Letter from church asks group to move demonstration off Temple Square
Are women equal?
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
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!
Thank you, Sister Moody, for your wonderful, respectful, even insightful letter.
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
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
Yes, we are equal, but not the same!!!!! There are obviously vast differences
between the sexes.
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
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?
There is nothing wrong with males meeting together to strengthen their lives.
Women do it as well. We all need support and love.
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
I wonder if it is the same "thoughtful discussion" Emma had with Joseph?
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...
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.
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?
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.
>>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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
"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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
@ 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 ?
Protesting the Lord is not the same thing as petitioning the Lord. The first
exemplifies pridefulness, the second humility.
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
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.
Brave Sir RobinSan Diego, CAAbsolutely -- 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... ANDBe 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.
@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.
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
Part IIName 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.
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.
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.
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??
@MKEL- Well said!
@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
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.
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.
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.
@ 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.
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?
"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.
@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!
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.
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.
@JaredWomen 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
@lib_cat_ladyNot 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.
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
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.
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.
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?
The road to apostacy has many onramps, this being one of them.
Satan is very powerful and is leading many within the church to apostasy.
"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
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.
>>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."
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
@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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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
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.
@Black37You said, "Each prophet from BY to Kimball preached the
Blacks were cursed and could not hold the priesthood."@LDS
RevelationsYou 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_ladyYou 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
@ 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.
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.
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?
"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?
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.
What a wild and "beyond the mark" interpretation of Matthew 7: 7.
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.
>>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 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
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
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?
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.
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?
@KellyWSmithFaithfully 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
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.
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.
These are "faithful, active women", they say.Faithful,
active members don't try to tell the prophet how to run the church.
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?
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.
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...?
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
@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".
jtmurphysr Germany, 00Gordon B. Hinckley himself (you remember
him right?) indicated that it was not beyond the realm of consideration that
women could hold the priesthoodI would be very interested in the
reference to the above. Thanks.
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.
"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?
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.
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
jtmurphysrGermany, 00@KellyWSmithFaithfully 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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I will follow the Prophet.
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!
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.
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?
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.
@liahonaWestbank, BCIf 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...
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!"??
@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."
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.
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.
@get her done:"Are women equal?"No. They're
@LawguyJust 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
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
@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!
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 speechfreedom of assemblyfreedom to do what a person
wishes if it does not harm others (even if other people think it is bad)*wikipedia
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.
@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
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.
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.
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
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
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.
@sid 6.7Dear Sid6.7As 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.
Great and spacious building scene being acted out in our times.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
@ 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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
I wonder what percentage of the comments, so far, are from men?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
@Fred VaderI 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.
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
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.
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.
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.
The Church will NOT bend to this. As a woman, I have no sympathy
with this group.
It resembles to old Sonia Johnson years.
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.
"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
The author of chaos is never the Lord.
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.
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.
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"????
("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.
@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?
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."
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!
@ClarkhippoThere'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".
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."
"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
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.
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.
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 whathe, the Lord Jesus Christ has directed.
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...
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
"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.
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.
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
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.
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
Churchexcommunication for polygamy. excommunication for those who
preach another GOSPEL until the will of the Lord is revealedi 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 cleanFOLLOW THE PROPHETS
Women getting the Priesthood? Ain't. Gonna. Happen. Girls, you just
don't get it, do you?
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).
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.
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.
Open minded MormonNo 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
---- 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 ?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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).
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 !
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.
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.
When men can bare babies, then I'll think about the Priesthood. Why do we
all have to have the same talents, etc?
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.....
Women of the Church, you want to hold the Priesthood, go home and hold/hug your
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".
@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.
@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
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
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.
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 1:38Why doesn't this group mention THIS scripture? .
KaladinGreeley, COI 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
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.
@ 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.
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
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.
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.
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"...
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.
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!
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-existanthome, 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.
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.
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.
"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.
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.
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!
@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.
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 1:38You 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
@ Int'l BusinessmanDeborah 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
"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.
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 duplicateCan 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
@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.
@in-the-know Alpine, UtahI 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
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
Ask the enlightened Ordain Women -- Which men would they deny access to General
Priesthood so they can attend?
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.
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
"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.
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.
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.
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 wordsBestBrian
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.
@bj-hpDeborah was a "judge in Israel". She most certainly held
the priesthood just as today's "judges in Israel" (LDS bishops)
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.
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].
President Hinckley also said that Polygamy is 'not doctrinal' - when
clearly it was doctrinal. So take that as you may.
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.
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..
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.
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
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?
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