Ordain Women Group Prohibited From Protesting On Church Property

[stemelbow]

I'm suggesting that what is taught in that material about the organization of the Church, namely the Priesthood, and the roles of these priesthood leaders, makes it clear that 1) The Lord organized the Priesthood the way he wanted it, and 2) we are to follow his prophets, seers, and revelators counsel as they are the Lord's watchmen. We should never actively oppose the policies of the church or the official declarations or counsel of the general authorities assuming we know the Lord's will better than them. Remember, the Lord has chosen them to be his spokesmen. You really think the first presidency and the twelve are not in step with the Lord on something as fundamental as this issue? 

 

Its a good question we should have asked all of those years when the leaders were preaching what now is considered untruths about the cause of the priesthood ban.  Understandably, there is some wiggle room on some things.  This may very well be one of them.  We simply don't know--although many seem to claim they do know, perhaps even on both sides.

[Stone holm]

 Bottom line, you can't make demands of God

 

Why not?  I see no limitation on our communications with God.  Do you think that God only listens to groveling sycophants?

[smac97]

Its a good question we should have asked all of those years when the leaders were preaching what now is considered untruths about the cause of the priesthood ban.  Understandably, there is some wiggle room on some things.  This may very well be one of them.  We simply don't know--although many seem to claim they do know, perhaps even on both sides.

I think there is a fairly significant doctrinal distinction between the priesthood ban and that limitation of the priesthood to men. Perhaps this topic merits a separate thread.

Thanks,

-Smac

[rockpond]

I'm suggesting that what is taught in that material about the organization of the Church, namely the Priesthood, and the roles of these priesthood leaders, makes it clear that 1) The Lord organized the Priesthood the way he wanted it, and 2) we are to follow his prophets, seers, and revelators counsel as they are the Lord's watchmen. We should never actively oppose the policies of the church or the official declarations or counsel of the general authorities assuming we know the Lord's will better than them. Remember, the Lord has chosen them to be his spokesmen. You really think the first presidency and the twelve are not in step with the Lord on something as fundamental as this issue? 

 

Well, not everyone sees the clarity that you do.  So I assume you are backing away from your "we all know" statement.  But I'm glad that you have that clarity in your life.  Hold tight to it.

 

Yes, I do think that the prophet and apostles could be out of step with the Lord on something as fundamental as who receives the priesthood here in mortality.  They have been before.  I guess that's part of how the restoration works.

[halconero]

What does women performing ordinances in the temple have to do with being "called to be priestesses unto God and their husbands?"

Secondly, what are these "higher ordinances which are not given to most members?" Women "acting" or "exercising" the priesthood is not the same as being ordained to an office or holding the priesthood keys of accountability. Women have always been able to "exercise" the priesthood through their church leader's priesthood or husband's priesthood.

 

I agree on your second point. There's an instance in Doctrine & Covenants where men act in the priesthood without being ordained to an office within it. Joseph and Oliver record that they baptized each other before ordaining each other to the priesthood. I also partially agree with you on your second point: Yes, women have always been able to exercise the priesthood through their church leader's priesthood or husband's priesthood. I'd argue that they aren't using someone else's priesthood, but acting under their keys. Much like a baptism, confirmation or other ordinance wherein males use their own priesthood, not that others to perform ordinances, but always under the direction of the presiding officer of the Church.

 

There's something consistent with proxy work in the church: a particular sex does not for and in behalf of the opposite sex. This is true for the work on behalf of the dead, but also priesthood ordinances. Males perform certain ordinances in the name of (or better on behalf of) God. Since Heavenly Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are males this necessitates that those acting as proxies for them are also male. The implications of this when it relates to women performing saving ordinances are marvelous and beautiful. As Elder Perry so beautifully said in the April conference of last year, the priesthood is not "male" but is fully expressed in a marriage. A single Melchezidek priesthood holder, even an endowed one, does not enjoy the fullness of the priesthood. He and his wife must enter into a specific religious priesthood order to enjoy its fullness. If priesthood is then the power to act as proxies for deity, the fullness of it is not to act as representatives of God, but of God & Goddess. This might sound convoluted, but I believe it to be an important point. 

 

Women who exercise the priesthood don't "use" the priesthood of a male, though they may act under the direction of the keys of a male. The temple ordinances, proxy work, and teachings imply that she has access to a special saving power specific to the feminine, to which men do not have access. Furthermore, to answer your question, women must be priestess to their husbands not be in subservience to them, but because their husbands are damned without receiving saving and exalting ordinances under their hand. This places women in a position of glorious, amazing, saving power over the husbands (in other instances men have the power to save their wives. It is definitely an interdependent relationship). 

