Hmmmm, let's see... If the church is true, then these women need to
respect the will of the Lord.If the church is false, then the
priesthood isn't worth having.Perhaps these women should adopt
a consistent position? Either support the Lord's prophet or join a church
that will be happy to ordain them.
@RedWings - you can see that same pattern in the comments here.
Anyone else wonder why the sister who was to lead the "300 protesters"
in singing "The Spirit of God Like a Fire in Burning" did not know the
hymn and needed a Hymnbook? This is not an obscure hymn. A news photographer
separately noted that most of the protesters were the same people often seen at
LGBT rallies.I am thinking this "movement" is not much of
one at all. It is just another opportunity for the haters to make a scene."You can leave the LDS Church but you can't leave the LDS
As far as I'm concerned, these sisters are welcome to the priesthood if
they want it. I've got some hometeaching they can help me with.
Silverprospector-One last note. Priesthood authority is not just
about giving blessings. Priesthood authority is needed to administer ordinances
such as performing baptism, giving the gift of the Holy Ghost, giving the
sacrament, and so on. Another way to know women did not receive priesthood
authority is because they did not performed priesthood ordinances (baptism,
sacrament, etc). You should not get caught up about their giving prayers in
faith by the laying on of hands. I repeat, Priesthood itself is not the laying
on of hands.
Silverprospector & DocHolliday-Both of you have missed the point
and keep avoiding the key to everything. To have priesthood, it needs to be
conferred upon you. It was never conferred upon women by the Prophet or by other
church leaders who held Priesthood Keys. In short, a presiding
authority (like the Prophet) holds priesthood keys which allows him to direct
and preside over priesthood work (which includes conferring Priesthood on
someone). Women were given permission to lay their hands on people in the prayer
of faith (a prayer can include a request to rebuke illness). You have been
terming this a "blessing," but it shouldn't be confused with having
the priesthood or giving a priesthood blessing.Priesthood blessings
start with a declaration, "By the authority of the Melchizedek
Priesthood." The women never stated this when laying their hands on someone
in the prayer of faith to call down God's blessings. Therefore, their
prayers of faith by the laying on of hands were NOT priesthood blessings. Silverprospector - People can be healed with no priesthood involved.
This is related to faith and a spiritual gift for some. Go read Moroni 10
if you do not believe me.
1.96 Standard DeviationsI have to comment here. You are the one that
is spreading false information. You have done it before on other posts. The
evidence is out there - women were encouraged to administer to the sick. Now
they aren't. why is that? Did god change his mind? If women are allowed to
give a blessing to heal the sick, but without the priesthood power, then what is
the point of the priesthood? If anybody can give a blessing, and they don't
need the priesthood to heal, then why would anybody ever use the priesthood to
give a blessing. Your excuses are confusing, and it doesn't make sense.
Continued....in Cache Valley, Apostle Ezra T. Benson had called on
women who had been ordained and held the power to rebuke diseases to do so and
urged all the women to gain the same power by exercis[ing] faith.This was not in the early days of the church, as you claim, and plenty of men
were present to give blessings (against what you claim). So why would they have
women pronounce non-priesthood blessings by the laying on of hands? What good
can a blessing do if it isn't by the priesthood? If it does work, then
there is no use for the priesthood because anybody can do it by the laying on of
hands. the picture you paint doesn't add up, and it
doesn't make sense.
1.96 Standard DeviationsWrong. you are the one that is incorrect.
you are spreading false information. You make excuses for them laying on the
hands and giving blessings. You have also made other excuses that don't
hold water regarding other topics, so it isn't surprising. So you think
they used the layin on of hands, but didn't hold the priesthood? That makes
sense. The only blessings I know of that use laying on of hands are priesthood
blessings. Joseph Smith specifically addressed the propriety of
women giving blessings:If God gave his sanction by healing there could be no
more sin in any female laying hands  on the sick than in wetting the face
with water. There were women ordained to heal the sick and it was their
privilege to do so. If the sisters should have faith to heal the sick; he said,
let all hold their tongues.(grand palmer, women and authority)
So, ladies, now you've seen behind the impregnable 'Priesthood
Curtain', now that you've seen our most closely guarded
'secrets', 'secrets' like "love God, be kind to your
neighbors", and, yes, most amazingly of all, "love and serve your wives
and children", was the Priesthood session everything you hoped it would
be?OK, I'm being teasingly sarcastic, but what is discussed at
a General Conference Priesthood meeting was no 'secret' at all and is
nothing worth "demanding" admittance to as a woman. Get real, you
wanted "equality" when "equality" has existed all along.I agree with some other posters here: what may have started out as a
desire to be treated as 'equal' (again, when it already exists) will
result in some women AND some men choosing to lose their testimony (Yes, losing,
or maintaining a testimony is indeed a "choice") because they were not
admitted to the meeting.However, as the Church leaders said, it is
simply a matter of logistics: seats for women means there's FEWER seats for
Priesthood holders....Priesthood holders who desperately need to feel the Holy
Spirit by attending the meeting.What's next?, men in Relief
Brahmabull & DocHolliday-Please stop spreading false information
about the church conferring the priesthood upon women in the 1800s. Women were
given permission from the Prophet Joseph to lay hands on people in the prayer of
faith -- likely related to the church being small at the time and many men
called away to serve missions. This continued for a time and stopped. Women did
not receive the priesthood or perform priesthood ordinances or perform
priesthood blessings. The laying on of hands is not the priesthood itself and
does not mean the women were given the priesthood. The women gave a prayer of
faith on someone's behalf while laying their hands on a person. End of
I have tried several times to post references to women holding the priesthood in
the early days of the church, but the moderators won't allow my comment to
come through. Apparently they feel it is better to ignore historical facts.Nevertheless, women were given the authority to give blessings of
healing using the laying on of hands in the 1800's, there are many examples
of this, yet mainstream mormons seem unaware of this fact. That is
why it is not so far fetched that women now want to be included. Why not? It
happened in the past.
