Female Apostle

[Tao]

Certainly both men and women have opportunities to serve, but any type of service which requires the priesthood is not open to women. Women can't bless a sick child...

Neither can men. As a holder of the priesthood, I can no more heal a child than I can move a mountain.

I didn't say "heal," I said "bless."

I guess where I was going with this is that in my eyes, it really doesn't matter who is saying the words. Why vie for the position?

OK, if you're genuinely going to argue that a priesthood blessing is no different from a faithful prayer, then why do priesthood blessings exist at all? Contrarily, if there is a difference between the two, then how can you argue that women have equal access to whatever opportunities it is that the priesthood confers? (I could make the same argument about any of the responsibilities or privileges of priesthood holders.)

I apologize for my lack of clarity. I am not claiming them to be the same, what I was trying to point out is that when giving a blessing, "I" (as in my will) am not involved anymore than anyone else, and quite less than others. I had understood your desire to be able to bless a child to be a desire to have your will be expressed in that blessing, and in my experience that quite simply doesn't happen.

If you think that every single leader at every level of the church is always perfectly in tune with the Spirit and always does everything exactly as he should, then it may not be a big problem that women aren't equally involved in the decision-making process. If, on the other hand, the Church is run by people who are doing their best but aren't perfect, then it makes a big difference that over half of the population isn't equally represented.

Heh, I know all too well that we as humans are very fallible. But in that respect, where does gender come into play? Couldn't you then say that 99% of the unit is not being represented? I'm not voting on how to run the unit either, how does my being male, or even holding the priesthood place me in some preferred position to yourself in that matter?

In a way, many of my thoughts are directed to you in hopes that I can understand the the disillusionment I've had a number of friends express. I really don't get it. I don't see that holding the priesthood makes me any better than anyone else. Should Ephraim envy Judah for the responsibility to keep the law? Should Judah desire the birthright for the chance to lead? Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? There isn't a single thing in the priesthood that I can think of that aggrandizes the holder thereof.

[Dragon Lady]

I don't mean to derail the conversation at all, but I'm always disappointed when I hear women talk about how they never want to have the priesthood because it is a "huge and scary responsibility" and how they have enough to worry about "being responsible for the raising and educating and nurturing of [their] children" - because, shouldn't the mother and father be equally responsible for this? Regardless of who is in the workforce, parents share the responsibility of raising and education their children. I know that my opinion on church matters may hold little meaning to some of you, since I fell off of the Mormon bandwagon years ago, but I don't see why it can't work both ways - that is, the priesthood and parenthood being two, equally shared responsibilities among men and women.

I don't mean to pick on just you, Dragon Lady. The way you phrased what you said is kind of a pet peeve of mine. You may be the primary caregiver of your children, but I think you will agree with me that this does not diminish your husband's responsibilities as a father.

I apologize for the mini soapbox.

I would never diminish Yellow's responsibilities as a father. He is an excellent father. I am a better mother simply by having him as a partner. But he is [in]not[/i] the primary nurturer. I am by mere fact that I am with Dragon Baby 8-9 hours more per day than Yellow is. I am her primary example. I have more responsibility to try to get her to sleep, to eat, to share, to learn. Yellow plays a large part in that, too, but time-wise he plays less of a roll. During the day, his full-time job is to sit at a computer and bring home a paycheck and provide for our family. During the day, my full-time job is to nurture, feed, teach and play with our children. When he comes home in the evening, we split the responsibilities. Day or night, we talk about about what we want for our family. We make major decisions about it together. When I don't know how to handle something, I ask for his opinion. (Thank goodness for chat. Seriously.)

The decision making in our family is 50/50. The actual implementing of it, however, is much more heavily laid upon my shoulders. And I don't see a single thing wrong with that. And, fyi, that's a huge responsibility. I am very content to let my husband hold the responsibility of providing and protecting and holding the priesthood.

[wired]

There isn't a single thing in the priesthood that I can think of that aggrandizes the holder thereof.

To the contrary, I would say that every aspect of the priesthood aggrandizes its holder if he acts correctly.

"Joseph Smith said that some people entirely denounce the principle of self-aggrandizement as wrong. 'It is a correct principle,' he said, 'and may be indulged [in] upon only one rule or plan--and that is to elevate, benefit and bless others first. If you will elevate others, the very work itself will exalt you. Upon no other plan can a man justly and permanently aggrandize himself' (quoted in Andrus and Andrus, comps., They Knew the Prophet, 61)."

[Dragon Lady]

As for having one's voice heard, any council or meeting which consists entirely of priesthood holders is a council where women do not have the opportunity to speak for themselves.

