Joseph Smith and Priesthood for women.

[SanctitasDeo]

That may be true. It has been a while since I read that study. I was really more interested, though, with what you thought about the rest of what I said.

[annewandering]

I know more women are poor than men are poor. While I am encouraged that college graduates have a better chance of fair treatment, I know we are not finished solving the problem of fairness to women in the marketplace. The feeling from many women is that they do not feel equal and then they see that women do not hold the priesthood so perhaps they are feeling that even in God's own church women are not treated equally or fairly. In some cases I agree that women are not always treated fairly in the church but as far as I can see that is more on the heads of individual people not the church.

I have never had an issue with the priesthood being held by men. It makes no difference to me. What I do find interesting was Joseph Smith's comment if accurately reported.

What I am inclined to believe is that we are to be one in marriage. If we are one then does it matter who is ordained? Do women need to be higher leadership positions? I dont know. The church is making a solid attempt to bring women into leadership meetings so we are heard. In the end, it seems to me, that it is a matterof trusting God. If He wants women to have the priesthood we will have it. If not we wont. If he wants a woman to be a prophet and president of the church it will happen. Until then, if ever, we need to accept God and His will whatever that is.

[Wingnut]

In the context of my question, women marry men for eternal families, to have the priesthood in their homes and, of course, love.

Men marry women because they love them, and desire eternal families.

With a stronger growing feminist movement (which seems to have the goal of excluding men so women can do everything), it makes men feel inferior because... well, let's face it - women do almost everything better than men.

So why should men try if women can do everything?

I think that's why the Lord put the balance of responsibilities between both partners - to ensure that both have a role and can be valued for what they bring to the marriage.

So I'm curious...women shouldn't have to not need a man, but you make it sound like the only reason a woman would need a man is because of the Priesthood. So what need does a man have for a woman, then?

Okay, here's to the feminists:

You are all fighting to be EXACTLY equal to Men. Men hold the priesthood, so you feel that it is downright unfair if you can't hold it too. Men can wear pants, it is downright unfair if you can't too. Etc. etc.

Can you not generalize so much? Not all feminists think the same way, just as not all gay people think the same way, or all men, or all Mormons, etc. Not all feminists (even Mormon ones) want to hold the Priesthood.

So... the feminist movement is fighting the same fight as the Gay/Lesbian Marriage movement. You are both fighting for the world to believe that Wives and Mothers are replaceable by Men and that Husbands and Fathers are replaceable by Women. Therefore, gender has zero impact on the makeup of a family/society.

No, but you are making the same argument as against the SSM movement: that it all happens as a group, rather than in individuals.

Edited December 31, 2012 by Wingnut
typo

[skippy740]

So I'm curious...women shouldn't have to not need a man, but you make it sound like the only reason a woman would need a man is because of the Priesthood. So what need does a man have for a woman, then?

I'm sure I've painted myself in a corner pretty well here. In some of my posts, I was trying to illustrate the end results of the feminist agenda. Others, I was trying to convey the way the Church and the gospel would have us live.

I'm going to illustrate how some may think about relationships by using the 'maturity continuum' that Stephen R. Covey talks about in his book "The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People". (As I'm sure you know, Stephen R. Covey was LDS and recently passed away.)

Dependency: Dependency says "I lack, therefore, I need you to help me. I cannot have/do/be on my own." 1-1 = 0 (One takes from the other.)

Independence: Independence says "I don't need you because I can have/do/be just fine all on my own." 1 + 1 = 2 (Two independent people)

Interdependence: Interdependence says "I'm a whole person on my own, but together we can accomplish great things through our unique attributes, skills and talents." 1 + 1= 3 or more (Two people seek to build something that is larger than the sum of their parts individually.)

Now, if two people are completely DEPENDENT upon each other... without being able to stand alone or apart for a while, that's not a good thing. I would venture to say that they bring too much 'need' into the relationship and this will inspire the worst of themselves to come out in the relationship.

