@Bill in NebraskaI have some doctrinal concerns with some of what
you said. If every woman holds the priesthood equally with her husband, what of
those not married? There are plenty of single sisters. I held the Melchizedek
Priesthood independant of being married or not. If she equally holds the
Priesthood with me, can she join me in ordaining my son a deacon? Can she
baptize my daugter?Wives may be equally share in the BLESSINGS with
their husbands in holding the Priesthood, but they do not hold the Priesthood.
We teach that the authority of the Priesthoid is given through an ordinance by
the Laying on of Hands, and women do not go through that ordinance.
Lagomorph: Actually the spiritual and othe has very real relevance. IF you
care to look at the Priesthood of God as it was held in the Old Testament and
the New Testament you will find not one woman who ever held the Priesthood.
There may have been prophetess be they didn't hold the Priesthood.
Equality is not always man's law only. The Mechizedek Priesthood's
true name, "the Holy Priesthood, after the Order of the Son of God". It
was shortened to Mechizedek Priesthood out of reverence to Jesus Christ and
called after a very righteous holder of the Priesthood.Every woman
in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints holds the priesthood with
their husband on an equal basis. Though everything in the LDS Church is done
under the authority of the Priesthood as many have already stated. The talk in
the last General Conference Julie Beck who was release during the Conference as
General Relief Society President spells out how the priesthood blesses the lives
of the women of the Relief Society. Maybe you should read that. Then you
really see how the sisters actually feel about the priesthood.
Utes Fan: "Church felt that the ERA was too vague..."How
ambiguous is "Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or
abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex."? Maybe
the ratification timeline was the confusing part.It seems pretty
clear to me. As I said in my OP, "So much for considering women fully
equal, at least in the eyes of the law." If you oppose the plain statement
of the ERA, you are opposing the equality of women in the eyes of the [civil,
secular] law. Spiritual equality or inequality allocated by sex has no
Bill in Nebraska,"Further, Emma later in life mentioned that if
anything could be changed it would be her, not Joseph. She knew Joseph did
exactly as the Lord directed pertaining to polgamy though it didn't set
with her."That's a great point that is neglected all too
often. I would also like to add something to it. Just because Emma didn't
like something HARDLY would say that Joseph Smith's perception of her
didn't elevate her or her life as a human being. Emma's remarks about
Joseph after he died prove the exact opposite. She loved Joseph, spoke MORE than
highly of him, and knew he was God's prophet until the day she died.How often do we have perfect days where us and those we love interact
without any disagreement or confrontation? I'd like to see such a planet,
cause it aint on Earth. Sure, Emma didn't exactly say "Yay for
polygamy", but Joseph's perception, treatment, and love for her is
great and there is no reasonable doubt that can be cast on it. Such a criticism
can only be accomplished by not knowing or ignoring the facts.
WI Member: I'm not sure where you got your information pertaining to Eliza
R Snow and Emma Smith. Fact is that Emma knew all about the prophesy of Polgamy
and that Joseph was doing it. Fact is that she knew he had been married and
sealed to Eliza Snow and that in the beginning welcomed her into her home. There
is the story that later though that Emma knocked Eliza down the stairs of the
home.Joseph didn't marry Eliza behind her back but with her
blessing at first. That did change and thus Joseph to keep Emma from becoming
frazzeled didn't inform her of some of the others.Further, Emma
later in life mentioned that if anything could be changed it would be her, not
Joseph. She knew Joseph did exactly as the Lord directed pertaining to polgamy
though it didn't set with her. In her dying words she called out to Joseph
and let him know she was coming. No doubt she is with him today.You
words are misleading and contradictory to the facts.
RE: The incorrect idea in Christian history that wives should be dependent began
with the false premise ? that the Fall of Adam and Eve was a tragic mistake and
that Eve was the primary culprit ?1 Timothy 2:11-15, Let the woman learn
in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp
authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then
Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the
transgression. Yet she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in
faith(in Jesus) and love and holiness with propriety.Paul speaks of the
godly women finding fulfillment in her role as a wife and mother at home, and
refers to godly women being saved spiritually through the most significant birth
of all the incarnation of Christ(John 1:14). The gospel(good news).
I find it ironic that the author quotes Joseph Smith about husbands respecting
and cleaving to their wives, and none other. The next paragraph is about Eliza
R. Snow, plural wife of Joseph. Emma'a feelings were not respected when it
came to polygamy. It must have been very difficult to learn that Joseph had
married her best friend and Relief Society counselor, Eliza R. Snow, behind her
@Lagomorph"By the the 1970s, Utah killed the Equal Rights Amendment.
