- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I don’t know what it is, but things related to the priesthood have been standing out to me lately. Particularly, how important it is to many people. I’ll share a few examples of what is making this sit on my mind. -On Facebook today, a family member shared a quote by Elder Oaks expressing the need for fathers to “magnify their priesthood in their own family.”
-A few Sundays ago, our bishop told a long story from his mission about a nonmember hiking through the jungle to get to him and his companion for a priesthood blessing. Supposedly because this guy knew it could heal his injured foot.
-A little while ago, a friend of mine was remembering our late friend in a post on social media, expressing many good things about him. One of them was that “he was a worthy priesthood holder.”
Even before my faith crisis, I never really was into the whole “priesthood power” thing. The priesthood has never had much value for me. So when I hear or see people’s expressions of their beliefs about it, I have a hard time understanding where they are coming from. I know our church’s teachings and claims about the priesthood are one of the things that make us unique. But, I can’t help but feel like the love for it goes deeper than that. Even from the unorthodox side, the desire for women to hold the priesthood shows some belief in its value, if only for the authority it gives within the church.
My questions for everyone here are, what are your thoughts and/or beliefs in regards to the priesthood? Do you believe it has actual, tangible power? Does someone being a priesthood holder make them a better person or at least require that they live at a higher standard? And does the priesthood have any effect on your other beliefs about the church or gospel?
PazamaManX wrote:
My questions for everyone here are, what are your thoughts and/or beliefs in regards to the priesthood? Do you believe it has actual, tangible power? Does someone being a priesthood holder make them a better person or at least require that they live at a higher standard? And does the priesthood have any effect on your other beliefs about the church or gospel?
A) I think that “Priesthood-Holder” is a symbol for “Not Being Afraid to Show Up and Contribute in specific ways”
. – That’s what I was taught in YW in looking for a spouse. Priesthood-holders were empowered and motivated to “show up” for their families and their wives. In my more cynical middle age, I am not sure whether what I was taught was “descriptive” or “prescriptive – almost to the point of wishful thinking”>
“The Priesthood” to me has 2 functions, and I don’t know the worth of either function to the holders themselves (and I think it may vary).–
Church Organization function–> Explicit running of the church/funds/Autonomy. Most decisions in this arena seem to focus on imposing top-down order and/or logistics. I personally think that the “correlation” of the 1950’s through 1970’s was in part a theological justification for assuming control of R.S. funds. I also think that this area would benefit the church the most if the priesthood power were re-taught as “going alongside” but “not interchangeable” to the authority to do things in the church. Another paradigm shift would be a HUGE culture shift in family responsibility understanding and action – women cannot run the houses (women between the ages of 20 and 60 are the “sandwich” generation – carrying a load for parents/grandparents/children and employment – with variable levels of support from spouses/siblings/other interested parties) and the church (more then they already do through soft power) at the same time sustainably for long periods of time and not burn out more and faster than they already do. –
Complete “Rituals” (blessings of specific types, meeting design and oversight, etc.)–> I don’t know how important it is to the priesthood holders themselves that they handle these functions. I do know that there becomes an accidental fight of “my rituals are more important than yours” when it comes to the “Priesthood vs Motherhood” comparison conversations. I do know that putting people “in charge” of something gets them there and engages them (and I think that is part of the conversation). But I also see changes in teaching (facilitating conversations vs lectures), connecting methods (virtual/recorded/in-person/small group just to name a few) that challenge the need for some rituals, some aspects of rituals, etc. CONCLUSIONS
I honestly think that “the priesthood” actually makes relationships worse right now. The “Priesthood Question” has become a “Y/N Checklist Point” that doesn’t grapple with what it means to the individual entering a relationship with another person. The priesthood holder shows up, completes some rituals, and everyone assumes that that means that person is responsible and will “show up” in relationships – which may or may not be true and may or may not be a problem (depending on whether the individual is practicing unrighteous dominion or not).
That being said, “Priesthood” depends on an explicit, structure of hierarchy and complimentary gender roles. Unfortunately, what I have needed most from life was an explicit structure that had “space” in it for me and my values – which wasn’t what happened. I make decisions and I speak up (no “soft power” sideline influence for me), “Equality” is important to me (everyone is equally empowered by default – decisions need to be made weighted most by the stakeholders, expert based consultation and environment experiencers – not random people). I also feel that I challenged authority (even when trying to get clarification or just being helpful) so easily that my voice was not heard.
