Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Discussions toward a better understanding of LDS doctrine, history, and culture. Discussion of Christianity, religion, and faith in general is welcome.
Anon70
Posts: 606
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 11:56 pm

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by Anon70 » Sat Dec 16, 2017 7:58 pm

nibbler wrote:
Sat Dec 16, 2017 7:03 pm
What's interesting to me about the announcement is that they're replacing priesthood preview with something that both the young men and young women can attend, which is clearly an attempt to balance the scales. It's like they are aware of the gender gap but have no idea what to do about it.
This didn’t make sense to me either. To quote someone on another blog it’s another lesson for girls on the “blessings of the priesthood”.

User avatar
Rob4Hope
Posts: 1359
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 1:43 pm
Location: Salt Lake City -- the Motherland!!

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by Rob4Hope » Sun Dec 17, 2017 9:32 am

I don't understand the brethren's fixation on gender roles. My heck...a girl can't sit and be a witness? Is there something inferior about female eyeballs or something?

This is just stupid.

Also, there was some mention above about how some of the YM are gunna possibly be "bending over" after dunking some of the YW a few times. When I first read this, I was like "WHAT?" Then, remembering some of the clingy clothing and so forth, I couldn't help but agree.

AND THEN the thought occurred to me...what about those older men doing the same thing!? A hand on the back of a young woman and being laid down backwards in the water while hands are clinging to your arm?

I'm not trying to be offensive here. But this DOES strike me as potentially abusive and wrong. YUK! I have some catching up to do on this thread.

User avatar
Jeffret
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 6:49 pm

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by Jeffret » Sun Dec 17, 2017 10:39 am

Rob4Hope wrote:
Sun Dec 17, 2017 9:32 am
I don't understand the brethren's fixation on gender roles. My heck...a girl can't sit and be a witness? Is there something inferior about female eyeballs or something?
Yeah, that's basically how they approach it. See, female eyeballs are in females. From a patriarchal mindset, in which the church is heavily steeped, women are inferior. Oh, they like to say things that pretend otherwise. They talk about putting women on a pedestal, crowing about how wonderful they are. But, the implication is that women are wonderful at doing womanly things, but they can't manage doing manly things. Like being in charge. Or being in charge. Or running things. Many of the church's actions and policies are based upon making sure that women and men have different assignments and roles. Certainly by the time you get to "the brethren's" level, women pretty much disappear entirely from any significant roles. They keep the YW, Primary, RS presidencies around to make sure the women know that's the limit of their being in charge of things. But all the GA men just tell the women what to do and don't really involve them.

Many of the rest of the things in the church are intended to create artificial separations between men and women and to teach boys and girls from the youngest ages so that they will abide by them. They've got to perpetuate their power and that of the men who follow after them. Church leaders talk about the need to strengthen the priesthood. By that, they mean the need to invigorate the men in their dominance and sustain the separation of gender roles. The PotF is primarily about establishing gender roles as doctrine. It's the fundamental basis for the Church's long fight against LGBT people.

In the youth programs, the boys have to be taught they are in charge and they do all of the significant religious and ceremonial duties. They have different assignments at each age bracket, which are very public and supported. The girls get nothing, except for constant repeated lessons to honor the priesthood, i.e., to grant especial honor to the boys and men. This does play into the deep-seated societal ideas of men / boys as protector and as rescuer for the princess or damsel in distress. From long and deep societal training most people pretty well accept it. Even those who try not to are unaware of the ways in which their biases are shaped.

