Women And The Priesthood

[selek1]

How unfair God would be to men if he gave almost all women the opportunity to be mothers while limited to a very, very, very small percentage of men though no fault of their own (but simply by being born at the wrong time and place) the alleged parallel role of "Priesthood".

I'm gonna get whacked for saying this, but the notion also contradicts the whole "the natural man is an enemy to God" theme of the Gospel.

Children and motherhood are largely (though by no means exclusively) a biological imperative. It is natural for women to want to be mothers.

So how can God be just and elevate women by telling them "do what comes naturally", while telling men to deny/defy their own natural biological impulses?

[Calm]

I'm gonna get whacked for saying this, but the notion also contradicts the whole "the natural man is an enemy to God" theme of the Gospel.

I totally agree with you on this. For one thing, I've seen such a variation of the quality of mothering by mothers, I don't really buy the whole motherhood makes someone automatically more nurturing, etc. One has to only look at how children have been treated in the past as well as in the present when a mother has the option of finding someone else to care for her children as to how many are willing to take up this option when it is just a choice for them (and not an imperative due to financial need).

[BlueDreams]

Oops. I swear, I looked last night and saw only one post. thanks though for the double point, cal.

With luv,

BD

Edited August 13, 2012 by BlueDreams

[BlueDreams]

Jeremy, I’m still ironing out some thoughts about what is written in this thread, so sorry if this seems at all disjointed.

I have a problem with your definition of equal. Though I certainly do believe that men and women should be equal partners and that there is (major) room for improvement in practice among the saints, I also think that ordaining women to the priesthood in the same fashion as men is not the correct route. Or endeavor. The other day I had the first moment in my entire life that I wanted the priesthood. Never have wanted it in my life. The reason why was quite simplistic, I wished I could do what I do in the temple as a temple worker outside of the temple. To me, the temple indicates a level of gender equality and roles that are not fully realized outside of their sacred walls. But I also realized that I was yearning was a little off. I want exactly what I find in the temple, which is apart of the overall priesthood but has a distinctive role among women for women which is brought into play with men (for men), equally important and intrinsic for there to be a wholeness in eternity. I feel that this is what is missing. I don’t want the priesthood as men have it. I want the priesthood in the way women have it to be fully recognized and utilized within the church.

The problem with the egalitarian approach you mention is that it doesn’t necessitate actual equality. It infers that what women have is not enough; that they have to have what men have to be whole. There have been groups that have tried this and it fails because it does not recognize and establish the roles women play as equal to the one men have played. The Kibbutz, in Isreal, were initially based on this ideal, but faltered because it failed to recognize the very real needs and desires of women. What I read and study and pray points to something different (both in and out the church) than what you’ve mentioned. I don’t want what men have, I want what women have to be equally recognized as necessary within an individual, familial, communal, and societal scale. It’s not in most societies and communities (including our own religious/cultural tradition) and I think it’s one of the major downfalls that keeps us away from zion.

As a semi-related example:

“If a given woman does not wish to participate in the Priesthood, the easy solution is for that woman to simply choose not to participate. A policy which bars all women from the Priesthood based not on anything they have done (as a male might be so disqualified) but rather simply for being female simply doesn't make sense, accomplishes nothing, is scripturally unjustifiable, and is an inequity where the Lord has counseled us to be equitable.”

“There is a strange disconnect here; on the one hand, we are told that priesthood duties should be considered as a joyful responsibility and privilege for men to take part in and aspire to be worthy of, yet on the other hand, we are told that women shouldn't be just as eager. (It has been said in this thread that some women don't like to make decisions and some don't want the extra responsibility -- how would we respond if a male said the same thing?”

These two ideas seem to be contradictory to me. I am a woman who prefers to make decision, doesn’t enjoy following the crowd, and often takes on responsibility. I still don’t want the priesthood duties associated with men. But the main reason I find these contradictory is that it would lead to inequity, just of a different sort. It would be similar to women who are labelled “just a mom” if they choose to stay at home with their kids. It creates a hierarchy of spirituality, leadership, and responsibility. If women chose they couldn’t handle the added responsibility of holding priesthood duties, where it was an optional thing I could see this used as a gage to recognize “true” or “stronger” spirituality. May seem far fetched but I’ve already seen this occur with RM sisters, where men will have a preference to who they date by whether or not they’ve served a mission. This is a limiting understanding of spirituality and what it means to be one IMO.

