Ashley Isaacson Woolley: Ordain Women is not the answer on Mormon women’s equality

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Miss Piggie Phoenix, AZ
    Oct. 24, 2014 7:37 p.m.

    @Neanderthal: "Call to the Priesthood is a call to go to work. Women have it easy as they are not so called. They should be jumping for joy rather then moaning and complaining."

    If women are given the priesthood they should be required to wear a suit, white shirt, and tie to church... and keep their hair cut short. Anything else would be discriminatory.

  • Neanderthal Phoenix, AZ
    Oct. 24, 2014 1:48 p.m.

    @TheProudDuck: "I appreciate that only a minority of LDS women have any interest in exercising Priesthood office."

    Call to the Priesthood is a call to go to work. Women have it easy as they are not so called. They should be jumping for joy rather then moaning and complaining.

    Of course, they are encouraged to teach in various church auxiliaries and to go on missions but they're not considered derelict if they don't.

    @Thats what I thought: "...the Church did not have the OW group that tried to get into Priesthood session arrested..."

    You don't arrest women for this sort of stuff. Period.

    @Old But Not Stupid: "The great irony herewith is the shrift these misguided ladies will get from the imposition of Sharia Law that changing demographics eventually will cause in the coming years."

    I don't know, but it could be Shariah was imposed, in the Muslim world, on females because they got a little uppity.

    @Eileen Fullenwider: "I didn't say change doctrine, I said change the culture."

    Women have unique roles... in their youth to middle age they are supposed to be attractive... some say 'sexy.' Men aren't.

  • Dr. Thom Long Beach, CA
    Oct. 22, 2014 9:27 a.m.

    After a short illness, our Stake Patriarch died and a new one was called and his wife was called as his assistant; so much for women in the church not having a priesthood calling. Does anyone know of a Patriarch who is single or widowed?

  • Dante Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 21, 2014 8:43 a.m.

    One of the two photos accompanying the article states that it includes the Church Office Building. Des News appears to have cropped the building out of the photo without revising the caption.

  • JSB Sugar City, ID
    Oct. 14, 2014 9:36 p.m.

    Both men and women in the LDS church have promised to strive to build up the church. If I break that promise and continue to break that promise, and refuse to repent, it is a serious sin and the church has the right and responsibility to excommunicate me.

  • John Locke Ivins, , UT
    Sept. 29, 2014 11:45 p.m.

    The LDS women whom I have spoken to, are somewhat embarrassed by such a suggestion.

    I know of a woman years ago who left the Church and joined NOW. She was married and had several children. My wife and she were clode friends. Inviting my wife to lunch one day, she tried to "convert" her to to her point of view. My wife basically told her that she had her own views and supported the Priesthood and the brethren she knew and loved who were an active part of it, just as she was an active part of the Relief Society. She told her friend that she loved her and that would never change, regardless. They never met again, as the lady would have nothing to do with my wife after that.

    When the Church says it is an incorrect position, we both support that direction.

  • Lilalips Attleboro, MA
    Sept. 27, 2014 6:11 a.m.

    There are almost no women helping to decide church policies. There are very few women in higher positions of church leadership. Women don't even write their own manuals anymore. Our church has very sexist policies such as: A man can be married up to 4 women. A woman must have her first husband's permission to get a temple divorce. There are no women zone leaders. There are no women Sunday School presidents. There should be no reason why women cannot lead in these positions and be treated equally in the temples, which by they way they are not. Officiating is not the same as leading. Mostly women are treated well on a personal level. But any church "court" only in involves men often sitting in judgment of women. There is great room for improvement in these areas. Women should be able to hold their babies when being blessed. As of now they are not. Don't tell me that our church believes in full equality. I was taught as a youth in Seminary that I had to accept polygamy if I wanted to go to the highest degree of the Celestial kingdom. Has this changed?

  • skeptic Phoenix, AZ
    Sept. 23, 2014 2:20 p.m.

