Sorry, skipped over the Priesthood aspect. I once had a Branch President who stated that if women held the Priesthood, the men would never catch up. I whole heartedly agree.

Good question!

Is there a crack in the door where there wasn’t before?

Seriously, we need to have like buttons because i enjoy this post greatly!!!!

Margaret, that’s great that the narrative of the status quo works for you. It isn’t anyone’s place to call you brainwashed. On the other hand, it is not your place to unfairly characterize those who want women to have the priesthood in this manner:

I sometimes wonder if those sisters who feel that women are considered less important are more concerned about earthly prestige than spiritual development.

This is an absurd and not very charitable generalization. See here. Also, the idea that women can’t have the priesthood to allow men to somehow “catch up” spiritually to women — also absurd. Putting women on a pedestal alert:

Being revered does not make you empowered. Being celebrated doesn’t make you equal. This is called putting women on a pedestal, and it’s a way of distracting them from the fact that they don’t have the same rights you do. You know what goes on pedestals? Vases. Trophies. Pretty, shiny things that are For Display Only. Pedestals are not for people.

Bradley, then why do men have the priesthood? When a good man [without the priesthood] acts in the name of God, how can he [God] refuse? You can say this about anyone, anywhere. I guess nobody needs the priesthood.

When I was in the military, I was supposed to want what my superiors wanted. I did not always understand just why they wanted it, nut I was told that was not my affair. I had to rely upon the arm of flesh which did not always get things right.

But, in that respect, my relationship with God is the same. I want (or need to want, I am not always exactly in line) what God wants for meand the rest of His children.

If God wants women to hold the priesthood, it will come via revelation and I will accpet it wholeheartledly. Right now, we just need to find out if that is what the Lord wants.

Glenn

Glenn,

But, in that respect, my relationship with God is the same. I want (or need to want, I am not always exactly in line) what God wants for meand the rest of His children.

Okay, but even if one accepts that “what God wants” is ultimately passed down to his children through the Church, it does not follow that everything that the Church does is necessarily “what God wants.” Then you’re right back where you were in the military:

I had to rely upon the arm of flesh which did not always get things right.

Point being, just because women do not currently hold the priesthood, one cannot automatically conclude it is because God wants it that way.

The big deal about this new introduction to OD #2 is that it concedes the possibility that the priesthood / temple ban was not of God. (And, relatively speaking, for the institutional church, this is quite an admission.) It took the arm of flesh WAY too long to figure this out. I have a hard time giving it the benefit of the doubt this time around.

Orwell:
J Max Wilson and Bruce Nielson articulated my feelings towards your thesis in this thread.
http://www.millennialstar.org/rejecting-the-living-prophets-by-following-future-prophets/

Bookslinger, are you saying that you think any discussion of equality for women in the church is the same as rejecting the prophet? That seems to be what Max is saying there, and it is a very extreme position.

Interesting post, Orwell. I don’t think anyone has mentioned this, but the most disturbing part to me in all of this is the line: “Church records offer no clear insights into the origins of this practice.” For a church that prides itself both on the meticulous keeping of records and on touting its reliance on divine revelation to guide the church and shape its policy, this statement is both unacceptable and unconscionable. For something close to 150 years, we denied the priesthood to an entire ethnic group and we can’t say why, how or when the practice started? Hiding behind the vagaries of record keeping and denying the overt racism that such policies arose from is nothing less than a stunning example of moral cowardice. I don’t understand why, as supposed lovers of truth, we don’t just admit this, apologize, and move on. If we members are supposed to be honest in our dealings with our fellow men, we need to hold the church as a whole to the same standard.

Yeah, April, it is pretty baffling. Just another symptom of how so much of the sexism in the Church can be attributed to the fact that some people just aren’t used to paying attention to these issues — I mean, why would women ever come to mind when thinking about the priesthood, right? What’s hilarious here is that their blind spot has worked against them for once.

Then again, maybe it did cross their minds but the idea of leaving “male and female” out of the quote would have been too conspicuous. Of course, I’d love to be wrong on both accounts. It would be fantastic if someone really did slip it in on purpose.

JohnnyS, my expectations on this issue are so low, that even a vague, read-what-you-want-into-this kind of statement is a victory in my eyes (hence my distinction between “direction” and “destination” in the OP). But I totally sympathize with how you feel.

C’mon, Jetboy and J. Max are some of the guilty pleasures of the bloggernacle. They are unintentionally hilarious with their religious primal screams. They can only affect your blood pressure if you take their rants serious. I wish they would write more. I see them as modern Rodney Turners.

I jump in when the topic is gays and ‘the Church’, but I am not touching this one. I hope you all can sort it out–I can’t.