Shortcomings in living prophets?

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Why would you accuse me of distorting your viewpoints?

You said, and I quote, "...you... came across as being genuine...." "...Diarrhea... I... have...." "My personal opinion... is... under the guise of searching for truth." "I... ripped... one...." "It... was... bad."

Finally, some honesty from Rocky!

Why would I accuse you? Um gee I don't know....because it's true and you haev a long history of doing it to everyone on this board. You being glib about it only serves to prove me more right.

Obviously.

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Hm, I will have to refute this point by point.

1. You said, "Why would I accuse you? Um gee I don't know...." "I am being glib."

Ok. Thanks for the clarification!

2. You said, "... you have a long... board.... Obviously."

I don't know what that is supposed to mean, but it makes me a bit uncomfortable. This is the religion forum, let's keep things above the belt.

lol...keep your homo-erotic tendencies to yourself.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Did you really just say "keep... yourself... homo. Your... [sic] erotic?"

I am a happily married man, Rocky!

Hmmm ... does your wife know about your man-crush on me?

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Did you really just say "keep... yourself... homo. Your... [sic] erotic?"

I am a happily married man, Rocky!

lol...okay, okay. You win.

[JohnnyLingo]

You know I find it interesting that the people I really directed the thread to have declined to comment. I mainly got responses from people I feel are reasonable and not apostate in their views.

I guess because it's not as socially acceptable to bash on prophets if they're living.

Kinda backwards from what the norm is in that area.

Huh.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

I ... happily married ... Rocky!

And hopefully you two enjoy a long life together, too. Congratulations!

[Solon]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

Since so many of you are comfortable deciding what shortcomings men like David O. McKay and Brigham Young had, I'm interested in knowing what problems you see in those currently sustained as prophets, seers, and revelators.

I know President Packer is disliked... someone want to outline the reasons why? And feel free to bash on anyone else you feel has major unresolved sins.

Alright, I'll bite. For what it's worth, I'm not commenting on "major unresolved sins," since I don't really believe in sin, at least not in the conventional LDS way. But here's an example of a shortcoming I perceive in contemporary LDS leadership.

I personally have a deep-seated issue with the contradictions between the way the LDS church talks about women and the way it treats them. On the one hand, yesterday's sacrament meeting in my congregation strung together a number of quotations about how women are God's ultimate and culminating creation . . . how there is no station higher than feminine motherhood/sisterhood/daughterhood . . . etc. Indeed, at practically every General Conference, the good ol' boys joke about how men are just a bunch of clueless louts, grateful that their noble, righteous, and virtuous wives will pull them to salvation. I think this practice degrades both women and men.

On the other hand, if one sets aside this rhetoric, it becomes obvious that women have very little official say in church affairs. In the past 75 years, they have lost autonomy in the Relief Society, the ability to bless their own, and feminism has been identified as a threat to the church. Women make slightly but significantly different covenants in the temples, and access priesthood blessings only through a male agent.

So, which is it? Are they the supreme creation of the universe? Or, are they second-class members in the Kingdom? [probably somewhere in between] I'm not advocating for women to receive the priesthood (it's not really my place), but I am advocating for the leaders of the church to lay aside the condescending double speak and quit the smoke-and-mirrors routine of worshiping womanhood while denying its basic equality with manhood. For whatever reason, righteous or corrupt, the LDS church is a male-led organization. Pious professions of female moral superiority are condescending and countermand actual practice. Instead of placing females on the proverbial pedestal, maybe the LDS leadership should take a hard look at its 'doctrines' and 'policies' with regards to administration and females. I don't have an alternative to suggest. I just think the rhetoric should go.

I hold the leadership responsible for this paradoxical dichotomy between what LDS say and what they do. Sin? Probably not. Disingenuous? Definitely.

Just my opinion, and I'm sure many will respond with "women don't need the priesthood like men do . . . it teaches service and compassion that women have naturally." I personally find this attitude quite condescending (as does my wife).

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Solon

Alright, I'll bite. For what it's worth, I'm not commenting on "major unresolved sins," since I don't really believe in sin, at least not in the conventional LDS way. But here's an example of a shortcoming I perceive in contemporary LDS leadership.

I personally have a deep-seated issue with the contradictions between the way the LDS church talks about women and the way it treats them. On the one hand, yesterday's sacrament meeting in my congregation strung together a number of quotations about how women are God's ultimate and culminating creation . . . how there is no station higher than feminine motherhood/sisterhood/daughterhood . . . etc. Indeed, at practically every General Conference, the good ol' boys joke about how men are just a bunch of clueless louts, grateful that their noble, righteous, and virtuous wives will pull them to salvation. I think this practice degrades both women and men.

On the other hand, if one sets aside this rhetoric, it becomes obvious that women have very little official say in church affairs. In the past 75 years, they have lost autonomy in the Relief Society, the ability to bless their own, and feminism has been identified as a threat to the church. Women make slightly but significantly different covenants in the temples, and access priesthood blessings only through a male agent.

So, which is it? Are they the supreme creation of the universe? Or, are they second-class members in the Kingdom? [probably somewhere in between] I'm not advocating for women to receive the priesthood (it's not really my place), but I am advocating for the leaders of the church to lay aside the condescending double speak and quit the smoke-and-mirrors routine of worshiping womanhood while denying its basic equality with manhood. For whatever reason, righteous or corrupt, the LDS church is a male-led organization. Pious professions of female moral superiority are condescending and countermand actual practice. Instead of placing females on the proverbial pedestal, maybe the LDS leadership should take a hard look at its 'doctrines' and 'policies' with regards to administration and females. I don't have an alternative to suggest. I just think the rhetoric should go.

I hold the leadership responsible for this paradoxical dichotomy between what LDS say and what they do. Sin? Probably not. Disingenuous? Definitely.

Just my opinion, and I'm sure many will respond with "women don't need the priesthood like men do . . . it teaches service and compassion that women have naturally." I personally find this attitude quite condescending (as does my wife).

This topic has already been addressed with many concluding as you have. The "manhate" syndrome evident from the "female praise" does tend to put one off. But it is now part of the culture to praise women generally while detesting the men. You won't go a leadership or conference without some proverbial reference to the inate goodness of women and inate evil of men.

[RockyBalboa]

lol...the way they treat LDS women? Oh geez... Women get off EASY in the LDS Church.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

lol...the way they treat LDS women? Oh geez... Women get off EASY in the LDS Church.

Doesn't it offend you whenver they go into the predicable spiel about how wonderful men are, how lucky we slovenly men are because without the angelic guidance of our perfect mates would never be able to make it to heaven?

It sounds as if they're trying to get some later. I wish they'd stop pandering to one gender or another. It reminds me of the "player" at the club who panders to the women while the rest of the guys roll their eyes. Because the women lack authority, we have an uneasy tension about an all male leadership addresses women. How that is resolved in the future will be interesting.