Quantcast
Faith

LDS Church: Aims of 'Ordain Women' detract from dialogue

Letter from church asks group to move demonstration off Temple Square

Comments

Return To Article
  • get her done Bountiful, UT
    March 17, 2014 9:20 a.m.

    Are women equal?

  • cassandove Tampa, FL
    March 17, 2014 9:25 a.m.

    I honestly don't believe the letter will do any good, but I hope it does. I am saddened that these sisters want to ruin the Priesthood Session of Conference for our men and boys, but I also know that no unhallowed hand will prevail against the will and work of God — even if that hand comes from within the Church.

  • milojthatch Sandy, UT
    March 17, 2014 9:33 a.m.

    Here is this thing about this, because it really is this simple. Does God run this church? Does Thomas Monson serve as His spokesperson on Earth right now? What has Pres. Monson in his official capacity as Prophet said about this issue?

    If you said "Yes" to the first two questions, then how can you possibly question this when you should know the answer to the third. If you said "No" to either of the first two, then you have a personal conflict you need to resolve. Let your actions carry you from there!

  • michaelitos Salt Lake City, UT
    March 17, 2014 9:34 a.m.

    Thank you, Sister Moody, for your wonderful, respectful, even insightful letter.

  • 1.96 Standard Deviations OREM, UT
    March 17, 2014 9:34 a.m.

    I liked the letter. The Ordain Women group have been clearly told that women ordination is against doctrine and the God revealed organization of the church. These women do not have any more excuses for their advocacy. Their efforts are now essentially apostasy and they are sowing the seeds of division among the church.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    March 17, 2014 9:35 a.m.

    Looks to me like they're causing thoughtful discussion, not preventing it. I guess that all depends on who feels entitled to define what that discussion is.

  • twinb Nashville, TN
    March 17, 2014 9:35 a.m.

    Yes, we are equal, but not the same!!!!! There are obviously vast differences between the sexes.

  • atlantic1 Williamsburg, VA
    March 17, 2014 9:44 a.m.

    A person who truly understand the doctrine and scriptures and is truly converted would have no such concerns. As a woman, I value my own form of priesthood in the power of creation and nurturing.The Lord knows we women, by nature, do the service and nurturing and guidance that priesthood contains. I also know all things will be clear to me one day that I do not understand and that the brethren are not making decisions, God is. These people are attention-seeking trouble makers, not interested in dialogue. They have a choice, they can leave the Church. When I disagreed with my previous church, I simply left it 35 years ago.

  • mecr Bountiful, UT
    March 17, 2014 9:45 a.m.

    As a woman in the Church, I think we have plenty and too many responsibilities and things to do right now. Why would I want to have the Priesthood on top of that? Why would I want to be a bishop? or a stake president? with power comes responsibilities and I don't think they even have an idea what they are asking for. They don't even care that yes, the majority, do not agree with their agenda and are trying to drag us in regardless we don't want to. If the majority was asking for, then go ahead, but they do not have the vote of the majority. Why are they even trying?

  • PBunch Paradise, CA
    March 17, 2014 9:48 a.m.

    There is nothing wrong with males meeting together to strengthen their lives. Women do it as well. We all need support and love.

  • Bloodhound Provo, UT
    March 17, 2014 9:49 a.m.

    Was the Savior a bigot because he didn't ordain women and marry gays? Ordain Women and other liberal LDS groups need to stop judging the Church by the standards of the world. Instead, judge the world by the standards of the Lord's Church.

  • MoreMan San Diego, CA
    March 17, 2014 9:52 a.m.

    I wonder if it is the same "thoughtful discussion" Emma had with Joseph?

  • The Rock Federal Way, WA
    March 17, 2014 10:02 a.m.

    Do these women really want a male Relief Society President, or Young Women's President?
    Are men invited to the Women's Conference? Why don't men have a monthly activity? When will the Elders or HP budget come close to the Relief Society budget? Even the young women get more than the young men.

    The LDS church is either run by God or it is run by men. If it is run by men then the Priesthood is not the power of God on earth (translation: No Power = Nothing).

    If President Monson was at liberty to grant this request he would give them nothing because that is what the Priesthood would be.

    Tilting at windmills...

  • antodav TAMPA, FL
    March 17, 2014 10:03 a.m.

    They did this last time even after they got the chance to watch it online. Perhaps the Church should just stop making Conference attendable in person and make it into only a broadcast. The apostates and the anti-Mormons constantly drive the Spirit from the Conference Center grounds.

  • sid 6.7 Holladay, UT
    March 17, 2014 10:06 a.m.

    I wonder if there is any possibility in the near future of the Prophet having a "Revelation" about this subject similar to the one the then Prophet had in the late 70's early 80's regarding Blacks and the Priesthood?

    I get the whole "only men can hold the Priesthood" thing and I agree with some of the posters on here who claim most LDS woman don't want it anyway. But what's the big deal about the woman attending the Priesthood meetings? After all men attend the Relief Society meetings. Fair is fair let the women attend. All they have to do is turn on the TV and watch it anyway so what's the difference?

  • tigger AMERICAN FORK, UT
    March 17, 2014 10:07 a.m.

    Yes, women are equal. Men are too. I had a recent conversation with a friend of mine very involved in her church where she has male and female pastors. We weren't talking about religion per se, but she expressed irritation that she was always asked to help with food planning for her congregations' social activities. She was stunned that my husband was in charge of the activities in my ward and planned them without my help. She was equally surprised to find out that prior to this assignment he taught the 7 year-olds in primary (her Jr Sunday School equivalent). Me, I teach adult gospel doctrine.
    I just don't see the unfairness of it all. But, to each his own. I have my own pet projects for advocacy, religious and others, and do not presume to claim mine are better or more important than anyone elses.

  • mhenshaw Leesburg, VA
    March 17, 2014 10:09 a.m.

    >>Are women equal?

    Yes. But equality in the gospel doesn't mean everyone does the same thing or receives the same blessings in this life. It means that we are all children of God, loved equally, with an equal chance to develop a Christlike character and so gain all that the Lord has promised.

    But to help us develop that character, God customizes our individual callings in the Church according to the talents and character traits we have or that we need to develop; and He gives us the gifts we need to perform those callings so we can develop those talents and traits. That maximizes our spiritual progress and the Church's growth as a whole (see 1 Corinthians 12 in its entirety). So instead of campaigning for callings we haven't received, we should humbly satisfy ourselves with the callings we do receive.

    Activists who demand that the Church change doctrine to accommodate their desires are refusing to submit their wills to the Lord. They want Him to submit to theirs. In so doing, they retard their own spiritual growth and become less like Him, not more.

  • Sal Provo, UT
    March 17, 2014 10:16 a.m.

    It's a curious thing to me that LDS men don't demonstrate to be allowed to attend the Women's Conference held the week before Conference.

    I would like to see some female leaders speak at the Priesthood session just as male leaders speak at the Women's session. Men can be strengthened by women speakers. Adam did the right thing when he listened to his Eve.

  • fish8 Vernal, UT
    March 17, 2014 10:22 a.m.

    If a male tries to go into the Womens broadcast the week prior to Gen. Conference they will be turned away. Why? Because it is a meeting for the women of the church and they don't want to have to turn away a young (or elderly) woman from attending in the conference center because a male has taken one of the seats. I know this as a fact because several years ago my friend who was a Bishop at the time,drove his young women out to the conference and when he tried to enter he was politely told he was welcome to attend at a different site, but the conference center was reserved for women only. He didn't call the media or hold a protest. He just walked across the road and attended where he was asked to.

  • vangroovin West Jordan, UT
    March 17, 2014 10:31 a.m.

    That was a very thoughtful and direct letter. As I stated last time this happened, their actions will lead to apostasy unless they repent. It's not worth losing all your blessings over to come at odds against the Lord's Church or one of the doctrines therein. If you struggle with something, talk to your bishop, pray to understand the will of the Lord. Understanding of the Lord's ways will come, but it may take time. Be patient.

  • shadow01 Edwardsville, IL
    March 17, 2014 10:37 a.m.

    Every conference I see groups that want the church to change its practices and beliefs.
    There seems to be something backward about that. I recall that the Atanasian creed was arrived at by committee to define what and who God was.
    Then in about 1820 the Prophet Joseph had illuminated to him in no uncertain terms that those creeds previously defined by man were incorrect.
    In fact, with few exceptions, when man has sought to sidestep revelation or ignore it and press on blindly with their own imaginations, the consequences have been less than positive.
    (We want a king so we may be like unto other nations. We want to be able to divorce, and so on)
    When and if women will be ordained to the priesthood it will come through revelation through his prophet. Don't ask the prophet to change his mind, ask God and be prepared for his answer.
    Just remember, asking God does not involve picketing to show your dissent.

  • Seldom Seen Smith Orcutt, CA
    March 17, 2014 10:38 a.m.

    Let's pretend, that there's no meaningful difference between a man and a woman. The words husband and wife should be abolished, as should mother and father, brother and sister. There should be no girl scouts or boy scouts, and hence forth should all just be scouts. Homosexuals, teenage girls and boys, those delineators are now passe, everybody should share the tent on campouts.

    Our country has no cultural norms, America is disintegrating.

  • Happyinlife PROVO, UT
    March 17, 2014 10:38 a.m.

    Woman and men are equal, but that does not make them the same. I do not believe that my role as a woman is any less important than my husbands role as a man, but I am getting the idea that some woman do.

  • MoreMan San Diego, CA
    March 17, 2014 10:43 a.m.

    Women may be different than men, but does God respect them less and/or are the less spiritually capable? This is why very few people take the LDS seriously.

  • UtahBruin Saratoga Springs, UT
    March 17, 2014 10:45 a.m.

    I know I have heard some question somewhere...

    Something about supporting, affiliating, or agreeing with people whose teachings are against or contrary to the the church.

    I think there is another one somewhere about sustaining the President and the Apostles of the church and local leaders, etc.

    And I think there is one I have heard before about having a testimony of the restoration of the gospel in these latter days?

    Hmmmmmmm, are these ladies asking themselves these questions I wonder. I am going to go with no, as they continue to fight the church.

  • Dave D Spring Creek, NV
    March 17, 2014 10:47 a.m.

    "Women in the church, by a very large majority, do not share your advocacy for priesthood ordination for women and consider that position to be extreme," Moody said.

    So where does that leave those of us who are not in the majority? Simply because a person holds different views from the hierarchy of the church is no reason to belittle their concerns and make them feel ostracized.

    Statements such as "A person who truly understand the doctrine and scriptures and is truly converted would have no such concerns," or "The apostates and the anti-Mormons constantly drive the Spirit from the Conference Center grounds" do nothing to foster dialogue, but hurt those with serious questions.

    Many women and men are concerned about structural limitations in the church for women. The church in question is not "The Church of the Prophet," or the "Apostolic Church," but The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Not only does the same suggest it is Christ's church, but the Church of Latter-day Saints. As such, we ought to own our membership. I for one applaud these men and women for bravely trying to make their church better through peaceful means.

  • kevo Saratoga Springs, UT
    March 17, 2014 10:48 a.m.

    Are men and women equal? For the most part...

    I think men have a ways to go to be as awesome as women. Be patient with us, we'll get there someday.

  • Mom of Six Northern Utah, UT
    March 17, 2014 10:51 a.m.

    As an LDS woman, why would I even want the priesthood? Women have enough on their plate with raising children and managing a household; not to mention those who financially support the family as well, without the added responsibilities of priesthood callings. If certain women don't like the fact that men and women were created differently with different responsibilities there are other churches one can attend that give women priesthood callings.
    God made men and women differently what is wrong with that? It doesn't mean subservient or one is better than the other....we are just different. My husband would be the first to say that women are better and the only way a man can begin to "catch up" is by God giving men the priesthood to learn to be a little more kind and thoughtful.

  • Sister Murphy Germany, 00
    March 17, 2014 10:52 a.m.

    I look forward to attending the PH session of conference. I have hope that after waiting patiently and reverently in line for a stand-by ticket, the other sisters and I will be welcome to come listen to a Prophet's voice.

    Peace to all who are angsty regarding women and the priesthood.

  • Brave Sir Robin San Diego, CA
    March 17, 2014 10:54 a.m.

    Are these activist women really sure they want to receive the priesthood? Really? Because if you are sure, this is what you have to look forward to:

    1. Having the duty to go on mission (as opposed to the choice you have now).
    2. Losing your P-day on your mission (if you're a district or zone leader).
    3. Sitting through priesthood executive committee meetings.
    4. Having to conduct meetings.
    5. Having to call people to callings nobody wants to accept, like scoutmaster or nursery leader.
    6. Helping people move.

    Personally I'd rather be in relief society. I'd trade all of the above for cooking at funerals and having a monthly activity where you eat and talk all night.

  • MKEL Highland, UT
    March 17, 2014 10:57 a.m.

    The work of groups such as the Ordain Women organization do not elevate or enrich the welfare of women in the Church. On the contrary, they tell women that their role as defined in revelation from God is not enough for them. It is not enough to be a loving, righteous mother who keeps her covenants and seeks out service in the temple and in the community around her. To this Ordain Women group, God's plan for women is not enough. Do women really need another force out there telling them that what they do right now isn't enough?
    And to those who imagine they have a bigger and better way to run the church, do you really think that whatever background or training you have trumps the intelligence and knowledge of the prophets? In what universe does the mind of a mortal ever hope to eclipse that of one who has the special privilege of communing with an omniscient God? Though they are imperfect men, their power and authority is from God. If you don't believe that, it makes no sense to try or desire to attend any session of General Conference.

  • April Y South Jordan, UT
    March 17, 2014 11:02 a.m.

    I am disappointed in Deseret News for misrepresenting Ordain Women's actions in October and plans for April. Ordain Women did not attempt to force entry to the Priesthood Session without tickets. Ordain Women waited in the standby line, just like other people without tickets. When each Ordain Women supporter was denied entry, she peacefully left.

  • McMurphy St George, Utah
    March 17, 2014 11:02 a.m.

    @ sid 6.7.
    My very thoughts. I understand the Ordain group is only asking that the church leadership seek guidance from Heavenly Father as to whether women should be ordained. True ?
    Also, if the priesthood session is broadcast for all to see, what is the big deal about excluding women from being physically present ?

  • Archibald SLC, UT
    March 17, 2014 11:03 a.m.

    Protesting the Lord is not the same thing as petitioning the Lord. The first exemplifies pridefulness, the second humility.

  • Jared NotInMiami, FL
    March 17, 2014 11:04 a.m.

    Hutterite: "Looks to me like they're causing thoughtful discussion, not preventing it."

    Ordain Women has caused thoughtful discussion; however, at this point the only thoughtful discussion is coming from the Church while Ordain Women is showing that they are willing to be neither thoughtful nor interested in discussion.

    Sal @ 10:16 - "Men can be strengthened by women speakers" - we certainly can and are. We have 4 sessions (and can watch the General Women's Meeting online) with female speakers who give wonderful talks.

  • One opinion west jordan, UT
    March 17, 2014 11:05 a.m.

    When I was younger I searched for a church I could belong to and support with all my heart. I knew God existed and that His son Jesus Christ was more than just a story. I felt with all my heart the Lord lived and has never abandoned us. I spent years going to various churches before I read the Book of Mormon, heard the story of Joseph Smith, and knew what The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints believed. I knew it was the one that I wanted to spend my life in. I have never regretted that decision. Just the opposite, it has made my life so worthwhile.
    As a woman, I have never felt cheated by not being given the Priesthood. I have never felt less of a person for not having the Priesthood. I have been blessed to develop my talents in so many ways through the leadership of the Priesthood. I have been given great gifts to spiritually guide me in all I want to do and accomplish both in church callings and as a mother. I trust the Lord and know that His wisdom and knowledge far surpasses mere mortal wisdom.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    March 17, 2014 11:08 a.m.

    Brave Sir Robin
    San Diego, CA

    Absolutely --

    Add to that:

    Home Teaching,
    collecting Fast Offerings,
    setting up and taking down folding chairs,
    Shoveling the snow for all the widow's and disabled in the Ward,
    spending Saturdays moving neighbors coming in, or going out of the ward,
    endless Service Projects,
    cannery assignemtns,
    Blood drives,
    Staffing the Scouting Programs -- including overnighters, hikes, and week-long outings,
    ALL expected to served a full 2 year Mission...

    AND

    Be the provider for the Family.

    Trust me,
    It's not all it's cracked up to be Sisters.

    Raising Children is a Full-Time calling,
    Priesthood is supposed to be the Equalizer.

    [And at times, quite frankly -- I feel like it's an un-equalizer!] hahaha.

  • Kaladin Greeley, CO
    March 17, 2014 11:09 a.m.

    @DaveD - You say "many" are concerned about this. Around 4% of those who "attend church regularly" agree. Around 11% of those that do not attend regularly agree. That is not many. But the bigger issue is that these women are not "bravely trying to make their church better by peaceful means." Most of them do not belong to the church, are members but do not attend, and do not sustain the leaders of the church. It is very telling that all those who have commented in favor of this "movement" are either obviously against the church as a whole or have some very serious testimony issues. Those of us that believe in the church wish you well, but please don't pretend this is an issue for believers.

  • azreader1 tucson, AZ
    March 17, 2014 11:14 a.m.

    Wow, shades of Sonia Johnson all over again. I met Ms. Johnson several years ago, and she insisted that she didn't leave the Church, but that the Church left her. Sounds like meaningless semantics to me, because the end result was predictable: Ms. Johnson is no longer member of the Church, and the Church continues on.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    March 17, 2014 11:14 a.m.

    Part II

    Name one saving Ordinance Women do not fully participate in.

    Name and Blessing?
    Baptism?
    Holy Ghost?
    Patriarchical Blessing?
    Endowment?
    Celestial Marriage?

    If "Officiating" is the only stickler --
    see my additional list of Priesthood responsiblities above.

  • lib_cat_lady Clearfield, UT
    March 17, 2014 11:14 a.m.