    It is said that JS was in favor of women receiving the priesthood and in fact gave it to Emma. So was he wrong, again.

  • jahenders Colorado Springs, CO
    Sept. 22, 2014 1:11 p.m.

    I always find these kind of groups strange and illogical, where it's Ordain Women, some similar groups of Catholic nuns, etc. They claim to be faithful members of their faith, but they reject core tenets of their faith -- especially the divine inspiration of their leader(s). If any LDS person believes the prophet is, indeed, a prophet of God and that God directs the church, then they shouldn't be arguing vehemently with that God-given direction. Instead, they might encourage consideration or dialogue, but should save their hardest questions for God.

    If, instead, they believe the prophet is just a man running a faulty organization on his own whims, then they should probably just admint it and join (or found) a different church.

  • lds_phoenix colo spgs, CO
    June 26, 2014 9:55 a.m.

    To Vince here,
    I am not sure what you intended by your statement about the ERA, but the Church was in agreement with a majority of the population when it stated that the ERA was not the answer. A popular slogan of those days was "Equal Rights Yes! ERA No!" The reason for the opposition to the ERA, for both the Church and a majority of population, was the vague wording of the amendment. The Church made many statements supporting the equal rights issue itself, but not the specific amendment.

    Several states adopted similarly worded amendments after the ERA didn't go through, and what ended up happening, especially in cases in Maryland and Pennsylvania, was that women were deprived by the courts of spousal and child support as direct results of ERA-type state laws. This is what the Church was speaking out against, as it deplores men that shirk their responsibility of providing for their children.

  • Mc West Jordan, UT
    June 26, 2014 9:02 a.m.

    Eileen Fullenwider
    I am so glad that when I served as Relief Society president in my ward I was not required to sit on the stand during Sacrament Meeting! Who cares about all this recognition? Are we here to be honored or here to serve? There are a lot of people missing the point of the gospel when they go about asking for more respect and recognition. Just go out and serve!

  • Beulah South Jordan, UT
    June 25, 2014 1:14 p.m.

    In the laws of the land "sameness" is apparently the only measure of equality. But I'm so tired of being told that I'm not equal to a man if I'm not the same as a man. I am a woman. I am not the same as a man. I don't need someone with a degree in gender theory trying to convince me otherwise. Theocracy is a real blessing.

  • cval Hyde Park, UT
    June 24, 2014 3:47 p.m.

    To: WI_Member
    Appleton, WI

    The author of the article states "On the other hand, the church may hesitate to make changes to avoid appearing bullied or shamed by Ordain Women."

    Shouldn't the church make changes because it is the right thing to do, regardless of who gets the credit?

    They will!!!

  • TheProudDuck Newport Beach, CA
    June 24, 2014 2:40 p.m.

    "What does it matter...that predators claim those few who fall by the way?"

    To heck with those losers. It's all about the ninety and nine.

    Never one of my favorite talks. The thing about caravans: It's not enough that they keep moving. It also matters *where they are going.*

  • ulvegaard Medical Lake, Washington
    June 24, 2014 11:11 a.m.

    Perhaps I might also claim that my rights of equality have been violated when the bishopric of our ward was changed a year ago and I wasn't called as the new bishop. I am a high priest, I try to be worthy, but still, I didn't get called.

    And that is fine. I am an organist and I love to serve as an organist and I report directly to the music chairman - a woman - and she makes decisions and I have no problem with that as I have witnessed her inspiration in serving in her calling.

    Before any of us feel that we are not an integral part of the church because of our gender or some other reason, perhaps we might ask ourselves if we are not an integral part because we aren't contributing in ways that are best suited to us and as needed by the congregation in general.

  • GSmith Huntington Beach, CA
    June 24, 2014 7:57 a.m.

    "The Church is like a great caravan—organized, prepared, following an appointed course, with its captains of tens and captains of hundreds all in place.

    What does it matter if a few barking dogs snap at the heels of the weary travelers? Or that predators claim those few who fall by the way? The caravan moves on.