To Mom25 from Minot, ND! Thank you for saying exactly how I feel also!
@Brahmabull, the one thing you are forgetting that this happened in Old
Testament times when there were no righteous men to fulfil the duties within
their land. It was not evident in New Testament times. What are you saying
about these latter-day times? That it doesn't matter if there are worthy
priesthood holders on the earth, women deserve this right and privilege. That
the First Presidency and Quorum of the 12 are not worthy priesthood holders?
That my Bishop is not a worthy priesthood holder? That his wife could do things
better? I find that thinking sad.You also mention about these women
having the right to voice their concerns, they already did that prior to the
Priesthood Session and were told it would not be possible. So what did they do,
rather than listen and be guided by the Priesthood, they protested and bought
notoriety to their cause. Why is that not considered wrong or inappropriate??
Any report on how many men were turned away from the Women's conference? I
wonder if any of the women in this group tried to attend at a local stake
center. I guess none because no news media would be there.Anyone
else find it ironic that the leader of the group is an attorney?
My wife thought it ironic the location in which the Ordain Women watched
conference, stating that City Creek was the perfect place for them, observing,
"I mean c'mon... All that shopping!!"
The Church has scriptural and traditional reasons why women are not given the
Priesthood at this time. As one of the speakers at conference noted the Temple
ordinances provide Priesthood powers to both genders equally. I have
more fundamental questions. Other churches ordain women and they have positions
of leadership. Have more people "come unto Christ" as a result? Have
these churches held to Gospel principles or has the influence of feminists
changed their moral compass? If some one wants to advocate this change as
"progress", then show that "progress" makes a difference in
building the Kingdom.
@Ranch Brahm and TruthseekerNot surprised to see you three as the main
supporters of the OW here. Same on all the articles about the LDS Church as
those that constantly find fault in our doctrine and beliefs. You all cite
"sexist" remarks on the comment board. Could you point some out? I bet
you can find one here too.
once freeSo anybody that has a doctrinal or procedural question has
the spirit of contention?? Your comment says it all. Closed minded thinking is
never the answer.
The Savior selected MEN for his 12 Apostles. HE and THE FATHER are men. Women
have children - a gift not given to men. Our purposes are distinctly
different....still we are instructed to be "ONE, and if ye are not ONE ye
are not MINE". Says it all to me. "Contention is not of me, but is of
the devil", saith the Lord. We know the Church will have dissenters.
It's been fortold for millenia. You are meeting some of them. Recognize
them for "WHAT" they represent as well as WHO they are.
There are many posts condemning these women for their actions. I am curious
about these peoples thoughts in regards to past history.Around
1977-78 there were many members who sided with blacks and the priesthood, would
those individuals also be considered out of line?
I think the reason that men and boys have a Conference session of their own to
attend is that the Priesthood Meeting encourages them in their divinely designed
masculine roles. Relief Society and Young Women conferences encourage women and
girls in their divinely designed feminine roles. In each case, the
vision being presented is enhanced by being surrounded by those who share that
Ad Remthey have a right to voice their concerns in the church just
as anybody else does. that is how the bretheren are made aware of possible
problems and necessary changes in the policy of the church. Many times since the
1830's has there been changes in doctrine, policy, and practice. It has
happened before, why can't it happen again?
Mike RichardsYou, and many others on this site seem to be unaware
that there is strong evidence that women held the priesthood in the early days
of the church. Of course, you will probably deny it despite all the evidence to
the contrary. But it seems to have happened. That is why it bothers me when
people act like women holding the priesthood is such a far-out, far-fetched and
ludacris idea. It happened in the past, so no it really isn't that
I do not understand the motivation behind this at all. If you believe in the
Gospel of Jesus Christ as taught by this church then you understand the Prophet
is the guide here on Earth speaking for Jesus Christ and there is a division of
power on earth. The men hold the power to act in the office of the priesthood
and the women share by going to the Temple and completing the covenants they
have made. It is a simple division but one that has been clearly defined and
does have any blurring of the lines just because social convention says women
should be able to exercise the priesthood in the same way men do. It is a team
effort and can only be properly done if the women do their part and men do their
part and together they do the parts that are required of them to enter the
Celestial Kingdom. Christ’s church is a church of order and the order is
explained through the Prophet not by any other means. This is a male and father
son bonding experience, you can’t have it, sorry.