    See that's the thing, @Sal. Men don't need to demonstrate to be able to attend the Women's conference. They are allowed to attend. No questions asked. This is about so much more than the priesthood, folks. It is. It's about having access to the same rights and privileges that men do. It's about having a woman available when a woman needs to confess something personal, or if there is something so personal going on at home (abuse and such) that a woman doesn't feel comfortable discussing it with a man. It's about a whole list of things that go with having the priesthood that can enrich a woman's life. The priesthood isn't the male equivalent of motherhood. We call that thing fatherhood. Maybe before you get all hate and crazy on these women, you should figure out what the real issues are.

  • BlitzSA South Africa, 00
    March 17, 2014 11:26 a.m.

    It is sorry to read these type of stories. The Sister must realize that they are very important to the Priesthood. No Priesthood holder can can perform of live his Priesthood properly without the support of our Sisters. It is only Heavenly Father and His Son that can change the way the church is organized and until They change the organization thereof we all must uphold the given instructions.Sisters your are in Salt lake don't you know how fortunate your are! Don't let satin deceive you.

  • Fitness Freak Salt Lake City, UT
    March 17, 2014 11:30 a.m.

    Religion doesn't work the same as politics. Not everybody gets a say. In the case of the L.D.S. church, just ONE person does that.

    Its' NOT a democracy! (which is a GOOD thing, BTW)

    Maybe the women who (apparentally)don't like those rules should form their own church.

    Thats' whats great about our country - ANYONE can form their own church.

    Frankly, I have to wonder if they just do it for attention??

  • Mom of Six Northern Utah, UT
    March 17, 2014 11:32 a.m.

    @MKEL- Well said!

  • Dave D Spring Creek, NV
    March 17, 2014 11:40 a.m.

    @Kaladin,

    Let's go ahead and add your comments to the hurtful list. I hope that someday Mormons with all kinds of views can feel like they are truly a part of the body of Christ. Until then, may I share this quote that I love and hope still holds true in the church today?

    “We are not so much concerned with whether your thoughts are orthodox or heterodox as we are that you shall have thoughts.” -President Hugh B. Brown

  • lawguy TAYLORSVILLE, UT
    March 17, 2014 11:41 a.m.

    It's disheartening to hear how many of you want the OW supporters to just "leave the church." I always thought that we were a missionary minded church that was trying to bring people INTO the fold of Christ, not an exclusive social club that is trying to enforce doctrinal litmus tests in order to kick out otherwise believing members if they don't happen to agree on every single doctrine or policy.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    March 17, 2014 11:42 a.m.

    I doubt that it’s incidental that the Church chose a female spokesperson to address this in what seems to me like a stance that is gender-inclusive in being anti-intellectual. Ordination of women is a topic across Christian denominations. The Catholic and LDS postures sound nearly identical to me. Anglicans and others are starting to open the door just a crack.

    For those who dismiss this as more signs of the times, they should note that a Pope in the fifth or sixth century once wrote a letter opposing female involvement in the Eucharist. The issue obviously goes back a long way.

  • Laura Bilington Maple Valley, WA
    March 17, 2014 11:42 a.m.

    These letters repeat the familiar themes:

    Women are equal. But their spheres are different. Separate but equal...where have we heard that before?

    God told the Prophet that the Priesthood should be open to men only. And the Prophets all hear what they are told and report it accurately. If a woman hears God say something different...well, she wasn't listening carefully.

    We know that you women don't want really want the Priesthood. And it's a lot of work. You are busy enough with the stuff we've assigned you to do. Now be good, dutiful, and submissive girls and go back to your kitchens.

  • Bleed Crimson Sandy, Utah
    March 17, 2014 11:42 a.m.

    @ LDS Liberal - Isn't that an oxymoron?

    Women are given the power to create life and nurture her children. They work hand and hand with God to create physical bodies for God's spirit children. What greater blessing is there than that?

    Men aren't given the power to create life and therefore are on an unequal ground with women. God gave men the role to hold the priesthood to bless and strengthen his wife and children. The priesthood is the equalizer to the role of the woman.

    God gave men and women different but equal roles in this life.

  • lawguy TAYLORSVILLE, UT
    March 17, 2014 11:43 a.m.

    An addendum to my earlier comment: This is very personal to me. I'm a faithful, believing member who was married in the temple to an amazing woman who happens to agree with OW's cause. She has been teetering on the edge of activity for awhile now, in large part because she doesn't feel like she belongs. I keep trying to tell her that she does, that the fold of Christ is big enough for all, but then she logs on to stories like this and reads the comments and is told over and over that people don't even want her in the church if she happens to disagree on a single issue or policy. In a very real sense, you're the kids on the playground telling the different kid to get out of the clubhouse. Moments like this make me really embarrassed to be a member of a church that would spawn this kind of pride and pettiness. As a people, we're supposed to be better than this, aren't we?

  • Black37 Kaysville, UT
    March 17, 2014 11:54 a.m.

    "Any worthy MALE" May have the priesthood. Why no worthy FEMALE? I am active, RM ect ect. It is not true that doctrine is un changing in the church. If you have read the new essays that the church is putting out on LDS.ORG it is clear that what is today's doctrine is open to change. Each prophet from BY to Kimball preached the Blacks were cursed and could not hold the priesthood. It was not represented as opinion or theory, but as fact and doctrine. There are hundred's if not thousands of quotes that support this.

    Although my wife is indifferent, I applaud and support these women. They are part of us. The church is not perfect - there are many doctrines that have changed and our church is better because of it. Just because you do not have a great desire and do not feel that it is important to you, doesn't excuse dismissal of those who seek it.

  • Dave D Spring Creek, NV
    March 17, 2014 11:59 a.m.

    @lawguy,

    If I could like your comments a thousand times, I would. But since I can't, I will do everything in my power to make people like your wife feel like they are truly wanted and loved in the church. The Church is big enough for anyone who wants to be there. Let's act like it!

  • David Mohr Victoria/BC/Canada, 00
    March 17, 2014 12:06 p.m.

    Do these ladies know how many men would love to be able to abrogate their responsibilities to women? Let the ladies do Home Teaching, administer the workings of the Church, disrupt their lives with duties that have caused strife in many homes. It is not that we are not willing to see women hold the Priesthood if God offered it to them - it is that we respect the duties they already have and appreciate their service already being given. And we love God enough to perform those duties He has appointed to men. I thank God that He has duties specifically for me and other duties specifically for the woman. God House is a House of order and there is a place of worth for each and every one of us in it. With my duties and my wife's different duties (my Priesthood and her Women's), there is an equality that is not achieved in the world-at-large. My wife glories in her assigned duties and fully supports me in mine as I glory in mine and fully support her in hers. I am so thankful for the service that the women of the Church give.

  • KellyWSmith Sparks, NV
    March 17, 2014 12:06 p.m.

    I think it is interesting that they don't want to be limited to the Free Speech zones, where the "apostates" protest against the church, as they claim, "We are members, not apostates".

    Hello? You are speaking against the church, that qualifies you as an apostate. These people need to wake up as to what they are really doing here.

  • Sal Provo, UT
    March 17, 2014 12:12 p.m.

    @Jared

    Women are equally strengthened by male speakers at all the sessions you mentioned. And in addition, we are strengthened by extra male speakers at our Women's only session the week before Conference. Why wouldn't men have a few extra female speakers at their male-only Priesthood session?

  • Sal Provo, UT
    March 17, 2014 12:16 p.m.

    @lib_cat_lady

    Not true that men are allowed to attend the Women's only Conference session. Only a few LDS male speakers are in attendance. Men in general are not permitted entrance.

    I fully back the LDS leaders in the doctrinal issue that women do not need Priesthood responsibilities. We already have Priesthood power by way of being set-apart for our callings. However, A few female speakers at Priesthood sessions seems like a good idea to me.

  • annewandering oakley, idaho
    March 17, 2014 12:17 p.m.

    The responsibilities of the Priesthood are by no means out of women's abilities. Men and women have proven that they can step up to any responsibilities needed. That is not the point. Men have the priesthood because that is how He told His prophets to organize the priesthood and the church. If tomorrow He told the prophet to ordain women to the priesthood, then great. These things are not our decision to make. Does anyone believe that God looks at protests and says to Himself, "Oh. Hey I never thought of that. Maybe we ought to try it out!"
    That said, it seems wrong to tell anyone that is having issues with the gospel to go find another church. It is true they can if they want but why would we encourage that? We ALL have issues of one sort or another. If not its a miracle and we have a second Jesus Christ. I am very grateful that God has not turned me away for my sins and imperfections and lack of understanding.

  • lib_cat_lady Clearfield, UT
    March 17, 2014 12:18 p.m.

    Dear LDS Liberal and Sir Robin Brave -

    I appreciate your spelling out how hard it is to have the priesthood. However, your list also shows a lack of understanding about what women do in the church as well. My 3 girls and I have done service projects that were hard physical labor, set up and taken down for ward functions and all sorts of stuff that;s "men's work". We did it willingly. We've worked at the cannery and organized blood drives. My daughters would have loved to go to scout camp, while my son thought it was akin to torture. I repeat, the priesthood is not an equalizer to motherhood. For instance, any 12 year old boy who goes to church can hold the priesthood. Not every woman can have a baby. I know many sister missionaries who would make better zone leaders than some of the elders. When my daughter blessed her baby a couple weeks ago, her only responsibility was to bring the baby. She wasn't even allowed to hold the baby. These comparisons just don't work.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    March 17, 2014 12:20 p.m.

    KellyWSmith,

    "....You are speaking against the church, that qualifies you as an apostate."
    ______________________________

    Not even a medieval cleric could have said that any better before sending a heretic to the stake to be burned.

    Is there no allowance for dissent in the LDS Church? That would be quite a paradox for the church that is America's distinctive contribution to world Christianity.

  • lawguy TAYLORSVILLE, UT
    March 17, 2014 12:29 p.m.

    By the prevailing logic of the conservatives who are populating this message board, here are some others who should have just left the church:
    --Progressive Jews who, prior to Peter's revelation, believed that the gospel should be preached to the Gentiles.
    --Mormons circa 1975 who believed in their hearts that the church's official stand about blacks was wrong and that the priesthood should be extended to all.
    --Any Mormon who, prior to 2007, believed that the Lamanites were not the "principal" ancestors of the Native Americans. After all, the title page of the Book of Mormon itself said they were!

    My point isn't to disparage the church. I love the church, and I believe in its core truth claims. But the idea that a member cannot personally believe that the church is wrong about something without somehow placing themselves in apostasy is just not true. It has never been true, and the above list of instances where it demonstrably wasn't true could be tripled without any effort at all. So rather than kicking people out who disagree or shaming them, why not just keep loving them and give them reasons to stay anyway?

  • NT SomewhereIn, UT
    March 17, 2014 12:37 p.m.

    The road to apostacy has many onramps, this being one of them.

  • UteNationAlum Cottonwood Heights, UT
    March 17, 2014 12:41 p.m.

    Satan is very powerful and is leading many within the church to apostasy.

  • Sarah 123 Chapel Hill, NC
    March 17, 2014 12:48 p.m.

    "Ordination of women to the priesthood is a matter of doctrine that is contrary to the Lord’s revealed organization for His church."

    Chapter and Verse, please, Ms. Moody

  • Aggie5 Kuna, ID
    March 17, 2014 12:54 p.m.

    I would rather have the responsibity of being a presto of holder, than a mother at home.
    That job takes stronger humans, and that would be a woman.
    There job is of the highest order as well.

  • mhenshaw Leesburg, VA
    March 17, 2014 12:58 p.m.

    >>So where does that leave those of us who are not in the majority?

    In disagreement with the Lord. And when you disagree with the Lord, one of you is wrong. I will leave it as an exercise to the reader to decide which is which.

    >>I understand the Ordain group is only asking that the church leadership seek guidance from Heavenly Father as to whether women should be ordained. True?

    That's what they claim, but their behavior suggests that Ordain Women don't think that it's an open question whether God wants women ordained. They've already decided that He does and the Church is in error. If it were otherwise, they would accept a "no" answer from the Church leaders (which they've received), take down their website, and stop agitating. A continued public push for doctrinal change in the face of a contrary official Church statement (all of which are approved by senior Church leaders) shows they won't accept the prophet's counsel despite the Lord's announcement that "whether by mine own voice or the voice of my servants, it is the same."

  • ClarkHippo Tooele, UT
    March 17, 2014 12:58 p.m.

    I can't help but wonder if these groups who want to change LDS doctrine are doing so not because they want to truly serve the Lord, but because they desire notoriety, fame or applause.

    No one in the LDS Church has a right to the priesthood. It is a singular privilege. One which Doctrine and Covenants 121 warns can be taken away if used to any level of unrighteousness.

  • IsaacsTM Huntingtown, MD
    March 17, 2014 1:00 p.m.

    As a Bishop, I am puzzled by their approach. If I had a man in my ward who came up and demanded the priesthood, I would likely hold off until I felt like he was more humble and prepared. I would go over the oath and covenant of the priesthood and talk over what the covenants are. For example, D&C 84:44 states that "For you shall live by every word that proceedeth forth from the mouth of God." Is a woman (or a man for that matter who is not ready), who comes forth and demands the priesthood, living by every word that comes forth from the mouth of God? The very demanding nature of their whole approach reveals that even if the priesthood were open to women, they would not be spiritually in a position to make that covenant. I mean truly make that covenant with all the other components of it. The work of the Lord that women do in this church is unmatched by any organization in the world. A faithful and diligent latter day Saint woman, strengthened by the gift of the Holy Ghost, has a power for good that can change lives forever.

  • Dacheat22 Saratoga Springs, UT
    March 17, 2014 1:02 p.m.

    Equality doesn't mean that they can cast the priesthood as a right that women can CHOOSE to have or not as they see fit.

    Last I checked, it wasn't that way for the men.

  • PacificCreek Puyallup, WA
    March 17, 2014 1:03 p.m.

    Are men and women equal? Yes, we are all loved equally by our Heavenly Father. The Family Proclamation states that "Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose." God has roles for each gender in this life and in the eternities. Both roles are critical to the plan of salvation!! Men and Women are equally blessed by the priesthood, through blessings, baptism, temple attendance, eternal marriage, creating life and the opportunity to obtain the highest degree of glory. Ordain Women seems to think the value of women in the church is measured by the who performs the ordinance instead of the value in recieving it. I have had this discussion with my 3 daughters before. Simply holding a position on the church 'Org Chart' makes you no better in the eyes of God nor less deserving of his love and blessings. I don't know why God has decreed that Men hold the priesthood but I do know he runs the church and guides its highest councils.

  • OhBoy Washington, DC
    March 17, 2014 1:09 p.m.

    I think the church is right on this one. If the group feels the need to protest, do so in the designated area. Though OW doesn't see it this way, they are protesting. Don't make every general priesthood meeting a circus or divert the story from the messages that people have been working hard to prepare.

    Jesus did not ordain women; his 12 apostles were all men. We have a second witness of that in the Book of Mormon; he called a second set on this continent, all men. He chose women for other roles, for instance, he revealed himself as Messiah to the woman at the well, and showed himself first to a woman, after his resurrection.

  • Captain Golgafrinchan Pangea, UT
    March 17, 2014 1:13 p.m.

    My thoughts: Whose church is it? The members' or the Lord's? Doesn't the Lord look upon the heart of an individual? Or is it upon the protest of a group? I would guess that when someone has 'demonstrated' that they are ready for the priesthood, the Lord will direct a change in his church. But I have not applied this matter to my own prayer; I speak aloud the definition of faith and apply it to this matter, and I feel I don't need to apply this matter to prayer. But hey, that's just me.

  • KellyWSmith Sparks, NV
    March 17, 2014 1:13 p.m.

    @Craig Clark "Not even a medieval cleric could have said that any better before sending a heretic to the stake to be burned. Is there no allowance for dissent in the LDS Church?"

    Hold on here. No one said anything about burning anyone at the stake. That is quite a stretch from what was said.

    The definition of "Apostasy" is "One who apostatises is known as an apostate. The term apostasy is used. . . to mean renunciation and criticism of, or opposition to, a person's former religion, in a technical sense and without pejorative connotation." They then go on to say: "very few former believers call themselves apostates because of the pejorative implications of the term." [Wikipedia].

    By this definition they are criticizing the church and opposing a teaching they don't like, one that has already been dealt with in Sonja Johnson. They don't like being called an apostate because of the "implications of the term."

    Dissent is handled far differently in the church than the political world. They need to follow that path and not the worlds way of dealing with issues by protest and grandstanding. That was Satan's method in the premortal life.

  • sid 6.7 Holladay, UT
    March 17, 2014 1:29 p.m.

    I don't know weather to laugh or cry when I read some of the comments here. Particularly those of Brave Sir Robin and Liberal. As the Cat Lady pointed out the days of the women standing in the kitchen area tending to funeral potatoes and chasing children about are long since over. The world is an active place and so to is the Church. With the above attitude should we not allow women to participate in sport, hiking, hunting or other activities as it is not Womanly?

    I know it's a shock to some of you but Women are certainly capable of stacking chairs, home teaching going on Missions and attending Priesthood sessions. Some of you may also be surprised that women walk upright and don't drag their knuckles on the ground when in motion.

    And by the way, since when has going on a Mission ever been a requirement for the young men of the church? I can't recall when any of the authorities ever having demanding that all young men go on a Mission. It has been encouraged but it is not a requirement of the Church.

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    March 17, 2014 1:30 p.m.

    How does it "detract from dialogue" when there is no dialogue? This is an entirely one-sided conversation, the only side talking does not allow the other side to talk. Control is key.

  • Wiscougarfan River Falls, WI
    March 17, 2014 1:35 p.m.

    Count me as one more who does not believe that all things between genders should be "equal."

    A few posters outlined some of the things sisters should be grateful the have little or no responsibility for in the church (i.e. home teaching, move-ins). I also disagree with this line of thinking. I love what "The Proclamation to the World on the Family" says about gender roles and responsibilities and have no desire for the rights and responsibilities afforded to women in the church. I like being a guy and take my priesthood responsibilities seriously. I don't want to be a mother, don't want to go to general women's meetings, don't want monthly social activities, don't want to deal with funerals, etc.