The problem for the Church, though, is that society is changing. Women and men in society are seeing less and less reason that women have to be second-class. Girls are growing up with stronger societal messages of equality, though this is far, far from perfect or equal. This change in Church policy is wholly in line with Church doctrine, culture, and expectations. It's just that when a change like this happens, it shows a new light on the things that have always been there.
Rob4Hope wrote:
Sun Dec 17, 2017 9:32 am
This is just stupid.
Nobody ever said patriarchy was smart.
"Close your eyes, for your eyes will only tell the truth,
And the truth isn't what you want to see" (Charles Hart, "The Music of the Night")

Reuben
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2017 3:01 pm

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by Reuben » Sun Dec 17, 2017 10:47 am

Rob4Hope wrote:
Sun Dec 17, 2017 9:32 am
AND THEN the thought occurred to me...what about those older men doing the same thing!? A hand on the back of a young woman and being laid down backwards in the water while hands are clinging to your arm?

I'm not trying to be offensive here. But this DOES strike me as potentially abusive and wrong. YUK! I have some catching up to do on this thread.
Fortunately, while testosterone levels peak precisely at priest age, they fall back a bit around age 19, and then start dropping steadily after age 30 by about 1% per year. By age 90 they're at a very manageable 50% or so of the age-30 level. (Source: https://www.healthline.com/health/low-t ... els-by-age. I was very, very surprised by the high peak levels compared to pre-puberty boys, and girls the same age.) Also, further brain development tends to give men more control over their thoughts. As I am today, I'd personally be surprised if I was affected, even if I hadn't gotten any for weeks.

Still, for a church that makes so much out of the "appropriateness" of interactions, it's kind of weird.

As a youth, with my testosterone levels and undeveloped brain both trying to con me into making more little humans because human development is tuned to the songs of 200,000 years ago... well...

I almost want to go on a youth temple trip now. I would regret not being able to bring popcorn into the baptistry, though.
Learn to doubt the stories you tell about yourselves and your adversaries.

User avatar
MoPag
Posts: 3741
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 2:05 pm

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by MoPag » Mon Dec 18, 2017 12:58 pm

Thoughtful wrote:
Sat Dec 16, 2017 10:28 am
blazerb wrote:
Sat Dec 16, 2017 6:28 am
Reuben wrote:
Fri Dec 15, 2017 6:04 pm
Yes, there will also be jockeying to hide His Majesty, and it will be glorious. Many young men will exit the pond hunched over, turned sideways, or just very quickly. Some poor guys just can't stay in contact with a female without um, reacting.

(Source: Myself, at my first dance, nearly bent over double so my partner wouldn't notice. I thought it was the best night of my life.)
I expect the water in the font to be kept about 10 degrees colder. :) I know I would have had some incredibly embarrassing moments if I had been performing baptisms at this age.
Cold water for the girls would make their situation worse. And by extension negate the effect of warm water for the boys.
Oh wow! I didn't even think about that. Ugh! There was one priest my ward growing up. I was really tall, he was really short. The top of his head came to just about my arm pit. Baptisms would have been a very horrifyingly awkward experience.
...walked eye-deep in hell
believing in old men’s lies...--Ezra Pound

User avatar
MoPag
Posts: 3741
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 2:05 pm

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by MoPag » Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:22 pm

Rob4Hope wrote:
Sun Dec 17, 2017 9:32 am

AND THEN the thought occurred to me...what about those older men doing the same thing!? A hand on the back of a young woman and being laid down backwards in the water while hands are clinging to your arm?

I'm not trying to be offensive here. But this DOES strike me as potentially abusive and wrong. YUK! I have some catching up to do on this thread.
Holy sh!tsnacks! I never even thought about his from the guys perspective. The Dallas temple got sick of finding underwear and bras in their laundry so they gave us these little under-suits to wear under the jumpsuits. No support what-so-ever! Now I just feel horrible when I think about youth baptism trips. Ugh!!! I haaate church!!!!!
...walked eye-deep in hell
believing in old men’s lies...--Ezra Pound

User avatar
MoPag
Posts: 3741
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 2:05 pm