I'm an LDS woman. I think that if women are given the Priesthood, then we
will take over everything in the Church. We will plan everything, give all the
blessings, counsel everyone, do all the baptisms, take the lead in meetings, and
so forth. In every ward I have been in, there have been more active females in
the ward than actives males. I have noticed that females tend to be more
diligent in their callings than many males. ("If you want to get something
done, ask the Sisters" is a common refrain.) In addition, women
with the Priesthood will have everything that men have and MORE...because men
will never be able to bear children. We will be able to have jobs like men,
have all the authority and callings at church like men, fight in wars like men
(women can train to become as strong as many men, and modern technology and
fighting methods means physical strength is less important in fighting). No
amount of training or dedication or protesting in the streets will give men the
"right" to bear children.The ability to bear children and
Priesthood power are both eternally vital and complement each other.
When men start giving birth to children - then will I stand up and say that
women should have the Priesthood - but NOT UNTIL THEN!
Actually one of the talks could of had to do with her - the one on Home
teaching. Just change it to visiting teaching and brethren to sisters. Each has
to do it right and each should have heard that talk.While I did
watch it along with my husband I personally found the talks boring except for
the one on Home teaching. So Sister Kelly - stop trying to draw attention to
yourself. If you truly want to hold the priesthood go home and give your husband
or any male member in your family that has the title of deacon, teacher, priest,
elder and so forth a hug as you will then be holding the priesthood.
The trend of the world right now and has been for a generation or so, is for the
sexes to demonstrate their complete independence from one another once and for
all. It has seemed a major need for women to prove that they can support
themselves and create themselves in the world without the need for men to assist
them. It is unfortunate that some men have intensified this resolve through
their own bigotry and self proclaimed superiority over women.Sheri
Dew, in her last Conference talk explained how men and women need each other;
that neither was complete without the gifts and abilities of the opposing
gender. What see is a group of well meaning sisters who feel that unless they
can have priesthood conferred upon themselves, that they cannot be independent
in the gospel. But that is the whole point. The Lord stated quite eloquently in
the first chapters of Genesis that neither men nor women were complete without
the other. Without priesthood, men could never compliment the natural gifts of
Sister Kelly obviously does not speak for the majority of LDS women of the
Church. Every sister in my home ward in Australia has said that they do not
want to be ordained to the priesthood. Why would we need to be ordained when we
already enjoy the blessings of the Priesthood as wives, mothers, temple patrons
and members of the Church? The Ordain Women group believe that by being
ordained they can sit in council with the Brethren. Obviously these women have
never served as a President or in a Presidency of the Relief Society, Young
Women's or Primary organisations. The sisters who hold these offices sit
in council with the Brethren often and work closely with them to ensure the
needs of the youth, women and children of the Church are addressed. The crowning comment though is stated by Sr Kelly that the messages of the
Priesthood meeting did not resonate with her. Yet, as I listened to these
talks, my heart was touched by the words of President Monson as he admonished
the brethren to reach out to those for whom they are responsible. I guess
that's the difference I listened with my heart.
@Bleed Crimson:"Then why on earth is she trying to get into the
priesthood session in the first place? The purpose of the priesthood session is
for the church leaders to give counsel to the brethren of the church, not the
sisters!..."Oops. Much of what was discussed in Saturday's
Priesthood Session dwelt on missionary work... Why weren't the ladies
invited to attend, since there's a ton of lady missionaries out there who
need the training/encouragement just as much as the guys do?Somebody
needs to think this through.
The complete and utter lack of humility of these women, their belligerent and
confrontational attitude, their total disrespect for the authority of the
General Authorities of the Church, and their greater esteem for worldly
philosophies than for the Gospel itself, are all precisely the reasons why they
should not be ordained to the Priesthood. They didn't even care what was
said at Priesthood session. They were only seeking to exalt themselves.
@1aggieI have read and understand the 9th Article of Faith. The
heavens are open and revelation does come through proper channels. I highly
doubt that the opening of heaven is persuaded by protests in the streets and
"likes" on social media sites. And clearly your "movement" is
not a proper channel for revelation for the Church. I am sure that those
leaders who made improper doctrinal changes in the early Church were well
intended and believed that what they were doing was "consistent" with
the doctrine. The point is, the change came from a source other than the proper
revelation the Lord talks about in the 9th Article of Faith. Hence the danger
of apostasy. When the Prophet speaks I will follow. Until then, I personally
would not presume to counsel the Lord or His prophets.
I see so many posters trying to equate the petition for the priesthood for women
with the prayer of a prophet concerning the ordination of priesthood to all
worthy males. All are forgetting the huge difference between the two. For my
60 years in the church I was taught that the blacks could not hold the
priesthood in earlier days. I was taught that it was a temporary condition that
we hoped we would live to see changed in our lifetime. I also taught that on my
mission to the blacks in Colombia in the 1970's. There was no surprise
when the revelation was given to the prophet - only gratitude and jubilation
that the anticipated day had arrived. My father also taught that we
would likely witness the day of two-piece garments. Again, it was expected. At
the appointed day of the Lord, revelations were received. The petitions for gay
marriage and for women holding the priesthood are not at all the same. There
are no such doctrines to support men or women of the same gender married for
eternity, nor for women holding the priesthood.
@New Yorker"Faithful, attending, committed members can recognize
one another among crowds of strangers by common scriptural idioms cultivated by
repeatedly reading the scriptures and hearing them repeatedly quoted.
"Resonate" does not appear in the standard works. I see
"resonate" as a tell here."The word "idioms"
does not appear in the standard works. I see "idioms" as a tell here.
