Mormon Studies

[Snow]

I went to a lecture tonight by the dean of the School of Religion at Claremont College which is one of the top 10 schools of Religion in the US. They are actively working towards opening a Mormon Studies department and endowing a chair. They are recruiting 4 top-flight scholars to fill the the chair. In the running right now are Dr. Flake of Vanderbilt, Daynes of BYU, Givens and Barlow from I forget where. Two years ago there was no Mormon studies department anywhere. Today, three are in some state of getting up and running, the other two being USU and Utah Valley in Provo.

She also talked about early female leadership in ancient Christianity which was much more involved than I previously thought. I have to do some research but apparently Paul talked about a Junia (female) who was foremost among the apostles???

In explaining the dymanics of men women, public life and domestic life and who led where and what were their values, Dr. Torgeson (spelling?) said that the key male virtues in ancient Rome where, honor, courage and strength, the key female virtues were chastidy, silence and obedience. She paused and looked in my general direction and so, I said back loudly, "THAT'S WHAT I'M TALK'N BOUT" then I added sheepishly, Oh! Was that inappropriate?

On another note, I got asked to chair a session of the upcoming Sunstone Symposium. I can't even spell symposium unless it is by luck.

[Guest Starsky]

Really? That is all very very intriquing.

[Cal]

Originally posted by Snow@Mar 14 2004, 12:06 AM

I went to a lecture tonight by the dean of the School of Religion at Claremont College which is one of the top 10 schools of Religion in the US. They are actively working towards opening a Mormon Studies department and endowing a chair. They are recruiting 4 top-flight scholars to fill the the chair. In the running right now are Dr. Flake of Vanderbilt, Daynes of BYU, Givens and Barlow from I forget where. Two years ago there was no Mormon studies department anywhere. Today, three are in some state of getting up and running, the other two being USU and Utah Valley in Provo.

She also talked about early female leadership in ancient Christianity which was much more involved than I previously thought. I have to do some research but apparently Paul talked about a Junia (female) who was foremost among the apostles???

In explaining the dymanics of men women, public life and domestic life and who led where and what were their values, Dr. Torgeson (spelling?) said that the key male virtues in ancient Rome where, honor, courage and strength, the key female virtues were chastidy, silence and obedience. She paused and looked in my general direction and so, I said back loudly, "THAT'S WHAT I'M TALK'N BOUT" then I added sheepishly, Oh! Was that inappropriate?

On another note, I got asked to chair a session of the upcoming Sunstone Symposium. I can't even spell symposium unless it is by luck.

Sunstone? You must be even more enlightened than I thought. :) What do they want you to talk about?

[Jason]

Snow,

You said: "I have to do some research but apparently Paul talked about a Junia (female) who was foremost among the apostles???"

I thought that was Thecla? The young woman who followed Paul around, and baptised herself in the arena before wild beasts tore her to pieces?

J

[Snow]

Originally posted by Cal@Mar 14 2004, 08:52 AM

Sunstone? You must be even more enlightened than I thought. :) What do they want you to talk about?

Nah, not talk, just chair.

There is a Call for Papers an based on who submits what, a program it put together with the author of the papers as speakers. Then they sometimes need panelists to rebutt the speaker or offer an alternative perspective. I declined to be a panelist. Then they need a chair which is basically someone who calles a session to order, introduces the panelist and asks them to speak into the microphone. I could probably handle that, beings how there are only three steps...

At Claremont they have 8 councils that guide there programs:

Protestantism

Catholicism

Eastern Orthodox

Judaism

Indian Religions

Islam

Something else I forgot, maybe oriental religions

And now The Council of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

Last year, Yale hosted the first ever Symposium on Mormonism (outside BYU) and they are going to host the 2nd in October - if anyone is interested. The four key speakers will be the four I mentioned above talking about Mormonism in:

-American History Studies

-Religious History Studies

-Literary Studies

-Women Studies

[Snow]

Originally posted by ExMormon-Jason@Mar 14 2004, 10:26 AM

Snow,

You said: "I have to do some research but apparently Paul talked about a Junia (female) who was foremost among the apostles???"

I thought that was Thecla? The young woman who followed Paul around, and baptised herself in the arena before wild beasts tore her to pieces?

J

Romans 16:7 talks about Junia, a female, who according to which translation you read is either of note among the apostles or formost among the apostles.

Some versions such as the NIV have it as a male, Junias, but that was a creation post 7th century when women lost their position in the Church.

