Lesspotential Missionaries.

[Fiannan]

Sometimes there are quite simple reasons for things occuring. Found this article from 1988. Just could spell some problems for the Church.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...751C1A96E948260

[boyando]

Sometimes there are quite simple reasons for things occuring. Found this article from 1988. Just could spell some problems for the Church.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...751C1A96E948260

It seems a little odd that everyone out of the Church wan'ts to tell everyone inside the Church, how to live there own lifes.

I think that the Church it self has trials just like we do. I also think that nothing can stop the "stone cut from a mountain without hands".

[shanstress70]

<div class='quotemain'>

Sometimes there are quite simple reasons for things occuring. Found this article from 1988. Just could spell some problems for the Church.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...751C1A96E948260

It seems a little odd that everyone out of the Church wan'ts to tell everyone inside the Church, how to live there own lifes.

I think that the Church it self has trials just like we do. I also think that nothing can stop the "stone cut from a mountain without hands".

Fiannan, when did you leave the LDS church?

[ALatterDaySaint]

Fainnan, a quote from the link you offered...

The Mormon Church has often been criticized as rigidly patriarchal. Under Mormon beliefs, for example, women cannot attain the highest degree of celestial glory unless they are married, and only men are allowed to achieve full status as church members.

This is a fine example of "ignorance is bliss". Women cannot attain the highest degree of the celestial glory unless they are married? Oh no!...oh, wait, that applys equally to the men. Ok, and now what about the women not being able to achieve "full status" as church members? Do we only baptize the women's feet? Every member of the Church is equal. I am just as much a member of the church as Gordon B Hinkley. Now, if they're refering to the priesthood offices then they are still very ignorant. Priesthood offices are male positions. There are numerous female positions in the church. Do we really think it would be productive to have some man teaching Relief Society? Thats a ticking time bomb!

Sure the church is patriarchal, just as the Lord set it up. However, the women hold equal membership and hold high and essential offices and callings.

Its almost not worth replying to this rubbish but I figure it was an easy 2 points so I went ahead and replied.

[pushka]

Hmmm...could it be that you're all reading Fiannan's post incorrectly?

From what I can gather from his past posts, I don't see him as an Ex-Mormon or anything...I think the reason he posted this link is because he is so concerned that the numbers of children born to Mormon families is falling, and he is extremely pro large LDS families...

Perhaps you could post a reply Fiannan, so that we're all clear about your intentions? :)

[shanstress70]

Hmmm...could it be that you're all reading Fiannan's post incorrectly?

From what I can gather from his past posts, I don't see him as an Ex-Mormon or anything...I think the reason he posted this link is because he is so concerned that the numbers of children born to Mormon families is falling, and he is extremely pro large LDS families...

Perhaps you could post a reply Fiannan, so that we're all clear about your intentions? :)

No, mine was actually sarcasm! I was responding sarcastically to allmosthumble's post, "It seems a little odd that everyone out of the Church wan'ts to tell everyone inside the Church, how to live there own lifes."

I thought it was funny bc he/she assumed Fiannan was out of the church... I'm pretty certain he is not!

[shanstress70]

However, the women hold equal membership and hold high and essential offices and callings.

I have to disagree with this (of course :) ). In my experience, women cannot even meet in the building without a 'member of the priesthood' present. I'm not sure if this is a churchwide policy, or just my then-bishop's policy. Anyone know?

All of the financial decisions are ultimately made by men in the church.

As for the argument that women have the task of bearing and raising children and that takes a lot of time. There are only so many years in our lives that we have and raise children. And there are plenty of women who cannot have children. I think this is a lame excuse.

I saw a very interesting 'article' once that someone put together. It asked the question, "Would any man join a church that..." Some of the points below it were, only women are allowed to speak for God, only women could perfrom church ordinances, women covenanted to obey Mother in Heaven, but the men convenanted to obey their wives, at age 12 the girls got the priesthood when getting into teen years but boys got a 'Manhood medallion', the BoM had only 4 references to men but the rest was about women, etc., etc., etc.

[Fiannan]

Fiannan, when did you leave the LDS church?

Uh last Sunday I think. My grandfather in law had to go to the hospital so we left early from Sacrament so my wife could go visit him with her mother -- I think about 30 minutes earlier than the end of sacrament.