Katy Kelly of Ordain Women:"We are... asking Church leaders to
prayerfully consider the ordination of women.Our understanding of
the gospel is that the heavens are not closed....We believe that the expansion
of Priesthood keys must come from God through revelation to the First Presidency
and the Twelve Apostles. The role of Church members in this process is
demonstrated throughout the D&C which includes many examples of revelations
received after members approached the Prophet and requested revelation. This
pattern was established by Jesus Christ, "Ask, and it shall be given you;
seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." It is our
belief in God and our faith in the Church that compel us to bold,
faith-affirming action. And your whole labor shall be in Zion, with all your
soul, from henceforth; yea, you shall ever open your mouth in my cause, not
fearing what man can do, for I am with you. Amen; (D&C 30:11).Equality is not about sameness; it is about removing obstacles to access and
@1Observer"How is the "Ordain Women" movement any different
than the shifting political and social winds that led to the demise of the
Church in the meridian of time?"It seems you have not heard of
our Article of Faith #9. In case not, it says in part, "we believe that He
will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of
God." Your 'closed heavens' and 'change is bad'
attitude is counter to the fact that change is the only constant in this world
and especially in our church. If you actually read and understand what the
sisters you are condemning are actually saying (and asking for), then you will
see that it is not inconsistent with our Article of Faith #9 and they are not
trying to bring about the demise of our Church!
A couple of hundred years or so after the death and resurrection of Christ, the
doctrines of the Church began to change to bend to the politics and common
thinking of that day. Leaders and Church members let personal beliefs and the
doctrines of men influence doctrinal changes and many plain and precious Gospel
truths were lost. Ultimately the Gospel was taken from the earth, necessitating
the Restoration heralded in with Joseph Smith in the Sacred Grove. How is the
"Ordain Women" movement any different than the shifting political and
social winds that led to the demise of the Church in the meridian of time?
"Resonate" is a term that sounds more New Age than L.D.S.Faithful, attending, committed members can recognize one another among crowds
of strangers by common scriptural idioms cultivated by repeatedly reading the
scriptures and hearing them repeatedly quoted. "Resonate" does not
appear in the standard works.I see "resonate" as a tell
May I say simply that conference was tremendous, uplifting, encouraging,
hopeful, and truly a feeling of abundant love.so I will say to Ms Kelly or
anyone who may question the value of women, self worth of women-the place of
women-in the Lord's Kingdom.listen again to Elder Anderson's
remarks, reread the family proclamation--and then proclaim your blessings from
the Lord as His daughter or son. I believe conference shared and expressed the
Lords thoughts and feelings and reiterated his love for these women and to all
his children-for in the voice of His servants it is the same as He speaking
it-for it is His words--As it is His church.
We need to feel sorry for them and pray for them. They have obviously stopped
listening to Christ and are listening to the world about fairness &
equality:( I am so sorry they have lost the light of Christ. I hope the few
minutes of fame are worth it:( ladies you can be in the world and not of the
world. Pray for forgiveness for that sad spectacle by daughters of our Heavenly
Funny - I didn't notice many empty seats, but then again there were
probably just as many so-called empty seats at the General Women's meeting
last weekend. I don't think the goal is to fill the conference center but
to share messages. Many people coincide a vacation or long weekend trip to
conference just to get into a session of conference. I have a feeling
none of the messages of conference have resonated with her, not just the
Priesthood session. I, however, have found something of interest &
greater knowledge from all sessions. Shocking that a woman can appreciate the
messages intended for the women, youth & men. I believe there is something
for all in these messages regardless of age or sex.
Of course none of the messages resonated with you. You are not a male! Those words completely show the silliness of the Ordain Women crowd. This
whole thing is an attention seeking objective. Members don't
receive revelation for the church. The Lord tells His prophets what He wants to
happen, not the other way around. For a great rebuttal to this movement go to
LDSmag and read the post by Maurine Proctor. It's what I've said from
Another step closer to apostasy after this weekend. Maybe these gals
should check in with Sonia Johnson and get some pointers on how to properly
handle women's right issues.After this failed media event
I'm sure several of these ladies and their husbands will be in for the
shock of their lives.
While I don't always agree with everything in the Church, the Church is not
a business in the public square. It has governing principles (which I
acknowledged have changed from time to time - but not right now) - so -
"Sorry Sisters - this effort is a total non-starter".
Even Eve thrust the forbidden fruit at Adam, saying, I wanted this, so now we
both have to deal with it. It's the same pattern. I want it sister, so men
-- make it happen my way. Somethings never change.
Re:BYU&WUFAN"This group is bad news. I have been following this
group for some time online. They constantly poke fun of current and past leaders
of the church. This group is a wolf in sheep's clothing. Half of the group
have an ax to grind."Hmmm, well i just visited the facebook page
and there are many comments. Thus far, I have not come across an anti-Mormon
comments, so suffice it to say they are few, if any. Perhaps you can provide us
with an example from one of the leaders of this group which is anti-Mormon or
which doesn't adhere to their stated policy to back up your claim. You did
not make it clear in your 1st comment that you were talking about OTHER people
posting comments on their facebook page. Would you also hold DN to
the same standards? Does DN endorse every comment on its site? Perhaps Ordain
Women should include a disclaimer on their facebook page.I just
think we should/could have a respectful, honest,and FACTUAL debate on this
Sisters: Do you not consider going to some other church where you could be
"ordained" because you believe God's Priesthood is only in the LDS
Church. If this is the case, then why, at the same time, do you seek to convince
the Lord that His eternal plan is in error?