With luv,

BD

[Calm]

Well said and I am glad you posted twice so I could give you two point.

[Acris Venator]

I really like this. I even gave you a rep pt for that.

But it begs another question. Why are boys given priesthood when they are not near ready to become fathers. And what of childless women?

The Aaronic Priesthood is preparatory, yet it administers what Elder Holland refers to as the most sacred ordinance in the church. Why do 14-year-old girls menstruate when they aren't ready to become mothers? Because we were sent here to see how we handle a measure of power.

A woman's unique power can only be given to her by her mother. Which means that the line of mothers stretching back to Eve is actually a line of authority as powerful as any Priesthood line.

Imo, if the body is a temple, then the womb is likely a veil. For some it's heresy for me to say that because no prophet ever said so, but I don't care. As big of a jump that the Celestial Kingdom is from the Terrestrial is probably the best symbolic indicator of how far we drop when leaving the Lord's presence to come into this world. So when I read Hebrews 10:20, where it states that Christ's body is the veil, I really don't see the bodies of women any differently. I think women are one with their veil just as Christ is one with his, and that their jurisdiction over that veil is just as sex-specific as the male authority over the ordinances of the Priesthood.

Who enters or exits a woman's temple body? Only those whom she gives permission. THAT is the same authority that bishops and stake presidents hold over the temple building.

What is the primary function of a temple? It is veil work. So when Christ and Paul assert that the body is a temple, veil work is ultimately what they are getting at. A man's body does not have a veil, so the Lord directs prophets to built temples so that they can be brought up to speed with regards to performing holy veil work. And when I say "up to speed" I mean up to speed with women because women are the ones who are familiar with the cost of passing individuals between worlds. One purpose of temple buildings is to make men one with the same veil that Christ is. So when Christ prays to the father that we may be "one with him" as he is "one with the Father", I think in one sense he is praying for the Father to allow us to have the saving ordinances. All of those ordinances require veils.

And what is the cost of veil work? It is always blood. Even if the perineum never tears, often times the hymen already has. And a woman will still pay that blood price via her menses throughout her life. The womb never allows a woman to forget her stewardship.

The symbolism plays out upon the bodies of each individual woman in ways that are meaningful to her. And to your second question, if a woman who wants children is not able to have children, then she will often experience a Gethsemane-like bout of suffering that affects the rest of her adult life. Does adoption or eventual pregnancy by medical means heal that suffering? To an extent. But that is after the fact of much suffering and soul-rending. Imo, the suffering of women, whether they bear children or live alone for most of their lives, is best viewed in reflection of the sufferings of Christ. And specifically because his sacrifice and worthiness is precisely what makes his ordinances effective.

A lot of questions about why men receive the priesthood often center their rationale on the question of worthiness, but I don't think it matters much to anyone (other than the individual Priesthood holder and the Lord) if he is worthy to perform an ordinance. Sure, if the man is a known sinner he will be prevented from participating. But I think that is more for his protection than for anyone else. The essential truth about working veils is that the workers do not own the veils in question, they just work there. What really matters with regard to ordinances is if Jesus' Atonement was worthy to give these ordinances their meaning, and that is a matter of faith.

The veils are immutable. You do not harm God by eating/drinking the sacrament unworthily, you simply harm yourself. The womb works the same way. You do not harm God when you enter the womb sexually prior to marriage (or extra-maritally), you simply damn yourself. But if you are married then the womb isn't only a place of birth; it is also a veil of belonging between husband and wife. So even a childless wife exercises that authority when she is with her husband.

Veils only create belonging. The womb's power to do so is first inferred in Exodus 13:2. This is just as true for the veil of the Priesthood. Once you pass through that veil, you belong to God in a way that is more powerful. Baptism passes you into discipleship. The Endowment passes you into further covenant and gives you necessary tools for passing through yet another veil. The New and Everlasting Covenant passes you into a joint belonging that has the potential to lead you to exaltation. This is why marriage is directly related to the Atonement, and is the primary metaphor used by the Savior. The Atonement is the very bond that unifies the sexes (and their specific powers) in that ordinance.

