When do women become high priests?

[theplains]

This is in response to some thread comments made by @Pyreaux  here.

Quote

Not as some think; that with Christ as our High Priest, there is no need of earthly Priests to 
reach God, rather we are to follow Christ into the High Priesthood itself. You are entering Gods 
presence because *you*, as the fully idealized Christian, are a High Priest.

Quote

Technically their baptism was the start of the priestly path, and any calling requiring an endowment 
of power makes a woman a Deaconess, and in Temple Marriage they enter the "highest order of the 
priesthood". That is in life. Though not called a priest in life, in death, they are certainly a 
fully-fledged High Priestess unto God the Father, since they are fully prepared to approach the heavenly 
throne in the Holy of Holies of Heaven.

 
Do women become high priests in mortality through their faith in Christ's atonement or does
it occur afterwards, in their resurrection, as exalted beings?

[manol]

27 minutes ago, theplains said:

Do women become high priests in mortality through their faith in Christ's atonement or does
it occur afterwards, in their resurrection, as exalted beings?

Maybe they already are, but it's not [yet] overtly taught.

Maybe that is why women don't need to be ordained in order to enter the temple, where virtually everything involves priesthood.

Maybe that is why women wear garments and robes specifically and emphatically associated with priesthood without it being out of place.

Maybe that is why women participate fully in ceremonies and ordinances pertaining to the priesthood.

Maybe that is why it is not out of place for women to make the same claim or assertion at the veil that men do. 

Edited September 4, 2023 by manol

[MiserereNobis]

Whenever they finally pick up and put away the chairs after services. 

[Rain]

58 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Whenever they finally pick up and put away the chairs after services. 

Someday I have to meet you!

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, theplains said:

This is in response to some thread comments made by @Pyreaux  here.

 
Do women become high priests in mortality through their faith in Christ's atonement or does
it occur afterwards, in their resurrection, as exalted beings?

The implication in the endowment is, by THAT ORDINANCE they skip those steps. 

It's the GET OUT OF JAIL FREE clause.

Edited September 4, 2023 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, manol said:

Maybe they already are, but it's not [yet] overtly taught.

Maybe that is why women don't need to be ordained in order to enter the temple, where virtually everything involves priesthood.

Maybe that is why women wear garments and robes specifically and emphatically associated with priesthood without it being out of place.

Maybe that is why women participate fully in ceremonies and ordinances pertaining to the priesthood.

Maybe that is why it is not out of place for women to make the same claim or assertion at the veil that men do. 

Clue: they are clean per the ordinance.

Anybody hear thunder?

I think it was Elder Bednar who said we can discuss anything but the words we specifically by covenant promise not to.

 

 

[rpn]

Nowadays men aren't ordained as high priests much either.   Most male ordinations are to the office of Elder.

[CV75]

4 hours ago, theplains said:

This is in response to some thread comments made by @Pyreaux  here.

 
Do women become high priests in mortality through their faith in Christ's atonement or does
it occur afterwards, in their resurrection, as exalted beings?

"High priest" is the wrong term, and having a priesthood office is different than being a priest or priestess in the kingdom. The latter is possible for men and women in mortality through faith in Christ (meaning His terms), but nothing wrong with doing this later, either.

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, rpn said:

Nowadays men aren't ordained as high priests much either.   Most male ordinations are to the office of Elder.

@theplains- If you are called into a position that requires it, men are ordained to be a  High Priest. When they are released, the ordination remains dormant until they are called again to be a leader.

This is not a new concept.

I am an ordained Seventy - years ago there was a calling in the leadership of the stake missionaries - 7 men in the Stake presided over the Stake missionaries and they were called "Presidents".

After the program changed, the ordinations became dormant 

In the impossibly unlikely case that I were called as a Seventy today, theoretically I would not have to be re-ordained.  Same thing for bishops.

Any Melchizadek priesthood holder, - when set apart to do so- can administer temple ordinances - without being a "High Priest"; except for one - one has to be ordained a Sealer to do sealings

Edited September 4, 2023 by mfbukowski

[Smiley McGee]

5 hours ago, manol said:

Maybe they already are, but it's not [yet] overtly taught.

