Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Women And Priesthood Essay


Recommended Posts

Posted

On a first skim, I'm impressed that the essay does not attempt to give any explanation for why women are excluded. The closest it comes is (i) providing the historical context that, as with all other christian churches of the day, LDS in Joseph's day only ordained men and (ii) a footnote reference to Elder Oaks' famous conference address when he said that the exclusion was according to the Lord's "direction" but gave no source for where that direction is found.

 

Apart from these two minor references, the essay is silent on why. No claim that women are more spiritual, that women have motherhood, etc. In fact, judging by the essay, the corollary to priesthood is relief society, not motherhood. Interesting. 

 

And thank God that the essay didn't go the direction of Cassler's two trees and claim that child birth and lactation are somehow ordinances. 

Posted

Rivers, I agree with the placement of this topic in the "news" section, but inevitably the real discussion about these essays will take place in the main forum. You may want to move it.

Posted

I'm not sure that this essay said much. Women don't hold priesthood office but they exercise priesthood authority as missionaries, auxiliary leaders, teachers, temple workers etc. I think they could have just put up the Oaks from a couple of years ago as he said the same things. The essay doesn't seem to give any explanation about the "whys" of how this is organized but simply says it "is".

 

From reading the essay I get the impression that the church feels women should be falling over themselves thanking the church for allowing them to speak and pray and teach.

 

I'm also underwhelmed by the new gospel topic on Mother in Heaven. It just didn't say much.

Posted

I'm surprised they didn't attempt to address the issue of women prophets, apostles and deacons in the Bible.

Yeah. I was hoping they would have delved into that also. But its a great essay nonetheless.

OW supporters will undoubtedly still make a fuss over it.

Posted

I'm surprised they didn't attempt to address the issue of women prophets, apostles and deacons in the Bible. 

 

Because prophet isn't priesthood.

Because the apostles and deacons in the bible that are assumed to be female may not have been female or may not have been apostles and deacons.

Why assume aberrations?

Posted (edited)

I'm not sure that this essay said much. Women don't hold priesthood office but they exercise priesthood authority as missionaries, auxiliary leaders, teachers, temple workers etc. I think they could have just put up the Oaks from a couple of years ago as he said the same things. The essay doesn't seem to give any explanation about the "whys" of how this is organized but simply says it "is".

 

From reading the essay I get the impression that the church feels women should be falling over themselves thanking the church for allowing them to speak and pray and teach.

 

I'm also underwhelmed by the new gospel topic on Mother in Heaven. It just didn't say much.

 

 

I think it makes reference to that it doesn't say much, probably because there isn't much known about HM

 

"As with many other truths of the gospel, our present knowledge about a Mother in Heaven is limited. Nevertheless, we have been given sufficient knowledge to appreciate the sacredness of this doctrine and to comprehend the divine pattern established for us as children of heavenly parents"

Edited by Duncan
Posted

On a first skim, I'm impressed that the essay does not attempt to give any explanation for why women are excluded. The closest it comes is (i) providing the historical context that, as with all other christian churches of the day, LDS in Joseph's day only ordained men and (ii) a footnote reference to Elder Oaks' famous conference address when he said that the exclusion was according to the Lord's "direction" but gave no source for where that direction is found.

Apart from these two minor references, the essay is silent on why. No claim that women are more spiritual, that women have motherhood, etc. In fact, judging by the essay, the corollary to priesthood is relief society, not motherhood. Interesting.

And thank God that the essay didn't go the direction of Cassler's two trees and claim that child birth and lactation are somehow ordinances.

I find it refreshing that the essay made no comparisons between motherhood and priesthood. I never bought into that.

Posted

Loved this paragraph:

The priesthood authority exercised by Latter-day Saint women in the temple and elsewhere remains largely unrecognized by people outside the Church and is sometimes misunderstood or overlooked by those within. Latter-day Saints and others often mistakenly equate priesthood with religious office and the men who hold it, which obscures the broader Latter-day Saint concept of priesthood.

 

Disappointed no mention of Queens and Priestesses was made.  Also, all that discussion of women administering and no reference to the historical practice of Mother's blessings.

 

The Mother in Heaven essay is nice but doesn't really break any new ground.

Posted

I wish it could have said more. I think a lot of us yearn for more answers about Heavenly Mother and the role of women in God's plan. But I understand that we can hardly expect any doctrinal innovation to come through a Gospel Topics essay, since their purpose is mainly to summarize the church's past doctrinal understanding and where we are at right now and to provide context in how that relates to wider societal trends. In any case, I think the women and priesthood essay will hopefully lead to it becoming more common knowledge that women used to heal by the laying on of hands.

