Quantcast

Comments about ‘LDS Church responds to priesthood meeting request by activists’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Sept. 24 2013 11:55 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Ohio-LDS
NE, OH

Thank you Kate Kelly. Thank you.

Wookie
Omaha, NE

God has order in His Kingdom and in His Church.

God Bless/Godspeed

Dennis
Harwich, MA

Isn't it interesting that the Church would keep (any) woman out of the proceedings yet have a meeting that 12 year old boys can attend. What if a young mans father had passed and his mother brought him to the meeting? Would she be kicked out? Can you see the confused look on my face?

adamgale
La Verkin, UT

@Dennis, a member of their ward or stake could easily take them to the conference. She would still be refused service because the words aren't for her, but for her priesthood worthy son.

Uncle_Fester
Niskayuna, NY

Gee Dennis, stop being confused it's not that hard. It's a meeting for men, directed at men. The materials are not directed at women. Why should space be freed so that people to whom the message is not directed may attend?

Johnny Triumph
American Fork, UT

This is such a shame to me. As a man I am not demanding that I experience all the role of womanhood has to offer. I wish at times that I could have the same abilities to love, nurture, and bless lives like women have to offer. That I can't experience the closeness that a mother shares with her children. But I do not expect the Prophet to petition the Lord and ask for those blessings and abilities to be extended to me. Confusion of roles is really causing a lot of pain, both in the world and in the Church.

@Dennis - a loving and nurturing mother would find a way for her son to attend. Hopefully there are other male figures in the boy's life who would watch out for him and take him to the meeting. A loving mother would, I believe, seek to have the influence of other Priesthood holders in her son's life so that he could grow into a worthy Priesthood holder.

RG
Buena Vista, VA

Men and women are the same in some resoects, not the same in others. I believe that holding the priesthood by males only is something intrinsic to the nature of their gender, and applies not to just this mortal existence, but to premortality and postmortality. The analogy to extending the priesthood to men of all races does not hold. For reasons unknown, black men were denied the priesthood for many years, but it was common knowledge that that situation would someday end, in the millennium if not before. However, the same cannot be said for women and the priesthood. But the priesthood cannot be used to bless oneself, although priesthood holders are blessed by honoring it, the same as women are blessed by honoring their covenants; and the highest blessings of the priesthood are reserved for those who enter celestial marriage, jointly as man and wife.

Ohio-LDS
NE, OH

@ Johnny Triumph,

As a man, I am sad that you do not believe you have the same abilities to love, nurture and bless lives like women can. I certainly do. And I have the same closeness with my children that my wife does. Nothing that is good is dependent on gender-exclusivity. I am grateful for my god-given role as a parent - a role I share equally with my wife.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

Well to some extent the need for activism is not so needed when they're now going to broadcast the priesthood meetings as well.

NoCoolName_Tom
Lafayette, CA

I hate how LDS members tend to retreat to *non-doctrinal* explanations for why things are the way they are. You can't find proof that women are "more spiritual" than men in the Standard Works. You won't find proof that a mother's love is somehow equivalent to Priesthood in the Standard Works. You won't find that most popular of folk doctrines that motherhood is the equivalent to Priesthood in the statements of Thomas S. Monson since he became President of the Church. You won't find the explanation that men *need* the Priesthood because they are so much more deficient than women in the Temple.

Let's all step back a bit from the standard, unscriptural, unofficial, undoctrinal rhetoric and state all that *can* be said on the subject: It is possible that at some future date women *could* be given the Priesthood, and the reason why that future date isn't the here-and-now is *unknown*. Seriously, isn't that the standard response to the Temple Ban for African Latter-day Saints? Nobody knows? To go beyond this same response in the current dialog is dangerous.

NoCoolName_Tom
Lafayette, CA

The LDS Priesthood is not a zero-sum game. Giving women the Priesthood doesn't lessen a man's connection to God.

Let's be rational about this: we can all agree that there is a reason why *all* worthy men in the Church are expected to receive the Priesthood, right? The Church could still operate if the old rules of the Levitical Priesthood were still in effect and only a select few had it. So there has to be some benefit to all non-Black men having the Priesthood, right? And in 1978 everyone was (justifiably) overjoyed that Priesthood blessings could be extended to *all* worthy men. Why was there such happiness at this change? Because there are *benefits* to having more Priesthood holders. So if we follow this through to it's natural conclusion, what benefits are these that would somehow *not* be expressed that much more if all worthy people held the Priesthood?

Wookie
Omaha, NE

Such actions have a potential to be a slippery slope. I'm glad that this is His Church and His Order for His Kingdom. I have faith in this statement.

Godspeed and God Bless All

NoCoolName_Tom
Lafayette, CA

@FrankSegesman, are you seriously suggesting that someone should leave the only true Church with the authority to perform the necessary ordinances that pertain to salvation and exaltation and thus be doomed to an eternity in a lesser kingdom never to achieve her full potential merely because she holds an opinion you disagree with? Because, even if you meant it flippantly, that's exactly what you are saying Kate kelly should do.

Ranch
Here, UT

The sexism on this thread is apparent. Just wow you guys. Wow.

Zyn Man
Henderson, NV

These women are misguided and do not understand that they do not need to hold the priesthood to have all of the blessings that the preisthood provides. It seems more of an attention getter. And it seems to me that it is treading on areas that may question whether these women should be allowed to remain members of the church. Akin to those who follow poligamy.

Johnny Triumph
American Fork, UT

@Ohio-LDS - Women have an inherent ability to love that men just don't have. That does not mean that I do not love my children, it's just in a different way than women can. I agree with you that I relish my role as a parent. But to say I have the same abilities as my wife is shortsighted and demeaning to her. I value what she has to offer and count myself as very lucky to have those abilities in our home, much like I hope she values what I bring. Our inherent traits are God-given and we should value them and the ways they can benefit our homes. As a man, I am sad that you cannot recognize that men and women both bring essential qualities to the home, and that you feel you can replicate your wife's talents and abilities.

Shushannah
Kendal, Cumbria

The Lord proffers the invitation to attend priesthood meetings... perhaps this handful of daughters should petition Him for admittance, and let the brethren get on with learning how they can best improve the help they can offer the brothers and sisters they serve in their respective units...

dasha!
Provo, UT

Let's just speak to the request by some women to attend the priesthood session. In the past the priesthood session was available to read or watch after the fact (by anyone, including women, nonmembers, etc.) and now it is going to be available live on TV and online, also by anyone. So the argument that "It's a meeting only for priesthood holders" obviously doesn't hold water, does it? So why shouldn't women also be able to physically be in attendance at the meeting? And the argument that women would be taking up seats that men could (or should) be filling also doesn't follow (esp. now that men can watch it live on TV/online themselves as well).

And if you still want to illogically hold up those two arguments for why women shouldn't be allowed into priesthood session, then, OK...let's also stop letting men into the women's and young women's conferences since, by the same logic, those meetings are for women/young women only and men shouldn't be taking up seats that women/young women should be sitting in.

geekgreg
Kanab, UT

Whatever the commentators may say about the specifics of this situation, I just wanted to say this is a fine article and is well written. It presents both sides and doesn't demonize anybody. Good job.

Lone Star Cougar
Plano, TX

What will she do if the church respectfully declines her request?

May I suggest that possibly women are in nature more Christ-like and that God has given the Priesthood to men to teach them to be more Christ-like.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments