The latest viral-nova mormon essay to hit the internets is about how a woman taught primary children how priesthood blesses our lives. I believe it is a valiant attempt to wrestle with the complicated and contradictory messages that we have always been given about women and the priesthood. It is a worthwhile endeavor, and I don’t want to discourage people [0] from the hard work it takes to be a part of the conversation. That’s really what I think is needed, a conversation. [1]
I do want to point out how fast the target is moving on our discourse on women and the priesthood. In 2013 Sheri Dew published the book Women and the Priesthood. I summarized her chapter on “Understanding The Keys, Authority, and Power of the Priesthood” below to the best of my ability:
Only certain priesthood holders hold certain keys in the Church. Keys authorize the ordinances and the authority required to perform the ordinances, those who receive ordinances have priesthood power available to them. Men with keys can give some women authority; sister missionaries and women in the temple have been given authority to perform works by those with keys. After going to the temple, women have direct access to priesthood power. Authority and priesthood are two different things, women have only been given divine authority.
fast forward a few months later and Elder Oaks steps up to the plate and throws us a curve ball of further light and understanding:
“Priesthood keys direct women as well as men, and priesthood ordinances and priesthood authority pertain to women as well as men… We are not accustomed to speaking of women having the authority of the priesthood in their Church callings, but what other authority can it be? [2]
and a few months later Elder Ballard addresses Education Week:
“When men and women go to the temple, they are both endowed with the same power, which by definition is priesthood power.”
Within a span of less than 12 months we have the following teachings being given, which are markedly different from what I ever heard growing up:
Dew: women only have “access” to priesthood power and only “divine” authority
Oaks: women have priesthood authority
Ballard: women are endowed with priesthood power
I think we should be forgiven of the fact that for the time being, confusion reigns when we talk about women and the priesthood. [3] Listen I’m no Jonathan Stapley, Linda K. Newell, Fiona Givens, or Maxine Hanks. I have no historical/academic cred in this area. But I do want to be a part of the conversation, so I’d like to respond to Heather from Women in the Scriptures [4] based on my own study, prayer, and life experiences.
From her blog she described being in the CTR7 class and presenting the following:
“The priesthood is God’s power, and it is all around you. It is the power that makes the sun shine, the power that makes flowers grow, rain to fall, gravity to work; it is the power that helps you learn and helps you know that things are true or not true, it is the power that answers prayers and makes miracles happen. It is the most powerful power in the entire world and God gives it to both boys and girls. “
I guess I can understand linking the marvelous acts of nature and laws of science to priesthood power. When I’m in nature I regularly marvel over the amazing creative powers of my Heavenly Father and Mother. I feel very close to them when I’m outside in nature. I believe the creative keys of priesthood power were used to organize matter in the universe to function according to already existing laws that even God can’t break. Nature should remind us of God’s love for us, but I’m drawing the line with acts of nature being priesthood power in action. If priesthood power becomes everything around us all of a sudden it becomes nothing at the same time.
She also went on to list other ways girls have priesthood power: going on missions (yay!), growing babies (nay!), and magnifying callings as Primary President (yay!). I could have predicted the growing babies=priesthood philosophy line would come up here. Listen, I am in awe of the miracle of birth and motherhood more than you know. My daughter was born from a frozen oocyte during an IVF cycle, at the time less than 100 babies in the history of the world had ever been created from a frozen oocyte. My little IVF baby is literally one in a billion. Every day of pregnancy was a marvel for me, but in no way was I exercising priesthood power; I was witnessing the natural miracle of birth.
If snowstorms and fetuses are priesthood power then are the snow machine operators at Jackson Hole and horses birthing foals exercising priesthood power? I suppose even 15 year-old pregnant teenagers use priesthood power while my infertility leaves me hanging. If every wonder of nature is priesthood power than I feel like Oprah, “You have priesthood power and you have priesthood power! Everybody gets priesthood power!!!”