Posted (edited)

Sigh. It's a step forward, and an okay summary, but it completely sidesteps most of the meaningful questions about why and instead interprets the ambiguous 'key' statement by Joseph Smith in a way that maintains the status quo that developed after he was dead. If you look at the source documents, it's pretty clear that Joseph did give full Priesthood to women and the men couldn't handle it; the convoluted doublespeak in this essay that tries to make it seem that the current organization of the Church treats men and women as equals is deeply disingenuous. 

 

If women really "exercise priesthood authority", then why are they not "ordained to priesthood office"

 

It makes no sense. It's just sexism legitimized through ritualization. 

Edited by JeremyOrbe-Smith
Posted

Sigh. It's a step forward, and an okay summary, but it completely sidesteps most of the meaningful questions about why and instead interprets the ambiguous 'key' statement by Joseph Smith in a way that maintains the status quo that developed after he was dead. If you look at the source documents, it's pretty clear that Joseph did give full Priesthood to women and the men couldn't handle it; the convoluted doublespeak in this essay that tries to make it seem that the current organization of the Church treats men and women as equals is deeply disingenuous. 

 

If women really "exercise priesthood authority", then why are they not "ordained to priesthood office"

 

It makes no sense. It's just sexism legitimized through ritualization. 

 

hmmmm, what woman was given the priesthood by Joseph Smith? Isn't great though that salvation and exaltation are not a priesthood office? It's pretty clear that God gives revelation without an explanation

Posted

 Isn't great though that salvation and exaltation are not a priesthood office?

 

Salvation isn't a priesthood office, but exaltation is.

Posted

Salvation isn't a priesthood office, but exaltation is.

 

but women don't need it, otherwise they would be told so-do you know where that is?

Posted

Huh...a woman either holds the priesthood or she doesn't..let her into Priesthood meeting so she can find out!

Posted

Huh...a woman either holds the priesthood or she doesn't..let her into Priesthood meeting so she can find out!

Relief Society is part of the priesthood.

Posted

Huh...a woman either holds the priesthood or she doesn't..let her into Priesthood meeting so she can find out!

I'm not sure what that would solve.

Posted

but women don't need it, otherwise they would be told so-do you know where that is?

 

They are.  In the temple.  One of the first things they are told in the temple.

Posted

Sigh. It's a step forward, and an okay summary, but it completely sidesteps most of the meaningful questions about why and instead interprets the ambiguous 'key' statement by Joseph Smith in a way that maintains the status quo that developed after he was dead. If you look at the source documents, it's pretty clear that Joseph did give full Priesthood to women and the men couldn't handle it; the convoluted doublespeak in this essay that tries to make it seem that the current organization of the Church treats men and women as equals is deeply disingenuous. 

 

If women really "exercise priesthood authority", then why are they not "ordained to priesthood office"

 

It makes no sense. It's just sexism legitimized through ritualization.

It's a significant step forward. Just as with the racial ban, the first step is to stop propagating the whys. Then as hearts change, the doctrine will eventually follow. Last of all, the whys will be repudiated. It's a long process but it's underway. Not 1978 yet, but also not 1949. I'd say we're around 1968.

Posted

It's a significant step forward. Just as with the racial ban, the first step is to stop propagating the whys. Then as hearts change, the doctrine will eventually follow. Last of all, the whys will be repudiated. It's a long process but it's underway. Not 1978 yet, but also not 1949. I'd say we're around 1968.

Or, 30 AD maybe. Unless Jesus was also behind the times by not ordaining women. ;)

Posted

One thing I liked about the essay was it's call for Mormons and non-Mormons to think of the priesthood more broadly than we tend to. I think that was what Elder Oaks was trying to get at in his recent general conference talk as well. To some extent, the dispute over women and the priesthood is a semantic issue: what does "priesthood mean?" The way we use words affects how we treat and think of other people. Your average Mormon today conceives of the issue as being something like priesthood = motherhood, two separate spheres. The article states that the Relief Society, temple, and the other ways that women in the church exercise authority is part of the priesthood just as much as offices and ordinances. In other words, women make up half of the priesthood in the church. This conception of the priesthood perhaps isn't the last step to a perfect understanding, but I think that if the church as whole could grasp the concepts explained in this essay the church would be greatly improved.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...