415: Kate Kelly on the Ordination of Mormon Women (ordainwomen.org)

April 3, 2013
By

KateToday we interview Kate Kelly – Founder of the Ordain Women website (http://ordainwomen.org).  In this episode we discuss: why Kate and her associates are calling for the ordination of LDS women, how female ordination might benefit both the institutional church and its members, and how others can support this initiative.  Additional links mentioned in the podcast are listed below.

70 Responses to 415: Kate Kelly on the Ordination of Mormon Women (ordainwomen.org)

  1. April 3, 2013 at 12:47 pm

    Great interview! Why is she listed as a co-founder here in the article? I thought that she was simply the founder.

    • Ryan
      April 3, 2013 at 1:49 pm

      The Trib has made similar references.

      • Twain
        April 16, 2013 at 2:50 pm

        Do Mormon members really have the ability to sway God and his anointed (aka, mormon prophets)?

        If the LDS church is truly run by revelation, given to inspired prophets that have dedicated their long lives to humble devotion to the Lord, then one would expect them to be very in-tune with God’s will. Mistakes will be made, but the Lord would let them know before the common member, would he not?

        In fact, the doctrine is just that, as stated by W. Woodruff in the OD-1 of the D&C: “The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as president of this Church to lead you astray.”

        However, the LDS church has backpedaled due to peer and member pressures. They have on polygamy, on the blacks, on the gays (no longer a sin to have attraction just to act), on women praying at conference and more.

        The infallibility claim of the prophet could be the undoing of the LDS church’s revelation claims when gay marriage is upheld as celestial doctrine and women are ordained. At that point, I imagine members will recognize they have the power, not the apostles, not first presidency or others.

        They could recognize it now. SLC will cave when the members decide they want it more than to appear obedient. Members are the Tiger in the Mountain West.

  2. April 3, 2013 at 12:47 pm

    The only hope for the advancement of Mormonism, IMO, is for the brethren to come right out and say, “We are and all before us…including Joseph Smith…have been fallible and even deceitful. We have been guilty of errors both of omission and commission.” The greatest double-bind the Roman Catholic Church put itself into was declaring the Pope infallible. The greatest double-bind fundamentalists put themselves into was declaring the Bible inerrant. You’re right, John, the brethren have produced a good product and that’s where they should focus. The Church has a great deal to offer millions of families.

    • blake
      April 3, 2013 at 2:52 pm

      It is so unnerving and disgusting to me that people were called into the bishops office for adding a profile to an internet site. I really don’t understand why the church has so much fear that they feel they must monitor membership that closely. Way too big brother for me. Creepy!

      • Charlie Carnevale
        April 4, 2013 at 1:42 am

        Blake: it depends on the Bishop and his opinion on what is or not acceptable. It isn’t the institution as such that is monitoring members that closely.

      • Sara
        April 10, 2013 at 3:08 pm

        They are actively participating in a group that fights and conspires against the tenets of the gospel. They outright reject the proclamation on the family, given as official Church doctrine. They are no longer worthy of their temple recommend.

        • Blake Stone
          April 20, 2013 at 5:20 pm

          Sara,
          Many people think they’re right and everybody else is wrong. The sheeple should know their place and just roll over, right? Who are you to determine if others aren’t worthy of their temple recommend? Isn’t that between God, the bishop (priesthood holder) and the recommend holder? Remember, you’re not a priesthood holder so you’re not capable of making that determination.

    • Charlie Carnevale
      April 4, 2013 at 1:41 am

      Sharon: “The only hope for the advancement of Mormonism, IMO, is for the brethren to come right out and say, “We are and all before us…including Joseph Smith…have been fallible and even deceitful”

      I bet you they will never say they are or were deceitful but the church will continue to advance and grow, especially around the world.

      Fallible? In mormon lingo it is being ‘human’ with ‘human errors’.

      • April 4, 2013 at 8:46 am

        Charlie: “I bet you they will never say they are or were deceitful but the church will continue to advance and grow, especially around the world.”

        The church will continue to grow, but in the information age it will continue to lose its “best and brightest” unless it comes to honest terms with its past. Whatever truth the church has to offer depends on what it is and what it can become … not on what it was.

        The church can offer truth, comfort and community even with female elders, temple-married gays, unapologetic history and better education on what revelation is. Joseph Smith was a grifter, but he was also a prophet.

