- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
richalger wrote:shoshin wrote:
The news about these possible excommunications is a distraction, like most of these “controversies” are. The things that matter are: Am I becoming more like Christ?
Ditto.
Which is the intellectual equivalent of putting your head in the sand. You could say that about EVERY problem in the church. Just because we’re trying to emulate the values of Christ personally doesn’t mean we should ignore any other issues, it’s not either/or. Moreover, the response to this issue is very much relevant to if we’re becoming like Christ. Do we feel compassion and empathy for John and Kate or are we dismissive of them?
Shawn wrote:I think those who are only asking questions don’t need to worry about being disciplined. KATE KELLY WENT WAY BEYOND ASKING QUESTIONS. She:
1. Founded an organization
2. With teachings that are not in line with church’s teachings
3. That seeks to recruit followers
Quote:Today, Sunday, 17 March 2013, is the 171st anniversary of the establishment of the first Relief Society. In the Relief Society minutes, we read that Joseph Smith said that the Relief Society would be a “Kingdom of Priests.” He also literally ordained its first female leaders. In the same minutes, Emma Smith is described as being set apart but not ordained, with an explanation by Joseph Smith that Emma had already been ordained and therefore did not need to be ordained again, but merely set apart for this particular calling. Joseph Smith described the Relief Society as one that would be analogous to the male priesthood organization. We wish to mark this significant day in history with our own act, and the
founding of another women’s organization: Ordain Women… In a church that cherishes the value of restoration, we hope to encourage our leaders to restore women to their rightful place as leaders and priesthood holders. Ordain Women is committed to making our faith a place where we can live up to our full divine potential, and we believe that the only way women will be able to have genuine equality and live up to this potential is by being able to be ordained to the priesthood.
…We ask the brethren to bring to fruition our beloved prophet Joseph Smith’s original vision for the Relief Society sisters to over 7 million female members of the church today. We ask that women be ordained and participate fully in all levels of service within the church….
Join us, as equality missionaries, in making our plea heard. –
http://ordainwomen.org/organizing-the-women-after-the-manner-of-the-priesthood-2/
I highlighted the words about founding an organization and seeking recruits. Some teachings I see that are not in line with church teachings are:-Emma Smith was ordained to a priesthood office.
-It is their right to hold the priesthood.
-Women cannot be considered equal until they are ordained to the priesthood.
-Joseph Smith intended for women to hold the priesthood.
*I am not saying I agree or disagree with those teachings. They are things that appear to me to be not in line with church teachings.*
I agree
Old-Timer wrote:I agree with most things you write and say, Hawkgrrrl, but I have never disagreed more strongly with you than I do in this case. I appreciate the attempt at clarification in the follow-up comment (very few, in your opinion, and the comparison to clams – as well as the use of “steeped” and “tools, which I see as very, very different things), but the first statement is WAY too broad for me.
Serious question, focused on the first statement:
Isn’t kicking a whole group of women out of womanhood for supporting a system in which they are comfortable the very antithesis of a core principle of feminism? It’s one thing to say they are deceived or deluded or working against female interests generally (that they aren’t feminist and don’t understand feminism), but it’s another thing entirely to say they are no longer or not legitimately women.
It’s especially ironic, imo, that such a statement is being asserted in a thread alongside statements opposing excommunication from a group (the LDS Church) that is MUCH smaller than the group (women) from which they are being excommunicated, figuratively, by the comment. Kate Kelly MIGHT be excommunicated from the LDS Church, so those who don’t support her should be excommunicated / excluded from womanhood?
I disagree.
I agree
Thank you to everyone on this thread. I probably do not agree with much of the people in this forum about almost everything. But I do appreciate hearing other perspectives. I love the list Neil deGrasse Tyson gave us to discover truth. ( http://richalger.blogspot.com/2014/03/the-opening-scene-of-cosmos-spacetime.html – Test ideas by experimentation and observation
– Build on those ideas that pass the test
– Reject the ones that fail
– Follow the evidence wherever is leads.
– Question everything
If you are sure to include the kind of experimentation that Alma urges, this list it a great one. We might add, be civil in our interactions. When we doubt the good faith of our neighbors, progress stops.
Shoshin- Quote:
The news about these possible excommunications is a distraction, like most of these “controversies” are. The things that matter are: Am I becoming more like Christ? Am I growing in faith, hope, charity, humility, forgiveness? Am I becoming more wise and knowledgeable? Am I repenting so I can stay clean and continue to grow spiritually? Am I learning to love better? Am I becoming more free from pride?”I so agree with this list. It is the how in this situation that I struggle. A month ago in Relief Society the teacher, who is a member of our ward presidency, mentioned that all of us in the room, she kept nodding as she said it, “Know why the priesthood is the way it is.” A lot of head nodding and um humming happened. I sat there and thought okay, I could challenge your comment. Part of me really wanted to. Not because I support OW, but because we have said in the past we knew stuff as a church, and shoot and bedanged it we didn’t. Race and the Priesthood is a biggie. We changed our mind.
I don’t love unnecessary contention. I don’t like creating it or aiding it. I don’t know what, in situations like this, what the Christ centered response looks like or sounds like. The Christ I keep reading about, being told about,etc. is painted as inclusive, embracing, out reaching. I want to emulate that. How in a very noisy divided debate – in a church that boldly takes his name – do I do that? Which sister do I speak to and how do I speak to her with out hurting the other. Which one is the battered man, who fell among thieves on the side of the road?