 

In short, I agree with your sentiment. I don't believe in what I call "male ordination" to the priesthood. Likewise, I wouldn't advocate for men to hold the powers and blessings women have in the priesthood. I believe "male ordination" of women to be redundant, ignorant, and not comprehensive of the Gospel. 

 

Edit: When I say ignorant I do not mean it in a condescending or pejorative sense. I mean that many on both sides of the Ordain Women issue, have not heard, studied or understood the feminine priesthood entailed in the temple rites and exaltation.

Edited March 28, 2014 by halconero

[Scott Lloyd]

Anybody can.  Do you think God can't take it?  Often people get discouraged or feel slighted on the big scale.  When this happens some of these people demand God set things right, or demand He help them.  So obviously people can make demands of God. 

 

Demanding God help with an issue that we're trying to fight through on earth doesn't seem bad.

Probably a better way to say it is, "You can't properly make demands on God."

 

In all things, God is to be approached with humility and deference. He is not some government agency or retail establishment.

 

Some folks do err when they forget that proper relationship.

[jchristopher]

I agree on your second point. There's an instance in Doctrine & Covenants where men act in the priesthood without being ordained to an office within it. Joseph and Oliver record that they baptized each other before ordaining each other to the priesthood. I also partially agree with you on your second point: Yes, women have always been able to exercise the priesthood through their church leader's priesthood or husband's priesthood. I'd argue that they aren't using someone else's priesthood, but acting under their keys. Much like a baptism, confirmation or other ordinance wherein males use their own priesthood, not that others to perform ordinances, but always under the direction of the presiding officer of the Church.

There's something consistent with proxy work in the church: a particular sex does not for and in behalf of the opposite sex. This is true for the work on behalf of the dead, but also priesthood ordinances. Males perform certain ordinances in the name of (or better on behalf of) God. Since Heavenly Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are males this necessitates that those acting as proxies for them are also male. The implications of this when it relates to women performing saving ordinances are marvelous and beautiful. As Elder Perry so beautifully said in the April conference of last year, the priesthood is not "male" but is fully expressed in a marriage. A single Melchezidek priesthood holder, even an endowed one, does not enjoy the fullness of the priesthood. He and his wife must enter into a specific religious priesthood order to enjoy its fullness. If priesthood is then the power to act as proxies for deity, the fullness of it is not to act as representatives of God, but of God & Goddess. This might sound convoluted, but I believe it to be an important point.

Women who exercise the priesthood don't "use" the priesthood of a male, though they may act under the direction of the keys of a male. The temple ordinances, proxy work, and teachings imply that she has access to a special saving power specific to the feminine, to which men do not have access. Furthermore, to answer your question, women must be priestess to their husbands not be in subservience to them, but because their husbands are damned without receiving saving and exalting ordinances under their hand. This places women in a position of glorious, amazing, saving power over the husbands (in other instances men have the power to save their wives. It is definitely an interdependent relationship).

In short, I agree with your sentiment. I don't believe in what I call "male ordination" to the priesthood. Likewise, I wouldn't advocate for men to hold the powers and blessings women have in the priesthood. I believe "male ordination" of women to be redundant, ignorant, and not comprehensive of the Gospel.

Well said. I agree with most of what you have said. The priesthood is not fully realized outside the new and everlasting covenant of marriage. But would you say that "exercising" the priesthood ONLY refers to performing priesthood ordinances such as baptisms, seals, or blessing the sacrament?

[jchristopher]

Anybody can. Do you think God can't take it? Often people get discouraged or feel slighted on the big scale. When this happens some of these people demand God set things right, or demand He help them. So obviously people can make demands of God.

Demanding God help with an issue that we're trying to fight through on earth doesn't seem bad.

Sure, you can demand something of God, but you can't make him do anything. He is to be approached in humility, and will only grant requests according to his own goodwill and pleasure

[pogi]

Bottom line, you can't make demands of God

 

Why not?  I see no limitation on our communications with God.  Do you think that God only listens to groveling sycophants?

 

No, God listens to arrogant and presumptuous pricks as well.

