Why Are We Upset That Some Women Want The Priesthood?

[Stone holm]

Just another reply, after reading my post over again, it does seem condescending, but that's just not me if you only knew. Women in RS are already serving selflessly....I'll never forget the RS President who I worked with as her secretary. She was not your average president, she took service very serious, yes we did tie over 50 quilts in RS Meetings and donate, but she went out and sought organizations, non LDS, that we could help and we did this for nearly 2 years when we helped with a homeless shelter once a week. Doing various things, also heading up Christmas Sub-for- Santa's that the ward helped with and provided Christmas for several families at the shelter. This awesome lady helped with many people in the ward that were ill either mentally, age related or disease related. Even men would call her before the HP group leader, which was really not good, but that's how reliable she was. And she was a confidant to many and kept their secrets and wouldn't discuss alot of the women's issues to her presidency. I'll never forget cleaning a home for a family in our ward who moved out and it wasn't easy. They were hoarders and definitely didn't see the mess underneath. Once it was all moved out of there, this RS Pres. was moving a washer and dryer making sure it was clean underneath, rat feces were everywhere, but she was all about getting the job done right. We of course ran to help and were covering our noses with rags in the process. The RS is a service organization and do see where some women need more authority and that definitely needs to be the case in RS. Why not just start there? And see where it goes. Would giving women the Priesthood change how the RS works or enhance it, dont know, possibly or possibly not. One thing women should have IMO, would be to authorize women to give her children blessings if a male isn't in the home. That maybe should be interchanged. But enough of my murmuring.

Another good podcast about women here...... http://mormonmatters...ng-their-lives/

That's not murmuring. I think most successful Bishops and Stake Presidents figure out early that if you really want something done thoroughly and well, sick the RS on it.

[CASteinman]

Do we always know that the First Born is always the Savior in all creations? No we have no idea.

But we do have an idea pertaining to THIS creation.

Yes, is Heavenly Mother an ordained Priesthood Office Yes.

Out of the 1st Book of Speculations.

If mortal priesthood holders were fore-ordained to their callings, why have no women come forth? Good question, so none of the black Africans who lived and died before 1978 in America could possibly have been fore-ordained to hold the Priesthood?

Both incorrect and irrelevant.

[Stone holm]

But we do have an idea pertaining to THIS creation.

Out of the 1st Book of Speculations.

Both incorrect and irrelevant.

We consider the Temple activities as the 1st Book of Speculations?

Which is incorrect? That they weren't foreordained to hold the Priesthood, or that we ordain them now in the Temple (by the way I don't know if we do or don't but can't imagine that we would slap back a current Priesthood bearer from having his ancestor ordained by proxy in anticipation of the Endowment).

[CASteinman]

We consider the Temple activities as the 1st Book of Speculations?

No, however your comment comes out of the -- I think -- the 11th Chapter of 1st Speculations. As I recall, the whole chapter is about Mother in Heaven and how the Priesthood applies to Her.

Which is incorrect?

That they were not foreordained to hold the Priesthood. Since some did.

Moreover, it is irrelevant to the larger topic.

[Maidservant]

And what would happen if the brethren announced that ordination was no longer needed in order for men to access their priesthood? It goes both ways, maybe? Maybe we are thinking about it too much from 'one side'?

I have priesthood.

I am not authorized to act in any Aaronic priesthood office or structure (i.e. the Church) except by delegation (any calling is a delegation from the bishop/priesthood).

I understand why men, and not women, hold office in the Aaronic priesthood structure of the Church (it has to do with Atonement symbolism; and while we're at it, why is the Savior male? in any case, the bishop is the representation of Christ and the lamb unblemished on many, many levels).

But I am authorized to act in a priesthood organization called the family.

Priesthood is the power and authority to act in God's name. As a woman, I am authorized for that in many instances, and all things done by God are done by his priesthood.

If you tell me that NOW I must be ordained . . . you will have taken something from me.

The structure of the Aaronic Priesthood organization, the Church, is typed in the parable of the washing of the feet. Women are not 'barred from leadership positions'. They are the ones served (feet being washed) and the bishop is the foot washer of all the church (not just women).

The Church is the gate and the men are at the gate in this lesser priesthood (i.e. Aaronic priesthood church) (not the only priesthood). The women are inside the gate, authorized with patriarchal priesthood along with their husbands (a woman is the person who authorizes a man to have this priesthood; she permits him to be her husband and the father of her children).

My sons absolutely need a brotherhood, a quorum for their psychological and spiritual growth. If you remove that from them, you will have to come up with something else, so why don't we keep what we have?

I would love to be able to lay my hands on my childrens' heads in blessing or in healing without feeling like I broke the universe, but I can do this by calling on the name of Jesus Christ, not by referencing an ordained Priesthood. I don't do this, because I don't feel I am permitted to do so, but I would love it if I could.