    Is there a ravine to cross, a miry mud hole to pull through, a steep grade to climb? So be it. The oxen are strong and the teamsters wise. The caravan moves on.

    Are there storms that rage along the way, floods that wash away the bridges, deserts to cross, and rivers to ford? Such is life in this fallen sphere. The caravan moves on.

    Ahead is the celestial city, the eternal Zion of our God, where all who maintain their position in the caravan shall find food and drink and rest. Thank God that the caravan moves on!" - Bruce R. McConkie, Oct. 1984 General Conference

  • GSmith Huntington Beach, CA
    June 24, 2014 7:48 a.m.

    I have served in several bishoprics. I have never known of one man who aspired or wanted to be bishop. So it's interesting to hear of the OW sisters who want to be bishops or stake presidents. And as for my experience serving in bishoprics, I can only say we valued the voice of the sisters in the church very much (ward council meetings, welfare meetings, etc.). My wife was relief society president for many years, and the bishop constantly sought her council and opinion. It almost felt like she was the third counselor in the bishopric. So for the OW crowd to say they don't have a voice? Really? I have a feeling these women were critical of the prophet long before this issue became public.

  • deseret pete robertson, Wy
    June 23, 2014 7:51 p.m.

    The women of the church make a tremendous contribution in every ward and stake and in the general leadership of the church.They are essential to its success and ( I believe }, will continue to be a great asset to the growth of the church.Don't be mislead by a few detractors in or out of the church.If you have a Testimony of the church you will know and understand the score.

  • Maximus Veraces Rexburg , ID
    June 23, 2014 5:45 p.m.

    "What we do in life, echoes in eternity." - Maximus

  • humbug Syracuse/Davis, UT
    June 23, 2014 3:17 p.m.

    Outstanding op-ed. Well thought out. Thanks for writing.

  • Janet Ontario, OR
    June 23, 2014 2:53 p.m.

    If your Church membership and all of the blessings that stem from it, including temple blessings,are precious to you, why would you risk losing it all to speak against the status quo? Ms. Kelly is divorcing the Church over irreconcilable differences. She could have reconciled, but she wouldn't, knowing the divorce was inevitable. She made a choice of what mattered most. I am truly sad for her. And this DN article is right on. Ordain Women has done far more harm than good to the Church it claims to care about.

  • TheProudDuck Newport Beach, CA
    June 23, 2014 2:12 p.m.

    "On the other hand, the church may hesitate to make changes to avoid appearing bullied or shamed by Ordain Women."

    I devoutly hope not.

    I would not like to think that the Church would avoid making changes that ought to be made because of fear of *appearances.* Do what is right, let the consequence follow.

  • Michigander Westland, MI
    June 23, 2014 9:12 a.m.

    Ordaining LDS women of wisdom and knowledge as deaconesses per Romans 16:1-4 is the ONLY answer. In The Church of Jesus Christ (WHQ: Monongahela, Pennsylvania) we have done exactly that since at least 1862. We have ordained possibly a few 1000 such women/sisters since then.

  • John C. C. Payson, UT
    June 22, 2014 10:10 p.m.

    Many women are aware of their glorious, exclusively feminine role as co-creators of life with God. They might feel demeaned by those who would have them look elsewhere.

  • Bleed Crimson Sandy, Utah
    June 22, 2014 7:08 p.m.

    @ WI_Member

    "Shouldn't the church make changes because it is the right thing to do, regardless of who gets the credit?"

    Shouldn't the church stand by it's doctrine because it comes from God? The church is not a democracy and should not be influenced by outside activists, regardless if you believe if it's right or wrong.

  • WI_Member Appleton, WI
    June 22, 2014 6:41 p.m.

    The author of the article states "On the other hand, the church may hesitate to make changes to avoid appearing bullied or shamed by Ordain Women."

    Shouldn't the church make changes because it is the right thing to do, regardless of who gets the credit?