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by MoPag » Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:30 pm

nibbler wrote:
Sat Dec 16, 2017 7:03 pm


What's interesting to me about the announcement is that they're replacing priesthood preview with something that both the young men and young women can attend, which is clearly an attempt to balance the scales. It's like they are aware of the gender gap but have no idea what to do about it.
Um...a class where the girls get to hear about all the awesome powers the boys are gonna get. And then get gas-lit into believing that they are just as special? How can the church not see how crazy stupid this is?
...walked eye-deep in hell
believing in old men’s lies...--Ezra Pound

User avatar
slavereeno
Posts: 1247
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:30 am
Location: QC, AZ

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by slavereeno » Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:51 pm

Rob4Hope wrote:
Sun Dec 17, 2017 9:32 am
AND THEN the thought occurred to me...what about those older men doing the same thing!? A hand on the back of a young woman and being laid down backwards in the water while hands are clinging to your arm?
Yeah, my YM used to complain that the funky underwear they were handed, and with YW present and the clingy-ness of the suits for both genders made them rather uncomfortable and embarrassed. (that's my sanitized translation from the more crude version offered by the YM themselves!) Personally my tastes have gravitated to more mature women as I have gotten older, so I didn't really experience that problem the last time I officiated in baptisms with YW. However, in my teens and 20's, yeah I could see that having been an issue as a basic biological response.

I used to think BFTD was an ok part of the faith I could live with, but this is just making it feel kind of gross.
Jeffret wrote:
Sun Dec 17, 2017 10:39 am
But, the implication is that women are wonderful at doing womanly things, but they can't manage doing manly things.
From our stake leadership we hear the opposite, which should be just as offensive. Stuff like: "Its not that women can't do these things. Men are simply not as good as women by their very nature, they need the priesthood in order to live a good enough life to return to heaven. Women are so good anyway they can make it without the priesthood. The priesthood is a crutch for males to live good enough to make it." Since man hate is culturally OK in the US these days, this is more palatable. It should be no less offensive IMHO. In my latest row with my TBM friend he cites incarceration rates as evidence of this. (ie. far more men then women in jails), and that this is proof that there will be polygamy in heaven. (ie. Many righteous women will make it by their own merits and not very many men will make it, so the women have to share the few righteous men.) This whole concept has been troublesome for me, a big item on my shelf.
Last edited by slavereeno on Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Rob4Hope
Posts: 1359
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 1:43 pm
Location: Salt Lake City -- the Motherland!!

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by Rob4Hope » Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:52 pm

I was TBM when they changed the washing/anointings and stopped touching your body. I've heard HORROR stories about that. I know there were some comments above about age and how the effect of doing such things as baptisms of the YW, if you are a grown adult man, would be lessened. But from what I understand in the washing/anointing section, the body touching caused several problems FOR ADULT MEN.

My point is, any touching at all could be problematic, even if its in the baptistry.

User avatar
Jeffret
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 6:49 pm

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by Jeffret » Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:53 pm

MoPag wrote:
Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:22 pm
The Dallas temple got sick of finding underwear and bras in their laundry so they gave us these little under-suits to wear under the jumpsuits. No support what-so-ever! Now I just feel horrible when I think about youth baptism trips. Ugh!!! I haaate church!!!!!
Wow! Really?! I just can't imagine that. And who thought that would be a good and sufficient solution to the problem?

We've got two daughters with radically different body shapes. I imagine one of them would have had no problems with such clothing arrangements but with her sister that may be dangerous, perhaps for all involved.
"Close your eyes, for your eyes will only tell the truth,
And the truth isn't what you want to see" (Charles Hart, "The Music of the Night")

User avatar
Jeffret
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 6:49 pm

