Reasons Wrongly Given Why Women Don't Have The Priesthood

[Zakuska]

 

An Aposlte has just as much Authority in the Priesthood as I do. Yes, he holds more keys, but that doesn't make him God nor an untouchable Ark. I did excuse my self with the qualifying "all dew respect".

 

I was diagreeing with him while trying my hardest to not be disagreeable.  Looks like I failed in that effort.

 

Glad you are comfortable telling a member of the 12 that he is full of rocks theologically. Better you than me, I suppose.

 

So Emma is "ordained" to teach Sunday School. But read the Original Minutes to the Orignization of the Releif Society in the Joseph Smith Papers. Women  were also to go forth Healing with concecrated oil and much more than that, all things that have been usurped by men in todays church.

 

I'm aware that in the 19th century women gave blessings. But then the Prophet asked that they stop. It's his right to do so. We also practiced plural marriage at the time. Are you suggesting that discontinuing that practice was a mistake as well?

 

This is in the intro:

"Let this Presidency serve as a constitution— all their  decisions be considered law; and acted upon as such.

If any Officers are wanted to carry out the designs of  the Institution, let them be appointed and set apart, as  Deacons,Teachers &c. are among us."

 

 

http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSummary/nauvoo-relief-society-minute-book#!/paperSummary/nauvoo-relief-society-minute-book&p=1

 

According to the original Notes of the RS women where to be ordained to the office of "DEACON", "TEACHERS" etc!

 

Thats from the Prophet Joseph Smiths mouth himself!

 

See that one little (and inconvenient) word "as" in there? It kind of changes the whole shooting match. It means that the R.S. sisters are to be given callings and set apart in those callings the same way that men are called as Deacons and Teachers. Yes, Deacons and Teachers are offices of the Aaronic priesthood, but they are not the priesthood itself. So we can agree. Sisters in the R.S. are given callings within that society. They are called to be Visiting Teachers, to serve on committees, to function in presidencies, and so on. But in the same manner as the priesthood does not mean that they are given the priesthood. Remember, before Joseph went to Carthage, he told the 12 that he had given all the keys of the priesthood to them. He didn't say that he forgot the one about ordaining the sisters. 

 

Aren't symantic games fun!

 

No ones arguing that a "Deacon" in the Relief Society has the same Job as a Deacon in the Young Men Orginization.

 

People are arguing that they have no Priesthood period. Which isn't the truth, and goes against common sense and temple Liturgy.

 

If they're not given the priesthood then why does one of the articles of clothing that they wear specifically represent their "Priesthood and Powers"?

 

If they wear clothing that represents what Priesthood they have how can they then not have priesthood? It makes reason stare.

 

That's like saying your'e not a Scout even though you have a badge on your sash that says you earned your Eagle Scout.

Edited June 23, 2014 by Zakuska

[Buzzard]

 

That's like saying your'e not a Scout even though you have a badge on your sash that says you earned your Eagle Scout.

Actually, you can have the badge, have a sash full of merit badge patches, and go around giving Eagle Courts of Honor dressed in full Native American regalia. But unless the BSA says you are an Eagle Scout, you are not an Eagle Scout. Kind of like the church and the priesthood.

[Zakuska]

Actually, you can have the badge, have a sash full of merit badge patches, and go around giving Eagle Courts of Honor dressed in full Native American regalia. But unless the BSA says you are an Eagle Scout, you are not an Eagle Scout. Kind of like the church and the priesthood.

Your cleaver play on words would make sense if indeed the church hadn't codified "Priesthood and Powers" into the temple endowment for women.

 

Or are you saying that the church is saying one thing to our sisters and doing another?

Edited June 24, 2014 by Zakuska

[Buzzard]

Your cleaver play on words would make sense if indeed the church hadn't codified "Priesthood and Powers" into the temple endowment for women.

 

Or are you saying that the church is saying one thing to our sisters and doing another?

Nope. I am saying the the church makes the rules and decides what they mean, and even changes what the rules mean from time to time. (As do other organizations). If we want to be fully participating members of the church, we go by their rules as they currently construe them. It's perfectly OK to raise our hand and ask the referee what this or that rule means, but it's not OK to tell the referee that his interpretation of the rule book is flawed, and that because you interpret the rules differently, the runner is safe/the election must be reversed/women must be ordained.  Thanks to our judicial branch, you can sometimes pull that off in the secular world, but not in the church. Our executive, legislative, and judicial branches are all the same body.