        • ruy lopez
          April 4, 2013 at 5:42 pm

          I find the phrase “best and brightest” at best misguided or uneducated; at worst racist and hegemonstic. “Best and brightest” according to whom? A white north american?

          • Didac
            April 9, 2013 at 6:53 am

            No, Ruy. That’s not what Sharon indicates. The best and brightest are whoever chooses to see the truth for what it is, often those educated and intelligent folks.

            Unfortunately, the Church will continue to cater to people in Latin America and other countries (notice the 45% of new missions there) because people in Latin America are more “receptive” to the Gospel. Read that as you will.

            People from other countries such as the US and many of the European nations will continue to leave and experience null growth (notice 1 new mission opening there and others combining and closing). Are Europeans and Americans smarter, more intelligent than in other countries? No. Of course not. But they are more open-minded and less dependent on the entity called “LDS Church.” People in Latin American will continue to buy the story sold in the Book of Mormon as the true history of their ancestors and that’s a strong pull for many Hispanics and others to join and remain in the Church.

          • Anna
            April 9, 2013 at 7:01 am

            Since when does “best and brightest” denote a racist comment?

            It is in quotation marks because that was the languaged used by former General Authority Marlin Jensen upon learning why so many members are leaving the Church today.

          • April 10, 2013 at 7:33 am

            Thanks Didac and Anna for coming to my defense over the “best and brightest” quotation. As Anna correctly noted I was quoting a former general authority who wept when he read the results of John’s research. I try not to take it personally when people jump to conclusions that I’m “misguided”, “uneducated”, “racist”, “hegemonstic [sic]“. After many decades living in the skin of a southern Mormon woman, it’s a prejudice I’ve encountered many times. Sigh.

        • Sara
          April 11, 2013 at 10:27 am

          If you truly believe gay marriage can exist in the temples of God then you do not have a real understanding or testimony of the gospel and plan of salvation. To receive the highest degree of glory in the Celestial kingdom you must be sealed. Have you ever wondered why? It is because the procreative powers are reserved for the highest level of the Celestial kingdom. The procreative powers are the most important powers our Heavenly Father and Mother have! Homosexual relationships cannot and do not exist in heaven because — among other reasons — they are not fruitful. Men and women were created as two halves of a whole. We have different powers and strengths that are meant to be used in conjunction with the other. Neither man nor woman can be exalted without the other.

          • Brad
            April 11, 2013 at 5:10 pm

            Um…I think Adam was made from dust… And Eve was made from a rib pulled out of Adam. Procreation needed?

          • Sara
            April 11, 2013 at 9:43 pm

            Yes Brad. The procreative powers in the Celestial kingdom enable gods and goddesses to have spirit offspring. Thus how we were all created.

        • ruy
          April 16, 2013 at 6:59 pm

          I was not addressing the crying guy who said the “best and brightest” initially; only the racism manifested in parroting him.

          And Didac, “unfortunately” according to whom? The supporter of a white and north american (and Southerner) who parrots of General Authorities? You should suggest to your friends that people from Germany and the “South” should never say “best and brightest” and anything like it for a couple hundred years. “A ten gallon mouth.”

  3. PaulW
    April 3, 2013 at 3:08 pm

    Hey John,

    It would be really cool if you got all the podcasts listed on Stitcher Radio…

    • April 3, 2013 at 3:10 pm

      Paul – I thought Mormon Stories was listed on Stitcher radio. Are they not showing up?

      • PaulW
        April 3, 2013 at 3:31 pm

        Yes, looks like you are now…it’s been several weeks since I actually searched for it. Awesome!

  4. April 4, 2013 at 7:18 am

    John, thanks so much for taking the time to interview me. What a blessing it is to have you in our community. Your contributions are so valuable.

    To clarify Jason’s point (but, not to be a diva!!) I am the founder, not co-founder of Ordain Women.

    Much love.

  5. Andrew
    April 4, 2013 at 4:21 pm

    It beggars belief that women put on and wear the robes of the holy Priesthood during the Temple Endowment Ceremony, receiving all the rights and privileges therefrom, yet are denied these perfectly legitimate rights of equality with men, outside of the Temple walls. The Brethren need to wake up from their long slumber.