    There are things about church doctrine that make me wonder and perhaps wish were a little different, but at the end of the day this whole discussion around "equality" has little value to me because I've already made up my mind about "God's authority" and "testimony." I believe there is a prophet who speaks for God, that's good enough for me.

  • LDS Revelations Sandy, UT
    March 17, 2014 1:37 p.m.

    I'm not at all surprised by the letter or that the Ordain Women group will continue to push for ordination. The Church certainly has the right to define what Priesthood session is and who it's for — and these women have the prerogative to ask for more. I do disagree though with the idea that a male-only Priesthood is a matter of doctrine and not subject to change without revelation. The same was said about the restriction on blacks holding the priesthood. In the late 40s and then again in the 60s the ban was cited in FP statements as doctrinal and the reasons for it were given— most of which have since been repudiated. From my perspective the ban been shown to have been an idea of men that was adopted in an earlier time held onto past the time it should have been. Certainly the same could be true of women and the priesthood. Isn't saying 'never' in a Church that believes in continuing revelation a little problematic?

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    March 17, 2014 1:43 p.m.

    IsaacsTM,

    "As a Bishop, I am puzzled by their [Ordain Women] approach. If I had a man in my ward who came up and demanded the priesthood, I would likely hold off until I felt like he was more humble and prepared...."
    ______________________________

    That’s a quite different thing, Bishop. No one has a right to ordination upon demand. But there is a fundamental difference here to be addressed. Men are not only eligible for ordination by virtue of gender, they also have instilled in them from an early age the expectation of them to live worthily to be ordained when called. Women aren’t even eligible regardless of personal worthiness or desire.

    That’s Church doctrine. We are taught that it comes from God. But civilization has come too far to no longer question the basis for an exclusively male institution that wields authority over religious life.

    This same debate is going on in the Catholic Church as well.

  • ClarkHippo Tooele, UT
    March 17, 2014 1:58 p.m.

    @Black37

    You said, "Each prophet from BY to Kimball preached the Blacks were cursed and could not hold the priesthood."

    @LDS Revelations

    You said "In the late 40s and then again in the 60s the ban was cited in FP statements as doctrinal and the reasons for it were given..."

    I was wondering if either of you would be good enough to share a few actual quotes. Don't misunderstand, I'm not saying you're wrong, but I would like to see some actual quotes instead of just claimed quotes.

    @lib_cat_lady

    You said - "I know many sister missionaries who would make better zone leaders than some of the elders."

    One argument I hear often is that LDS women would do better than the men if only they were the ones in charge. But if the argument in favor of giving the women the priesthood is equality, than comments like yours don't speak of equality but of superiority. It's a subtle way of saying that the fathers and sons within the LDS Church truly have nothing to offer.

  • The Rock Federal Way, WA
    March 17, 2014 2:00 p.m.

    @ David D

    "Women in the church, by a very large majority, do not share your advocacy for priesthood ordination for women and consider that position to be extreme," Moody said.

    "So where does that leave those of us who are not in the majority? Simply because a person holds different views from the hierarchy of the church is no reason to belittle their concerns and make them feel ostracized."

    I learned a long time ago that my beliefs are not important. What is important is what God believes. If my beliefs are different than those held by God then I am in the wrong and need to change, not the other way around.

  • John Pack Lambert of Michigan Ypsilanti, MI
    March 17, 2014 2:04 p.m.

    These people are delusional if they see any indication of a willingness for dialogue in this letter.

    The attemptes to claim they are "faithful" Church members fly in the face of their constant attempts to spread ill-will against the Church and undermine the teachings and work of the leaders of the Church. They have no right to demonstrate on Church property, and I hope the Church removes them if they attempt to do so.

  • IsaacsTM Huntingtown, MD
    March 17, 2014 2:06 p.m.

    Craig Clark:

    "But civilization has come too far to no longer question the basis for an exclusively male institution that wields authority over religious life."

    I think Craig you are missing part of my main point. The idea that within the church, by virtue of men holding the priesthood, that men are the only ones who can be fulfilled, and have a fullness of joy, and who wield all of the authority, is simply not true. Women have equal opportunity to have all of the joy of the gospel. My joy does not come from running a ward counsel meeting. The greatest joys come from doing all of the "little" things in service to individuals. Women have the gift of the Holy Ghost and have callings large and small. They have a greater natural capacity for service than men. We have a general relief society and primary presidencies (it is obviously not "exclusively male") that travel world-wide and speak for the church. Have you ever read what Sheri Dew has said about the priesthood?

  • mecr Bountiful, UT
    March 17, 2014 2:09 p.m.

    "That’s Church doctrine. We are taught that it comes from God. But civilization has come too far to no longer question the basis for an exclusively male institution that wields authority over religious life."

    If the Church is going to drive itself by civilization's changes rather than revelation, then this Church is not the Lord's. Asking for the possibility for women to call it the least to be ordained in the priesthood is the same as any male or a non-member asking to be ordained.

    Also, if the majority of lds women do not agree with it, why does this group keep trying?

  • John Pack Lambert of Michigan Ypsilanti, MI
    March 17, 2014 2:09 p.m.

    The Church as a private organization has a right to determine how its property is used. If they do not want a group holding a meeting on Temple Square, the groups should respect that request and not attempt to do so. If the group does not want to be grouped with Apostates and anti-Mormons, they should stop acting in the manners of apostates and anti-Mormons. You do not demonstrate you are a faithful Church member by participating in demonstrations denouncing the actions of Church leaders.

  • Spellman789 Syracuse, UT
    March 17, 2014 2:14 p.m.

    What a wild and "beyond the mark" interpretation of Matthew 7: 7.

  • kargirl Sacramento, CA
    March 17, 2014 2:15 p.m.

    Yes, men and women ARE different. And we come with different gifts, not only because of our personalities, but because of our genders and the experiences that it brings. But motherhood does not happen for all women, fatherhood does not happen for all men...so why the idea that having the Priesthood is equivalent to motherhood, when it isn't? We are in this life, right now. And I believe it was President Hinckley who talked about agitating for our ordination...that we hadn't done much of it at the time. Well, we are now, politely, reverently. We speak up, so President Monson and his counselors know how we feel. Power? No. Service? Yes. We already work doing backup, for the men in the Priesthood, we would be putting our shoulders to the wheel, and sharing the work. Multiplying talents, giving ours and hey, maybe there could even be some couple callings! The point is, Heavenly Father gave us talents, and many are being buried. Go back to the original Relief Society and what the sisters were doing, and what they were becoming. See for yourself.

  • mhenshaw Leesburg, VA
    March 17, 2014 2:18 p.m.

    >>I can't recall when any of the authorities ever having demanding that all young men go on a Mission. It has been encouraged but it is not a requirement of the Church.

    That's because ordering people around isn't the way the Lord does things. He gives us commandments and if we obey them, we receive the attached blessings. If we don't obey, we receive no such blessings. But He doesn't compel us against our will or threaten us with punishment if we don't do what He wants.

    "No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the bpriesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; by kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile—reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy." (D&C 121:41-43)

  • The Rock Federal Way, WA
    March 17, 2014 2:19 p.m.

    The church exists for many reasons, not the least of which is it is a vehicle to take ordinary people and turn them into great men and women. We have to give people opportunities for growth and development if they are to gain leadership skills.

    The Young Mens program of the church fills this need for boys and the Young Womens program does the same for girls. The same is for true for all the other auxiliaries of the church. Women actually have many opportunities to serve, grow and develop. Men are not allowed to be in the presidency of the Primary.

    Many men would never develop leadership skills that appear to come to many women naturally if it were not for the way the Priesthood is organized.

    This is not about pride, or power, or vanity. It is about service, building both men and women.

    I have never met a Stake President or a Bishop who did not have an amazing wife. These women are their unofficial councilors. My wife serves that role for me, and not just in my church callings.

    Women in the church have far more power than they may realize.

  • shamrock Salt Lake City, UT
    March 17, 2014 2:26 p.m.

    It's hard to have a "dialogue" with a group when you've banned them from Temple Square and announced that their views are anti-doctrinal. Just sayin'.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    March 17, 2014 2:38 p.m.

    Will this eventually look like blacks and the priesthood?

    From what I gather, no one knew why blacks were ever denied. Doesn't appear that they were denied based on scripture or revelation. Correct me if I am wrong.

    Could this be the case here? I sincerely don't know.

    But doesn't it have to be either prior scripture, revelation, or opinion?

  • Opened Brooklyn, NY
    March 17, 2014 2:48 p.m.

    There has been a lot of is the "church ruled by people or god and his doctrine" questions. let's not forget His doctrine prevented men who's skin wasn't white from holding the priesthood until the 70's. Carrying out ones priesthood responsibilities correctly can lead to great blessing and a sense of purpose. In time, as society grows to see women as equals to men maybe God will too.

  • Dave D Spring Creek, NV
    March 17, 2014 2:50 p.m.

    Bishop Causse said the following during the last priesthood session:

    "So, my brothers, it is your duty to reach out to anyone who appears at the doors of your Church buildings. Welcome them with gratitude and without prejudice. If people you do not know walk into one of your meetings, greet them warmly and invite them to sit with you. Please make the first move to help them feel welcome and loved, rather than waiting for them to come to you."

    He said this literally as women were refused entrance into a church building. Did anyone think of the irony of this statement as it was spoken?

  • jtmurphysr Germany, 00
    March 17, 2014 2:59 p.m.

    @KellyWSmith
    Faithfully agitating for change is not apostasy.

    Gordon B. Hinckley himself (you remember him right?) indicated that it was not beyond the realm of consideration that women could hold the priesthood, but that the women "aren't agitating" for it. Agitation does not equal apostasy.

    It amazes me how the most righteous "Christians" - especially Mormons - are so quick to judge and declare those with divergent opinions to be under the influence of Satan or a diving into apostasy. They're the un-Christlike, because they're not like you. Surely it's a porn addiction right? How awesome it must be to be flawless in your faith without question. Even Joseph admitted having questions.

    I'm saddened, and more than a little embarrassed, to learn how narrow minded and un-Christlike those I've called "Brother" and "Sister" seem to be. Christ taught compassion and love not judgement and vilification. Shame on you, all of you, for your hurtful and hateful words towards your Sisters. You may disagree, but they're still our Sisters. And that, regardless of your opinions, or the Church's PR machine, is undeniable.

  • Flashback Kearns, UT
    March 17, 2014 3:02 p.m.

    A little history sports fans.
    D&C section 20:64 talks about getting a certificate of ordination from "him" meaningthe priest that ordained him. Later in that verse it mentions "him" or "he" again.

    D&C Section 68:19- "... a high priest of the Melchizedek Priesthood has authority to officiate...when no literal decendant of Aaron can be found..." Who had the priesthood that were decendents of Aaron? That's right, the Levites (all men).

    D&C 84: 33-34,38-" For whoso is faithfull unto the obtaining of these two priesthoods of which I have spoken...They become the sons of Moses and of Aaron...", "And he that receiveth my Father...". The word "He" is mentioned in this section several times from Verse 32 to verse 38.

    The priesthood ban of blacks isn't an apt comparison because it isn't scriptural. It was a part of the times. It became policy. A whole bunch of scriptures would have to be thrown out to ordain women. No scriptures had to be thrown out regarding blacks and the priesthood.

  • 1covey Salt Lake City, UT
    March 17, 2014 3:05 p.m.

    What is the biggest complaint against men? A lot of men do not take responsibility. Men are generally less sensitive than women. So why is it so hard to understand that the Priesthood is the Lord's program to help men learn their duties and be responsible? The Priesthood is about service to others. The Priesthood is to help men come closer top God. Women are way ahead in this department. Amen to what Rock said.

  • wer South Jordan, UT
    March 17, 2014 3:17 p.m.

    These are "faithful, active women", they say.

    Faithful, active members don't try to tell the prophet how to run the church.

  • 1covey Salt Lake City, UT
    March 17, 2014 3:28 p.m.

    Addendum: I think the Prophet has heard about the request from the OW group by now. These women want the Priesthood; there is order in the Priesthood and these people are not following it. Not much of a recommendation for their cause. If they feel strongly that their request is not being forwarded through proper channels, why stop at the Prophet? Go right to the top. After all, that's where the prophet has to take this request. If they do not believe this, then why make a request at all?

  • PP Eagle Mountain, UT
    March 17, 2014 3:34 p.m.

    For the record - from Black37 - "Each prophet from BY to Kimball preached the Blacks were cursed and could not hold the priesthood."

    This is actually not true. In fact you would be hard pressed to find a single prophet or Apostle that actually preached that. There was much speculation about that but no doctrine. Brigham Young is on record as saying that someday Blacks will hold the priesthood. President Kimball is on record as saying that it was one of the greatest days in the history of the church when he received the revelation that all worthy males could hold the priesthood.

  • 3GrandKeys Walnut Creek, CA
    March 17, 2014 3:34 p.m.

    Why even argue that most women in the church don't even want the priesthood? What if most men wanted women to have the priesthood? Most 19 year old boys don't "want" to go on missions for two years but they do because they're told it's what they should do. Do you know how many returned missionaries I know that have "nightmares" (that's precisely the word they use) of being called to go back out on a mission again? So which is it? Does it matter what members want or not? Why even mention what members want? When the prophet speaks isn't it case closed...by common consent of course...er...but not...?

  • stevenwaters Holladay, UT
    March 17, 2014 3:48 p.m.

    It's easy to understand the confusion. The general authorities of the LDS church have removed and altered the records of church history relating to this topic.

  • Fred Vader Oklahoma City, OK
    March 17, 2014 3:55 p.m.

    @jtmurphysr: You said, "Christ taught compassion and love not judgement and vilification." And then you did the exact opposite yourself by saying, "Shame on you, all of you, for your hurtful and hateful words" Is that not also judging and vilification?

    Personally, I do not have any problem with women wanting or not wanting the Priesthood. I don't think anyone is evil, bad, or apostatizing for questioning whether or not women can have the Priesthood. Having questions is exactly how Joseph Smith got started.

    But as a caution, I would point out the story of Martin Harris. He repeatedly "agitated" toward Joseph to let him show the 116 pages of the BoM to his wife. Multiple times Joseph told him "no". Until Martin asked one more time, and the Lord allowed it due to the constant "agitation." Then the 116 pages were lost, and Joseph was severly admonished by the Lord and prevented from further translation for a long time.

    Be careful that the Lord does not give you exactly what you ask for, just to then have it blow up against you. God will not be mocked, nor will he be pestered, through "agitation".

  • Grandma 20 Allen, TX
    March 17, 2014 3:56 p.m.

    jtmurphysr
    Germany, 00

    Gordon B. Hinckley himself (you remember him right?) indicated that it was not beyond the realm of consideration that women could hold the priesthood

    I would be very interested in the reference to the above. Thanks.

  • Mark from Montana Davis County, UT
    March 17, 2014 3:58 p.m.

    Frankly let these women take on the rolls and responsibilities. Let them get up at 0600 for the meetings that start that early. Let them stay until 6 or 7 in the evening with the follow up meetings. I personally would rather be able to spend the time with my family instead of being in meetings all day Sunday, plus the training that take place on Thursdays or Sat evening. Load them up and give it all to them.

  • helpersofmyjoy Midvale, UT
    March 17, 2014 3:58 p.m.

    "We have heard men who hold the priesthood remark that they would do anything they were told to do by those who preside over them -- even if they knew it was wrong. But such obedience as this is worse than folly to us. It is slavery in the extreme. The man who would thus willingly degrade himself should not claim a rank among intelligent beings until he turns from his folly.

    "A man of God would despise this idea. Others, in the extreme exercise of their almighty authority have taught that such obedience was necessary, and that no matter what the Saints were told to do by their presidents, they should do it without any questions.

    "When Elders of Israel will so far indulge in these extreme notions of obedience as to teach them to the people, it is generally because they have it in their hearts to do wrong themselves."

    Joseph Smith, Jr.

    When there is no dialogue AT ALL how do you detract from it?

  • Kaladin Greeley, CO
    March 17, 2014 3:59 p.m.

    I stand by my earlier post. Reading the posts that have come since verifies it. My wife is a greater person than I. I have served alongside her in primary. I have held callings in cub scouts, boy scouts, young men, elders quorum and music. Have I ever wanted to be a Bishop, Stake President, General Authority? No. Do I want to go to every priesthood meeting, service project, campout, etc that I have been asked to attend? No. But I do it. I don't turn down callings. I try to serve the best I can. Why? Because I believe that's what the Lord wants me to do. I believe the callings are more than men sticking me in a calling for no reason. When a woman is my leader in primary or scouts do I complain and say "Why isn't a man in charge?" No. I sustain her and serve with her. Serve in the capacity you are asked to serve in and try to magnify your calling rather than asking for a "greater" one and you will be happy. Seek after the honor of men and you will not be.

  • kargirl Sacramento, CA
    March 17, 2014 4:04 p.m.

    There was a good deal of discussion of why and who was to be considered not permitted by skin color and heritage to hold the Priesthood before 1978. There was similar disagreement on whether those who were gay or lesbian but not practicing (remaining chaste, as were heterosexual LDS) could be given the same callings, including Priesthood, for the males, as their brethren. That, too, was decided quite differently from earlier in Church history. None of this turned out as "doctrinal" as many, including General Authorities of the day, would've had us believe. They are human, too, and of the time they live in, as well as prophets, and, sometimes, ahead of, or sometimes, behind their times. Not a criticism, just people, being people, you see. We can love that about them. And we can love the sisters who do not agree with OW. We aren't asking you to be what you aren't, we are asking for a hearing as faithful LDS members.

  • PP Eagle Mountain, UT
    March 17, 2014 4:06 p.m.

    jtmurphysr
    Germany, 00

    @KellyWSmith
    Faithfully agitating for change is not apostasy.

    Gordon B. Hinckley himself (you remember him right?) indicated that it was not beyond the realm of consideration that women could hold the priesthood, but that the women "aren't agitating" for it. Agitation does not equal apostasy.

