Priesthood question


sister_in_faith
 Share

Recommended Posts

I am a female convert to the church, and admittedly I don't fully understand the priesthood. I have some questions I would like to ask, I hope you guys will indulge me.

I am aware that there is some controversy over women not being able to hold the priesthood. I guess I don't really care one way or the other, so I support whatever the church decides, but I do want to know...

What is it about women that makes them 'unfit' to hold the priesthood? I'm not really sure how to word the question without it coming off wrong, let me try again... What is it about the priesthood that makes it something that a woman should not be a part of?

I hope you guys understand the general question... I just want to know why the priesthood is a male only thing, what about it makes it a male only thing?

I don't have an agenda in asking, I'm genuienly curious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a female convert to the church, and admittedly I don't fully understand the priesthood. I have some questions I would like to ask, I hope you guys will indulge me.

I am aware that there is some controversy over women not being able to hold the priesthood.

There is no controversy about the topic among those who enjoy the Spirit. There may be various opinions, but controversy exists only among those who deny the Spirit and try to change doctrines they don't like by attempting to rally grassroots support, as if administrative decisions in the kingdom of God were an initiative to be passed by popular vote.

What is it about women that makes them 'unfit' to hold the priesthood? I'm not really sure how to word the question without it coming off wrong, let me try again... What is it about the priesthood that makes it something that a woman should not be a part of?

Women are indeed a part of the Priesthood. The highest order of the Priesthood that has been revealed to us is the New and Everlasting Covenant (sometimes casually called "temple marriage" or "eternal marriage"), and that order is entered only by a man and a woman jointly. The wife is as much a part of that supernal order as the husband, even though she does not "hold" the Priesthood in the same sense her husband does.

I do not agree with those who equate Priesthood with motherhood, but I do think it's instructive to ask a somewhat parallel question to yours: "What is it about men that makes them 'unfit' to be mothers?" Of course, the question itself is faulty. Men are not 'unfit' to be mothers; rather, they simply are not the right type to be mothers. In a similar sense, women are not 'unfit' to hold the Priesthood; rather, Priesthood is held by men.

I hope you guys understand the general question... I just want to know why the priesthood is a male only thing, what about it makes it a male only thing?

The safest and most obvious answer is: Because that is how God has ordained it. Any other explanation, from the idea that men are inherently superior over women (and thus hold the Priesthood because of that innate superiority) to the idea that men are inherently inferior to women (and thus hold the Priesthood to make up for that innate deficiency), is pure speculation and should be ignored.

Hope that helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've wondered about this question too and while I do not know how doctrinal my opinions are, I'll share them with you nonetheless.

Question: What is it about men that makes them 'unfit' to bear children? Why is bearing children only a female thing?

Are you aware that their may be some controversy over men not being able to bear children?

Think of it! What other labor is in of itself so designed and full of opportunities to sanctify yourself than those in bearing and rearing children?

Opportunities to express charity, patience, long suffering?

What have you left us men eh? What work can we perform that will likewise act as a refining fire to distill out of us those divine qualities you perfect through bearing and raising children?

Why, it is the priesthood!

And that's not the end of the story either. It seems apparent to me that we need more time to achieve the same results you do through bearing and rearing children. Hence they start men on the priesthood path at the age of 12!

Likewise as to how bearing and rearing children can be considered a right and a responsibility, so too with the priesthood.

Think of your Bishop as an example. Think of all the burdens he has to bear in hearing about the sins and suffering from sins that people he loves are going through. The burden of having to council and guide them according to the mind and will of God. The anguish he endures in seeing people he loves embrace sin and leave the church?

Well, these are a few of my thoughts at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a female convert to the church, and admittedly I don't fully understand the priesthood. I have some questions I would like to ask, I hope you guys will indulge me.

I am aware that there is some controversy over women not being able to hold the priesthood. I guess I don't really care one way or the other, so I support whatever the church decides, but I do want to know...

What is it about women that makes them 'unfit' to hold the priesthood? I'm not really sure how to word the question without it coming off wrong, let me try again... What is it about the priesthood that makes it something that a woman should not be a part of?

I hope you guys understand the general question... I just want to know why the priesthood is a male only thing, what about it makes it a male only thing?

I don't have an agenda in asking, I'm genuienly curious.

There is lots of speculation but very little actual revelation. I personally have no clue. My wife could serve in any calling I have ever had and do a better job of it. Perhaps the reason has nothing to do with who if most fit for it.

However, priesthood is a calling of service. I have observed some differences between most women and most men - for example most men seen to need assignments while most women seem to be more amenable to volunteer.