Two people who are completely INDEPENDENT may not feel any reason to work with the other. I'm thinking of a roommate situation here. Both don't need each other at all... but may be casual friends. No needs imposed or sought for in the relationship, if there is a relationship at all.

Two people who are desiring INTERDEPENDENCY are whole individually, and can bring their best selves into the relationship because they have full self-confidence and self-assurity of themselves to bring into the relationship.

With that kind of definition, most feminists paint women in the corner of being completely dependent... by relying on someone else for their identity and sense of purpose. The phrase that "I need a man" comes to mind. This is the dependency mindset, and we can agree that we don't want to be here.

The goal of feminists (per my own understanding) is to help all women to be independent. "I don't need anyone to take care of my needs. I am woman and hear me roar! I don't need anyone!" Typically said in an aggressive stance and tone. They don't need a man and don't want anything to separate their role from what men can have, do or be.

The goal of the gospel is interdependent relationships, particularly through marriage. "Let us work together to create something that we cannot do individually on our own."

The Family Proclamation outlines many of these roles for us: https://www.lds.org/topics/family-proclamation

Edited December 23, 2012 by skippy740

[ACommonMan]

I don't agree with the sentiment that "women do almost everything better than men".

As I see it, the issue is not can a particular man be better than a particular woman. The issue is that men and women have their own unique roles to play. When it comes to Christlike virtues, women innately have the upper hand. They tend to be more caring and less interested in personal recognition. Because they can be more emotional than logic driven, they pick up on spiritual promptings more easily.

"Equality" in the secular world is a crock because it drags women down to be equally good at lighting fires, speaking crudely, and beating people up. The real goal should be men rising to the spiritual level women historically have reached more easily.

[annewandering]

I'm sure I've painted myself in a corner pretty well here.

lol Let it dry and you will be ok.

[Vort]

When it comes to Christlike virtues, women innately have the upper hand. They tend to be more caring and less interested in personal recognition.

I disbelieve this.

Because they can be more emotional than logic driven, they pick up on spiritual promptings more easily.

If you suppose that spirituality is closer to emotion than it is to logic, I suppose this might make sense. I do not believe spirituality is more akin to emotion than to logic, though.

The real goal should be men rising to the spiritual level women historically have reached more easily.

You begin from a false premise, so your conclusion is faulty. (There's that darn logic again!)

[annewandering]

I disbelieve this.

If you suppose that spirituality is closer to emotion than it is to logic, I suppose this might make sense. I do not believe spirituality is more akin to emotion than to logic, though.

You begin from a false premise, so your conclusion is faulty. (There's that darn logic again!)

Dang! I just wanted to feel superior here for a few minutes anyway!!! Oh well. We all have our weaknesses and some might even be related to gender. On both sides.

[ACommonMan]

If you suppose that spirituality is closer to emotion than it is to logic, I suppose this might make sense. I do not believe spirituality is more akin to emotion than to logic, though.

The Spirit speaks to us heart to heart, as a burning in the bosom. That is why I equate The Spirit with emotions.

Logic is good, as is intellect. However, those who rely too much on logic end up leaning to their own understanding. (see Proverbs 3:5)

[Maureen]

Vort's Post #80:

Originally Posted by ACommonMan

When it comes to Christlike virtues, women innately have the upper hand. They tend to be more caring and less interested in personal recognition.

I disbelieve this.

Originally Posted by ACommonMan

Because they can be more emotional than logic driven, they pick up on spiritual promptings more easily.

If you suppose that spirituality is closer to emotion than it is to logic, I suppose this might make sense. I do not believe spirituality is more akin to emotion than to logic, though.

Originally Posted by ACommonMan

The real goal should be men rising to the spiritual level women historically have reached more easily.

You begin from a false premise, so your conclusion is faulty. (There's that darn logic again!)

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

Wow, it's a Christmas miracle. It's one of those rare occasions where I agree with Vort. :)

M.

