mordorbund

I know this one! Because the metric salespeople lie. Metric is supposed to be sooooo much easier, but those that have looked into it know it isn't. For length (in the standard system) I'm dealing with nice round numbers like 12, 3, 5280, etc. For volumes we get nice numbers like 2 and 4. Move over to metric and suddenly we're using 2.54 and 3.785. Yeah, that's so much easier.
 
Also nature uses the Standard measurement for time with numbers like 12, 60, 7, and 30. Don't go against nature - abandon the metric system!

http://lds.net/forums/topic/54066-did-women-ever-hold-the-priesthood/#entry777367
 
We've acknowledged that women have been given authority to perform saving ordinances in the temple every bit as binding as though they were performed by a priesthood holder. Why stop there? What is so different about washings and anointings that they can be authorized to perform that ordinance but not baptism?

I know this one! Because the metric salespeople lie. Metric is supposed to be sooooo much easier, but those that have looked into it know it isn't. For length (in the standard system) I'm dealing with nice round numbers like 12, 3, 5280, etc. For volumes we get nice numbers like 2 and 4. Move over to metric and suddenly we're using 2.54 and 3.785. Yeah, that's so much easier.
 
Also nature uses the Standard measurement for time with numbers like 12, 60, 7, and 30. Don't go against nature - abandon the metric system!

I suspect it goes back into the idea of gender roles/separate stewardships.  Holding the priesthood gives one a degree of ministerial responsibility towards the Church and its members (and indeed, the world at large) that will necessarily pull the priesthood holder away from the home.  To facilitate child-rearing the Lord has set up a system where one parent is primarily responsible for ministering outside of the home, while the other parent is free to make ministering inside the home her number one priority.  (Could the Lord change this?  Of course.  But up to now, He hasn't.)
 
With regard to the initiatory ordinances, I think the Lord makes an exception to the paradigm outlined above for the reasons TFP suggests vis a vis the initiatory ordinances--although, with the 2006-ish changes to the ritual, I think it would be highly amusing to see the Church leadership decide that the reasons for allowing women to officiate in those rituals for other women are no longer valid and instruct that henceforth only (male) priesthood holders may officiate in that ritual as well.  There's certainly precedent--IIRC, women giving (non-priesthood) blessings by laying-on-of-hands was fairly common up until the 1940s at which time the First Presidency decided that that function rightly pertained to the priesthood, and the Relief Society was instructed to stop doing it.

I know this one! Because the metric salespeople lie. Metric is supposed to be sooooo much easier, but those that have looked into it know it isn't. For length (in the standard system) I'm dealing with nice round numbers like 12, 3, 5280, etc. For volumes we get nice numbers like 2 and 4. Move over to metric and suddenly we're using 2.54 and 3.785. Yeah, that's so much easier.
 
Also nature uses the Standard measurement for time with numbers like 12, 60, 7, and 30. Don't go against nature - abandon the metric system!

It must have taken FOREVER to send a text.

There is an interesting relationship with Emma in the Church. I'm inclined to agree with you that it's hard to look at history and not see some sort of falling away, but there are also much that is admirable. It showcases, I think, the need to look at historical figures, and people in general, as more than just "bad" or "good", that admirable people can otherwise fall short to some degree, and those who might be qualified as less than admirable can otherwise be admirable in some respects.

I think he's asking why women can't pass the sacrament. After all, the deacon hands it off to them all the time.

The biggest problem I have with computer solitaire is that it won't let me cheat. I thought the rules of the game include a proviso that when you get stuck you can pull a card you need and go on from there.

It must have taken FOREVER to send a text.

Your not 80 now ???

By the way, there's a great story of President Kimball helping his missionary son come to terms with "know" vs "believe".
 
 
 
The entire chapter is worth a good read (and a better ponder).

By the way, there's a great story of President Kimball helping his missionary son come to terms with "know" vs "believe".
 
 
 
The entire chapter is worth a good read (and a better ponder).

By the way, there's a great story of President Kimball helping his missionary son come to terms with "know" vs "believe".
 
 
 
The entire chapter is worth a good read (and a better ponder).

When the keys were restored. I don't have time but I will read that talk by Elder Uchtdorf when I get a chance. 

When the Priesthood was restored. So what are we missing with the ten tribes? I don't think that has anything to do with the restoration. 

Well, for one thing, as I discovered recently, the sacrifice of animals. Some other things are questionable, for example, polygamy and the law of consecration. Does the fact that they were restored count as restored before the end, or do all things restored have to be currently in place before the end? Even if the first is true, I don't know that the law of consecration counts as having been fully restored. ??
 
I'd have to do more thinking and research to come up with anything else.

Implying that there are other true churches with which the Lord is not pleased? Seems at odds with JS-History 1:18-19. I read "true" in the same sense as "right", and "false" in the same sense as "wrong". There is only one church which is right and all others are wrong. That does not mean that they are completely wrong. It just means, as a whole, they are wrong. The only way to be the right (or true) church is to be completely right. There is only one true church and only one right church. The meaning of "true" is mathematical. Take a series of similar complex mathematical equations that claim to come to the same conclusion and ask which one is true. Even if they all contain elements of truth, only the one with all the correct methods, numbers, and mathematics will generate the proper response. That one, therefore, is the true equation. The elements of truth in the others do not render them true. The fact that the Lord is well pleased with the right and true church is incidental to the meaning, imo. 