    June 22, 2014 11:08 a.m.

    How can someone say they believe the church is the true restored Gospel on this earth and wake up one morning deciding he or she wants a major change in the institution of the church and will do just about anything to get it, to include activism? On what planet does that occur? if this were the Methodists who vote by council or the Baptists who pretty much do what they want, I'd understand it. But the LDS church has always said revelation comes from one source, and that doesn't mean some person who decides that's the way it's going to be after her morning bowl of Cheerios.

  • vcoll35 Rogers, AR
    June 22, 2014 7:56 a.m.

    I appreciate this thoughtful response to the current situation. I find it ironic that some women in the Church associate ordination with equality. Church leaders have been addressing women's equality since the early days of the Restoration. Brigham Young said, “Priesthood is to be used for the benefit of the entire human family, for the upbuilding of men, women, and children alike. There is indeed no privileged class or sex within the true Church of Christ." Imagine a comment like that in the mid-1800's! Doctrines of the Church do not diminish women - they exalt them! I suspect that concerns about women's equality may stem from the Church's emphasis on mothers not working outside the home whenever possible. Only those who do not understand the value of motherhood and the importance of the work done at home would feel that this recommendation is demeaning to women.

  • LittleStream Carson City, NV
    June 22, 2014 7:54 a.m.

    I like the article, but I am having a hard time determining how there is inequality? I share in the priesthood every time I make a covenant with Heavenly Father. I have been sealed to my husband for time and all eternity through the power of the priesthood. I take sacrament every week and am grateful for the priesthood holders who pass it, including my son. I have the bishop, high priesthood holders, and stake priesthood holders consult with me about Family History questions and problems, as well as indexing questions and issues.

    Someone tell me how I am being treated unequal? I sided with Women's lib in the 60's for a lot of reasons, mostly work related. But I just don't get this one. The only thing I would like to be able to do is be able to wear some of my nice pant suits to church, but don't because I have been instructed not to - and having seen some of the teenagers attire, I understand completely. Whatever President Monson directs, I will do. Ordain Women would do well to remember that. And remember who they are.

  • Eileen Fullenwider Tucson, Arizona
    June 22, 2014 3:29 a.m.

    I believe there are several 'culture' changes that can be made to improve the image of LDS women. Why not changes the culture.
    1. The R.S. president should sit on the stand during sacrament with the Bishop. The RS president should participate in interviews with female members. Women should present longer and more talks at General Conference. There should be RS councils from the General President in Salt Lake to local Stakes. Women need more women... The RS magazine was a great magazine...RS meetings during the week were great ways to keep women connected and the mother education and culture refinement meetings are well needed again. We don't need to always wear long skirts and denim and polyester. And crafts are not our highest priority. Change the culture and you change the conversation. I didn't say change doctrine, I said change the culture

  • Sam from the south Washington, UT
    June 21, 2014 10:52 p.m.

    I love, respect, and admire the fifteen men that most members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints sustain as prophets, seers, and revelators. The collective wisdom and spirituality of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles is a great source of strength and inspiration. I have found, over my lifetime, as I read, ponder, and pray about what they have said and written that the Lord speaks to me personally, helping me with the challenges of mortality. I hope that I will always be found following in their footsteps as they sincerely try to do what the Lord would have them do. It always amazes me that some people, who claim membership in this church, think that they know better than these ordained Apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ.

  • FanOfTheSith Vernal, UT
    June 21, 2014 7:29 p.m.

    Excellent job Ashley. Good for you.

  • Old But Not Stupid Moorpark, CA
    June 21, 2014 4:37 p.m.

    Laura Bilington
    Maple Valley, WA

    "Hiding behind the supposition that "Jesus only ordained men" is a cop out. Jesus didn't ride in a car or use a computer or (we assume) shave his beard. We do know that he preached inclusion--welcoming men and women, rich and poor. No one is claiming that he said anything about restricting representation to Caucasian males, or that women had some mysterious "purpose" in life which meant that certain roles would be closed to them."