They’re already high priests but if they want the sacrament they need a 16 year-old boy around to administer it? 

[Rain]

18 minutes ago, Smiley McGee said:

They’re already high priests but if they want the sacrament they need a 16 year-old boy around to administer it? 

15 if turning 16 that year.

[Pyreaux]

7 minutes ago, Smiley McGee said:

They’re already high priests but if they want the sacrament they need a 16 year-old boy around to administer it? 

The Israelite King and Queen were robed in white as a priest, anointed with holy oil as priests, and goes in the Upper Room of the Temple above the Holy of Holies to get married. Even the higher Melchizedek priesthood of King couldn't usurp the duties of the lesser priests, like when King Saul preformed the sacrifice when Samuel was seven days late, it was apparently one of the strikes that lead to losing his kingdom. Not to say it's an exact mirror of the ancient ways, there is just precedence for this kind of division of labor.

[Rain]

5 minutes ago, Pyreaux said:

The Israelite King and Queen were robed in white as a priest, anointed with holy oil as priests, and goes in the Upper Room of the Temple above the Holy of Holies to get married. Even the higher Melchizedek priesthood of King couldn't usurp the duties of the lesser priests, like when King Saul preformed the sacrifice when Samuel was seven days late, it was apparently one of the strikes that lead to losing his kingdom. Not to say it's an exact mirror of the ancient ways, there is just precedence for this kind of division of labor.

So what is the division of labor? What priesthood duties do women have not related to their callings?

[Pyreaux]

3 minutes ago, Rain said:

So what is the division of labor? What priesthood duties do women have not related to their callings?

The duties of the Aaronic priesthood, specifically. I haven't really given it much thought. They can administer higher temple ordinances, just not the sacrament and baptisms.

[Smiley McGee]

2 minutes ago, Pyreaux said:

They can administer higher temple ordinances

Seems to be more driven by necessity or practically expedience than by some deeper, obscure doctrine. Avoids having men in the women’s changing room, and avoided discomfort back when only a shield was worn. No sealings performed by women…always a man officiating at the altar in an endowment….

[manol]

3 hours ago, Smiley McGee said:

They’re already high priests but if they want the sacrament they need a 16 year-old boy around to administer it? 

I'm NOT saying that women already being priestesses is church doctrine.  Obviously it's not!

I'm saying that women's participation in the endowment ceremony is consistent with women ALREADY being priestesses.   They wear priesthood garments, participate in priesthood ceremonies and ordinances, and (just before passing through the veil) they lay claim to something that arguably has to do with priesthood. 

Either priesthood (or priestesshood) is not necessary for half of the people who do these things, or they actually already have it.

In my opinion.

Edited September 5, 2023 by manol

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Smiley McGee said:

They’re already high priests but if they want the sacrament they need a 16 year-old boy around to administer it? 

They are learning how to serve in the Priesthood and take on responsibility for others 

Most people don't need a Bishop either if you want to see it that way. 

 

Edited September 5, 2023 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

20 minutes ago, manol said:

I'm NOT saying that women already being priestesses is church doctrine.  Obviously it's not!

I'm saying that women's participation in the endowment ceremony is consistent with women ALREADY being priestesses.   They wear priesthood garments, participate in priesthood ceremonies and ordinances, and (just before passing through the veil) they lay claim to something that arguably has to do with priesthood. 

Either priesthood (or priestesshood) is not necessary for half of the people who do these things, or they actually already have it.

In my opinion.

"Kings and Queens, Priests and Priestesses to the Most High God..."

 

[Smiley McGee]

17 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

They are learning how to serve in the Priesthood and take on responsibility for others 

Can’t do that while sharing the table with the Priestesses? 

[Buckeye]

8 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

"Kings and Queens, Priests and Priestesses to the Most High God..."