[Cal]

Originally posted by Snow+Mar 14 2004, 10:27 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Snow @ Mar 14 2004, 10:27 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Cal@Mar 14 2004, 08:52 AM

Sunstone? You must be even more enlightened than I thought. :)  What do they want you to talk about?

Nah, not talk, just chair.

There is a Call for Papers an based on who submits what, a program it put together with the author of the papers as speakers. Then they sometimes need panelists to rebutt the speaker or offer an alternative perspective. I declined to be a panelist. Then they need a chair which is basically someone who calles a session to order, introduces the panelist and asks them to speak into the microphone. I could probably handle that, beings how there are only three steps...

At Claremont they have 8 councils that guide there programs:

Protestantism

Catholicism

Eastern Orthodox

Judaism

Indian Religions

Islam

Something else I forgot, maybe oriental religions

And now The Council of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

Last year, Yale hosted the first ever Symposium on Mormonism (outside BYU) and they are going to host the 2nd in October - if anyone is interested. The four key speakers will be the four I mentioned above talking about Mormonism in:

-American History Studies

-Religious History Studies

-Literary Studies

-Women Studies

Snow--I'm interested in what topics will be discussed. When you know, could you tell me? In fact, I might be interested in attending or reading a script of the symposia.

[Snow]

Cal,

The Claremont deal with be Oct. 24th through 26th. I probably comment again when details are known.

In the meantime you may be interested in the Sunstone West Symposia this April, also held at Claremont, if anyone locally is interested, I'll see you there:

http://www.sunstoneonline.com/

The preliminary program is available there as a pdf file

[Snow]

So does anyone wonder how it was that in the very early (days of Paul), there was a female apostle?

Next thing you know, they will be ordaining Italians, or worse, the Swedes.

[lurker]

Snow,

I went to hear Jan Shipps talk about the church at Claremont a few months back. It was a very unique experience for me to hear a non-lds person addressing the religion in a non-threatening, intellectual way. There was an interesting mix of people, and the Q and A was quite a bit of fun. I found myself sitting next to a student from a neighboring institute. But, there were also alot of religion majors, interested parties, and skeptics there as well. And the missionaries, of course. Still, if I had to guess, I'd say that about half of the people there were LDS. What would you say the make up of your crowd was? Are more LDS people going or more non-lds?

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Snow@Mar 15 2004, 02:54 PM

Next thing you know, they will be ordaining Italians, or worse, the Swedes.

As long as they don't ordain the French, I'm okay with it.

[Snow]

Hi Lurker,

I was at the Shipps lecture as well. My wife and I looked all over for you; well, we would have - if we knew you were going, and we knew what you looked like, and if we hadn't snorted all that glue and .... If you were sitting by me you may have heard me chortle loudly when one of the evangelicals asked Dr. Shipps the dishonest question: "What about the Mormon's claim that the blood of Christ isn't enough to cover our sins" right before my wife elbowed me in the side.

The Dean that spoke to us Saturday night was the one that invited and hosted Jan Shipps and she was thrilled with the way it turned out. The previous year they had invited one of America's top historians, the LDS scholar Richard Bushman. The turnout for that was so much more than then typically had for regular lectures that they moved the Shipps lecture to the auditorium.

If you are asking about the crowd that was there Saturday, we are all LDS or LDS related - a few look a bit fundamentalist (but I don't really know) and some are quite liberal and many of us are orthodox. It is an LDS study group and scholars, authors, poets, historians, general authorities, and the like are invited to address the group every month. Several scholars/authors are regular members of the group. Richard Dutcher is the next scheduled speaker:

http://www.mesg.tierranet.com/

[Jason]

If Junia was a woman, then perhaps we could say that she was not a priesthood holder, but still an apostle. Sort of like the Deaconesses mentioned in the NT.

J

[Jenda]

I have read an article dealing with women in the early church, and this is part of what it stated about this point.

"The latter two women (referring to Priscilla and Junia (who was even argued in early days about whether a man or woman)) were called in the Greek scripture "diakonos". This same word was used in reference to the widows mentioned in Timothy. Clement of Alexandria used the word "syndiakonous" when referring to the apostles' sisters. Diakonos literally means "servant" and could be translated "deaconess". Those advocating that the early church ordained women point to the use of this word in the original texts as evidence that women held a specific priesthood office. While such a conclusion seems on the surface to be reasonable, other evidence refutes it. This is because the word "diakonos" in used in scriptural passages which have no reference to women. Paul uses the word in reference to himself and his works (Rom 11:13; 1 Cor 3:5; 2 Cor 3:4; 2 Cor 6:3). He lists it as a manifestation of the Spirit placed between the gift of prophecy and the gift of teaching (Rom 12:7), which the King James translates as "ministry". The word is also used to describe the work of Stephanas and his household, they having "devoted themselves to the service of the saints" (eis diakomian tois hagiois etaxan heautous) (I Cor 16:15). Such a varied use implies that the word, instead of defining a specific office or calling for women, had a broad application.