    Also, "We do know..." in addition to His not using modern technology that in His contemporary society women did not serve on the Sanhedrin or other governing bodies. Since you are a woman, I would have assumed that you are also aware of the feminine "....mysterious 'purpose' in life..." otherwise known as childbearing. That is a "certain role" that is surely closed to men in our society. When are we (men) going to be liberated?

    Lastly, representation (whatever that means?) is not restricted to Caucasian males in the LDS Church. So many of us cannot see the point you are trying to make.

  • Frank Fourth New York, NY
    June 21, 2014 4:15 p.m.

    "Whatever its original intent, it ironically demeans Mormon women as well as men and hinders progress on women’s issues."

    And those issues in the LDS Church on which progress is needed would be exactly what?

  • Hospitality SPRINGVILLE, UT
    June 21, 2014 4:02 p.m.

    Message for Ms. Bilington: The caucasion males are not there to represent the membership of the Church. They represent Christ, who's church it is. Ordain Women should take their issues to Him.

  • PamMeadows Wilmington, NC
    June 21, 2014 12:27 p.m.

    This article is absolutely right on the money. "Ordain Women" most certainly does not speak for me and because they think themselves somehow enlightened, a certain scripture comes to mind about when they are learned they think they are wise. They are neither wise nor enlightened only being lead astray down a path that will not end well for themselves.

  • Lagomorph Salt Lake City, UT
    June 21, 2014 12:21 p.m.

    Woolley: "Ordain Women also counterproductively makes ordination synonymous with equality."

    But what other possible conclusion can there be? The converse of the statement is "lack of ordination [on the basis of sex] is synonymous with inequality." This logically clear as a matter of definition, unless the LDS Church wants to redefine "equality." It's fine if the LDS Church, like the Roman Catholic Church, wants to withhold or allocate church privileges and status on the basis of sex as a matter of interpretation of doctrine, just don't try to call it equality. "Separate but equal" is never equal. If certain people are denied certain benefits or powers, they are not equal, even if you maintain that they have "equivalent" different benefits. Just be honest and say, "We have an unequal system. That's the way it is. Deal with it." That's much better than trying to foist the charade of equality on us.

  • Old But Not Stupid Moorpark, CA
    June 21, 2014 11:49 a.m.

    In the name of equality, compassion, and diversity Ordain Women probably support tolerance for some Muslims who make similar sounding political demands. I assume many of them are familiar with the works of Saul Alinsky.

    The great irony herewith is the shrift these misguided ladies will get from the imposition of Sharia Law that changing demographics eventually will cause in the coming years. Imagine, men will be able to declare themselves divorced and the women will have to suffer behind their veils.

    These women may want to be careful about what they pray for. The Lord just might answer their prayers with a most unappealing result.

  • sharrona layton, UT
    June 21, 2014 10:19 a.m.

    RE: Twin Lights, “I have known few members without questions or concerns of some kind at some point in their lives. Questions imply a seeking for divine answers”. True,

    In(D&C 84: 6-17) the line of priesthood is given from Moses to Adam. verse 13, Esaias, who lived in the days of Abraham. Esaias is a Greek with priesthood authority. there are exceptions.
    Modern N.T. translations haveIsaiah instead of Esaias,see(Romans 9:27,29 NIV,NET)..

  • Chessermesser West Valley City, UT
    June 21, 2014 10:06 a.m.

    OW website has a lot of untruths. They are spinning the truth, not telling the truth.

  • Thats what I thought South Jordan, UT
    June 21, 2014 8:54 a.m.

    Another rock and a hard place situation- the Church did not have the OW group that tried to get into Priesthood session arrested, even though they clearly were protesting on the private property. So does this mean the angry men yelling about Joseph Smith can now protest their way all the way to the door of the conference center with no problems? If the Church now arrests the angry yelling guy, is it showing favoritism to these women over the angry men? Now the Church has to choose between inequality of treatment (which I am sure OW doesn't mind when it would be in their benefit) or having protesters all the way to the door of General Conference.