[Vort]

The Spirit speaks to us heart to heart, as a burning in the bosom. That is why I equate The Spirit with emotions.

But the equation is incorrect. The Spirit may inspire emotion, but it is not emotion. Similarly, the Spirit may inspire ideas or thoughts, but it is not idea or thought.

Logic is good, as is intellect. However, those who rely too much on logic end up leaning to their own understanding. (see Proverbs 3:5)

The same can be said of those guided by their emotions.

[annewandering]

spirit is neither logic nor emotion. It is spirit and that is ruled by neither.

[Guest]

We, meaning the people on this thread, have a unique meaning for the word feminist?

Yes.

A feminist in this thread - from my conversation with... ah, I can't remember anymore and I can't page back since I'm writing this post... - but here, I have your post here to illustrate how the word feminist is being used in this thread:

The feeling from many women is that they do not feel equal and then they see that women do not hold the priesthood so perhaps they are feeling that even in God's own church women are not treated equally or fairly.

That's how the word feminist was used in this thread to which I was responding to. Feminism does not mean Equal in the sense that everything is The Same. That is, men hold the priesthood, therefore, women should also hold the priesthood. True feminism is when a woman has equal value to men even when they have different roles that contribute to the common good. For example, a stay at home mom has the same value as a career dad even when they are doing different things that contribute to the family. A female wartime nurse has equal value to a male soldier when they are doing different things to contribute to the war effort. There are roles that align to a man's strength and there are roles that align to a woman's strength. True feminism realizes the female strengths and exploits them to their utmost while realizing a man's strength and allow men to exploit their strengths to their utmost.

If I am wrong and I am speaking of a different era then why do women still get paid something like 75% of what men in the same jobs get?

Because women take weeks off to have babies, days off to care for a sick child, personal time off to go to school field trips, etc. etc. Men, generally, don't do those things. There is equal pay for equal work between genders. But, there is a workday disparity between genders in America, so you will see unequal pay in the statistical analysis.

I know more women are poor than men are poor.

Yes. Because in almost every State in the nation, children are given to the women in a single-parent household or women end up raising a child of an absent father. There are a lot less absent mothers than there are absent fathers. Women can't work and take care of children at the same time so they are limited with the work that they can do or the take-home pay that they end up with.

I have never had an issue with the priesthood being held by men. It makes no difference to me. What I do find interesting was Joseph Smith's comment if accurately reported.

What I am inclined to believe is that we are to be one in marriage. If we are one then does it matter who is ordained? Do women need to be higher leadership positions? I dont know. The church is making a solid attempt to bring women into leadership meetings so we are heard. In the end, it seems to me, that it is a matterof trusting God. If He wants women to have the priesthood we will have it. If not we wont. If he wants a woman to be a prophet and president of the church it will happen. Until then, if ever, we need to accept God and His will whatever that is.

Amen to that. In all my years of life - from both sides of the world, from Catholic to LDS - I have never felt that the Church Leadership did not hear what me - as a woman - has to say. It was different in my grandmother's time, so I am grateful that I did not experience what she experienced.

[annewandering]

I am not sure why we are so in agreement lately, Anatess but its nice!

[Guest]

I am not sure why we are so in agreement lately, Anatess but its nice!

Because it's Christmas? :)

I like you, Anne. Even when I'm disagreeing with you. :)

[annewandering]

Because it's Christmas? :)

I like you, Anne. Even when I'm disagreeing with you. :)

And I like you too! It's good to have someone who is honest in their opinions. :)

[Guest tifenni]

To see a Buy MapleStory Mesos or Buy Guild Wars 2 Gold world in a granda of stand.And a heaven in a wild flower.Hold infinity in the palm your hand and eternity in an hour.

[Magen_Avot]

So what do you guys think about this? I am surprised myself.

Let me excuse myself for such a long absence. Family duties while unemployed commanded my attention and now, alas, I find myself in the Middle East as a blessing from God to help me see to my family's need.

