Will L D S Women Ever Be Ordained To The Priesthood?

[why me]

The question is false. Is it not just women that would be ordained to the priesthood but girls too. I don't understand why the lds forget the girls. Do not boys hold the priesthood? So why not the girls? In fact, if females are ordained to the priesthood, we can safely say that over 80  percent of the membership will have the priesthood. And like the boys, there should be no opt out of it. The ordainwomen organization seems to discriminate against girls who would also hold the priesthood because by including girls in the equation it would complicate their message in the media. How to explain to the media the reason why girls would hold the priesthood too would be the problem to explain to the media for the ordainwomen movement. However, it would be a great missionary tool to include the girls in their message which is perhaps one reason the OW movement wishes to avoid it.

 

If females hold the priesthood, the entire lds church will need to change its structure. No more relief society, no more young women's etc. No visiting teaching...since both male and female will need to attend the same meetings together.

Edited June 13, 2014 by why me

[why me]

I prefer priestesshood, given the Satanic history and connotations associated with witchcraft.

The word priestess is actually sexist because the word separates the female from the male. The word poetess is never used now because of its sexist connotation. Likewise for the word stewardess. It is never used now either. So, the feminists would never accept the word priestess.

[why me]

But I am always a confused about why the lds leave out the girls in the equation. Do the lds on this board really believe that if women received the priesthood, the girls would be excluded from being deacons, teachers and priests? And would women automatically be ordained elders? I don't think so.

 

And what would girl presthood holders be, deaconesses. My gosh, what a sexist sounding church it would be with deaconnesses and priestesses. I think that it is obvious that girls and women would be deacons, teachers, priests and elders without the nesses to specific names.

Edited June 13, 2014 by why me

[Pahoran]

But I am always a confused about why the lds leave out the girls in the equation. Do the lds on this board really believe that if women received the priesthood, the girls would be excluded from being deacons, teachers and priests? And would women automatically be ordained elders? I don't think so.

I believe that someone suggested that female-specific titles should be created. I don't know if they intended that those titles should simply be different labels for the same offices, or if they should represent dedicated female priesthood offices. The suggested title for the female equivalent of "Elder" was "Crone."

Perhaps we should start another poll: how many sisters would like to be ordained crones?

I don't know if they took it further, but if female elders were crones, what title should apply to female high priests? The term that represents itself most irresistibly is "Hag," but somehow I don't see that getting much traction either.

 

Regards,

Pahoran

[Tacenda]

The question is false. Is it not just women that would be ordained to the priesthood but girls too. I don't understand why the lds forget the girls. Do not boys hold the priesthood? So why not the girls? In fact, if females are ordained to the priesthood, we can safely say that over 80 percent of the membership will have the priesthood. And like the boys, there should be no opt out of it. The ordainwomen organization seems to discriminate against girls who would also hold the priesthood because by including girls in the equation it would complicate their message in the media. How to explain to the media the reason why girls would hold the priesthood too would be the problem to explain to the media for the ordainwomen movement. However, it would be a great missionary tool to include the girls in their message which is perhaps one reason the OW movement wishes to avoid it.

If females hold the priesthood, the entire lds church will need to change its structure. No more relief society, no more young women's etc. No visiting teaching...since both male and female will need to attend the same meetings together.

I think we just say everyone is blessed with the Priesthood through the High Priest (Jesus) and call it a day.

[rpn]

I think there may come a time when church members understand better what priesthood and women are together and separately , in a more eternal context, and that improved understanding eliminates the perception of some of "gender inequality".   And if the Lord wants women to be ordained to priesthood offices that is fine by me.   But I'm not expecting that change.

[Tsuzuki]

The word priestess is actually sexist because the word separates the female from the male. The word poetess is never used now because of its sexist connotation. Likewise for the word stewardess. It is never used now either. So, the feminists would never accept the word priestess.

Most neopagan religions are fine with "priestess" (if there isn't a more culturally specific term in that tradition), and it's common for priests and priestesses to have the same level of authority, but different functions. "Witch" is also acceptable for either gender. I know a couple of Mormon women who are also witches, and I've never heard them complain about not holding the LDS Priesthood.

 

[thesometimesaint]

Most neopagan religions are fine with "priestess" (if there isn't a more culturally specific term in that tradition), and it's common for priests and priestesses to have the same level of authority, but different functions. "Witch" is also acceptable for either gender. I know a couple of Mormon women who are also witches, and I've never heard them complain about not holding the LDS Priesthood.

 

 

I don't have any problem with the person that practices Wicca, but it's Theology does go against LDS Theology .

[Tsuzuki]

I don't have any problem with the person that practices Wicca, but it's Theology does go against LDS Theology .

There's more than just Wicca. I took my parents to a class on Thelema, and afterward my dad commented on how much it was like Mormonism.

[thesometimesaint]

There's more than just Wicca. I took my parents to a class on Thelema, and afterward my dad commented on how much it was like Mormonism.

 

The similarities are common to all Christian religions, but without the Christ. To me some of the differences include a belief in Hor, Nirvana, and the use of Majick.