  6. Brad
    April 5, 2013 at 8:56 am

    Good idea…bad outcome…

    I can envision the sisters eventually required to accomplish a large percentage of the work load as we watch the brethren fade into a coma on the back row. Lets face it… The women get things done…give a man the option of shifting priesthood responsibility off to their wife? Oh happy days…happy days… Never to miss the first or last quarter of the epic battle on the grid iron…oh happy days…
    New song: come come ye saints no toil or labor fear but with joy have your wife do it all…

    Disclaimer: the content of this post is in the form of satire. The opinions expressed do not reflect the opinions of any good men or women in or out of the church. No men were harmed or became comatose from posting of the aforementioned script.

    All kidding aside…Go Kate…it is comforting to hear opinions and desires like this expressed in public. We should not discount the expression of one’s asking The Lord for the blessings of his power and authority. I hope he hears your plea…

    • April 5, 2013 at 11:47 am

      Some great snark, Brad.

    • Dave
      April 8, 2013 at 3:36 pm

      I was talking to my wife last night and asked her if she had heard about some women asking to get ordained. She had not but stated that she is already to busy and unless it became a commandment she wants no part of it. I was shocked because we were just talking about how women were not allowed to pray in GC and that freed male slaves got the vote 70 years before women and she thought those things were wrong. Maybe many women that are against women getting the priesthood do so because of the added responsibility. So with that in mind, what is the goal here? Would ordination be a choose or a requirement?

      • Lilli
        April 14, 2013 at 8:53 pm

        Yes, from what I have seen only a rare woman is willing to take on the responsibility that full equality requires, in marriage, church and society, let alone do most seem to want the responsibility to possess Priesthood power and authority, despite that it is the greatest thing there is to possess and a woman’s divine right to possess it.

        As we look back in history we see that few women have wanted, or asked for, the responsibility of equality, even in marriage, let alone in the church, so no wonder that woman still aren’t treated as equals today, for it seems that most women still don’t care that they are being abused and controlled by men, for it’s much easier for women, even if it’s degrading and disrespectful of their divine rights.

        What is God to do if women don’t want total equality and full respect. He definitely won’t force it on them.

  7. Dave
    April 5, 2013 at 11:43 am

    Very enjoyable podcast. I can see both pros and cons to women getting the priesthood. All of the cons I can think of have to do with outdated male thinking. I served in Iraq and when a female who was in charge had to deal with the locals she carried no authority in their minds at all. I also think that in certain communities women play the responsible role and the men are just there as sperm donors and if the young boys see women as spiritual leaders as well as family leaders then it’s harder for them to learn their roles as part of a family. Let me just say, as a less than knowing (but still trying to believe) active member who serves on the High council in my stake, I would have no issues with women getting the priesthood. I do think that there would be a whole lot more to work out than when the blacks were allowed to be ordained. I am ready to see some big changes in the church.

  8. April 5, 2013 at 11:59 am

    Apropos of this Mormon Stories topic, I talk about the Relief Society lesson title from two weeks ago, “Brethren, We Have Work To Do”, (huh?) here: http://algonquinonthebayou.blogspot.com/2013/03/girls-are-smarter-than-boys.html

  9. April 5, 2013 at 12:54 pm

    RE: whether opening ordination to women in other religions has caused membership declines: correlation ≠ causation.

  10. Brenda
    April 5, 2013 at 5:00 pm

    The LDS Church has been the greatest blessing in my life. Why? Because of it, I have the Gospel. Through it I met my husband, and the growth from our many callings continues to enhance our respect for each other. It helped us to raise and protect our children in a world full of crap. It pushed me to develop talents I never knew I had. It has taught me to get along with the unlovable, and it has opened my sphere to the most wonderful people. It teaches me to emulate Christ.

    Should women be ordained? I don’t know. But I DO believe completely, that the Lord runs this great church. I’ve seen enough to erase any doubts. I know it works for me. And if and when women are ordained, it’ll be on his time and according to his wisdom, and not ours. May we desire and pray for it? Of course. Should we pressure and demand it from Church leaders? In my opinion, no.

    One of the most important lessons I learn over and over is the value of humility. I like to think I’m fairly intelligent, but I would never assume I know more than people who have traveled a road ahead of me, or have more information than I have, or see a bigger picture than I see. That said, I have seen enough to understand why it would not be a good idea for men and women to serve in a presidency together.