I ask this sincerely. If you have insight – I would really like to hear.
Mom3, I would like to give of my experience in an attempt to answer your inquiry. Personally, I have zero problem with confrontation. Not contention, mind you, but confrontation. When I’m being really selfish I point out everything I see and say why I don’t agree with it. When I’m better and with the spirit, I am more able to discern when to shut my mouth. [emoji5]️ This entire month interestingly has been focused on priesthood, in my ward. I KNOW that I don’t understand all the differences and nuances between Priesthood and priesthood. So when the discussion is about keys, I try to listen and keep a prayer in my heart that I’ll understand a little more. However, when the opportunity presents itself to widen the scope of the priesthood (power vs keys in my mind) I barrel through that door as quickly as I can. I did that on Sunday. With tact of course. [emoji6] You know what? Another sister and a counselor in the bishopric both thanked me for my comments and perspective. It’s not that I give up my quest for understanding, it’s that I acknowledge what I don’t have and try to give what I do have in a loving and helpful manner.
In Elder Oaks’ talk about the Priesthood in April, he quoted Sister Burton who said that we need to understand the Priesthood better – and then he said that her statement applies to ALL of us. He then went on to change the way we can talk about the Priesthood in multiple ways. How do I comment when someone repeats what we have said in the past that doesn’t match what Elder Oaks said in General Conference? I usually smile and say something like:
Quote:I really like what Elder Oaks said in General Conference in April . . . I know that’s a new way to look at it from when I was younger, but I really like it.
Who is going to argue with that in church?
Of course, I had to read it carefully and think about it carefully in order to say that without misquoting him – and it helps that I prepared a month-long lesson about it for Sunday School this month. We’ve been able to cover only six paragraphs each week, which illustrates how packed it is with newly framed stuff.
richalger wrote:
– Test ideas by experimentation and observation– Build on those ideas that pass the test
– Reject the ones that fail
– Follow the evidence wherever is leads.
– Question everything
When we doubt the good faith of our neighbors, progress stops.
I agree with this, and I must recognize when two different people apply this process to the same topic there is a good chance they will end up with two very different conclusions.
In the Book “The Varieties of Religious Experience” by William James, I found the following passage very apropos to the current discussion. BTW, this was written over 100 years ago! Quote:“A genuine first-hand religious experience (such as that of Joseph Smith) is bound to be a heterodoxy to its witnesses, the prophet appearing as a mere lonely madman. If his doctrine prove contagious enough to spread to any others, it becomes a definite and labeled heresy. But if it then still prove contagious enough to triumph over persecution, it becomes itself an orthodoxy; and when a religion has become an orthodoxy, its day of inwardness (i.e., inward spiritual experience) is over; the spring is dry; the faithful live at second hand exclusively and stone the prophets in their turn. The new church, in spite of whatever human goodness it may foster, can be henceforth counted on as a staunch ally in every attempt to stifle the spontaneous religious spirit, and to stop all later bubblings of the fountain from which in purer days it drew its own supply of inspiration. –p. 295”
That indeed is an awesome quote. Sheldon wrote:In the Book “The Varieties of Religious Experience” by William James, I found the following passage very apropos to the current discussion. …
Sheldon, that’s a great quote from that book. I think it is worded very well and explains a lot. Even helps me understand the human nature we deal with, with possible excommunications or discipline, what is happening.And this has always been going on. Throughout history. It always happens, because some groups cling to the orthodoxy of proven teachings, and some groups feel that stifling loss of newness or power in the orthodox others cling to.
It is just interesting it can come full circle in a religion like Mormonism. So I think it is good for us to know our history so that we are aware of what happens, in and out of the church. How quickly we can forget what early saints went through, and what they sought so desperately for.
At least we can be grateful we live in times when it is just disciplinary councils and polite letters exchanged…not burned at the stake or stoned or hanged or thrown in the lion’s den for following one’s conscience or differing views. Reference AoF 11.
Old-Timer wrote:In Elder Oaks’ talk about the Priesthood in April, he quoted Sister Burton who said that we need to understand the Priesthood better – and then he said that her statement applies to ALL of us. He then went on to change the way we can talk about the Priesthood in multiple ways.
How do I comment when someone repeats what we have said in the past that doesn’t match what Elder Oaks said in General Conference? I usually smile and say something like:
Quote:I really like what Elder Oaks said in General Conference in April . . . I know that’s a new way to look at it from when I was younger, but I really like it.
Who is going to argue with that in church?
Of course, I had to read it carefully and think about it carefully in order to say that without misquoting him – and it helps that I prepared a month-long lesson about it for Sunday School this month. We’ve been able to cover only six paragraphs each week, which illustrates how packed it is with newly framed stuff.
Oh Ray, you are way to kind! I relish telling people they are wrong. Talking in my Best Sheldon Cooper voice, I’ll say “Oh, you’re wrong, didn’t you pay attention to the last General Conference, or did you sleep through that part?
The excommunication made the front page of Yahoo. I’m surprised, I didn’t realize so many people outside the Church were watching. There are many LDS people who are well placed in journalism. Beyond which a boatload of folks at Buzzfeed are Mormon.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.