Sunday, December 1, 2013

A thought on women and the priesthood

I don't claim to have any real special insight into this question that has been bouncing around social media and the news recently, not so much since the last general conference but still recently. The question of whether women can/will/should be ordained to the priesthood isn't one I've bothered to waste much time fretting about. I really don't care much. My personal feelings have always been that it's not something that will happen, but I'm fine with that. I don't, in any sense, feel inferior to or diminished by the brothers with the authority of the priesthood because I don't have it. The blessings of the priesthood are available to all through those who hold the authority and through the covenants we make with God, especially through the temple. Women have other things to be concerned about without rushing about being bishops and giving blessings. But, I said it's not something I've thought much about and here I am writing a whole blog post about it. Why? It starts with a talk, then some scriptures.

Resources:
One day a while back I was listening to Sis. Stephen's talk while I got ready for school. I wasn't listening for any special reason, or looking for any particular answers I just had it on while I did my hair. Sis. Stephens was talking about covenants and what it means to be a covenant keeper. I don't know what she said, but something just popped into my head as I listened. "The priesthood is a covenant. Men are proxy ordained in the temple for the dead." or something to that affect. As I said, the question of women and the priesthood had never much bothered me, except all the fuss women were raising over nothing and looking like faithless idiots (in my opinion) while they were at it. (I mean, really, you think trying to get into priesthood session is a good idea? Just watch it online or read it, no big deal people. Anyway...) But here was this truth stuck into my thoughts as I listened to an unrelated talk (for a related talk, listen to Sis. Stephen's talk in the Sunday morning general conference meeting.) on a topic I'm not worried about. But like most thoughts like this one it didn't just come and go but lingered over the next few days. I thought more about it during my scripture study and decided to look up the scripture containing the well known to Mormons phrase "the oath and covenant of the priesthood". Enter Doctrine and Covenants 84: 33-40.

I'll interject here a definition, with a very appropriate example sentence, courtesy of Google.
Oath:
noun
noun: oath; plural noun: oaths
1.
a solemn promise, often invoking a divine witness, regarding one's future action or behavior.
"they took an oath of allegiance to the king"
synonyms:vow, pledge, sworn statement, promise, avowal, affirmation, word, word of honor, bond, guarantee  

So, when men are ordained to the priesthood they make an oath, one could say, of allegiance to the King, our Savior, and make a covenant with him. Covenants in the LDS faith are not a small thing. They are the way back to heaven. They are the way Heavenly Father has designed for us to obtain certain blessings through obedience and his grace. On lds.org we find this about ordinances
"In the Church, an ordinance is a sacred, formal act performed by the authority of the priesthood. Some ordinances are essential to our exaltation. These ordinances are called saving ordinances. They include baptism, confirmation, ordination to the Melchizedek Priesthood (for men), the temple endowment, and the marriage sealing."
Note, this is officially published by the church information. Ordination to the Melchizedek Priesthood is a saving ordinance for men. So, here comes the logic and reasoning:
If it's an essential thing for men to make this covenant by receiving the priesthood, thus why it's done in temples for deceased brethren, doesn't it make sense that if women were to receive the priesthood it would also be an essential, saving ordinance like it is for the guys? Does it make sense that Heavenly Father would set the work of family history and temple work going for almost 2 centuries then make a dramatic switch in what women need to be exalted? No, not really. Why would he have all the temple work done for these people then make us go back and tack on one more thing afterwords? And this wouldn't just be for people who died without the gospel, we're talking any woman who's lived in this dispensation at least. And since there's no indication of women ever having been given the priesthood in the past we're probably looking at every woman who's ever lived. Think of that. If God didn't give the priesthood to Eve when she and Adam were kickin it on the earth, why would he make us go back and give it to her millennia afterwords? Seems kinda silly when you think about it.
I feel like someone out there might say something about  making receiving the priesthood for women an optional thing, like going on a mission. Nope. See, going on a mission is an optional thing for women precisely because we do not hold the priesthood and being a full time missionary (or doing your best to do so) is a priesthood duty/obligation. So, if women were to receive the priesthood it would be just as necessary as the other ordinances we already participate in such as baptism and the endowment.That would sure put a lot of women to work in the temple! But ask yourself, does this sound like the plan of an all knowing, ultimately wise god who knows the end from the beginning and has a perfect plan for our salvation? No, not really. It sounds like craziness. "Um, I guess now this group can have this particular ordinance after millions of years of not having it, and hundreds of years of temple work not including it." It's chaos and confusion and not like the Heavenly Father I believe in.
Now, theoretically, could it happen? Sure. There's no obvious biological, spiritual, or social reason why women couldn't have the priesthood in that sense. The simple fact is though that it's Christ's church and we do things his way. If Christ says "No, that's not how it's done" that should be enough for us. And when you think about it, either way it does not help nor hinder our ability to follow God's plan and obtain exaltation. I can return to Heavenly Father's presence just fine without it, so why petition and question and fret about it? I seem to remember something in the scriptures about not seeking to council the Lord. Let him do his work, and focus on following Him and doing your own work. You can petition, beg, demand, plead, and pray for something but unless it's part of His plan it's not going to change and you're just going to be frustrated and upset. Better plan, pray for the prophets. Pray that they'll be guided and directed in these times of turmoil. Then pray for faith to follow their direction.

Moving on, a few more thoughts on the topic before I finish this extremely long entry-
As you keep reading D&C 84 you get to 54-58, 61-62. I feel like this pertains precisely to our present day and this situation. "And your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief, and because you have treated lightly the things you have received...not only to say, but to do according to that which I have written—  That they may bring forth fruit meet for their Father’s kingdom..." What is it they have forgotten that they have received? What is it they must do? What is the fruit that they must bring forth? I would suggest that it is the gift of the Relief Society. The actions of Visiting Teaching. The fruit of missionary labors. These are wonderful blessings that do not require the priesthood authority to participate in. The Relief Society is a miracle and a blessing. Why would anyone want to substitute Elder's Quorum for Relief Society? Visiting Teaching is a huge responsibility, as are the general RS goals of helping the poor and needy in spiritual and in temporal needs. Why would the Lord lay on us more requirements and duties if we are not first doing the ones we have been given? And why would he remove the wonderful program of Relief Society where it fills such a needed roll that the Priesthood organization doesn't necessarily fill in the same way? We are all under the same commandment to preach the gospel to every nation, tongue, and people. We can do that at any age, no matter our race, gender, marital status, or length of membership in the church. When it comes down to the essentials it doesn't matter if you have the priesthood or not, you can do the Lord's work just the same. I would be really curious to talk to some of these women who are pushing so hard for this change about the Relief Society. Do they love it? Do they know it's deep history? Do they understand it's purpose along side the organization of the priesthood in the church?


I don't mean to sound rude or antagonistic towards those who are pushing for this change. I just cannot comprehend their standpoint in the light of the scriptures and modern revelation. I believe that we are all sons and daughters of a loving Heavenly Father. He created a plan that would allow us to become as he is, perfect and perfectly happy. He organized the plan of salvation, perfectly. He sent his perfect Son to atone for our illnesses, pains, afflictions, temptations, trials, death, and sins. (Alma 7:11-13) He restored the gospel to the earth through a living prophet, and continues to guide it through his chosen servants.   
 8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord.
 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. -Isaiah 55
I believe that Christ is the head of his church. He has got it under control and will lead it in the correct path until the end of time. Our duty is to be obedient and do His work in spreading the gospel. Who's got time for standing in line to not get into meetings we're not invited to? We've got work to do. Best get crackin!