Clovis Fan said, “Men do not have the same privileges as women in creating
and nurturing children. Without the priesthood, men would have nothing.”
That's not how Elder Ballard sees it. He said, “Men and women have
different but equally valued roles. Just as a woman cannot conceive a child
without a man, so a man cannot fully exercise the power of the priesthood to
establish an eternal family without a woman. In other words, in the eternal
perspective, both the procreative power and the priesthood power are shared by
husband and wife.”
@TruthseekerEveryone has a role to play in the LDS Church. For
anyone to suggest that motherhood is the sole role women can play in the LDS
Church is extremely short sighted. My wife and I don't have any children
yet, but my wife has still held many responsibilities in her various church
callings along with being the most important person in my life. I frankly
can't imagine what I'd do without her. It seems to me that
some people in the world are so determined to make everyone "equal" that
they fail to understand that each person has unique gifts, talents and
abilities. If one wanted to push equality to the extreme, they would completely
eliminate individuality. Not only would everyone look the same and act the same,
anything that was unique to any individual would be eliminated as being unequal.
Is that what the true goal is?
I disagree with Ordain Women, but I also disagree with commenters who attempt to
conciliate women for not having the priesthood. There is no need for that,
because having the priesthood does not indicate greater favor by the Lord.
Clovis Fan wrote, “Sister Kelly needs to realize that women are already
valued higher than men in God's eyes.” Not true. The scriptures say
men and women are valued equally by God. Clovis Fan also said,
“[Women] have the privilege of procreating and raising children.”
Well, no, not every woman does, but every man can qualify for the priesthood.
Comparing maternity to the priesthood is wrong. Gender influences our roles in
this life, but our worth is not defined by those roles. In April of this year
the Church made this statement: “The worth of a human soul is not defined
by a set of duties or responsibilities. In God’s plan for His children,
both women and men have the same access to the guidance of His spirit, to
personal revelation, faith and repentance, to grace and the atonement of His
Son, Jesus Christ, and are received equally as they approach Him in
It amazes me that KK would go so far as to rebel so openly and push her opinions
and lead other women away in her crusade. She oversteps herself to assume that
demanding to be allowed to enter the GENERAL Priesthood session.. . along with
her objective to be "ordained"? She is in the wrong church then to
expect that in ours. The priesthood is conferred as already mentioned and
clarified. IF it was intended for women to have the priesthood don't you
think it would have begun with Joseph and Emma? Not. KK, you do
not understand your role and position as a woman in the church. A woman is
blessed so much by the virtue of her temple covenants. She is not denied those
blessings and is able to received them without holding the priesthood through
faithfulness to all her covenants. Treading in dangerous waters
will only lead to more unhappiness and discontent, despair. For what? Do not
be deceived. It is time to stop, turn around to be happy with those blessings
already afforded you now. Isn't what she is
doing counter to the doctrine and teachings of the Church?
From Ordain Women's website:“We welcome those who . . .
care deeply about the Church and its members and are concerned about how gender
inequity affects all of us." What an ironically paternalistic statement. In
essence, Ordain Women is saying “LDS women need our help. They are
obviously too weak to help themselves and too weak-minded to even know they need
help.” I happen to believe that most LDS women are smart, strong, and
living their faith because they choose to, not because they have no other
choice. They don't need anyone, least of all critics of the Church, to come
I reject the notion that women's important role as mothers should
automatically preclude them from any possible priesthood ordination.One observation:Women live long AFTER they have born and raised
children. And many women don't have the opportunity to be mothers.Maybe we ought to stop explaining, or justifying current positions and
leave it that Church leaders, thus far, have not received inspiration to change
the status quo. Ranch is correct. There is rampant sexism in these
This women's group talks a lot about equality, but if their definition of
equality is based on how the world views it, then I can't help but wonder,
do these women want an LDS Church where their sons are told over and over again
they are worthless, that fathers have no role to play whatsoever except in
simply being the person who fathers the babies?
Are these women even members of the Mormon church? Who is to say. If they are
members, do they go to church?its seems like if they were members they
would have a hard time going to church.can you imagine having them in a
sunday school lesson?
I did chuckle at SLCWatch's satire. I had not read all the comments. I
know that it is easy to say, go join a church that will let women have the
priesthood or embrace gay marriage. We know that the Lord is not going to let
people tell him what to do and in turn, he is not going to let the Prophets do
things contrary to his will. But the Lord does want people to see the errors of
their ways and to soften and change their heart. I respect the church in their
kind approach to these groups that harass, I would be a bit more gruff. Yet, if
it were my child, I would hope that they would be treated with kindness and
respect, so that one day she would return to the fold because she was treated
As an active LDS man, I actually do have sympathy for these women who are
attempting to change LDS policy. While I won’t attempt to
speak fully on their behalf, I imagine they see how, in various parts of the
world, women are still oppressed and treated like animals. In many countries,
women are still not allowed to vote or hold office, are subject to frequent
violent crimes such as rape and stoning with little, if any, means of bringing
their perpetrators to justice, and of course, we see how in some countries women
are still victims of barbaric practices such as being burned to death if they
can not pay an adequate dowry to their future husband’s family. On the flip side however, the western world’s view of gender roles
and gender treatment has some very clear differences, and this is where I have
concern. How many times, for example, have we in the western world
heard the message from feminists groups that children don’t need fathers?