[Zakuska]

Nope. I am saying the the church makes the rules and decides what they mean, and even changes what the rules mean from time to time. (As do other organizations). If we want to be fully participating members of the church, we go by their rules as they currently construe them. It's perfectly OK to raise our hand and ask the referee what this or that rule means, but it's not OK to tell the referee that his interpretation of the rule book is flawed, and that because you interpret the rules differently, the runner is safe/the election must be reversed/women must be ordained.  Thanks to our judicial branch, you can sometimes pull that off in the secular world, but not in the church. Our executive, legislative, and judicial branches are all the same body.

Ah Gotcha...

 

"The church belongs to the leaders and the members can go suck rocks, my way or the high way"

 

What ever happend to... "No bond or free, male or female, all are equal to the Lord", from the infant in the Nursery to the Prophet at its helm?

 

Ill stand with Brother Joseph and take him at his word when he Endowed his wife and gave her temple clothing and codified what they symbolized in the the Liturgy. and not some  evacuated Token gift.

 

We can agree to disagee... I suppose.

Edited June 24, 2014 by Zakuska

[Calm]

Ah Gotcha...

 

"The church belongs to the leaders and the members can go suck rocks, my way or the high way".

Given the leader the Church belongs to is Christ, in essence...yes.

[Buzzard]

Ah Gotcha...

 

"The church belongs to the leaders and the members can go suck rocks, my way or the high way"

 

What ever happend to... "No bond or free, male or female, all are equal to the Lord", from the infant in the Nursery to the Prophet at its helm?

 

Ill stand with Brother Joseph and take him at his word when he Endowed his wife and gave her temple clothing and codified what they symbolized in the the Liturgy. and not some  evacuated Token gift.

 

We can agree to disagee... I suppose.

That doesn't mean we don't pray and seek our own confirmation. But to have it any other way is an invitation to chaos. Or at least Methodism. 

[mtomm]

Actually, you can have the badge, have a sash full of merit badge patches, and go around giving Eagle Courts of Honor dressed in full Native American regalia. But unless the BSA says you are an Eagle Scout, you are not an Eagle Scout. Kind of like the church and the priesthood.

 

Except in this case the Boy Scouts organization gave you the sash and the badge.  

 

I suppose to draw the analogy out further you'd have to say that they gave you the Eagle Scout stuff but are saying you really aren't an Eagle Scout.  You can act like an Eagle Scout when another Scout tells you what you can do certain scoutish things.   However, you are not allowed to call yourself an Eagle Scout.  

 

Is this about correct?  

[Buzzard]

Except in this case the Boy Scouts organization gave you the sash and the badge.  

 

I suppose to draw the analogy out further you'd have to say that they gave you the Eagle Scout stuff but are saying you really aren't an Eagle Scout.  You can act like an Eagle Scout when another Scout tells you what you can do certain scoutish things.   However, you are not allowed to call yourself an Eagle Scout.  

 

Is this about correct?  

Not at all. I am talking about someone taking "this honor unto themselves" when they don't actually have that honor. What in the world are you referring to?

And as an aside, you can have your scout rank-any rank-taken away by the BSA. It has to be done by the National Executive Council and is very rare, but has happened. 

[mtomm]

Actually, you can have the badge, have a sash full of merit badge patches, and go around giving Eagle Courts of Honor dressed in full Native American regalia. But unless the BSA says you are an Eagle Scout, you are not an Eagle Scout. Kind of like the church and the priesthood.

 

I was referring to the bolded part.  I was just drawing out the analogy to what it is like for endowed women.  They have been endowed with certain things but are not given the scout ranks or the ability to act as scouts outside the temple.  I'm not sure how you got to "taking this honor unto themselves."  As long as she isn't acting outside of the temple she is doing no such thing.  I don't know of any woman doing that.  And I'm sure if she has she is no longer a scout..errr I mean member.   Some women want to receive their rank outside the temple and be recognized as full-fledged scout members.  

That's how I see it. 

Unless, the whole reference to the temple isn't even correct and that there is no conferring of anything done there.  Then none of it makes any difference. 

[Zakuska]

Not at all. I am talking about someone taking "this honor unto themselves" when they don't actually have that honor. What in the world are you referring to?

And as an aside, you can have your scout rank-any rank-taken away by the BSA. It has to be done by the National Executive Council and is very rare, but has happened. 

Who's "Taking the Honor Unto Themselves" the Church gave them the Clothing and told them it represents their Priesthood and powers.  Now your sitting her trying to take it away and telling us the Church doesn't know what its talking about.

[wenglund]

I never said she was an "E"lder?  (Did you notice the Capital 'E'?) I said she was an 'elder' (ie a member of the Melq. Priesthood or more mature order of Priesthood)

 

Tell me DJBrown. Why do Endowed women wear the exact same clothing as endowed men do both in AND outside the temple? And why does one of the pieces of clothing specifically represent priesthood and powers that they hold (like a military rank patch) if indeed Women do not hold the Priesthood?

