My wife and the priesthood


interalia
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hello all it has been a while.

My wife is taking the missionary discussions for the first time since we met nearly 10 years ago. She actually seems interested in moving forward, but she has one hang up and it is a BIG on - in fact it is the same hang up I had (ok still have somewhat).

When we go to church together ANY time the priesthood is mentioned with regard to it being only male, she gets irritated. If she hears it enough, she leaves in a blind fury. We often have talks later where she lets out all of her emotion on it then calms down.

I think it is important to note that she doesn't find me contemptible or the members in this, but she feels this idea of men having the priesthood exclusively is fundamentally flawed. This wouldn't bother her so much except for the fact she WANTS to join the church now and WANTS to believe it, but is having a very difficult time rectifying affiliating herself with an entity (the church) who espouses a male-only priesthood.

I too had a very difficult time with this when I was learning about the church. I still have a difficult time with it today. The only thing that made me leave it alone was the Spirit finally confirming to me the truth of the church despite my opposition to this one area. I went forward with joining the church hoping it would one day make sense. To date it hasn't completely to me, but I accept it and move on now.

I wish I knew how to help her with this. She feels so strongly about it and I know it is only bothering her as much as it is because she wants to believe the church is true. Any ideas out there? Perhaps I'll see something I haven't tried or a perspective that might appeal to her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I was born to parents who were members of the Church, I was baptized at age 8, was the star seminary student, served as a missionary, was a temple ordinance worker for a few years and I'll tell you this: it still doesn't make sense to me. In fact, the more I read and study the issues of feminism in the Church, the less sense this all makes to me. I'm fairly convinced that it will never make sense--but I'm okay with that.

Now, we could run the gauntlet of various spins and interpretations to try and shed light on women and the priesthood. But they all have their strengths and weaknesses. Just to try to throw some of the more common ones out there:

  • "men have the priesthood, women have motherhood" (this is of little comfort to people who aren't comfortable with men having positions of authority over women simply as a matter of gender.)
  • "men have the priesthood to raise them to the level of women" (a pile of rubbish, in my opinion, for which I see no doctrinal evidence at all)
  • "why would a woman want the responsibility of the priesthood?" (why wouldn't you want to take on an fulfill covenants that give you access to God's power and great blessings)
  • "I hold the priesthood every night when he comes home from work" (lame joke with no practical use

The simple fact is, this is a really tough part of accepting the Church when you have even minor feminist attitudes. The way I cope with it is to keep an open mind: if/when God asks the Church to extend the priesthood to women, I will happily and eagerly fulfill His will. Until then, I don't understand why it works the way it does. But because I feel what I do with respect to the Savior, His atonement, and the latter-day revelations, I accept it and channel my energies to other matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Questions- Why would she want women to hold the priesthood? How does she see the concept as flawed? How does she feel about the role of womanhood today?

I suggest perhaps she read some of the conference talks that revere women. (Russell Ballard is a big advocate of women in the church.) Also talks by President Hinckley about the importance of women in the church.

Sure, women aren't able to hold the priesthood, but there are things men can't do either. That's the way the Lord made it to be. Women and men have different roles in the Lord's kingdom. He has set it up so that there is an equal division of labor. When it's needed we do have access to priesthood blessings through our husbands or other church leaders.

As a woman I don't feel the least bit deprived because I can't hold the priesthood. I have enough responsibility as it is. Nor do I feel one iota less imprtant than the men in the church. It might be something she has to experience- being a member and having callings and being a mother (do you have children?) to realize there is plenty to keep us busy without having priesthood responsibilities, too.

Best wishes for you and her. I hope she can overcome this hang-up because I have no doubt the Lord will bless you both for her becoming a member.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mormonmusic

I too had a very difficult time with this when I was learning about the church. I still have a difficult time with it today. The only thing that made me leave it alone was the Spirit finally confirming to me the truth of the church despite my opposition to this one area. I went forward with joining the church hoping it would one day make sense. To date it hasn't completely to me, but I accept it and move on now.

Therein lies your answer.