How many times in TV shows, movies and in popular music, are males shown as
either lazy and brainless, or as selfish womanizers?
Re: TruthseekerMy comment is right on. I am talking within the
comment sections of the facebook page. Just because something is a policy
doesn't mean it is followed. I have been watching this page for a couple of
months. There are plenty of anti LDS comments, and the admin does nothing about
Kelly kind of shot herself in the foot, she has now proven a point that she is
fighting against, Priesthood sessions are not intended for the sisters. I went
in and listened to some of it last night with my husband. But the messages were
for the men, not for me. All my life I have asked either my father or husband
what was said. I have enjoyed getting basic information, but I knew my husband
would not want to watch the Relief Society session, why? Because it has nothing
to do with him. Isn't it wonderful that we are members of a church where
they take the time to address the women and the men individually and center
their comments more to their needs.
These women need to stop trying to stir the pot. If they are so obsessed in
being "ordained," perhaps they should move their membership to one of
the "mainline" churches that allows female ordination. But, then again,
they wouldn't be able to stir the pot and run their blogs and seek media
attention trying to changed the practices of the LDS Church.
Sometimes, SOMETIMES, men and boys need to feel comfortable in their own skin
while in the midst of others so they can understand the messages said without
the "all-knowing eye" of a female presence (like wives or mothers). Let them have their time together. It's a great male bonding time, and
women don't need to be in there to feel equal. Let them be!
The sexism, it is strong in these comments.
Sister Kelly needs to realize that women are already valued higher than men in
God's eyes. They have the privilege of procreating and raising children
with God, they are the fairer, gentler sex and because of this more women than
men will be saved in the end. They already have an extremely important, highly
valued role in this life and beyond without the priesthood. Men on the other
hand by their nature will have a more difficult time than women overcoming the
natural man. Men do not have the same privileges as women in creating and
nurturing children. Without the priesthood, men would have nothing. Sister
Kelly's lack of understanding of the great blessings she already has just
by being a women will lead to her spiritual demise if she continues down this
Re:BYU&UWFAN"This group is bad news. I have been following this
group for some time online. They constantly poke fun of current and past leaders
of the church. This group is a wolf in sheep's clothing. Half of the group
have an ax to grind."Re:UncleRicoThis movement is being
orchestrated by enemies of the LDS Church."FalseFrom
the group's website:"What’s your Ordain Women profile
policy?We do not solicit, nor do we support, diatribes against the Church
of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Rather, we encourage thoughtful
submissions on what the ordination of women would mean personally and/or for the
institutional Church. We welcome those who are faithful Mormons, those who might
return to the LDS Church but for gender inequality, or those who care deeply
about the Church and its members and are concerned about how gender inequity
affects all of us."
While Ms Kelly claims to be active in her ward, based on their website, I would
venture that MOST in this group are not active or not even members of the
Church. She states it is nice to be in the presence of the Prophet and Apostles
yet her actions and behavior deny them. She has founded an apostate group that
publicly and actively riles against the doctrines of the Church. Is this not
grounds for excommunication? Tough and sticky situation for her Priesthood
@Uncle Rico"This movement is being orchestrated by enemies of
the LDS Church."Uncle Rico, please back that comment up. You
obviously have information that we do not. Let's hear it. Who
specifically are the enemies you are accusing and what orchestration is
We see from most of the posts here that Kelly's comments of non-resonance
of the spoken messages to her, is a direct reflection of how this movement is
not of the Lord, but of the Great Agitator himself. Her cause is
divisive and contentious. Therefore, she, and I'm sure most of her group,
was left spiritually empty because the Holy Ghost cannot dwell where their is
contention. Another reason why the Bretheren handled this situation in the
manner it should have been, through the direction of the Lord.
@ Ad RemAfter reading the article, then reading your comment I
wonderwhat do you believe in? Your little rant belittles the religious and
so again I ask what do you stand for?Always easier to tear down then
create isn't it?
There is a way for this group to have a priesthood conferred and still be in the
Mormon tradition if that's what they desire. The Community of
Christ(Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ)has given their priesthood office to
women years ago.
This movement is being orchestrated by enemies of the LDS Church.
While were at it I want to join the NRA (National Rifle Association) and push
them to support a ban on guns. I want to join Al Qaeda and start a pro-American
and Pro-Israel chapter. I want to join Amnesty International and push for a
violent, kidnapping and torture group to attack those who don't share our
views. I want to join PETA and host the annual BBQ and small animal sacrifices.
I want to join Green Peace and move them to invest more in oil companies,
Japanese Whaling and help cut down all those unsightly trees. I want to Join
the International Rescue Coalition and change their policy on refugees so we can
send all those fleeing oppression back where they came from. I also want to
join the Optimists club and help them admit there just isn't any point in
going on.Oh, and for those who don't understand
satire...It's a joke.