  • manaen Buena Park, CA
    June 21, 2014 1:27 a.m.

    I'm puzzled: this far overstates OW affect on the Church.

    A far lesser opponent was running his mouth at Muhammad Ali at their pre-fight weigh-in. Muhammad Ali ignored him for a while then turned to him and said, "If you every hit me, and I find out about it..." This is how I see the purported match between the restored Church and OW.

    That's how OW's buzzing about in their self-importance strikes me. We've always had noisy apostates and we likely always will. For some reason, each edition prances about as if it were special, runs its course, and goes away. Is anyone still campaigning for Sonia Johnson and her issue?

  • Sentinel Ogden, UT
    June 21, 2014 12:53 a.m.

    I applaud Ashley's essay and agree 100% with what she has written. Exactly.

  • U-tar Woodland Hills, UT
    June 20, 2014 11:39 p.m.

    I thought you feminists got all equal righted up in the 60's, so stop your whining and take it like the man you really want to be.

  • erwad whoville, UT
    June 20, 2014 9:49 p.m.

    I don't agree with the OW cause or methods obviously the author of this article doesn't either - however the title of this article seems to inadvertantly admit an inequality exists. Right? I by indicating that OW is not the 'answer' on Mormon women's equality seems to recognize there maybe an inequality or problem to be solved, even if it isn't through OW. Freudian slip :) ??

  • Vince here San Diego, CA
    June 20, 2014 9:18 p.m.

    Sounds strangely reminiscent like when the Church pushed against passing the ERA because "the ERA was not the answer."

    Since the ERA, have there push other alternative pushed forward? Sometimes, alternatives, as uncomfortable as they make some people feel, can be addressed, investigated, talked about.

  • Harrison Bergeron Holladay , UT
    June 20, 2014 9:16 p.m.

    The underlying assumption of the Ordain Women bunch is based on an erroneous belief. They think they can change who gets ordained to the Priesthood the same way they would change a department store's return policy on a dress (or pant-suit perhaps) they don't like. Arguing with the clerk will get you nowhere in this case. The manager cannot help either.

    You have to go to the owner in this situation. And the owner is God. They have his direct line, if they will use it. But they should understand that what they are asking is for Him to rethink His entire creation. It is like asking him to change which gender has babies. Of course, with God, nothing is impossible. However, it would seem like a more reasonable request to ask God for understanding about why He did things the way He did.

  • Elizabeth Cohen Bolton, UK, 00
    June 20, 2014 7:35 p.m.

    I was raised in the church from the age of 8 when my family joined. I studied seminary, institute and served a mission. I was never undermined by any leader because of my sex. I was never treated differently from the males around me. I was valued for who I was. If I had questions I was actively encouraged to ask them, to study and look for the answers and ultimately to pray to know the truth and growing up I asked a lot of questions.

    I am currently inactive. I'm the one stopping myself from being active. It's my choice. I admit I'm imperfect and my faith isn't very strong but at no time since I became inactive have I ever felt that the church wasn't true.

    Ordain Women are wrong and show a clear lack of understanding of the doctrines of the Church. I am not hiding behind any supposition. I know the Church is true. I believe that the Church is being led by on-going revelation. Thomas S Monson is a prophet.

    I am saddened that as members of the church those belonging to Ordain Women don't know these things too.

  • TheProudDuck Newport Beach, CA
    June 20, 2014 6:18 p.m.

    I appreciate that only a minority of LDS women have any interest in exercising Priesthood office. And I don't like the left-wing idea that people who don't hold left-wing beliefs that are supposedly in their best interest are suffering from "false consciousness."

    That said, since people are different, it is rare for there to be anything near unanimity on anything more controversial than whether the sky is blue. Therefore, whenever, among a group, there is near unanimity about something, it is reasonable to question whether there are tendencies in that group's culture that inclines them to have the ideas they believe they are supposed to have.

