Beyond Pants

[Vort]

Help me a little with how this makes sense - are you implying that any male that is incapable of fathering children should not be ordained to the priesthood? Sometimes I am a little dense and do not get it - are you being sarcastic in your obvious speculation that makes perfect sense?

No, of course not. You claimed that you could not even speculate a reason that makes sense. I gave a rather obvious one. It makes perfect sense. Not sure why you are conflating fathering with holding the Priesthood.

Any logical reason that makes sense to exclude any demographic from the priesthood most certainly ought to apply to every individual that does hold the priesthood?

Quite obviously not. No reasonable person would make such a claim, I think.

[Just_A_Guy]

JAG,

I find that whole section very problematic because when they printed the section, it contained both the March/April 28th 1835 revelation and the November 11, 1831 revelation together and in the wrong chronological order not to mention that the November 11th revelation was edited number of times.

Having said that, what I was trying to say is that it was indeed a process. At that time the lesser priesthood didn't equal Aaaronic Priestood as we know it but the office of priest and the high priesthood didn't equal the Melchizedek Priesthood but the office of high priest. The terminology of Aaronic Priesthood and Melchizedek Priesthood as we know it, happened gradually over a period of time.

Granted, but for the purposes of the discussion at hand - that evolutionary process seems to have been largely complete by the end of Smith's life. What came later - under JFS - was the notion that conferred of one of the orders of priesthood, and ordination to a particular office, should be properly ritualized as two different steps. But the linkage had long been there.

It's NO. What about if the revelation is YES? So far, it seems to me that a lot of people seem to think that women not holding the Priesthood is God's will and they are fine with that (without questioning) . . .

Suzie, why is it that if I disagree with a Mormon progressive, automatically I'm the one who never questioned it, never struggled with it, never thought about it, never prayed about it? How can the feminist wing of the Church claim to be a "loyal opposition" when their entire argument is premised on such condescending assumptions about the orthodoxy and an utter lack of empathy for those who disagree with them?

, a lot of them also talk about trusting in the Lord's Prophet on this however, how come if God decides to give the Priesthood to women then some people would start questioning and wondering if it was indeed revelation?

Because of the principle I referenced earlier, which I've heard referenced to as the "Law of Samuel". If we're sufficiently obnoxious, the Lord gives us what we want, even if doing so is actually contrary to His will and to our own best interests.

[mikbone]

The Church is still true.

Boyd K. Packer sets the tone for conference.

Sister Elaine Dalton gave a wonderful talk. Very nicely on point.

M Russell Ballard was succinct

It appears that the line up was inspired.

Edited April 6, 2013 by mikbone

[carlimac]

I'm sure some women are rejoicing about the prayer. No biggie. She(whoever she was) gave a nice prayer but I missed the lower tone of voice that is always soothing to me. Just my preference.

[pam]

I'm sure some women are rejoicing about the prayer. No biggie. She(whoever she was) gave a nice prayer but I missed the lower tone of voice that is always soothing to me. Just my preference.

I'm already seeing postings all over facebook about how they won. Pffft

[Wordnerd]

From Sis. Dalton, and Elder Ballard's talks, the answer I'm seeing from the Church is "you don't understand the nature and purpose of the priesthood" not that I'm very hopeful that the agitation will get dropped in response. "There are none so blind as those who will not see"

[LittleWyvern]

Well, I guess I'll be the person here that goes against the grain a bit and admits that I actually enjoyed the prayer and I felt like I was spiritually edified by it like I do for all General Conference prayers. I think the decision was inspired and I'm optimistic that this will have a positive effect on most people.

[mnn727]

I'm already seeing postings all over facebook about how they won. Pffft

"They won? because an obviously spiritual woman who actually follows the Prophet gave a prayer in General Conference?

I wonder if they listened the the rest of the speakers? especially the comments by those speakers on the Priesthood.

- - - -

No offense to the ladies, but I don't really want centerpieces in HP group meetings. Although if they brought the comfortable chairs with them..............

[mikbone]

They won?

They probably need to go re-read the rules of the game.

If 'they' don't change their game plan they are probably gonna lose big.

[bytebear]

I thought it was a specific session that women had never prayed in, but other sessions they had. Is this right?

[Maureen]

I'm sure some women are rejoicing about the prayer. No biggie. She(whoever she was) gave a nice prayer but I missed the lower tone of voice that is always soothing to me. Just my preference.

Her name is Jean Stevens.

Stevens is the first counselor in the LDS Church’s Primary presidency, which oversees instruction of children under age 12 in the worldwide faith.

The Salt Lake Tribune said:

The drive reportedly generated about 1,600 letters from 300 participants, but a church spokesman said prayer assignments predated the "Let Women Pray" campaign.

It gives the impression that the choice for the benediction was made by the Church. But then again this is the Salt Lake Tribune, you can't trust anything they write.

Jean Stevens is first woman to pray at Mormon conference | The Salt Lake Tribune

M.

[Jenamarie]

Well, I guess I'll be the person here that goes against the grain a bit and admits that I actually enjoyed the prayer and I felt like I was spiritually edified by it like I do for all General Conference prayers. I think the decision was inspired and I'm optimistic that this will have a positive effect on most people.