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by Jeffret » Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:10 pm

slavereeno wrote:
Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:51 pm
From our stake leadership we hear the opposite, which should be just as offensive. Stuff like: "Its not that women can't do these things. Men are simply not as good as women by their very nature, they need the priesthood in order to live a good enough life to return to heaven. Women are so good anyway they can make it without the priesthood. The priesthood is a crutch for males to live good enough to make it." Since man hate is culturally OK in the US these days, this is more palatable. It should be no less offensive IMHO. In my latest row with my TBM friend he cites incarceration rates as evidence of this. (ie. far more men then women in jails), and that this is proof that there will be polygamy in heaven. (ie. Many righteous women will make it by their own merits and not very many men will make it, so the women have to share the few righteous men.) This whole concept has been troublesome for me, a big item on my shelf.
It should be offensive, because it is. It's offensive to both men and women. It does still originate from the same place -- patriarchy and misogyny. It's pablum thrown out to placate the people and preserve the power structure where men have to dominate women and men hold the positions of power. If it works, which seems to be the case, then it accomplishes its purpose in sustaining the patriarchy.

Fundamentally, if anyone really believed this and truly believed that the work were more important than life-or-death, as important as your eternal salvation, nobody would put up with the second-class leadership, ministering, and service they're supposedly getting. Why would you put up with incompetent, second-class revelations that shift the chairs around the deck, when women could reveal to you the mysteries of heaven? If that were the case, I'm seeking out a church run by women and hoping I can learn enough from their superior capabilities to get me by.

(In reality, it's pretty clear that men and women are socialized differently, but when it comes down to it their capabilities as a group are pretty similar. I can sometimes open a jar that my wife can't manage, but there are many women that would exceed my jar-opening abilities. If you want to hire a person as chief jar-opener, they'd be better suited than I. There are really only a few very specific differences that are consistent and meaningful between men and women.)
"Close your eyes, for your eyes will only tell the truth,
And the truth isn't what you want to see" (Charles Hart, "The Music of the Night")

User avatar
Red Ryder
Posts: 4144
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:14 pm

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by Red Ryder » Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:51 pm

Sorry to interupt the boner in a baptism suit conversation, but the physical act of baptism where hands are sprawled across the chest is part of the problem. Any ordinance where physical contact between sexes occurs, there are bound to be problems. Since women give out the secret handshakes and officiate in initiatories, then why not just allow the women to do the baptism and confirmation in the temple? Or have a hydrolic priesthood holding robot do the dunking!

It's time to give women the priesthood!!

It's time to give men table decorations too!!
“It always devolves to Pantaloons. Always.” ~ Fluffy

“I switched baristas” ~ Lady Gaga

“Those who do not move do not notice their chains.” ~Rosa Luxemburg

User avatar
Emower
Posts: 1061
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 10:35 pm
Location: Carson City

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by Emower » Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:16 am

Some of you bring up a good point. In a church where we have chaperones hawking through dances making sure personal space is a premium, why is it suddenly ok in the temple to have a priest touching a young woman and holding her as she comes up all dripping wet and glistening? You dont even need thoughts at that point, the visual is plenty good for a 16 year old. And what about the creepy 16 year old who will make the YW uncomfortable? Will they feel free to decline to be baptized by him? Will they need to request who they are baptized by in advance? This just isnt that great of an announcement.

User avatar
MoPag
Posts: 3741
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 2:05 pm

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by MoPag » Tue Dec 19, 2017 10:49 am

Emower wrote:
Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:16 am
And what about the creepy 16 year old who will make the YW uncomfortable? Will they feel free to decline to be baptized by him? Will they need to request who they are baptized by in advance?
My guess is they will be shamed for asking to not be touched by a guy who creeps them out. It will just be one more way the church grooms the YW to become victims.
...walked eye-deep in hell
believing in old men’s lies...--Ezra Pound

User avatar
Rob4Hope
Posts: 1359
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 1:43 pm
Location: Salt Lake City -- the Motherland!!

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by Rob4Hope » Tue Dec 19, 2017 11:03 am

I know some YM & YW who will LOVE the experience. It will be a way to touch, and perhaps even touch closely.

It ain't all about being creeped out, and not exclusively by just YW who don't want a YM touching them. Some YM don't want to touch the YW. In fact, some YM want to be be touched or touch other YM.