 

I’ll have to check the wording next time I’m in the temple but I believe the current language promises men may become “Kings and Priests to the Most High God” while women may become “Queens and Priestesses in the new and everlasting covenant.”  

[mfbukowski]

47 minutes ago, Smiley McGee said:

Can’t do that while sharing the table with the Priestesses? 

And today, would that be seen as "making the women serve food?" I suspect the boys would show up even less than they do now.  Today usually half of those passing sacrament are Elders.   We have more than enough sisters that could do it for the men, but that's not the goal.

It is to show up and do your duty, just as the Bishop does

I accept the Family Proclamation as the best paradigm socially for humanity, based on testimony, and experience, not metanarratives about women's equality.  Boys need to learn THEIR responsibilities.

Of course women should have equality in every possible way, that for me, goes without saying.

You really WANT to take a little tray around the chapel?

I suppose that is part of the metanarratives more than anything 

I have no problem but then the boys lose the training in what is their own role.

 

Edited September 5, 2023 by mfbukowski

[JLHPROF]

2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

@theplains- If you are called into a position that requires it, men are ordained to be a  High Priest. When they are released, the ordination remains dormant until they are called again to be a leader.

This is not a new concept.

I am an ordained Seventy - years ago there was a calling in the leadership of the stake missionaries - 7 men in the Stake presided over the Stake missionaries and they were called "Presidents".

After the program changed, the ordinations became dormant 

In the impossibly unlikely case that I were called as a Seventy today, theoretically I would not have to be re-ordained.  Same thing for bishops.

Any Melchizadek priesthood holder, - when set apart to do so- can administer temple ordinances - without being a "High Priest"; except for one - one has to be ordained a Sealer to do sealings

We're heading towards the only priesthood offices being Elder and Apostle with everything else being a "calling" you are set apart for instead of ordained.

It won't be long before there will only be Elders set apart instead of ordained to higher offices.

It's bad doctrine and if taken too far would bring about the loss of various priesthood keys.  There's no such thing as dormant priesthood.  As one stake president told a young deacon, use it or lose it.

[mfbukowski]

46 minutes ago, Buckeye said:

I’ll have to check the wording next time I’m in the temple but I believe the current language promises men may become “Kings and Priests to the Most High God” while women may become “Queens and Priestesses in the new and everlasting covenant.”  

Please do.

[Smiley McGee]

15 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

And today, would that be seen as "making the women serve food?" I suspect the boys would show up even less than they do now.

C’mon, this is lazy.
 

16 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

I accept the Family Proclamation as the best paradigm socially for humanity, based on testimony, not metanarratives.

 

You should begin with this so the other party understands that no real discussion is to be had.

[Rain]

43 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

And today, would that be seen as "making the women serve food?"

If it is a duty of both men and women there is no reason to see it as "serving food".

43 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

I suspect the boys would show up even less than they do now. 

So what responsibility should we give to the girls so they will "show up"? 

43 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Today usually half of those passing sacrament are Elders.   We have more than enough sisters that could do it for the men, but that's not the goal.

It is to show up and do your duty, just as the Bishop does

I accept the Family Proclamation as the best paradigm socially for humanity, based on testimony, and experience, not metanarratives about women's equality.  Boys need to learn THEIR responsibilities.

Of course women should have equality in every possible way, that for me, goes without saying.

You really WANT to take a little tray around the chapel?

That is what the sacrament and the duty of passing it means to you?

It always bothers me when people put down priesthood duties to show women why they shouldn't want to do them.  Either the duty is something sacred or the duty is a chore/means nothing.  You can't have it both ways. 

43 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

I suppose that is part of the metanarratives more than anything 

I have no problem but then the boys lose the training in what is their own role.

 

And what training do girls have with the priesthood?  What role do they have? 

If someone tells me "I don't know why women are ordained" I can deal with it.  But please stop putting the priesthood and priesthood duties down in an effort to show why women wouldn't want to work hand in hand with God this way. If you respect what the priesthood means don't disparage it. And don't put women on a pedestal and leave them floundering by telling them they don't need the training. Even Jesus needed training.