    It seems, with much of the reasoning of women who want to be ordained, there is a focus on what they feel they lack, and not on what they have. I feel that what the Church has given me, added to what the Gospel promises me, is so overwhelming and incomprehensible, that I don’t have any room left in my heart to want more. So if the Lords wants me to be ordained, that’d be wonderful. If not, that’s wonderful too. Either way, I’m blessed and humbly grateful.

    • Zack T.
      April 7, 2013 at 8:04 am

      Not a wiser comment could be made on this subject:

      “It seems, with much of the reasoning of women who want to be ordained, there is a focus on what they feel they lack, and not on what they have.”

      Thank-you Brenda for you insight.

    • Jay
      April 20, 2013 at 9:11 pm

      Brenda,

      Just replace everywhere you say LDS with Roman Catholic or Jehovah’s Witness or Lutheran etc. etc. whose members would say the exact same thing about their leadership. The LDS church is not any “greater” than any other church even though its members have been taught to believe so. I do agree it is obvious that god leads the LDS church though, the god of popular opinion. You have to be terribly naïve (or Orwellian) not to recognize that.

    • Stef
      April 24, 2013 at 10:06 am

      (Amen to Brenda)

    • Hello
      May 1, 2013 at 11:22 am

      This is probably the best phrased comment to this article. Well said.

  11. Elizabeth
    April 5, 2013 at 9:54 pm

    Show me a woman who is desirous of holding the priesthood and I’ll show you a woman who is disenchanted with some aspect of the LDS Church and is on the road to apostasy. I don’t need the the priesthood to feel equal to men in the Church. Those who do don’t fully comprehend the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

    • Dave
      May 3, 2013 at 2:57 am

      I am an active member, just to clarify, and in my dealings with other active members I do not know of anyone who is not disenchanted with at least one aspect of the LDS church. I don’t know anyone that thinks blacks not have the priesthood earlier than 1978 was a good thing. It pissed off a lot of church leaders back in the day and it caused the question to be asked. God didn’t show up in the Thursday morning first presidency meeting and say “BY THE WAY SPENCER, LET GIVE THOSE BLACK FOLK THE PRIESTHOOD”

  12. Clara
    April 6, 2013 at 2:21 am

    Thank you Kate. I’m praying for you and the cause of equality in the church. You are very courageous.

    • Clara
      April 9, 2013 at 2:26 am

      After reading the post below, I just need to say one more thing– Kate, I am honestly declaring that you are super, super, super awesome and courageous :)

  13. Brenda
    April 7, 2013 at 5:09 pm

    “Sometimes we act as if an honest declaration of doubt is a higher manifestation of moral courage, than is an honest declaration of faith. It is not.” Jeffrey R. Holland

    • Kelly
      April 8, 2013 at 10:50 am

      Sometimes we act as if an honest declaration of faith is a higher manifestation of moral courage, than is an honest declaration of doubt. It is not.

      • Brenda
        April 9, 2013 at 6:33 pm

        Then I suppose my honest declaration of doubt regarding ordainwomen.org is also a manifestation of moral courage. As per your comment, apparently it goes both ways.

        • Kelly
          April 9, 2013 at 10:53 pm

          That is the point I was trying to make. It can and does go both ways.

    • Dave
      April 8, 2013 at 3:47 pm

      I would say that it depends on which group you are talking to. It’s always easier to go along with the crowd.

      • Brenda
        April 9, 2013 at 6:16 pm

        I agree. So it depends on which crowd you choose ….. and this life is all about agency. As for me, I choose the Prophet, and the One who speaks through him. Prov. 3:5 “Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and lean not unto thine own understanding.”

    • Utahhiker801
      April 8, 2013 at 8:17 pm

      I would say that honest declarations of doubt or of faith are both important and can equally require moral courage. To suggest that a declaration of doubt is of less worth leads me to question the motives of the speaker.

      And it kind of smacks of a bit of name-calling. I guess I don’t feel it’s my or his job to measure anyone’s moral courage.

  14. Trent
    April 9, 2013 at 11:51 am

    I assume that on the heel’s of the ordainwomen.org movement, we will be seeing a more organized effort among the LGBT community for doctrinal changes regarding same sex marriage and even a push for same sex temple marriage. Kate, with your all inclusive/all egual philosophy, I am wondering if you would support doctrinal changes to include same sex marriage/same sex temple marriage?

