Agreed, except the giving of blessings. I've given blessings where I've felt a physical energy travel down my arms. It leaves a 'cleansing' feeling. That is a blessing to me

Thanks for this post. I think you have cleared up this distinction pretty well. I haven't read a post that explains the difference.
You do have a choice, though. To hand out towels or to baptize.
Some of us, who don't hold the priesthood don't have that choice. We just hand out towels.
That doesn't make our saving ordinances any different, of course, but as you illustrated with your 12 yo, there is something special that comes with the ability to hold the priesthood and be able to serve others that ought to be available to all worthy members of the church, regardless of their chromosomal differences (XX vs XY)

ed42:

Thanks for the comment. Yet are we not all able to have meaningful spiritual experiences?

Jessawhy:

Thank you. We all have choices. You have choices that I do not have as well. I feel that much of the choice involved in holding the priesthood and serving in it is more the choice of fulfillling responsibilities and of obedience.

And while it is true that women can not currently hold the priesthood, that does not mean that they can not be leaders and serve others in this great church. I have seen tremendous leadership and service come from women - just as much if not more than from men holding priesthood..

I might share a story I heard from my parents who just returned from a mission in Kenya. There is an isolated branch near Kitale, and a set of missionaries went there for a visit for a few weeks. When they got there, there was a young girl passing the sacrament. The missionaries told the branch president that this can not happen - one must at least be a deacon in the Aaronic priesthood to pass the sacrament. The branch president said he would take care of it. The next week she was passing the sacrament again. The missionaries went to the branch president again, saying they thought he was going to take care of this. The president said that he did take care of it - he ordained her to the priesthood.

Eric,

Sorry to threadjack, but did your parents witness the situation with the girls passing the sacrament? I have heard three (now four) different versions of the girls-passing-the-sacrament story. In one version it takes place in Swaziland (this was the one current in my mission in South Africa), in one version it happened in Brazil, in another the girls were in a ward in Washington state. While I don't discount the possibility of such a situation, the similarities and second-hand nature of the telling causes me to be cautious.

Good point. I only know that my mom related the story to me. She did not present it as if it were some legend. But I admit that I can not say for sure.

"I have had my turn, and someone else can do it next time."

Uh, not if that someone else is a woman. I find that sort of obtuseness incredibly grating. The privileged should show some manners and sensitivity and not try to pretend that everyone is being treated the same. I'm sure you don't think that everyone who's "someone" is a man, right?

I think you just don't understand what people mean when they say "privilege." It doesn't matter if it's special to you or if you enjoy it. Privilege just means special treatment that makes you seem more important and powerful. You can't avoid that by pointing to other privileges that are more equally granted, or saying that you personally don't feel privileged. It's not a matter of how you feel, it's a matter of how others treat you.

I am not pretending that everyone is being treated the same. We are all different, and are in incredibly different circumstances.

I'm sure you don't think that everyone who's "someone" is a man, right?

And this wasn't intended to be grating?

My main point here is that the other privliges that are equally granted are much MUCH greater priviliges. And that much of what a priesthood holder 'gets' to do are simple administrative tasks that should NOT make the holder feel better than anyone else, and Not make the non-holder feel any worse.

It's not a matter of how you feel

Is this the sensitivity you were talking about?

I don't know about other places, but the women and others who do not hold the priesthood are treated just as well as priesthood holders in my ward. My wife, for exapmle, is beloved in our ward. She has served in many important callings and councils. She has taught the gospel and provided meaningful service. Sounds kinda like a priesthood holder to me, and other than a few simple administrative tasks, she can do anything I can in the church. But what really matters is that God loves her, and all the blessings of eternal life are available to her. That is the real privilige worth seeking. But then I am obtuse.

You can try to trivialize the priesthood as a few administrative tasks, but that isn't the doctrine, and you're not changing anything by pointing to other privileges more equally granted.

other than a few simple administrative tasks, she can do anything I can in the church.

Really? Come on. If you're going to be like this, what's the point?

Please do not misunderstand. I am not trivializing THE priesthood. THE priesthood is a tremendous thing, it is huge, it is vital. What I am trivializing (if anything) is the fact that I happen to hold the priesthood.

Oh, and yes, really (as far as my wife can do almost anything in the church).

Perhaps some more examples will help.