She needs to have those spiritual experiences that convince her it's true in spite of the nagging questions. There will always be nagging questions. I have a ton of them and they bother me from time to time. The trite answers I get for the Church's failings bother me ("The church is perfect but the people aren't" for example) and sometimes I feel like I have to leave a meeting just to get away from it. She will need those powerful spiritual experiences to keep her active when those unpleasant experiences materialize, as they probably will.

So, your quest should be to help her have spiritual experiences that counteract, or anesthatize (excuse my spelling) the concerns.

I could launch into a long list of things to do that create such experiences, but I have a feeling there wouldn't be much interest, so I refrain. Study how to do this, and help her strengthen her testimony through the Spirit.

It's the only way when things don't make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moe, it looks like we posted at roughly the same time. I asked the very question you were making light of. "why would a woman want the responsibility of the priesthood?" (why wouldn't you want to take on an fulfill covenants that give you access to God's power and great blessings)

My response to that is - I don't feel any less access to God's power and blessings because of not holding the priesthood. I have prayer to access His power and am abundantly blessed because of the priesthood through those that hold it. It is very nearby and I have instant access to it through the men in my life- not just men in my household (of which there are precious few) but through my leaders. I don't even feel they always need to be physically present for me to access those blessings.

I just asked my husband whether he felt any superior to women because of his ability to hold the priesthood. His immediate answer was - Absolutely not! If I ever even think of it that way- guess what? poof! the power leaves. (Doctrine and Covenants 121:36-42) The power of the priesthood is only to be used in total righteousness and submission to God's will. Using the priesthood to lord over women (like even asssuming the males species is superior) is UN-righteous and the power is then null and void.

Edited by carlimac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello all it has been a while.

My wife is taking the missionary discussions for the first time since we met nearly 10 years ago. She actually seems interested in moving forward, but she has one hang up and it is a BIG on - in fact it is the same hang up I had (ok still have somewhat).

When we go to church together ANY time the priesthood is mentioned with regard to it being only male, she gets irritated. If she hears it enough, she leaves in a blind fury. We often have talks later where she lets out all of her emotion on it then calms down.

I think it is important to note that she doesn't find me contemptible or the members in this, but she feels this idea of men having the priesthood exclusively is fundamentally flawed. This wouldn't bother her so much except for the fact she WANTS to join the church now and WANTS to believe it, but is having a very difficult time rectifying affiliating herself with an entity (the church) who espouses a male-only priesthood.

I too had a very difficult time with this when I was learning about the church. I still have a difficult time with it today. The only thing that made me leave it alone was the Spirit finally confirming to me the truth of the church despite my opposition to this one area. I went forward with joining the church hoping it would one day make sense. To date it hasn't completely to me, but I accept it and move on now.

I wish I knew how to help her with this. She feels so strongly about it and I know it is only bothering her as much as it is because she wants to believe the church is true. Any ideas out there? Perhaps I'll see something I haven't tried or a perspective that might appeal to her.

Beside what is given, it is not common knowledge at this time, what lies in the highest state within the Celestial Kingdom regarding usage of the Priesthood with our beloved female companions. Interesting it is to note, Interalia, the term PRIEST and PRIESTESS found in the D&C, including various brethren of the past, talking about that this order – priest and priestess. Seeing the term, reveals that our companion in some way or form will have a role define.

Even in the church, as a sealed couple in the everlasting covenant [temple marriage], we share our priesthood authority with companions. One area of interest, when we give a priesthood special blessing upon a child in the family, she can stand in with you. Remember the temple covenants you made across each other at the alter – ye are one with GOD. You are not only physical sense but through the priesthood you are given.

Even the Garden of Eden, there was no true definition of Eve in the beginning but considered an Adam. They were both called Adams. It was afterward, that Adam declared who she was when the roles become evident.

As I can attest to you, Heavenly Mother is not a silence partner when SHE deals directly with HER spirit offspring in this mortality. There are moments, rare it is, SHE will make HER presence known to a selective child. This is special and very unique.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using the story dialog in the Book of Genesis, naming her Eve was not given in the beginning but was after the fall sited in chapter 3 verse 20.