    -----------------

    Please provide a reference of when this was spoken. Your interpretation does not seem to fit the facts and I would like to read it for myself. Questions and new ideas are great, but campaigning to have your ideas implemented is not. I have seen to many people with an axe to grind end up excommunicated - and it's not always a bad axe. It was the manner with which they proceeded.

    It is definitely narrow minded to demand a radical change then criticize others for the behavior you are exhibiting. The church is 2 things 1-Private - which makes these demands ridiculous logically and 2-Directly led by The Lord - which makes these demands immoral

    Asking a question, no matter how radical is fine. Not accepting the answer is the path to apostasy.

  • christy51 El Paso, TX
    March 17, 2014 4:15 p.m.

    I left the church because of the inequality between genders in the LDS church. I took my daughters and joined a church that allows women ordination because that is how I believe it should be. I wish I could have stayed in the LDS church, but my daughters are too important to me and I want to teach them women and men are equal. These are the standards we live by now.

  • liahona Westbank, BC
    March 17, 2014 4:19 p.m.

    If President Monson makes the announcement at General Conference in April that he has gone to the Lord and the answer is no. What will OW movement do?

  • linleyk Wilmington, DE
    March 17, 2014 4:19 p.m.

    Our revered President Abraham Lincoln stated: Sir, my concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God's side, for God is always right.
    Why do women even need the Priesthood? A man cannot lift his hands to give himself a blessing or ordination. It is just a call to serve others. If he needs to be served, he must find other Priesthood holders to serve him. I am busy enough with my six children, my husband, and the things I already do in this life.

  • trekker Salt Lake, UT
    March 17, 2014 4:21 p.m.

    OW asked before the Prophet and the 12 Twelve regarding this issue, the leaders have made the churches position clear again today it was via spokesperson Sis Moody. Protestors are trying to go into priesthood session after being told no is not sustaining the leaders of the church. I wonder if continued action by OW will result in disciplinary action by the church. Causing a spectacle in the news and rallying people up is not asking, it is demanding change. No one should demand anything from the Prophet. You are welcome to write letters privately and ask questions but when he replies with an answer the discussion is over whether you agree with the answer or not, assuming you believe he hold the keys to act and speak for the Lord regarding the Lord's church. If you don't you don't really believe.

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    March 17, 2014 4:24 p.m.

    I foresee the movement to ordain women will not be successful. The political pressure that helped other LDS changes along does not exist in this instance nor it is likely to ever exist. Women being different than men and having different roles is comfortably accepted and likely will remain so.

  • From Ted's Head Orem, UT
    March 17, 2014 4:34 p.m.

    I believe that the Ordain Women movement is a group of people who are advocating for a change of LDS Church doctrine to what they believe it should be, including ordaining women to the priesthood. (There is also their belief that "God" is comprised of a two beings, Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother.) This group of people is organizing a action for GC, a form of demonstration that on its face is to seek admission to Priesthood Session, but yet one where they know with certainty that they will not be allowed to enter. This "demonstration" should be prohibited from taking place except in the designated areas.

    It is also my belief that many LDS Church members frown on these public displays of disagreement with church policy or doctrine. I do not know these people, yet I feel they are misguided. They, along with those seeking to change the LDS stance on homosexual intimacy being a sin regardless of legal marriage status, are passionate, vocal, seemingly impatient, and most importantly seem to believe that they are in a position to determine the Lord's will more than his prophet and apostles can.

  • LovelyDeseret Gilbert, AZ
    March 17, 2014 4:47 p.m.

    I think it is dishonest of Ms. Kelly to say that they are not Anti-Mormon. I recognize many of the names on her list and at her protests as avid even rabid Anti-Mormons.
    With that said, I think they should continue, I can see no reason why the ordination of women can't happen, maybe not in the immediate future but in the future. Simply do it in a peaceful loving way.

  • Danite Salt Lake City, UT
    March 17, 2014 4:54 p.m.

    While I agree completely with some opinions stated about the divisiveness of this organization, and while I doctrinally can't disagree more with OW's stance, I think it may be best to reconsider our tone with these groups. And by "we" I mean the rank and file of the church. The Brethren have been clear on doctrine and yet moderate in tone, let's follow their lead.

    In these the last days, we don't need to create a division that truly doesn't exist. These people are not in a state of apostasy for examining this issue. They're not necassarily questioning the Brethren. Let's not push our brothers and sisters into a corner and make them feel as if it's an "us vs. them" issue....we all have plenty of difficulties without creating them from within the Kingdom itself.

  • Straitpath PROVO, UT
    March 17, 2014 5:01 p.m.

    I will follow the Prophet.

  • keepamericafree salt lake, UT
    March 17, 2014 5:16 p.m.

    This idea that women carry around with them that they are somehow considered inferior to men in the church is a lie that is perpetuated by the devil himself! We do not have to be exactly the same or have the same jobs to be equal. Women wanted so called "equal rights" so they could work outside the home and look where that got us. Now not only are we expected to bear the children and clean the house and do the shopping but now we get to leave our children in day care so we can have the so called "privilege" of working like a Man as well.
    Having the priesthood is a responsibility and a Job just like any other responsibility and I would just like these women to know, as a wife and mother....
    I DON'T WANT ANOTHER RESPONSIBILITY!

  • Southern Girl Salt Lake City, UT
    March 17, 2014 5:23 p.m.

    To PP (Eagle Mountain): You should google Joseph Fielding Smith and Bruce R. McConkie and their statements about blacks. (Statements from other prophets will also be there.) Growing up in the South, we were taught this, and because all references about blacks and the priesthood were from the prophets, it was considered doctrine. So, never say "never" about women being ordained to the priesthood. Doctrine has been and does get changed.

  • I know it. I Live it. I Love it. Provo, UT
    March 17, 2014 5:35 p.m.

    God's church is not one of confusion, but order.

    Those who would confuse the truth for their own purpose are not of God, but are being moved by another force. We must not be duped, tricked, confused, or allow ourselves to doubt on this matter. It is clear. The doctrine is clear. God's love is clear. Some of the loudest voices in this movement are from people who left the church. If that isn't your first clue, then what will be?

    When we err, our Heavenly Father reminds us of it until we correct our path. The thing about causing division, disagreement, or "a discussion" that pretends to be something else... is that it's all in the name of not following what the Savior has already given us to do.

    Believe in revelation. Otherwise, kneel down and ask for help to believe. But if you don't want to believe it, what are you doing?

  • The Authority Richfield, UT
    March 17, 2014 5:49 p.m.

    Let's see, 90 percent oppose it, probably another 5 percent don't care, yet this small vocal group keeps up with its nonsense that is in opposition to DOCTRINE. It comes down to do you believe that we have a living profit on the Earth or not. If you do, he's said no, quit asking. If you don't, then it's time to join some other religion.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    March 17, 2014 6:00 p.m.

    @liahona
    Westbank, BC

    If President Monson makes the announcement at General Conference in April that he has gone to the Lord and the answer is no. What will OW movement do?
    4:19 p.m. March 17, 2014

    ========

    By the same token,
    What If President Monson makes the announcement at General Conference in April that he has gone to the Lord and the answer is YES. What would all the nay sayers do?

    You might want to keep and Open Mind...

  • Umbrella Man New York, NY
    March 17, 2014 6:03 p.m.

    I am dumbfounded at how many people in these comments are insisting both that women seeking ordination are in the minority and that they should either conform or get out of the church. Is this what it means to you to leave the 99 and seek after the one that is lost? You may not agree with this movement, but any reaction that is without empathy, compassion, patience, love and a real effort to understand is the antithesis of Christlike behavior. How would you feel if a majority of us responded to your pain and frustration with, "You're small and wrong. Get out!"??

  • helpersofmyjoy Midvale, UT
    March 17, 2014 6:06 p.m.

    @Danite THANK YOU for this:

    "In these the last days, we don't need to create a division that truly doesn't exist. These people are not in a state of apostasy for examining this issue. They're not nec[e]ssarily questioning the Brethren. Let's not push our brothers and sisters into a corner and make them feel as if it's an 'us vs. them' issue....we all have plenty of difficulties without creating them from within the Kingdom itself."

  • Wiscougarfan River Falls, WI
    March 17, 2014 6:27 p.m.

    Re: Dave D.

    "...it is your duty to reach out to anyone who appears at the doors of your Church buildings. Welcome them with gratitude and without prejudice. If people you do not know walk into one of your meetings, greet them warmly and invite them to sit with you. Please make the first move to help them feel welcome and loved, rather than waiting for them to come to you."

    He said this literally as women were refused entrance into a church building. Did anyone think of the irony of this statement as it was spoken?

    Sorry, no irony there. Obviously context matters and welcoming strangers to our sacrament meetings is very different from inviting them to more specific meetings. It would be inappropriate (and perhaps even offensive) to invite someone into the church only to usher that adult into a primary or nursery classroom. So too would it be inappropriate to welcome a female into a priesthood meeting where she would be out of place and the messages shared would be for a different audience. If we truly want to welcome everyone we should direct them to the appropriate meetings.

  • Robester Provo, UT
    March 17, 2014 6:31 p.m.

    I personally feel frustrated with this issue. I am mostly bothered by the way members of the LDS church are calling these women apostates, questioning their worthiness, and downplaying their thoughts. Then I realize that a lot of this language comes from a need to defend their faith, which I get. But since when does defending the faith mean that we name call or tell these women to just leave? I loved President Uchtdorf's talk about telling people who feel different to stay and that they are welcome. As one who feels 1/2 "traditional Mormon" and 1/2 very non-traditional(Boo labels), I love that message and feel that just as one group needs to choose to stay, the other group needs to help them feel welcome. Please, no matter what you believe, realize that "the others'" experiences are legitimate in their eyes. With so much religious dialogue available online, we need to realize that these are our brothers and sisters and that we need to stop hiding behind our anonymity. Each "group" just needs to do a better job with helping the other feel that they are loved. I know I am not perfect, but I want to try.

  • Miss Piggie Phoenix, AZ
    March 17, 2014 6:37 p.m.

    @get her done:
    "Are women equal?"

    No. They're superior.

  • David G Woolley Bountiful, UT
    March 17, 2014 6:38 p.m.

    @Lawguy

    Just a point of clarification. The title page of the Book of Mormon was written by Moroni circa 400 AD. Joseph Smith said, “The title-page of the Book of Mormon is a literal translation, taken from the very last leaf, on the left hand side of the collection or book of plates, which contained the record which has been translated, the language of the whole running the same as all Hebrew writing in general; and that said title page is not by any means a modern composition, either of mine or of any other man who has lived or does live in this generation” (History of the Church, 1:71)

    I believe what you refer to as the title page is actually called an introduction, written to anyone unfamiliar about the book and was never intended nor accepted as scripture. The introduction has been updated to reflect our changing understanding about the geographical setting of the Book of Mormon. In that context, it isn't surprising to note that Joseph Smith taught that if anyone alive in his day were to live into the next century, they would find thousands of evidences supporting the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.

  • ellen toronto ann arbor, MI
    March 17, 2014 6:42 p.m.

    I believe that civil disobedience is always an element of change. During my life time I have witnessed change that has always been preceded by citizens who request and even demand it. Recent examples are marriage equality for the LGBT community. I recall from my youth the long-over due responses to African-American citizens, e.g. integration of schools, busses, restaurants. In our own Church the granting of Priesthood to African-American males was also long overdue. Denying the priesthood to Blacks had been described as a doctrinal precedent just as the ordination of women is now being described. I believe that granting the priesthood to black men was the result of mighty prayers to that effect as well as a response to social pressure, i.e. sports teams refusing to play at BYU as long as the discriminatory policy was in place.

    Now it is time for women to become equal citizens in the Church. Separate but equal does not apply to women just as it did not apply to Blacks. Women and men need to make their voices and their prayers heard in regard to this significant matter.

  • Robester Provo, UT
    March 17, 2014 6:45 p.m.

    @linleyk I definitely understand your question. My husband no longer believes in the LDS church and as a result if my children need a priesthood blessing, I call my home teacher. It would be convenient for me to have the priesthood, so I do not need to disrupt whatever is going on at my home teacher's house and because it makes me feel very vulnerable. That being said, if women don't have the priesthood, then fine. I made the choice to raise my children in a home without priesthood being there, but I can also make the choice to get off my high horse and call a home teacher. Just when it comes to practicality it would be nice to hold it. But if not, what evs!

  • thingsthatmakeugohmm Plano, TX
    March 17, 2014 6:45 p.m.

    It's a Human Rights issue.

    Human rights is the idea that all people should have rights. These rights are seen as universal, which means they are meant for everyone, no matter what their race, religion, ethnicity, nationality, age, sex (also women's rights), political beliefs (or any other kind of beliefs), intelligence, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity are.

    In the 19th century, John Stuart Mill was an important philosopher who thought about human rights. He said that people should be able to control their own bodies and minds. He talked about three special ideas:
    freedom of speech
    freedom of assembly
    freedom to do what a person wishes if it does not harm others (even if other people think it is bad)

    *wikipedia

  • BeachBabe Los Angeles, CA
    March 17, 2014 6:58 p.m.

    We are taught in the church that men and women are equal. I believe this to be true but I don't believe that being equal equates to having the same responsibilities. Forgive me if I am wrong but is it not true that four quarters each valued at twenty-five cents combined are equal to the value of a single dollar bill or ten dimes? While they are equal in value they do are not the same. I am not trying to imply that women are of lesser value or represent a specific monetary value, rather that women serve a different purpose in the church that I don't believe involves ordination to the Priesthood.

  • wrz Phoenix, AZ
    March 17, 2014 7:02 p.m.

    @1.96 Standard Deviations:
    "The Ordain Women group have been clearly told that women ordination is against doctrine..."

    I don't understand why women would want to be ordained in the first place. It means alotta extra work.

    @Sal:
    "Adam did the right thing when he listened to his Eve."

    How so? Had he not listened to Eve he coulda lived like a king in the garden. But, instead, he got tossed out on his ear.

    -------

    There's no reason why man and wife should not be attending the so-called Priesthood session together. After all the women are told they 'hold' the Priesthood in connection with their husbands.

  • Social Mod Fiscal Con West Jordan, UT
    March 17, 2014 7:07 p.m.

    Looking back at the very earliest days of Church history, I would say that it isn't completely contrary to Church doctrine that women could hold the priesthood.

    With that said, I don't think it will ever happen, and I think that the WO movement is going about it wrong.

    If they truly have testimonies of the truthfulness of the Church, they should be petitioning God directly, through personal prayer. If there is any chance of it happening I believe the petition of a righteous woman is actually more likely to move God's heart than a plea from the Prophet.

  • BeachBabe Los Angeles, CA
    March 17, 2014 7:06 p.m.

    A second question I wish to articulate is how can the Ordain Women claim to seek an answer regarding women and the Priesthood yet seem unwilling to accept an answer that they don't like?
    When asked about what will happen if requests for tickets to the Priesthood Session are denied, the response was
    "Ordain Women will remain intact. We will continue to seek ordination through faith-affirming action and discussion. We plan to move forward in thoughtful, creative and courageous ways." (http://ordainwomen.org/april-5/)
    If the Lord reveals through his prophets that women should ordained than I will accept it as I believe that President Monson and other leaders receive this revelation on behalf of us as Church members from God. However, I will admit that I am offended that women who claim to seek an answer respond that they will "continue to seek ordination". That to me represents a lack of belief and trust in the answer of the Lord, whatever it may be.

  • keepamericafree salt lake, UT
    March 17, 2014 7:07 p.m.

    The priesthood is not given as a right or privilege or honor it is given as a tool meant for service. Carrying the priesthood is a mission of servitude not privilege.

  • MAYHEM MIKE Salt Lake City, UT
    March 17, 2014 7:11 p.m.

    I have a son who was recently ordained a Bishop in the Church. He's "up to his neck" in time constraints, visits to the needy, lack of sleep, welfare decisions, adjudicating moral violations, endless meetings, talk preparation(s), and . . . litle time with his own family.

    Give these protesters what they want! Ordain them and make them Bishops! That'll teach 'em!

  • BeachBabe Los Angeles, CA
    March 17, 2014 7:15 p.m.

    I have had very strong feelings on this matter for quite a while. After reading the article and furthering my reading on the Ordain Women website I have just a few comments and the occasional question to bring up.
    First, as a woman in this church I have never felt as some previous commenters have, that I have less responsibility or even less love from my Heavenly Father because of my gender. I do not hold the Priesthood. I don't anticipate that I ever will. I am okay with that. I understand that some women and men do not feel that way. While I disagree with their opinions, I realize that they are fully entitled to them as I am mine. However, it appears that there is a fine line between loving and accepting those who question the authority of the church out of a desire to gain a testimony of certain principles and those who question with the intent to change the church so that their ideals become mainstream practice.

  • David G Woolley Bountiful, UT
    March 17, 2014 7:17 p.m.

    @sid 6.7

    Dear Sid6.7

    As a point of clarification, President Monson and many other prophets and apostles have taught that missionary service in the LDS church is considered a priesthood duty.

    “I repeat what prophets have long taught—that every worthy, able young man should prepare to serve a mission. Missionary service is a priesthood duty—an obligation the Lord expects of us who have been given so very much. Young men, I admonish you to prepare for service as a missionary. Keep yourselves clean and pure and worthy to represent the Lord. Maintain your health and strength. Study the scriptures. Where such is available, participate in seminary or institute. Familiarize yourself with the missionary handbook. Preach My Gospel.

    “A word to you young sisters: while you do not have the same priesthood responsibility as do the young men to serve as full-time missionaries, you also make a valuable contribution as missionaries, and we welcome your service.”

    Thomas S. Monson, “As We Meet Together Again,” Ensign, Nov. 2010, 5-6.

  • rlsintx Plano, TX
    March 17, 2014 7:24 p.m.

    Great and spacious building scene being acted out in our times.

  • anotherview SLO, CA
    March 17, 2014 7:27 p.m.