It is my understanding that as exalted beings in the Celestial Kingdom that a man and a woman will hold all responsibilities as unequal equals. In other words it will be the covenant that unites them that creates a whole greater than the sum of the parts.

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen lots of answers to this question - and it's asked quite often.

Basically, it has absolutely nothing to do with worthiness or ability. Women are not lesser than men in any sense at all.

The answer that made the most sense to me, is that Priesthood is all about serving others. There is no such thing as a priesthood holder laying his hands on his own head and giving himself a blessing, or ordaining himself to an office, etc. If it does not bless someone other than the person doing it, then it isn't a priesthood function. Women tend to have vast natural capacities to bless others in a multitude of ways. Men tend to need guidance, direction, authority, and process. We're natural abusers of power, so the formal organization of ordaining and office-assuming and whatnot helps keep us on track.

If that answer doesn't really float your boat, there are plenty others. A quick search of LDS.org gives us:

Women and the Priesthood

Blessings of the Priesthood for All: An Inseparable Connection with the Priesthood

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amen Traveler! My wife far surpasses me in so many ways.

A personal testimony of why men are to hold the priesthood is it is an extra motivation to live worthily and responsibly. God doesn't usually call the smartest, wisest people but weak, unwise people (men in a lot of ways) and through the calling, he makes them strong.

In a way I see it as a means to strengthen men and help keep us focused on what's important, something that is typically less of a problem in women.

I understand this is in no way a proper answer or a doctrinal one to the question but just my rationalization. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

s_i_f, I wrote: "Any other explanation, from the idea that men are inherently superior over women (and thus hold the Priesthood because of that innate superiority) to the idea that men are inherently inferior to women (and thus hold the Priesthood to make up for that innate deficiency), is pure speculation and should be ignored."

Unsurprisingly, the next four responses (all men) proved my point:

It seems apparent to me that we [men] need more time to achieve the same results you [women] do through bearing and rearing children. Hence they start men on the priesthood path at the age of 12!

I have observed some differences between most women and most men - for example most men seen to need assignments while most women seem to be more amenable to volunteer.

Women tend to have vast natural capacities to bless others in a multitude of ways. Men tend to need guidance, direction, authority, and process. We're natural abusers of power

A personal testimony of why men are to hold the priesthood is it is an extra motivation to live worthily and responsibly. God doesn't usually call the smartest, wisest people but weak, unwise people (men in a lot of ways)

Consider: Jesus Christ himself held the Priesthood. Is it because the Lord was deficient and immature, and needed it to learn how to serve?

Consider: During his mortal tenure, Jesus ordained not one woman to the Priesthood. Not one. Are we truly to assume that there were no women of his acquaintance who were selfish or petty or in need of guidance, direction, authority, and process? No women who were natural abusers of power? No women who were weak and unwise?

s_i_f, as you begin to reject the idea that women do not hold the Priesthood because they are somehow inferior to men, please do not accept the equally false (and equally poisonous) lie that men do hold the Priesthood because they are somehow inferior to women. Reject all such ideas. Such a belief will not help you in any way, now or in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thought:

My understanding is that priesthood entails a solemn obligation to minister to others regardless of one's own personal circumstances. In times past, men were called on missions halfway around the world with no prior notice and were expected to leave in a matter of weeks, even though their financial or family circumstances were very grave indeed (e.g. Brigham Young/Heber Kimball; Levi Savage). There's no theological reason that that couldn't start happening again.

I am uncomfortable equating the priesthood with motherhood per se, but the fact remains that if both mother and father have the same priesthood obligations (ranging from missionary service to home teaching to 2-AM blessings halfway across town) then there would be some severe disruption in the domestic sphere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, I don't think I wrote my OP very well. I don't think that women are inferior to men, and I don't think men are inferior to women. We are just different. I want to understand what, in our differences make men candidates to be p'hood holders and women not. There has GOT to be a difference that we can point to, and say, THAT is why. I want to know what that is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thought:

My understanding is that priesthood entails a solemn obligation to minister to others regardless of one's own personal circumstances. In times past, men were called on missions halfway around the world with no prior notice and were expected to leave in a matter of weeks, even though their financial or family circumstances were very grave indeed (e.g. Brigham Young/Heber Kimball; Levi Savage). There's no theological reason that that couldn't start happening again.

I am uncomfortable equating the priesthood with motherhood per se, but the fact remains that if both mother and father have the same priesthood obligations (ranging from missionary service to home teaching to 2-AM blessings halfway across town) then there would be some severe disruption in the domestic sphere.