In a sense, I needed and ended up with a quasi-explicit mostly matriarchal structure in my home – and I could a)mourn what happened, b) shame others and myself for what happened, c) be in denial for what happened (and wait patiently on the sidelines for nothing to change), or d) do what I need to do for my family – even it it means that the church-sanctioned “ideal family structure” and the “day-to-day family structure of how things are run” part ways.
Holding the PH in the church certainly has the power to authorize someone to perform functions that are recognized by the church. Outside of that context I see the PH as being similar to Dumbo’s feather.
PazamaManX wrote:
My questions for everyone here are, what are your thoughts and/or beliefs in regards to the priesthood? Do you believe it has actual, tangible power? Does someone being a priesthood holder make them a better person or at least require that they live at a higher standard? And does the priesthood have any effect on your other beliefs about the church or gospel?
The priesthood used to be a fairly important part of my overall belief, and I considered it one of the pillars of my testimony. I believed it had real power to heal and move mountains and all that, if only I was righteous enough. At times it was a motivation to improve myself, but most of the time it was an unnecessary guilt trip. And there are a lot of things I never would have done if it wasn’t for the “priesthood duty” rhetoric, like serve a mission (which ultimately precipitated the collapse of my testimony).
In that priesthood represents a call to serve and bless others, I believe that it has the power to make men better family and community members. In that it represents a power and authority, I believe that it can have a damaging effect.
Thankfully our church has highlighted the first and slowly moved away from the second.
On one hand, it embodies the “privilege” of serving and administering. That is obvious and easily enforced. On the other hand, it’s portrayed as giving people special power to work miracles and act in God’s name. Where it breaks down, for me, is on this second “blessing” of the priesthood — the power to work miracles in God’s name. It’s really just a guessing game. You give a blessing and say what comes to mind, but whether what you say actually happens to the bless-ee is dependent on whether what you said happened to overlap with God’s will. And a lot of the time (most of the time), it’s doesn’t.
I don’t deny I’ve had experiences where I’ve given blessings and what I said came to pass. A lot of the time, it hasn’t though. Sometimes I think I just got lucky.
I am grateful for the opportunity to, in some small way, try to explain my understanding of the priesthood and what it intel’s. As a scientist I rely a great deal on empirical evidence and logic. The problem is that we do no know much about anything. 95% of what we think we know about our universe cannot be explained with our current science (or religion) and so we are left with terms like “Dark Matter” and “Dark Energy”. It is my impression that we have a similar understanding of spiritual things. The vast majority of that which is spirit lacks means of current empirical metrics. In an effort to create some semblance to establish empirical metrics of spirit or intelligence (societies) in our universe a Russian, Nikolai Kardashev, put forth what is called the Kardashev scale of intelligent societies. For more information I suggest a simple Google search using “Kardashev scale”. In short Kardashev suggested that we categorize civilizations by their intelligent use of resources observed to exist in our universe. Or in other words – the ability to control and utilize energy – realizing that matter and energy are essentially the same thing.
I would now like to reference a statement made by the fiction novelist, Arthur c. Clarke. He said in essence that any civilization with sufficiently advanced technology would appear to be magic. My understanding of the priesthood is in essence the means by which an intelligent society orderly governs and maintains the universe (their environment) – both seen and unseen. I realize that this definition is rather vague, but I believe it is because the reality of such things is far beyond what our current civilization is capable.
I have often thought that it would be fun to go back in time and get one of our ancestors from 200 years ago and just show them around. Perhaps take them on a commercial jet. I wonder what they would think. It is also interesting to me that few of our own society have much of a clue of how a wing creates lift or understand wind shear.
One of the titles of the priesthood is “order”. Because I am somewhat OCD this is appalling to me. That the priesthood is connected to order and creating order. We are also given understanding that there is spirit or intelligence in all things. I understand (believe) that the priesthood is a means by which all things have order.
One of the things we learn about the order of complex systems (Chaos Theory) is that is does not work to attempt to create an unbalanced complex order. This is the great complaint of environmentalists – that our concepts of civilization are not in balance with “nature” and so by building up our social comforts we destabilize our environment.
I believe the priesthood is real and a most important power we must learn to utilize as eternal beings manipulating the order of things. Obviously, we have tendencies to see things as a class I or lower-class civilization. We want to utilize the priesthood for the convenience of our current understanding. And so we tend to think of power as similar to some super human “Marvel” character that can just snap their finger and make something so. Obviously, the priesthood does not work like that. The priesthood is much more than just initiating what we want or what we think in the moment.
