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
32843
PROVO, UT

@dasha!

It is not, and has never been, up to you to decide whether or not a presiding Priesthood holder should be permitted to attend any function of the Relief Society, or any other Church organized women's or young women's conferences, as retaliation for not being able to attend the Priesthood session of conference. That's just silly.

If you're really that unhappy about this take it up with the Lord. If it's the Lord's will, He'll make that known to those he has chosen to lead His Church. If you really believe that the Lord guides His Church through the Priesthood as it is presently constituted, and the answer is still no, clever arguments are not going to make any difference and you only find yourself in opposition to the Lord.

It is not, and has never been, about whether or not Sisters should be permitted to attend the Priesthood session. It is about whether or not you sustain and follow the Brethren and support their decisions. Right now, you're sowing the seeds of dissension. Does the Spirit reside in such a one who sows dissension among the Lords Church?

John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

This is the ultimate in attention grabbing showmanship. If these people wanted to just watch priesthood meeting, they could show up at many chapels and do so.

The article is incorrect in saying it was just broadcast to stake centers. In my stake for years it has been broadcast to all 5 buildings that had satellite dishes. Starting I believe 2 years ago, we have had broadcast over the internet to our local chapel.

We do not turn anyone away. If some women showed up, we would have neither the will nor the organization to turn them away.

I have to say these people do not understand the nature or order of the Church. I am also 100% convinced that the new policies on broadcasting have nothing to do with their showmanship, and much more to do with the concerns of men who live far from any chapels, or those who have work or family responsibilities that make attendance hard.

John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

The claims that the views of Church members were in step with national views on gender are plainly written by someone who does not know their history.

Utah granted women the right to vote in 1870. Mormons in the state legislature, lead by Charles W. Penrose, pushed for granting women the right to hold office in 1880, but were opposed by the non-Mormon governor. The US congress rescinded the right of women to vote in Utah in 1884, and the right was not returned until 1896.

In many other ways, starting with the founding of the relief society, the church had a radical position on women.

Giving women the endowment in the temple was radical. True, there are no easy analogies. But loose analogies like Masonry show that in general the things outside the church most similar were restricted to women.

While Brigham Young Academy being coeducational at its founding was not unprecedented, it was not until the 1960s and 1970s that the top private institutions in the US became co-ed.

The Church's teaching on women have also always been radical in not condemning Eve.

John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

The claim that one must have the priesthood to give a blessing of faith can only be made without having actually read the scriptures on the gifts of the spirit or without understanding them. Healing is a gift of the spirit. One does not need the priesthood to have the gift of healing.

ChuckFinley
Lehi, UT

I've been looking through the scriptures to help myself get clear how I stand on this issue. I found these references really helpful...maybe you will, too.

3 Nephi 11:28-40

The Family: A Proclamation to the World

D&C 3 (relevant as an example of what can happen when we keep asking the Lord to change his mind)

3 Nephi 18:22-25

Lord Avenue
Ilford, UK, 00

I live in London, England and my wife is a member of the Church of England. Twenty years ago they introduced women priests. Since then church attendance by men has fallen dramatically - from about 40% of the congregation to about 25%. Why? Because males find it more difficult to access their spiritual nature, and without male leadership a church drifts steadily towards a feminised version of Christianity that men cannot relate to. An equivalent and opposite situation exists in sport. Men are physically stronger and can beat women in most sports. That is why female-only teams and races are common. If men demanded to participate in female-only sport, women would be discouraged and female involvement would plummet. The LDS priesthood provides a opportunity of young men to raise themselves up. Do the protesters not see that if they achieved their goal they would harm women, because it would become so much more difficult to find a 'good man'.

agentbb007
Lehi, UT

Wow over 300 comments, well everyone definitely has an opinion on this one. You know if these women really want to have the priesthood so bad why don't they just go join the RLDS church?

Woodyff
Mapleton, UT

It is my belief (and I am a convert of 36 years) that there is a lack of understanding of the Gospel by these activists. They need to study the scriptures and be converted to the Gospel. Again, my opinion, that many born into the Church lack a conversion to the Gospel. There is alos a complete misunderstanding of what occurs in a Priesthood meeting. Read your scripture, repent, and gain a testimony. Like has been said above, if you want to hold the Priesthood, then join the RLDS, which I believe in now the Community of Christ church?

Woodyff
Mapleton, UT

@Brahmabull individuals do NOT receive revelation for the Church.