For what it's worth, the new handbook stresses the importance of women on councils. Sure, there are still going to be councils without women on them, but the church is stressing that women have a very important place in our church and have input equally as important, if not more at times, than men. Watch the latest Worldwide Leadership Training if you want proof.

[Tao]

So Tao, do you believe Bishops, stake presidents, apostles, prophets, etc. Use no thought or consideration whatsoever? They just pray and God directs them what to do?

Or do they come with their own ideas and notions, and work hard to make decisions to the best of their ability, and seek divine sanction in doing so?

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe for a second that this church is LED by men. But I'd be an ignorant fool if I said that different men don't act differently in a given calling.

Not at all. But it may be egotistical to claim that the ideas that come are theirs and theirs alone. Of course each person is going to filter things through their individual filters, a talk on faith by President Uchtdorf is going to have more aeronautical references than one by Elder Bednar. But I'm currently of the opinion that that talk would have had the same impact in the odd event that Pres. Uchtdorf went AWOL the morning of the conference. The filters can make things easier or more interesting for others, but are for the most part entirely superficial.

Again, I'm pulling largely from my own experience and understandings. I'm a relatively intellectual individual, yet when it comes to spiritual situations, it isn't my thoughts or intellect that gets anything done. Yes, I have to study it out in my mind so that I'll have some chance at understanding what it is that I'm supposed to do, but that's akin to studying vocab/jargon so as to understand instructions given in any setting. Being handed an instruction manual is no good if you can't read it, but neither is being able to read and follow instructions sufficient reason to feel as though you developed them.

[Tao]

There isn't a single thing in the priesthood that I can think of that aggrandizes the holder thereof.

To the contrary, I would say that every aspect of the priesthood aggrandizes its holder if he acts correctly.

"Joseph Smith said that some people entirely denounce the principle of self-aggrandizement as wrong. 'It is a correct principle,' he said, 'and may be indulged [in] upon only one rule or plan--and that is to elevate, benefit and bless others first. If you will elevate others, the very work itself will exalt you. Upon no other plan can a man justly and permanently aggrandize himself' (quoted in Andrus and Andrus, comps., They Knew the Prophet, 61)."

Exactly. It is not the priesthood that elevates you, it is the standing in the position you are placed in and fulfilling it. In this, the Prophet is no more exalted than the Primary president, or the activities chair. No power or influence can be maintained by virtue of the priesthood. It is the service; and the love, humility and meekness that such service imparts that grants such influence.

[wired]

There isn't a single thing in the priesthood that I can think of that aggrandizes the holder thereof.

To the contrary, I would say that every aspect of the priesthood aggrandizes its holder if he acts correctly.

"Joseph Smith said that some people entirely denounce the principle of self-aggrandizement as wrong. 'It is a correct principle,' he said, 'and may be indulged [in] upon only one rule or plan--and that is to elevate, benefit and bless others first. If you will elevate others, the very work itself will exalt you. Upon no other plan can a man justly and permanently aggrandize himself' (quoted in Andrus and Andrus, comps., They Knew the Prophet, 61)."

Exactly. It is not the priesthood that elevates you, it is the standing in the position you are placed in and fulfilling it. In this, the Prophet is no more exalted than the Primary president, or the activities chair. No power or influence can be maintained by virtue of the priesthood. It is the service; and the love, humility and meekness that such service imparts that grants such influence.

I agree with your conclusion, but I disagree with your choice of words in saying "It is not the priesthood that elevates you."

[wired]

As for having one's voice heard, any council or meeting which consists entirely of priesthood holders is a council where women do not have the opportunity to speak for themselves.

For what it's worth, the new handbook stresses the importance of women on councils. Sure, there are still going to be councils without women on them, but the church is stressing that women have a very important place in our church and have input equally as important, if not more at times, than men. Watch the latest Worldwide Leadership Training if you want proof.

Interesting you'd bring up the WWT. They made a point of utilizing Sister's advice and making sure they aren't just set aside. (Elder Ballard exaggerated the point at different points.) My wife and I (who have both served on Ward councils) both thought it was great that we thought, "huh?" when he made that point. Our experience has been that, through our years of Church service, we've never had the impression that women have ever been ignored on Ward councils or in welfare committee. Quite the contrary, my perception is that the the Bishop's counselors and the Relief Society President have been the most "authoritative" figures on the councils.

This isn't to say that women haven't been ignored in the past; rather, this is to say we think it's great that our experience has been a marked improvement from anything that would resemble women being ignored.

[Dragon Lady]

Oh, I agree. I've served on two ward councils and on both of them I've felt that my presence, participation and opinion have been highly valued. My opinion has been sought out. I've felt anything but ignored. But I'm sure there are wards that do ignore the input of the women on the council, enough so that the Brethren felt it important to emphasize to the leadership of the world how important it is.