    • Jay
      April 20, 2013 at 9:19 pm

      Something tells me Kate is not touching this question my freind. I really don’t believe that is part of her cafeteria plan.

  15. Rude Dog
    April 9, 2013 at 7:08 pm

    Doubt is not the opposite of faith, it is it’s handmaiden. Some would say that you cannot have faith without doubt. The opposite of faith is not doubt but surety. Because of this I’ve always been slightly uncomfortable with the ease of the LDS cultural phrasing “I know such and such is true” because it leaves so much faith behind. This seems to me to play into Carl Jungs comment that most people use religion to avoid the God experience. Is our cultural use of the “I know” language leaving faith and the honest search behind?

    Another thing I will add less you think me completely pro faith, and that is faith may at times be a virtue, but I think it much more likely to be a vice. A little faith may go a long way, or “Mountains may be moved, and millions of people who would normally never acquiesce an evil are brought to it straight away and with ease, and with self righteousness.” The bretheren could only hope for more doubt, surety and unexamined faith is killing this church and leading hundreds of thousands out of it.

  16. Leslie
    April 10, 2013 at 9:00 am

    I appreciate how faithful Kate came across and with the intention to wait upon the Lord and at the same time asking for women and men to increase their vision and imagination about ordination. I commit to that. Here is a fabulous dream I had this morning. I think it relates to the stream of new and living water coming if we have a container big enough:
    I came into the kitchen and everything was wet; The table and floor and it seemed like it was raining inside. I looked and someone had left the window open at the top and it was raining outside so things were wet inside too. I looked around noticed a fairly large streaming drip from the ceiling. I looked up and saw a little circular fan grate in the ceiling and realize it must be leaking from the roof. I get a clear crystal pitcher to catch the water so it doesn’t drip on the floor and it is coming so fast, I know the pitcher will not hold it all.

    I guess my job is to make myself a bigger container for God’s grace waiting to pour from heaven

  17. Sara B
    April 11, 2013 at 2:15 pm

    I just finished listening to this wonderful podcast–Kate, you spoke to the matter and the issues so beautifully and humbly. It is everything that I wish I could articulate to my friends and family on the matter. The website design and content is lovely! It has a wonderful spirit to it, and beautiful testimonies. Because of that, it cannot be ignored or marginalized, nor will it be a source of negativity. This is what I’ve been looking for and waiting for for many years now–thank you for applying your skill set and for having the courage to set to step up and initiate this website and movement! It is already a blessing, regardless of immediate or future outcomes.

  18. Stormin
    April 13, 2013 at 8:08 pm

    Late on the scene to comment. If you want to believe in this imaginary LDS priesthood that’s up to you —— I believe anyone (men or women) can act for God based on their FAITH in Jesus Christ (who Mormons rarely testify their relationship with for good reason). However, based on LDS history if you want a revelation on LDS priesthood for women you ——— 1. You need to get a fairly large group of active believers, and 2. You need to be able to impact the tithing inflows of the church. Get some of the popular/rich LDS women (Romney, Osmond, Marriott, Huntsman, etc.) on your team as a possible spokesperson and threaten impact on the tithing inflows and the revelation will flow like manna came from heaven —— You will probably be offered a GA position!

  19. charles
    April 14, 2013 at 7:52 pm

    In the beginning of the podcast there was a discussion on the history of women doing blessings of the sick within the church. I think that a movement to allow this to be restored would be a much better first step because it would not require any doctrinal changes, just the removal of a policy. I have had discussions with many women on these facts that would never support women holding the priesthood that had no problem with the doctrine of women giving blessings, because I could point to actual quotes from early church leaders and specific examples in church history as well as in the scriptures. However talking about women holding the priesthood immediately causes many people to discredit these things. Its likely someone during the early 1800s fighting for black people to have the right to vote or interracial marriage before slavery was ended. If things are done incrementally they are not as threatening to people. If women were allowed to give blessings again which has been done by males for so long after a while they may begin to question why not other things, but right now it is too big of a leap with not as much to build on as women giving blessings.

