LDS Church not Right Wing

[_angsty]

So far we are equals.

I'm not sure how you are arriving at this considering that the Catholic scenario under discussion is not sexist at all. The members who assist in the ordinance of the Eucharist assist without regard to sex and serve the entire congregation without regard to their sex or the sex of the congregants. In the case of the LDS initiatory (or whatever it is called now) the women officiate (without holding the priesthood) only to other women and only in a setting in which mixed company would be frowned upon.

Your original claim was that the church was exceptional in virtue of allowing some women to officiate in some circumstances (without being ordained to the priesthood) and that this set it apart from organizations "like the Roman Catholic Church." Here we have been shown that the church is clearly not exceptional in this regard. If by your definitions organizations like the RCC are "right wing" in part because of their policies regarding gender and the priesthood, then you haven't succeeded at showing how the LDS church stands apart from them if you are willing to concede that the scenarios are equal. I don't think you can rationally claim even that, given that the RCC scenario is clearly less sexist, but if we were to accept it just for the sake of argument, your original thesis probably needs to be given up.

[_angsty]

Critics of the LDS Church like to paint it as extreme right wing, and point to its patriarchal structure, lumping the LDS Church in with organizations like the Roman Catholic Church and some evangelical organizations that think the Bible forbids letting women have leadership positions over men. The big question is why can't women hold the LDS priesthood.

KevinSim, going back to your original thesis. Can you please clarify for me what you are saying here? I'm not sure I understand how the initiatory example even answers the criticism you set the example up with. You pointed out a circumstance in which a few women officiate (without being ordained into the priesthood) ordinances that involve only other women.

-Women who officiate these ordinances are not ordained to the priesthood and do not hold the priesthood. They perform a limited priesthood function that has been delegated to them by those (men) who do hold the authority.

-This does not stand in contradiction with the ultra-conservative idea that women shouldn't "have leadership positions over men," or threaten any "right-wing" credentials the church might have.

Also, can you please clarify what you mean when you say "right-wing"?

[_KevinSim]

Society at large? No. But the organization he is supposedly closely guiding, with his chosen mouthpiece at its head? I think that's not too much to expect.

Why don't you think that God might disagree with society on the timing of some changes?

You have every right to come up with that explanation, although to me it looks a lot like an apologetic, an attempt to rationalize acceptance of the policy.

I looked up apologetic at "dictionary.reference.com/browse/apologetic?s=t" and didn't find a definition for a noun. One of the definitions for an adjective was "defending by speech or writing." By apologetic do you mean one who defends "by speech or writing"? If so, is there something wrong with defending someone or something?

I did "attempt to rationalize acceptance of the policy"; what alternative does a rational person have when his church, that he has reason to believe God inspired, presents him with a policy that's difficult to understand?

I have no idea if you lived through that era, so I don't know if you can relate to the conflicts the reversal caused.

I'm 52. I "lived through that era."

As for me, after initially welcoming the belated change in policy, I was left with a growing distrust in the idea that our leaders were actually being guided by revelation. Four years (and one slowly crumbling "testimony") later, I was completely out of the church.

Several things have shaken my testimony over the years, but it hasn't crumbled yet. I guess I don't see how a church getting God's will wrong in one area (if it did indeed get God's will wrong), means God didn't choose that church to take His message to the world.

[_KevinSim]

I'm not sure how you are arriving at this considering that the Catholic scenario under discussion is not sexist at all.

Not sexist at all? Women and men together can distribute the Eucharist, but they can't bless it. They need a priest to bless it, and the Roman Catholic Church doesn't have women priests. So how do you conclude that "the Catholic scenario under discussion is not sexist at all"?

Your original claim was that the church was exceptional in virtue of allowing some women to officiate in some circumstances (without being ordained to the priesthood) and that this set it apart from organizations "like the Roman Catholic Church." Here we have been shown that the church is clearly not exceptional in this regard.

Yes, and when that was pointed out to me I stated that I stood corrected. That was my way of saying that I recognized that I had made a mistake. So I no longer think the LDS Church is exceptional in that regard.