But isn’t the thing that makes our Church the “one true church”; the fact that we have the restored priesthood? Everyone can’t have something that was absent from the world for millennia. I truly believe God is our Father, Christ is our Savior, and Joseph reestablished the Gospel on the earth with the restoration of the priesthood. I believe, using the quotes from our leaders above as citations, that priesthood power is exercised through making and keeping covenants. If you want to teach children about priesthood power they use, teach them that the baptismal covenant they make enables them to repent and be made clean every week during the sacrament. Teach them when they enter the temples to make covenants they are endowed (receive the gift) with priesthood power. I even don’t mind if you teach them that pioneer women anointed, healed, and blessed by laying on of hands. Teach them that there is so much more to be revealed, that there is so much we don’t understand. But please don’t teach my children things as doctrine that have not been revealed. [5]
[0] Ergo, trying to keep my snark to a minimum.
[1] Well that, and further revelation – okay so what we really need is further revelation.
[2] You should have seen my end-zone celebration dance as I celebrated the death knell Oaks delivered on Sis. Dew’s assertion that women = divine authority and men = priesthood authority.
[3] Let’s be honest, confusion has always reigned re: women and priesthood, as evidenced by the Relief Society minutes of Nauvoo (search term: lay hands)
[4] I regularly receive links from this blog from well-meaning members hoping to “cure” me of my feminism.
[5] My newest favorite term I saw someone use was doctrinal fan fiction. By all means, take what has been revealed and explore it and personally draw some conclusions. But when personal opinion is taught as doctrine, I get a bit miffed. I’m looking at you, Two Trees.
Wheat & Tares 
“The priesthood is God’s power, and it is all around you. It is the power that makes the sun shine, the power that makes flowers grow, rain to fall, gravity to work; it is the power that helps you learn and helps you know that things are true or not true, it is the power that answers prayers and makes miracles happen. It is the most powerful power in the entire world and God gives it to both boys and girls. “
I can’t help but hear that in the voice of Obi-Wan Kenobi. Priesthood power sounds a lot like the force. So would priesthood power be the weak force or the strong force?
A simple question:
Where in the scriptures does it use the term “priesthood Power”?
Answer: the only reference is Joseph’s letter to the saints regarding sealing and baptisms for the dead (Section 128).
In fact in section 121 it specifically states that no power or authority can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood.
The scriptures are rife with the references to the power of faith, the power of the holy ghost, the power of Godliness and the power of God, but mention of the power of the priesthood is interestingly absent.
Strange, very strange, perhaps we are straining at gnats again.
Could it be that the conversation is stalled because we have failed in our efforts to understand certain key words:
Priesthood
Keys
Authority
Just a thought.
The article is all over the place. It starts with the priesthood being everything then nothing and then ending with a statement about what people shouldnt do linking another article.
i dont understand the all becomes nothing thought. Does an infinite atonement lose its awesome power because of its infinite nature or would a limited one be better.
To me seeing divinity in everything even horse fetuses reminds me of the creators hand.
One creator used one power to do all things. The more we acknowledge him in our lives we come to recognize that we use that same power in all we do. This thought I am trying to express can usually be seen when someone says “i can do nothing without the saviors grace enabling me.”
Sean, you have some really good questions. I agree on the lack of discourse we have really at all about the priesthood in the scriptures. I remember my dear neighbor in Virginia who is a baptist visiting with us about how they were trying to figure out what a high priest is supposed to do based on the few verses they had to work with.
I think there’s a lot of talk about priesthood power, even thought it’s not in the scriptures, because it’s been in our latter-day discourse through the words of the living prophets – and if we believe in the 14 fundamentals of following the prophet, their words are more scripture than our old scripture.
But I do believe you’re right. After the past 12-24 months I actually don’t think any human on earth has an exact handle on what “priesthood, authority, power, and keys” really mean. I do like Sis. Dew’s chapter on it (well all except for that women only get “divine authority” because if priesthood authority is from God and divine authority is from God – then what, pray tell, is the difference?).
Ron, if priesthood power is what makes grass and babies babies grow – we don’t really need people to join our church to have the restored priesthood do we?