When we come to this earth, this corresponds with baptism. We are BAPTIZED IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER, SON AND HOLY GHOST. The male baptizer is an integral part of the symbolism. The baptism = our earth life; being held on to by our fathers = being held on to by our Godhead Father/Son and Holy Ghost as we pass through this particular ordinance of earth life (it is an ordinance from the point of view of our pre earth life). The passage of earth life is not the beginning of our progression, nor is it the final portion of it. It is the telestial portion of it (telestial = Aaronic = male as part of the symbolism). As the mother, I ask the father of the children to baptize my children (our children), and I place them in His hands for the duration of the baptism (think earth life).

The maleness is integral to this kind of expression of priesthood, these offices.

However, women have priesthood. They have the power and authority to act in the name of God and to function in priesthood order in those orders for which they are authorized.

Priesthood, God's actual priesthood, (not our own on loan) is how anyone on earth even breathes and is preserved from day to day.

To repeat and to be even more plain: you cannot give me again something I already have!

Edited April 1, 2013 by Maidservant

[CASteinman]

However, women have priesthood. They have the power and authority to act in the name of God and to function in priesthood order in those orders for which they are authorized.

I feel this way also. And your post moved me.

[Stone holm]

No, however your comment comes out of the -- I think -- the 11th Chapter of 1st Speculations. As I recall, the whole chapter is about Mother in Heaven and how the Priesthood applies to Her.

That they were not foreordained to hold the Priesthood. Since some did.

Moreover, it is irrelevant to the larger topic.

Ah but someone argued, don't think it was you, that the holders of the Priesthood were foreordained to do so, and if that is the case then why haven't we seen examples of women holding the Priesthood , which I believe to be a basically absurd argument for the reason laid out about Africans who lived and died at the time of the ban. Of course, I am not willing to necessarily concede the fact that women haven't been ordained to the Priesthood in a more expanded manner than currently occurs in the Temple. As some of Joseph Smith's revelations respecting Emma sound an awful lot like an ordination to me.

[CASteinman]

Ah but someone argued, don't think it was you, that the holders of the Priesthood were foreordained to do so, and if that is the case then why haven't we seen examples of women holding the Priesthood , which I believe to be a basically absurd argument for the reason laid out about Africans who lived and died at the time of the ban.

Your logic is bizarre. At least some men were foreordained. Maybe all men. Maybe all people. If so, it is as it is.

Of course, I am not willing to necessarily concede the fact that women haven't been ordained to the Priesthood in a more expanded manner than currently occurs in the Temple. As some of Joseph Smith's revelations respecting Emma sound an awful lot like an ordination to me.

They were an "ordination" as he did not distinguish very much between ordination and setting apart from what I can tell, much of the time. This was a language usage issue that we have cleared up over time to avoid confusion -- a confusion that did not actually occur in Joseph's time, but which has given opportunity to people later on.

Even though he didn't make a difference in verbiage, he DID make a functional distinction between ordination in offices of the Priesthood and ordination to a calling under the auspices and direction of the Priesthood. After all, he had received the revelation on the Oath and Covenant and also spoke to the women at their first meeting of the Female Relief Society as follows:

The sisters should "always to concentrate their faith and prayers for, and place confidence in … those faithful men whom God has placed at the head of the Church to lead His people; that we should arm and sustain them with our prayers. … If this Society listen to the counsel of the Almighty, through the heads of the Church, they shall have power to command queens in their midst.”

Edited April 1, 2013 by CASteinman

[Stone holm]

"Your logic is bizarre. At least some men were foreordained. Maybe all men. Maybe all people. If so, it is as it is." Not exactly sure whose logic you are actually referring to. I suspect that "foreordination" adds little or nothing to the argument. It is easy to say, yeah the individuals holding the Priesthood were foreordained to do so, that is most likely true. Does that mean that individuals who do not currently, or haven't held the Priesthood in the past were not foreordained to hold it? Hm....nope....because we contingently ordain all males to the Priesthood in the Temple. Does that mean that we will never change the practices as to who we ordain to what outside, or even in the Temple? Nope. So the foreordination argument goes up a blind alley so to speak.

[CASteinman]

So the foreordination argument goes up a blind alley so to speak.

Unless you are referring to ordination to the Priesthood Offices of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on the Earth. Then it starts to pertain to things around us.

[JAHS]

I hardly think a straight forward poll constitutes murmuring. We may be the Lord's sheep, but we are not sheeple who gave up our right to have and discuss opinions upon entering the waters of baptism, nor are we Cathoics who ascribe to the doctrine of infallibility.

Responding a little late here but like CASteinman said I was not responding to the existance of the poll, just to the attitude of the feminists who strive to change the church through social pressures. Nothing wrong with having their opinions on things like this, but changes like they want to have made are going to happen from within the leadership of the Church; not because of pressure from without. When you openly and publicly complain and demand changes be made, I call that murmuring.

[Stone holm]

Responding a little late here but like CASteinman said I was not responding to the existance of the poll, just to the attitude of the feminists who strive to change the church through social pressures. Nothing wrong with having their opinions on things like this, but changes like they want to have made are going to happen from within the leadership of the Church; not because of pressure from without. When you openly and publicly complain and demand changes be made, I call that murmuring.