3:20 And Adam called his wife’s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

You will also find in Genesis (see Chapter 2), regarding the 'first flesh' observed by Moses, who authorship identifies Adam was created before animals and Eve. Even the animals were created before Eve. However, this is another ensuring discussion in another thread regarding evolution and pre-adamic race.

18 ¶ And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

21 And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;

22 And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

Edited by Hemidakota
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moe, it looks like we posted at roughly the same time. I asked the very question you were making light of. "why would a woman want the responsibility of the priesthood?" (why wouldn't you want to take on an fulfill covenants that give you access to God's power and great blessings)

My response to that is - I don't feel any less access to God's power and blessings because of not holding the priesthood. I have prayer to access His power and am abundantly blessed because of the priesthood through those that hold it. It is very nearby and I have instant access to it through the men in my life- not just men in my household (of which there are precious few) but through my leaders. I don't even feel they always need to be physically present for me to access those blessings.

I just asked my husband whether he felt any superior to women because of his ability to hold the priesthood. His immediate answer was - Absolutely not! If I ever even think of it that way- guess what? poof! the power leaves. (Doctrine and Covenants 121:36-42) The power of the priesthood is only to be used in total righteousness and submission to God's will. Using the priesthood to lord over women (like even asssuming the males species is superior) is UN-righteous and the power is then null and void.

You seem to have skimmed over my statement: "The simple fact is, this is a really tough part of accepting the Church when you have even minor feminist attitudes."

I don't feel men are superior to women, nor vice versa. But the explanations you offer don't address the feminist concerns of equality very well (those being the societal imposition of gender roles).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beside what is given, it is not common knowledge at this time, what lies in the highest state within the Celestial Kingdom regarding usage of the Priesthood with our beloved female companions. Interesting it is to note, Interalia, the term PRIEST and PRIESTESS found in the D&C, including various brethren of the past, talking about that this order – priest and priestess. Seeing the term, reveals that our companion in some way or form will have a role define.

Even in the church, as a sealed couple in the everlasting covenant [temple marriage], we share our priesthood authority with companions. One area of interest, when we give a priesthood special blessing upon a child in the family, she can stand in with you. Remember the temple covenants you made across each other at the alter – ye are one with GOD. You are not only physical sense but through the priesthood you are given.

Using a strict interpretation, Hemi, all of the ordinances the Church teaches and authorizes priesthood holders to perform are tied to the Aaronic or Melchizedek priesthoods. Women are not authorized to hold either of these priesthoods, and so it would seem that they are not authorized to participate in those ordinances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Even the Garden of Eden, there was no true definition of Eve in the beginning but considered an Adam. They were both called Adams. It was afterward, that Adam declared who she was when the roles become evident"

Huh??

The word Adam means 'mankind' in Hebrew. When Moses wrote about Adam, one possible interpretation is that Adam is figurative of the human race. Likewise, Eve may have been portrayed as figurative of the race as well. So the people Adam and Eve could both be called 'adams'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Marty for adding the clarity. I failed to answered that portion.

Jolene E. Rockwood, in her article 'Eve's Role in the Creation and the Fall to Mortality', stated,

First, Adam and Eve were created symbolically as two equal parts of one unified whole and were united in all their actions. The word translated as man is the Hebrew 'adam, meaning "humankind," or man in a collective sense. 6 It is used throughout most of the story rather than the more specific Hebrew noun 'ish, meaning "one man," or "husband." The plural sense of ha-'adam is seen when it is used with "them," a plural pronoun, in "Let us make man in our image . . . and let them have dominion. . . . So God created man . . . male and female created he them." (Genesis 1:26-27.) 7

Many verses in the Book of Mormon indicate similar usage of adam and man as plural nouns. In 2 Nephi 9:6, man is used as a plural for the first couple, just as in the Hebrew version of Genesis: "And because man became fallen they were cut off from the presence of the Lord" (italics added).