 

A sycophant is someone who is self-seeking.  That is the opposite of what jchristopher had in mind I think.  Making demands on God is the more self-seeking approach.  It is a "my will and not thine be done" attitude.  It is like saying, "remove this cup from me...NOW!"  We shouldn't presume to know God's will for us, but should be humble enough to suffer His after making our desires known.

Edited March 28, 2014 by pogi

[jchristopher]

Its a good question we should have asked all of those years when the leaders were preaching what now is considered untruths about the cause of the priesthood ban. Understandably, there is some wiggle room on some things. This may very well be one of them. We simply don't know--although many seem to claim they do know, perhaps even on both sides.

1) Please provide some examples.

2) "We simply don't know" what?

Edited March 28, 2014 by jchristopher

[Scott Lloyd]

No, God listens to arrogant and presumptuous pricks as well.

 

A sycophant is someone who is self-seeking.  That is the opposite of what jchristopher had in mind I think.  Making demands on God is the more self-seeking approach.  It is a "my will and not thine be done" attitude. 

I agree. See my post above and my subsequent post in the thread stone holm just started to vent about this.

[jchristopher]

No, God listens to arrogant and presumptuous pricks as well.

 

A sycophant is someone who is self-seeking.  That is the opposite of what jchristopher had in mind I think.  Making demands on God is the more self-seeking approach.  It is a "my will and not thine be done" attitude.  It is like saying, "remove this cup from me...NOW!"  We shouldn't presume to know God's will for us, but should be humble enough to suffer His after making our desires known.

Bingo!

[JLHPROF]

I've been through the temple, but as you said, very few have received these "higher ordinances" so it makes sense that I wouldn't know about them.

 

Women "acting" or "exercising" the priesthood is not the same as being ordained to an office or holding the priesthood keys of accountability. Women have always been able to "exercise" the priesthood through their church leader's priesthood or husband's priesthood.

 

Exactly my point.  You say that women are NEVER ordained to an office and don't hold priesthood except through their husband.   You are unaware of the ordinance where women are ordained to a specific priesthood office and you fail to recognize that an endowed woman has received a form of priesthood as well.  It's making sweeping statements without all the information.

 

I don't believe women should be ordained to the ecclesiastical priesthood because I think it is out of order according to eternal law.  However, anyone who says women (in the temple) don't hold priesthood and cannot be actually ordained to an office are equally unaware of eternal laws and ordinances. 

 

Women are equal partakers in the priesthood bestowed in the temple - the place that represents the society in which God lives. 

This is typified in the fact that our Heavenly Mother is a full Goddess but yet we don't generally pray to her or do things in her name.  It is the order of the eternities for women to have priesthood bestowed upon them.  (And yes, the fact that women receive priesthood in the temple should be evident to anyone who actually understands the endowment).

 

Women are not equally partakers in ecclesiastical priesthood - the priesthood designed to operate in this mortal existence.  This is typified in the fact that our Heavenly Father and elder brother Jesus Christ are the beings through whom we have been asked to work out our salvation to get from this mortal existence back to the heavenly society, and not through our Heavenly Mother despite all her priesthood office and qualification.

 

We are all too hung up on the priesthood of mortality and not focused enough on the priesthood of the eternities.

As Eliza R. Snow put it - (sorry about the Adam-God quote, but it's the best perspective on priesthood I've read).

 

 

Adam, your God, like you on earth, has been

Subject to sorrow in a world of sin:

Through long gradation he arose to be

Cloth'd with the Godhead's might and majesty.

And what to him in his probative sphere,

Whether a Bishop, Deacon, Priest, or Seer?

Whate'er his offices and callings were,

He magnified them with assiduous care:

By his obedience he obtain'd the place

Of God and Father of this human race.

Obedience will the same bright garland weave,

As it has done for your great Mother, Eve,

For all her daughters on the earth, who will

All my requirements sacredly fulfill.

And what to Eve, though in her mortal life,

She'd been the first, the tenth, or fiftieth wife?

What did she care, when in her lowest state,

Whether by fools, consider'd small, or great?

'Twas all the same with her--she prov'd her worth--

She's now the Goddess and the Queen of Earth.

Edited March 28, 2014 by JLHPROF

[jchristopher]

Exactly my point. You say that women are NEVER ordained to an office and don't hold priesthood except through their husband. You are unaware of the ordinance where women are ordained to a specific priesthood office and you fail to recognize that an endowed woman has

I guess I'm not being as accurate with my words as I need to be. I was referring to the ecclesiastical offices and the ordinances performed by those holding them. At least I think that's what I was referring to.