So what do I do outside of the 'church'? Well, not enough, but my wife and I are equal partners in our family leadership. And sure, I might administer some blessing once in a great while, but my wife can say meaningful prayers with and for our children. I believe my wife's prayes can be just as effective in terms of receiving desired blessings from God (in general) and in strengthening relationships.

And I go home teaching. Well, my wife goes visiting teaching. The two efforts are very compatible. We both visit the homes of members of our ward, teach gospel messages, offer our help and assistance. There is not much difference. Again, I might be asked to give a blessing once in a while, but my wife can pray with the sisters she visits as well.

And there is missionary work. I can share the gospel with my friends, relatives and neighbors. And so can my wife. Not a lot of difference there.

I attend church, partake of the sacrament, sing the hymns, give talks, and say prayers. My wife can and does do all of these things too.

I have served in young men's presidencies, my wife has served in young womens presidencies. Not much difference in these callings. I have served in Elder's quorum presidencies, my wife has served in Relief Society presidencies. Not much difference here either. We have both served as Sunday School and Primary teachers. We have both served on Ward Councils and Ward Welfare committees.

We have both been baptized, received the Holy Ghost, been endowed, and sealed.

So again I say, that other than a few administrative tasks, she can do anything I can in the church.

Now, I have tried to be specific with real life examples to express how I feel about this. Now, you can insult me again, or make me look like some liar who really doesn't believe what I am trying to say.

But if you are going to be like that, what's the point?

THE priesthood is a tremendous thing, it is huge, it is vital. What I am trivializing (if anything) is the fact that I happen to hold the priesthood.

I really don't see the distinction you're trying to draw here. You hold a tremendous thing. Women don't. That makes you privileged. It doesn't matter if you don't often intentionally use it, or if it doesn't mean much to you (an easy attitude to have if you aren't being denied it), because that's not the doctrine. Holding the priesthood is very important to many men, and would be to many women if they were not excluded from it. It's generally recognized as an important thing. Therefore it is a privilege. One person's opinion is not dispositive as to privilege.

Let's approach this from the opposite direction. What does holding the priesthood add to your life? Anything important?

Thank you for a civil and constructive comment. Sincerely.

I will try this again.

Being batized - tremendous thing, vital. Major privilige.
Performing a baptism - Administrative necessity. Minor privilige.

Partaking the sacrament - tremendous thing, covenant, major privilige.
passing the sacrament - Administrative necessity, a duty, bit of a chore, minor privilige.

This is the flavor of the distinction I think I see. I feel that if men feel much of a sense of privilige in holding the priesthood they probably lack some humility, and perhaps should have an attitude adjustment. I think those who desire the priesthood for the sake of the privilige it would bring might have the wrong attitude about it.

So to answer you question at the end, I might try this hypathetical. If President Monson were to announce that he was going to step down as prophet, and that his wife would take his place (and he would never complain), and that all through the church the men would no longer hold the priesthood and the women would, I would be completely fine with that. And while you may think I am completely nuts, I would view this as a minor policy change, and not that big of a deal. I would still go home teaching, I would still do missionary work, I would still attend much the same meetings, I would still receive the ordinances, I would still be able to be exalted. I would still go to the temple. So whoop-de-doo. What is the big change? My wife would give a few blessings once in a while, she mighe be a ward clerk or bishopric member someday, she might perform an ordinance here and there. Okay. So what is the big difference? Probably the biggest difference is she would call on somebody to say the prayer at dinner instead of me.

I would think that after a while, my wife would see that this whole thing would not be a big deal either.

My membership in the church, receiving the ordinances, the general principles of the gospel mean much more to me than the fact that I personally hod the priesthood.

So, maybe my take on this is all wrong. Now that our claws are not out any more, maybe you (or somebody) can help me understand better.

Well, thank you too. I'm glad to hear that you would be content in a matriarchy, and that you recognize that you are privileged, even if you dismiss it as "minor." I don't see how your view of the priesthood is consistent with mainstream LDS doctrine, and I can't quite bring myself to believe that you find so little fulfilling or special about holding the power of the priesthood.

And I think your view of the significance of holding the priesthood is a distinct minority, and therefore you remain privileged, because your individual opinion of the priesthood's significance is not dispositive, and you are treated by others as privileged. Surely you recognize that others consider holding the priesthood a very special, fulfilling, significant life experience, not just because they want privilege, but because exercising the power of the priesthood is a spiritually meaningful and important experience to them, or could be if they were not excluded from it.