Ditto. I thought it was a lovely, heartfelt prayer.

[annewandering]

It is nice that she prayed. /shrug. I am curious how many who dont follow the Salt Lake tribune and/or internet gossip even noticed. I wouldnt have. Its really not all that exciting who prays. Women pray in church all the time. I did notice she was nervous to start and became less so as she went along. It was a good prayer and said what was needed to say.

Edited April 6, 2013 by annewandering

[Anddenex]

I know, I know... because all the other prayers in GC were never heartfelt or sincerely spoken.

Why would anyone think it wouldn't be a heartfelt prayer? Does this really shock people?

[Jenamarie]

I know, I know... because all the other prayers in GC were never heartfelt or sincerely spoken.

Why would anyone think it wouldn't be a heartfelt prayer? Does this really shock people?

Huh? Where did I imply that the men's prayers weren't also sincere and heartfelt? Whatever other people may be reading into it, it was still lovely prayer, and a lovely conference as a whole.

[LittleWyvern]

I know, I know... because all the other prayers in GC were never heartfelt or sincerely spoken.

Wait, what?

Well, I guess I'll be the person here that goes against the grain a bit and admits that I actually enjoyed the prayer and I felt like I was spiritually edified by it like I do for all General Conference prayers. I think the decision was inspired and I'm optimistic that this will have a positive effect on most people.

[Vort]

Did you hear that auditing report?! That was really excellent! "Appropriate accounting practices, approved budgets," etc.! Now THAT's an auditing report!

[annewandering]

It was consistent with other general conference prayers. I dont remember ever hearing a rotten prayer in general conference. :) I also dont remember anyone ever commenting on one before either.

[LittleWyvern]

Did you hear that auditing report?! That was really excellent! "Appropriate accounting practices, approved budgets," etc.! Now THAT's an auditing report!

I KNOW! I even understood some of those fancy accounting words this time!

[Anddenex]

Huh? Where did I imply that the men's prayers weren't also sincere and heartfelt? Whatever other people may be reading into it, it was still lovely prayer, and a lovely conference as a whole.

Let me ask a rhetorical question, how many other prayers have you mentioned, personally, from GC (on an open forum) that were heart felt and sincere?

As LW mentioned, "go against the grain" and actually share that she enjoyed it.

Why? How are either of you going against the grain with regard to a prayer spoken in general conference.

Last general conference did you make any mention regarding the lovely, heartfelt and sincere prayers from the brethren?

If not, why not?

I'll quote Annewandering last response:

It was consistent with other general conference prayers. I dont remember ever hearing a rotten prayer in general conference. I also dont remember anyone ever commenting on one before either.

EDIT: Her last sentence is the focal point -- no one has ever commented about a prayer before. All the prayers in GC are heartfelt and sincere, why comment on only one.

Edited April 6, 2013 by Anddenex

[LittleWyvern]

Let me ask a rhetorical question, how many other prayers have you mentioned, personally, from GC (on an open forum) that were heart felt and sincere?

As LW mentioned, "go against the grain" and actually share that she enjoyed it.

I meant go against the grain of this board. I'll explain why below...

...Wait, hold up...

she

Last general conference did you make any mention regarding the lovely, heartfelt and sincere prayers from the brethren?

Well, I've never felt such an opinion was controversial until now. I didn't mention that I enjoyed all the prayers of previous conferences because it was obvious. For this prayer, it is much less obvious: people have differing opinions here. I'm trying to make my opinion clear where it is not immediately obvious, that's all.

[Suzie]

Suzie, why is it that if I disagree with a Mormon progressive, automatically I'm the one who never questioned it, never struggled with it, never thought about it, never prayed about it? How can the feminist wing of the Church claim to be a "loyal opposition" when their entire argument is premised on such condescending assumptions about the orthodoxy and an utter lack of empathy for those who disagree with them?.

JAG, you can disagree all you want just like I do . Having said that, let's not put it like it's the feminist "wing" who is the only one being condescending and lack empathy when we are hearing people talking about them ("feminists") having the need of repentance, Church discipline and many other things. I ask, why is it so hard to just disagree without becoming judgmental and Pharisaical?

So what if some women in the Church want the Priesthood? If you (not you personally) do not agree then fine, say I do not agree and point taken. Going further than that and throwing judgments to them is causing a lot of contention and pain. And the same principle applies to the other side.

[Jenamarie]

I commented on this particular prayer because it was relevant to this particular thread.

[Suzie]

Gosh darn it folks , the prayer is being mentioned so much because it made history but you all knew that already.

[Anddenex]

...Wait, hold up...

Well, could have sworn when I viewed your profile I saw "female" -- CRAP -- Sorry.

Well, I've never felt such an opinion was controversial until now. I didn't mention that I enjoyed all the prayers of previous conferences because it was obvious. For this prayer, it is much less obvious: people have differing opinions here. I'm trying to make my opinion clear where it is not immediately obvious, that's all.

I assume this is my confusion, why would a prayer spoken by a women be less obvious to enjoy, or believe to be heartfelt or sincerely spoken?