- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Beefster wrote:
What’s weird is that it used to be common for women to give blessings of healing in the early church. It wasn’t done with priesthoodauthority, but it was still the power of God. Somewhere along the line, this was discouraged and it faded into obscurity. That leaves me scratching my head. The early church was, strangely, leaps and bounds ahead of most institutions at the time when it came to women’s rights, but now it lags behind somewhat. Funny how that happens.
My child-bearing days are probably done, but I would have loved to have a sister give me a blessing because I was going to have a baby – just as our brethren give their children blessings when they are starting school. My husband did give me individual blessings as needed during that time – but it is not the same.
I don’t specifically want to be ordained – I just would like to return to women giving blessings, and a recognition that what we need as sisters is not necessarily always what the brethren need as well. I feel that they design the programs for the brethren, and the sisters get a nod of different needs with the R.S. program – but note that for the last 25 years both the R.S. and Priesthood lessons have been “correlated” or standardized to meet the needs of the brethren.
Beefster wrote:
In priesthood sessions, there have been a number of talks on the priesthoodpowervs priesthood authorityand I suppose you probably have priesthood powerthrough various means and righteous living. You have yet to receive the priesthood authority, and TBH, I think that really only stops you from taking part in official ordinances. I think the laying on of hands for healing from those without priesthood authority is frowned upon, but there’s nothing stopping you from that either. I just don’t think you can use oil. I would be surprised if women didn’t get some form of priesthood authority in the eternities. The only way I could see women not getting the priesthood in mortality ever is if the female priesthood is fundamentally different. Perhaps it pertains more to the spirit body (whereas the male priesthood corresponds to the physical body), but that’s just a speculative possibility.
I feel that will be given as much “priesthood authority” as the church (with male-dominated leadership) is comfortable handing off to women and the leadership sees a point to bestow. I feel the situation is complicated by the principle that men generally think/talk in hierarchies, and women think/talk in networks (Studies done in this area by Deborah Tannen). An important part of hierarchies is who-can-do-what-and-why, and an important part of networks is what-needs-to-be-done-and-how-do-we-accomplish it.
I personally have an appreciation for the church’s recognition that men and women are fundamentally different. I sorta get why some women feel cheated, but I also sorta get why other women don’t really want to have to deal with having the priesthood. At least clinically. I don’t have the slightest idea what it’s like to be a woman, so there’s only so far my empathy can take me. I like your thoughts on networks vs hierarchies. It vaguely reminds me of the waffles vs spaghetti analogy for men vs women and how they think.
I would love to have women in baby blessing circles. I think most women would really love that.
I just wonder how men’s needs and women’s needs would be separately tended to with women getting the priesthood. I wonder if their roles would be different within the priesthood. I suspect we’d still have Priesthood/RS meetings, just by different names.
Now that we are getting closer (FP to be announced either tomorrow or Monday), I’ll pull out a few of the things I’ve been thinking this week. I’m thinking more and more that RMN moves DFU to 1st Counselor and promotes a new, younger Apostle to fill the 2nd Counselor. It just makes sense to bring (relative) youth into the FP since at 93, we can assume RMN won’t be as vigorous as he might have been a few years ago, and he would surely recognize that limitation. Here are all the Apostles as ‘young’ or younger than DFU, in order of age:
– QLCook (77) – I like him, but he’s not expressly dynamic and isn’t enough younger than HBE to justify without having any punch.
– JRH (77) – Please, no. Many love him, but I’m sure you all know I just think of him as angry. To me, he seems way older than 77.
– DTC (72) – I like D Todd, and at 13 years younger than HBE, I think that would be a good trade. He has more of the FP Presence.
– RARasband (66) – Energetic man. I like him because of his every-man quality, but that attribute might also be harder to accept into the FP.
– NLAndersen (66) – while not my favorite, strikes me as being the most LIKE RMN. His demeanor is the same, and he’s a retrencher, just like the new main man. If RMN reaches into the lower echelon of the Q12, he could pick the mirror image of himself.
– DAB (65) – we’ve talked about him earlier. He is the obvious choice because he’s a near shoe-in to rise to at least near the top anyway. DAB Has a PhD in Organizational Behavior, which would be useful at the top of the Church. Interestingly, DAB has the least Utah connection of anyone in this list. He is from California, attended BYU, during which time he married his wife, but after BYU, lived outside of Utah until his call as an Apostle.
– DGRenlund (65) – He is also a heart surgeon. In fact, I’d be surprised if it wasn’t RMN who nominated DGR for the Q12. I imagine the two probably had a lot to talk about personally before his call to the Q12.
-GEStevenson (62) – He would definitely bring gravitas into the FP. Is already a known administrative success, having been the Presiding Bishop, so he’d likely be a big help.
LookingHard wrote:
Beefster wrote:
My hopes with a RMN presidency is that the church opens Mainland China for missionary work and actually having branches/wards and stakes/districts. I’m not sure if that’s a close thing politically, but I’m hoping for it anyway.I have a friend that just got back from living in Shanghai. He said that every single Sunday they start sacrament meeting telling everyone that they are there under the privileged of the government with the stipulation they do no proselyting at all while they are in China. This is read again at the end of the meeting. Interesting. There are so many political issues going on that I don’t see China opening up to this right now. My $0.02.