Thank you, I think you may have really hit on something here. I could totally see how if women held the priesthood it could pull them away from family, something that would not be good at all. Men and women have different roles in society, and perhaps women need to focus on their other roles, and not be distracted by priesthood duties.

Good thought!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

President Franklin D. Richards:

I ask any and everybody present who have received their endowments, whether he be a brother Apostle, Bishop, High Priest, Elder, or whatever office he may hold in the Church, "What blessings did you receive, what ordinance, what power, intelligence, sanctification or grace did you receive that your wife did not partake of with you?" I will answer, that there was one thing that our wives were not made special partakers of, and that was the ordination to the various orders of the priesthood which were conferred upon us. Aside from that, our sisters share with us any and all of the ordinances of the holy anointing, endowments, sealings, sanctifications and blessings that we have been made partakers of.

Now, I ask you: Is it possible that we have the holy priesthood and our wives have none of it? Do you not see, by what I have read, that Joseph desired to confer these keys of power upon them in connection with their husbands? I hold that a faithful wife has certain blessings, powers and rights, and is made partaker of certain gifts and blessings and promises with her husband, which she cannot be deprived of, EXCEPT BY TRANSGRESSION of the holy order of God. They shall enjoy what God said they should. And these signs shall follow them if they believe.

(Brian H. Stuy, ed., Collected Discourses, 5 vols. [burbank, Calif., and Woodland Hills, Ut.: B.H.S. Publishing, 1987-1992], 5: [19 July 1888]).

"In the restored Church of Jesus Christ the Holy Priesthood is conferred, as an individual bestowal, upon men only, and this in accordance with Divine requirement. It is not given to woman to exercise the authority of the Priesthood independently; nevertheless, in the sacred endowments associated with the ordinances pertaining to the House of the Lord, woman shares with man the blessings of the Priesthood. When the frailities and imperfections of mortality are left behind, in the glorified state of the blessed hereafter, husband and wife will administer in their respective stations, seeing and understanding alike, and cooperating to the full in the government of their family kingdom.

"Then shall woman be recompensed in rich measure for all the injustice that womanhood has endured in mortality. Then shall woman reign by Divine right, a queen in the resplendent realm of her glorified state, even as exalted man shall stand, priest and king unto the Most High God. Mortal eye cannot see nor mind comprehend the beauty, glory, and majesty of the righteous woman made perfect in the celestial kingdom of God."James E. Talmage, "The Eternity of Sex", Young Woman's Journal, Oct. 1914: 602-3 page 138:

If you were spirit children of your heavenly Parents before you came on this earth, then if you become a resurrected being, and you have a companion who is a resurrected being, and you have children, won't you, then, be in the same situation that your heavenly Parents now are in? Then wouldn't your children be spirit children? Would not the offspring of resurrected parents always be spirits as we were spirits, offspring of resurrected parents before we came on this earth? Then you would have spirit children who would be entitled to an earth to go to, and it would be their heavenly father who would be responsible to provide an earth for them. And so through the power of the priesthood the man has the opportunity of obtaining that degree of perfection by which he may create worlds and populate them with his own offspring. That is why we say the woman does not hold the priesthood but she is entitled to all the blessings of the priesthood through her husband. He, of course, in turn, cannot realize the fulness of the blessings of the priesthood without a wife. So it works both ways-neither without the other. The ultimate goal, the purpose of creating this earth was that of establishing families and homes of our own for all eternity and becoming gods as our heavenly Parents are.

(Elder Eldred G. Smith, 10 March 1964, BYU Speeches of the Year, 4–7)

Edited by livy111us
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There has GOT to be a difference that we can point to, and say, THAT is why.

While I agree there is a non-arbitrary reason for men holding the priesthood it's not necessarily something we, in this life, will be able to point to and say, "Aha!". I think you are falling into the same trap as those who look to tannins and caffeine as reasons why tea and coffee are prohibited by the Word of Wisdom, in their effort for that "aha!" they overlook that we (speaking collectively of the Church) are not necessarily given the "aha!".

Edited by Dravin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being different isnt the same as being inferior. I do agree with a lot of the points made, although it is true they are speculation, except that neither women, nor men are inferior to the other because of weaknesses. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say they are different in their strengths. There is no denying that the ability to give birth, even if it is just a theoretical genetic thing and not a reality, as in sterile women, gives women a different perspective than men have. We have to have a different one for our own survival and safely, alone.