[Jason]

Hey fiannan,

Would you say that it's the fewer children per household as the cause for the decline in Missionary numbers, or the new "tougher" requirements and standards for service?

I would think the latter more than the former.

[pushka]

<div class='quotemain'>

Hmmm...could it be that you're all reading Fiannan's post incorrectly?

From what I can gather from his past posts, I don't see him as an Ex-Mormon or anything...I think the reason he posted this link is because he is so concerned that the numbers of children born to Mormon families is falling, and he is extremely pro large LDS families...

Perhaps you could post a reply Fiannan, so that we're all clear about your intentions? :)

No, mine was actually sarcasm! I was responding sarcastically to allmosthumble's post, "It seems a little odd that everyone out of the Church wan'ts to tell everyone inside the Church, how to live there own lifes."

I thought it was funny bc he/she assumed Fiannan was out of the church... I'm pretty certain he is not!

Thanks for clarifying this Shanstress70! I was a little confused after reading your response as I originally suspected that Allmosthumble was referring to the author of the article rather than to Fiannan!

[Maureen]

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

Sometimes there are quite simple reasons for things occuring. Found this article from 1988. Just could spell some problems for the Church.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...751C1A96E948260

It seems a little odd that everyone out of the Church wan'ts to tell everyone inside the Church, how to live there own lifes.

I think that the Church it self has trials just like we do. I also think that nothing can stop the "stone cut from a mountain without hands".

Fiannan, when did you leave the LDS church?

I don't think allmosthumble was referring to Fiannan. I think he was referring to the commentators in the article.

M.

[shanstress70]

Oh OK... sorry to completely confuse everyone!

[BenRaines]

Jason, the lower numbers of missionaries is based upon two things. One, as you mentioned, was the raising of the bar for what is acceptable behavior before missions that allow them to go. The second is the pure numbers. Families are smaller and the church is aware that the number of potential missionaries from a pure numbers standpoint is less and then the higher standard.

I do know that they have found using better qualified missionaries has yielded better results that someone just spending their two years in the mission field and then going home just as they were before they left or worse off.

My son had a missionary who when he arrived at the airport outside the mission home, before flying home, went and changed in to jeans and a tshirt and was already planning his inactivity in the church because he had already done his time. Sounds like he never should have been out there in the first place.

Ben

[Bob_oz]

<div class='quotemain'>

However, the women hold equal membership and hold high and essential offices and callings.

I have to disagree with this (of course :) ). In my experience, women cannot even meet in the building without a 'member of the priesthood' present. I'm not sure if this is a churchwide policy, or just my then-bishop's policy. Anyone know?

All of the financial decisions are ultimately made by men in the church.

As for the argument that women have the task of bearing and raising children and that takes a lot of time. There are only so many years in our lives that we have and raise children. And there are plenty of women who cannot have children. I think this is a lame excuse.

I saw a very interesting 'article' once that someone put together. It asked the question, "Would any man join a church that..." Some of the points below it were, only women are allowed to speak for God, only women could perfrom church ordinances, women covenanted to obey Mother in Heaven, but the men convenanted to obey their wives, at age 12 the girls got the priesthood when getting into teen years but boys got a 'Manhood medallion', the BoM had only 4 references to men but the rest was about women, etc., etc., etc.

I wonder if the Bishops policy that sisters should not be in the chapel without a priesthood holder in attendance was designed to regiment women kind under the long arm of male domination or just maybe he was aware of concerns for the ladies being out after dark in the community, our Bishop does not make that rule but the caring concern is good for even in our little corner of the world we have problems right in the car park

[BenRaines]

I live in a very exclusive area of Las Vegas, far from the strip. We have priesthood patrols in our parking lot on Sunday due to the number of breakins to cars while we are in church. It is a magnet to those who want to take what is not theirs.

We also require two priesthood brethren in the building any time the sisters are there. Not because they can't be in the building but for their personal protection. It is at the sisters request not the Bishops insistence.

Ben

[shanstress70]

OK, that's a good thing to protect the sisters. What about the financial decisions? What is the reason why women can't make them?

[BenRaines]

Didn't know they couldn't. Guess no one told my wife. She makes ours. She is also head of Young Womens program in our ward. She is given a budget just like the Young Mens leader is. They both spend it as they see fit.

