Continuity In Change: Paikea As A Model For Extending Priesthood To Women

[Abulafia]

And to do so, they must also restrict all other references to men to only apply to men.  Which is just about the entire corpus of scripture.   Can't have it both ways and come up with a credible apologetic to restrict priesthood.   We are better off just saying that's the way it is.

That's why I tend to go with the theory that those precious few references to gender equality are actually genuine.  They go so much against the grain, yet they managed to survive.

[Stone holm]

Like many other issues in criticizing the LDS Church, it's recyclical. It'll come and go over the decades. I remember this issue when I was young when my mother would talk about it in th home. No, she never sought the priesthood and always honored my father being the priesthood ohlder in the home. She would express disappointment towards those who moved to "equalize" men and women in the LDS Church and community.

Well yes I remember the ERA battle and I like most members supported the Brethren in defeating the attempted amendment. But, I dido back then because I felt that women's rights were already protected and that was back in my homophobic days and there was a concern back then that the homosexuals would use it to further protect their rights. Of course we don't have to worry much about that issue since the homosexuals are doing a pretty successful job of asserting their rights without it. I don't think the women are going to be as easily denied this time around. So it may have been cyclical, but that does not mean it will always end the same.

[mfbukowski]

Well yes I remember the ERA battle and I like most members supported the Brethren in defeating the attempted amendment. But, I dido back then because I felt that women's rights were already protected and that was back in my homophobic days and there was a concern back then that the homosexuals would use it to further protect their rights. Of course we don't have to worry much about that issue since the homosexuals are doing a pretty successful job of asserting their rights without it. I don't think the women are going to be as easily denied this time around. So it may have been cyclical, but that does not mean it will always end the same.

And everyone therefor has a right to be a General Authority too.

 

I am going to start demonstrating tomorrow so I can assert my right to be a GA.  Nice salary, just have to minister to people all day- sounds like a great gig we all should have.  After all, we have a right to it.

[Darren10]

Well yes I remember the ERA battle and I like most members supported the Brethren in defeating the attempted amendment. But, I dido back then because I felt that women's rights were already protected and that was back in my homophobic days and there was a concern back then that the homosexuals would use it to further protect their rights. Of course we don't have to worry much about that issue since the homosexuals are doing a pretty successful job of asserting their rights without it. I don't think the women are going to be as easily denied this time around. So it may have been cyclical, but that does not mean it will always end the same.

Nope, I said "recyclical" for a reason. It'll come out, be used, then back on the backburner for something else to be rekindled and used against the LDS Church.

Edited October 1, 2013 by Darren10

[Stone holm]

Nope, I said "recyclical" for a reason. It'll come out, be used, then back on the backburner for something else to be rekindled and used against the LDS Church.

Americans have short attention spans, so things like this come in waves. I tend not to see waves of pressure to change the status quo regarding what is perceived as doctrine and what is perceived as tradition as "against the Church", but more as vigorous family discussions attempting to discern a more perfect way. By persuasion and long suffering rather than by the authority of the leadership.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

And everyone therefor has a right to be a General Authority too.

 

I am going to start demonstrating tomorrow so I can assert my right to be a GA.  Nice salary, just have to minister to people all day- sounds like a great gig we all should have.  After all, we have a right to it.

You might have the right answer but asking the right question is more important MFB.

[CV75]

Why shouldn't we learn from Paikea's story by likening it to ourselves? 

The story shows two things (for me): One is that human tradition is limited and the society can die out if it doesn’t change (and in changing, the former society dies anyway! -- hopefully to be replaced with something better). The Bible shows us that even divine tradition is limited in this world (hence the Apostasy, or even why the Lord’s program is subject to criticism or “not enough”).

 

The other thing I think about is that both Pai and the grandfather’s traditions are like the “corn of wheat” (John 12:24) in many ways. One key to progress is for the dead or dying to intentionaly replace itself with something better. Another key to continual progress is that what is dying is good in the first place (a bad seed will simply die – that’s it, no new growth). Not all human traditions are good, but some are; we know that all of God’s traditions are good.

