Women teaching patriarchy to women.

[LA Ute]

It will change, eventually.

None of us may live to see the change, but I have no doubt that this Priesthood restriction will go away just like the other culturally-based restriction. People thought that other restriction was divinely-inspired and would last forever, too.

I would not mind seeing it change, but I do not think it will. Then again, I do not know. The older I get, the less I seem to know.

[Jeff Lebowski]

The older I get, the less I seem to know.

Humility or Alzheimer's?

[LA Ute]

Humility or Alzheimer's?

I'm sorry, can you remind me what this thread is about?

[CardiacCoug]

Will there be an opt-out option for women, like the military? I have no complaints about the benefits without the responsibility, but I'm not going to rehash my opinions in RF's thread.

Was RF's thread a recent thing? Maybe I missed it.

I agree that the vast majority of LDS women don't want to hold time-consuming leadership callings that come with the Priesthood. Most men feel exactly the same way about leadership callings -- it's only the real sickos (in my opinion) who actually aspire to be a Bishop or Stake President or higher.

I look at it this way: Men who don't aspire to leadership callings in the Church but receive the callings anyway usually report that being able to serve was a great blessing to them. Why shouldn't women (even if they don't aspire to have the callings that come with the Priesthood) have the chance for those same blessings?

So I'm not really buying the argument, "Women don't even want to have the Priesthood anyway."

[LA Ute]

We had a bishop once who was the oldest bishop in the Church at the time - age 76 when called. He loved to tell jokes and did so often over the pulpit. I think it drove the next stake president (the successor to the one who called this bishop) nuts, as he lived in our ward too and took just about everything very seriously. (At a stake priesthood leadership meeting he passed out a bootleg copy of BKP's talk about "the unwritten rules" of the Church. I was fond of asking, "If they are unwritten, shouldn't that tell us something?")

But I digress. This great and kind bishop liked to say this:

"When Sister Smith and I got married we made an agreement: I would make all the big decisions and she would make the little ones. It's been 50 years now and the whole thing has worked out great -- we haven't had a single big decision yet."

I always loved that.

[Tex]

It will change, eventually.

None of us may live to see the change, but I have no doubt that this Priesthood restriction will go away just like the other culturally-based restriction. People thought that other restriction was divinely-inspired and would last forever, too.

The real beauty of the 1978 priesthood revelation is in its value as a crutch for every pet doctrine any given member wants the church to change.

[Indy Coug]

The real beauty of the 1978 priesthood revelation is in its value as a crutch for every pet doctrine any given member wants the church to change.

Some day, the church will stop taking mites from old ladies.

[LA Ute]

The real beauty of the 1978 priesthood revelation is in its value as a crutch for every pet doctrine any given member wants the church to change.

I am hoping to see a de-emphasis of white shirts someday. Meanwhile, I will endure.

[beelzebabette]

Was RF's thread a recent thing? Maybe I missed it.

I agree that the vast majority of LDS women don't want to hold time-consuming leadership callings that come with the Priesthood. Most men feel exactly the same way about leadership callings -- it's only the real sickos (in my opinion) who actually aspire to be a Bishop or Stake President or higher.

I look at it this way: Men who don't aspire to leadership callings in the Church but receive the callings anyway usually report that being able to serve was a great blessing to them. Why shouldn't women (even if they don't aspire to have the callings that come with the Priesthood) have the chance for those same blessings?

So I'm not really buying the argument, "Women don't even want to have the Priesthood anyway."

That's fair. I'm not a great sampling of an average woman in the church. It's possible interest level, should culture need to catch up with a change in practice, would more closely approximate missionary service.

I did not serve a mission.

[KillerDog]

The fact that the Church withholds the Priesthood from women simply reflects our sexist cultural heritage.

I thought women held and exercised the priesthood. Hmmmm, maybe I have to rethink my understanding of the temple.

[CardiacCoug]

The real beauty of the 1978 priesthood revelation is in its value as a crutch for every pet doctrine any given member wants the church to change.

Are you really arguing again that the 1978 Priesthood revelation is pretty much the only significant policy or doctrinal change the Church has ever made in response to societal pressure?

It seems like we went down this road pretty recently and you gave up when you realized how badly you were losing this argument. There are literally hundreds of policies and doctrines that the Church has changed over the years and these changes don't anticipate changes in society, they respond to societal changes and pressures, but the Church lags by a decade or more.

You seem to think that at one point, God wanted people to wear garments that went from the ankles to the wrists. Then He decided to lighten up and allow the current version of garments. Is God always changing his mind about stuff?

[CardiacCoug]

I thought women held and exercised the priesthood. Hmmmm, maybe I have to rethink my understanding of the temple.

Women are so special and sacred that they can only exercise the priesthood inside the walls of the temple. Is that what we believe? Kind of like why we aren't ever supposed to talk about or talk to our Heavenly Mother.

[Tex]

Are you really arguing again that the 1978 Priesthood revelation is pretty much the only significant policy or doctrinal change the Church has ever made in response to societal pressure?

There are literally hundreds of policies and doctrines that the Church has changed over the years and these changes don't anticipate changes in society, they respond to societal changes and pressures, but the Church lags by a decade or more.

You seem to think that at one point, God wanted people to wear garments that went from the ankles to the wrists. Then He decided to lighten up and allow the current version of garments. Is God always changing his mind about stuff?

It's the only one anyone ever cites. If I hear an argument for LDS-sanctioned gay marriage based on the changing of the temple garment length, I'll let you know.

It seems like we went down this road pretty recently and you gave up when you realized how badly you were losing this argument.

You have an active imagination.

[CardiacCoug]

It's the only one anyone ever cites. If I hear an argument for LDS-sanctioned gay marriage based on the changing of the temple garment length, I'll let you know.

The garment change was a response to cultural pressure. My point is just that not every change in the Church comes by way of "Thus saith the Lord..." A lot of it comes by way of societal pressure. Some of it comes by way of individual members saying, "We should change this Church into something a little bit better."

It's not my imagination. You were pwned in this thread (admittedly, mostly by UD and MW) and you ended up resorting to not-so-pithy one-liners and s. In the words of MW, "Mullahs are on the run."

http://cougarguard.com/forum/showthr...t=25733&page=4

[Soccermom]

Women are so special and sacred that they can only exercise the priesthood inside the walls of the temple. Is that what we believe? Kind of like why we aren't ever supposed to talk about or talk to our Heavenly Mother.

I don't buy that flowery excuse either. I think it is as you stated earlier -- just remnants of our sexist cultural heritage. Although, when Joseph Smith was the prophet, it seemed like women were on a much more equal playing field. Unless my understanding of church history is severely misinformed, I thought women used to be seen as prophetesses and had much more responsibility and occasion to serve. In some ways, during Joseph Smith's tenure, ideas about women's roles in the church were a lot more progressive than they are today.