This whole thing just makes me smile. The comment about patrolling the dances to keep YM/YW from hanging on each other. All of the sudden we now have a way for YM to touch other YM, and how easy it is to negate what that might do.

I think its kindof normal for kids to want to touch each other. Hell,..I did. I ADMIT IT! But of course, I left the church, so I'm going to hell anyway...and I'm OK with that to. Maybe one of these YM touching another YM will baptise me when I'm gone.

Oooooo....who knows what might be involved in that! :lol:

User avatar
Red Ryder
Posts: 4144
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:14 pm

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by Red Ryder » Tue Dec 19, 2017 5:07 pm

Are you suggesting a 16 year old preist might enjoy baptizing a large chested Laural, Mia Maid, or Beehive? Over and over and over again so that the dead people can be like Jesus?
“It always devolves to Pantaloons. Always.” ~ Fluffy

“I switched baristas” ~ Lady Gaga

“Those who do not move do not notice their chains.” ~Rosa Luxemburg

consiglieri
Posts: 328
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 12:02 pm

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by consiglieri » Tue Dec 19, 2017 5:23 pm

Why did it take 177-years to bring how baptisms are performed inside the temple in line with how they are performed outside the temple?

User avatar
crossmyheart
Posts: 380
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2017 6:02 am
Location: Where the wind comes sweeping down the plain

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by crossmyheart » Wed Dec 20, 2017 11:16 am

Jeffret wrote:
Fri Dec 15, 2017 10:04 pm
Thanks, Thoughtful! I found this one particularly enjoyable, in kind a painful sort of way: Church Announces Boys Can Do More
Thanks for this link Jeffret-

I am coming in to this discussion a little late. I have been too busy to even check my email, nonetheless daily news and events. Just heard about this yesterday. The change is not surprising, and definitely late in coming. It is the news release that turned my stomach. The way they just swept aside the YW roles. So demeaning.

My DD is 10. We have become even more inactive this year, but I DREAD the year she turns 12. My DH has commented he wants us to be active again when our children get closer to 12. I cant idly stand by and allow her to be treated this way. Working on her now with critical thinking practice to get her to see that she should never allow herself to be treated as second class to a male counterpart.

User avatar
Corsair
Posts: 3080
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:58 am
Location: Phoenix

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by Corsair » Wed Dec 20, 2017 12:50 pm

Red Ryder wrote:
Tue Dec 19, 2017 5:07 pm
Are you suggesting a 16 year old preist might enjoy baptizing a large chested Laural, Mia Maid, or Beehive? Over and over and over again so that the dead people can be like Jesus?
From a faithful standpoint, this policy change is brilliant and I expect that many devout young men will take the experience in the faithful manner intended. The enormous blind spot is how it absurdly magnifies the differences between sacred activities allowed between genders.

I fully anticipate some doofus 16 year old boy who holds his hands in "non-approved locations" on certain young women. These stories will filter their way on reddit before the end of 2018. Some instances of this story will be where a Priest takes just a little bit longer that normal to baptize his Laurel girlfriend in the soaking wet white jumpsuit. There will also be the stories of young women enduring the passive-aggressive shame of not feeling the spirit when handing out towels.

The more pernicious variant of this story is the MIA Maid who is paired with the Priest who is just barely worthy to be there in the first place and has to be continually told where to place his right hand when the girl is submerged. These stories will start filtering onto reddit and other apostate forums along with an unflattering comparison with the experiences of Helen Mar Kimball.

User avatar
Emower
Posts: 1061
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 10:35 pm
Location: Carson City

Re: Aaronic priesthood boys can now baptize in the temple

Post by Emower » Wed Dec 20, 2017 12:59 pm

Corsair wrote:
Wed Dec 20, 2017 12:50 pm
These stories will start filtering onto reddit and other apostate forums along with an unflattering comparison with the experiences of Helen Mar Kimball.
For it to be a true comparison it would need to be Russel Nelson baptizing that poor Mia Maid having his hand drifting all over.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 34 guests