 

Assuming the LDS Church is an extension of God’s tradition, no matter what stage we are in, if it is of God, it is good, and as the cascade of progress continues, Zion comes forth. But we can always rejoice in any interim stage, because any stage is good for our “haply” feeling after the Lord (Acts 17:26, 27).

 

We can’t really know much about the future, except what has been prophesied. So the only reason why women should not be ordained (as are the young men and men) is because that is not within our province right now, and/or that we haven’t been given the reasons. That may seem very unsatisfactory, but the next stage always requires faith to the extent of stepping into the darkness (like the corn of wheat did, buried in the earth, and even “dying.”). The current stage always requires faith to “haply feel after Him,” and also to the extent of stepping into the darkness of what we don’t have satisfying answers for. Everyone has their Achilles heel in these matters.

[BlueDreams]

 

But much of that revolutionary spirit seems to have gotten lost somewhere along the way. I have yet to hear a convincing reason why women should not be ordained. Priesthood is not equivalent to motherhood; fatherhood is. The only reply seems to be that God Said So -- but he has not explicitly said so anywhere in our canonized scriptures. It seems to me to be a cultural practice which causes pain to people needlessly. So why do we need to keep defending it?  

 

 

I quite liked your post. But I wanted to point out that arguments for why women should not be ordained as men are can be far more nuanced than simply the idea that motherhood is equivalent to priesthood (which I would also agree is weak, unless you expand the idea of what mother means). Personally, the best way to understand a view point is to find the strongest arguments for it. I have often been disappointed with common rhetoric against ordination because it didn't really dig beyond the surface level and was more of a means to defend how things are at the moment....something I was also not entirely satisfied with. Though I should also state that even the weaker arguments, like the one you mention, do often have bits of truth that I like about them. Just as arguments for ordination (that I also don't find very convincing) have things that ring true in them.

 

 

My personal reasons can be found here. A more elaborate expression that I strongly agree with can be found here

 

With luv,

BD

[Darren10]

Americans have short attention spans, so things like this come in waves. I tend not to see waves of pressure to change the status quo regarding what is perceived as doctrine and what is perceived as tradition as "against the Church", but more as vigorous family discussions attempting to discern a more perfect way. By persuasion and long suffering rather than by the authority of the leadership.

 

Don't know if this has to do with Americans having "short memories" so much as there beinfg a current fad to cling to. Right now this fad includes a rise in feminism in the LDS culture. This is precisely the type of feminism I recall my mother dealing with when I was young but perhaps more intense (and perhaps that is only my perception since now I'm directly involved in learning about the debate and responding to it as opposed to being a young boy only witnessing my mother responding to it.) And if you think this is only an intense home discussion to create "a more perfect way" as if these are spiritual pioneers, just consider my posts on the call to storm the Priesthood Sesssion and demand "equality". I don't think this'll happen and perhaps only a minority of LDS feminists call for this but this is hardly compatible to this being a "home discussion". Also, there is already a more perfect way revealed. A man cannot become and exalted being without havinga woman at his side. God the Father loves His daughters just as much as He loves priesthood holders.

[Stone holm]

Don't know if this has to do with Americans having "short memories" so much as there beinfg a current fad to cling to. Right now this fad includes a rise in feminism in the LDS culture. This is precisely the type of feminism I recall my mother dealing with when I was young but perhaps more intense (and perhaps that is only my perception since now I'm directly involved in learning about the debate and responding to it as opposed to being a young boy only witnessing my mother responding to it.) And if you think this is only an intense home discussion to create "a more perfect way" as if these are spiritual pioneers, just consider my posts on the call to storm the Priesthood Sesssion and demand "equality". I don't think this'll happen and perhaps only a minority of LDS feminists call for this but this is hardly compatible to this being a "home discussion". Also, there is already a more perfect way revealed. A man cannot become and exalted being without havinga woman at his side. God the Father loves His daughters just as much as He loves priesthood holders.

 

Feminism as a fad.  Interesting, now if I had fired off a comment like that....sigh.

[Tacenda]

Darren, I'll bet the church will get the LDS women to stand against the OW out there. Just like the church did when they had women fight against the ERA. So no worries.