[JLHPROF]

I suppose that could be considered so for those who work in the temple or if they receive the second anointing. But they have not nor ever will be ordained to any priesthood office in this life time IMO.

This is a contradiction. Those women that receive their second anointing in this life ARE ordained to an office.

[rpn]

I read last week that a current bishop is going to assign mia maids and laurels as VT companions, just like their male counterparts are assigned to HTing.   I get the parallel, but given the differing purposes of VTing and HTing, I can't see that this is appropriate.   How can a woman share her woes appropriately with a YW, who is supposed to be protected from adult things.   It is true that HTers leave the young men behind sometimes when dealing with adult things, even when they are the appointed emissaries.

[Zakuska]

I read last week that a current bishop is going to assign mia maids and laurels as VT companions, just like their male counterparts are assigned to HTing.   I get the parallel, but given the differing purposes of VTing and HTing, I can't see that this is appropriate.   How can a woman share her woes appropriately with a YW, who is supposed to be protected from adult things.   It is true that HTers leave the young men behind sometimes when dealing with adult things, even when they are the appointed emissaries.

 

I had a long discussion with my Parents last night about this subject.  In today's day and age with all the information available on the internet there is no way to "protect kids from adult things" like my parents could.  So its best to face them head on and deal with them in a controlled appropriate way. 

 

Growing up it was taboo to even mention Homosexuality in front of kids. I didn't really even know what it was until I was about 16. My kids knew what it was in the 1st grade because parents of their classmates.

[Calm]

I read last week that a current bishop is going to assign mia maids and laurels as VT companions, just like their male counterparts are assigned to HTing. I get the parallel, but given the differing purposes of VTing and HTing, I can't see that this is appropriate. How can a woman share her woes appropriately with a YW, who is supposed to be protected from adult things. It is true that HTers leave the young men behind sometimes when dealing with adult things, even when they are the appointed emissaries.

And young men aren't supposed to be protected in the same way? Seriously?

Aren't Home Teachers supposed to be there for those they teach to open up to them?

I would love to see some documentation on this.

I have been involved or known of YW projects that involve helping others get through "adult things"...the loss of a spouse through death or divorce, the loss of a child, helping an unwed mother, helping the homeless. Teaching YW how to be charitable and compassionate to those in need is a huge part of what the Gospel is there for. I can think of nothing that would be appropriate for a young man to witness that would be too much for the tender hearts of a young woman.

Edited June 13, 2014 by calmoriah

[Zakuska]

And young men aren't supposed to be protected in the same way? Seriously?

Aren't Home Teachers supposed to be there for those they teach to open up to them?

I would love to see some documentation on this.

I have been involved or known of YW projects that involve helping others get through "adult things"...the loss of a spouse through death or divorce, the loss of a child, helping an unwed mother, helping the homeless. Teaching YW how to be charitable and compassionate to those in need is a huge part of what the Gospel is there for. I can think of nothing that would be appropriate for a young man to witness that would be too much for the tender hearts of a young woman.

I took my 8 year old son HT with me for 3 years starting in about 2006 because my HT companion was inactive and our schedules rarely coincided. My son would play legos on the floor with their kids while the adults talked. I figured it was better to do it that way than not at all. My brother and I also take our sons to Gen Preisthood meetings even though they aren't even deacons yet. then we all go out to eat and Grandpa picks up the bill. Kids are growing up faster and faster now days.

Edited June 13, 2014 by Zakuska

[Calm]

My dad took me home teaching to an inactive family home where there was obviously smoking when I was 9 or 10. I don't see that as a negative experience. It helped me learn that caring for the flock doesn't mean just the ones that come running when the shepherd appears at the door all nicely combed and clean but the ones with thorns in their coats as well and even stragglers and wanderers.

[carbon dioxide]

I voted no but I will clarify my vote.  It is not for me to tell the Lord what he will or will not do.  But I hope and pray that if God ever makes a change it will be on his own time and according to his own terms.  If changes occur do to the demands of some small group or it can be linked to such a group in any way, it would be a disaster for the Church.  How could any LDS ever fight against the charge by LDS critics that the LDS Church changes its doctrine and practices due to pressure and nothing they believe is absolute.  It would be an effective charge against the LDS Church and it would be hard for any member to deny the charge.  Antis would have a field day on this for many years and on this point they would be exactly right.

[Bikeemikey]

I voted no but I will clarify my vote. It is not for me to tell the Lord what he will or will not do. But I hope and pray that if God ever makes a change it will be on his own time and according to his own terms. If changes occur do to the demands of some small group or it can be linked to such a group in any way, it would be a disaster for the Church. How could any LDS ever fight against the charge by LDS critics that the LDS Church changes its doctrine and practices due to pressure and nothing they believe is absolute. It would be an effective charge against the LDS Church and it would be hard for any member to deny the charge. Antis would have a field day on this for many years and on this point they would be exactly right.

So your concerned god might be pressured into it? That's a strange idea.

[Garden Girl]

There may be a day come when women will be formally ordained to the Priesthood (I actually do not believe it will happen for this life)... but if this does happen, it will be because of revelation to the Lord's prophets, not because of some group demonstrating and demanding such action.