Ben

[Palerider]

Our church here is given a certain amount of money each year......we tell everyone in Ward council what the amount is and ask them to let us know what they think they will need to operate from for the year...we also remind them to remember that this money is the Lord's and its sacred(my opinion). They tell us what they need and they have it to do what they feel is best for their area of responsibility.....in our Ward council which meets twice a month...we discuss alot of issues in there and the Sisters play a very large part in that meeting. This is where we solve problems and plan events etc for our Ward. If this isn't right then I have been doing this all wrong for a very very long time.......

[Lindy]

I do know that they have found using better qualified missionaries has yielded better results that someone just spending their two years in the mission field and then going home just as they were before they left or worse off.

That's my feeling.... quality over quantity... too many young men have been shoved out into the mission field by parents, peers and a sense of "I have to do this" not "I want to do this". It's kind of disheartening to listen to non members recall things they remember from "missionaries" who shouldn't have been out on a mission for the church in the first place. We need the quality to teach others....

MHO

[shanstress70]

Our church here is given a certain amount of money each year......we tell everyone in Ward council what the amount is and ask them to let us know what they think they will need to operate from for the year...we also remind them to remember that this money is the Lord's and its sacred(my opinion). They tell us what they need and they have it to do what they feel is best for their area of responsibility.....in our Ward council which meets twice a month...we discuss alot of issues in there and the Sisters play a very large part in that meeting. This is where we solve problems and plan events etc for our Ward. If this isn't right then I have been doing this all wrong for a very very long time.......

But if you men do not agree with the way the sisters are going to spend the money, you get the final say-so. I don't dispute anything you say here, but you men are the ultimate decision-makers.

[begood2]

I live in a very exclusive area of Las Vegas, far from the strip. We have priesthood patrols in our parking lot on Sunday due to the number of breakins to cars while we are in church. It is a magnet to those who want to take what is not theirs.

We also require two priesthood brethren in the building any time the sisters are there. Not because they can't be in the building but for their personal protection. It is at the sisters request not the Bishops insistence.

Ben

In my ward there isn't a requirement that two priesthood brethren be in the building any time the sisters are there. In fact several times the only one there is the librarian or the sister in charge of the genealogy computers.

The women aren't second class members, but are highly respected co-contributing members who's help is vitally needed and appreciated immensely. :)

[BenRaines]

Shantress,

Please contact my wife and tell her that I am in charge. I have not been able to get that through to her in 30 years of marriage.

Truth be told it is by mutual agreement that things are decided in our home. Are we referring to church decisions or are we talking about household decisions?

Ben

[Guest MrsS]

<div class='quotemain'>

Our church here is given a certain amount of money each year......we tell everyone in Ward council what the amount is and ask them to let us know what they think they will need to operate from for the year...we also remind them to remember that this money is the Lord's and its sacred(my opinion). They tell us what they need and they have it to do what they feel is best for their area of responsibility.....in our Ward council which meets twice a month...we discuss alot of issues in there and the Sisters play a very large part in that meeting. This is where we solve problems and plan events etc for our Ward. If this isn't right then I have been doing this all wrong for a very very long time.......

But if you men do not agree with the way the sisters are going to spend the money, you get the final say-so. I don't dispute anything you say here, but you men are the ultimate decision-makers.

Where did you get that from?

'You men' meaning Priesthood holders, or the Bishopric?

What really goes on is: the primary president/ young womens president/ relief society president (who is always a woman, as is her presidency) brings a request for refund along with the sales receipt to the Bishopric Counselor who is over Primary. She has signed this request, thus saying that the items were indeed used for primary. The Counselor then signs the request and gives it to the Ward Clerk. The clerk makes out the refund check and gives it to the person named on the request. BTW this is the same procedure for the Young MEN"S Presidency, Elders Presidency, and High Priest's Presidency too.

Never in all my years in the Church have 'Those Men' ever denied repayment of monies paid for any of the auxiliaries. I have only known of one incident where the Bishopric said no to the spending of money. This was last year. The young women had a fund raiser to raise money to go to camp. They raised 250% of what was needed. The young women's presidency figured that the excess should be spent on the Young Women program. The Bishopric went to the Stake and asked. The answer came back ~ no ~ the excess goes into the General Ward Budget. From there it can be spent as the Bishopric sees fit.