And I would ask, and strongly urge, that you refrain from making careless remarks like the one in your original post. "Someone" will not get a turn next time. A man will, and a woman will not. And when the privileged are casual about the situation, or deny the existence of the disparity, even without meaning to, it really rankles. I'm sure it makes some men feel better to gloss over the exclusion of women, but it isn't intellectually honest to do so, nor is it sensitive or kind.

My view may well be a minority view. My view may be dead wrong. This post was quite personal in terms of opinions, feelings and experiences.

I do not want to give the impression that I am at all disappointed or unsatisfied with holding the priesthood. But I do think there are enough special, fulfilling, significant, spiritual and important experiences to go around in the gospel whether one has the priesthood or not.

When it comes to any disparity, I would suggest that to be casual or dismissive of it is the safe side. If we diminish any such disparity (if it even exists), we are more likely to see men and women as equal partners, we are more likely to avoid pride in our priesthood, we are more likely to avoid unrighteous dominion.

If we exaggerate any disparity then we are less likely to see men and women as equals, we are less likely to avoid pride, we are more likely to exercise unrighteous dominion. This exaggeration can rankle also. This exaggeration isn't intellecutally honest, nor is it sensitive or kind.

Eric, I am going to have to say that you probably are a minority in the church- at least in regards to things that are written about holding the Priesthood. Browse through any Aaronic Priesthood lesson manual and it is pretty clear that holding the Priesthood is considered a distinct, and wonderful blessing in itself.

As I said, the question of privilege isn't whether there are enough experiences to go around. The question is whether you are getting something that women are denied. And the answer has to be yes, doesn't it? That's privilege. You can go on about other opportunities all you like, but it doesn't relate to the question of whether you are privileged because you have the priesthood.

I'm not asking you to exaggerate, I'm just asking you to represent the situation accurately, and not bring up red herrings about exaggeration. It's not a matter of interpretation. "Some priesthood holder," not "someone." "Someone" is incorrect. I don't see how it benefits anyone to distort the facts. I do think it was an oversight on your part, but you should realize that it's problematic to speak inaccurately about these sensitive issues. It shouldn't be a struggle just to get men to admit that women are being excluded. It's disrespectful, as if women aren't even entitled to an accurate representation of their exclusion.

z

I'm so sorry that you feel slighted by not holding the priesthood. I suppose I am very fortunate to be married to Eric, who in no way "lords" his priesthood authority over me. I feel respected, honored and loved. He provides well for me and our children so that I am fortunate enough to stay home with our 4 boys. Eric is very humble and I have never felt a lack because I personally do not hold the priesthood. I am still given all the blessings through that holy priesthood that I need.

Currently I am the Nursery Leader, the Ward Choir Director, the Ward Music Chairman, and a Den Mother in our Ward. I was 1st Counselor in the Relief Sociey Presidency until two weeks ago (replaced by nursery calling) I have served in Stake callings as well. There is no office in the church that I would wish to have that I cannot hold because I do not have the priesthood. Who would ask to have all the demands placed on them that a Bishop has? Not me. I do not covet the priesthood for myself. It is just not the order that the Lord has laid out for his church at this time. Men and women have different roles and I for one am quite content in them. I am sorry that you feel slighted.

Starfoxy:

Thanks for chiming in.

I have been an Aaronic Priesthood quorum advisor for 6 of the last 10 years and have taught every lesson in the manuals multiple times. Talk about the priesthood is much more centered on responsbility then being a blessing. And these blessings are much more centered on the priesthood in general than the holding of it.

I think it may be the term privilige that is my hangup. The term just does not seem right. Responsibility seem so much better.

z:

Yes, men get something women don't. But I am not sure privilige is the right word for that.

And sure, I could have added some priesthood holder. But anyone reading this would know that, (so it was of course no real distortion) and someone fit my feelings about it. It really shouldn't matter much who does it.

And I think you are the one exaggerating the disparity.

Well, I think you just don't understand the meaning of the word "privilege" in this context. It and "responsibility" are not mutually exclusive. Privilege means being treated differently or set apart as special in some way that others recognize as important and that is a source of power or other benefits, such as access to certain spiritual experiences, leadership opportunities, etc.. I don't know what definition you're using.