 

Would all the Endowed women in the room please remove any clothing you are wearing that is given only to "priesthood holders" and leave it at the door. DJ Brown would like to excise you from the New and Everlasting Order of the Priesthood.

 

Why do I always have to fall for this? I hate walking so close to the Line. Mods I felt since I was being accused of teaching false Doctrine I at least had a right to respond.

 

PS. DJBrown please listen more closely the next time you go to the house of the Lord rather than accuse others of teaching false Doctrine. Thank you.

 

Zak, my friend,

 

If the priesthood is bestowed by ordination and in accordance with keys, then to your way of thinking, when and how have temple-endowed women been ordained to the priesthood? 

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[mtomm]

Zak, my friend,

 

If the priesthood is bestowed by ordination and in accordance with keys, then to your way of thinking, when and how have temple-endowed women been ordained to the priesthood? 

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

 

Do you have to be ordained to officiate?  

[Buzzard]

Do you have to be ordained to officiate?

Apparently not.

The first baptism in this dispensation was performed by an ordained non member. Special situation I know, but The Lord can set things up differently from the way things are usually done if he sees fit. You go tell him or at least his servants that they are up a creek without a paddle.

[wenglund]

Do you have to be ordained to officiate?  

 

No, though to my understanding, ordination, conducted under the direction of those holding the keys, is required to hold the priesthood--at least that is how worthy males over the age of 12 in the church receive it in this dispensation.

 

To me, the priesthood is analogous in a way to attaining a drivers license. When a person is of age and meets the state requirements, the state issues a drivers license. This gives the qualified person the right and authority and power to drive automobiles within the authorized jurisdiction. 

 

However, while as a teen I had the authority from the state to drive pretty much anywhere and whenever I wanted, my parents held the keys to the car, and they had the authority over me to limit when and for how long and where I could use their cars.

 

As for women officiating in the temple, perhaps it is somewhat analogous to a temporary or learners permit. They don't hold a license/priesthood, but have restricted permission, under supervision, to drive/perform select temple ordinances.

 

Evidently, though, my buddy Zak appears to think otherwise. And, so I am looking for his explanation.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited June 25, 2014 by wenglund

[mtomm]

Apparently not.

The first baptism in this dispensation was performed by an ordained non member. Special situation I know, but The Lord can set things up differently from the way things are usually done if he sees fit. You go tell him or at least his servants that they are up a creek without a paddle.

What does your last sentence mean?

[JLHPROF]

"Your endowment is to receive all those ordinances in the house of the Lord which are necessary for you, after you have departed this life, to enable you to walk back to the presence of the Father, passing the angels who stand as sentinels, being enabled to give them the keywords, the signs and tokens, pertaining to the holy priesthood, and gain your eternal exaltation in spite of earth and hell."             --Brigham Young

 

1. Women receive the same keywords, signs and tokens of the priesthood as the men do and wear the same priesthood clothing.  They are taught the same priesthood words, signs and tokens.  That is why we know they have priesthood in the temple.  This is what Joseph meant when he said he would turn the key on their behalf.  (It is not because of what they are allowed to give by temple presidents authority - initiatory work.  It is because of what they receive - priesthood keywords, signs, tokens and clothing).

 

2. When second anointings are bestowed women have a priesthood holders hands laid on their heads and they are ordained Queens and Priestesses by the priesthood, not set apart but actually ordained.  This is what Joseph meant when he promised to make the women a kingdom of priests.

 

In a temple environment or society women are given all the same priesthood authority to return to the presence of God and pass by the angels.  They can be ordained to an office so far above Deacon or Elder.  When a man is made a King and Priest he is said to hold "the fulness of the Melchezidek Priesthood" and the same applies to women when they are made "Queens and Priestesses".  And both genders continue to wear priesthood clothing.

 

But this does NOT automatically mean they have the authority to function in male offices any more than a man can function as a Queen and Priestess.  This does not give women authority to pass the sacrament.  They don't hold "more priesthood" than a deacon.  They hold different priesthood roles.  To say otherwise is to twist priesthood roles as revealed by the prophets from heaven to make them fit a modern POV.

Edited June 25, 2014 by JLHPROF

[Zakuska]

Zak, my friend,

 

If the priesthood is bestowed by ordination and in accordance with keys, then to your way of thinking, when and how have temple-endowed women been ordained to the priesthood? 