It’s not actually likely – the mighty Catholic Church can’t pull it off. All religions in China have to be under the control of the state. The only way round this would be to have a “second true church” which would be officially separate from us.
My wife keeps telling me she thinks President Nelson won’t be the new prophet. All because he’s making an announcement this Tuesday, and that means he wouldn’t be announcing his own presidency. Doesn’t sound right to me…my understanding is “The Senior member is the new prophet unless the Lord indicates otherwise”. Have the last five words of that phrase ever been invoked in our history? And is it the Senior member of the remaining 14 Apostles, or of the quorum of 12, one of whom are in the existing presidency at the time of the prophet’s death? I haven’t thought through the issues or given this much thought, so I thought I’d ask about it. SilentDawning wrote:
My wife keeps telling me she thinks President Nelson won’t be the new prophet. All because he’s making an announcement this Tuesday, and that means he wouldn’t be announcing his own presidency. Doesn’t sound right to me…my understanding is “The Senior member is the new prophet unless the Lord indicates otherwise”. Have the last five words of that phrase ever been invoked in our history? And is it the Senior member of the remaining 14 Apostles, or of the quorum of 12, one of whom are in the existing presidency at the time of the prophet’s death? I haven’t thought through the issues or given this much thought, so I thought I’d ask about it.
There is almost no chance it will be anyone but Nelson IMO. I think Nelson making the announcement even proves that – if he’s not the prophet he has no business making an announcement, it would be up to the quorum as a whole (IMO).
As far as I can tell, no, the senior apostle has never been passed over and the Lord has apparently never indicated that such should be the case. That’s a pretty easy church history search. And it is the senior member among all the apostles (there can be more than 14 with additional counselors to the president and right now there are 13), although I have heard it taught otherwise (erroneously, I believe). And I think someone pointed this out before, one does not have to be an apostle to be called as a counselor, although it hasn’t happened otherwise in a long time (but was common in the early church).
I can’t imagine it being different than RMN, but technically the first presidency is resolved, and the Apostles lead the church, and they decide to reorganize a new First Presidency, or leave as is and run the church as Quorum of the 12 Apostles (Although there are 14 currently). It isn’t automatically the senior apostle, but if they do propose to reorganize the first presidency then it will be the senior apostle, and presented to the church members for sustaining vote later (conference).
It makes sense to me the President of the Quorum will make the announcement if the Apostles will lead the church or the First Presidency is being reorganized.
I have no assumptions about the announcement – except that it will not be an announcement of someone else becoming the President of the Church. 
Old Timer wrote:I have no assumptions about the announcement – except that it will not be an announcement of someone else becoming the President of the Church.
“Brethren, the Lord keeps telling us that we should have President Monson stuffed and keep him in his chair, because even full of sawdust he’d be a better Prophet than any of us.”
DarkJedi wrote:
There is almost no chance it will be anyone but Nelson IMO. I think Nelson making the announcement even proves that – if he’s not the prophet he has no business making an announcement, it would be up to the quorum as a whole (IMO).
That is my logic. Her logic is that someone else would be making the announcement of his presidency if it were RMN. I think it’s a thin argument.
Frankly, I don’t really care much. RMN is 90 so whoever is first counselor will likely be the face of the FP for much of RMN’s presidency if history repeats itself. That will be interesting to see. Hope they put a youngling in there so we can enjoy his vitality for a while!
IMO the special meeting is something to capitalize on the social media thing. If the announcement trends (or whatever the kids are calling it) then a ho-hum announcement becomes a missionary opportunity. This is the church moving into the 21st century.
SilentDawning wrote:
DarkJedi wrote:
There is almost no chance it will be anyone but Nelson IMO. I think Nelson making the announcement even proves that – if he’s not the prophet he has no business making an announcement, it would be up to the quorum as a whole (IMO).
That is my logic. Her logic is that someone else would be making the announcement of his presidency if it were RMN. I think it’s a thin argument.
Frankly, I don’t really care much. RMN is 90 so whoever is first counselor will likely be the face of the FP for much of RMN’s presidency if history repeats itself. That will be interesting to see. Hope they put a youngling in there so we can enjoy his vitality for a while!
But Nelson is a very healthy and vigorous 93-year-old. Most I know that age are in a nursing home or should be. I do anticipate (and hope for) a short reign, but I think we’ll have him for at least a few GCs. I don’t hope for a youngling since the most obvious choice is DAB.
DarkJedi wrote:But Nelson is a very healthy and vigorous 93-year-old. Most I know that age are in a nursing home or should be.
Right, but even the most vigorous ones don’t tend to live indefinitely; they just flop over dead one day without the downhill slide of most of the others.
NightSG wrote:
DarkJedi wrote:But Nelson is a very healthy and vigorous 93-year-old. Most I know that age are in a nursing home or should be.
Right, but even the most vigorous ones don’t tend to live indefinitely; they just flop over dead one day without the downhill slide of most of the others.
My wife has an 111-year-old grandmother. She still drove in her 90s and wasn’t bad at it. She is in a nursing home, but she is still pretty sharp (knows who we are, tells coherent stories of the past, knows the date, etc.) and she dresses herself every day. Granted she is an exception, but just pointing out it does happen. I do expect that one morning she just won’t wake up. Hinckley was pretty much that way, I expect Nelson to be the same – hopefully closer to Hinkley’s age at death than Grandma’s.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.