Why its more appropriate for men to have the priesthood probably relates to those strengths in some way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

s_i_f, I wrote: "Any other explanation, from the idea that men are inherently superior over women (and thus hold the Priesthood because of that innate superiority) to the idea that men are inherently inferior to women (and thus hold the Priesthood to make up for that innate deficiency), is pure speculation and should be ignored."

Unsurprisingly, the next four responses (all men) proved my point:

Consider: Jesus Christ himself held the Priesthood. Is it because the Lord was deficient and immature, and needed it to learn how to serve?

Consider: During his mortal tenure, Jesus ordained not one woman to the Priesthood. Not one. Are we truly to assume that there were no women of his acquaintance who were selfish or petty or in need of guidance, direction, authority, and process? No women who were natural abusers of power? No women who were weak and unwise?

s_i_f, as you begin to reject the idea that women do not hold the Priesthood because they are somehow inferior to men, please do not accept the equally false (and equally poisonous) lie that men do hold the Priesthood because they are somehow inferior to women. Reject all such ideas. Such a belief will not help you in any way, now or in the future.

Vort,

I do not recall that you and I have discussed much in the past. Perhaps we have; I have an excellent memory - it is just short. I thought I would comment on your post - I do not know that we disagree. Just thought to comment.

We are trained to use certain kinds of logical principles and to sometimes apply them where they do really apply. For example we often think in terms of the mathematical trichotomy principle. This principle assumes that if two things are not equal one is greater than the other or vice versa. It is my observation - and I think this to be most obvious - that men and women are not equal. One of the mathematical definitions of equal is that one can be substituted for the other without changing anything. (I guess some try to do that but I do not believe it can be empirically demonstrated.) At the same time, I do not see at all that one can be shown to be greater than the other. In fact it appears to me that the truth is that both the man and the women are less than what they would be with the other.

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is it about the priesthood that makes it something that a woman should not be a part of?

You can get a glimpse of the answer by determining why Heavenly Father takes care of all things physical, while we can assume Heavenly Mother's role is largely spiritual.

The "down to the nitty-gritty" answer is that Jesus had to be born of an immortal Father and mortal mother in order to perform the blood atonement.

Did you catch that? Read it again and think about it.

Had Christ been born of mortal father and an immortal mother, He would have been born immortal, like His mother. He would not have been able to perform the atonement because He would not have been born with blood. This is an eternal truth and drives the very plan itself and the eternal roles of males and females.

It's certainly not that one is more important than the other, it's simple logic.

Since, for the above reason, it is required that "men" lead things physical or earthly, then naturally they hold the Priesthood. Because as I said, but will word it differently, if women had the divine roll of the physical or earthy (appearing to mortal man and revealing God's will), then a mortal Savior could not be born and children could not be redeemed.

This is deep, and might take a very long time for me to explain how I arrived at this. But, I'm sure those of you with ears to hear will hear it.

Edited by Justice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can get a glimpse of the answer by determining why Heavenly Father takes care of all things physical, while we can assume Heavenly Mother's role is largely spiritual.

Sorry, Justice. This is simply false. D&C 29:34 reads:

Wherefore, verily I say unto you that all things unto me are spiritual, and not at any time have I given unto you a law which was temporal; neither any man, nor the children of men; neither Adam, your father, whom I created.

God is a God of spirit, and we must worship him in Spirit and in truth (John 4:24).

As for "heavenly Mother", besides the bare fact that she exists, we know nothing at all about her. Nothing. At. All. Without any doubt whatsoever, this is by design. On this topic, my firm conviction is that speculation is most unwise.

The "down to the nitty-gritty" answer is that Jesus had to be born of an immortal Father and mortal mother in order to perform the blood atonement.

Did you catch that? Read it again and think about it.

Had Christ been born of mortal father and an immortal mother, He would have been born immortal, like His mother. He would not have been able to perform the atonement because He would not have been born with blood. This is an eternal truth and drives the very plan itself and the eternal roles of males and females.

This is no type of gospel doctrine. It is pure, unadulterated speculation, and one with a slight startrekkian odor to it. You are welcome to such space doctrine, if you choose to pursue it, but please do not mistake it for revealed truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are trained to use certain kinds of logical principles and to sometimes apply them where they do really apply. For example we often think in terms of the mathematical trichotomy principle. This principle assumes that if two things are not equal one is greater than the other or vice versa. It is my observation - and I think this to be most obvious - that men and women are not equal. One of the mathematical definitions of equal is that one can be substituted for the other without changing anything. (I guess some try to do that but I do not believe it can be empirically demonstrated.) At the same time, I do not see at all that one can be shown to be greater than the other. In fact it appears to me that the truth is that both the man and the women are less than what they would be with the other.