You appear to have an outlier view of the significance of holding the priesthood, so don't expect others to share your minimizing attitude towards it. Some people actually think holding the priesthood would be a meaningful and spiritually nourishing experience unlike any other. What a bunch of exaggerators they are.

Becky, I'm just thrilled that things have gone so well for you as a woman in a patriarchal system, but I don't see what that has to do with the question of privilege. Men are privileged whether you feel slighted or not, and I'm sure you're aware that other women have fared far worse. I hope you never experience the negative side of patriarchy, I really do.

z

I think my feelings of not having been slighted have everything to do with whether I perceive holding the priesthood as a privilege or not. I believe having the priesthood on earth and given to the church is a wonderful gift of a loving father. The blessings that follow that gift are what makes salvation possible. I am a recipient of every blessing offered through that priesthood as long as I have lived worthy of them - nothing essential is withheld. Just because I am not one of those "privileged/responsible" to be administering those blessings does not mean that I have been overlooked because I am a woman for some honor - if anything, I am honored and privileged to be the recipient of said blessings without having the duties and responsibilities that accompany it.

If you have experienced the "negative side of patriarchy", I am sorry. I know that there are priesthood holders who misuse their authority - I have seen it. This would not however be rectified by having women hold the priesthood too. It is a flaw and occurrence merely because men (and women) are human. When given authority, the temptation is there to abuse it - and some will. Please chalk it up to human failing.

I think that so much of the unhappiness and dissatisfaction that result from this issue results from seeking after something that you don't have and are unlikely to have in the foreseeable future. Men and women have been given different roles. Acceptance of these roles grants contentment.

If we are to stir things up in the hope for change, we should look very closely at a few things. What are the chances for success - is this an eternal principle? or merely a temporary one? Is it worth stirring up discontent and disharmony in the church over? and finally - What are my motives? Why is this so important to me? I think that if I were wanting to hold the priesthood so that I could be in authority over others, or to "have" something that I couldn't before, or even to prove that I was equal - those would be, in my opinion, inappropriate reasons. If my reasoning was so that I might have the opportunity to serve in greater measure, I would say that, that is appropriate. I would, however, suggest that there are ample, and then some , opportunities to serve as a woman in the church. Sometimes I feel stretched too thin and that there are so many more opportunities that I just don't have time to get to. Anyway, that's my soapbox. This is actually only the third time I have ever posted anything. I just think that it is so unfortunate to have so much unhappiness stem unnecessarily from this one issue.

Some have said that my opinions expressed in this post and in my comments go against church doctrine, or that I am an outlier on this issue. This of course concerned me so I decided to consult the standard repository of all wisdom and knowledge related to the Kingdom of God - 'True to the Faith'. I would like to present the relevent section here:

Priesthood Authority Given to Men on Earth

God gives priesthood authority to worthy male members of the Church so they can act in His name for the salvation of His children. Priesthood holders can be authorized to preach the gospel, administer the ordinances of salvation, and govern the kingdom of God on the earth.

Male members of the Church may begin their priesthood service when they reach the age of 12. They begin by holding the Aaronic Priesthood, and the later may qualify to have the Melchizedek Priesthood conferred on them. At different stages in their lives and as they prepare themselves to receive different responsibilities, they hold different offices in the priesthood, such as deacon, teacher, or priest in the Aaronic Priesthood and elder or high priest in the Melchizedek Priesthood.

For a male member of the Church to hold the priesthood, an authorized priesthood holder must confer it on him and ordain him to an office in that priesthood.

Althought the authority of the priesthood is bestowed only on worthy male members of the Church, the blessings of the priesthood are available to all - men, women, and children. We all benefit from the influence of righteous priesthood leadership, and we all have the privilege of receiving the saving ordinances of the priesthood. (TTTF p. 124)

There really is no more current, official, correlated, or doctrinal statement regarding the priesthood being given to men than this. If you find anything that I have said to contradict this statement then simply disgard my silly and meaningless opinions and stick to the booklet.

However, if I had thought to consult this source prior to posting, I would have included this statement in my post to help make my point. Live and learn.