DCT
Idaho Falls, ID

The thing about this is, when I asked a bishop about this very subject of priesthood and why the women weren't given it, this Bishop told me that it was because they already have the priesthood. I thought that was interesting since the women aren't given priesthood duties as I believe they should.
I pondered on this and researched church history and found out that the Bishop was right in this regard. When Joseph Smith Jr started the church, he not only ordained women into the priesthood, he also ordained them into the Melchizedek priesthood. These ordinations were never removed and in fact women still receive the Melchizedek priesthood when they become temple worthy. It was Emma Smith that became the first female priesthood holder. The Quorum of the Anointed was then formed with both Men and Women as equal holders of the priesthood.
Slowly the Mormon men in leadership started minimizing what women were allowed to do in exercising their priesthood gifts.
And as the male priesthood holders are reminded and admonished to use their priesthood in service, so should the women be allowed to too.

paul the morman
slc, UT

Feminist revelation based change. Who is leading the church?

John Adams
Palmetto Bay, FL

@ DCT
Idaho Falls, ID

With all due respect, I suggest you go back to your LDS history and re-read what the Quorum of the Anointed was and what its function was.

Also, if you insist that women were given the Melchizedek priesthood, I would be most appreciative if you would provide the source for that alleged fact.

Thank you!

Surf is Up
Miami, FL

If these women see the church as a club and the priesthood as a ranking to aspire to; and that the prophet and apostles can be bullied or guilted into trying talk the Lord God Almighty into changing His plan then these women had best find a new faith that yields to such pressures.

There are plenty out there.

paul the morman
slc, UT

This is why the US government never pays ransoms to terrorists and international kidnappers.
If you pay them once they keep coming back.
These feminists have (and other enemies of the church) have learned that the church will give in if they are LOUD enough. It happened 6 months ago with sustainings with women's maiden-names and opening prayer. It will continue to happen each time the church capitulates.

chubbeehubbee
Kanab, UT

I'm not concerned about Ms. Kelly asking priesthood leaders to consider extending the Priesthood to women. I, for example, have asked my local priesthood leaders to speak more on issues like religious tolerance and bigotry. I recognize that they are the ones empowered to consider my request and, as appropriate, ask for divine inspiration. The bigger concern is that she is organizing protests and speaking publicly about what should be a private spiritual issue. If her intent is to rouse rouse public sentiment in support of her issue, then I believe her action might be inappropriate. From my perspective though, I really don't care. The decision isn't mine, nor is it hers and all will be well regardless of what she or I think.

gburns52
Milford, UT

The problem I see with this movement is that the church has a defined system in place to petition the prophet and they are trying to bypass it and petition the will of men by going to the press. See Matthew 6. It really has nothing to do with what they are asking. If they were acting with real faith, and believed that God wanted them to have the priesthood, all they would need to do would be to ask Him in prayer and He would tell His prophet to make it so. Amos 3:7
Now, as far as the question on women getting the priesthood, anyone that has gone through the temple should already know the answer to that.

DSB
Cedar Hills, UT

@paul the morman - maybe what you see as "capitulation" is actually small advancements of more Christlike practices. What is sacred about using husbands' last names in sustainings? If that was so important to God, why didn't He cause ancient people to adopt last names at all? Maybe God doesn't even care about how mortals choose to utilize a naming system. Use maiden names or not - what difference does it make?

As a new counselor in a bishopric 20 years ago I was told by the Bishop's wife that I should not call on women to give opening prayers in sacrament meeting. Despite having been raised in a faithful family where my own father was Bishop for most of my formative years, I had never heard of this policy, and wondered why anyone would think a female was less able to invoke the Holy Spirit and properly open a sacrament meeting. How in the world is that a priesthood function, and where is the scriptural justification? I told her it was this kind of unsupportable practice that helped perpetuate the idea that we are a chauvinistic church.

You see it as capitulation. I see it as growing up.

Old RM
Mesa, AZ

It is a shame that there are women in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints whose testimonies aren't strong enough to accept and love their roles and let our men have the same privilege. Some things just don't make sense. Do they want the Relief Society meeting to be made up of men and Priesthood meeting to be made up of women, then they will have a smile on their faces. Or have some women been overlooked for a calling they wanted?

RBB
Sandy, UT

Dasha- Never let facts get in the way of your opinion. About half the ushers at priesthood session were women. Stop listening to the propaganda and start listening to the prophet.

grams
small town, UT

If these women were truly actively living the gospel they would be too busy to find discontent.And they would know the reasons that we have different callings. They would be thankful that the men do hold the Priesthood. Sad,sad, sad.

to comment

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