Church authorities have also generally affirmed that the Genesis account describes the first couple as united in their actions in Eden and have recognized 'adam as a plural word representing both the man and the woman. For example, Erastus Snow, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve, said in 1878:

"Male and female created he them and called their name Adam, which in the original in which these scriptures were written by Moses, signifies 'the first man.' There was no effort at distinguishing between the one half and the other, and calling one man and the other woman. This was an after distinction, but the explanation of it is—one man, one being, and he called their name Adam." 8

Spencer W. Kimball made a similar scriptural gloss in 1976:

" 'And I, God, blessed them [Man here is always in the plural. It was plural from the beginning.] . . . ' (Moses 2:27-28.) . . .

" 'And I, God said unto mine Only Begotten, which was with me from the beginning: Let us make man [not a separate man, but a complete man, which is husband and wife] in our image . . . ' (Moses 2:26.) . . .

" 'Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam [Mr. and Mrs. Adam, I suppose, or Brother and Sister Adam], in the day when they were created.' (Gen. 5:12.)." 9

The unity of Adam and Eve is further clarified in the "rib" story where the Hebrew words translated help meet and rib shed light on the author's intent.

The Lord states, "It is not good that the man [collective] should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him." (Genesis 2:18.) This phrase "help meet" (Hebrew 'ezer kenegdo) is an interesting one. 'Ezer, which in this context is translated as "help" (meaning "helper"), has the unfortunate connotation in English of an assistant of lesser status, a subordinate, or inferior—for instance, a willing but not very competent child. 10 In Hebrew, however, the word describes an equal, if not a superior. The other usages of 'ezer in the Old Testament show that in most cases God is an 'ezer to human beings, 11 a fact which makes us question whether "helper" is an accurate translation in any of the instances it is used. A more accurate translation in this context would be "strength" or "power." Evidence indicates that the word 'ezer originally had two roots, each beginning with different guttural sounds. 12 Over time, the two gutturals were merged into one word, but the two meanings, "to save" and "to be strong," remained. Later, the meanings also merged into one word, "to help." Therefore, if we use the more archaic meanings of 'ezer, and translate 'ezer as either "savior" or "strength," we clarify not only the context we are discussing but also the other passages in the Old Testament where 'ezer is used, especially when 'ezer refers to God in his relationship with humankind.

'Ezer translated as "strength" or "power" also fits in nicely with the second word in the phrase, kenegdo, which has traditionally been translated as "meet for" or "fit for." Because kenegdo appears only this one time in the Old Testament, earlier translators had little upon which to base their translations. An important clue to the meaning of this word is found in its usage in Mishnaic Hebrew, where the root means "equal." Kenegdo, then, means "equal to" and the entire phrase 'ezer kenegdo means "power or strength equal to." Thus, when God makes ha-'adam into two beings, he creates woman, a power or strength equal to man.

Reference Notes:

6. Ha-'adam in the King James translation has been inconsistently translated, most often as a proper name, Adam. See Lussier, "'Adam in Genesis 1, 1-4,24": 137-39. For more extensive discussion of this and other issues relating to Hebrew usage, see Jolene Rockwood, "The Redemption of Eve," in Sisters in Spirit, ed. Maureen Ursenbach Beecher and Lavina Fielding Anderson (Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1987), pp. 3-367. Erastus Snow, 3 Mar. 1878, in Journal of Discourses, 19:269.

7. Erastus Snow, 3 Mar. 1878, in Journal of Discourses, 19:269.

8. Kimball, p. 71; bracketed interpolations his.

9. Phyllis Trible, God and the Rhetoric of Sexuality (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1978), p. 90; also John L. McKenzie, "The Literary Characteristics of Genesis 2-3," Theological Studies 15 (1954):559; Clarence J. Voz, Woman in Old Testament Worship (Amsterdam: N.V. Verenigde Drukkerijen Judels and Brinkman-Delft, n.d.), p. 16.