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

 

 

Its quite simple Wade. They have it from birth. They are foreordained at birth to be the bearers of the power to create life.Men are foreordained at birth to be the bearers of the power to Start life.

 

Think about this.  When Jeremiah the Prophet was ordained to be a Prophet, where was he?

Jeremiah 1:5

5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

 

 

So God ordained him through his Mother.

 

Isaiah makes mention of this type of motherly ordination for the Messiah as well.

Isaiah 49:5

5 ¶And now, saith the Lord that formed me from the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him, Though Israel be not gathered, yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the Lord, and my God shall be my strength.

 

1 Nephi 21:5

5 And now, saith the Lord—that formed me from the womb that I should be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him—though Israel be not gathered, yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the Lord, and my God shall be my strength.

 

Isaiah 44:2

2 Thus saith the Lord that made thee, and formed thee from the womb, which will help thee; Fear not, O Jacob, my servant; and thou, Jesurun, whom I have chosen.

 

Isaiah 44:24

24 Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

 

 

We as Elders in the church like to be able to trace our Priesthood Authority thusly...  I was ordained to the Priesthood by my father, and he his father, and he his father, and so on and so forth until we get to Joseph Smith who was ordained by Peter James and John.

 

In the Scriptures for Jesus we are given a similar line of Authority. Luke gives us his Male Priesthood Genealogy through Joseph all the way back to Adam through the Male line. However, Matthew gives us an alterrnative Line of priesthood Authority Which comes from Melchizedek to Abraham all the Way Down to Mary his mother.  This Female Line of Priesthood Authority has led some Scholars to speculate whether the briefly mentioned Melchizedek. to Whom Abraham payed his tithing was actually a Female.

 

To Top this off, the Author of the book of Hebrews tells us that not only would the Messiah have right to the Priesthood through BOTH his Father AND his Mother, but through God the Father Himself.

Heb 7

 

1 For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;

 2 To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King ofSalem, which is, King of peace;

 3 Without father, without mother, without descent, having neitherbeginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.

 

 

 

Note: "Without" in the KJV often means "outside of" or "besides the fact".

 

So besides the fact that the Messiah would have right to the priesthood by "Decent" through both his Father and his Mother. He also would have Right to the Priesthood from God the Father himself, and thus Luke makes the Logical leap of tying Adams priesthood Authority to God the parents themselves through Lineage.

 

Luke 3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

 

 

PS. Also note that John the Baptists Priesthood Authority is tied to Both his Father and Mother in the geneology given of him as well.

Edited June 26, 2014 by Zakuska

[mtomm]

Is there an instance where a woman MUST be endowed in order to be called to any position in the Church? (Besides temple callings.)   I know that it would be strongly desired and I'm sure in some cases it would seem crazy for them not to be endowed but where is it a requirement?  I cannot think of any.  I realize that we'd would think that general auxiliary presidents, stake RS presidents, etc would but I'm sure in every case an exception could be made. 

 

For this reason (and this wasn't my thinking at the beginning of the thread) that when people say women already hold the priesthood that is not true.  If it were  then endowment would be a requirement.  I think officiating in the Melchizedek and Aaronic priesthoods (temple) is not the same as being ordained.

 

What I find puzzling is that the sisters working in the temple are not dressed to officiate as the patrons are (neither are the men).  What is it they are doing called?  I must know but it escapes me perhaps.

 

 

Zak: So everyone woman despite any religious affiliation or belief or knowlege  is an ordained priesthood holder?  Why would God do that for the women and not for men?  Like you said men trace their priesthood authority and it certainly doesn't have to be through their fathers.

[Zakuska]

Is there an instance where a woman MUST be endowed in order to be called to any position in the Church? (Besides temple callings.)   I know that it would be strongly desired and I'm sure in some cases it would seem crazy for them not to be endowed but where is it a requirement?  I cannot think of any.  I realize that we'd would think that general auxiliary presidents, stake RS presidents, etc would but I'm sure in every case an exception could be made. 

 

For this reason (and this wasn't my thinking at the beginning of the thread) that when people say women already hold the priesthood that is not true.  If it were  then endowment would be a requirement.  I think officiating in the Melchizedek and Aaronic priesthoods (temple) is not the same as being ordained.

 

What I find puzzling is that the sisters working in the temple are not dressed to officiate as the patrons are (neither are the men).  What is it they are doing called?  I must know but it escapes me perhaps.

 

 

Zak: So everyone woman despite any religious affiliation or belief or knowlege  is an ordained priesthood holder?  Why would God do that for the women and not for men?  Like you said men trace their priesthood authority and it certainly doesn't have to be through their fathers.

 

I know church policy states that the Releif Society President should be a temple endowed Sister, Preferable happily Married.