    As an LDS woman, I would be open to women being ordained with the priesthood. No pollster or LDS leader has called me.
    I do think women should have more autonomy leading their organizations, more input on every level of the church organization, and the ability/authority to participate in blessings--part of the prayer circles.

    However, my opinion of Kate Kelly has worsened.

    But this issue just highlights why there is no danger of church leaders being required to perform same-sex marriages.
    Churches are given wide latitude when it comes to discrimination based on race and sex.

  • Svoboda_Religii West valley City, UT
    March 17, 2014 7:34 p.m.

    Thanks to all the members, who have written here in support of our Church. It's simple. Who is leading the Church? If anyone doesn't like something about the Church, pray about it. Eventually you will get understanding.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    March 17, 2014 7:49 p.m.

    Re: "We feel as faithful, active Mormon women we have nothing in common with people who oppose the church . . . ."

    Yeah, nothing in common. Except for the fact that you, like they, oppose the Church.

    Seems kinda like viewing the sun at midday and denying it.

  • Willem Los Angeles, CA
    March 17, 2014 8:05 p.m.

    Pure discrimination!

  • iron&clay RIVERTON, UT
    March 17, 2014 8:17 p.m.

    Revelation is the key.

    Joseph started the church in 1830 through revelation from God.

    Each of us can have revelation from God as we read the Book of Mormon and ask with sincere heart, real intent and having faith in Christ.

    We can feel the power of the Holy Ghost, who is a member of the Godhead, manifesting the truth to us as we meet the above conditions.

  • nicholdraper West Jordan, UT
    March 17, 2014 8:18 p.m.

    Read "Why Men Hate Church" By David Murrow. In other churches the participation rate of males is dismal. David Murrow states that in Europe only about 5% of the male population attends meetings weekly. I've attended other religious meetings and the number of men is surprisingly small. For Mormons they believe that you must be married to be exalted so it is not a male dominated but a partnership dominated religion. Mormon women are priestess, but the term is only used in the temple. They do not need to be ordained to take part in temple ordinances. Just like direct decedents of Levi do not need to be ordained to be in the Aaronic priesthood. In the temple if you are going to have a member of the temple presidency speak to you it may be the temple Matron. Of course the women on the fringes do not understand this because they do not go to the temple.

  • Empyrean Logan, UT
    March 17, 2014 8:21 p.m.

    @ MoreMan:

    If "very few people take the Church seriously" as you contend, then why is it one of the fastest growing churches in the world and the fastest growing Christian church in America? It appears great numbers are taking the Church seriously... and to their genuine benefit.

    @ David D:

    These advocacy women have had their dialog responded to in a respectful manner. They just are not willing to accept the answer. They are no longer asking, they are demanding.

    @ sister Murphy:

    You and all other people are always welcomed to listen to the prophet's voice. Means and a proper place are always provided. Demanding your own changes regarding this doesn't foster anything positive.

    @ McMurphy:

    That guidance has already been sought for by Church leaders and the answer given. Some just have a hard time accepting that. They should seek their own personal guidance.

    Regarding Priesthood and Relief Society General sessions... There wouldn't be room for both men and women to attend both of these meetings. There are physical facility limitations. Consequently, men and women have their own separate meetings to attend. They are broadcast for anyone interested to hear and are benefited for doing so.

  • anonymousPal Salt Lake City, UT
    March 17, 2014 8:31 p.m.

    President Hinckley in an interview said that women could receive the priesthood through revelation but that they don't ask for it.
    In his exact words:
    Interviewer: Is it possible that the rules could change in the future as the rules are on Blacks?
    Gordon B. Hinckley: He could change them yes. If He were to change them that's the only way it would happen.
    Int: So you'd have to get a revelation?
    Gordon B. Hinckley: Yes. But there's no agitation for that. We don't find it. Our women are happy. They're satisfied. These bright, able, wonderful women who administer their own organisation are very happy. Ask them. Ask my wife.

  • Pops NORTH SALT LAKE, UT
    March 17, 2014 8:34 p.m.

    Some have thoughtfully suggested that the petitioners address their concerns to Heavenly Father. But maybe they should address their concerns to Heavenly Mother...

    Of course I'm not serious. The fact that we are commanded to pray to our Heavenly Father and NOT to our Heavenly Mother - and the fact that she isn't even mentioned in scripture - perhaps says something about the organizational structure and gender roles that exist in Eternity. It isn't that big of a stretch to guess that God might wish to organize things in His church in a similar manner to how things are done in heaven.

  • KJR Alpine, UT
    March 17, 2014 8:41 p.m.

    If you believe it's the true gospel, follow it. If you believe that it is a social club with arbitrary rules, start your own club with your own rules. If you are one of those people who believe that it's arbitrary but that the Church structure is designed to oppress women, I can't believe that you have ever known any faithful adherents of either gender.

  • U-tar Woodland Hills, UT
    March 17, 2014 8:43 p.m.

    There are certain personalities that love to go against the grain. These women who say they want the priesthood actually just want to create controversy, and deep down inside, really do not believe in the doctrines of the church, as they pretend to. They just want to make trouble, the LDS church will always have it's haters and detractors.

  • sharrona layton, UT
    March 17, 2014 9:04 p.m.

    RE: Pops,The fact that we are commanded to pray to our Heavenly Father and NOT to our Heavenly Mother - and the fact that she isn't even mentioned in scripture?

    Heavenly Mother in the Bible? Some would argue that a reference to female deity is in the Bible, namely references to the "queen of heaven" by Jeremiah. The problem of course is that such references (Jeremiah 7:18; 44:17-19, 25) are negative.

    That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.(John 3:6) This passage contradicts the concept of a flesh and bone Heavenly Mother who gives birth to heavenly spirit babies.

    Ecc 12:7)… the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

    For in him we live and move and have our Being...(Acts 17:28)Creation is dependent on God for it’s very existence.

  • mattrick78 Cedar City, UT
    March 17, 2014 9:20 p.m.

    The priesthood is more than getting tickets to the Priesthood Session of General Conference. How soon are we going to see them line up to help with the home teaching?

  • Samuel Adams Layton, UT
    March 17, 2014 9:22 p.m.

    If President Monson makes the announcement at General Conference in April that he has gone to the Lord and the answer is no. What will OW movement do?
    4:19 p.m. March 17, 2014

    ========

    By the same token,
    What If President Monson makes the announcement at General Conference in April that he has gone to the Lord and the answer is YES. What would all the nay sayers do?

    I disagree with the reasoning stated above.
    President Monson does not need to make a big public showing/announcement any more than Elisha needed to come out and speak with Naaman (2 Kings 5). Elisha sent out a messenger. President Monson sent out a messenger. Naaman eventually followed what the prophet said. I pray OW does the same.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    March 17, 2014 9:51 p.m.

    I wonder what percentage of the comments, so far, are from men?

  • sba Aurora, CO
    March 17, 2014 11:00 p.m.

    The quote by Sister Kelly, that they are "faithful members of the church" strikes me as ironic, as faithful members seek inspiration to know that Thomas S. Monson is a prophet. If he is, there is no further discussion. The head of this church is the Lord, not man, and our prophet leads under His direction. These women, I'm sure, are good women of faith. But they do not fully understand that this is His church, not man's (or woman's). It is not a church that votes on doctrine. It is a church of faith, of personal revelation to confirm to us that our leaders are correct (not blind acceptance). But the bottom line is this: if it is truly the Lord's church, led by a living prophet of God, then the issue is a non-issue.

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    March 17, 2014 11:06 p.m.

    See, it's people inside the church who care most about potentially changing things. Those outside it generally don't care; if they take issue with it they just don't join that's all.

  • Aephelps14 San Luis Obispo, CA
    March 17, 2014 11:33 p.m.

    I have no idea whether women will ever have the priesthood, but what I do appreciate about Ordain Women is that they are asking questions and creating dialogue. I would have to disagree with the letter that they are somehow disrupting a "thoughtful discussion", they are just trying to raise awareness and assure that the issue is fresh in the minds of leaders. I honestly find it very refreshing that they are so open with their concerns. I appreciate so much about the LDS church, but within its culture, openness is not one of its stronger qualities. There is a lot of improvement to be had in making church a question/doubt friendly environment in which people can more deeply discuss ideas and have their knowledge of truth strengthened.

  • carlosbyu Provo, UT
    March 18, 2014 12:34 a.m.

    I don't have problems with women attending priesthood sessions. Actually to me that is a great idea. Obviously that does not mean that I agree with the ordination of women to the priesthood. I certainly do not agree with that, but I don't see any problem in allowing them to be with us in our priesthood meetings if they want to attend.

    Also, on the same note, I think that men should be welcome to Relief Society meetings if they want to attend. Obviously the RS meetings are for women but in general terms, nobody should be prohibited to attend any church meeting in the basis of gender differences.

  • prelax Murray, UT
    March 18, 2014 12:46 a.m.

    What if someone else knocks at the door, and asks that it cannot be opened?

    You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometime, you just might find, you get what you need.

  • Wonder Provo, UT
    March 18, 2014 1:08 a.m.

    Why are so many of the male posters on here complaining about presiding in meetings, home teaching and giving service as if they are the only gender who does either of these things? Ever heard of a Relief Society President or Primary President? Ever heard of visiting teaching? Ever heard of compassionate service given all the time by women in the Church? Sheesh, no wonder women are annoyed -- it's as if some of you have absolutely no clue that women do their fair share of service.

  • ClarkHippo Tooele, UT
    March 18, 2014 1:53 a.m.

    Is it a coincidence that simultaneously there are groups of people attempting the force the LDS Church to give women the priesthood and force them to allow same-sex marriage while at the same time others are suing the LDS Church in England for alleged fraud?

    Farewell freedom of religion.

  • jtmurphysr Germany, 00
    March 18, 2014 1:54 a.m.

    @Fred Vader
    I can see where you might consider my statement to be a judgement Fred, however I didn't declare anyone to be in apostasy, or void of the spirit. I didn't make any value statement about anyone spiritual worth or righteousness. I expressed my disappointment in a *behavior*. I don't consider that to be a judgement.

    You raise a valid point, regarding caution in agitating - and if in this Conference the Prophet of the Lord stands before the congregation and says he has taken this question to The Lord and the Lord's response was clearly "No." Then yes, that changes the landscape dramatically. However, we have not yet received that guidance, and until we do I say "agitate away."

    I'm curious about the foundation of your position that God will not be pestered... I think there's a pretty robust history of people "pestering" the Lord. I know I have one at least, and it's worked out ok for the first half-century plus. :)

    I think your guidance in caution for what we ask of our Heavenly Parents is valid in all causes, not just this one.

  • jtmurphysr Germany, 00
    March 18, 2014 2:07 a.m.

    There have been a few of you looking for the reference about President Hinckley and his statement regarding agitation. It was in an interview on Compass with David Ransom which aired in November, 1997.

    There is an exchange that begins with David asking President Hinckley about women holding the priesthood, and here is the relevant quote extraction. I'll post a URL below, but if you just Google 'COMPASS INTERVIEW WITH PRESIDENT GORDON B. HINCKLEY' you'll get it.

    RB: Is it possible that the rules could change in the future as the rules are on Blacks ?

    GBH: He could change them yes. If He were to change them that’s the only way it would happen.

    RB: So you’d have to get a revelation?

    GBH: Yes. But there’s no agitation for that....

    --------
    So that's a Prophet of the Lord indicating that there would need to be "agitation" before he sought revelation.

    It's a very enlightening interview, I think a lot of people in this conversation could gain from reading it in its entirety...

  • bamball Mesa, AZ
    March 18, 2014 3:04 a.m.

    As an elder, would it be okay if I pierced my ears and wore modified dangly Relief Society medallion earrings, to match my necklace? And yes, I know, only one per ear.

  • Max Charlotte, NC
    March 18, 2014 6:17 a.m.

    It is one thing to advocate for a change in church policy. I have done that myself and have succeeded. But these women are trying to change DOCTRINE and they will not succeed. Policy is from man, doctrine is from God.

  • CBAX Provo, UT
    March 18, 2014 6:19 a.m.

    Please ordain women. 50% less chance of me called to be elders quorum president!

    But wait, does this mean that I could be called to join relief society? Heck I i'll just turn it down, no big.

  • Cats Somewhere in Time, UT
    March 18, 2014 7:05 a.m.

    The Church will NOT bend to this.

    As a woman, I have no sympathy with this group.

  • morpunkt Glendora, CA
    March 18, 2014 7:11 a.m.

    It resembles to old Sonia Johnson years.

  • CDL Los Angeles, CA
    March 18, 2014 7:33 a.m.

    Surely the notion of asking and knocking pertains to righteous requests. God has set his doctrine and neither man nor woman can change that doctrine nor dictate to him what that doctrine should be. Those issues should be left in the world and our hearts should turn away from that. I've never felt discriminated against even as a missionary when the Elders stepped in to baptize our investigators. I suggest that prayer be the guide to gods will, and not the principles that the world dictates.

  • Alipate SAN BRUNO, CA
    March 18, 2014 7:50 a.m.

    "No unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing." We are in the last days, heretic groups like this will be a common occurance in the coming years.

  • weareight Midland, MI
    March 18, 2014 7:52 a.m.

    The author of chaos is never the Lord.

  • Sister McGoo Cushing, OK
    March 18, 2014 7:53 a.m.

    The Adversary has been selling the same lie to women for ages. That women need access to everything that men have. That women need to take everything from men. Boys schools, country clubs, boy scouts, etc... all the while praising the formation of exclusive girls and women's organizations like girls scouts and girls schools and women's colleges. This is hypocrisy typical of the adversary. If this were about equality, alongside the "Give us priesthood" signs would be "Disband the Sexist relief society" signs. But it isn't about equality, It's about the adversary destroying the fabric of our society by destroying the family unit, starting with fatherhood and men and their roles, and carrying women's roles along with it.

    I know the Ordained Women group feel like they're doing something noble, but they have been fooled by the adversary. They deserve our compassions and care.

  • 1.96 Standard Deviations OREM, UT
    March 18, 2014 7:55 a.m.

    jtmurphysr:

    How come you forgot to bring up Presiden't Hinckley's interview with Mike Wallace on 60 minutes on April 7, 1996? Here is a portion of the transcript:

    "Mike Wallace [voiceover, footage of people in church]: Now that blacks can be priests, the current issue is whether Mormon women will ever be priests.

    [Gordon B. Hinckley interview]

    Gordon B. Hinckley: Men hold the priesthood in this church.

    Mike Wallace: Why?

    Gordon B. Hinckley: Because God stated that it should be so. That was the revelation to the church. That was the way it was set forth."

    ....

    So, a prophet of God stated it was revelation to the church for men to hold the priesthood. That was the way it was set forth.

    The living church leaders today have re-emphasized this same thing. There are no excuses for the Ordain Women group -- they are out of order.

  • TA1 Alexandria, VA
    March 18, 2014 8:13 a.m.

    As I have said before about this topic - I am usually very liberal - but this is not the public square and in the confines of the Church - the Church is entitle to pursuit whatever action is deems correct.

    And (from the sightly numerous) "Men in Relief Society"????

  • Jamescmeyer Midwest City, USA, OK
    March 18, 2014 8:23 a.m.

    ("Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you"),"
    I'm not sure that's how it works. If I were to ask and knock for permission to, say, look at pornography, I would be asking and knocking until I could do so no longer.

    As for being "ready for the blessings and responsibilities of the priesthood."? I'm not sure that protesting the pattern and organization of the Church has ever been a valid indicator for prepardness in directing it by the priesthood.

    And finally, I wish people would stop trying to tell women that they're not valid or strong or important unless they do the same things men do.

  • Eliyahu Pleasant Grove, UT
    March 18, 2014 8:25 a.m.

    @LDS Liberal:
    "Shoveling the snow for all the widow's [sic] and disabled in the Ward, "
    Funny... I'm the one who does that in our Pleasant Grove neighborhood, and I'm not even LDS. Will that get me into the meetings? :)

    Seriously, I see little good coming out of a refusal to engage in serious dialog with the women who want the church to consider ordination for them. Suggestions that they be barred from Temple Square at a time when I, a Jew, could enter it freely shocks the conscience of the rest of us. Your church teaches that prophecy and revelation is an ongoing process, which means that a change in ordination is not out of the realm of possibility. Hence, treating those who advocate for it as second-class members only makes the church look bad to the rest of us. Who would want to join a church where peaceful petition for consideration of change make the petitioner a pariah?

  • Tekakaromatagi Dammam, Saudi Arabia
    March 18, 2014 8:30 a.m.

    Come to Priesthood Meeting and hear: "Brethren, you need to do better." Go to Relief Society and hear, "Sisters, you are doing just fine, keep up the good work!"

    I have always wanted to give a lesson in priesthood meeting and to bring a lace table cloth, a picture of the Lord, and a floral arrangement and announce, "Before I start, I want to thank my wife who helped me prepare the lesson today."

  • LittleStream Carson City, NV
    March 18, 2014 8:32 a.m.

    This feels so odd to me to be taking this position. When I was inactive in the 60's and 70's I was all for women's lib. Now that I have grown up (?) and hopefully become much wiser ( at least now I am very active and involved in my church and doing temple work.) I find myself wanting to ask these women do they REALLY support and sustain the general presidency, the stake presidency and their bishoprics? If the answer is yes, then why are they doing this? If the answer is no, then why are they still in the church, why aren't they in another church that does allow the women to hold the priesthood? I, for one, am extremely busy and fulfilled with my callings in the church. I feel honored that the priesthood sustains me enough to bless me with these callings. I've seen the enormous hours of service a Bishop puts in for his flock. I've followed the life of President Monson and we'll never know the untold hours of personal time he gave up with his family for the church. Really, women? Remember who you are!

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    March 18, 2014 8:37 a.m.

    @Clarkhippo
    There's a difference. People generally aren't trying to force the church itself to perform same-sex marriage, they just want to have the freedom of religion to do it in their own other churches (or without a church since not all marriages involve one). Ordain Women is a member-based group trying to change internal church policy. Outsiders generally don't care too much about what a church does, if they find something sexist their answer is just "well I just won't join that then".