And if they ask very sweet and ladylike?

[WWTMJD]

Well we know that there will be Priests and Priestesses, Kings and Queens unto the most high God and it will happen, at some point in our eternal progression... but with great priesthood power comes priesthood responsibility. My wife, if I could speak for her, finds herself plenty busy; more than she'd probably care to have in addition to what she already does. If I had my way, I'd have said, "Yes! Just find the Sons of Levi already! I'm good just being a common member of the church who raises a good family and partakes of the sacrament! But maybe that's just me.

[Stone holm]

Well we know that there will be Priests and Priestesses, Kings and Queens unto the most high God and it will happen, at some point in our eternal progression... but with great priesthood power comes priesthood responsibility. My wife, if I could speak for her, finds herself plenty busy; more than she'd probably care to have in addition to what she already does. If I had my way, I'd have said, "Yes! Just find the Sons of Levi already! I'm good just being a common member of the church who raises a good family and partakes of the sacrament! But maybe that's just me.

Yeah, I ran it by my wife and that was not her reaction. I did hear it come out in one meeting by a Sister that expanding their Priesthood would be just another excuse by the males to dump more work on them, the Sisters by and large already understand that they are doing the majority of the work already.

[Cheeky]

Men hold the Priesthood, yes, but women are given the privilege of bearing children

I never understood the reasoning of "Men are given the Priesthood, women is motherhood". Priesthood isn't equal to Motherhood. Women are giving Motherhood, men are giving Parenthood AND the Priesthood.

I believe that women holding the Priesthood would unbalance things and make it so the man was not a proper complement to the woman, less

How?

[JAHS]

And if they ask very sweet and ladylike?

I think the main point is that a change as big as this would come directly from God Himself to the church leaders, who I'm sure have been aware of the desire of a few women to want to have the priesthood for a long time. Some changes do come by someone asking why; but a change as big as this would be is not going to come simply because a few church members want it.

Edited April 2, 2013 by JAHS

[Stone holm]

I think the main point is that a change as big as this would come directly from God Himself to the church leaders, who I'm sure have been aware of the desire of a few women to want to have the priesthood for a long time. Some changes do come by someone asking why; but a change as big as this would be is not going to come simply because a few church members want it.

Agree

[Pahoran]

Yeah, I ran it by my wife and that was not her reaction. I did hear it come out in one meeting by a Sister that expanding their Priesthood would be just another excuse by the males to dump more work on them, the Sisters by and large already understand that they are doing the majority of the work already.

You keep harping on this theme. One of two things is going on: either every LDS woman you know is bitter and cynical, or the views of these ladies are somehow being filtered through one cynical lens.

Which is more likely?

It is true that the sisters do a lot of the work in a ward. The notion that they do "the majority of it already" is available to those who simply aren't aware of what the brethren do.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Stone holm]

You keep harping on this theme. One of two things is going on: either every LDS woman you know is bitter and cynical, or the views of these ladies are somehow being filtered through one cynical lens.

Which is more likely?

It is true that the sisters do a lot of the work in a ward. The notion that they do "the majority of it already" is available to those who simply aren't aware of what the brethren do.

Regards,

Pahoran

Yep, that was pretty much a direct quote from a sister and have heard it over and over again. Have been in many callings over the years -- and don't ever fool yourself as to who is doing the bulk of the work at the Ward level, or you will get run over by a steamroller some day.

[Saints Alive]

I wonder if the women (and men) who are pushing for ordination have enough faith to accept it if the answer is no?

[Pahoran]

Yep, that was pretty much a direct quote from a sister and have heard it over and over again. Have been in many callings over the years -- and don't ever fool yourself as to who is doing the bulk of the work at the Ward level, or you will get run over by a steamroller some day.

Unusual things must be happening in your ward if people are running over each other with steamrollers.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Stone holm]

Unusual things must be happening in your ward if people are running over each other with steamrollers.

Regards,

Pahoran

Well don't know anything about you, but in the Wards I have lived in and held leadership positions in, you really don't want to get in the way of a determined Primary President or Relief Society President or even the Sister Missionaries unless you have very, very good reasons -- unless you want to get flattened like asphalt.

[alter idem]

I would counter with a better question, what if the First Presidency added The Proclaimation on the Family to the D&C as OD-3? That is a more plausible question... one that is actually related to the OP question...

I thought they might the next time the church put out an updated version of the scriptures--but they just did that and as far as I know they did not include the Proclamation on the Family.

[alter idem]

I don't buy the idea that there would be massive apostasy from the Church if women were given greater Priesthood authority.

I don't think so either, but I wonder if they DON'T give women the priesthood, if this movement does not die down, but grows....will we see apostasy?

[Saints Alive]

I don't think so either, but I wonder if they DON'T give women the priesthood, if this movement does not die down, but grows....will we see apostasy?

I just hope that the first presidency doesn't base their decisions on the threat of apostasy.