    • Dave
      April 16, 2013 at 12:40 pm

      This makes perfect sense to me. It would be a first step, just a baby step. It would give power to women, fill a gap in the homes where there is not a priesthood holder, it would allow Sister missionaries to perform a service that they currently can not do, and it would not be too much of an added responsibility for the women who don’t want the priesthood.

  20. Michael F
    April 16, 2013 at 8:43 am

    Kate brought out some great ideas about “faithful” agitation and her idea of women ordination as a means of a member retention tool. i felt really positive about this interview and feel we are living in a time when changes can take place without bloodshed or excommunications on differing voices or points of view. Very thought provoking interview. thanks John. thanks Kate.

  21. RayG
    April 17, 2013 at 10:30 pm

    Kate, I’m sure you are a nice person, but I have a hard time being smitten with the my-wisdom trumps everyone else’s attitude of a 32 year old young adult whose major life experience is attending college. To say some of your opinions are naive would be an understatement. The thought that there would be no impact on the church, because we’re better than that, is laughable. To think that men and women could serve together in Bishoprics effectively is the thought process of a person with limited experience in life.

    Being the lefty that you are, I realize that all that really matters is the intentions you have, not the consequence of the policies you propose. Why do you think it is against church policy for Bishops and RS presidents to travel together? Because of the broken marriages that happened when vows were broken. You think a male bishop could spend hours each week with a female counselor without a few cases of adultery occurring?

    How about allowing women to be in charge? You think we have a problem having enough men in the church now, wait till it doesn’t matter if a man or women can be Elders quorum presidents, or HP group leaders, see what happens to men’s activity rates then. Were the church to implement what you are agitating for, there would be an immediate and irreversible downward trend in church activity rates, even more so than now.

    This is not to say that women aren’t capable, or spiritual, or amazing. They are all those things and more. My personal opinion is that the priesthood is the way the Lord forces men to think about other people. Women do this naturally, men don’t. The priesthood forces men to serve others, spend time on things other than their own interests, and feel vital to the success of something bigger than themselves. For whatever reason, men don’t come by these things easily, women do. Priesthood helps us in those areas.

    Other than preside at certain meetings, there are few things the priesthood is essential for that women can’t already do. I’ve been in Ward Council meetings for 15 years, in several wards and under 5 different bishops. I can’t recall an instance when the women on the council weren’t respected, listened to, and vital to the functioning of the ward. I’m sorry some seem to have negative experiences, but that is not church policy, just some less tactful individuals.

    Come back in a ten years when you’re raising 3 or 4 kids and tell us how much you want to be a Bishop then. The last thing most women in the church want is to have another responsibility added to their already over-stretched schedules. I’d wish you good luck, but, for the good of the institution, I really hope your efforts fail.

  22. Lilli
    April 18, 2013 at 10:36 am

    Honoring women’s divine right to the Priesthood would not necessarily add any more responsibility to their callings, but it would add additional power and authority, so they would have equal voice and veto power in decision making in the Church, which would be a very good thing.

    But the biggest thing to realize here is any Church that doesn’t recognize women’s right to possess and use the Priesthood and equal positions with men, isn’t a true Church, so why bother with trying to change it. If God/Christ really led the LDS Church you wouldn’t have to petition men to repent and honor women’s equality, it would already be happening. For Christ believed in women’s full equality in all things.

    If Joseph Smith was here and his true Church still functioning, women wouldn’t have to ask for the Priesthood, he would already have given them it, like it appears he was trying to do before he died.

    Men like Brigham Young though did not believe in equality for either women or blacks, so the rest is history.

    The true Church went into apostasy after Joseph Smith died and now to try to get an apostate church to change and allow women to have the Priesthood is all in vain, for even if they did they don’t have real authority and power themselves to even give it. You might as well go ask the RLDS, FLDS or Catholic Church for Priesthood power and equality as to ask the LDS Church for it, for they lost it all long ago when Joseph died.

    When Christ returns he will definitely give women full Priesthood authority and power, if they don’t already possess it now.

    And Bishops will not have female counselors, but the Bishop’s wife will be a Co-Bishop along side him, she over the women and he over the men. They will probably each have their own counselors of the same sex to aid them. Same as Stake Presidents, a co-husband and wife team over the Stake, each with equal authority and power in all decision making, just like marriage should be.

    There will also be equal female apostles and Prophetesses, like there were in earlier times.

