| 20 comments ]

WHM:let’s sing “Follow the Prophet”

by Mary Ann

In honor or Women’s History Month, I’ve written a few extra verses for the Primary song “Follow the Prophet”. I thought the FMH community might enjoy seeing them.

Lisa was a blogger—
She sold out her soul,
with sexy help from Artemis
she made the pink blog grow.
What you lack in quality,
make up in quantity.
FMH will show the way to
Hell for you and me.

CHORUS:
Forget the Prophets,
Forget the Prophets,
Forget the Prophets,
Broad is the way.
Reject the Scriptures,
Reject the Scriptures,
Reject the Scriptures,
Broad is the way.

JohnR was not a prophet—
he wants to be one though,
“I once had the Priesthood
I renounce it for me and you”
Pretending to be a woman,
JohnR wore a kilt
Apologized for his appendage
suffering from his man-guilt.

repeat Chorus

Quimby wants the Priesthood
Shout all those men right down!
I'm smareter than some old dude,
your Bishop is a clown.
With self-righteous anger
she becomes a permabore,
who now can contain her?
She'll wildly rant even more.

repeat Chorus

(1 Cor. 14:34-35 JST)
Paul really was a prophet
he knew what to do,
when women covet Priesthood
they're not allowed to rule.
Worthy men can get the Priesthood,
Brother Joseph he agreed,
But FMH will not hear it,
Lacking eyes to see.

repeat Chorus

(Alma 32:23)
Women they can be inspired,
Little children too,
That doesn't get them Priesthood,
Just like the men do.
Grasp and rest the Scriptures,
on your feminist blog,
It really doesn't matter,
Cause God chooses theolog.

20 comments

Anonymous said... @ March 19, 2007 at 8:35 AM

yuk. it is one thing to support the current policy on priesthood, it is another to rub it in.

Snarkimus Prime said... @ March 19, 2007 at 9:10 AM

"current policy"? How is thousands of years of Scriptural text "current policy"?

Steve EM said... @ March 19, 2007 at 2:35 PM

I beleive anon is correct. Priesthood restricted to men is a current policy. It's certainly a tradition based on scripture too, but you could say the same for a multitude of things we've moved on from. I have to beleive if the women of the church went on strike over the priesthood, a revelation would come forth resolving the issue. That's the way our church works: leaders typical only inquire of the Lord on big policy questions when there's a crisis. They're people like us.

Dave said... @ March 19, 2007 at 2:55 PM

Just to be clear, wondering why women *don't* hold the priesthood isn't necessarily the same thing as *coveting it*.

I am never going to get that annoying melody out of my head now! Argh!!!!! I have no problem with the original words or Mary Ann's additions, but the melody clings like velcro-coated viper.

Dave said... @ March 19, 2007 at 2:55 PM

Um, that was actually Janet. I don't know why I'm showing up as Dave other than I'm married to one--irony, much?

Bored in Vernal said... @ March 19, 2007 at 3:05 PM

Dear, you need a bit of poetry help. Assignment: memorize Robert Frost's "Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening," followed by Kilmer--"Only God Can Make a Tree."
Then try again.

Jack "Marlboro Man" Mormon said... @ March 19, 2007 at 3:39 PM

"Dear, you need a bit of poetry help. Assignment: memorize Robert Frost's "Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening," followed by Kilmer--"Only God Can Make a Tree."
Then try again."

Hmmm...only God can make a tree? Doesn't that seem even mildly sexist to you?

Where, oh, where is a feminist when you need one!!

Snarkimus Prime said... @ March 19, 2007 at 4:59 PM

Well, FMH girls, there you go, with Steve EM on your side, you can't lose.

Janet, Mary Ann's replacement verses have women leading the Church. That sure sounds like coveting the Priesthood to me.

Janet said... @ March 19, 2007 at 5:21 PM

Well then, you need to dust off your critical thinking skills. Her verses refer to scripturally documented cases where women acted in leadership capacities. Be fair: you're the one touting scriptural precedent in your first comment on this thread. She's doing the same. And she never suggested replacing the existing verses--she's just adding to them. You appear to see what you're predetermined to see.

Are you truly threatened by the strong women who exist in the scriptures? Does the existence of women like Deborah somehow detract from his admirable male contemporaries in your estimation? God seems to have found good uses for them. I try quite hard to understand y'all, but sometimes I think you'd prefer the old idea that women didn't even have souls, if you find even women God and his scriptural scribes have found reason to praise so dreadfully threatening.

Stephen said... @ March 20, 2007 at 6:28 AM

Huldah was a prophet
that much we know
Vetted all the scriptures
put on quite the show

Then there was Deborah
loved by the Lord
Valued a tent peg
and valued the sword

...

As to what Paul said
you've read his word
A female apostle
won his award

Those were the old days
now we have the new
The gospel to Gentiles
after the Jew

...

This is fun. Juna or Junea (Junia in the most common translations) is the last known female apostle, so I thought I'd finish mine with that.