[juliann]

Don't know if this has to do with Americans having "short memories" so much as there beinfg a current fad to cling to. Right now this fad includes a rise in feminism in the LDS culture. This is precisely the type of feminism I recall my mother dealing with when I was young but perhaps more intense (and perhaps that is only my perception since now I'm directly involved in learning about the debate and responding to it as opposed to being a young boy only witnessing my mother responding to it.) And if you think this is only an intense home discussion to create "a more perfect way" as if these are spiritual pioneers, just consider my posts on the call to storm the Priesthood Sesssion and demand "equality". I don't think this'll happen and perhaps only a minority of LDS feminists call for this but this is hardly compatible to this being a "home discussion". Also, there is already a more perfect way revealed. A man cannot become and exalted being without havinga woman at his side. God the Father loves His daughters just as much as He loves priesthood holders.

The feminism of the 60s was far, far, more intense and far reaching than this.  And it wasn't a fad, just not particularly well managed as a movement.  Women would be in a very sad state had it not occurred.  If you continue to only see this in black and white terms...the OW or bust.....  you are missing most of what is going on.  http://www.feministmormonhousewives.org/2013/10/a-moderate-mormons-manifesto/?fb_source=pubv1  is where the rubber will hit the road, not OW.  OW just moves the discussion along. 

[juliann]

Darren, I'll bet the church will get the LDS women to stand against the OW out there. Just like the church did when they had women fight against the ERA. So no worries.

Not close.  And the ERA backlash was much like the Prop 8.  People did it because they chose to not because they were "made" to.    I backed the ERA at the time but my sister really gets angry when she hears stuff like that.  They got no instruction from on high,  they got a bus on their own and went to the convention on their own.  But then, this was back when women could do stuff on their own.  heh  So I would be careful about blanket statements.  Also, the church was very vocal about the ERA.   They have yet to say anything about OW except respond to their request for tickets.  And I'm sure the silence will continue.    A political event that galvanized the nation and a small group of women protesting a church policy aren't even in the same ballpark. 

[Stone holm]

There is I suppose some risk that the OW tactics may actually slow things down. There is this belief amongst many Mormons that the Church is never influenced by public pressure and especially not demonstrations. As a result some would say that those who were sympathetic on the issue, might feel constrained to delay action in order to maintain that image. In which case, if that be true, covert forms of pressure would be the better tactic.

[mfbukowski]

You might have the right answer but asking the right question is more important MFB.

Not sure what you mean.

[Tacenda]

Not close. And the ERA backlash was much like the Prop 8. People did it because they chose to not because they were "made" to. I backed the ERA at the time but my sister really gets angry when she hears stuff like that. They got no instruction from on high, they got a bus on their own and went to the convention on their own. But then, this was back when women could do stuff on their own. heh So I would be careful about blanket statements. Also, the church was very vocal about the ERA. They have yet to say anything about OW except respond to their request for tickets. And I'm sure the silence will continue. A political event that galvanized the nation and a small group of women protesting a church policy aren't even in the same ballpark.

There is a great podcast where they discuss the ERA and the church, it's located on mormonexpositerpodcast.com. I found it to be pretty enlightening. One thing they bring up, if I'm remembering correctly, is that someone went around and checked license plates at a rally supporting the ERA, and checked if they were members, then whomever was called into their Stake President's office. It's very hard to believe, but who knows?

[Stone holm]

During the ERA battle the Church used Mitt Romneys mother to be its spokesperson to fight against ratification. If a fight like that developed now, I am not sure how it might play out.

[juliann]

There is a great podcast where they discuss the ERA and the church, it's located on mormonexpositerpodcast.com. I found it to be pretty enlightening. One thing they bring up, if I'm remembering correctly, is that someone went around and checked license plates at a rally supporting the ERA, and checked if they were members, then whomever was called into their Stake President's office. It's very hard to believe, but who knows?

