Excommunications on the Rise.


onethatislazy
 Share

Recommended Posts

Wow.  I don't know what to say, I'm actually having MAJOR second thoughts as a member of this church over this whole ordaining women issue. Some of my views about this are based on personal experience (I've been part of too many churches in which men make all the decisions and in which women are considered "better seen and not heard").  

 

That being said, I don't personally want to be a priesthood holder.  Some women do, and I don't see why they wouldn't want that.  To me that's absolutely normal.  To me, it's not a deal breaker.  But the response from the church on this issue might be.

 

Why excommunicate someone when it seems apparent to me that all they are actually trying to do is begin a dialogue with the leadership of the church?

 

I thought we were supposed to be led by the Holy Spirit, yes?  The men AND the women in the church?

 

The message seems to be that the male leadership will keep the women quiet.  I'm just saying - that's how it comes across to me.  Let's not discuss this, let's just keep them quiet.

 

I think this has less to do with ordination, at its root, and more to do with women who feel they are essentially lesser human beings because men make all the decisions within the structure of the church.  

 

It's no wonder to me at all that they took this and made it public.  If they hadn't, other women who are members of the church and who have been wondering why they cannot be ordained priesthood holders would never have a chance to voice their very sincere desire to understand why they are essentially left out.  Publicly raising to the issue seems the only way these other members who are wondering about this would know that, yes, other women in the church feel the same way they do.

 

Okay, now, stack up that kindling, I'll give you the lighter... just conveying to you how all this comes across to me, in my spirit, my heart, my mind, in everything.  I'll get over it eventually.  Unless I'm all crispy after the fire goes out.

 

 

Sorry, but it is thoughts like this that bug me to no end.

 

Kelly inniated a dialogue.  Believe it or not, she succeeded on that front. 

 

BUT she didn't like the answer and kept going.

 

Therefore, we can only assume she wasn't looking for a dialogue. That, or didn't properly understand what a dialogue is.

 

Once again, she didn't "just want to start a dialogue".  She wanted ordination.  That's it.  Stop making up stuff about what she wanted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by Just_A_Guy, June 25, 2014 - Pending mod discussion.
Hidden by Just_A_Guy, June 25, 2014 - Pending mod discussion.

Wow.  I don't know what to say, I'm actually having MAJOR second thoughts as a member of this church over this whole ordaining women issue. Some of my views about this are based on personal experience (I've been part of too many churches in which men make all the decisions and in which women are considered "better seen and not heard").  

 

That being said, I don't personally want to be a priesthood holder.  Some women do, and I don't see why they wouldn't want that.  To me that's absolutely normal.  To me, it's not a deal breaker.  But the response from the church on this issue might be.

 

Why excommunicate someone when it seems apparent to me that all they are actually trying to do is begin a dialogue with the leadership of the church?

 

I thought we were supposed to be led by the Holy Spirit, yes?  The men AND the women in the church?

 

The message seems to be that the male leadership will keep the women quiet.  I'm just saying - that's how it comes across to me.  Let's not discuss this, let's just keep them quiet.

 

I think this has less to do with ordination, at its root, and more to do with women who feel they are essentially lesser human beings because men make all the decisions within the structure of the church.  

 

It's no wonder to me at all that they took this and made it public.  If they hadn't, other women who are members of the church and who have been wondering why they cannot be ordained priesthood holders would never have a chance to voice their very sincere desire to understand why they are essentially left out.  Publicly raising to the issue seems the only way these other members who are wondering about this would know that, yes, other women in the church feel the same way they do.

 

Okay, now, stack up that kindling, I'll give you the lighter... just conveying to you how all this comes across to me, in my spirit, my heart, my mind, in everything.  I'll get over it eventually.  Unless I'm all crispy after the fire goes out.

 

I honestly cannot figure out if responses like this are based on ignorance of the gospel or willful deception. This is the standard marching tune of those who support Ordain Women. This expression of hurt, which feels manipulative, coupled with a complete lack of logic is incomprehensible.

 

This better-seen-and-not heard response is utter rubbish. Obviously! There is a huge amount of dialogue in the church, with great efforts going on to address women's concerns. You're either blatantly and purposefully ignoring this or your'e living in a self-fashioned Ordain Women box with blinders on to anything but that objective.

 

Almost everything you say here is based in lies? So the question follows: Are you lying or being lied to and obliviously drinking it in?

Link to comment

Wow.  I don't know what to say, I'm actually having MAJOR second thoughts as a member of this church over this whole ordaining women issue. Some of my views about this are based on personal experience (I've been part of too many churches in which men make all the decisions and in which women are considered "better seen and not heard").  

 

That being said, I don't personally want to be a priesthood holder.  Some women do, and I don't see why they wouldn't want that.  To me that's absolutely normal.  To me, it's not a deal breaker.  But the response from the church on this issue might be.

 

Why excommunicate someone when it seems apparent to me that all they are actually trying to do is begin a dialogue with the leadership of the church?

 

I thought we were supposed to be led by the Holy Spirit, yes?  The men AND the women in the church?