I don't think you can rationally claim even that, given that the RCC scenario is clearly less sexist, but if we were to accept it just for the sake of argument, your original thesis probably needs to be given up.

I did give it up, and if that isn't clear enough, I do give it up.

[_KevinSim]

This does not stand in contradiction with the ultra-conservative idea that women shouldn't "have leadership positions over men," or threaten any "right-wing" credentials the church might have.

And yet women do "have leadership positions over men." The three women that make up the Primary presidency have authority over the men who serve as Primary teachers. Granted that most Primary teachers are women, but I think it's safe to say that there are some male Primary teachers in each ward. I know there are some in my ward.

Also, as often as not a woman serves as chair of a ward's Activities Committee, and there is usually a few men on that committee, so there also women "have leadership positions over men."

Also, can you please clarify what you mean when you say "right-wing"?

I think I just meant "ultra-conservative."

[_krose]

I looked up apologetic at "dictionary.reference.com/browse/apologetic?s=t" and didn't find a definition for a noun. One of the definitions for an adjective was "defending by speech or writing." By apologetic do you mean one who defends "by speech or writing"? If so, is there something wrong with defending someone or something?

Here's part of the definition I access by a right-click on the word:

noun
a reasoned argument or writing in justification of something, typically a theory or religious doctrine : "the unconvincing apologetic of modern Muslim writers"


As a general rule, I don't like the approach of apologetics, even though we all do it to one degree or another. The problem I see is beginning with the assumption that a proposition is definitely true, then looking for and highlighting only the data that support that prior belief. It's coming up with justifications for something you already believe -- the opposite of the scientific method.

I'm 52. I "lived through that era."

So you were just graduating from high school when the reversal came? Do you remember the protests and boycotts against BYU's athletic teams, and all the talk of losing tax exempt status? The protests mostly happened in the late 60s and early 70s, after the 1968 olympics (when the two black sprinters were kicked out for holding up a black-gloved fist during the national anthem).

[_krose]

As for me, after initially welcoming the belated change in policy, I was left with a growing distrust in the idea that our leaders were actually being guided by revelation. Four years (and one slowly crumbling "testimony") later, I was completely out of the church.

Several things have shaken my testimony over the years, but it hasn't crumbled yet. I guess I don't see how a church getting God's will wrong in one area (if it did indeed get God's will wrong), means God didn't choose that church to take His message to the world.

If that reasoning works for you, that's fine. It doesn't for me.

For me this episode served as a refutation of a central, essential tenet of the church -- that the president is a "prophet," who is guided by God and is constantly receiving revelation for members.

I don't see a logical role for a caring, consistent, intervening god in this episode. Much like the polygamy reversal, I believe the priesthood ban was reversed due to outside pressure (as well as Kimball's conscience, of course).

The fact that Brown and Kimball lobbied unsuccessfully to get the ban overturned in 1969 (stymied by Lee) says a lot about it.

[_Brackite]

Critics of the LDS Church like to paint it as extreme right wing, and point to its patriarchal structure, lumping the LDS Church in with organizations like the Roman Catholic Church and some evangelical organizations that think the Bible forbids letting women have leadership positions over men. The big question is why can't women hold the LDS priesthood.

LDS youth can go to the temple to do baptisms for the dead. Temple activities that you have to be an adult for were once called, endowment sessions, initiatory work, and temple sealings. Some years back initiatory work was called washings and annointings. It may have been changed back to intiatory work now; I'm not sure.

But I've recently found out that for women doing washings and annointings it wasn't men who performed the washings and annointings; it was other women! So in the temple, women do hold the priesthood, in a way. At least you don't see anything like that in Roman Catholicism, or in the mentioned evangelical churches.

So I guess I object to the right wing label. Joseph Smith was in many ways quite radical, liberally, and some of that has survived to this day in the temple ceremonies.

According to LDS Theology, Women do not need to receive the Priesthood to get Exaltation. Only the men need to receive the Priesthood to get Exaltation.
12th LDS President, Spencer W. Kimball Stated:

In order to reach the goal of eternal life and exaltation and godhood, one must be initiated into the kingdom by baptism, properly performed; one must receive the Holy Ghost by the laying on of authoritative hands; a man must be ordained to the priesthood by authorized priesthood holders; one must be endowed and sealed in the house of God by the prophet who holds the keys or by one of those to whom the keys have been delegated; and one must live a life of righteousness, cleanliness, purity and service. None can enter into eternal life other than by the correct door Jesus Christ and his commandments.