    • Jay
      April 20, 2013 at 9:16 pm

      Lilli,

      What do you base your belief in Joseph Smith off of?

      • Lilli
        April 22, 2013 at 12:39 am

        Jay,

        I base my beliefs from Joseph Smith by the things he did during his life, the sacrifices he made for truth and how he stood up for the protection of all women, the things he said and taught to the women in Relief Society about power and authority and equality and the way he respected and loved Emma and how he protected her and all women and his understanding of Charity, which means honoring women’s total equality in marriage, church and society.

        Joseph also believed in Christ’s Golden Rule, ‘Doing unto others as you would have done to you’. Meaning, men would not want to have to submit to or follow a wife or women leaders who held God’s Priesthood power and authority, when he wasn’t given the same privilege, position and power.

        I also believe Christ considered his wife Mary to be equal to or greater then his Apostles, her holding as much or more Priesthood power and authority as the Apostles did.

        For the more love (Charity) we possess the more Priesthood power we have. And God and Joseph Smith both taught that true Charity comes more naturally to women.

        Ancient writings also seem to suggest this high position of his wife Mary, but I believe just studying Christ’s teachings shows how he gives women such a supreme position.

        • Dave
          May 3, 2013 at 3:14 am

          Where does it say that Mary was the wife of Jesus and that she had priesthood? Also you said the JS respected and loved Emma so much, then why did he marry other women with out her knowledge or consent? I’m not trying to get cheeky, it is just an honest question.

          • Lilli
            May 5, 2013 at 9:58 am

            Dave,

            Other ancient writings that didn’t make it into the New Testament talk about Mary and how she was so respected & that her position was maybe even ‘above’ the Apostles in Christ’s eyes. Plus, it seems Joseph was trying to give the women in his day full Priesthood power and authority, equal to men’s. Plus from all that I have studied and learned I believe that God is no respecter of persons, and everything men can gain, so can women. Men and women are completely equal in power and authority in heaven and should be here too.

            I believe women were given Priesthood power and authority in the Pre-existence, probably much more than men will ever receive, for giving ‘birth’ is the most significant Priesthood act there is on this earth and only women have the power to do that.

            I believe that Priesthood power is also connected with righteousness and Christlike pure love, the more love the more power we gain, and I believe women have more love then men in this world, thus more of God’s power.

            Though authority and power are 2 different things, so though we may have power to do certain things, we also need authority to ‘use’ that power in certain areas.

            When you realize where Brigham Young got his idea about women submitting to men (“The Peacemaker” that circulated in Nauvoo) and you see that almost all unrighteous men believe in subjecting women to their rule, you know that God’s way is just the opposite.

            And Joseph did not marry any other women or live polygamy, he instead fought against it his whole life and had true love and respect for Emma, despite what the storybooks say that were written by Brigham Young and his followers who tried to justify their adulteries.

            We have to study out the real history of Joseph Smith and listen to the Spirit and of course have true love for our spouse if we ever want to understand Christ’s gospel and how to tell true prophets from false ones and truth from error.

          • Dave
            May 7, 2013 at 2:27 am

            Lilli,

            Thank you for your response. I have heard and read some of what you are talking about as far as Jesus and the idea that he was married and that JS never practiced plural marriage but I have come to a different conclusion. Plus the official policy of the church does not back up your claims. I mean no disrespect at all and I enjoy hearing your ideas and thoughts.

            I agree with you that BY did not treat women as equals and that he took away some of their rights and was a bully to some degree. Many of your other ideas about the pre-existence, etc were new to me and maybe that is the case, but again I haven’t found that information in any of my readings or study.

            You also talked of true and false prophets, do you care to name names?

          • Lilli
            May 8, 2013 at 11:56 pm

            Dave,

            Thank you for your kind response. I understand that the Church does not back up what I am talking about, for if it is true, why would they? They probably never would. They stick with Brigham’s version of the story, for the victors get to write the history.

            But despite all the hearsay, rumors and 2nd hand accusations and claims by usually those who had every reason to lie and who wanted to live polygamy, there is actually no proof that Joseph ever preached or practiced polygamy, at least not that I or others searching for it have found or shown by any historian I know of.

            But we do have much strong actual proof that Joseph preached and warned against polygamy his whole life and said that any member who fell for polygamy, even if a prophet came preaching it, would be damned along with that prophet. Those are pretty strong words.