The first paragraph expresses that the priesthood in general, and as a whole is a very important and big deal. I agree. It states that priesthood holders can preach the gospel, administer ordinances and govern the kingdom. I maintain that women can and do teach/preach the gospel, and that administering ordinances and governing the church is largely filled with administrative tasks.

With respect to the ones holding the priesthood, the statement emphasizes worthiness and responsibility. And does not mention any sort of honor, privilege, or blessings that are reserved only for the one who holds the priesthood. I feel this is entirely appropriate.

The only place blessings and privileges are mentioned is in the last paragraph, where the authors go out of their way to state that the real blessings and privileges of the priesthood are available to all. Again, I think this is appropriate and is very much what I was getting at in this post.

Over at Mulling and Musing, m&m wrote a review of the recent Womens conference. In it, Sister Beck (the General Relief Society President) was quoted as saying this:

The half of the plan that creates life, that nurutres life, that causes growth, that influences everything else, was given to us [the women]. And influencing is ever so much mmore long-lasting than managing. The keys are given to help us manage it all correctly. One half is not more important than the other half.

I think this also speaks to priesthood largely being an administative/managing thing. Leadership (influence) can come from anyone.

Wow. Memories of the 70s, and the Equal Rights Amendment. The ward was buzzing, the word in all our meetings was that we had to vote against this evil thing, this law that gave equal rights to women, because it was the tool of the Devil to demote women down to a man's level, to be off of our pedestals where we were rightffully placed. I did my duty and campaigned diligently, wrote letters to the editor, voted against equal rights.

Oh, we were so special. Didn't we realize how special we were? Couldn't we see that even though we were left out of the most important part of the church, that through our influence and our special nurturing capabilities, and all the callings that we got to have, that we were truly MORE powerful, underneath it all?

Didn't we understand that we were not less important than our brethren/husbands, we just had different duties?

Hmm. Duties of parenting (which a man can do). Duties of nurturing (which a man can do). Duties of teaching (which a man can do). Duties of leadership (again, the man can do this, too). Everything but the responsibilities and duties of the priesthood, which ONLY a man can do.

So, after all this, what kinds of duties and responsibilities can you NOT do, Eric? You don't sound like you're being snarky, you do sound very patient, so I appreciate your continued patience with us as I ask how you possibly can think that the right to hold the priesthood is NOT a privilege?

So, after all this, what kinds of duties and responsibilities can you NOT do, Eric?

Is there not something special associated with being a mother that I will never know? Other than that not much. And not much is my point.

Of course there are certain things in the church that only a priesthood holder can do. My point is that many of these are administrative in their nature, and are over-rated as experiences. These things seem like much more tasks and duties than perks.

I think others have touched on my problem, and that is with the word privilege. When I hear someone say the phrase 'male priesthood privilege' I feel a fairly strong negative connotation to it. Perhaps this is unnecessary, but might that be intended by such a phrase? Sometimes?

If this were replaced by 'male priesthood responsibility' the negative connotation would likely go away. But again, perhaps this is a me problem.

I am amazed and grateful that you think I have been patient. I feel that I was coming off a bit defensive, and reactionary, and rude. I want to apologize, and say I am a little embarassed by how some of my comments were likely taken.

So I guess I might say that I look at the priesthood as a responsibility given, and not a privilege sought. A duty performed, not a perk 'enjoyed'. I am struggling with words here, and am exposing some weakness. Hopefully someone can understand better than I can express currently.

You are truly patient, and I appreciate that you appear to be sincere rather than disingenuous about the privileges of the priesthood.

Let's liken it to being president of the United States. It's a privilege AND a responsibility. It's a largely administrative duty. But it's a position that is special, dreamed of by many, and yet available only to citizens who were born here. A foreign born citizen who was previously a citizen of a foreign land can NEVER be president, no matter how much they'd like to be, or how capable they might be. They don't have the right.

You mention that you can never know the something special associated with motherhood. Well, I can never know the something special associated with fatherhood. I submit that parenting is not inherently a female (mom-related) activity, and mothers shouldn't have a more special bond than fathers, to their children.

You can never be pregnant and give birth, but that was the least part of my association with motherhood.

I must confess I truly expected a bit of an impatient, maybe even rude, response to my comment. You charmed me with your gentle response. As I said to the Baron on another post, when I see that someone has given a sincere effort, I am willing to agree to disagree.

Thanks so much for the opportunity to participate in this forum!

Wow. Thanks again.