10. From Voz, Woman in Old Testament Worship, p. 16: "Besides Genesis 2:18, 20, this word ['ezer] appears in the Old Testament nineteen times. Of these it is used once in a question. (Ps. 121:1--the answer to the question is given in the following verse in which it is said that one's help comes from the Lord.) It is used three times of man as a help, (Is. 30:5; Ezk. 12:14; Dn. 11:34), but in each instance it is clear that man's help is not effectual. (Dn. 11:34 could refer to God); fifteen times it is used of God as the one who brings succor to the needy and desperate. Thus, if one excluded Gen. 2:18, 20, it could be said that only God gives effectual help ('ezer) to man. . . . Viewing woman as created to be a subordinate assistant to man finds no basis in the word ('ezer)." See also Jean Higgins, "Anastasius Sinaita and the Superiority of the Woman," Journal of Biblical Literature 97, No. 2 (1978):255: "Of forty-five occurrences of the word in the LXX. [septuagint], forty-two unmistakably refer to help from a stronger one."

11. R. David Freedman, "Woman, a Power Equal to Man," Biblical Archaeology Review 9 (January-February 1983):56-58.

12. A complete listing of usages is found in George V. Wigram, The Englishman's Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance of the Old Testament, 5th ed. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan Publishing House, 1980), pp. 1073-74; see also Walter Brueggemann, "Of the Same Flesh and Bone (Gn. 2, 23a)" Catholic Biblical Quarterly 32 (1970): 532-42. Only two other usages refer to a human being: Job 18:12, where it is translated as "side" ("destruction shall be ready at his side"), and Jeremiah 20:10, which has uncertain meaning ("all my familiars [friends] watched for my halting [KJV], "for my fall" [RSV], or, "at my side"). Sela' refers to the side of a hill in 2 Samuel 16:13, but every other usage gives construction details for the tabernacle or temple.

Edited by Hemidakota
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using the story dialog in the Book of Genesis, naming her Eve was not given in the beginning but was after the fall sited in chapter 3 verse 20.

3:20 And Adam called his wife’s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

You will also find in Genesis (see Chapter 2), regarding the 'first flesh' observed by Moses, who authorship identifies Adam was created before animals and Eve. Even the animals were created before Eve. However, this is another ensuring discussion in another thread regarding evolution and pre-adamic race.

18 ¶ And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

21 And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;

22 And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

Where do you get that there were two Adams and then one was made into an Eve? I think I prefer to go with the temple version of the creation. Animals, then one man was placed on the earth, then Eve. Adam only named her. He didn't define her role.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where do you get that there were two Adams and then one was made into an Eve? I think I prefer to go with the temple version of the creation. Animals, then one man was placed on the earth, then Eve. Adam only named her. He didn't define her role.

Did you see this post?

The word Adam means 'mankind' in Hebrew. When Moses wrote about Adam, one possible interpretation is that Adam is figurative of the human race. Likewise, Eve may have been portrayed as figurative of the race as well. So the people Adam and Eve could both be called 'adams'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where do you get that there were two Adams and then one was made into an Eve? I think I prefer to go with the temple version of the creation. Animals, then one man was placed on the earth, then Eve. Adam only named her. He didn't define her role.

You're taking it too literally. When he says there were two adams, there were two representations of the race. No one took one of those adams and turned it into Eve, one adam, the one we refer to as Adam, named the other adam Eve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You seem to have skimmed over my statement: "The simple fact is, this is a really tough part of accepting the Church when you have even minor feminist attitudes."

I don't feel men are superior to women, nor vice versa. But the explanations you offer don't address the feminist concerns of equality very well (those being the societal imposition of gender roles).

NO I didn't skim over that part. I caught it.

I would call myself feminist in that I think women should strive to develop the best in themselves. They should get equal pay for equal work and all that. If a woman isn't married and doesn't have a family (her family SHOULD be her top priority if she has the opportunity to have one) I think it's great if a woman can rise to great heights in the world. She should be able to do anything she aspires to that's righteous and productive and good. President and CEO of companies, President of nations, climb the highest mountain in the world, whatever. If she can do it- more power to her. But that's talking about the earthly world. In matters of the spirit and the Lord's kingdom, He has created specific responsibilites that are different for men and women. EQUAL but different. Men are not called upon to do certain women's duties and women aren't called upon to take on men's. But both genders are blessed equally by the work of the other. It's when women desire the power or whatever it is that they want from holding the priesthood, that they start going against God's plan. I don't know why God made it the way it is. I do know that His plan is there to bring to pass all the happiness and eternal riches possible to both genders in the world to come. So I'll just trust that He knew what He was doing when He set it up.