Today we use the word "minister" in such a broad way. While we say a priesthood member ministers in ways peculiar to his office, we also describe the service lay members give by using the word "minister". We speak of the ministry of music, the ministry of social service, and the ministry of physical care, all of which can be and are performed by the unordained. The fact that Paul uses the word "diakonos" in such diverse ways implies that he did not intend it to describe a priesthood office. As a result, some scholars have concluded that the most reasonable way to translate "diakonos" is to render it "minister". This means that the use of the word "diakonos" in the original text is no evidence that women were ordained to priestly offices.

Supporters of the belief that women were ordained in the days of the apostles also point to the text (Rom 16:7) which mentions that Junia was noted among the apostles. They conclude that Junia, who perhaps was a woman, held the apostolic office. This seems a reasonable assumption, too. Equally reasonable, however, is the assertion that Junia was a noteworthy sister of the apostles, who traveled with them in order to provide them ministry, and who helped spread the gospel among widows and housewives."

[Jason]

Snow,

Any more thoughts on this topic? I'd like to know your feelings on this, as well as your views of women holding the priesthood de facto via the LDS temple ceremonies (eg ritual washings & anointings, wearing the Priesthood robes, etc)?

Furthermore, it seems to me that it would be more likely to find a female Priest in the earliest days of Christianity, when women Priests were still fairly normal and highly regarded.

[Snow]

Interesting that this thread would crop up again right now. I am going to a symposium Thursday and Friday at Claremont College where the Dr. Torgeson I heard talk (see first post of thread) is Dean of Religion. The symposium is on Joseph Smith and features LDS and non-LDS scholars. Dr. Torgeson talked about the symposium way back when I started this thread and here it is - this week.

Coincidence Jason? Or maybe divine intervention... if so then we had both better repent.

Any way, I haven't yet added early female involvement in Christian development to my areas of study but I gather generally that they had a role and sometimes a leadership role that was quashed early on.

I wonder what would have happened had Joseph Smith lived longer??? There were women in the Quorum of the Anointed. In the early days of the restoration, even into Salt Lake, women were blessed and healed the sick and that was sanctioned by both JS and BY.

I have only a sketchy recollection but whereas today we think that women do not have the priesthood, the thinking used to be that women participated in the priesthood through their husbands and back in JS's day that women participated in the priesthood through their temple endowments independently of their husbands.

Gordon B. Hinckley certainly does not rule out extending priesthood to women and says that it would take a revelation from God.

My current, though superficial, thinking is that is shouldn't come as any great surprise if one day in the next 25 to 50 years women got the priesthood.

I do have so material on the subject including Maxine Hanks (one of the Sept Six - ex'd for her femmist views) but I am reading 4 other books right now so I don't know if I'll get to it.

What do you think?

[Guest ApostleKnight]

Originally posted by Snow@Oct 18 2005, 08:50 PM

My current, though superficial, thinking is that is shouldn't come as any great surprise if one day in the next 25 to 50 years women got the priesthood.

←

I wouldn't be surprised either, but then to me it really doesn't matter. By that I mean that a person who holds the priesthood is promised no blessing that a non-priesthood holder won't receive. That's almost a double-negative, let me rephrase that.

Any blessings that a righteous priesthood holder will receive are also promised to the righteous non-priesthood holders (i.e. women as per this discussion) in the church.

One other thing I've thought about now and again...when a woman is ready to go the temple, she only needs a recommend (regardless of the purpose, mission or marriage).

When a man is ready to go to the temple, he must first be ordained to the office of Elder in the priesthood. So what do women have that guys have to make up for in priesthood anyway? If there IS an inequality anywhere, it's that women are born with something that guys have to catch up with via the priesthood!

[harrypotter]

Originally posted by ApostleKnight+Oct 19 2005, 01:54 AM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-Snow@Oct 18 2005, 08:50 PM

My current, though superficial, thinking is that is shouldn't come as any great surprise if one day in the next 25 to 50 years women got the priesthood.