What the Bishopric did with that money was: For the April conference in Salt Lake, they got 20 tickets for the Young Women and the Young Men. With the excess money that was raised by the Young Women for their camp fund and the excess money that the Young Men raised for their camp ~ that was pooled together to take the Young Women & Young Men, their drivers and chaperones to Salt Lake to the April Conference. No expense to the youth or the drivers or chaperones. Paid for all of their food. The young Women and Young Men had to earn that right to go. They had to read Truth Restored, memorize the Proclamation, plus some other things.

In the event that the Bishopric does deny money to be spent on an activity, it is NOT because he is on a male power trip. It is because the activity is not in keeping with LDS standards. ANY activity that is sponsored: i.e. paid for with Church funds have certain criteria to meet. Taking any auxiliary( Primary, Young Womens, Young Men, Relief Society, Elders Quorum, High Priest Quorum) to see Brokeback Mountain, or any R rated movie is a No Go.

Same goes for the auxiliary purchasing items for their Sunday lessons. They are all given a Budget to work within. It is not unusual for them to go over budget ~ but before any major items are purchased (before any major activity is put into place), this must meet with the approval of the Bishopric. Again, what is getting approval is the type of activity and that it is meeting the standards that have been set by the First Presidency.

but you men are the ultimate decision-makers

Actually, Heavenly Father speaking through the First Presidency is the Ultimate Decision Maker.

[Guest MrsS]

<div class='quotemain'>

I live in a very exclusive area of Las Vegas, far from the strip. We have priesthood patrols in our parking lot on Sunday due to the number of breakins to cars while we are in church. It is a magnet to those who want to take what is not theirs.

We also require two priesthood brethren in the building any time the sisters are there. Not because they can't be in the building but for their personal protection. It is at the sisters request not the Bishops insistence.

Ben

In my ward there isn't a requirement that two priesthood brethren be in the building any time the sisters are there. In fact several times the only one there is the librarian or the sister in charge of the genealogy computers.

When I lived in Seattle ~ the Priesthood were there to protect the women and youth during their meetings and activities.

Same for this ward in Arizona. With good reason. Not too long after the Stake Center was dedicated, some guy came into the womens room and assaulted one of the sisters while she was in the stall. Thankfully, it was a pot luck dinner night, and one of the sisters was leaving with her stainless steel bowl. She heard the screaming, went into the restroom and knocked the man unconscious with the bowl. She ran out to the parking lot to get her husband who was waiting to take her home. From that time on ~ there has always been at least two priesthood holders at each door!

The women aren't second class members, but are highly respected co-contributing members who's help is vitally needed and appreciated immensely. :)

Right on Begood!

President James E. Faust, Second Counselor in the First Presidency: "A conviction that you are a daughter of God gives you a feeling of comfort in your self-worth. It means that you can find strength in the balm of Christ. It will help you meet the heartaches and challenges with faith and serenity. . . . A woman can and must have an identity and feel useful, valued, and needed whether she is single or married. She must feel that she can do something for someone else that no one else ever born can do" ("What It Means to Be a Daughter of God," Liahona, Jan. 2000, 123–24; Ensign, Nov. 1999, 102).

[Bob_oz]

Its been a few days since I last posted on this topic and I have to say that its been a pleasure reading your postings.

I am heartened that we are not alone with challenges in the community (I didn't think were ever were) the world over, these challenges serve to remind us all that these indeed are the last days.

Shantress, please I do hope you understand where we are coming from when we talk about Priesthood v male domination, please don't misinterpret caring concerning love for control, sometimes the best of intentions may come across badly, the best of doctors can have a shocking bedside manner but it does not mean the treatment prescribed is done so without the best intent. There are a lot of us men who will take a lifetime to come close to getting it right, maybe that is why we have the Priesthood!

As far as financial control goes Mrs S put it very well, in our ward a better part of our available funds are used by the Sisters, Young Women, Relief Society, Primary, Activities Committee, Library and yes there are guidelines for the expenditure of what we regard as the Lords funds and yes there is a programme to work within but I don't recall anyone unhappy where they understand these points.

Bob