 

GG

 

 

[Tsuzuki]

The similarities are common to all Christian religions, but without the Christ. To me some of the differences include a belief in Hor, Nirvana, and the use of Majick.

Apples are different from oranges, but that does not mean that you cannot eat both.

[why me]

There may be a day come when women will be formally ordained to the Priesthood (I actually do not believe it will happen for this life)... but if this does happen, it will be because of revelation to the Lord's prophets, not because of some group demonstrating and demanding such action.

 

GG

I would assume that girls will also be ordained? Unless of course, girls would be discriminated against unlike the boys who do get the priesthood. With the ordainWomen movement we have discrimination against girls since they seem to never mention girls in their program. This is intentional and they have amazingly controlled the conversation with the members and media by excluding girls. Girls will have to receive the Aaronic Priesthood. However, as I have stated on a different thread by mentioning girls the OW movement could have been a missionary tool because for most outsiders, such a concept as ordaining girls would be a novelty since most outsiders do not know that in the lds church all males of age get the priesthood.

 

The title of this thread is a case in point. The OP intentionally or unknowingly excludes the girls. A more honest OP would be: Will lds females ever be ordained to the priesthood?

Edited June 14, 2014 by why me

[rpn]

 

And young men aren't supposed to be protected in the same way? Seriously?

You misunderstood me.   I wrote that YM are also excluded sometimes from adult things.  This isn't about gender.  But it is my experience that families with HTers do not discuss the same things or concerns that women do with VTers they trust.   Sure if what VTing is is to read the message and show up once a month, girls work just as well as women.  But if VTing is improving the sisterhood to meet individual women's needs then I just don't see that in the same way.  

[MatthewG]

So explain it to me like I'm five. Why do women NEED the priesthood?  

[Tacenda]

Post from Alan Rock Waterman on Mormonstories Podcast Community on FB......

 

Regarding Kate Kelly, this intriguing suggestion from Tom Philips as posted on Reddit:

 

"Maybe her argument should be "why are some women given the priesthood and others denied it?" Without this put to them the brethren merely say it is "God's will" that the priesthood is only for men.

"However, they are at the same time conferring the priesthood on women in their secret ordinance "The Second Anointing".

...

"Whereas, in the endowment, women are blessed to become "Queens and Priestesses" in the Second Anointing they are actually ordained Queens and Priestesses for TIME and all eternity.

"After this priesthood was conferred on my wife, during our Second Anointing an apostle (Elder Ballard) directed her to wash my feet and pronounce a blessing upon me by laying her hands on my head.

"We are all familiar with female temple workers performing priesthood ordinances in the temple, but my wife was given added authority and note it was for TIME and all eternity, it is for the NOW.

"So, are the brethren discriminating among the sisters of the church? Of course they are, just as they discriminated within males until 1978. The ultimate discrimination, of course, is the Second Anointing. Given to relatively few members and kept secret from the rest.

Maybe Kate's defence could be, I only want for all 'worthy' sisters that which is conferred on a selective secret 'elite'."

 

 

Me:  Wow never thought of this.  Maybe this gave Kate the boost to start OW, besides Pres. Hinckley saying that women weren't agitating for it.  At least I'm assuming this crossed her mind. 

Edited June 14, 2014 by Tacenda

[JLHPROF]

 

Post from Alan Rock Waterman on Mormonstories Podcast Community on FB......

 

Regarding Kate Kelly, this intriguing suggestion from Tom Philips as posted on Reddit:

 

"Maybe her argument should be "why are some women given the priesthood and others denied it?" Without this put to them the brethren merely say it is "God's will" that the priesthood is only for men.

"However, they are at the same time conferring the priesthood on women in their secret ordinance "The Second Anointing".

...

"Whereas, in the endowment, women are blessed to become "Queens and Priestesses" in the Second Anointing they are actually ordained Queens and Priestesses for TIME and all eternity.

"After this priesthood was conferred on my wife, during our Second Anointing an apostle (Elder Ballard) directed her to wash my feet and pronounce a blessing upon me by laying her hands on my head.

"We are all familiar with female temple workers performing priesthood ordinances in the temple, but my wife was given added authority and note it was for TIME and all eternity, it is for the NOW.

"So, are the brethren discriminating among the sisters of the church? Of course they are, just as they discriminated within males until 1978. The ultimate discrimination, of course, is the Second Anointing. Given to relatively few members and kept secret from the rest.

Maybe Kate's defence could be, I only want for all 'worthy' sisters that which is conferred on a selective secret 'elite'."

 

 

Me:  Wow never thought of this.  Maybe this gave Kate the boost to start OW, besides Pres. Hinckley saying that women weren't agitating for it.  At least I'm assuming this crossed her mind. 

 

 

Well, now that is a fascinating argument.  But I doubt you could use the priesthood ban analogy to claim discrimination unless you could argue that only women of a certain race receive their higher blessings.

 

In fact, I would argue that the Church could use this to claim that women ARE being ordained to the priesthood, but that the requirements are more demanding for women than for the men (who just have to turn 12) - then it would be a case of inequality in application of the priesthood, but not exclusion from the priesthood.