(The Miracle of Forgiveness, Page 6)

The LDS Gospel Principle Manuel States:

He commands us all to receive certain ordinances:

1. We must be baptized.

2. We must receive the laying on of hands to be confirmed a member of the Church of Jesus Christ and to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

3. Brethren must receive the Melchizedek Priesthood and magnify their callings in the priesthood.

4. We must receive the temple endowment.

5. We must be married for eternity, either in this life or in the next.


(2009 Edition, Link: http://www.LDS.org/manual/gospel-princi ... n?lang=eng )

However, I have heard before that women in a way receive the Priesthood when they go through the Temple for their endowments.

[_Tobin]

According to LDS Theology, Women do not need to receive the Priesthood to get Exaltation. Only the men need to receive the Priesthood to get Exaltation. 12th LDS President, Spencer W. Kimball Stated:

In order to reach the goal of eternal life and exaltation and godhood, one must be initiated into the kingdom by baptism, properly performed; one must receive the Holy Ghost by the laying on of authoritative hands; a man must be ordained to the priesthood by authorized priesthood holders; one must be endowed and sealed in the house of God by the prophet who holds the keys or by one of those to whom the keys have been delegated; and one must live a life of righteousness, cleanliness, purity and service. None can enter into eternal life other than by the correct door Jesus Christ and his commandments.
(The Miracle of Forgiveness, Page 6)

LMAO

That is non-sense. YOU MUST have God's authority (a.k.a. priesthood) inorder to enter his presence and reach exaltation.

[_Brackite]

LMAO

That is non-sense. YOU MUST have God's authority (a.k.a. priesthood) inorder to enter his presence and reach exaltation.

So you are trying to say that you disagree with LDS President Spencer W. Kimball, and with the LDS Gospel Principal Manuel???

In order to reach the goal of eternal life and exaltation and godhood, one must be initiated into the kingdom by baptism, properly performed; one must receive the Holy Ghost by the laying on of authoritative hands; a man must be ordained to the priesthood by authorized priesthood holders; one must be endowed and sealed in the house of God by the prophet who holds the keys or by one of those to whom the keys have been delegated; and one must live a life of righteousness, cleanliness, purity and service. None can enter into eternal life other than by the correct door Jesus Christ and his commandments.

(The Miracle of Forgiveness, Page 6, Bold Emphasis Mine.)

Requirements for Exaltation

The time to fulfill the requirements for exaltation is now (see Alma 34:32–34). President Joseph Fielding Smith said, “In order to obtain the exaltation we must accept the gospel and all its covenants; and take upon us the obligations which the Lord has offered; and walk in the light and the understanding of the truth; and ‘live by every word that proceedeth forth from the mouth of God’” (Doctrines of Salvation, 2:43).

To be exalted, we first must place our faith in Jesus Christ and then endure in that faith to the end of our lives. Our faith in Him must be such that we repent of our sins and obey His commandments.

He commands us all to receive certain ordinances:

1. We must be baptized.

2. We must receive the laying on of hands to be confirmed a member of the Church of Jesus Christ and to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

3. Brethren must receive the Melchizedek Priesthood and magnify their callings in the priesthood.

4. We must receive the temple endowment.

5. We must be married for eternity, either in this life or in the next.


(2009 Edition, Bold Emphasis Mine.)

There is Not any mentioned about the Sisters (Women) having to receieve the Melchizedek Priesthood to get Exaltation.

Maybe you are thinking about Doctrine and Covenants Section 84, verses 20 through 22.
Here is that Passage:

Section 84:

20 Therefore, in the ordinances thereof, the power of godliness is manifest.

21 And without the ordinances thereof, and the authority of the priesthood, the power of godliness is not manifest unto men in the flesh;

22 For without this no man can see the face of God, even the Father, and live.

I really don't see in that Passage that women have to have the Melchizedek Priesthood to get Exaltation.