I think I did a pretty good job of acknowledging God’s hand in the creative process of nature.
When a couple gets drunk, has sex, and creates a baby out of wedlock, is this God’s priesthood power in action?
I have to wonder if there is a disconnect because the higher ups in the church view women and the priesthood differently after having the 2nd anointing, but cannot explain it to the rest of us who have not. And the recent rhetoric is the generalized bandaid that results.
God’s power is available to anyone who will engage it directly, being LDS has absolutely nothing to do with that. But for those who can’t or won’t engage God’s power directly the LDS church will (attempt? pretend?) to broker that power to you. In order to maintain order *within* the church a hierarchy was created and in doing so a proprietary LDS brand of God’s power (authority really) was created.
The feminist question of ordaining women shined a bright light on this arrangement and the question of what exactly IS the priesthood? It soon became evident that power and authority must be de-conflated in order to better understand the true definition and this can’t be done easily without some spin to prevent the priesthood from looking like well…nothing! Once this is done it becomes apparent then LDS priesthood is authority to act *within* the LDS community, in that sense it is power to act within the the LDS community. But does it contain God’s power when applied? Not by virtue of being LDS, when God’s power is included in an LDS priesthood act it is related to the personal faith and relationship with God of the participants which is not LDS specific or LDS proprietary. However by ritualizing and normalizing the ritual within the community more people will participate in approaching God than would otherwise because they feel less awkward about doing it. So LDS priesthood can be thought of as authority to act withing the LDS community and a formal invitation to approach God on behalf of others.
The “priesthood” is further conflated with church governance. If you take notice you will see that this is the least addressed topic by the brethren under the question of ordaining women. “Priesthood” was used by correlation to remove from women and consolidate under men powers once specifically given to women by Joseph himself! It appears to have been a power grab that even included removing relief from The Relief society and giving that relief $ budget and authority to men! So in this sense “priesthood power” isn’t God’s power it is governance power and women are specifically excluded from it.
When we observe the church’s response to feminist agitation we encounter confusing hair splitting definitions of priesthood power that suggest women already have it and we see some bones tossed in their direction like women leaders portraits hung in the Conference Center but we don’t see ANY movement towards female governance, the General Relief Society President is still addressed as sister rather than President and all female leaders still fall under the authority of some man.
Church governance is where the real (probably as much subconscious as conscious) misogynist/chauvinist conflict exists. Why? Well in theory the men are to lovingly look after the women but in practice they don’t. In practice they are either clueless or somewhat misogynist/chauvinist in their personal biases. The evidence for this is “forgetting” to invite women to pray in GC for more than 180 years for example! So, the natural way to balance this problem out is to give women equal governance, but that will likely NEVER happen.
Some of this sleight of hand is accomplished by pandering to the “views” of hand picked privileged LDS women who’s views just happen to be the views of the brethren. So the brethren spin the ordain women question away from church governance knowing that most women don’t want to take on that responsibility and we continue on in a somewhat misogynist/chauvinist male dominated church governed entirely by men while pretending to placate a few moderate feminist sisters. If you close your eyes and cover your ears it will eventually all blow over just like ERA.
Can we hold priesthood? Isn’t priesthood just a group of priests? I can’t hold a neighborhood, or hold motherhood, so how can I hold priesthood? I can be part of a priesthood, neighborhood, or motherhood, though. Isn’t priesthood essentially an order of priests?
Also, if John the Baptist restored the Aaronic Priesthood, and Peter/James/John restored the Melchizedek Priesthood, what is Moroni talking about when he says Elijah needs to come and reveal the Priesthood (see JSH 1:38)?
I suggest we don’t quite understand what is meant by priesthood.
The title of this post is actually the same thought I had when I read the original essay you are referencing. However, after giving some though, I still do, more or less, back the original essay and her ideas. I think the concept does lead to some confusion because of the common, everyday nature of several aspects she referenced, but I think that just because those everyday things aren’t “some great thing” doesn’t make them any less or dilutes the power inherent in them.