So much for considering women fully equal, at least in the eyes of the
law."------------The LDS Church had no such reasons for
opposing the ERA. The Church felt that the ERA was too vague and that it might
jeopardize the Church's position on the differences between men and women.
Meaning, the Church was simply trying to protect its religious freedom, which is
frequently at the root of whatever political issue the LDS Church has an opinion
on. Please note that the Church's position on differences between the
genders does not imply inequality, although critics often spin it to appear that
Cowboy Dude "Woman do more in the LDS Priesthood which they have than many
male ministers can do in other churches."I agree with you that
in reality that LDS women are equal in the most important missions of the LDS
church even with some privileges such as redeeming the dead, missionary work,
and perfecting the Saints. It is mostly at the local level.However,
the article is about perception. For those looking from the outside and for
young women and young men in the Church, the perception is that the Church is
led only by male General Authorities, Bishops, and Stake Presidents. There are
still many traditions in the Church that emphasize this patriarchal leadership.
On the other hand, some of those traditions are finally going away too.
Good comments; Lagomorph: my personal reaction to the Equal Rights Amendment was
I was "darned if a group of overpaid, overweight men (recall the gender
make-up of government at the time) would tell ME what it meant to be a
woman". I come from a long line of strong, independent-minded woman who I
know struggled at times with societal restrictions, but who ultimately proved
that strength, like virtue, cannot be legislated; it must be earned on an
Article: "Marriage was perceived as hierarchical with women inferior and
subservient to men. If a woman earned a wage, it was legally her
husband’s. Some physical violence against women was legal...."This is the "traditional marriage" that so many want to
preserve?Razzle2: "...the LDS Church was considered liberal for
that time"Pendulums swing and the rest of the country caught up.
By the the 1970s, Utah killed the Equal Rights Amendment. So much for
considering women fully equal, at least in the eyes of the law.The
author's lede about the role of perception vs. reality makes the selection
of the art to accompany the piece interesting. No one will ever really know,
but the archeological and genetic evidence points against Eve being a blow-dried
Breck Girl. Would the perception of Eve and the interpretation of her place in
the faith be different (among Americans, anyway), if she were portrayed as
African, say a !Kung or Maasai?
It is a "cop out" to say women must "hold" the Priesthood to be
equal.Woman do more in the LDS Priesthood which they have than many
male ministers can do in other churches. Not only do women give
public prayers, testimonies, and discourses; they are "set-apart" by the
"laying on of hands" to work under the direction of the Priesthood. With
this Priesthood they have the authority for leadership in many church positions
and even lead the male teachers in the Primary organization.In this
century; Temple Presidents and Mission Presidents are usually called as couples
only.But, most powerful is the fact that women of the LDS Church do
not need to be even "set-apart" in the Priesthood to perform sacred
priesthood ordinances in the LDS Temple to redeem those that have passed on.
In the entire 64 years of my life so far, I have been taught to believe that
women are not exactly "equal" to men, but superior to them. I was also
taught the value of keeping this a secret from the men so they wouldn't
feel bad, but lately it seems it isn't so much a secret anymore. I was
taught that men need the priesthood where women do not, and that if women were
given the priesthood, they would be unfairly burdened by it. I was taught that
the Lord especially loves and favors women. See Jacob 2:7.It is true
that in at least one instance in the Bible there is an indication that woman is
equal to man: Genesis 2:18, which says: "...It is not good that the man
should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him." To me, that is an
archaic way of saying that woman is a helper, "meet" or equal to him and
appropriate for him.
Since the article is predominately about the 19th century & early 20th
century, it should be noted that the LDS Church was considered liberal for that
time. Women gave discourses, taught seminary, gave public prayers, and sat in
So what if women don't suffer in childbearing? I really don't think
that scripture is well understood or translated. To say that we have to suffer
in birth just perpetuates the notion that women need to be 'punished'.
It's work, hard work, but it doesn't mean we have to suffer and if we
did, things such as visualisation, hypnobirthing wouldn't work. In some
cultures, pain & childbirth are not even considered related. Women can and
have given birth without any pain whatsoever. I don't believe Heavenly
Father means it the way it was translated, but the long history of women being
treated as less than men (and I am sorry, it sill happens and even in the
church). Patting me on the head and telling me I am just naturally more
spiritual and that's why I don't have the priesthood doesn't put
me on an equal footing. I am not saying I want the priesthood. But platitudes
don't create equality.
To be the truth that women have equal status with men then women will need to
receive the priesthood equal to men.