←

I wouldn't be surprised either, but then to me it really doesn't matter. By that I mean that a person who holds the priesthood is promised no blessing that a non-priesthood holder won't receive. That's almost a double-negative, let me rephrase that.

Any blessings that a righteous priesthood holder will receive are also promised to the righteous non-priesthood holders (i.e. women as per this discussion) in the church.

One other thing I've thought about now and again...when a woman is ready to go the temple, she only needs a recommend (regardless of the purpose, mission or marriage).

When a man is ready to go to the temple, he must first be ordained to the office of Elder in the priesthood. So what do women have that guys have to make up for in priesthood anyway? If there IS an inequality anywhere, it's that women are born with something that guys have to catch up with via the priesthood!

←

I know that the RLDS gives the priesthood to women. I am not sure wheather it is part of Heavenly Fathers plan that woman ( themselves) need the priesthood to fuffill there eternal destiny though. Considering their role in creation and a mans role in the creation. God created them male and female for a reason we both have gender characteristics for a reason they are part of an eternal identity.

The only references i have read to women officating in priesthood activity is by Edward Tullidge books ie; Women of Mormondom who was RLDS, so i would take it with a pinch of salt.

[Jason]

Originally posted by Snow@Oct 18 2005, 07:50 PM

Any way, I haven't yet added early female involvement in Christian development to my areas of study but I gather generally that they had a role and sometimes a leadership role that was quashed early on.

From what little I've studied on the subject in the past months, there is a new current of thought among some scholars that say that there were multiple streams of teaching and practice in early christianity. In other words, there was no one, single church at the beginning. There were several, all with their own valid, apostolic authority. It wasn't until later centuries that one, single stream (what we call Orthodox) emerged and surpressed the rest.

While not terribly useful for many Orthodox christians, this information may be potentially useful for Latter-day Saints.

I wonder what would have happened had Joseph Smith lived longer??? There were women in the Quorum of the Anointed. In the early days of the restoration, even into Salt Lake, women were blessed and healed the sick and that was sanctioned by both JS and BY.

Seems to me that Women were on their way to holding an ecceliastical equality with men back in Smith's day. That they may have been given the Priesthood seems possible, but it was overruled by others (like what happened to Elijah Able) later on.

Again, I believe that the Temple ceremonies are the only remaining thread women have in actually using Priesthood that they don't technically hold.

I have only a sketchy recollection but whereas today we think that women do not have the priesthood, the thinking used to be that women participated in the priesthood through their husbands and back in JS's day that women participated in the priesthood through their temple endowments independently of their husbands.

In the early Utah period, that does seem to be the case.

Gordon B. Hinckley certainly does not rule out extending priesthood to women and says that it would take a revelation from God.

My current, though superficial, thinking is that is shouldn't come as any great surprise if one day in the next 25 to 50 years women got the priesthood.

I do have so material on the subject including Maxine Hanks (one of the Sept Six - ex'd for her femmist views) but I am reading 4 other books right now so I don't know if I'll get to it.

What do you think?

←

I believe that women will be ordained in your church within my lifetime. You're faith is much more dynamic than say the Roman Catholic Church, therefore it would be much easier for the LDS to ordain women using your claim to continuous revelation which can even trump earlier revelation.

[Serg]

Well....we dont believe that woman SHOULD or HAVE to have the piesthood. They of course CAN, like in the case of Deborah and others. But the explanation there is that there was no worthy men to hold it. Or she was just a leader with out it. When speaking of the deaconesse in Romans, we may say she didnt have to hold the priesthood to be called like that for the mere word only represents servant, which in fact ALL followers of Christ are. And as to the Junia, well it would be a lot better to watch the sintax in the sentence. You see if i say that YOU are very appreciated AMONG the members of this site, that DOES NOT mean that you are in fact a member but that AMONG they that ARE, you are appreciated. I dont believe women held the priesthood in the primitive church, there was no necessity. LOL.

[Guest Member_Deleted]

Originally posted by ApostleKnight+Oct 19 2005, 01:54 AM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-Snow@Oct 18 2005, 08:50 PM

My current, though superficial, thinking is that is shouldn't come as any great surprise if one day in the next 25 to 50 years women got the priesthood.

←

I wouldn't be surprised either, but then to me it really doesn't matter. By that I mean that a person who holds the priesthood is promised no blessing that a non-priesthood holder won't receive. That's almost a double-negative, let me rephrase that.

Any blessings that a righteous priesthood holder will receive are also promised to the righteous non-priesthood holders (i.e. women as per this discussion) in the church.