I have no doubt there were local wingnut leaders doing crazy stuff....just as there were with Prop 8.  Like I said, you just can't make blanket statements.  And if they were called into the SP office, so what?  I was in a singles ward at the time and my friend and I drove the poor bishop crazy.   She got up and gave a "women's lib" talk and ignored the red button to shut up.  I gave lessons in RS...one of which a counselor was sent in to correct the next week.  But nothing was ever said to us directly.    In an institute class, an instructor took a list of pro-ERA points and twisted them into anti-ERA points...which didn't exactly make sense but oh, well.  At the end of his rant, one of the students said in her best little girly voice..."oh,  I just don't know what I would do if I had to take care of [whatever it was]".  It was some everyday type thing and my first thought was somebody should stop her from ever being responsible for children.  I'll never forget the feigned helplessness...and nobody said a thing.  I made a few comments at the beginning of his anti-ERA stuff then shut up and rolled my eyes.   In other words, there was no church wide purge going on anymore than there was for resistance to the Prop 8 urging....aside from a local wingnut here and there.

[juliann]

During the ERA battle the Church used Mitt Romneys mother to be its spokesperson to fight against ratification. If a fight like that developed now, I am not sure how it might play out.

Not gonna happen.  Women like Maxine Hanks have said they are on committees in church headquarters.   I don't know specifics.  My best guess is that the church will converge with the moderate voices out there like Valerie Hudson,  Neylan McBaine, etc.  There is no reason to talk about OW. 

[Stone holm]

Not gonna happen.  Women like Maxine Hanks have said they are on committees in church headquarters.   I don't know specifics.  My best guess is that the church will converge with the moderate voices out there like Valerie Hudson,  Neylan McBaine, etc.  There is no reason to talk about OW.

Not gonna happen.  Women like Maxine Hanks have said they are on committees in church headquarters.   I don't know specifics.  My best guess is that the church will converge with the moderate voices out there like Valerie Hudson,  Neylan McBaine, etc.  There is no reason to talk about OW.

Yeah, somehow I don't think the Church would play its hand in the same way today . There are so many more professional women in the Church now days. We have a lot of professional women in our Ward. You fire off some condescending or semi sexist comment and they will hand you your head on a platter.

[Bernard Gui]

Selections from modern, early Christian fathers, and the New Testament regarding the ordination of men to the priesthood....

Edited October 2, 2013 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

“For whoso is faithful unto the obtaining these two priesthoods of which I have spoken, and the magnifying their callings, are sanctified by the Spirit unto the renewing of their bodies.

“They become the sons of Moses and of Aaron and the seed of Abraham, and the church and kingdom, and the elect of God.

“And also all they who receive this priesthood receive me, saith the Lord;

“For he that receiveth my servants receiveth me;

“And he that receiveth me receiveth my Father;

“And he that receiveth my Father receiveth my Father’s kingdom; therefore all that my Father hath shall be given unto him.” (D&C 84:33–38.)

ENSIGN FEB. 1993 WHAT EVERY ELDER SHOULD KNOW—AND EVERY SISTER AS WELL: A PRIMER ON PRINCIPLES OF PRIESTHOOD GOVERNMENT

BY ELDER BOYD K. PACKER

Of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

There are references to a patriarchal priesthood. The patriarchal order is not a third, separate priesthood (see D&C 84:6–17; D&C 107:40–57). Whatever relates to the patriarchal order is embraced in the Melchizedek Priesthood. “All other authorities or offices in the church are appendages to [the Melchizedek] priesthood” (D&C 107:5). The patriarchal order is a part of the Melchizedek Priesthood which enables endowed and worthy men to preside over their posterity in time and eternity.

[Bernard Gui]

Doctrine and Covenants 117

15 The bishopric is the presidency of this priesthood, and holds the keys or authority of the same.

16 No man has a legal right to this office, to hold the keys of this priesthood, except he be a literal descendant of Aaron.

17 But as a high priest of the Melchizedek Priesthood has authority to officiate in all the lesser offices, he may officiate in the office of bishop when no literal descendant of Aaron can be found, provided he is called and set apart and ordained unto this power by the hands of the Presidency of the Melchizedek Priesthood.

27 And every decision made by either of these quorums must be by the unanimous voice of the same; that is, every member in each quorum must be agreed to its decisions, in order to make their decisions of the same power or validity one with the other—

28 A majority may form a quorum when circumstances render it impossible to be otherwise—

29 Unless this is the case, their decisions are not entitled to the same blessings which the decisions of a quorum of three presidents were anciently, who were ordained after the order of Melchizedek, and were righteous and holy men.