[Bikeemikey]

I also don't think that the Lord is going to tell Rockpond one thing and someone else the opposite. It's the same concept spoken about by Moroni in chapter 10 of the book of Mormon. Book Mormon is true, and any man or woman who sincerely asks The Lord to know the truth with a humble heart Will receive a witness the power of the Holy Ghost that is true. Despite the fact that people say they have prayed and received a witness that it is not true, it still is true, and God wouldn't give different people conflicting answers.

 

Well we have nothing left to debate on this particular issue as we obviously have very difference understandings of revelation that are opposed to each other.

[Calm]

 

 

In short, I agree with your sentiment. I don't believe in what I call "male ordination" to the priesthood. Likewise, I wouldn't advocate for men to hold the powers and blessings women have in the priesthood. I believe "male ordination" of women to be redundant, ignorant, and not comprehensive of the Gospel. 

 

Very well explained, much more coherent than my attempts…meaning I also agree with you.

[Ahab]

You cannot be serious. This is an attempt at ironic humor, right?

Thanks,

-Smac

If you have to ask that shows you didn't see the humor in what he was saying. But yes he was trying to be funny. You just need to use another one of your senses to sense that.

[stemelbow]

Sure, you can demand something of God, but you can't make him do anything. He is to be approached in humility, and will only grant requests according to his own goodwill and pleasure

 

Pleading, "...Help me, please", is in a sense demanding and is also approaching in humility.

Edited March 28, 2014 by stemelbow

[stemelbow]

I think there is a fairly significant doctrinal distinction between the priesthood ban and that limitation of the priesthood to men. Perhaps this topic merits a separate thread.

Thanks,

-Smac

 

Whether there's a doctrinal distinction or not is beside the point.  it just so happens that leaders preached explanations of the ban as if they were true, but now we can safely say those explanations are untrue.  So we can safely say leaders may preach things that are untrue while thinking they are true.  It'd be wise for us to test all of our assumptions.

[stemelbow]

1) Please provide some examples.

2) "We simply don't know" what?

 

1)  I recommend this thread for starters:  http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/62408-repercussions-of-new-race-and-priesthood-site-announcement/?hl=%2Brace+%2Band+%2Bpriesthood

 

2) We simply don't know all things.  Some of our conclusions could be painfully wrong.  After all I assume, for instance, women in heaven have more power and authority than men do here.  Else why are they priestesses and goddesses?

[stemelbow]

The truth is nearly everyone makes demands on God.  It just so happens many do it by attributing to His will what they imagine it to be.  Then they run around speaking for Him trying to condemn others while they imagine they are in God's favor. 

[jchristopher]

As per the churches letter to OW today:

"Ordination of women to the priesthood is a matter of doctrine that is contrary to the Lord’s revealed organization for His Church."

Is this the most precise, clearly stated, official word from the church that it is official church doctrine that women don't/won't receive the priesthood? Does this put to rest the whole "women not holding the priesthood is just a policy" stance?

It should put it to rest. This makes it pretty clear too:

“Women do not hold the priesthood because the Lord has put it that way. It is part of His program. Women have a very prominent place in this Church...The men hold the priesthood, yes. But my wife is my companion. In this Church the man neither walks ahead of his wife nor behind his wife but at her side. They are co-equals in this life in a great enterprise" (Gordon B. Hinckley).

[JLHPROF]

It should put it to rest. This makes it pretty clear too:

“Women do not hold the priesthood because the Lord has put it that way. It is part of His program. Women have a very prominent place in this Church...The men hold the priesthood, yes. But my wife is my companion. In this Church the man neither walks ahead of his wife nor behind his wife but at her side. They are co-equals in this life in a great enterprise" (Gordon B. Hinckley).

 

I like your optimism, but this will put nothing to rest for the OW group.  And Pres. Hinckley's statement is a very simplistic explanation of a much more complex topic.

[jchristopher]

I like your optimism, but this will put nothing to rest for the OW group. And Pres. Hinckley's statement is a very simplistic explanation of a much more complex topic.

Not sure what's so complex about it.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

Can you imagine the pronouncements of BY being used "to put to rest" the issue of blacks and the Priesthood? Fortunately, he didn't have the final say.

Edit: Not that I support Women's Ordination is any way, shape, or form. Our portion of the church has already been down that road. Ugh.

Edited March 29, 2014 by BookofMormonLuvr