ordination (for men). so the statement for me reads more muddled than deeply problematic. It's seems to be a common potential problem when are highest leaders do not have formal training that includes better understanding of world religion. It also doesn't do well in clarifying what's different in priesthood access in those endowed to those who are only baptized. Since most of the callings available to women doesn't need a woman to be endowed.  

Honestly, I generally agreed with most of her talk before this. Genuinely liked her openness in the beginning part. I think most of us did not understand that priesthood power and authority applied to women due to the cultural focus and policies that focused more on male roles in it. This has consequences in how we (in general) feel about the power women have and bring in their day to day and general callings. I see that shifting and that is good and needed. I do think we need to be clear and well versed into what we already have if we're going to know what it looks like to move forward and what is still truly missing. 

The thing I found most problematic was actually after this:  ": Nevertheless just as he tried to do with Adam + Eve in the GoE, the advisory wants us to  focus our attention on what we haven’t been given and not to focus on all that we have been given."

I'm not okay noting what we don't have as the adversary's goal. I think there are forms of criticism that focuses on these lacks in a conflict/fight orientation. And that I could believe is of the adversary because I don't believe that's a healthy or good approach to it. It can leave on bitter and seeing people as enemies rather as co-members trying to do the best with what they have and love. But seeing deficit in and of itself is not something from the adversary. It's one of the main ways we may start receiving further revelation. I really don't like a needed process to growth being broadly attributed to the adversary 

 

These were my general thoughts...

With luv,

BD

Edited March 21, 2024 by BlueDreams

[BlueDreams]

3 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

So there’s no difference between LDS women and the Relief Society? I mean, is it possible to be an LDS woman and not be in the Relief Society?

 

It used to be many many decades ago (read 19th century), but not any longer. Basically if you're over 18 you're apart of the relief society. 

With luv,

BD

[MustardSeed]

6 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

So there’s no difference between LDS women and the Relief Society? I mean, is it possible to be an LDS woman and not be in the Relief Society?

 

No.  Any woman who is a member of the church records is a member of RS.  Even if they never attend. 
there is no sign up, no appointing, no authority, no need to be “worthy” , nothing.