I'm sorry, I didn't realize the First Amendment was a pay-to-play game.And I'll bet Tom Monson--and in fact, the bulk of active Mormons who weigh in on this issue in their individual capacities--pay a heckuva lot more in taxes than you and the other able-bodied-twenty-something-but-still-inexplicably-and-but-for-marijuana-incurably-ill legalization pushers do.
Yeah, it's just political.  
Paging Dr. Mengele. Dr. Josef Mengele, please call your office ...Which is why churches generally stayed out of the abolitionist movement back when slavery was legal under both state and federal law . . .If I start smoking pot, will my legal analyses become as sound as yours are?

It's definitely a view that derives largely from the home.  In fact, I'm annoyed when people blame the Good Girl/Boy Syndrome on the Church. 
 
Most of my sexuality lessons did not come from church.  They came from my parents, school, personal reading, conversations with others, etc. 
 
My view is that parents, having the brunt of the responsibility in teaching this, really do need to consider more than the Church's spot-on-but-assuming-parents-teach-more-details statements on the Law of Chastity.

Well, I really enjoyed it actually! It was nice to get out of the routine of Catholic mass and see how your church operates. Sacrament meeting was a little boring honestly, but Sunday school and Young Men's class were awesome. I can't say I've been changed or anything like that, I'm still a devout Catholic, but I wouldn't mind going again.

When we say Bishops dont receive training is not totally accurate. I cant speak for the whole Church but, it comes down to the Stake Presidents and the training they give to the Bishops. We were always encouraged to make sure door not locked and to leave it partially open and to have someone sitting outside the door. That could be a councilor or parent or even a youth leader.  As for interviewing Youth I personally always used a different set of questions depending on their age. I am not crazy about having a Parent in the room with me while interviewing their son or daughter for two reasons. The first being I would be concerned with getting the young man or woman to open up and feel comfortable and the other reason is....I dont want Mom or Dad answering the questions for their son or daughter or trying to dominate the conversation.
   I have had some very good conversations with the youth when I interviewed them. There were times they told me things and would then ask.....are you going to tell my Parents?? I would reply No i am not....but I think you should. Had a few times where the youth asked if I could get their Parents and bring them into the room.
    Bishops are human and we make mistakes....these callings are hard enough as it is. You get more crap from members sometimes than what you got going door to door as a Missionary. If you have never been a Bishop you have no idea what its like.  The first time I was called I dont think I did a great job at my calling being new and learning what I was suppose to do. I never asked to be called either time, but I am thankfull I was called a second time and I feel like I did a better job the second time around.  Total combined years of serving both times was 11 years.

So NextElement,
 
What did you think of the Sunday services?

Beatification is the second step to sainthood. First is Venerable, second Blessed, third Saint. So Mother Teresa is currently Blessed Teresa of Calcutta. When she becomes canonized (it's going to happen) she will become known as Saint Teresa of Calcutta. She's one step away. Not sure if it's the same for the Eastern Churches.As far as private devotions, it's accepted. When I was a Catholic I constantly asked for the intercession of my grandfather and my old confessor, 2 of the holiest men I've ever had the blessing of knowing. (Actually, I sometimes catch myself pausing and quickly ask them to pray for me, habits). If they aren't in heaven, I'm not sure what happens, though if they are in heaven they are as much of a saint as Padre Pio or St. Francis. However, while the Church says these private devotions are accepted, we shouldn't be saying in a group prayer, "Uncle Vern, pray for us" like we say "Padre Pio, pray for us." Privately we can say it though.
That's been my understanding as a Catholic for 20 years and as a current Catholic Studies and theology minor.

You're right, the Church is recognizing this person is in heaven. In Catholicism, anyone who is in heaven is a saint. A capital S Saint is someone the Church recognizes as definitely in heaven. We know they are in heaven because miracles have been done through their intercession. For JP2, the miracles included a woman healed from cancer who prayed for his intercession. (She is asking JP2 to pray for her) She was cured from the cancer and it was declared a medically-impossible miracle. After 2 miracles have been verified, they are eligible for canonization. I should mention the verification process for miracles is extremely strict and it HAS to be medically or scientifically-impossible for it to count.
 
My favorite part of the process is that there is someone called the "Devil's Advocate" whose job is to find reasons NOT to canonize the person. If this person's arguments can be debunked by those in charge of the canonization process, it continues. I heard that when Don Bosco (St. John Bosco) was up for sainthood the Devil's Advocate said he never had time to pray (he ran an oratory for poor orphans during Italy's industrial revolution). The response to that was "Well, his life was a prayer."
 
You're right, there is a delay between the person's death and the opening of their Cause for Canonization. And it is so that the fervor could die down a bit. It makes sure that the process is more neutral. However, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI (personally a favorite of mine), waived the standard waiting period for his predecessor and best friend, JP2. And just like the pope can waive the waiting period, he can also decide to canonize someone without the standard 2 miracles. This is what Pope Francis did with John XXIII.
 
The canonization itself involves a Mass. Actually, you can find this canonization on YouTube, which I recommend watching as the Mass is concelebrated with Pope Francis AND Pope Benedict. 2 popes canonizing 2 popes. Not to mention, I love Benedict so it was great to see him in public.
 
I hope this information helps a bit.