Searching the term ‘priesthood’ on lds.org leads to this (among several) definitions, “The priesthood is the eternal power and authority of our Heavenly Father. Through the priesthood, God created and governs the heavens and earth. Through this power He redeems and exalts His children.” I would argue that acts of nature *are* priesthood power in action because it is the epitome of God creating and governing the heavens and earth. Of course acts of nature aren’t examples of our exercising priesthood authority, since we aren’t actually doing anything, and we haven’t been given the authority/keys/power/whatever to create and govern creations in that way (typically.) I would even say that a reproducing horse *is* an example of priesthood power since it’s the way God has created horses. I think the difference between people and horses is that reproducing horses are God’s creations, but reproducing people are God’s actual spirit children, given mortal bodies through birth. I certainly don’t know if we can say growing babies=exercising priesthood, but I would suggest that child rearing, in all its forms, is a kind of “divine stewardship” that does have something to do with the priesthood, assuming it has something to do with God. Our church does have the restored priesthood to perform saving ordinances, but I don’t personally think the priesthood was entirely absent when the saving ordinances were absent from the earth, but of course that is just entirely my speculation.
And I definitely second the importance of teaching our kids the priesthood aspect of making and keeping covenants. I cringe at the thought of my own daughter being taught repeatedly the standard primary lesson that priesthood= boys and _____=girls.
I read that post when it was shared on my feed. I gotta give credit where it’s due, she gave a really uplifting message to a little girl in a CTR class that women have an important place in the church and God’s plan. Any quibble I have with her exact line of reasoning shouldn’t overshadow that. Kristine is right that our discourse on women and priesthood has been shifting radically in the past couple years.
Priesthood as the power governing creation and natural laws is doctrine, but it is not typically what we have in mind when we talk about “having” the priesthood. I do not expect the prophet to command mountains to move out of their place, or seal up the heavens to cause drought, even though I believe priesthood power has the ability to overrule existing natural laws. Having children is working within laws of nature that have already been set in motion at the time of creation. We do not speak of God commanding miscarriages, or cursing women with infertility. We see those as natural consequences of the Fall. In the same way, getting two kids together to produce a baby is also going to follow the same rules. If a sperm meets an egg, a zygote will occur. This is also a result of the Fall. Yes, the process is amazing, and yes, a spirit needs to be inserted somewhere along the way, but that is not a result of any priesthood power that is exercised on this side of the veil. As the embryo develops, genetic hiccups will occur. If you start saying that priesthood is involved in every stage of embryonic development, then you are going to get a pretty negative view of priesthood when you start to realize how often things go wrong. Not good.
Like others have said, when we talk about priesthood, we typically refer to the authority to act in an office or position in the church. This is what Elder Oaks refers to and is why the OP approves of the example of female missionaries and primary presidencies exercising priesthood authority.
I definitely agree that we typically don’t refer to priesthood as the power governing creation and natural laws when we talk about the priesthood; that we typically just refer to the authority to act in an office or position in the church. But perhaps that is part of the problem. Personally, my understanding of just what the purpose of the priesthood is and my relationship to it changed drastically when I understood the ‘bigger picture’ of it- it became much less male-centric to me and much more about divine gifts/responsibilities for all of God’s children.
It’s not the OP that’s all over the map. It’s the definition of priesthood. This topic is my emperor’s new clothes topic. I feel like a deer in headlights whenever we talk about it. I just don’t think we know what we are talking about, and it feels like we are confidently making things up, so I guess my feeling about priesthood has always been meh. I don’t really care. It’s everything and nothing. It’s the air. It’s a butterfly. It’s a feeling, an action, a body of people. Break out the Candy Crush.
Excellent OP, K. As you know, I’m a fan of the snarky captions, and these were top shelf!
Instead of addressing every comment, I’ll add my words to Hawk’s…..
I think every comment on a priesthood post includes all of these personal interpretations based on a selection of quotes from leaders that have been proof texted to support a position. From Valerie Hudson’s Two Trees to Yes Virginia to Ordain Women to Sheri Dew to Public Affairs.
