Oh sure, it would start out innocently enough. The branch president in the first spot (for convenience), the counselors in the second and third, and everyone else as they felt like it. But then they might put the executive secretary in the 4th spot. Some time later the Elder’s quorum president or High Priest’s group leader would sit in the 5th spot, and pretty soon everyone would be sitting in order of their authority.

Eventually this would devolve into order of righteousness, with people not partaking of the sacrament sitting toward the end. I think I had something to say about the Zoramites here, but I’m a little tired.

Anyway, the whole system would eventually collapse.

The end.

This topic may be an issue we can consider from the perspective of intention and behavior. I’ve often noticed that many discussions within the church have a greater tendency to focus on whether someone behaved correctly (e.g. “when he did X, was it a sin?”, “she sinned because she did x. From this we learn…”). And well, behavior does matter.

From what I can tell though, we’re ultimately judged on intent being followed by an action we deemed appropriate to that intent, without rationalization, not whether an action ultimately turns out to be correct. In this light, setting up sacrament in the round for my own amusement changes whether it’s appropriate or not.

Hypothetically you can have an individual who cluelessly does everything wrong, but with perfect intent, leaving a swath of carnage, or an individual who does all the right things, but with evil intent their entire lives. The one would probably end up in outer darkness, the other would be blessed for their actions (presumably in the form of kind souls attempting to inform them of the damage they’re doing), and would receive eternal life.

And this is why some believe George Bush is so dangerous.

Oh sorry I had a different point there. Basically I think yes, women can pass the sacrament if it can be done with pure intent not only for the act itself but for and within the current structure of the church. Otherwise the structure would need to be changed in the same way. And if we later discover we were mistaken, it will matter less than if we genuinely felt we were doing the right things. These things can be corrected. They’re either redone in a manner later deemed appropriate, or ratified by a presiding authority. Hey, members have been baptized before 8 and had that ratified years later. I think we’d be ok on the sacrament. The question is, do our leaders feel this is the correct course of action in their hearts. I don’t think that’s the case yet.

Perhaps it would make sense to redefine priesthood in such a way to indicate privileged male status in ecclesial participation.

Of course, the reason that I was given, as to why this job was now open to girls, was quite straightforward: there weren’t enough boys around to do it, particularly given the 5am part and giving up both Saturday and Sunday mornings indefinitely, and some Friday mornings as well. I think one of the girls also preps for the Masses during the week.

Anyway, if in 1500 years new member growth and birthrates are tanking, and current trends of higher church activity rates amongst teenage girls versus boys persist, we might just see all kinds of jobs ordinarily given to the YM, handed over to the YW.

We have recently moved, and I asked my husband to bless the house. After looking in the priesthood manual, he asked me to do it. The manual did not indicate that it was a priesthood function. So, I did it. It was great and I felt apart of the head of the house for doing so.

My point: I think women can do more that we think in the church and it may be just a matter of time that traditions are let go, and women are given more responsibility. (specifically the YW.)

You realize that if women would realize this, it could turn into a major boon for women everywhere. “Honey, I changed the last diaper in 20 seconds flat. Do you think you can beat that time?” Very Tom Sawyer. And from there the wife turns to a life of leisure. Men are easy, after all. You just wear a low-cut top to melt our minds, and give us som kind of competition relating to something you want done.

(And by the way, this is why the men’s room doesn’t _need_ a changing table. We men are far too busy swapping ever-more-elaborate stories about our prowess.

“Oh yeah? Well last week I changed my daughter one-handed, with both eyes closed, standing on one foot, and with only a single diaper wipe. Beat _that_, brother Jensen!”)

Some purists don’t like it- the preist is suposed to be the only one doing that except for “Extraordinary” cases, yet every church has several of these helpers every Sunday.