That's how I see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is priesthood? The authority to do certain things for God. That's it.

With the exception of presiding over quorums and a few organizations, and performing some ordinances, there is nothing different between men and women in the Church.

In the temple sealing, in fact, women DO hold the priesthood. They share the Patriarchal Priesthood with their husbands. Together, they both hold the keys to their exaltation as a couple and as a family. There is no greater priesthood authority than that.

I would imagine that in the next life, there will an even smaller dividing line between what men and women can do.

Priesthood blessings? I've known many women of faith who have healed more people with their prayers than many priesthood holders have with their hands.

Women can receive revelation just as well as men. It was the mission president's wife in Chile who received the late night revelation to prepare all the missionaries for the huge earthquake that was to come. The wise mission president listened to his wife tell of her revelation, and instantly put a plan into action.

Personally, while I understand the importance of priesthood authority, I think we tend to overrate it in many cases. The power of faith and personal revelation can bring to pass most things. Only in the instance of necessary ordinances is priesthood authority needed. Even then, in the temple, women are involved in performing the ordinances, so the issue narrows even further.

There is more than enough for all the members to do. It is more important to seek the Spirit and have it guide us in what the Lord expects for each one of us to do to bring to pass Zion in these last days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a question that helps people, but only if they're able to look at themselves in the mirror, and critically examine why they believe what they believe.

"Whadda you care?"

What, exactly is wrong, with a male only priesthood? From where I'm standing, all the honest answers to this question involve something along the lines of "because I know better than God what's best for us". If someone can look past all the blind fury and emotion and see the reality of their core gripe with the issue, it might help. Once coming to grips with the core gripe, one is left with the choice of accept God or reject Him.

LM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think part of the issue is that the views of equality can be quite different. I don't see the issue of equality meaning that both genders should hold the Priesthood. I think the idea that both genders have their specific roles both of equal importance is what explains it all to me.

It's just never been an issue for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a question that helps people, but only if they're able to look at themselves in the mirror, and critically examine why they believe what they believe.

"Whadda you care?"

What, exactly is wrong, with a male only priesthood? From where I'm standing, all the honest answers to this question involve something along the lines of "because I know better than God what's best for us". If someone can look past all the blind fury and emotion and see the reality of their core gripe with the issue, it might help. Once coming to grips with the core gripe, one is left with the choice of accept God or reject Him.

LM

A female can never be the president of the church regardless of her spirituality or any other earthly or spiritual trait because of her sex. An unrighteous male cannot be the president of the church either. Obviously these two are not equivalent, but it feels unfair that a righteous woman can never be called to such.

My wife honestly doesn't desire any authority, in fact she is more than happy with me fulfilling the "head of household" role in our home, but she resents the principled take that a female cannot, even if she desired it, hold the priesthood or any priesthood offices.

I ultimately don't understand it and will try not to justify the church for it - I'll just try to focus on the things that do make sense to me and how to receive personal revelation. Maybe this stumbling block can be overcome but she feel so strongly about it it's going to take a lot of humility on her part - humility and truly blind faith, something neither of us are good at (the blind faith part).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I read this statement, I do not understand the logic of the posting but there is more to the PRIESTHOOD ordination than just some authoritated calling of GOD. Even GOD has the same priesthood and for what end? Why would HE need it? Adding here a couple of ponderous questioning that a priesthood needs to seek for themselves the divine answer in understanding why it is beyond just a mere calling.

Interalia, we learn line-upon-line, precept-upon-precept; until we receive the perfect Day (see D&C 93). It is not expected of you to understand everything at once but may take not only a lifetime but even into the eternal ties. She may need time to receive an answer from GOD that will humble her about the need of the priesthood. I would start on a dark clear night by gazing up into the night sky. All of which is controlled by our FATHER and by which power is it controlled by? The Priesthood! I just marvel over this view aspect. .Just give her space and be patience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share