- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Hot off the press, only an hour ago… Some good news and a sign the church is moving in the right direction.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/56026380-78/women-general-conference-lds.html.csp Amen – and I like the fact (about which I’ve known for a lot of years) that talks and prayers are assigned far in advance of the actual sessions. I don’t know if the prayer assignments were made prior to the “Let Women Pray” activities, but I believe they were. Either way, I’m happy to see this. [
I locked the other simultaneous thread about this and directed comments here, since the title to this one is easier to find if searching for this topic.] Ray I totally understand. If you look at the time of our posts we were nearly simultaneous. Glad to share a post with friends, whoever’s thread we use. Hooray!!!! I think it is very likely that the let women pray in conference thing made the big guys consider it. Either way, makes me happy! Makes me think that maybe this was an oversight rather than a policy. It wasn’t a “policy”, but a side-effect. Only GAs have prayed in conference in recent memory; not out of policy or doctrine, but out of custom. No women are GAs. Ergo, no women have prayed. I don’t believe it was any sinister or sexist intent. Again, as I said in the other thread, I’m glad that this will now happen, I simply don’t attribute the past practice to any conspiratorial leanings against women. While I welcome the change, let’s not confuse this with opening up church leadership to both men or women or to refuting Section 132. This is evolution not revolution. In other words, the bottom line for me is that I didn’t get too worked up that only GAs have prayed, so I’m not getting teary-eyed that non-GAs will now pray.
Unspoken order of things, which just means any tradition or practice that can’t really be justified with doctrine. So, any guesses on who will be offering a prayer? My guess is Sis. Dibb.
My bet Sis Dalton and her no lobbying stance will be thrown in at some point. 
Ha ha 😆 I think it great but also I think how ridiculous it is that in 2013 we are making a big deal out of women praying. If it was 1950 maybe but now it seems a little embarrassing On Own Now wrote:It wasn’t a “policy”, but a side-effect. Only GAs have prayed in conference in recent memory; not out of policy or doctrine, but out of custom. No women are GAs. Ergo, no women have prayed. I don’t believe it was any sinister or sexist intent. Again, as I said in the other thread, I’m glad that this will now happen, I simply don’t attribute the past practice to any conspiratorial leanings against women. While I welcome the change, let’s not confuse this with opening up church leadership to both men or women or to refuting Section 132. This is evolution not revolution.
In other words, the bottom line for me is that I didn’t get too worked up that only GAs have prayed, so I’m not getting teary-eyed that non-GAs will now pray.
This is the direction I lean and I was kind of chagrined to see the effort that went into this issue. I don’t feel marginalized or demeaned when no women pray in General Conference. I do feel marginalized and demeaned when my church says that monogamy is the default setting, but when God commands polygamy, that’s what we do. I’m supposed to tell this to my daughters?
No way.
I think the whole point of it isn’t that women not praying in conference is such a huge deal…it’s just one step at a time. At least that’s how I see it. I want people to ask why things are the way they are instead of just accepting things because that’s the way they’ve always been. Quote:I want people to ask why things are the way they are instead of just accepting things because that’s the way they’ve always been.
This. Exactly.
Sometimes things as they’ve always been are just fine; sometimes they aren’t. It’s the asking and thinking that is important to me, and the humility to not go immediately to an extreme conclusion or immediately reject something different than what we naturally want. Asking is only sincere asking if someone is willing to accept answers that are different than one’s current understanding – or ask long enough that personally acceptable answers can be discovered if current understanding is missing.
What excites me is that I truly believed that they would never do it so quickly because it would look like a reaction to the request. But having the humility to evaluate the unwritten policy and make the change is a very good sign. I just hope the prayers will not continue to be mini talks or auditions for the apostleship. I would just like someone to give a simple heartfelt prayer that doesn’t make my eyes hurt from being shut so long.
hawkgrrrl wrote:I just hope the prayers will not continue to be mini talks or auditions for the apostleship. I would just like someone to give a simple heartfelt prayer that doesn’t make my eyes hurt from being shut so long.
Amen! I vote hawkgrrrl to give the first female prayer in GC… and I specifically vote for the Priesthood Session!You know, I think a great custom would be not to broadcast either the opening or closing prayer. Let each congregation, home, individual offer their own prayers. Bowing your head and closing your eyes while a person on the screen prays is borderline strange.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.