 

No, I wouldn't make that leap that all women everywhere have it.  They still need to be endowed in the temple to use it.

Edited June 25, 2014 by Zakuska

[wenglund]

Its quite simple Wade. They have it from birth. They are foreordained at birth to be the bearers of the power to create life.Men are foreordained at birth to be the bearers of the power to Start life.

 

That makes sense to me, and applies to all men and women regardless of religious affiliation or temple worthiness.

 

However, the meaning of "priesthood" in that sense strikes me as quite different from the ministrative sense we commonly use it in the Church, and have been using it here--where there are formal ordinations (laying on of hands) on earth of those who are qualified and under the direction of those with appropriate keys.

 

In other words, you may be using the term "priesthood" here idiosyncratically. 

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

I know church policy states that the Releif Society President should be a temple endowed Sister, Preferable happily Married.

 

No, I wouldn't make that leap that all women everywhere have it.  They still need to be endowed in the temple to use it.

 

This may be a policy that post-dates my years in singles Wards since the RS Presidents I knew back then were neither married, and some were not endowed.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Stone holm]

"Your endowment is to receive all those ordinances in the house of the Lord which are necessary for you, after you have departed this life, to enable you to walk back to the presence of the Father, passing the angels who stand as sentinels, being enabled to give them the keywords, the signs and tokens, pertaining to the holy priesthood, and gain your eternal exaltation in spite of earth and hell."             --Brigham Young

 

1. Women receive the same keywords, signs and tokens of the priesthood as the men do and wear the same priesthood clothing.  They are taught the same priesthood words, signs and tokens.  That is why we know they have priesthood in the temple.  This is what Joseph meant when he said he would turn the key on their behalf.  (It is not because of what they are allowed to give by temple presidents authority - initiatory work.  It is because of what they receive - priesthood keywords, signs, tokens and clothing).

 

2. When second anointings are bestowed women have a priesthood holders hands laid on their heads and they are ordained Queens and Priestesses by the priesthood, not set apart but actually ordained.  This is what Joseph meant when he promised to make the women a kingdom of priests.

 

In a temple environment or society women are given all the same priesthood authority to return to the presence of God and pass by the angels.  They can be ordained to an office so far above Deacon or Elder.  When a man is made a King and Priest he is said to hold "the fulness of the Melchezidek Priesthood" and the same applies to women when they are made "Queens and Priestesses".  And both genders continue to wear priesthood clothing.

 

But this does NOT automatically mean they have the authority to function in male offices any more than a man can function as a Queen and Priestess.  This does not give women authority to pass the sacrament.  They don't hold "more priesthood" than a deacon.  They hold different priesthood roles.  To say otherwise is to twist priesthood roles as revealed by the prophets from heaven to make them fit a modern POV.

Okay, let's leave the Temple and talk about the everyday world. Did Joseph mean that the women would only get the keys in the world beyond or in the Millenium? Doesn't that sound eerily like some of the spin that BRM used to spew forth about the blacks?

[JLHPROF]

Okay, let's leave the Temple and talk about the everyday world. Did Joseph mean that the women would only get the keys in the world beyond or in the Millenium? Doesn't that sound eerily like some of the spin that BRM used to spew forth about the blacks?

 

That old argument always smacks of "instantaneous gratification".  The whole idea that God is waiting on us to be ready.

I believe that Joseph absolutely intended exactly what he said - a kingdom of Priests (and a queendom of Priestesses).  That is, I believe he was always working towards building a Zion temple society in this life.  And that included ordaining women to be Queens and Priestesses in this life.

But within any society there are roles and functions specifically assigned.  And I don't believe God ever intends on women functioning in the Aaronic Priesthood for instance.

 

I don't think it compares with the BRM/negro teachings.

[teddyaware]

Okay, let's leave the Temple and talk about the everyday world. Did Joseph mean that the women would only get the keys in the world beyond or in the Millenium? Doesn't that sound eerily like some of the spin that BRM used to spew forth about the blacks?

Let's leave the temple -- you know, that main source of knowledge pertaining to the things of God that can enable us to actually understand the whole priesthood and priestesshood thing -- and let's look instead to the "real world" for the answers. After all, I'm not happy that I just found out women are ordained to be priestesses in the temple. And why am I not happy? Because priestesshood isn't good enough. It's not fair that women are ordained to be "only" mere priestesses; I want them to be ordained priests, exactly like the men. Nothing else will do for me and my progressive comrades. And besides, the whole ordination to priestesshood thing tends undermine OW, making them look ignorant and poorly informed. This cannot stand! (sarcasm off)