    LDS women know that they're not supposed to want to hold the priesthood, and so they don't. Some of them would not in any event. Others might. The mere polling right now, though -- ignoring the cultural tendencies towards conforming with what the powers that be ordain -- really doesn't say much about how people would think in the absence of those pressures.

  • SLC gal Salt Lake City, UT
    June 20, 2014 5:30 p.m.

    She hit the nail on the head! Thank you!!!!

  • Lecapitan Provo, UT
    June 20, 2014 5:26 p.m.

    "What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself: and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same." -D&C 1:38

    I don't want to criticize anyone in this ongoing issue. I will start off by saying that if the Lord revealed to, his mouth piece on the earth today, Thomas S. Monson that women of the Church were to receive the Priesthood tomorrow, I would have no problem excepting that. Remember this is the Lord Jesus Christ's Church and He is as the head. We ALL go through trials of faith and very personal struggles. And if we go to the Lord in prayer and in secret He will help us. Making a spectacle of a concern and bringing on media only gives ammunition that the media can twist and represent both sides inaccurately.

    We are all equal in the amount of love the Savior has for us. He created us. Let him be your guiding strength in your trials of faith.

  • Mikhail ALPINE, UT
    June 20, 2014 4:03 p.m.

    I am also weary of being referred to as a "mind-numbed, non-thinking, reactionary" member of the human race because I choose to believe in ways that aren't convenient or modern enough for those who choose to believe that they have a newer and better way of thinking. I believe because I do think, ponder and pray. I study. I try to listen to God speaking in my life. I trust that God has set apart a Church that, although administered by humans, is incredibly blessed with insight given through the Grace of God. I understand that God's ways aren't man's ways and am looking for greater light and knowledge, as I believe that to be the purpose of this life.

    Might the world not be a better place if we were all accountable to a power outside of ourselves and refused to be victims because some times we get exactly what we asked for?

  • lasaurus Salt Lake City, UT
    June 20, 2014 3:14 p.m.

    Whoa, tone it down. Kate Kelly didn't call all LDS men and leaders cowardly and un-Christlike. She called one action of one leader cowardly and un-Christlike.

  • Twin Lights Louisville, KY
    June 20, 2014 2:56 p.m.

    Very well written. Thank you.

    I have known few members without questions or concerns of some kind at some point in their lives. Questions imply a seeking for divine answers.

    Where an individual or group decides that the First Presidency and Quorum of Twelve are wrong and that they are right, that is not a question. It is an answer. One that says that the individual or group knows God's mind and will rather than those called and sustained as prophets, seers, and revelators. If that group or individual then teach and promote that position, they in effect set themselves in the prophetic position and put themselves in opposition to those so sustained.

    That this would lead to a disciplinary council should have been a foregone conclusion on the part of these folks.

  • Kiboo South Jordan, Utah
    June 20, 2014 2:49 p.m.

    I find it disconcerting that some would pretend to dictate to a private organization how they should administer their affairs. People like Ms. Bilington and others appear to have motives that have very little to do with revelation and more to do with pushing their own personal agenda.

    This is not the church of Ordain Women, it is the Church of Jesus Christ. If you don't believe that the leadership of the Church speaks on behalf of the Savior, maybe it is time to either humbly reconsider and change your position or find something more in line with what your believe system really is.

    I thought this article was masterfully written and dead on as to the position of the Church and most believing members. If and when changes are appropriate they will come through the appropriate channels after the revelation has been received, not because of outside pressure from some self-serving individuals or groups.

  • Liberal Ted Salt Lake City, UT
    June 20, 2014 2:29 p.m.

    There is a huge difference, between having a sincere question and asking for an answer. When you ask, you need to be prepared to accept the answer given.