 

The message seems to be that the male leadership will keep the women quiet.  I'm just saying - that's how it comes across to me.  Let's not discuss this, let's just keep them quiet.

 

I think this has less to do with ordination, at its root, and more to do with women who feel they are essentially lesser human beings because men make all the decisions within the structure of the church.  

 

It's no wonder to me at all that they took this and made it public.  If they hadn't, other women who are members of the church and who have been wondering why they cannot be ordained priesthood holders would never have a chance to voice their very sincere desire to understand why they are essentially left out.  Publicly raising to the issue seems the only way these other members who are wondering about this would know that, yes, other women in the church feel the same way they do.

 

Okay, now, stack up that kindling, I'll give you the lighter... just conveying to you how all this comes across to me, in my spirit, my heart, my mind, in everything.  I'll get over it eventually.  Unless I'm all crispy after the fire goes out.

 

 

LeKook you are the perfect example of why she needed to be ex'd.  You say want dialog... The church is dialogging and it is changing where it can.  However to be truly a dialog both sides need to be listening to the other.  The church has heard the women who are having issues.  It has changed what it can and been very clear on what it can't.

 

Christ controls the church, Christ decides who the priesthood can be confirmed upon.  Currently that is all worthy males.  To extend it to females requires the church to receive revelation from Christ that church is to do so.  Revelation that it does not have.  The Church isn't going to defy Christ for you or anyone (including the Ordain Women movement) so that they can get what they want.

 

But it appears that for all the calls for dialog a dialog wasn't really wanted.  She didn't listen to church as the church listened to her.  She instead wanted to lecture the Church and tried to gather people (like yourself) together to try to bully her desires over the Churches' understanding of what Christ wants it to be doing.  That is simply not acceptable

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Her latest sob story is that apparently her bishop told her she wasn't going to heaven. 

 

Maybe he did say that, but I'd rather see it from his claim.

 

Which heaven?

 

This woman sounds like she needs to go attend Gospel Principles Class again.  Bishops don't say "heaven".  Primary children don't even say "heaven".  They specify which Kingdom.

 

Now, if the Bishop told her she was going to Outer Darkness, then yeah, I might sympathize with her.  As it stands right now, she's far from Celestial glory... that's plain to see.  I'm no judge, but it's safe to assume that ex'd people have a long way to go to attain Celestial glory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which heaven?

 

This woman sounds like she needs to go attend Gospel Principles Class again.  Bishops don't say "heaven".  Primary children don't even say "heaven".  They specify which Kingdom.

 

Alternatively she already understands such quite well but is intentionally being imprecise when sharing the encounter for rhetorical effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 As President Jimmy Carter said on the Colbert Report a few months ago - he would be willing to join the Catholic church once they let women become Popes/priests.  I'm sure he and others would join the LDS church if the church let women become apostles.  

 

 

I'm sure a lot of people would join the church if we changed a lot of things.

 

I say we go through all our policies, doctrines, and views and find out how to change them to attract the greatest number of converts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure a lot of people would join the church if we changed a lot of things.

 

I say we go through all our policies, doctrines, and views and find out how to change them to attract the greatest number of converts.

 

Right on. The church of sex, drugs and rock-and-roll!  :thrasher:  :bananajam:  :fullband:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 As President Jimmy Carter said on the Colbert Report a few months ago - he would be willing to join the Catholic church once they let women become Popes/priests.  I'm sure he and others would join the LDS church if the church let women become apostles.  

 

One more reason why he was one of the worst US Presidents ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have big families, we're high on the spirit, and we sing "rock of ages" as a hymn.  I believe we got it covered.

 

For some reason I envisioned a live band playing the disco guitar (because, of course) that gets quiet for an exuberant sermonist to read 3 Nephi 19:26.

 

 

And Jesus said unto them: PRAY ON!!

And then the disco guitar cranks up again. 

 

 

Now that I type it out, I realize it's just Bill Cosby with The Book of Mormon.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Until recently, he topped my list.

 

 If he failed it was because the people were short sighted and let him and the country down.  Carter was and will always be a great man.  His Presidency was sabotaged by the lazy voters and conservatives who worked with Iran.  In other words - treason.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow.  I've seen Glenn Reynolds and other conservative commentators make that argument--in parody--about Obama--the "we just aren't worthy of his greatness" schtick.

 

It's thoroughly entertaining to see the argument made by someone who (apparently) is 100% serious about it--even if the president in question is Carter, rather than Obama.

 

Oh, and by the way:  Treason involves working against one's country, not one's president.  Which is why Senator Barack Obama was not promptly imprisoned when he visited Iraqi leaders in 2008 and told them not to work with then-president Bush on negotiating a new SOFA agreement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 If he failed it was because the people were short sighted and let him and the country down.  Carter was and will always be a great man.  His Presidency was sabotaged by the lazy voters and conservatives who worked with Iran.  In other words - treason.  

 

It's times like this that I wish the laugh button was still here, because this post cracks me up in so many ways. Thanks, Hoosier!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share