One of my friends recently sent the following link, http://whatwomenknow.org, and asked for my thoughts. I suppose to better understand what it means you should read a recent General Conference talk given by Sister Julie Beck of the Relief Society and the carefully chosen words of the women who signed and issued the statement on the website.
While I agree with a lot of what was said I have to question the way in which these people issued their concerns. By going to the trouble of calling out a specific talk and then signing their names it seems like they've drawn a pretty strong and definite line in the sand. I couldn't help but think that there would have to be a better way to deal with these "slights" then to publicly call out someone like that.
I can sort of understand the motivations for these statements but I don't necessarily agree with them. It appears evident that these women feel that their chosen lifestyles have been called into question by the church. It seems like they want the church to confirm to their chosen lifestyle, not the other way around. I might be wrong but that's the way it appears. I have done this before but haven't gone to these lengths.
I don't know what is going to happen here. Maybe it will spur some debate within the church. Maybe some people will be censured. Maybe things remain the same. I doubt that. Members of the church are becoming more educated and more independent. It's almost as if the church is just one of many membership cards that we now hold.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
The cooking book to end all cooking books... Take a look at this book . It is cool and ground breaking. It will make you wonder if you...
-
We all have our favorite movies. We feel a special connection to the characters, the story, and even the location or setting of the movie. ... -
...well actually it was more of an early evening. It's about time. The Jodi-Ryan courtship has gone on for too long and has been far to...
3 comments:
It has always been a point of interest to me to see how many different and diverse schools of thought exist in the church. I have known people who's politics are so far removed from me that I feel like I could never relate to them on any topic and yet there they are sitting on the same pew as me in the same church, expressing the same heart felt testimony of Jesus Christ and His doctrines.
The point is, we can be worthy members of the church and still be card carrying members of either political party. When we feel compelled to show public and pointed dissent against the church, that is when you have left true religion. I don't believe that true religion is at odds with any legitimate ideology whether political, social, or scientific.
If you find yourself at odds with the teachings of the church, it is you or your ideology that should be suspect, not the doctrine.
The web petition didn't really seem like it was disagreeing with much of what was said in the talk. It seemed more like an attempt to put the new President in her place for not painstakingly pointing out every possible different exception to the general guidelines she set forth in her talk. The unfortuate effect by taking this stand (besides what Norm posted) is that it will give the wrong impression to anyone who reads the petition without also reading the talk. By giving the impression that the position taken by the petition was "opposite" of President Beck, the petition essentially puts words into President Beck's mouth that simply were neither said nor implied.
Bad form. Bad bad form.
It's almost as if people forget that the prophet approves the text of each talk given in General Conference, and each sermon given should be considered as coming from God.
Post a Comment