  • ulvegaard Medical Lake, Washington
    March 18, 2014 8:43 a.m.

    I loved the part about not feeling that they belong in the same crowd as those who are protesting against the church, since they are Mormons in good standing and so on and so forth.

    Perhaps they are wanting a special area set aside for them to protest in labeled, "For faithful women protesting against church doctrine section only."

  • 1994 Cottonwood Hts., UT
    March 18, 2014 8:44 a.m.

    "And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron" (Heb 5:4). If these women understood even the very most basic elements of the Priesthood, they would know that those who seek honor, position and praise are last in the kingdom. The savior says in Luke 9:48 "For it is the one who is least among you all who is the greatest." Mark 8:35 Jesus says, "Anyone who wants to be first must be the very last, and the servant of all." These sisters are missing the boat altogether. They claim that they want to serve but they want it on THEIR terms. They say it is not about publicity yet they release statements to the press. They say that they are not opposed to the Church or its leadership, yet they refuse to receive counsel from them. If they truly honored the Priesthood, they would know that it cannot be demanded, only bestowed. Those who openly SEEK position, (whether Bishop, Stake President, General Authority or even Sunday School teacher) are not appointed; rather these assignments come as calls from the Lord's servants through inspiration.

  • skeptic Phoenix, AZ
    March 18, 2014 8:48 a.m.

    Why is it that it is always tha haves (in this case the men) who are always telling.the have nots (the women) why they can not have it and how it is bad for them. The right thing to do is to give it to them, and if they don't like it they can give it back. And if the men can join the Women's Relief Society and make it a better society then good for them, and the church. Amen.

  • Kaladin Greeley, CO
    March 18, 2014 8:49 a.m.

    I believe that it would be a disaster to give women the priesthood. This is why - men would fall away from the church in droves. We are weak. If I didn't feel the weight of the duty of my priesthood, I hope I wouldn't, but might fall into dangerous paths. I stay faithful not only because I have a testimony, but because my wife and kids need me to stay faithful. Look at the churches with women in the priesthood. How many men attend those churches compared the the LDS Church? I understand that women need to feel needed as well. They ARE. What would a ward be without the Relief Society? But we men are weak and really need to feel a sense of duty. That is why, as some other posters have mentioned, the priesthood session is so often a kick in the pants compared to the Relief Society meetings. If anything I have always found in the church that women are revered and respected, never put down. We need this sisters.

  • Abinadis friend Boise, Idaho
    March 18, 2014 8:53 a.m.

    Those of us Sisters who are faithful members of the Church realize that the Lord has set forth his rules regarding who should have the Priesthood. Sisters have responsibilities in the church different than the members of the Priesthood, just as we have different responsibilities as women. If the Lord gives the direction to admit Sisters into the Priesthood the Prophet will be directed. Why would any sister demand that they have the right to be ordained into the Priesthood. It is the Lord who makes that decision. No amount of demonstration will change what
    he, the Lord Jesus Christ has directed.

  • WRK Riverton, UT
    March 18, 2014 8:55 a.m.

    I think it comes down to obedience.

    For example, don't touch that hot stove. But I want to touch that hot stove, why can't I touch that hot stove, because it is not obeying. Forget that fact that it will hurt you (spiritually by not listening to the spirit because you are busy promoting a cause in opposition to what we are taught by a sustained leader of the church), but bottom line you are not being obedient. Not to man, but to God (who is Man by the way).
    Even when the blacks did not hold the priesthood, they did not protest, but patiently waited until the day that had been fortold them came to pass.
    I do not know of any scriptures that fortells of the day that women will hold the priesthood. I see in the scriptures that there are prophetesses but not preistesses (big diference).
    Oh that "Ordain Women had as their motto: We belive..." but aparently they do not...

  • dmcvey Los Angeles, CA
    March 18, 2014 8:56 a.m.

    Kind of seems like, if the purpose of this group is to advocate for ordaining women, them protesting is the dialogue--it doesn't detract because if they weren't there the church could just ignore them. Not that the church is paying any real attention to them at all. The only reason they are addressing this is that the protests embarrass them.

  • Just one more opinion Pleasant Grove, UT
    March 18, 2014 9:16 a.m.

    This comment is intended to be only half-serious with a dash of humor, but I keep getting the image of people on Judgment Day arguing with God on why they don't think they deserve their "final reward", and when they don't get what they want they threaten to go to mom! She'll understand. (You guys can decided which Mom is being referred to.) Hey, if people are comfortable with telling him how he should be doing things, I don't have any difficulty imagining people trying to argue their way into Heaven.

    (Sorry if this is a re-post, there seems to be a problem with submitting.

  • ny's amy jo Rochester, NY
    March 18, 2014 9:26 a.m.

    When I see these things I am saddened. I cannot understand how a woman can protest and demand they be ordained to the priesthood, but at the same time insist they are the church! They certainly are not representative of the scriptural doctrines, or the restored gospel that I cherish. While I love them as my sisters in Christ, they do not represent me or my beliefs in any way. I can only hope and pray they do not detract from the holy and sacred assembly of the prophets, seers and revelators coming in April.

  • grandmagreat Lake Havasu City, AZ
    March 18, 2014 9:29 a.m.

    This group brings tears to my eyes. Why are some women so easily lead astray. I have served in many callings in the church since my baptism almost 80 years ago, and am greatful for the Priesthood that has led us and blessed us with their service. I am wondering if this group of women have ever completed a Service project. Cared for the Sick, fed the hungry or really been "sisters' to the other millions of LDS women. We do not need the responsibiilty of the Priesthood, perhaps they do not understand what it is all about, but are easily led astray from what they have been taught. My prayers are with them that they will spend their time serving others, rather than not loving, and understanding the gospel as given to the Prophet Joseph Smith.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    March 18, 2014 9:33 a.m.

    A little LDS Church History lesson for you to consider...

    Those who think God never changes,
    That things will NEVER change,
    That are Close-Minded,

    Ususally --
    Apostasize and leave the Church when a reverse course is announced.
    [They say the Prophet is a Fallen Prophet.]

    Kirtland Bank,
    Polygamy,
    Blacks and the Priesthood,
    etc.

    Don't be so stiff necked, and close minded --
    That if the Prophet ever does declare that the Lord had revealed a change --
    even a complete 180 in course...

    Women and the Priesthood,
    or
    Gay Marriage...

    My advise to you is the same as it has been for nearly 200 years.
    Follow the Prophet.

  • scotchipman Lehi, UT
    March 18, 2014 9:37 a.m.

    Women in the Mormon church DO get the priesthood at their second anointing, problem with that is very few women in the church will receive their second anointing. There is NO reason why women should not be given the priesthood just like the men in the church.

  • Abbygirl East Carbon, UT
    March 18, 2014 9:46 a.m.

    I don't understand why?? Is it not enough that we have Relief Society? Is it not enough that as women of the church we have a very significant role in the church as it is? I would not want any of the responsibilities that my husband or any man carries within the church.. there is a order.. a order I love and respect. Seriously, I feel sorry for these women, that what they have is not enough, for surely the Lord has us where we need to be!

  • Lilalips Attleboro, MA
    March 18, 2014 9:54 a.m.

    The Church may not be ready to ordain women, but maybe some of the policies could be reviewed to show more respect for a woman's abilities to lead and to develop more intellectual skills besides those needed to maintain a home. In our Ward, the Young Women had a very successful fund raiser for girls camp that the whole ward looked forward to every year. The fundraiser was taken over by the Cub Scouts leaving my daughters with a very uneasy feeling about their value and worth. We say that women are so important and then we things like this happen that send very mixed messages. I could go on and on but I'm sure all that are reading this have their own stories like that.

  • JonathanPDX Portland, Oregon
    March 18, 2014 9:57 a.m.

    "Ordination of women to the priesthood is a matter of doctrine that is contrary to the Lord’s revealed organization for his church."

    One cannot get much plainer that that. There is no need for the Church to change its doctrine because a small group of people think they are being unfairly left out of things. That very reason is why there are so many thousands of niche splinter groups professing to teach their version of the gospel, but with a "special twist" that appeals to the itching ears of a few.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    March 18, 2014 9:59 a.m.

    dmcvey,

    "Kind of seems like, if the purpose of this group is to advocate for ordaining women, them protesting is the dialogue..."
    ______________________________

    Absolutely. But it’s an unpleasantness that Church leadership doesn’t know how to counter other than to dismiss the protest as counterproductive. It's no secret that the necessity for priesthood authority is central to Mormon belief. We will see gender equality only when women no longer have to fight for the same status that men take for granted.

  • trueblue75 USA, NC
    March 18, 2014 10:08 a.m.

    The suggestion that RS Pres sit up front during mtgs is bizarre to me!!! When I was RS President, the last thing I wanted to do on Sunday was sit up front (I did that in RS mtg)...I wanted to sit with my family (just as, I'm sure most Bishops would rather do.)... I guess there are people who are always looking at changing things rather than perhaps doing, serving, lengthening their strides in ways of helping the Lord's kingdom grow...after all isn't that what it is all about "bringing all to Christ"? Follow His Prophet!!!;-)

  • Wowwie US, CA
    March 18, 2014 10:18 a.m.

    Do we not raise our hand twice a year to sustain the First Presidency as prophets, seers, and revelators? They are God's mouthpiece and we must have faith that they are leading divinely leading the church. I believe that the priesthood is given to men only for the purpose of keeping families together. Satan's sole purpose is to destroy families, and by demanding to have the priesthood enables women to raise children without the husband/father. The men need the priesthood to keep them on the path, we women need the men as our husbands and fathers to help righteously raise our families. I encourage these women to have faith that God knows all and that His church is being directed in accordance to His will, not ours.

  • crimendelsiglo Spanish Fork, UT
    March 18, 2014 10:24 a.m.

    by abt the 2nd Century A.D. the Church of Jesus Christ was well into apostasy. The Church today is nearly 184 years established.

    Articles of Faith 5-6-7-8 BUT especially 9 are critical to maintenance of the Lord's Church

    excommunication for polygamy. excommunication for those who preach another GOSPEL until the will of the Lord is revealed

    i fear for the church members for the wolves in sheep images; we have no comprehension what trials we will face in just a few years. we need to be guided in the wilderness for 40 years to become clean

    FOLLOW THE PROPHETS

  • Shuzzie53 HAYWARD, CA
    March 18, 2014 10:30 a.m.

    Women getting the Priesthood? Ain't. Gonna. Happen. Girls, you just don't get it, do you?

  • sharrona layton, UT
    March 18, 2014 10:32 a.m.

    RE: Open Minded Mormon, My advise to you is the same as it has been for nearly 200 years.

    The LDS Church's title has not always had Christ's name since its foundation on April 6, 1830. The D& C 20:1 “the original name of the church was the "Church of Christ."

    In 1834, the name was changed to "The Church of Latter-day Saints" (H of C 2:63). This took place at a priesthood conference at which Joseph Smith was present. The vote was unanimous. Note that the name of Christ was completely omitted.

    This was the church's official title until April 26, 1838 when it was changed again to its current name.

    If we use the rule found in 3 Nephi 27,are we then to assume that the church that Paul addresses in 1 Thess 1:1 was in a state of apostasy? "the church of the Thessalonians"! Also "the church of God which is at Corinth" (See 1 Cor 1:2).

  • jimhale Eugene, OR
    March 18, 2014 10:33 a.m.

    The priesthood is not conferred on the basis of ability but rather on the basis of assignment.

    When women ask to be ordained, they are in effect asking for a new assignment. Men don't get to do that. Why should women?

    Now - there is equality for you.

    The basic problem here is that some women do not see or feel the importance of their natural assignment. Nor do they want to acknowledge that there is any difference due to gender.

    We are here to learn obedience not to set the rules.

    For every man who is made a bishop, many worthy men sitting nearby are not. Some of them are equally able and available. Nevertheless, they all raise their hands to sustain the one who was....called of God, by prophecy, and the laying on of hands.

    Most of us are in this Church because we believe that is how that works....even when we are not called....as well as when we are.

  • jimhale Eugene, OR
    March 18, 2014 10:36 a.m.

    The priesthood is not conferred on the basis of ability but rather on the basis of assignment.

    When women ask to be ordained, they are in effect asking for a new assignment. Men don't get to do that. Why should women?

    Now - there is equality for you.

    The basic problem here is that some women do not see or feel the importance of their natural assignment. Nor do they want to acknowledge that there is any difference due to gender.

    We are here to learn obedience not to set the rules.

    For every man who is made a bishop, many worthy men sitting nearby are not. Some of them are equally able and available. Nevertheless, they all raise their hands to sustain the one who was....called of God, by prophecy, and the laying on of hands.

    Most of us are in this Church because we believe that is how that works....even when we are not called....as well as when we are.

  • Cinci Man FT MITCHELL, KY
    March 18, 2014 10:40 a.m.

    The article indicates several changes in the church in recent years pertaining to women. Those changes came about by thoughtful dialog between the brethren and distinguished women of the church. Can this group lay claim to any input to the changes? Perhaps the answer to that question might lead them to understand that they are detractors, not sincere contributors to the discussion. I take that back. These ladies do not listen. They are not capable of dialog. Somehow they believe that Matthew 7:7 was written to instruct them to keep on knocking. It's amazing how these ladies reach for that one.

  • Anti Bush-Obama Chihuahua, 00
    March 18, 2014 10:53 a.m.

    Open minded Mormon

    No man can serve two masters. A double minded man is unstable in all his ways. It's not a matter of GOD changing it's a matter of people not being ready for something. If the church would allow Gay Marriage and Ordination of Women it would make God a hypocrite and the Prophet a fraud.

  • crimendelsiglo Spanish Fork, UT
    March 18, 2014 10:56 a.m.

    ---- scotchipman ---- am i the only one who doesn't know what your are talking abt ? do women receive receive a first anointing; do men ? what is this first or second anointing you mention. ARE you trying to obfuscate and create more havoc by innuendo ?

  • Anti Bush-Obama Chihuahua, 00
    March 18, 2014 10:58 a.m.

    I however don't believe in 'free speech zones' because they are a product of tyranny. If they want to advocate their agenda to secularize the church on church property, let them.

  • Holger Roy, Utah
    March 18, 2014 11:04 a.m.

    Follow God, follow His Prophet. Follow His Prophet follow God. If they don't want to keep their covenants then let them have their own church, do as they please and go where it will take them and everyone knows were that is.

  • let's roll LEHI, UT
    March 18, 2014 11:06 a.m.

    My pledge:

    I will not categorize, label or question the motives of women who are in this movement. As in all movements, motives are individual and vary. Some are no doubt sincere, some may have other motives.

    I will continue to welcome all to participate in the Church since I understand its purpose to be to help us all draw closer to Christ, whatever our individual strengths and struggles.

    I will continue to work on my individual discipleship and do my best to love, aid, and assist others in their spiritual quest, pointing myself and others to Christ.

  • CougarBlue Heber City, UT
    March 18, 2014 11:13 a.m.

    Sister Kelly is take Matthew 7 out of context. Also, you cannot serve two masters. You cannot raise your hand to sustain the prophet as God's spokesman, and then demand that he needs to change the way the Church operates because you think Women should have the priesthood. Those are two contradictory points of view. You sustain him then follow him. To do otherwise is to become an apostate.

    As far as a Relief Society President sitting on the stand like a Bishop, you do not see the Elder's Quorum President or the High Priest Group Leader sitting on the stand as the Bishop does.

    IF these sisters keep it up they will be out of the church and then they can go to one of the other denominations and be ordained there.

    When Sister Kelly says they are not demonstrating against the Church, but faithful members and should be allowed to be on the Church property to voice their concerns she does not understand she "is" protesting against the Church and its revealed practice of ordaining only men to the Priesthood.

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    March 18, 2014 11:13 a.m.

    This would be a lot simpler if this was a church where becoming a priest/bishop/etc was a choice like in most other Christian denominations, then the ramifications of such a change would feel a lot more...optional. But in this one if you have the right anatomy and reach a certain age then you're expected to have it (whether one does is a different matter of course) and that shifts the dynamic.

    @jimhale
    "Nor do they want to acknowledge that there is any difference due to gender."

    Should we restrict women from becoming President of the nation? Keep them from being CEOs? Would that be considered sexist?

  • Holger Roy, Utah
    March 18, 2014 11:22 a.m.

    James 1:17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning". In other words God does not change nor does His Son Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday and today and forever". Follow God is to follow His Son to follow His Son is to follow the Prophet. If one does not want to follow then start your own church and go where it will take you and every faithful saint knows where that is.

  • Justaregulargirl Murray, UT
    March 18, 2014 11:26 a.m.

    I haven't said anything about this before but these "pants wearing to church" feminists are driving me crazy. Wear pants. No one cares if you do. Outside of Utah all sorts of things "go" for clothing at church because people wear what they have and are really going to WORSHIP The Lord, not to make a statement.

    Also, women have always been able to read the talks from the priesthood session. There's no big secret there. Now you can watch it live online or KBYU. Watch the priesthood session. No one cares if you do. But I care when you try and speak for me so stop saying all the women of the church want to be ordained to the priesthood. Speak for yourself. I feel you truly do not understand what the power of God on the earth is for nor how it blesses you as a member of the human race. The priesthood is not to bless the holder but its blessings are available to all. (And really, I don't want to be a priesthood holder for sooo many reasons).

  • Willem Los Angeles, CA
    March 18, 2014 11:31 a.m.

    Disgusting! Women are our wives, daughters, mother in laws (helas) they deserve all the same rigths and benefits that we men enjoy.
    Lets get with it,we lDS members need to show the world that their are no second class citizens !

  • sanpaco Sandy, UT
    March 18, 2014 11:32 a.m.

    I find it ironic that a group dedicated to getting authority for women in the Church refuses to recognize the authority that The Church gave Sister Moody in writing this letter on its behalf.

  • Czuch Norris Centennial, CO
    March 18, 2014 11:49 a.m.