I don’t think any of y’all really know for sure, that’s why I’m all about sticking to the basics. Do we have it canon? Then you can teach the basics.
Everybody has a different definition of priesthood power authority and keys — that’s what I’m saying! So if you’re going to go off on a personal interpretation, at least label it so. Don’t treat it as the gospel truth is all I’m saying.
Believe in priesthood power butterflies all you want, but until it’s been officially taught and revealed DON’T TEACH IT AS A CERTAINTY. I swear the longer I live the more I’m convinced that no one knows what they’re talking about.
*edited to correct typos, someone remind me to stop commenting on my phone…..
Priesthood probably means different things in different context:
1. divine power, it probably means any kind of life force for good, accessible by both men and women, in and out of the church.
2. authority to do things, hold certain keys giving you a certain jurisdiction within the ecclesiastical kingdom of God.
So trying to placate the feminists, Mormons use the first kind of priesthood to try and show God’s magnanimity towards women, but the feminists are really talking only about the 2nd kind of priesthood.
As elder Ballard says above, during the endowment, both men and women wear the robes of the holy priesthood, so they can officiate in the ordinances of that priesthood, just like the men.
At present this is the only place where it is acknowledged that women can officiate in the ordinances of each of the priesthoods.
It is a small step from here to ordaining women to particular positions, so they can officiate in the ordinances they are entitled to. How long will that small step take?
If this equality of priesthood in the temple is accepted, then it requires equality in the celestial kingdom, not the patriarchy I hear taught so often. And I would think equality between mother and father in heaven is also included. Which in turn means equality is the ideal and our present, male only priesthood is sub optimal.
I agree with Kristine. As she and others have said, the more I study the topic of the priesthood, the more convinced I am that no one has any idea what he or she is talking about. So when we do talk about it, whatever our ideas and theories, everyone is right about it and everybody is wrong. Maybe someday we’ll get some clarification.
Also, this might explain why I am ambivalent about holding the priesthood. I don’t understand why administration in the church is tied to priesthood office or what priesthood power and authority my husband uses and needs as a ward clerk. Until I know what the priesthood is, how do I even know how to feel about it?
Mormons have answers to all life’s questions, or at least that is something that we sometimes like to think. If we don’t know the answer to a question, we are very good at making stuff up. We’ve made up a lot about priesthood and it’s relationship to gender. One of the best things thayt came out of the turmoil last summer was the declaration from the First Presidency that we DON’T KNOW why priesthood (I’m referring to church government and administration of saving ordinances) was assigned along gender lines. This means we can’t actually argue that priesthood is inherently tied to gender roles. We can’t actually argue that priesthood responsibilities are meant to complement female gender roles. We may not have a great idea of what priesthood entails, but I think we are making progress when we can openly state that our doctrine does not, in fact, provide solid answers to these common questions.
I do think we are headed toward a Dorothy Defense when it comes to women & the PH, like at the end of the Wizard of Oz when Glinda says to Dorothy: “But Dorothy, you’ve had the power all along!” But the caveat is as Nate says, it’s not the Priesthood, but the priesthood we are talking about. And yet Oaks does say it’s PH authority to fulfill callings when you are set apart, conflating the concepts of needing to be ordained and not needing to be ordained to hold the PH. Confusing.
Touché! Lds.org does not a canon make. But what *is* our canon on priesthood, especially since we have an ‘open canon’? More confusing. I add my vote to the ‘we don’t even know what we’re talking about anyway’ camp.
I’m another in the group that says we have no idea what we are talking about on this topic, and seem to be making it up as we go along. The number of contradictions is…
When I’m really feeling cynical I’ve begun to see it as a mechanism of control, to a) keep the men in line with the church, and b) keep the women (or attempts to) under the thumb of the men. Neither of which feel very godly or empowering.
