- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
My oldest son was sealed in the Manti temple yesterday, and I was impressed by the sealer’s counsel to my son and daughter-in-law. I want to share one thing with everyone here. He said multiple times that they were equal in marriage, and he said explicitly that this equality applied to the Priesthood, as well. He said they share the Priesthood equally, with no qualifications or exceptions. He also told each of them to support the other one when something was required of either of them – and he told my son, specifically, that meant taking care of household responsibilities and the kids when his wife was away from the home for any reason.
This was the heart of rural Utah, and he was probably at least 70.
I don’t know if sealers are being told universally to stress this or if it just came from him as an individual, but it was perfect for those of my family who were there listening.
Old-Timer wrote:He said they share the Priesthood equally, with no qualifications or exceptions.
This sounds like I great experience today, Ray, so I hope my next question doesn’t equate to raining on parades.
But the word “without qualification and exceptions” would seem to include — giving priesthood blessings of healing by the laying on of hands, using the blessing language prescribed by the church, invoking the power and autority of the Melchizedek Priesthood and dedicating homes. His statement was pretty uncategorical and all encompassing, but that isn’t really true — is it?
Ray, that is very interesting. I would of tried to talk to this person after the sealing was over. It sounds like you didn’t have that chance. Mazel tov! It had to be a great experience.
SD, I am certain he would have made a distinction between sharing the Priesthood and performing ordinances. The “without qualifications or exceptions” was my own description, not a quote – meaning he said it as a blanket statement. Sorry for not making that clear. I also understand there are inequalities when it comes to ordinance performance, but we are starting to talk about women having Priesthood power and authority once they are endowed on their own (which was the context of his first statement), and that is radically different than only a few years ago. It is explicit in Elder Oaks’ recent talk, and it is great to start hearing it from others – especially in that place and from someone his age.
Old-Timer wrote:SD, I am certain he would have made a distinction between sharing the Priesthood and performing ordinances. The “without qualifications or exceptions” was my own description, not a quote – meaning he said it as a blanket statement. Sorry for not making that clear.
Thanks…didn’t know about the endowment for women and its implications either…
I dug this up from my archives. I pulled this from a forum years ago. I have know idea of the who/what/when, but it seems to agree with what Ray heard in Manti. Quote:Excerpts from a talk given by an officiator at a sealing in the Salt Lake Temple:
“You have had a lot of stuff to learn in the last couple of days. I’m sure most of it went right over your head, but as you return often to the temple it’ll begin to make sense. Here is the important thing I want you to remember: You hold the priesthood. Not ‘through’ your husband but you hold the priesthood on your own. That’s the only way you can wear the garments–if you hold the priesthood. This priesthood gives you certain powers. You may use it to give blessings to your children as they come into your home. You may bless your home and those you love.”
In a private conversation after the ceremony: “You probably didn’t know that the priesthood was used a lot more by women in the early church. Taking the priesthood away from women was just a way of creating a greater delineation between men and women.”
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.