Just as a man's submission to a woman's final say on whether he is allowed to enter her temple body yields a certain endowment of power (the power of creation), so too a woman's submission to the male's final say in the temple building endows her veil further. For after she is passed through the veil into the N&EC of marriage, she becomes a sealer. Meaning that all who exit her womb are sealed to her & her spouse without consecutive temple ordinances being necessary. She is the sacred veil of that ordinance, and it doesn't matter where she performs it because her body is the temple of it. So even if the temple is ultimately about submitting to male Priesthood authority, the result is a population that has far more female sealers than male.

[Acris Venator]

Nobody other than the nuttiest patriarchalists think that men and women are "unequal"--regardless of the quality of their assigned gender roles. The issue is the subordination of one "equal" to another "equal." Women may even be put up on a pedestal, and considered to be "greater" than men. However, the fact remains that they are put on the pedestal, and thereby objectified and subordinated to men. That, not inequality, is the problem with such rationalizations for the priesthood ban against women.

A man has to submit to a woman's authority before righteously entering her temple as well. So your point about subordination cuts both ways.

If women are placed upon a pedestal it is more likely because they personally pay the price and put their lives on the line to pass the Lord's children from one world into another. Men merely do so symbolically with the saving ordinances, and they do so upon the coattails of a Messiah that already paid the price.

In truth, you cannot ban a woman from her God-given power. It just is.

[Acris Venator]

In the temple, women are endowed with priesthood power, and prepared to officiate in the ordinances of the Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthood. So endowed women have the priesthood. What they aren't allowed to receive, under current church policy, is ordination to a particular priesthood office, such as elder or high priest. I think that will inevitably change. What good is it to be prepared to officiate in the ordinances of the Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthoods, if the only such ordinance women can perform is washing and anointing?

Your first statement is a jump to a conclusion that is common, and I understand why many believe that. I happen to disagree. The problem with assuming that being robed is the same thing as an ordination is that the men are therefore robed needlessly and redundantly, as they all were ordained to both Priesthoods prior to their entering the temple. I think the real endowment of power is the signs, tokens, and covenants... all associated with their respective Priesthoods... that are necessary to pass through the Lord's veil which is a veil of male Priesthood. To me, the robes are more directly tied to the giving of those elements, and the "officiating" actually happens in the next world. Because it is in the next world where we will be Kings and Queens that are sovereigns over that power instead of the mere stewards that we are here. But the patrons in a typical endowment do not actually officiate in the ceremony in any capacity. Men officiate in Priesthood ordinances and offices that they were ordained and set apart to outside of the temple. The endowment is really about the veil.

To then go from that jump to assuming that the W&A for women is then where women get to do their "officiating" is missing the mark, imo. Women are set apart as temple workers by Priesthood holders, but they are never ordained. They will officiate as queens in the CK as per the good and faithful servants of the parable of the talents, where servants are made rulers "over many things".

All women, regardless of race, religion, or creed, are endowed with a temple body that possesses the godly power of creation. They are directly given these temples by their mothers. The fact that women do not need to be "worthy" to use that power doesn't change that immutable power, and the reason for this is that unification of body and spirit is always a "free" gift, be it at birth or at resurrection. This is simply another way in which motherhood mirrors the Atonement of Jesus Christ.

If the womb is a veil, then women are already priestesses the moment they are born. It is simply through their submission to the male Priesthood that they are anointed to be priestesses to their husbands, and that is specific to their potential to enter into the marriage covenant by virtue of their participation in the other ordinances. But if Jesus was correct in asserting that our bodies are temples, then they were likely priestess stewards over a sacred veil before they ever walked in the door.

[Calm]

The Aaronic Priesthood is preparatory, yet it administers what Elder Holland refers to as the most sacred ordinance in the church. Why do 14-year-old girls menstruate when they aren't ready to become mothers? Because we were sent here to see how we handle a measure of power.