Annewandering, the minutes from the Relief Society was a good catalyst for a long read but it was interesting. Over the past, oh.... two years, I guess, I find myself asking questions as conversations such as this one arise.

First let me say I don't consider myself an "intellectual" mostly because I like to keep things simple, I think our Father does too, but that is just one of my opinions. I pose these questions with the idea that we all have our own thoughts on them based on our filters, opinions and,... more or less, a lack of Celestial knowledge... if you follow my intended meaning there.

Ok, here's the questions:

What is Priesthood? Really... (not the standard answer)

a) The priesthood of God

b) Satans priesthoods

What does it mean to be a Priest?

a) Are there specific roles?

b) What are those roles?

....Ordination? Power?

What does it mean to be a Priestess?

a) Are there specific roles?

b) What are those roles?

....um,... Ordanation? Power?

Is there more to the meaning of "priesthood" in Celestial burnings that we do not now know?

As we enjoy the blessings of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ things were set up a certain way and the Priesthood which can exist without the church (not the other way around) was also restored. As we have it, it is the government of the church (keeping it simple here). I loved the reference earlier about the priesthood being linked to the family. I believe this very strongly.

I have answered the above questions in my own mind, knowing the limitations of my knowledge of the other side of the veil.

My youngest daughter is leaving for her mission in just a few days and we had a very long talk about this same subject (well, sort of), but in a real "called of God to preach the gospel" way. She feels very confident in her closeness with the Savior and 'knows' if she was prompted by the Spirit of God to command any of the gifts of the spirit she would be able to do it as His servant. I encourage her in this and stand with her in this conviction. Her only fear was,... what would the Elders or Mission President think, do or say if such a situation occured? I could only tell her, "do as the spirit commands you". (understand my oldest son was told on his mission, "don't rely on the spirit so much" ???? yeah, OK!)

I think at the core of a, "priest, priestess, prophet, prophetess, king or queen" in the kingdom of God lies a person who is spotless, holy, righteous, loves God, has bent their will to the will of God, and actually walks the path marked by Christ,... who actually is close enough to Him to "KNOW" His love and loves all other men and women with a Godly love. Anyone who is so closely aligned with Him could not be denied by Him their wish to bless the lives of anyone. Nor would they seek anything contrary to His will.

For now, things are the way they are, but in the hereafter we should be prepared to think outside the box we created to hold our opinions in. But as for what Joseph Smith was alluding to (based on a note taker)... Well..., he was the only one who claimed to have actually talked with God, face to face, (I believe him) and he certainly seemed to suggest the possibility of a feminine priesthood role without much context as to what exactly he was really getting to, or perhaps he was just describing a unity of holy women.

Who knows for sure?

Just be holy and walk the path where the greatest gift awaits us all...

and keep the good ones coming

[pam]

** Just peeking in **

Today I was at my in-law's ward, and a mother was allowed to participate in her baby's blessing - I had not seen that before, and was curious if this happens in other wards? The bishop announced the blessing, and all the guys got up as usual, and the mother got up too, and carried the little baby into the center of the circle - she took the mice, and told everyone there how grateful she was for the family and friends who were in town for the blessing etc. etc., then she sat in the center of the circle holding her child, while the men placed their hands on the babies head and gave the blessing. She later bore her testimony as it was testimony meeting.

Anyways, I thought it was nice that they allowed her to participate in the blessing circle.

Oh my gosh..they had mice in the circle?

[Magen_Avot]

Oh my gosh..they had mice in the circle?

Doesn't every church have one?

WHAT!!!! Is this the closest emoticon we have for a mouse????

I guess this will have to do: <:3)~~

Edited January 7, 2013 by Magen_Avot
Added a mouse,... sort of

[viannqueen3]

Changed- I was able to hold our baby in the middle of the circle for her blessing. But she was a wiggly 11 month old (we adopted her at birth and it took a long time for the legal issues to work out so we could have her sealed and blessed). I've never seen it done with an infant but I have to admit it was a really neat experience!