[Dragon Lady]

I can also see the day when women pray at general conference

A woman prayed at the Christmas Devotional tonight. Is that different than General Conference? (Ok, I know the obvious answer here is Yes. But I guess I didn't realize that it was a priesthood responsibility to pray at Conference, so I'm wondering how/why the Christmas Devotional would be different or if it's just tradition that has men pray at Conference.)

[Craig Jessop]

I can also see the day when women pray at general conference

A woman prayed at the Christmas Devotional tonight. Is that different than General Conference? (Ok, I know the obvious answer here is Yes. But I guess I didn't realize that it was a priesthood responsibility to pray at Conference, so I'm wondering how/why the Christmas Devotional would be different or if it's just tradition that has men pray at Conference.)

Oh no, this is the first time ever I think. I turned to my date and commented on what a BIG DEAL it was that she prayed tonight.

[Katya]

Exactly. It is not the priesthood that elevates you, it is the standing in the position you are placed in and fulfilling it. In this, the Prophet is no more exalted than the Primary president, or the activities chair. No power or influence can be maintained by virtue of the priesthood. It is the service; and the love, humility and meekness that such service imparts that grants such influence.

And yet, when President Packer said, in effect, that God would never allow someone to be born homosexual*, it was a much bigger deal than if a random primary teacher had said the same thing. Can you explain the difference?

*Yes, I'm quite aware that the wording on the transcript was changed, but even the attention that was paid to the change in wording and the motivations behind it speak to his words having a markedly different effect than those of an average church member.

[Dragon Lady]

Exactly. It is not the priesthood that elevates you, it is the standing in the position you are placed in and fulfilling it. In this, the Prophet is no more exalted than the Primary president, or the activities chair. No power or influence can be maintained by virtue of the priesthood. It is the service; and the love, humility and meekness that such service imparts that grants such influence.

And yet, when President Packer said, in effect, that God would never allow someone to be born homosexual*, it was a much bigger deal than if a random primary teacher had said the same thing. Can you explain the difference?

*Yes, I'm quite aware that the wording on the transcript was changed, but even the attention that was paid to the change in wording and the motivations behind it speak to his words having a markedly different effect than those of an average church member.

If Sis. Beck had said it, it would have cause a much greater stir than if a random male primary teacher had said it.

[Katya]

Exactly. It is not the priesthood that elevates you, it is the standing in the position you are placed in and fulfilling it. In this, the Prophet is no more exalted than the Primary president, or the activities chair. No power or influence can be maintained by virtue of the priesthood. It is the service; and the love, humility and meekness that such service imparts that grants such influence.

And yet, when President Packer said, in effect, that God would never allow someone to be born homosexual*, it was a much bigger deal than if a random primary teacher had said the same thing. Can you explain the difference?

*Yes, I'm quite aware that the wording on the transcript was changed, but even the attention that was paid to the change in wording and the motivations behind it speak to his words having a markedly different effect than those of an average church member.

If Sis. Beck had said it, it would have cause a much greater stir than if a random male primary teacher had said it.

Yeah, that's probably true. She holds a churchwide calling and she has the opportunity to speak in General Conference, all of which give her words weight and a wide audience.

[Katya]

As for having one's voice heard, any council or meeting which consists entirely of priesthood holders is a council where women do not have the opportunity to speak for themselves.

For what it's worth, the new handbook stresses the importance of women on councils.

I was happy to hear about that change (or clarification).

[krebscout]

Sauron's comment seemed to get lost in the discussion, but it's a pertinent thought. A priest is - by definition in our Church - one who holds the priesthood. A priestess is the same. And the temple teaches us about this principle.

Now, this life or the next - who knows?

[Cognoscente]

Wait, so Daryl Gibson weighed in on this? As in the Daryl Gibson from the NewsNet? I'm interested to know any behind the scenes interactions that have taken place, perhaps from a doubly anonymous 'nym for a writer!

And I thought Gibson's response totally rocked, by the way. Something about what Queen Alice said didn't sit right with me; while I obviously can't preclude a revelation giving women the priesthood, something tells me that it isn't going to happen -- after all, there have never been any promises made of women receiving the priesthood someday, while there were plenty about the blacks.

did you seriously call us "the blacks"?

...k

Hahahahaha!

Sorry, but that was really funny.

[Queen Alice]

Katya, I'd like to say, "Amen!" to every thing that you've said. My already very high opinion of you has increased.

I'd like to point out to male users on this forum, such as Tao, that just by being different genders we see issues very differently. It's understandable that you aren't able to fully relate to what we women feel like. And I don't believe that holding the priesthood makes you better than someone who doesn't, so please don't think that's my reasoning.

