Ok, I'm going to admit something: President Packer's talk offended me.
He said things that I did not agree with. And he said things that were contrary to what I believe.
I know I'm not alone in this, and I know you all know what I'm talking about.
Here is the exact quote that bothered me:
"It sometimes happens that the elders are called in to administer to the members of a family. Among these elders there may be presidents of stakes, apostles, or even members of the first presidency of the Church. It is not proper under these circumstances for the father to stand back and expect the elders to direct the administration of this important ordinance. The father is there. It is his right and it is his duty to preside. He should select the one who is to administer the oil, and the one who is to be mouth in prayer, and he should not feel that because there are present presiding authorities in the Church that he is therefore divested of his rights to direct the administration of that blessing of the gospel in his home. (If the father be absent, the mother should request the presiding authority present to take charge.)" (Ensign, May 2010)
(I bolded the parts that were important.)
When I heard that, I was offended by an apostle for the first and so far only time in my life. I admit, I struggled with it. Why should I defer to someone else in my own home? Why shouldn't I be in charge, even if my husband is away?
Because this was the first (and only) time I've had this experience, I wrestled with myself for quite some time over it.
Eventually, a quiet voice in my head said, "Erin, don't be so prideful. Don't take things the wrong way. Don't be offended. Being offended is the first step off the path. Don't you believe that President Packer communes with Heavenly Father? Don't you have faith that he is an apostle of the Lord?" And my answer to those questions was yes. And I let it go.
That's all I have to say about that.
Except that this disgusts me.
9 comments:
Yes, taking offense is the first step off the path. You are wise.
Part of me wants to be upset that he said it, but at the same time I'm not bothered at all. It's one of those times that I don't understand why, but have faith that it can be explained to me if it needs to be. I think it has a lot to do with keeping order, as the Lord likes us to have order with the Gospel, and not that women aren't partners in the home with their spouse.
It sounded like he was more giving instruction so there isn't confusion and, therefore, loss of the Spirit. Like a manners lesson of sorts... maybe.
Uh...I don't remember his talk at all. So this small quote is all I am going off of with what I am about to say. That being said...
Isn't he just saying that if the father isn't there, and someone needs to be administered to (which in my mind, means needs a blessing or something) that we call on other preisthood leaders to come do that for us?
if that is what he meant, I don't know what the big to do is over it. if he meant, the mom steps aside in her decisions in the home and lets someone else take over, I do not believe it. that is not what we have ever been taught before.
I am proud of you for coming to grips with your feelings though. That is very strong of you and humble.
I HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE that facebook page. and I'm even really understanding about gays and lesbians. I look at homosexuality the same as I look at hetero sexual sins. ITS A SIN. If you do it, it's bad, and you need to take care of it. It doesn't make YOU and evil person. You are NOT cast away automatically. the atonement is there for a reason. for all homo and hetero's alike. end of story.
and no matter what Pres. Packer said...I promise it wasn't a hate speech. that really breaks my heart that people take things SOOO wrongly.
um also - homosexuality, is NOT a sin...until you ACT ON IT. being attracted to the same gender in and of itself is not a sin .it is a trial that you have to overcome. just like heterosexuality. If you have pre-marital sex, you have to overcome that temptation, that weakness. You have to repent. Every engaged couple thinks about having sex. but it isn't until they ACT on those thoughts that it becomes a SIN. we are taught to control our thoughts because thoughts lead to actions, so it all makes sense. Same gender attraction isn't a sin. it's when you act on those feelings that it becomes a problem.
GAH. this makes me crazy. I need to read his talk and see what all the to-do is about.
loves!
I feel like I need to clarify something--this quote is not from the talk on Sunday. I bolded the May 2010 to point out that this was from LAST conference. And that it was something that bothered me. But I got over it, just like everyone who's so mad right now can and should get over it.
Anyway. I thought that was clear but maybe it wasn't.
The point is, I wasn't meaning to stir up some kind of feminist convo about priesthood authority. What I ACTUALLY wanted to talk about is the current situation with people lashing out against the Church's so-called "anti-gay" ness, I just didn't say it right out. Anyway, I hope now it's a little more clear what I was trying to say here.
Erin, I totally get you gril. I hadn't really thought about the other talk (From last conference) But I know that you're getting at what happened at THIS conference and the stir that it has caused.
And I think its sad that it has caused a stir. Especially that it has caused a stir within the members of the Church. Do you believe he is an Apostle? If you do, then you've got to agree that he is inspired of the Lord and that is the source he gets his info.
I was talking with Jordan about it this morning and he said "Since when has church opinions been popular with mainstream culture?" Um. Nevs. Thats when.
Is he an apostle or isn't he?
I think I heard at least 3 times the phrase, "prophets and apostles might not say what you want to hear." They are special witnesses of Christ and they say what Christ wants them to teach us. So if you're offended that your problem. No one is forcing you to abide by the principles they teach. You choose to do it so get up all off their backs. They're just doing their job.
Also, Erin, I get why you would feel that way about deferring to the presiding priesthood authority. There was a time when I would have felt the same way. But I like your learning moment. The priesthood is not ever supposed to be used as a tool to dominate. It's just an assignment to perform certain duties. That's how I see it anyway. It's the duty of people who hold the priesthood to preside. That's all.
Going along with what Andrea said. True that sister. Is he an apostle or isn't he? Which really stems down to do you believe in Christ or don't you?
I do want to add though that humans are weak. Sometimes our faith gets a little cracked. It happens to us all so I don't want to get all mad because someday I will do something dumb or wrong and I would like someone to show compassion on me when that happens.
Oh I get you now. Well, I hope that at least a good amount of the angry people gain some maturity and maybe even read the talk. I think it would help to actually see what he was saying and not what they perceived him to be saying. Hopefully they'll have enough humility to do that much.
Tay, exactly. People are getting all fired up about something when they didn't even read/listen to the talk. And that gets me.
Yeh i thought this was all in the SAME talk, until after I went to read it, and remembered the bolded MAY word. haha. so i figured it out, but only after i had commented. but still. i cannot believe this is happening. but i almost feel like BRING IT ON. god's on my side, fools. haha.
Post a Comment