One other thing I've thought about now and again...when a woman is ready to go the temple, she only needs a recommend (regardless of the purpose, mission or marriage).

When a man is ready to go to the temple, he must first be ordained to the office of Elder in the priesthood. So what do women have that guys have to make up for in priesthood anyway? If there IS an inequality anywhere, it's that women are born with something that guys have to catch up with via the priesthood!

←

I like your way of thinking!! :)

[Jason]

Originally posted by Serg@Oct 19 2005, 01:10 PM

I dont believe women held the priesthood in the primitive church, there was no necessity. 

Your opinion in this matter is hardly relavent. The facts are, however, that there were women Priests in early Christianity. While not specifically provable in the so-called "orthodox" christian churches, there is ample evidence of women Priests in those churches which we now call hetrodox (ie Gnostic, Johnanne, Pauline, etc).

Moreover, it is the hetrodox churches that have the most common bond to the teachings and beliefs of the Latter-day Saints.

So you can take out of that what you will.

[Guest Member_Deleted]

Originally posted by Jason+Oct 19 2005, 02:56 PM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-Serg@Oct 19 2005, 01:10 PM

I dont believe women held the priesthood in the primitive church, there was no necessity. 

Your opinion in this matter is hardly relavent. The facts are, however, that there were women Priests in early Christianity. While not specifically provable in the so-called "orthodox" christian churches, there is ample evidence of women Priests in those churches which we now call hetrodox (ie Gnostic, Johnanne, Pauline, etc).

Moreover, it is the hetrodox churches that have the most common bond to the teachings and beliefs of the Latter-day Saints.

So you can take out of that what you will.

←

Well I would think that it is God's seemingly arbitrary way of giving authority to men that disturbes people....

It isn't a necessity or expedient to have woman do both the leading of the church and the baring of children....

But there are those who want it to be that way... what are they thinking???

[Jason]

Originally posted by Please+Oct 19 2005, 03:05 PM-->

Originally posted by Jason@Oct 19 2005, 02:56 PM

<!--QuoteBegin-Serg@Oct 19 2005, 01:10 PM

I dont believe women held the priesthood in the primitive church, there was no necessity. 

Your opinion in this matter is hardly relavent. The facts are, however, that there were women Priests in early Christianity. While not specifically provable in the so-called "orthodox" christian churches, there is ample evidence of women Priests in those churches which we now call hetrodox (ie Gnostic, Johnanne, Pauline, etc).

Moreover, it is the hetrodox churches that have the most common bond to the teachings and beliefs of the Latter-day Saints.

So you can take out of that what you will.

←

Well I would think that it is God's seemingly arbitrary way of giving authority to men that disturbes people....

It isn't a necessity or expedient to have woman do both the leading of the church and the baring of children....

But there are those who want it to be that way... what are they thinking???

←

Spoken like a woman who's been throughly brainwashed by her Patriarchal society.

Women have been both the leaders of states and religions since time began. Why should it be any different today?

And Please, don't parrot what you've heard before. I'd like to hear something more original.

[Guest Member_Deleted]

Originally posted by Jason+Oct 19 2005, 03:09 PM-->

Originally posted by Please@Oct 19 2005, 03:05 PM

Originally posted by Jason@Oct 19 2005, 02:56 PM

<!--QuoteBegin-Serg@Oct 19 2005, 01:10 PM

I dont believe women held the priesthood in the primitive church, there was no necessity. 

Your opinion in this matter is hardly relavent. The facts are, however, that there were women Priests in early Christianity. While not specifically provable in the so-called "orthodox" christian churches, there is ample evidence of women Priests in those churches which we now call hetrodox (ie Gnostic, Johnanne, Pauline, etc).

Moreover, it is the hetrodox churches that have the most common bond to the teachings and beliefs of the Latter-day Saints.

So you can take out of that what you will.

←

Well I would think that it is God's seemingly arbitrary way of giving authority to men that disturbes people....

It isn't a necessity or expedient to have woman do both the leading of the church and the baring of children....

But there are those who want it to be that way... what are they thinking???

←

Spoken like a woman who's been throughly brainwashed by her Patriarchal society.

Women have been both the leaders of states and religions since time began. Why should it be any different today?

And Please, don't parrot what you've heard before. I'd like to hear something more original.

←

LOL.... you obviously don't know me.... cause I sent out an email the other day asking for people who know me to use one word to discribe me...

I received these in response.. FIESTY..... HERCULEAN.... INDEPENDANT.... FREE THINKER.... WARRIOR..... PROPHETESS.....

Need I say more?