    I'm not sure what the fuss about the priesthood is all about. Has the Lord promised a smaller amount of salvation to women if they don't have the priesthood? If that's the case, I'll jump out on the front lines with OW. I don't want to be in Heaven if I can't be there with my wife.

    On the other hand, if the Lord has promised equal rewards to women and men, then why do these women feel that the duties which have been laid out for their salvation aren't the right duties for them? Seems like a fundamental lack of trust in the Lord's promises.

  • Star Bright Salt Lake City, Ut
    March 18, 2014 12:03 p.m.

    When men can bare babies, then I'll think about the Priesthood. Why do we all have to have the same talents, etc?

  • texasangel Ballinger, Tx
    March 18, 2014 12:14 p.m.

    But for those of us ladies who have been or are single moms with no priesthood in the home or a father who honors it or has it- what about tickets for us - so we can bring our sons to this.....

  • Holger Roy, Utah
    March 18, 2014 12:22 p.m.

    Women of the Church, you want to hold the Priesthood, go home and hold/hug your husband, enjoy!!

  • wer South Jordan, UT
    March 18, 2014 12:25 p.m.

    They are "faithful"?

    Just like numerous people throughout history-what God willingly grants is not enough. They want notoriety. It's like other churches that pass the collection plate-"to be seen of men".

  • WRK Riverton, UT
    March 18, 2014 12:35 p.m.

    @jimhale, I wish I could hit like a bunch of times. That is very well put and I will be using that analogy to explain this to quite a few people I know.

  • WRK Riverton, UT
    March 18, 2014 12:48 p.m.

    @texasangel, What about those of us who have handicaped children that will never see them play in the sun in this life. I guess I will have to believe and have faith that in the next life, which I know will be, I will see her dance and play and I will not complain that it is not fair that I don't get to see it in this life.

  • cindy56k TOK, AK
    March 18, 2014 1:02 p.m.

    Thomas S Monson is the Prophet under Jesus Christ himself. These women are acting as if they need equality with men, the Priesthood is sacred to those of us who try daily to live the gospel. They should stop this and become the daughters of god they are supposed to be. Follow the Savior and do his work, not your own.

  • HeresAThought Queen Creek, AZ
    March 18, 2014 1:06 p.m.

    Our Father's house is a house of order. He created the genders and their unique roles long before this earth was here. He understands these roles perfectly, and while they are different, one is no less important than the other. The earth, its plants, animals, and human occupants are all subject to eternal laws that uphold that order, and the priesthood is most certainly a part of His plan. It fell to the males to bear the responsibility of holding that power, but also to remain worthy to use it. It is non-transferable to the opposite sex, just as carrying a child from conception to birth is impossible for a male.

    These meetings are special for us, as are the relief society and young womens' sessions. To detract from that special time as we separate into our "quorums" is not a step forward, but a disruption to the holy order of our Father.

  • The Caravan Moves On Enid, OK
    March 18, 2014 1:17 p.m.

    Article quotes:

    1 - "Moody said ......... Ordination of women to the priesthood is a matter of doctrine that is contrary to the Lord’s revealed organization for His church."

    2 - "In October, women with the Ordain Women group approached the priesthood meeting and entered the stand-by line, which his for people without tickets. They left when they were denied entry. Ordain Women spokeswoman Kate Kelly said Monday morning the group would repeat the process on April 5. "We're going to continue to ask and knock as we are are told to do in Matthew 7:7."

    No, you are not "asking" or "knocking". You are being disobedient to God. How convenient that those who support this group, male or female, do not discuss this:

    "What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the SAME." - Doctrine and Covenants 1:38

    Why doesn't this group mention THIS scripture?

    .

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    March 18, 2014 1:18 p.m.

    Kaladin
    Greeley, CO

    I stay faithful not only because I have a testimony, but because my wife and kids need me to stay faithful.

    ...we men are weak and really need to feel a sense of duty.

    8:49 a.m. March 18, 2014

    -------

    Amen to that!

    IMHO -
    That was beautiful, and makes the most sense of all the posts so far.

    Thanks

  • bj-hp Maryville, MO
    March 18, 2014 1:21 p.m.

    There is need for clarification here. A poster mentioned that the priesthood is given upon certain ages and times. This is partially true. For instance deacons are ordained generally at 12, teachers at 14 and priest at 16. Elders are generally ordained at 18 if going on a mission. Now the kicker is that to advance any where in the priesthood is a matter of worthiness. Each young man must have an interview with the Bishop semi-annually and their worthiness is discussed at this time. Nothing automatic about it.

    For one to become a member of the Melchezidek Priesthood one goes through much of the same thing. The big difference is that the individual has an interview with the Bishop and a member of the Stake Presidency. Again nothing automatic. I've seen where an individual is cleared by the Bishop but denied advancement by the Stake Presidency. Many of the questions asked pertains to the worthiness of the individual and are much the same as receiving a temple recommend. I can state emphatically that if the young man discloses and sexual sins in any of these interviews he will be denied advancement until he is deemed worthy of advancement.

  • The Caravan Moves On Enid, OK
    March 18, 2014 1:22 p.m.

    @ lawguy - TAYLORSVILLE, UT - "It's disheartening to hear how many of you want the OW supporters to just "leave the church." I always thought that we were a missionary minded church that was trying to bring people INTO the fold of Christ, not an exclusive social club that is trying to enforce doctrinal litmus tests in order to kick out otherwise believing members if they don't happen to agree on every single doctrine or policy."

    Whoa! Back up the truck! Nobody is saying they "want" those who are protesting for women to hold the Priesthood to leave the LDS church. We are merely saying (if the moderators will allow it) that "if" these people don't change their attitude, they will find themselves out of the Church. Nothing more, nothing less.

    Powerful words, true. However, the Savior himelf said "if you are not for me, you are against me". WE did not draw that line in the sand, Jesus Christ did.

  • greatbam22 andrews afb, MD
    March 18, 2014 1:25 p.m.

    3rd Nephi 11: 28- 30

    "28 ...And there shall be no disputations among you, as there have hitherto been; neither shall there be disputations among you concerning the points of my doctrine, as there have hitherto been.

    29 For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another.

    30 Behold, this is not my doctrine, to stir up the hearts of men with anger, one against another; but this is my doctrine, that such things should be done away."

  • sfcretdennis Nice, CA
    March 18, 2014 1:33 p.m.

    Someone please till me if during the time of Christ did Christ ordain women to the Priesthood? If don't then if you believe in this church and in a modern day prophet then you know that God well not do things that his children what. We do as he says and as we say.

    As fair as I am concerned this women who clam to be members but protesting because they have not the Priesthood do not believe in the words of our Prophet.

    Like I said God well do as he pleases not as we please and it is for us to follow his will not our own. I wish I could know the joys of growing life in my belly, but I can not I am a man and that honor is for women not men.

  • 1covey Salt Lake City, UT
    March 18, 2014 1:45 p.m.

    An historical note; it was not public pressure that induced President Kimball to seek guidance from God concerning the Blacks holding the Priesthood. It was concern over properly ministering to the large number of people of Black descent coming into the Church. Public agitation tends to foment agitation on both sides of issues, as is noticed in the preceeding comments. Let's strive for calm discussion, seek communication.

  • Mark Davis Austin, TX
    March 18, 2014 1:49 p.m.

    The Ordain Women movement is a fascinating challenge to the institutional church's stated policy of distributing instruction to its members in the form of revelation, rather than in response to feedback from its members. On the one hand the church is admitting that these groups have influence on Church policy, but at the same time the leaders want to maintain the control that comes with being disseminators of truth and not negotiators between conservative norms and changing modern social conditions. Seems that the above letter has and will only encouraged groups like this in their efforts, even as the church seeks to downplay and marginalize their existence by actions like this.

    If they ever start calling it a "policy"...

  • John Wilson Idaho Falls, 00
    March 18, 2014 1:54 p.m.

    This all reminds me of Sonja Johnson and the Equal Rights Amendment. Ms. Johnson went off of the deep end when she didn't get her way and paid a huge price for it in losing her family. I suggest the women behind "Ordain Women" look into the life of Ms. Johnson to see what their future likely will be if they continue down their path.

  • The Caravan Moves On Enid, OK
    March 18, 2014 2:05 p.m.

    Unfortunately there is the beginnings of dissension within the LDS church. Joseph Smith lost about 1/3 of his followers in the days after the bank failure in Kirtland. Does anyone think that such dissension simply 'cannot' happen again? Now, I don't want that, but you only have to see the 225+ comments to see the beginnings of it is there. Again, I don't want that, but to say it does not exist is unwise, at best.

    If people "choose" to leave, that is their choice. I don't wish them ill. But....I can't let them drive off a cliff without trying to warn my fellow brothers and sisters; I care too much about them.

    Personally, I'm staying. Forever. I've told my kids they can leave if they wish but they're not taking me with them. I know too much to leave.

    The Lord's gospel will continue to grow until it fills the earth. But, open your eyes.... just like in the Lord's time and Joseph's day, there will be temporary difficulties. Homosexual 'marriage', blacks/the Priesthood, women/the Priesthood, our history and polygamy = challenges to the testimonies of some.

    Keep the faith!

  • CB Salt Lake City, UT
    March 18, 2014 2:30 p.m.

    Spent the last hour reading all the comments, agreeing with many, laughing at others. But this is not a laughing matter. Unfortunately there will be some girls/women whose testimonies are fragile
    and will fall victim to their diatribe.
    Eve was beguiled by Satan, Adam was not. Watching Judge Judy convinces me that the beguiling of women appears to be an ongoing problem for them, even today.
    The wife/mother of any worthy Priesthood holder will be doubly blessed, once by that son/husband and second by her Heavenly Father. A mother is the heart of her home, a position I prefer to that of being it's head.
    And by the way, I think what we see here of earth is much what it was like in our pre-existant
    home, and if there was ever a choice of our gender, we were the one's to make it since God respects our free agency. This is a matter of deciding if you are on the Lord's side.

  • jimhale Eugene, OR
    March 18, 2014 4:12 p.m.

    In this Church, we do not request assignments, though we volunteer when asked. We can decline an assignment, but not one. We can propose, but not dispose.

    That's true at the highest level.

    Once, after attending a funeral for a President of the Church in the Tabernacle, I followed the funeral procession to the cemetery. After the grave was dedicated, as hundreds in the crowd turned to leave, I overheard a young woman ask an awkward question of two members of the Quorum of the Twelve.

    She said, "How does it feel to know that you may be one step closer to becoming President of the Church.

    One Apostle turned to the other (who, not coincidentally, was senior) and asked if he wanted to answer. The second Apostle smiled and said "No, you go ahead."

    The first Apostle then said, "Young Sister, how would you feel to know that you might be one step closer to having your life snuffed out so that someone else can be President of the Church."

    They smiled at her and went their way. Neither was ever President.

    I think we should be careful what we wish for.

  • SLCMom Salt Lake City, UT
    March 18, 2014 4:27 p.m.

    I enjoyed this article. It was well researched, well written and well balanced. Thank you, DesNews. I couldn't agree more with the statement that "women are denied nothing in this church". Amen! I am truly amazed at all of the wonderful changes and modifications lately to encourage our women and young women to serve and lead in even greater capacity. The new General Women's Meeting is now completely equal to the General Priesthood Meeting. The Church has bent over backwards to be kind, considerate, patient with "Ordain Women" and to actually personally acknowledge them with an official letter. But still, they insist on complaining. Nothing will satisfy people who carry a grudge. These sisters, need to choose if they want to follow the prophet and leaders and accept the Church as it is, or choose to leave. It's that simple. They need to stop pretending that they "represent" anyone other than themselves.

  • Twin Sister LINDON, UT
    March 18, 2014 4:55 p.m.

    "We feel as faithful, active Mormon women we have nothing in common with people who oppose the church and want to protest against it," she said. "The church is its members. We aren't against the church, we are the church."

    The sister who made this statement has fooled herself into believing that what she is promoting regarding women being ordained to the priesthood is not rebellion. Indeed, she and others who support their position are attempting to counsel God rather than to take counsel from Him through his appointed prophet, President Thomas S. Monson. These individuals are walking on shaky ground with regard to their church membership. They are not the church and they have much in common "with those people who oppose the church and want to protest against it." I hope they will see the error in their thinking and reconsider their position and rejoin the mainstream of the church.

  • bj-hp Maryville, MO
    March 18, 2014 5:24 p.m.

    Too many people think it was pressure or a law that ended the ban or African Americans or polygamy. Read carefully and you will see that not all blacks were banned from the priesthood but only those of African descent. Polygamy didn't end because of a law but because it was time to end. Same-sex marriage is against the doctrine of marriage and thus will probably never be accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. It does in effect destroy the eternal family.

    As for those who decry discrimination please remember the Lord discriminated when he declared that only Aaron and his sons could hold the Priesthood of Aaron. That meant only those who are descendants of Aaron (Levites) would hold this priesthood. When it was restored it was stated that not until the sons of Levi bring offerings will the Aaronic Priesthood be removed again. That of course means worthy Levites, not just any Levite. This holds true again when the priesthood was banned from African Americans. It wasn't until the revelation was received by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve. Revelation ended these practices.

  • momw payson, UT
    March 18, 2014 6:30 p.m.

    I am so saddened that these women can't see clearly how we as women are blessed by the priesthood. It comes across a bit ungrateful to our Heavenly Father for not appreciating a woman's divine roll and not appreciating a man's divine roll. At any given time, I can ask my husband for a blessing...and through this I see that our Heavenly Father actually gave His daughters more. If women held the Priesthood then what would men do...give up? The Priesthood blesses a man to bless his children and develop his roll as father.... this brings him closer to his children. As a Mother I am grateful for the closeness I gain to my children through nurturing them from conception on. This is not a competition...this is a family and within the family unit we have what we need to succeed!

  • sharrona layton, UT
    March 18, 2014 7:10 p.m.

    @greatbam223rd Nephi 11:29 For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another??

    (Jude 1:3) exhort you that ye should earnestly ccontend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. The Danger of False Teachers ie…

    Mormons claim their authority comes from the priesthood, what they fail to realize is that do not have the right to hold any of them. The Aaronic or Levitical priesthood ended with the death of Christ. The entire function ,and the term Cohen means, ’one who stands up for another, and mediate the cause.” Before the *Great Sacrifice ,the priest had to stand in the gap for the people and offer animal sacrifices. Do Mormons still carry out this function. No! Therefore their office is insignificant.

  • Brahmabull sandy, ut
    March 18, 2014 7:37 p.m.

    Caravan

    "What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the SAME." - Doctrine and Covenants 1:38

    You quote this scripture as an absolute. You can't do that, if god's word was absolute then no doctrine would ever change. Doctrines have changed over the years. Examples: word of wisdom - practice and adherence- , polygamy, blacks and the priesthood. etc. You don't speak for god. How do you know that someday women will not hold the priesthood again. That's right, again. They held it in the early days of the church, they gave blessings with the laying on of hands under direction from their leaders. Why then, if god doesn't change, can they not still do these things? It is too easy to use that scripture when you think you are right and on god's side, but dismiss that scripture in the face of the many changes in doctrine over the years. You can't have it both ways.

  • Int'l Businessman SLO, CA
    March 18, 2014 8:24 p.m.

    Deborah held the priesthood, and apparently was pretty successful. At least in that one instance giving a woman a seat at the table didn't hurt anything.

  • FelisConcolor North Salt Lake, UT
    March 18, 2014 8:26 p.m.

    Giving women the priesthood would severely damage, if not completely split, the LDS church. Then again, for these women that's probably the goal.

    Looking at the experience of mainstream Protestant churches over the past 50 years one finds that as soon as women took over positions of authority and leadership, men -- especially young single men -- headed en masse for the exits. Surveys show men perceive churches to be primarily feminine institutions; a lack of male leadership only reinforces that belief. Today in most mainstream Christian congregations, women outnumber men nearly two to one.

    Mormonism has remained vital during the recent decline in religious belief in part because LDS men, and in particular, LDS fathers have remained involved and committed to the church. Take way those opportunities to serve by giving women the priesthood and you take away much of the incentive for men to show up every week.

    Perhaps this explains why surveys show more LDS women are hostile to the idea of women being ordained than men; they seem to understand that when a woman becomes bishop, most men will choose to spend their Sundays worshiping at the Church of Pro Sports.

  • Kelliebelle66 West Jordan, UT
    March 18, 2014 9:14 p.m.

    To these women their main concern is ego and power. What they completely miss is that the priesthood power is about serving and working for the benefit of the church, it's members, and our fellow men, not exercising power over people. Women have opportunities in the church to serve as well. I often wonder if any of these women have been to the temple and participated in the priesthood ordinances there. Women do not have to be ordained to do that. When we make our covenants in the temple men and women are promised the same exact blessings. Men aren't told you are going to have everything and women will be nothing. They are exalted together. When I made covenants and was sealed to my husband in the temple we were both made the same covenants and were promised amazing blessings in return if we keep those covenants. I read somewhere where one woman suggested that the female auxiliary presidents sit on the stand with the bishopric. I thought I wouldn't have wanted to do that because I want to sit with my family. To them it's all about recognition and prestige.

  • CanuckBombarde Edmonton, 00
    March 18, 2014 9:44 p.m.

    Bravo to the courageous women of “Ordain Women.” There are many of us outside of Utah and who are not LDS that applaud your efforts. As the early Saints knew, the path is not always easy, but in the end, justice will prevail. You are doing your church a great service. In the words of Joseph Townsend from an LDS hymn: “There's the right and the wrong to every question; Be safe through inspiration's power.” Time will certainly prove your inspiration and validate your efforts.

  • thornfield Ames, IA
    March 18, 2014 10:02 p.m.

    Seeking for position and visibility through demonstration, and disregarding civil requests from the Church, reveals the true motivation for this group of women. We know how the Lord feels about those who seek for position: "...their hearts are set so much upon the things of this world, and aspire to the honors of men, that they do not learn this one lesson - that the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness." (D&C 121:35-36) It's a slippery slope, sisters. Please do not be deceived.