For what it's worth, I agree with everything you wrote above (except for the "trichotomy principle", which I have never heard of -- but I agree with the logic of the explanation you provide).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can get a glimpse of the answer by determining why Heavenly Father takes care of all things physical, while we can assume Heavenly Mother's role is largely spiritual.

The "down to the nitty-gritty" answer is that Jesus had to be born of an immortal Father and mortal mother in order to perform the blood atonement.

Did you catch that? Read it again and think about it.

Had Christ been born of mortal father and an immortal mother, He would have been born immortal, like His mother. He would not have been able to perform the atonement because He would not have been born with blood. This is an eternal truth and drives the very plan itself and the eternal roles of males and females.

It's certainly not that one is more important than the other, it's simple logic.

Since, for the above reason, it is required that "men" lead things physical or earthly, then naturally they hold the Priesthood. Because as I said, but will word it differently, if women had the divine roll of the physical or earthy (appearing to mortal man and revealing God's will), then a mortal Savior could not be born and children could not be redeemed.

This is deep, and might take a very long time for me to explain how I arrived at this. But, I'm sure those of you with ears to hear will hear it.

THANK you for this... I KNEW there was more to it, but couldn't quite put my finger on how to get it out, probably why I couldn't figure out how to ask the question in my head. This is very interesting, and gives me a lot to mull over. Thank you Justice!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THANK you for this... I KNEW there was more to it, but couldn't quite put my finger on how to get it out, probably why I couldn't figure out how to ask the question in my head. This is very interesting, and gives me a lot to mull over. Thank you Justice!!!

You may have enjoyed Justice's explanation, but as I pointed out, it is not doctrinally sound. I think Dravin's response gave the most correct answer yet to what you're asking, unsatisfying though you may have found it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, I don't think I wrote my OP very well. I don't think that women are inferior to men, and I don't think men are inferior to women. We are just different. I want to understand what, in our differences make men candidates to be p'hood holders and women not. There has GOT to be a difference that we can point to, and say, THAT is why. I want to know what that is.

I haven't read any other posts yet in order to respond without influence, just from my own personal perspective on the matter. Then I'll go back and read the wisdom of others.

Ideally man and woman make a union together. Each is a half of that union, which, when combined as the Lord intends, enable them to be one. They twain shall be one flesh.

Each has special gifts, attributes, and responsibilities which they combine in order to function as one. Together they are typically given posterity of God, and together have stewardship of that posterity.

One of the responsibilities God has placed upon the man's shoulders is that he preside over that posterity to provide for, protect, and bless them, so God grants unto him priesthood power and authority in order that he may act in that responsibility.

Woman, as half of that union shares in that power and in the blessings that come of it, but she has been given, and has upon her shoulders, the special responsibility of carrying, bearing, and nurturing the children that come of that union.

So with that, and since it is the man who has been given the responsibility to preside and act in the name of God in his duties as man, husband, and father, it is man God ordains to His priesthood power, that he may do so, that his wife and children may be blessed through him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Vort. IMO Dravin had the most correct answer. Women holding the priesthood is not doctrinal nor is there any doctrinal ideology (ie. found in the scriptures or otherwise voted on and accepted as such by the body of the church) that explains why women do not hold the priesthood. Perhaps some interesting opinions but no definitive answer.

As to what the priesthood is,... well, that may be another thread but consider men are ordainted to "the priesthood after the Order of the Son of God" as opposed to the idea that Lucifer has priesthoods (plural). :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mormonmusic

There are times when I see women having significant power to bless others, even without the priesthood. One man mentioned that he saw nothing wrong with a woman laying her hands on a person's head, and giving a prayer of faith. Don't invoke the priesthood -- or claim to be doing it by authority, but do it as a prayer of faith from a righteous woman. There are numerous examples where God answers the prayers of people who have no priesthood, with the scriptures replete with promises of blessings and answered prayers.

Also, when a priesthood holder gives a blessing and its not consistent with the will of God, then the blessing doesn't work anyway....it follows that a righteous woman who speaks while in the Spirit could have at least as much efficacy as a man with the priesthood.

The lead character in Legacy (a church sponsored movie) did this exact thing to heal an ox that had fallen - she laid her hands on it and told it to get up and walk -- and it did. So, I see the power to bless others as not so much being embedded in the priesthood as in the spirituality of the person trying to invoke God to intervene.

Edited by mormonmusic
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