One idea that keeps coming up is that the Priesthood really doesn't belong to man, and it's the power of God, so why should it matter what channel it goes through? E.g., when Katya mentioned that women aren't able to bless a sick child:

Neither can men. As a holder of the priesthood, I can no more heal a child than I can move a mountain.

I didn't say "heal," I said "bless."

I guess where I was going with this is that in my eyes, it really doesn't matter who is saying the words. Why vie for the position?

Look at it from the other side: If it doesn't matter who's saying the words, then why not let everyone have the opportunity to give blessings? I'm not after the Priesthood to elevate my status or be better than someone. I simply would like the additional opportunities to serve. If a close friend or family member joins the church, it would be wonderful to be able to baptize them and give them the gift of the holy ghost! And how fantastic it would be to be able to bless and pass the Sacrament, just like Christ did. It would be great for sister missionaries to be able to give investigators blessings in their homes the second one is requested instead of having to call up some guys to come do it for them.

It doesn't work to try and diminish the role of Priesthood holders to try and convince that women shouldn't need/want the Priesthood. We make a huge deal about being a worthy Priesthood holder; I've heard so many talks where a faithful man was able to bless someone, or how ashamed someone felt when he wasn't "worthy" to give a family member a blessing. Girls want to marry a guy who "respects his Priesthood." And yes, we shouldn't call it his Priesthood. The Priesthood being restored is touted as one of the main benefits of the Restoration. Priesthood holders bind things on earth and in heaven by doing temple work. Isn't it natural to want to have the honor to do that too? Not for a reason of status but out of a sincere desire to serve and help others?

I'll give the disclaimer that logic doesn't conquer everything as our perspective is more limited than God's is. But let me point this out in response to the idea that the Priesthood is equivalent to the responsibility of motherhood. Any fertile woman can be a mother. Children are conceived on accident due to failure to use birth control (which is very sad) by irresponsible people just looking for selfish pleasure (and not even thinking of the consequences of their actions). A crack whore can be a mom. On the other hand, the most righteous Godly woman on earth could be unable to have a child due to infertility (which may not be miraculously reversed like it was for Sarah and Rachel) or because she is unmarried. However, any righteous male aged 12 and older can have the Priesthood. The Priesthood is never given accidentally. It is very, very selective who can receive the Priesthood. Just something to think about.

Laser Jock, I do appreciate that you recognize the possibility of a change in Church policy. What I was trying to say is that in the end, that same idea is just dismissed as something that's useless to talk about. I feel there's useless speculation (where is Kolob?) and then there is sincere speculation, which I would more appropriately name "pondering." I like that we are all having this discussion. It is not fruitless in the least. I just wish that more often statements about women and the Priesthood would end with "it's likely that it will happen someday, or if it doesn't, we at least know it's a possibility" instead of "well, never mind, this isn't important, let's just ignore this."

I don't think assertions that there's plenty for women to do outside of the Priesthood are correct, because I agree with Katya's statement that it's like limiting the majors women can pursue but saying that a woman shouldn't worry about not being able to major in math because there are 100 other majors. Wanting to major in math is not wrong. Those assertions fit in with what I don't think is right--aiming to justify what's currently believed with any evidence that might support it instead of aiming to find the truth of the matter, even if it isn't the accepted belief. Please don't take this comparison too far, as it is far from perfect and was the most accessible I could think of quickly: It's like living in the 15th century and coming up with all the reasons why the earth is probably flat, and even the reasons why it should be flat and why it's good that it's flat. No matter how many lovely reasons you come up with that in a perfect situation the world would be flat, even though you can talk until you're blue in the face why it makes sense that God created the earth to be flat, it will never, ever change the fact that the earth is round.

Now, whether the earth is round or not (figuratively speaking) may not be knowable to us now, perhaps because we are limited by our current technology which won't allow us to sail a ship completely around the world. But that doesn't mean we stop discussing it and recognizing that it's very possible the earth just could be round.

[Queen Alice]

Also, I am so happy to have heard about the changes regarding the handbook and ward councils. Perhaps in many ward councils women were included completely, but it's clearly not the majority if the Church had to come and spell it out. I think this is a step in the direction we're talking about!

[Imogen]

Wait, so Daryl Gibson weighed in on this? As in the Daryl Gibson from the NewsNet? I'm interested to know any behind the scenes interactions that have taken place, perhaps from a doubly anonymous 'nym for a writer!

And I thought Gibson's response totally rocked, by the way. Something about what Queen Alice said didn't sit right with me; while I obviously can't preclude a revelation giving women the priesthood, something tells me that it isn't going to happen -- after all, there have never been any promises made of women receiving the priesthood someday, while there were plenty about the blacks.

did you seriously call us "the blacks"?

...k

Hahahahaha!

Sorry, but that was really funny.

i like to add a little levity to conversations i can't contribute to.