Good luck convincing any young woman that a biological function they have no choice in dealing with and has nothing to do with anyone but themselves is equivalent to the Aaronic Priesthood that allows young men to pass the sacrament, help the widows, etc. Edited August 13, 2012 by calmoriah

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

A lot of people feel two things will be happening soon. One is gay marriages in the temple or at least some abridged version.

Not in any Temple we build, or amen to the Priesthood of his Church. Maybe a retread of Matthew 10 and God's view of marriage that will never change. No if we are just another man made faith; yes. If we are then it does not matter what we do.

[Aspasia]

Good luck convincing any young woman that a biological function they have no choice in dealing with and has nothing to do with anyone but themselves is equivalent to the Aaronic Priesthood that allows young men to pass the sacrament, help the widows, etc.

[Tacenda]

I wish someone early on had told me I had the power in relation to the priesthood. I think my mother tried to point out that women had the power to have babies so men needed the priesthood. But I didn't get it back then. It feels like through the years it's been stripped away. Whether through church, school or the workforce.

I wish more young women were taught the power they hold in procreating with God. I think the church tries, but something gets lost in translating it. Maybe we'd get less self mutulating or less poor body image etc. Women are not just trophies etc.

[David T]

In Gospel Principles yesterday, the teacher asked for suggestions from the class why women didn't have the Priesthood. Some of the popular head-nodding ones (given by women!) were:

a) Women have Babies, Men have the Priesthood

b) The bible teaches women to be subject to their husbands, which would be hard if they had Church leadership position over them

c) Women didn't want it in the pre-existence.

Oh, and then the teacher said, "Hey, women did excercise priesthod power in the past. Did you know that? Women blessed their oxen when the men were not around, but they actually did it by virtue of their husband's priesthood. So they still really didn't do it themselves.

Just so people know these explanations are getting taught to our New Members and Investigators around the Church. (I had chimed in and said, 'There are actually no explanations, and speculating often does more harm than good', which was noted, and then the speculation went on. It was painful.)

[Calm]

It was painful.

We are a speculative people. No one seems to pay attention to when Adam and Eve managed not to create a whole new religion by themselves but actually waited until they received revelation rather than making up their own ideas for why they were sacrificing.

Wish that was an example that was honoured more in our community.

b) The bible teaches women to be subject to their husbands, which would be hard if they had Church leadership position over them

That explanation works so well with slaves and their masters, why not break it out all over again. Edited August 13, 2012 by calmoriah

[David T]

I will say that this talk by Julie B. Beck is very important, and I wish it could be quoted more: BYU Women's Conference - I need to start carrying a copy with me.

Some snippets:

---

"I’ve learned through studying the history of Relief Society that we have and live with an inseparable connection to the priesthood. The Prophet Joseph Smith put the sisters in the position to receive all the gifts, blessings, and privileges of the priesthood. We need never confuse the idea of those who hold the priesthood in trust, with the priesthood…Don’t confuse the power with the keys and the offices of the priesthood. God’s power is limitless and it is shared with those who make and keep covenants. Too much is said and misunderstood about what the brothers have and the sisters don’t have. This is Satan’s way of confusing both men and women so neither understands what they really have.”

“Home is where the Lord expects the priesthood to work best. When brothers and sisters mutually are responsible to protect and maintain and value the power of the priesthood, the keys of the priesthood and priesthood covenants and blessings, then we will be truly achieving something. "

"The first priesthood covenant we make is baptism and receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost. We teach that to children and it is honored and kept in our youth, looking forward always to the covenants found in the temple. Sisters, I’ve said before, I hope you go to the temple and pay attention. Pay attention and listen and look and learn and feel and understand what is happening, and the blessings and the gifts of the priesthood that come through the covenants and ordinances of the gospel. "

"Young women are prepared to receive the priesthood—the temple covenants in Young Women. And Relief Society was given the responsibility to firm up that maturity and get women prepared for the temple. Joseph Smith gave that assignment to the Relief Society and it has never been taken away from them. It is one of the major responsibilities”

“Recently I reviewed this Primary song. You’re familiar with it. It says, “Mine is a home where ev’ry hour is blessed by the strength of priesthood pow’r, With father and mother leading the way.” Mine is a home where every hour is blessed by the strength of priesthood power. That is your responsibility, sisters, to help your home be a home that is blessed every hour by priesthood power. It isn’t just when Dad is there. It’s not just when Mom is there. It’s not just when a priesthood ordinance or blessing is being performed. It’s every hour as ordinances, as covenants, are made and kept.”