The president example you brought up is interesting, but I do not like it much as an analogy to priesthood. The whole idea of campaigning for the priesthood, or for callings seems like an improper attitude to me. It might be a privilege because people voted for you, but that doesn't apply I don;t think.

As far as pregnancy and birth, there may be a parallel statement I can make. You may never pass the sacrament or be a ward clerk, but that is the least part of my association with the church. Anyone can have a positive influence and lead in the church in meaningful ways. We can all feel the spirit and be inspired. We can all receive the ordinances. Administering them for me is the lesser part of the experience.


As an after thoguht to a previous comment, you mentioned how many seem to elevate the role of women in the church to reconcile the priesthood thing. It now strikes me that perhaps I am trying to express the other side of the same coin, and am trying to downplay the specialness of an individual who happens to hod the priesthood.

Thanks for you civil comments on this.

Forgive me for submitting this twice...I feared it did not go through...

Hi Eric,

Just passing through and felt compelled to say something positive as an LDS woman that is not your wife. :-)

In the "old days" the word privilege was used a little differently. For example, let's say that I act as proxy for someone in a baptism or sealing, and some great day meet that person face to face. We embrace and she thanks me and in return I say "It was a privilege to do that for you". In that context, it means I felt honored, humbled, extremely blessed to have been able to do something that she could not do for herself.

Now take that understanding of the word and apply it to holding the priesthood...in other words, being able to act on behalf of God, or as His "proxy" on Earth. I think you would probably say that you really DO feel honored, humbled, extremely blessed to be able to act as Father would if He were here Himself. If Z read your words in that light, when you said "I don't think it's any big deal" or "It's more of a duty than a privilege" it came across as being very offensive. How can holding the power of God be no big deal? How can acting in His behalf be anything other than an incredible honor? FWIW, I did not read your words that way...but I think they very easily COULD be read that way.

THAT said, when Nemesis said

You can never be pregnant and give birth, but that was the least part of my association with motherhood.

the bristles on the back of MY neck stood up. *she says smiling and combing them back into place* I'm sorry but to me, that statement was offensive for all of the same reasons that Z felt Eric's comments were. Sure, being pregnant CAN be a miserable, painful, and often undignified experience, but there are ALSO privileges associated with motherhood that no man will ever be able to experience or fully appreciate and I sense Eric probably feels some sort of loss those.

The thrill of finding out that a human life other than my own exists within me. The miracle of creating LIFE-of being a necessary part of growing a mortal tabernacle for another spirit...something no man can ever do. Sure, he can "participate" in the genesis, and of course he can "parent" equally with me after the birth of that child, but for 9 months I get to do something that he will never be able to. (Sound familiar in reverse? "Women can participate in the blessings of the Priesthood, they just can't hold it"...) I'm sorry, but I would never ever say that being pregnant and giving birth is the least part of my association with motherhood. I know too many women who long for that part but have not or will not ever participate in it. These women, and all men, will never feel the kicks of tiny feet or feel the pressing of tiny hands from the inside AND out simultaneously. They will never wonder at another's hiccups at 2:00am and marvel at how strong, yet fragile they feel. They will never know what it is like to be alone but "not alone"-to experience a companionship that isn't like anything else in the world.

Men get to experience having the power of God flow through them. Women get to experience having the power of LIFE (which is also God's) flow through them. Men get to act as His proxy, women get to act as His partners. Without women, men would have no children of God to lay hands on, or pass sacrament to, or baptize, and without men, women would have no way to be sealed to the children of God. Yin and Yang, both necessary to complete the other.

So for the record, I LOATHE this argument and always have. It is like trying to decide which is more beautiful, the stars or the black night sky, for without both there would be no beauty at all. Or like debating over which is more important the melody or the harmony-when it was only the combination of both that brought the audience to their feet. If womanhood without priesthood is what God designed for my life, who am I to complain that I have not been blessed enough or that I deserve MORE than He has so graciously bestowed upon this undeserving daughter?

#26 aetheressa, thanks for sharing your perspective. You stated your beliefs very eloquently.

However, were I to be a woman who could not conceive, or a woman married to a man who was sterile, and if I were of the same belief as you that my portion of the holy work in the church was to bring life forth, I would feel very much sorrow that I was not able to participate in God's holy plan. Yet a sterile man can hold the priesthood, as well as a man married to a sterile woman. So the husbands could continue to do THEIR part, which seems less fair in the grand scheme of things.