40 The order of this priesthood was confirmed to be handed down from father to son, and rightly belongs to the literal descendants of the chosen seed, to whom the promises were made.

41 This order was instituted in the days of Adam, and came down by lineage in the following manner:

42 From Adam to Seth, who was ordained by Adam at the age of sixty-nine years, and was blessed by him three years previous to his (Adam’s) death, and received the promise of God by his father, that his posterity should be the chosen of the Lord, and that they should be preserved unto the end of the earth.......

Edited October 2, 2013 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

The Didache

15:1 Therefore, elect for yourselves bishops and deacons worthy of the Lord, men who are meek and not lovers of money, true and approved, for they also perform for you the ministry of the prophets and teachers. 2 Therefore, do not despise them, for they are your honorable men, along with the prophets and teachers.

1Timothy 3

2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

1Clement

44 Our apostles also knew, through our Lord Jesus Christ, and there would be strife on account of the office of the episcopate. For this reason, therefore, inasmuch as they had obtained a perfect fore-knowledge of this, they appointed those [ministers] already mentioned, and afterwards gave instructions, that when these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed them in their ministry. We are of opinion, therefore, that those appointed by them, or afterwards by other eminent men, with the consent of the whole Church, and who have blamelessly served the flock of Christ in a humble, peaceable, and disinterested spirit, and have for a long time possessed the good opinion of all, cannot be justly dismissed from the ministry. For our sin will not be small, if we eject from the episcopate those who have blamelessly and holily fulfilled its duties. Blessed are those presbyters who, having finished their course before now, have obtained a fruitful and perfect departure [from this world]; for they have no fear lest any one deprive them of the place now appointed them. But we see that you have removed some men of excellent behaviour from the ministry, which they fulfilled blamelessly and with honour.

[Abulafia]

Bernard, of course the early christian communities became patriarchal.  But that doesn't mean that that is the way that Jesus himself wanted it.  We simply do not know with any degree of certainty. Given the cultural context of the time and precedents within Judaism, Hellenism and Roman Society it isn't surprising that 'proto-orthodoxy' developed as it did.

There were however exceptions and there is evidence from the earliest Pauline texts that women played a very active role in leadership.  The evidence is there in the canon if it is looked for.  The Didache, which you quoted from also details travelling prophets who had a role in the Eucharist.  Women could be prophets, (as Acts alludes to with the daughters of Philip) but whether the Didache community could accept that role from women is not known.  There is very strong evidence that women acted as Deaconesses. (Pliny)  The problem is in the term and what it meant.  As I understand it, a deaconess was like a servant who 'waited at tables'.  A role in the love meals/eucharist with regard to women is then not surprising, and it may be that male deacons in the church, passing the sacrament are actually taking a role that was originally the woman's.

On the subordination of women to men, I can give multiple NT texts that emphasise that as a given.  Here's one example from 1 Corinthians 14 >

 

34 Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. 35 And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church.

 

However, despite these texts women had major roles to play in the early communities which Paul, (paradoxically) also outlines.
So, the earliest evidence is mixed, confusing and contradictory.

Paul also tells us that there is neither female or male in the Lord, and the Gospel of Thomas has Jesus teaching both Salome and Mary as well as the other disciples.  Women were always a part of his ministry and provided support to him in his travels.

Here's the text (that 2 Clement may have been aware of) from the Gospel of Thomas

 

Jesus said to them, "When you make the two into one, and when you make the inner like the outer and the outer like the inner, and the upper like the lower, and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female, when you make eyes in place of an eye, a hand in place of a hand, a foot in place of a foot, an image in place of an image, then you will enter [the kingdom]."

 

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/thomas-scholars.html

That's radical stuff, given the context of the time.  

A later addition to the text also has this intriguing snippet: 

 

Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life." Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven."

 

If this passage, at the very least, recalls the attitude of some of the early leaders to women (post resurrection) then I am not at all surprised that patriarchy took hold.  These are the kinds of attitudes that Jesus was having to deal with, even from his closest followers.