  • Bob K portland, OR
    March 19, 2014 3:00 a.m.

    A completely "outside" observation:

    Some women would undoubtedly be better than many men, as is true in most endeavors.
    --- so if talent and capability triumph, those women would want to use what God gave them, and they would feel they have the right to do so.

    Gently, the lds church dates from the early-mid 19th Century. Perhaps a LITTLE bit of asking whether some of the doctrines came from the standards of those times, and are not necessarily how God's word would be interpreted today, might be good.

    Some commenters' treating the women in question as if they were the same as the Federal Troops threatening Utah to force the end of polygamy seems to me somewhat less than Christian, and less than appropriate.

    God and Jesus are constant -- but man's understanding of them and their wishes ought to evolve a bit with the times.

    These women are God's children and loyal to your church, not your enemies.

  • Mayfair City, Ut
    March 19, 2014 5:36 a.m.

    I have read all 12 pages of these comments.

    My admiration for the many posters who see through this group's intentions and actions and have written eloquently about it.

    If these OW sisters truly feel the need for the Priesthood and had undertaken this correctly, they would have taken it up with He whose business it is to give the Priesthood, in prayer.

    And the the attendees to Conference walking past their demonstrations--and the Desert News--and the blogosphere--and The New York Times (or anyone else) would know nothing about it.

    Only God would know.

  • Twin Sister LINDON, UT
    March 19, 2014 8:35 a.m.

    @ Int'l Businessman

    Deborah from the Book of Judges in the Old Testament did not hold the priesthood. She prophesied under the inspiration of the Spirit and with that inspiration helped guide the children of Israel for a period of time when the children of Israel, due to their own rebellion against God, were not worthy to be lead by a duly ordained prophet who was as a spokesman for God.

    We have been taught that the greatest gift a person can receive in this life is the Gift of the Holy Ghost. Those female members of the church who want the priesthood already have the greatest gift God can bestow upon His children in mortality--the gift of the Holy Ghost. Any worthy member can use their gift of the Holy Ghost to prophesy within the realm of their own stewardship to do much good in building up the Kingdom of God on the Earth.

  • ArnoldV Puerto Princesa, 00
    March 19, 2014 8:51 a.m.

    "We feel as faithful, active Mormon women we have nothing in common with people who oppose the church and want to protest against it," she said....
    A true faithful and active member of the Church sustain his/her leader. Least we forget.

  • in-the-know Alpine, Utah
    March 19, 2014 8:52 a.m.

    this comment was rejected:
    when is the group of members going to demand a change to the tithing amount, say maybe 3%?
    what about a change to allow pre-marital sex?
    maybe a cup of coffee or a beer every now and again will be ok too, as long as we complain long and loud enough...

    for the following reasons:
    * Comment included personal attacks, name-calling, epithets, racial slurs or other derogatory statements.
    * Comment included obscenities or vulgarities.
    * Comment included ALL-CAPS shouting, overuse of punctuation, extreme length or violated other formatting rules.
    * Comment included overly speculative thoughts or information not included in the story.
    * Comment included insensitive thoughts that were not appropriate in the context of the story.
    * Comment was off topic or disruptive.
    * Comment included one or more URLs, which are usually rejected.
    * Comment included copyright infringement or plagiarism.
    * Comment included advertising or other promotion.
    * Comment included charity donation information or solicitation.
    * Comment included personal information.
    * Comment was a duplicate

    Can someone please explain? That is selective silencing of my comment, and has as much to do with the article as any other comment, yet mine was deleted.

  • Chilanga Larkspur, CO
    March 19, 2014 9:18 a.m.

    I'm old enough to remember Sonia Johnson quite well. In 1980, I was 16 and our Young Women group had driven from California to Salt Lake City to attend General Conference. We were in the Tabernacle when the speaker began reading names of the leaders of the church for sustaining. Suddenly the spirit of the meeting was broken as a group of women with signs, under the direction of Sonia Johnson, stood up in the balcony and began shouting, "No! We DON'T sustain you! We want equal rights! YES on the ERA! (equal Rights Amendment). They were quickly ushered out of the Tabernacle. This left a powerful impression on me. I watched as, over the years, Sister Johnson (also from northern Virginia, interestingly) and her followers went from politely lobbying for their views, to more and more aggressive forms of demonstration. Eventually she, and some of them, came out in open rebellion against the church.

  • Chilanga Larkspur, CO
    March 19, 2014 9:21 a.m.

    Eventually Sonia Johnson and some of her followers came out in open rebellion against the church. What got her ultimately excommunicated was that she went on a local television news show in the Washington, DC Metro region and said, "If the Mormon missionaries come to your door to try to convert you, turn them away!" She went from quietly "agitating" for her position, to open rebellion against the church in just a few years. She was then excommunicated. Eventually, she divorced, and (I believe her 4 children went with their father). She later decided that she was a lesbian, and she started a lesbian commune. She had publicly and repeatedly stated in more recent years that she thinks that "men" are responsible for most of the pain and evil in the world, and that almost every culture in the world is set up to the advantage of men, who use their power in harmful ways towards women. She has expressed that she sees the LDS church as institutionalizing and propagating this harmful pattern.

  • Chilanga Larkspur, CO
    March 19, 2014 9:24 a.m.

    Interestingly, Sonia Johnson has not publicly given her opinion on the current OW movement. Most of the women in the OW movement are genuinely good women who love God and want only to see the church be a reflection of God's kingdom on the earth. But I do fear, especially with the recent escalation of the OW tactics and message, that some of these good women will leave our church. I so hope they don't. We need them--they're our church family. I would ask the women of OW to very prayerfully consider where this is leading them, and to be patient and pray for the Lord's spirit to give them understanding. I, too, wish some things in our church were different. But I trust the Lord, and it's my job to pray to be able to change my will to His--not for Him, or the church to change for me. I'm beginning to understand more, perhaps, why we bow our heads when we pray, and perform other sacred ordinances. We must be willing to submit to the Lord in all things. Please re-think this, dear friends and sisters of OW.

  • Lionheart West Jordan, Ut
    March 19, 2014 9:35 a.m.

    I get uncomfortable when I hear people use words like "vote" or "discussion" in reference to how doctrines of the Church are decided. I know there are discussions among leaders to help them in their understanding and implementation of the Lord's revelations, but doctrines are received by revelation and are not the result of debates, discussions, or votes.

    If an LDS member takes exception with any doctrine of Christ's church he would do best to take his concern directly to the source, to the Lord. To demand, or even suggest that church leaders adjust church doctrine to a popular, (or unpopular) way of thinking is beyond presumptuous. It could be called heresy, but at least demonstrates a lack of testimony that the Church of Jesus Christ is really the Church of Jesus Christ.

  • goosehuntr Tooele, UT
    March 19, 2014 10:11 a.m.

    Ask and ye shall receive, knock and it shall be opened, seek and ye shall find." That is an interesting use of that scripture... The answer to the asking, knocking and seeking has already been given. Joseph Smith pestered the Lord after He said no twice to Josephs question, and lost 116 pages of sacred manuscript... something Joseph was bitterly chastened for. I believe the Lords words to Joseph went something like, " How oft...you have gone on in the persuasions of men. For behold, you should not have feared man more than God. Although men set at naught the counsels of God, and despise His words-(especially if there is a personal agenda that is opposed to them) Yet you should have been faithful;" Sisters... please spend your energy, time and talents in building the kingdom. We all have work to do and the time is hastening on. When and if it is time for a change like that, just know the question has already been asked. Let it go. I still don't know what it is you feel you lack? Is "all that the Father hath" still not good enough?

  • JonathanPDX Portland, Oregon
    March 19, 2014 10:41 a.m.

    @Open Minded Mormon - God does not change, but the manner in which he deals with men does as men and their hearts change (or fail to).

    It's like working with children - when they are infants we teach them in one manner, as toddlers we change our method to adapt to their more developed learning style. As youths and adolescents we change our teaching methods yet again. And so it is with God and the education of his children in their mortal state.

  • Cinci Man FT MITCHELL, KY
    March 19, 2014 11:22 a.m.

    @in-the-know Alpine, Utah
    I once commented only with a quote from President Thomas S. Monson and every word was kind, gentle, and respectful. I gave credit to TSM to start my post. DSN refused my comment for the same reasons yours was. I really don't think they read most of the ones they reject. Thanks for your post.

  • RedWings CLEARFIELD, UT
    March 19, 2014 11:38 a.m.

    Jesus said, "Take up your cross and follow Me. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light."

    When we spend time and energy demanding our "rights" and what we want, we are engaging in selfish activity. How often did Christ speak of His "right" to anything? His ministry was about serving others. I care a whole lot less about my troubles when I am helping others with theirs'.

    OW is made up largely of former members and those opposed to the LDS Church. They are seeking to destroy God's Church, not make it better. The Gospel is not a democracy - we don't get to negoitate commancments and doctrine with The Lord.

    We can obey and be blessed, or rebel and be destroyed. That is where agency fits in.

  • funny_guy Vacaville, CA
    March 19, 2014 11:51 a.m.

    Ask the enlightened Ordain Women -- Which men would they deny access to General Priesthood so they can attend?

  • bj-hp Maryville, MO
    March 19, 2014 12:38 p.m.

    Some have claimed that women both in Old Testament times and even early in History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Saints held the Priesthood. This is an incorrect assumption. Though Deborah was a prophetess she never actually held the priesthood. This is even true for those early in History of the LDS Church. At no time did they actually hold the priesthood. For mothers or fathers to bless their own children the priesthood is not a perquisite, nor was it necessary to do so to stand in the prayer circle of a blessing. They never held the Priesthood of God. Those who proclaim such are making an assumption. I as a non-priesthood holder at one time was allowed to stand in the circle holding my son for his blessing. I've seen even in some places where an individual not holding the Melchezidek Priesthood was allowed to stand in the circle by either the Bishop or Branch President. Yet again he didn't hold the priesthood. Making assumptions as made can really mislead and misinform others.

  • ardeare boston, MA
    March 19, 2014 12:49 p.m.

    Does this group, "Ordain Women" truly seek equality? I believe they will monitor these comments so I pose the following questions: Do you believe the church should take affirmative steps (lobbying, money, influence, doctrinal)to ensure fathers are given primary custody (which empowers them)in at least 50% of divorces? Do you believe alimony should be abolished, as it is primarily doled out to women,allotting you a reward for deteriorating marriages, father-child relationships, and temple vows? Do you believe in eternal families, and if so, would you agree that the priesthood is only necessary for one?

    Finally, do you believe the church is more of a club than a religion? That, persons in position of power can institute or abolish church policies as times change, without any direct inspiration from the Lord?

    Thanks

  • Mont Pugmire Fairview, UT
    March 19, 2014 1:09 p.m.

    "Isn't it interesting that we who wear mere wristwatches often seek to counsel the maker of the clocks of whole universe." (Apostle Neal A. Maxwell) This group is clearly at odds with the Clock Maker ... and that is not what the Savior I know has taught or wants for us. Just think what they could accomplish if they applied their energy to something useful.

  • skeptic Phoenix, AZ
    March 19, 2014 1:15 p.m.

    The ERA has been a god sent to the aspirations and well being for many women, so perhaps Sonja Johnson was an instrument of progress. Change seldom comes easy, and even the great ones like Jesus and Gandi pay a heavy price for their services to mankind.

  • happy2bhere clearfield, UT
    March 19, 2014 1:33 p.m.

    Interesting that some of these women want more responsibility in the Church by getting the Priesthood. I've always believed that the two most important people in a Church ward are the Bishop and the Relief Society President. They, more than any other office, have the stewardship of providing support, help, comfort and relief to the vast membership. So much of the work in a ward is done thru the Relief Society. Thank you for your service Sisters. We all benefit from it. Now I've got some 260 other points of view to read.

  • brian of ohio Kent, OH
    March 19, 2014 2:24 p.m.

    To elaborate on a point made by many others about do you really want the priesthood? Might I pose a what if question. What if a human were not able to fulfill all their duties if they had both womens roles and the priesthood, thus putting themselves under condemnation. Most Piesthood holders barely have time to fulfill their callings, jobs, AND family. Most women who fulfill their roles barely have time to take care of and teach their families, callings, and a job if they have one. I certainly fell short so many times trying to be a scout master, go to school and take care of two kids. I believe it possible that if these women got what they want, they would just be leaving duties unfulfilled which means they would be under all condemnations "fish behind a concrete wall" related to such duties. If they just wanted to hear a prophets voice as commented here(one of the OW commented, you can watch it online. So that is not your reason.

    As Alma said O were I an angel yet I sin in my desire for why ask more... out of words
    Best
    Brian

  • Pavalova Surfers Paradise, AU
    March 19, 2014 3:45 p.m.

    Are women equal on the bball court? The ball is smaller to accommodate women. In Lacrosse, the rules are different for the girls from the boys. Most women don't want/need the priesthood. Just another conference distraction...been there, done that.

  • 1aggie SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    March 19, 2014 9:46 p.m.

    @bj-hp
    Deborah was a "judge in Israel". She most certainly held the priesthood just as today's "judges in Israel" (LDS bishops) hold it.

  • jtmurphysr Germany, 00
    March 20, 2014 1:07 a.m.

    Only 1.96 Standard Deviations? tsk... :)

    No I didn't forget it, and thank you for bringing it into the conversation. It wasn't relevant to the discussion because unlike the Compass interview, Mike Wallace didn't ask if it could change. But, now that you included it, I will also point out that President Hinckley said, regarding blacks and the priesthood, "Because the leaders of the church at that time interpreted that doctrine that way."

    We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.

    The leadership of the Church received revelation that the interpretation of the doctrine at that time needed to change. Who are you, or I, or anyone else for that fact, to say that the ordination of women isn't another interpretation of doctrine that needs to change in this time? We can't possibly know the plans of the Lord. We can, and should, trust in the Lord and allow the process to work itself through, without judgement, without harsh words, or hateful behaviors, but with love, compassion and faith.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    March 20, 2014 8:09 a.m.

    Our LDS Temple robes are called the "Robes of the Holy Priesthood".

    Women wear their own robes - not their Father's or their Husband's.
    Women also participate in the full Endowment as their own.

    Men, however, MUST be ordained prior to particiapating in the Endowment.

    Thererfore -- In my mind and heart -- Women must already have the Priesthood.
    Probably from the Pre-Existance.

    [Hint: Lucifer refers to his Pre-existance Priesthoods as well].

  • Brahmabull sandy, ut
    March 20, 2014 9:19 a.m.

    President Hinckley also said that Polygamy is 'not doctrinal' - when clearly it was doctrinal. So take that as you may.

  • bj-hp Maryville, MO
    March 20, 2014 12:42 p.m.

    aggie1: If you go onto the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints website and search Deborah and Judges you will find that she did not hold the Priesthood. That she was not a common judge in Israel in the same manner as a Bishop. She was appointed as a judge just as our Federal Judges are today. She was a righteous woman who was revered by her people but she didn't hold any priesthood office.

    The same is said of those early sisters who were able to perform some blessing but didn't have any priesthood to pronounce priesthood blessings. Any mother or father in any home is authorized to do so. No woman at anytime has ever held the Priesthood whether in the Old Testament, New Testament, Book of Mormon or in the current day. It isn't doctrinal for women to hold it.

  • aconvert Canada, 00
    March 24, 2014 1:02 a.m.

    I am happy that as far as I know, out here away from church headquarters, that the dialogue on this has been civil and non-accusatory. I think none of us as faithful testimonied church members would expect any less. The sentiments expressed by Ordain Women are misguided for all the reasons people say in this thread, but I like that the tone is that these are sisters we are talking about and that there is hope for a change of heart for them and no one is berating them. My deepest hope for these sisters is that they do not leave the church but consider we are all brothers and sisters in the truest sense and that our Father in Heaven is in charge and made the rules for eternal reasons that are true and just forever and that we each are responsible to do all we can to serve, love, and live as He would have us do, and not become ensnared in the false thinking of the World..

  • concernedandsad Logan, UT
    March 25, 2014 12:44 p.m.

    In the Miracle of Forgiveness Joseph Smith is quoted as saying, "To save a soul is greater than to raise one from the dead." It is obvious here that you need priesthood power to raise a man(woman) from the dead, but anybody can help save souls. And if it is greater to save souls and if anyone can do this doesn't this make us all equal? I wish these women would take this energy, now that they have gotten their answer for a second time and help save the lost souls and bring them back to the fold. This can only be done by humbling oneself and looking for those opportunities which are all around us. In addition to helping save the souls who are living you can do temple work and save those who have passed on.

  • JennyMarieHatch Cedar City, UT
    April 5, 2014 3:06 p.m.

    Here are my thoughts on the ordination of women in the LDS church:

    "I believe this group of activist women are an organized cabal of professionally trained leftist agitators who have been tasked with doing a well publicized stunt in order to be excommunicated so they can then then whine to the media for the next twenty years about how evil and patriarchal the church is, having put their Feminist beliefs on the line and paid the seemingly ultimate sacrifice. I just wonder how much money they have been paid to do it"

  • J.D. Aurora, CO
    April 12, 2014 6:50 p.m.

    We can all rest assured that a revelation WILL come in the future that allows female ordination, and the people that will be criticised at that time are those who spoke against it. This is the exact same thing that is happening now with blacks in the priesthood. Even Brigham Young is not above being criticised now when he was considered a hero for his views back then. Is anyone like me and getting so tired of us changing direction everytime the wind blows? The church really looks foolish to everyone when it keeps changing to suit popular opinion. If we are the one true church, why dont we act like it?

  • MFrancis Toronto, 00
    Oct. 8, 2014 2:03 a.m.

    I personally think that women given the priesthood would be a great thing for the church. I think some women would agree that in terms of confession it would be far easier to confess to a female bishop than a male bishop.

    The question to ask is how would the church look after 6 months, 2 years, or 5 years if women were given the right to hold the priesthood ? Fortunately, we don't have to look too far. Our faith cousins in the Community of Christ allow ordination of women and, if anything, it has been a great advantage to that church.