    The way you react to the answer, is an expression of your real intent when asking. We don't always get what we think we should get. Does that mean the adult way to respond is to hold candle light vigils chanting to people you supposedly love and care for? That is a bit creepy for me. Do you run to the media every time you have felt you were wronged?

    The ordained women have written in their stance which embraces gay marriage. They feel all doctrine can be changed and should be changed by social pressure, by those who have not been given authority.

    With that said not everyone embraced Jesus Christ when he was here on the earth. There were plenty that didn't like His doctrine then as there are now. Back then the solution was to turn him over to the people and authorities. They in turned crucified Him. Now dissenters feel they are entitled to do the same again today.

  • panamadesnews Lindon, UT
    June 20, 2014 2:24 p.m.

    Maybe Sister Kelly's comment applies to her own actions, as it interesting that she moved about the same time disciplinary action by the local Church officials was about to begin. The local leaders could have moved her records to her new residence ward, but the new area's local Church officials would have had to start all over with interviews, etc. She had the option to return for her Church disciplinary meeting, as well. Perhaps it was decided to go ahead if in fact she determined not to return for the meeting. If she had indicated to those local Church leaders that she would rather have the meeting with the Church leaders in her new location, I am pretty sure they would have accommodated her. Just my thoughts, as I only know what I have read. One thing I know, the Church will survive and become stronger for it and those investigating the Church will see Sister Kelly's actions for what it really is.

  • ute alumni SLC, UT
    June 20, 2014 2:21 p.m.

    folks that don't like the church's position on issues ought to start their own and leave the rest of us alone

  • Laura Bilington Maple Valley, WA
    June 20, 2014 2:08 p.m.

    "Ordain Women seems not to want to discuss but to impose, does not ask questions as much as claim to have answers".

    Try that same sentence and substitute "The LDS hierarchy" for "Ordain Women".

    Hiding behind the supposition that "Jesus only ordained men" is a cop out. Jesus didn't ride in a car or use a computer or (we assume) shave his beard. We do know that he preached inclusion--welcoming men and women, rich and poor. No one is claiming that he said anything about restricting representation to Caucasian males, or that women had some mysterious "purpose" in life which meant that certain roles would be closed to them.

    Referring to lowering the age for missionaries as "addressing women's concerns" is laughable. Did you not notice that the lowered ages are still different for men and women?

  • John Brown 1000 Laketown, UT
    June 20, 2014 2:08 p.m.

    I appreciate this article.

    I appreciate thoughtful statements on both sides of this issue.

  • DLC/Orange County Placentia, CA
    June 20, 2014 2:00 p.m.

    Here's an idea, why don't we just strive to serve others, perform those callings and responsibilities that we are asked to do, study, pray and listen with a contrite spirit to those who are called to lead the church. Too many have the idea that the church is some kind of democratic organization that we can petition for changes. Stop worrying about equality for everything. Women and Men and not equal, all men are not equal, all women are not equal. We are not and never will be equal to one and other. We are individuals with strengths and weakness. This equality debate is getting old, and within the church I fear will be a great distraction that will lead many to apostasy.

  • gmlewis Houston, TX
    June 20, 2014 1:50 p.m.

    Lovingly and thoughtfully stated.

  • jliddle Dayton, NV
    June 20, 2014 1:45 p.m.

    It is inaccurate to attribute to Kate Kelly the "caricature of Mormon men and leaders as . . . 'cowardly and un-Christlike.'" She only used that language to describe the decision to hold her disciplinary council in absentia.

    What an ironic caricature.

  • keepamericafree salt lake, UT
    June 20, 2014 1:43 p.m.

    The church clearly stated that there is nothing wrong with asking questions. Asking is not the problem. The problem comes when you dont like the answer and you try to FORCE changes and cause a big stink when things don't go the way YOU want! I find it very interesting how when the ordain women group complained that they were at risk of excommunication, the media was all over it! But I have yet to see the churches response anywhere but local news. The media is only interested in the anti church news and wants nothing to do with the churches view point.