Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeWaters
I was sitting in another Stake Leadership Meeting the other evening. The usual discussion about increasing activity, improving missionary work, getting YM on missions, reactivation (i.e. rescuing).
After I got home, it occurred me that it didn't strike me as unusual that not a single woman was in attendance. It's actually called the Stake Priesthood Leadership Meeting. And there were probably a couple hundred men from the stake in attendance.
As far as I know, there is no Stake Leadership meeting that includes women. I know there is the occasional SLC training meeting that includes women.
Shouldn't this be weird to me? Over half of our wards are women. We do all this stuff, try to strengthen our wards, and strategize and all that and don't include any women. There's a High Council. But it has no women. As far as I know, there is not a stake council that includes women.
I've been told that SLC wants to remove power/responsibility from Bishoprics and place that on Ward Councils. Which does include women. That's a good thing I think.
But sometimes I scratch my head about how poorly we utilize the talents of women. Can't women be more fully included and utilized without giving them the priesthood?
|
Some stakes have a Stake Auxilliary Meeting which includes leaders in Relief Society, Young Women, and Primary. Also, many PEC's now incorporate the Relief Society president. And of course a decade ago President Hinckley incorporated women into the General Conference with two new annual meetings, as well as included them as separate groups in solemn assemblies.
So, I think the church is making good progress down this road. However, I suspect your complaint isn't about being more inclusive of women as much as it is a criticism of a male-only priesthood.