Those of us who have a spiritual witness from tHe Holy Spirit that Joseph Smith
received a vision of the Father and of the Son would never give counsel to The
Lord on what His doctrine should include nor would we tell Him that he somehow
forgot to extend priesthood responsibility to the women of His church. If
Christ is the head of this church, then why shouldn't we allow Him to
direct His church His way? I would think that if a "priesthood leader"
decided that Christ's doctrine was somehow faulty, that that
"priesthood holder" would forfeit that authority to act in Christ's
name.We probably all have questions about points of doctrine, but no
one whom I know who has received a testimony via the Holy Spirit, would deny
that testimony in an effort to seize "control" of the church from Christ
- who directs His church.
There are plenty of great religions that have women functioning in the role of
the priesthood as they see it relates to their religious organization and
philosophical beliefs. Just join one of those churches and religion instead of
try to change the one you belong to by petition or demonstration
It's a religion, not a social or political cause, which is why it is a
theocracy not a democracy.
This is so sad in a time that we all need to stand together. These women can
and do teach Sunday School, primary, Seminary and Institute. These women are
asked to give talks in their ward on Sunday. These women can stand and bear
their testimony monthly. These women can help with Family History, Indexing and
temple attendance. Why do they want the priesthood? Because they can't
have it! I'm tired at the end of the week doing the services I'm
asked to do. Yet I do them gladly! I feel great comfort that our priesthood
holders are there to bolster me up, give me blessings should I need them. After
seeing the bishops schedule for the whole ward, I would not want his job. To me
a shepherd takes 24/7. And you must at all times be worthy to give a blessing.
I would so much rather see these women protest about unequal pay or medical care
for all women and children. Look for something worthy to do. Remember Who You
I've taken girls to the young woman's conference in the spring at
least a half dozen times. Guess what? They didn't let me in because
I'm male. Why ? Because it is a meeting for young females. I went to a
place with the other males and watched the meeting on tv. We were all ok
letting the young woman having their time together.
@mainly me, @the deuce, @ arizona1, @reader: All your comments are
spot on. We see the adversary hyping the same sex attraction issue with the
Church, then he adds a second front with a small handful (out of 15 million)
wowmn and their male supporters.One can conjecture these proponents
see other religions have allowed female clergy and think they should have the
same opportunity.The priesthood for women and same sex marriage
approval are two rails of the same track heading nowhere within the LDS
Church.Comparing all worthy males eligible to receive the priesthood
and allowing women to hold the priesthood are doctrinally eons apart.
Good grief... I think someone likes the attention they are getting.
Miss Kelly said that while listening to the Priesthood meeting, nothing
resonated with her. All she wanted to do was get her 3 minutes of fame. I'm
sad for her and her little followers. If she is not happy then she needs to
branch off on her own; trust me NO ONE is going to stop her from leaving. As
with any other activist (who wants to shout and make noise)Miss Kelly
accomplished nothing. I hope she moves on and out of the way of those of us who
did appreciate the beautiful messages our brothers, sons, husbands and
father's were receiving.
If were the stake president of these women I would call them into my office.
They are walking a fine line between passion and apostasy. This type of garbage
is what gives the church a bad rap. They don't care about getting the
priesthood. They are so far into this that all they care about now is the amount
of publicity they get for their misguided campaign.
This group is bad news. I have been following this group for some time online.
They constantly poke fun of current and past leaders of the church. This group
is a wolf in sheep's clothing. Half of the group have an ax to grind.
"When asked about the meeting she said none of the messages resonated with
her."Those messages are not directed to me," she said, but
added that it is always nice to be in the presence of the prophet and those in
the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles."I think that she answered her
own questions about why she was not let in to the Priesthood Session
"When asked about the meeting she said none of the messages resonated with
her."Right. That's the point, sister. It is a meeting with
messages for MEN. So what was your point of all this brouhaha? Ridiculous.
They look pretty pathetic out there.
All sessions of Conference were wonderful, including the Women's Meeting
and the Men's Meeting. The General Authorities, both men and women, are
leaders of faith and inspiration. This small group of women deserve our prayers
and hopes that one day, they will understand and enjoy what God has for them.
May we all seek such understanding! May we gain peace from that search! On an
earlier post to another article, someone said this:"What is it that a
woman would be seeking through priesthood ordination that she does not already
have but a TITLE which has nothing to do with how God sees her, but with how the
world sees her." The goal was to have recognition and to Council the
Brethren. I rejoice in the gospel and am humbled by the existence of such good
men and women who lead the Church under the direction of the Savior. One day,
may we all be in tune, rather than in conflict.
"When asked about the meeting she (Kelly) said none of the messages
resonated with her."This one sentence says a lot about
Kelly's attitude and the contention that dwells within her.And
perhaps this is why the Priesthood session is for priesthood holders. If the
messages don't resonate with you because they are not completely directed
at you, then why persist in your divisive (but peaceful) protest. Sure, everyone
wants to see the General Authorities in person, but there is Relief Society
general session, and four other conference sessions for you to attend to see
them. Most members never get the opportunity to see the GAs in person. So be
thankful that you have, Sister Kelly.
Kate Kelly demanded entrance to the Conference session for the priesthood
session; when she was refused she watched it on a computer. Then she stated,
"None of it resonated to me." Of course it didn't!!!
The session was directed to the men of the Church. Where was she last week when
the messages were directed to the women? She could have requested and received
tickets for that event and been in the presence of the First Presidency at that
time.She needs to be reminded that her band of 150 women do NOT
represent the views of the rest of us.