----

I wonder if the publication of the Nauvoo Relief Society Sermons of Joseph Smith - by Deseret Book - will broaden the conversation a bit.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I totally agree with you on this. For one thing, I've seen such a variation of the quality of mothering by mothers, I don't really buy the whole motherhood makes someone automatically more nurturing, etc. One has to only look at how children have been treated in the past as well as in the present when a mother has the option of finding someone else to care for her children as to how many are willing to take up this option when it is just a choice for them (and not an imperative due to financial need).

I am too sure...in a world filled with only men such as war zones, they can and do become blood drunk. Men and Women are different and it ok to say it.

[Calm]

Men and Women are different and it ok to say it.

Never had a problem saying it. Testosterone makes a difference, big difference in some areas.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Never had a problem saying it. Testosterone makes a difference, big difference in some areas.

Until you old like me.

[Calm]

Until you old like me.

My dad has to take shots of various hormones including that one and he's in his 80s (he had a tumour eat up one gland, think it was cancer that took out some others). I believe it affects his memory and his ability to pay attention.

Testosterone is not just about being macho....

[Acris Venator]

Good luck convincing any young woman that a biological function they have no choice in dealing with and has nothing to do with anyone but themselves is equivalent to the Aaronic Priesthood that allows young men to pass the sacrament, help the widows, etc.

If the womb were termed a veil in our teaching of young women, and their stewardship over that veil likened to the veil of the Priesthood found in all of the saving ordinances, they would be fed far fewer abstractions than currently and it would empower them far beyond anything that is offered to them by 2nd & 3rd wave feminism.

It would change things for young men as well.

[shalamabobbi]

If the womb were termed a veil in our teaching of young women, and their stewardship over that veil likened to the veil of the Priesthood found in all of the saving ordinances, they would be fed far fewer abstractions than currently and it would empower them far beyond anything that is offered to them by 2nd & 3rd wave feminism.

It would change things for young men as well.

Thanks for these posts. I have a girlfriend who is finally getting baptized and this will help her understand this from a different perspective.

[Acris Venator]

I wish more young women were taught the power they hold in procreating with God. I think the church tries, but something gets lost in translating it. Maybe we'd get less self mutulating or less poor body image etc. Women are not just trophies etc.

Telling a girl that her body is a temple of holy veil work goes against the current of the world. It also messes directly with the logic of certain liberal attitudes with regards to the bodies of women.

The world prefers abstractions.

[Calm]

If the womb were termed a veil in our teaching of young women.....

Also:

if the body is a temple, then the womb is likely a veil

If the body is a temple, then men's bodies are temples as well. What is their "veil"?

[Acris Venator]

If the body is a temple, then men's bodies are temples as well. What is their "veil"?

It is the veil of Christ, found in his saving ordinances and in temples built by prophets. That is why "rebirth" is the entire construct of the Atonement. You can't have a rebirth unless there was already a birth to begin with.

Baptism by water is a rebirth. Baptism by fire is a rebirth. Sacrament is held in a chapel that veils the rite from the world, and Christ's body is termed a veil by Paul in Hebrews 10. If Christ's body is a veil, then we partake of emblems of his veil in every sacrament meeting. The Washing and anointing, the Endowment, the marriage covenant, and receiving the Second Comforter a la the Brother of Jared, and resurrection are all rebirths. The primary purpose of the Priesthood is to allow men to work that veil unto the salvation of those who have already passed through a veil to get here.

Christ passed through a veil to enter his father's kingdom. Would he come to the world through anything other than a veil?

Moses 6:59-60 lays it out for all to see.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

My dad has to take shots of various hormones including that one and he's in his 80s (he had a tumour eat up one gland, think it was cancer that took out some others). I believe it affects his memory and his ability to pay attention.

Testosterone is not just about being macho....

I have had such shots...they hurt!