            If you want to search deeper into the proven and published testimony from Joseph Smith while he was alive and could speak for himself, I suggest reading “Joseph Smith Fought Polygamy”, you can read it online for free at restorationbookstore.org

            And as for false prophets, I’m sure you realize that men who don’t respect women and who abuse them like Brigham Young did, can’t be true prophets, for they automatically lose any Priesthood, keys or power or position they may have had, Amen to his Priesthood. And that goes for all the other leaders who supported him in his evils and falsehoods and whoredoms.

            Thus the last true prophet we had was Joseph Smith, the rest have been false prophets and imposters, according to Christ and Joseph Smith. The Book of Mormon Prophets foretold this latter day apostasy of the Holy Church of God, which happened after Joseph died.

            The Church was broken up in many different groups, with the apostles going different ways and most falling for evil. But at least Joseph’s brothers who were apostles tried to maintain the same Church and teachings that their brother Joseph restored, while Brigham and those who followed him taught completely opposite doctrines and thus had a completely apostate church and people to take out west with him.

            The few righteous after Joseph died just stayed in the East and did the best they could with the scriptures that Joseph had given them and the Holy Spirit to give them revelation. Joseph taught that the Kingdom of God remains on the earth as long as just one man remains righteous and thus retains the Priesthood and can received revelation from heaven. I believe there were many who did so, but such righteous people are near impossible to find today, those who still believe in the Gospel and teachings of Jesus Christ.

            The LDS Church teaches the opposite of Christ in so many things that Joseph would never recognize it as a break off from his original church, for the Catholic Church is nearer to the restored Church then the LDS Church is, at least they don’t teach and allow whoredoms like polygamy and divorce and remarriage and subjection of women.

    • Jake Adelson
      April 22, 2013 at 4:11 pm

      Priesthood does not necessarily give you an equal voice and veto power.

      • Lilli
        April 28, 2013 at 12:57 am

        Jake,

        That is true, but it would pave the way for women to hold equal power positions with men, Co-Prophet, Co-Apostle, Co-Stake Pres., Co-Bishop, and then women would not only have God’s power (which they already do) but earthly positions of decision making power and veto power to ensure that women’s voices, needs & feelings are given equal respect & weight as men’s.

        Most women in the Church that I know feel that the Church is just a ‘Good ol Boy’s Club’ and women’s feelings, needs and voice are only given lip service, to say the least, while men make the decisions according to how ‘they’ think it should be, which usually serves men far more than women.

        The Church has a clear history of abusing women by things like polygamy, rolling out the red carpet for men to abuse, abandon (divorce) and commit adultery on his wife (by remarriage in temple even with a 2nd wife) (Christ taught divorce & remarriage was clearly adultery) and pressuring women to go along with men’s philosophy that she must submit to her husband and let him rule/preside over her and make the decisions, etc.

        Clearly the power needs to be equalized between men and women in marriage and in the Church, at the very least.

  23. Connie
    April 30, 2013 at 11:29 am

    I wish I could’ve asked Kate Kelly two of my own questions:

    1) Does she see any functional/cultural conflicts that would come out of women being ordained to the priesthood? There are simply a lot of logistical issues that I imagine with such a change. Would all females be required to serve a mission? Would wives/husbands be uncomfortable with their spouses serving in bishoprics with members of the opposite sex–especially when most of their meetings and information shared is confidential? Is that even appropriate? Could a bishop call a spouse to be his/her counselor? etc, etc. I am willing to imagine the pros of such a change, but when I imagine the cons as well–it seems like there could be some practical reasons why we are delegated our specific gender responsibilities.

    2) I respect the idea that we need to ask these questions–“Ask and ye shall receive; knock and it shall be opened unto you.” However,it seems like Kate and many of these women are involved with the attitude that women definitely SHOULD be ordained or that this change WILL indeed happen in our lifetime. What if the answer is no? Are they prepared to accept a no? Would that rock the faith of all these women who are creating profiles on their website? It seems as though many are “asking,” but have already made up their minds to what the answer is/should be.

Support

Monthly Subscription

One-Time Donation

Subscribe

Subscribe to podcast

RSS Feed

  • Podcast Feed

Facebook Support Group


Mormon Stories on Facebook