Sophistry. These women would have us believe that they worship Christ and
recognize the authority of the priesthood as found in the Restored Gospel, yet
must not believe the Prophet and Apostles are chosen of God to lead his kingdom
here on earth, ergo they need to be told what the Lord intends in relation to
the role of women. We can see from their website that they believe that God is
both male and female, a doctrine that is not taught by the LDS Church and what
likely is at the root of their disagreement with an all-male priesthood. Like wolves in sheep's clothing they claim to be part of the flock
and yet use the media to foist themselves into the limelight in a divisive
staged protest that mocks the practices of the LDS Church by including prayers
and songs in order to seem to follow the good shepherd. Did Kelly even listen to
the talks before she proclaimed that there was nothing in them that could
benefit her? She is now famous and enjoying her 15 minutes and should she
continue will likely leave or be excommunicated from the LDS Church. Sad story.
"When asked about the meeting she said none of the messages resonated with
her."All of the messages in the priesthood session were very
inspiring, and resonated with me. May I suggest that if they did not resonate
with her, that tells us more about her than it does about the messages?
I am not even remotely interested in having the priesthood! The last thing I
need as a busy woman & mother is to be shackled with that responsibility. I
already have enough on my plate & don't need to deal with having the
priesthood. Honestly quit focusing on what you don't have and focus on the
things you do.
When asked about the meeting she said none of the messages resonated with
her."Those messages are not directed to me,"Of
course they didn't resonate with you... It was intended to instruct the
Priesthood. No where in these articles has there been any mention of whether
these sisters attended the General Relief Society sessions last week. My guess
is that they had other interests and concerns that kept them away. I believe
the messages at the Relief Society meeting would have resonated with them if
they had the proper spirit with them.
"When asked about the meeting [Kelly] said none of the messages resonated
with her."'Those messages are not directed to me,' she
said..."That ought to be an indication of something, Sister
Kelly, wouldn't you agree?
Kate Kelly is defeating her group's goals by saying the Priesthood messages
didn't resonate with her.But there were quite a few empty seats
in the Conference Center. Let 'em in if they aren't taking any seats
from men and boys wanting to attend.They'll stop coming since
the messages "don't resonate with them."
It's always funny to watch religious people - they disagree with the
theology of the church of which they are a member, and so they try to
"change" it via protest or democratic action. If they don't
believe in the doctrines of the church, why are you a member?
Could have watched it on BYU TV from home and saved themselves the trip downtown
After reading an article in USATODAY, I think Ruth Todd's suggestion that
most view the movement as "divisive" is spot on. The author's
article suggested that the debate about the role of women in the "Mormon
church" "raged" on with today's actions. If a national news
outlet uses those terms to describe this event, then I think it is safe to say
that today's actions were perceived in a more divisive rather than unifying
manner. The article also gave a number of people a national forum to spew lies
about the Church.As indicated in my earlier comment, unless these
are the intended results/goals of this group of women, I would suggest they
resort to methods that do not appear so confrontational and attention-seeking.
Kelly said "Those messages are not directed to me"Then why
on earth is she trying to get into the priesthood session in the first place?
The purpose of the priesthood session is for the church leaders to give counsel
to the brethren of the church, not the sisters! The sisters had their meeting
last weekend to receive counsel from church leaders that is directed to them.
Even if they were admitted, they would still complain that the
message wasn't directed for them. This would create a chain reaction! She goes on to say "that it is always nice to be in the presence of
the prophet and those in the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles"If
she's sincere about wanting to be in the presence of the prophet and the
twelve apostles. Maybe she should get a ticket to one of the other four general
sessions. But the problem is that it's not good enough for these women. I'm sad to see them make these choices. It's not the prophets
decision on who gets the priesthood, it's God's decision! He gave men
and women different roles in this life for a reason.
These women need to get the terminology correct. No one is "ordained" to
the priesthood. The priesthood is conferred. Men are then ordained to certain
offices in the priesthood. Their website also contains a fair amount of false
I think the Church has handled the requests as well as it possibly could.
I've worked with feminists in academia for years, and though I still
disagree with a number of their viewpoints and methods, I at least respect their
sincerity.On the surface, the orchestrated, public methods used to
garner media attention do appear to be an attempt to shame the Church as a
misogynist organization that has not kept up with a changing society. Certainly
that must not have been the intended result by many of these women and the men
supporting them, but I think that is exactly the divisive perception that Ruth
Todd was referring to. Unfortunately, there are a number of people with
different causes, who rather than engaging Church leaders in a productive,
personal dialogue to better understand each other's views, seek to publicly
force the Church to change to fit their social views.
I am not of the LDS faith, however, it seems to me that these women were able to
view the talks given at the LDS Priesthood session as you could find them on the
BYU TV channel. I asked a Mormon friend about this as they subscribe to this
channel. It is only my opinion, but if you want to be ordained to the
Priesthood, you need to be asking the person who's priesthood it is. It is
my experience with members of this church that they take these types of
questions to God. I would say go to the source and ask him/her.
These women don't understand their roles as women. They share God's
procreative power, but that isn't enough. They've been taken in by
the world, which creates a divide between women and their true role. If these
women keep this up, they are endangering their membership in the church.