Brings to mind my not now so recent stint as ward music chair, for the stake music chairs instruction to me was: You need to do what the priesthood tell you! He was of course male, and retired CES to boot so…
Kristine A,
i dont understand what your trying to say about whether people join our church or not. Mormon theology is that everyone that has ever lived and will live becomes members of our church because our church seals in heaven whats sealed on earth. With the exception of those that sin against the holy ghost and sons of perdition. Power is different than authority. Authority is distinguished by keys.
Ron, I’m talking about when our missionaries try to convert members of other church’s who have already been baptized. If everyone has inherent priesthood power to do God’s will, why don’t their previous baptisms count? Ok now you’ll say because they don’t have the keys and authority, but that’s not what we teach, is it. We teach that were theonly ones with authorized priesthood, everyone else’s has no powerand authority.
And then it gets even more confusing to study history, because ordain women has pretty good justification for their position based on early teachings, but then everyone was so confused if women had the priesthood later leaders separated and denied women’s ability to anoint, heal, bless etc; and now in an effort to discredit OW we’ve gone back to this ” you’ve always had priesthood power and authority bit.”
Elder Packer taught there is no “free floating priesthood power,” and “Do not miss that one simple, obvious absolute: The priesthood ever and always is conferred by ordination by one who holds proper authority, and it is known to the Church that he has it. And even when the priesthood has been conferred, an individual has no authority beyond that which belongs to the specific office to which one has been ordained. Those limits apply as well to an office to which one is set apart. Unauthorized ordinations or settings apart convey nothing, neither power nor authority of the priesthood.” (The temple and the priesthood)
My point is the contradictory nature of statements, not just about women and the priesthood but about priesthood in General. I posit my assertion again, the longer I live – themore assured I am that no one understands what they’re talking about when it comes to priesthood. The stances are so far apart even just judging from the teachings of our current 12. By all means draw your own conclusions, but I’m so tired of people publishing these folk doctrines and people buying all in just because they felt good while reading it (I’m looking at you, Two Trees).
Kristine A,
What you see a a contradiction I see as a path.
A group of people following their trail master came upon the mightiest hill in the whole world. The trail master holds the map. The hiking began gradually with a very soft slope, people werenpicking flowers as they strolled. In what seemed like ages the mountains grade began to increase at an almost imperceivable degree. Only when the hikers looked backwards could they see the elevation change. Once that happened and they got perspective when they faced forward again they noticed how straight up this mountain had become and it forced them to be humble and patient. Latter in the day as they approached the summit the course the trail master began to take them on was a zig zag switchback course. The verticle assention was so steep that after a mile of switch backs they had increased just a few feet. Some of the fellow hikers seeing their progress slowed by the switchbacks began to get on all fours and crawl straight up the hill. Unfortunately because the ground was loose and full of gravel many got stuck, some slid back to their prior spot in the trail, and a small few were lost. The trailmaster encouraged them to follow him but he was an old frail man that no one seemed to get along with because he never got out and saw the rest of the world, he lived at the mountain and had a very plain life.
As the switchbacks increased in lenght it began to feel like hundreds of years of hiking only gained a few feet. The hiking party kept its path but there became two distinct groups. Those that followed the trail master happily and those that became resentful of the slow progress.
Dispite the the shift in attitude the trailmaster knew that if the party was still following him he had a job to do so he lead the party as best he could trying to keep the party together because if such a big group of discouraged hikers were to turn around all at once he knew it would prove the entire partys destruction with a landslide that with great intensity he persuaded them to stay reminding them of how far they had come and how close they are to the top. Not everyone disappointment could be appeased but the greater whole decided to continue to stay.
Finally as the sun was setting and bodies were failing they reached the summit and beheld the most magnificent thing they would ever see.
They saw the face of God and were embraced in heavenly arms. Their heavenly parents were waiting for them.
Joseph Smith gave the RS a priesthood key. To excersice power, influence, gain knowledge and intelligence, free agency, and to serve, help the needy and the poor. The key was not only given to the RS but to all women of the earth. According to Joseph F Smith and Elder Packard. Influence and power over the earth. To change things for good. It’s more than just conception and babies. BTW, in the scriptures all the faithful women are barren and struggle with that. Hannah was a priestess and it took most of her life time to concieve.