Don't have a refrain yet, but the rest of it scans, short as it is.

http://www.cbmw.org/resources/articles/femaleapostle.pdf

http://www.godswordtowomen.org/studies/articles/juniapreato.htm

See also:

Female Prophets, Disciples, Ministers & Apostles Mentioned in the ...
Romans 16:7: Paul refers to a male apostle, Andronicus, and a female apostle, Junia, as "outstanding among the apostles" (NIV) The Amplified Bible ...
www.gospelassemblyfree.com/facts/women.htm

Anonymous said... @ March 20, 2007 at 9:23 AM

Janet, can't women argue anything about gender without resorting to the tired and ridiculous attempt at self aggrandizement of "men are threatened by strong women who..."??

Why is it tired? Because it pops everytime gender is discussed.

Why is it ridiculous? Because few men that I know are threatened by strong women.

Why is it self aggrandizement? Because if men are threatened, which by your argument they are, then you, by definition, must be strong. You not only put down men but pat yourself on the back at the same time.

Reminds me of women who use that argument to justify their lack of dates; it's not because they are whiny or slovenly or socially inept or overweight or hostile or any other negative trait, it's because they are STRONG!!

Janet said... @ March 20, 2007 at 12:06 PM

Huh, Anon--I almost never make that argument because I know so many men who find strong women appealing. I made it here because I perceived (perhaps incorrectly--we're all biased) a misreading of Mary Ann's text and a defense of that misreading that seemed to reveal the feeling I described. I dearly hope men who dislike strong women are in the minority. They are in my life. But your "can women..." statement is as unqualified as was my little rant.

For the record, I'd have starved to death at BYU if it weren't for dating. But thanks for implying that I must be fat, socially inept, and ugly :) I'm really glad the good men of the Y disagreed, 'cuz I was one impoverished chica!

Stephen, you make me smile.

Anonymous said... @ March 20, 2007 at 12:39 PM

LET THE RECORD SHOW -

A 'nacle feminist has used the word chica to refer to herself.

Gentlemen, you may now commence calling women *chicks* without fear of feminist wrath.

Thanks, Janet!

Anonymous said... @ March 20, 2007 at 2:26 PM

A feminist also says it's ok for men to pay for things on dates! Wowsa!

Anonymous said... @ March 20, 2007 at 2:29 PM

Oh come on Janet, my CAN'T WOMEN statement is totally qualified. EVERY thread on gender in the bloggernacle contains the "men are afraid of strong women" meme.

And I was not insinuating that you couldn't get dates at BYU, what do I know about you? Apparently you are one strong chick. What I said was that argument is always self aggrandizing; women (which I never specified) who use it to justify their lack of social life are just the most egregious example of how it works.

Janet said... @ March 20, 2007 at 4:32 PM

"Chica" is a GREAT word! I wish there were an equally fun word for guys--"guy" is so vanilla, y'know. And "dude"? Too Bill and Ted. Any suggestions?

As for paying for dates? Well, I had no money, so if they wanted to go out to eat they sort of had to pay. I don't think women should expect men to lavish them with expensive stuff though--walks make just as nice of dates even if they do leave you with a growly tummy. But men shouldn't be reduced to walking vending machines, no. That would be sexist and unfair to men, wouldn't it?

"Every" thread, eh? Huh, don't know what I've been writing. "Every" statements often run awry of reality. *Some* men fear weak women, and those men often also lash out at women in a variety of ways which cause enough problems to merit serious discussion. But I don't know anyone who thinks all conversations about gender have to talk about such men.

But I am done now. I imagine the snarkers would rather I leave their site alone, anyhow. Cheers, everyone! Please though--share the appellation that can replace "guy" with a little more zest!

Snarkimus Prime said... @ March 20, 2007 at 6:22 PM

Janet,

You are right, women don't have souls. Nothing like dusting off that critical thinking hat, huh?

Janet said... @ March 20, 2007 at 7:47 PM

Yeah, I said I'd go away--but procrastinating work is so much more fun than doing it.

Snarkimus, you made me snort Diet Coke out of my nose when I laughed. Guess you showed me, LOL!

And now a thoroughly dumb question (perhaps revealing my ignorance of male cultural commonplaces): what's the outfit in "your" picture supposed to represent? Are you a Lego? I've been trying to figure it out forever and give up.

Seth said... @ March 20, 2007 at 10:16 PM

He's Optimus Prime, without the helmet. Ever watch Transformers back in the 80s?

Janet, you might try the Japanese word for dude - "yaro" (you lengthen the roh sound at the end for proper effect).

As in "kono baka yaro!"

But it's not exactly polite. So I guess we're back to square one.

Snarkimus Prime said... @ March 22, 2007 at 6:17 AM

Um, thanks, Seth.

Janet, the dude in the pic is an infamous internets supernrrrd, like the Star Wars Kid. The guy dressed up as Optimus Prime, an Autobot good guy from Transformers. The irony is this guy is obviously not a leader of cool transforming cars that save the world all day long.

Post a Comment