In addition, a man gets to have the priesthood forever (assuming he remains worthy) once he gets it, but a woman must inevitably end her own contribution to this yin-yang theory because she cannot continue to get pregnant and give birth after a biological point in time. Again, if this is the balance, it is not very fairly designed.

So while that comparison may be comforting to you (and I'm glad that it works for you) it does not work so well for others, especially those who wonder, is it really God's plan, or fallible man's interpretation of God's plan (just as with polygamy, and the priesthood for blacks, man's interpretation tends to change when there is 'greater understanding' or some other similar force occurring.)

Nemesis,

I thought of that as I was writing my first post, that certainly my friends who cannot conceive must feel that unfairness.
Some human beings cannot walk, or speak, or hear or see and these physical anomalies prevent them from experiencing some part of human life that others do. But we have been promised that once our human bodies have been perfected, they will function in every capacity that the kingdom we are assigned to allows, and all women who obtain exaltation to the highest degree will bear children in the most exalted fashion, regardless of whether they did on Earth. I think it is important to point out that there are millions of men who have lived, or will live, on Earth that will never hold the Priesthood either.

Of course you are not me and your viewpoint does not have to reflect mine. I do not believe that those who are sterile or without the Priesthood are unable to participate in God's holy work because there is far more to God's plan than having babies and holding Priesthood. Building the kingdom of God involves a myriad of things and with the exception of those two, every other aspect (that I can think of) is available to anyone of us, male or female.

But I think the crux of your posts is whether or not God's plan is fair, and before a meaningful dialog can take place on that topic, we would both have to be operating from the same understanding of what the word "fair" means and what God's plan involves. The word fair is defined as: proper according to set rules, just, without bias. And of course God's plan was in operation before we were organized and extends through the pre-mortal world, mortality, and on into life after death and beyond. God's work is self described as being "to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man" and whatever is involved in that process is a part of His plan.

If you agree with those definitions/premises and would like to continue a friendly discussion about determining whether or not God's plan is fair, I'd be happy to go from here. If you don't agree with my statements so far feel free to adjust anything I may not have represented fairly. If you just simply don't want to discuss it further, that's ok too, just let me know. :-)

Aetheressa:

Thanks. I appreciate those who try to understand in spite of my weaknesses of expression.

Since some of this comes down to definitions of privilege, here is what yahoo dictionary provides:


1. A special advantage, immunity, permission, right, or benefit granted to or enjoyed by an individual, class, or caste.
2. Such an advantage, immunity, or right held as a prerogative of status or rank, and exercised to the exclusion or detriment of others.
3. The principle of granting and maintaining a special right or immunity: a society based on privilege.
Law The right to privileged communication in a confidential relationship, as between client and attorney, patient and physician, or communicant and priest.
4. An option to buy or sell a stock, including put, call, spread, and straddle.

There is some of this definition that I might go along with, but definition #2 really bugs me the most. Mostly it comes down to how the word is used.

Eric,

I agree that #2 is disturbing, but I don't think that the Priesthood as exercised in the manner the Lord has established is EVER exercised to the exclusion or detriment of others, it is ALWAYS exercised for the inclusion and blessing of others. The Priesthood is the power of God that unites and benefits everyone. Without it, families could not be eternal, no sealings could take place, no work for the dead could be done. I am so thankful that I get to live during a time when God authorized it to be on earth, because there were many times when it wasn't.

I feel like I share my husband's Priesthood with him. In fact, we both feel that when a woman is sealed to a righteous Priesthood holder, that union creates a higher, more powerful and holy form of the Priesthood than the man formerly held on his own. Regardless of what anyone's personal opinion is, the fact remains that no male can access the full "rights, benefits, or advantages" of the Priesthood without a female.

I think the misunderstanding that occurred here was simply due to different styles of communicating or expressing feelings. I think that your underlying message was - that YOU as the "who" holding the Priesthood is insignificant in light of the "what" that is being exercised. I think that is a great attitude to have and I also think that the vast majority of men in the Church would agree. Sadly, there are those who dishonor the Priesthood and my heart goes out to all those who feel their unrighteous influence.

aetheressa:


THANK YOU!!!!!!!!