Shantel, perhaps you meant to say prophetess. Hannah was not a priestess. You could make an argument that she was of Levitical descent, but women of Levitical descent were not considered priestesses. Miriam and Elizabeth were both Levites, but they are never referred to as priestesses. The difficulty of infertility in the Bible is more easily explained by the cultural value of women in their ability to bear sons. The inability to bear sons disrupted inheritance of both property and priesthood. A wife’s infertility was a legitimate reason for a man to take an additional wife.
There are, in fact, righteous women who did not have difficulty conceiving: Eve, Leah, Tamar, Rachab, Jochebed, Naomi, Ruth, Abigail, Isaiah’s wife (referred to as a prophetess), and Mary.
I echo Hawkgrrrl’s sentiments……deer in the headlights.
All the comments are excellent.
This article was very good but I am still confused as ever. I am pleased that someone is writing about Priesthood and trying to explain it all. Thank you.
I agree with hawkgirrl, #15.
But, more specifically…My working theory is that priesthood power or the so-called power of the priesthood is nothing more nor less than the power of faith. If Christ walked on water, changed water into wine, and raised the dead, He did it via the power of His own faith. If a man today gives a “priesthood” blessing of healing, the consequences (if any) are due to his and/or the receiver’s faith–and not by channeling the power of God or via some power he has been granted by his ordination. The power of one’s faith is independent of God’s power (which is His “faith,” to the extent one so knowledgeable can have “faith”).
The concept of priesthood that fits all the information I have read (and my logical deductions from that information) is that it is an organizing and administrative “power.” The notion of keys and hierarchy are necessary for things to be orderly. All the rest of what we have been taught about priesthood (and especially that it IS the light of the sun, etc.) is just hyperbole. Such hyperbole may (in general) operate to create more faithfulness, but that is the only justification for all the obfuscation.
what a sad blog post and even sadder replies that think that A loving Heavenly Father won’t answer you if you seek, study, ponder and pray and ask him what the priesthood is.
I’ll go for heather’s OP and optimism over a snarky…I don’t know but I disagree post.
ReNee, I’m all for optimism, and I do applaud Heather’s efforts to bring this topic to the table. But I think Kristine’s point here is that our own search/ponder/pray answers, while important, cannot and should not enter into the doctrine we teach on Sunday, especially to our Primary kids. We can (and should) teach *them* to seach out and pray for answers, but we can’t teach our personal answers as doctrine. Additionally, it gets confusing to know just what to teach as the doctrine, when our various official sources of information are somewhat contradictory.
This article is fantastic. I LOVE it! I love your points. I LOVE the snark because Heather’s article DESERVES it. LOVE LOVE LOVE. Thanks for the rebuttal. WELL deserved!
Fbisti
I think you are onto something with your working theory. I was tempted to read in something that, when I went back to read yor comment again, wasn’t there. I just wanted to make sure it did not imply that lack of (obvious) consequences to PH blessings was not attributed to lack of faith. Hearts have been broken when the consequences desired from PH blessings do not occur. Living with the conclusion that such a consequence was not God’s plan requires truly great faith.
Thanks for the tittle as well because that’s EXACTLY the message Heather was sending. Believing something false does NOT make it true and your last sentences were AWESOME. DON’T teach that to our children unless it’s ACTUALLY DOCTRINE!
Kristine strikes again. Brilliant.
In typical Mormon fashion,
wemost of us don’t really want to offend anyone, so we are currently trying to make priesthood all things to all people as much as possible, while still limiting it to men, giving it to women in the temple and horses during gestation, denying it to non-Mormons at baptism but granting it to them when they plant gardens, and then insisting that it has been like this forever, “without beginning of days or end of years.”“Doctrinal fan fiction,” indeed. So, OK, ReNee, #29, if you have sought, pondered, and prayed and Heavenly Father has answered you as to what the priesthood is, please share. Ron, by chance, are you winifred’s husband?