Watcher wrote:
I am grateful for the opportunity to, in some small way, try to explain my understanding of the priesthood and what it intel’s. As a scientist I rely a great deal on empirical evidence and logic. The problem is that we do no know much about anything. 95% of what we think we know about our universe cannot be explained with our current science (or religion) and so we are left with terms like “Dark Matter” and “Dark Energy”. It is my impression that we have a similar understanding of spiritual things. The vast majority of that which is spirit lacks means of current empirical metrics.Then if there is so much we don’t know, even in spiritual things, how can we give credence to a church that claims to have all truth?
SilentDawning wrote:Then if there is so much we don’t know, even in spiritual things, how can we give credence to a church that claims to have all truth?
Pearl of Great Price – Articles of Faith – article of faith #9
Quote:We believe all that God has arevealed, all that He does now reveal, and
we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God. Where is the claim that “The Church” has all truth? I have never heard such a claim – ever?????
nibbler wrote:
Holding the PH in the church certainly has the power to authorize someone to perform functions that are recognized by the church.Outside of that context I see the PH as being similar to Dumbo’s feather.
This. In my view the priesthood is more administrative than spiritual and I don’t believe it holds any actual Godly “power.” It’s mostly a construct to perpetuate while male dominance in the church (although I don’t believe that’s what early Mormons though). Dumbo’s feather is a great analogy.
Watcher wrote:
Where is the claim that “The Church” has all truth? I have never heard such a claim – ever?????
That might claim be a bit hyperbolic, but I think there are people who believe it to be the case. And I have heard it said many times explicitly and implicitly that the church has more truth than any other. I don’t buy the latter, and I believe there are lots of truths out there the church fails to embrace (especially scientific truths).
DarkJedi wrote:
Watcher wrote:
Where is the claim that “The Church” has all truth? I have never heard such a claim – ever?????
That might claim be a bit hyperbolic, but I think there are people who believe it to be the case. And I have heard it said many times explicitly and implicitly that the church has more truth than any other. I don’t buy the latter, and I believe there are lots of truths out there the church fails to embrace (especially scientific truths).
You make an excellent point and I agree that many things that are taught “at church” are neither true nor revealed doctrine of the restored church. As an amateur student of ancient scripture texts, I am convinced that there are a great deal of errors and misdirection that get passed down as doctrine from our modern versions of ancient scripture. I am also acutely aware of my own misunderstandings and poor opinions as both a scientist and a latter-day saint – it is likely that many of my current opinions are incorrect. I personally go through a great deal of efforts to validate truths and take care to separate speculations from what is verified.
As a scientist I have learned, sometimes by sad or embarrassing experience, that critical peer review of my work is the surest method to eliminate many of my errors. I have also discovered that on several occasions even the most critical and abusive criticism has turned out to be helpful and beneficial. It does seem to me that those that are concerned about religion and study religious things are overly attached to “doctrine” when (at least it seems so to me) that personal connections are or should be, the primary religious concern.
For example, as a student of science, I became convinced that evolution is the best explanation of the variety of life we encounter on earth. Oddly many of my “church” acquaintances questioned how I could think of myself as LDS and believe in evolution. Perhaps, even more of an oddity – my wife is among such critics – and yet she loves me anyway???? She has asked that I not bother her about science though we have two of sons that have followed me into scientific disciplines. She is my religious anchor.
As I understand, there can be many opinions but beyond opinions what comprises truth and the truths that are taught by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are well documented in the “Standard Works” of the church. There are additional explanations in various published materials distributed under the authority of the First Presidency and Quorum of the 12 Apostles. I am willing to define such as “taught by the church”. I understand that any member, including general authorities, have their separate opinion and that such opinions are not truth taught by the church. Though I respect opinions – I do not think individual opinions are appropriate fodder for sacrament meeting talks or fast and testimony meetings but it does happen – I try to be forgiving.
I speculate that many criticisms concerning what the church teaches is someone’s personal opinion about things and not what the church teaches. I would be most unhappy if I was held accountable for whatever others have claimed that I thought or believed – even if they did so with a quote from me. I also take umbrage whenever someone speaks of another’s opinion without their permission. We see this a lot in political commentaries.
I am quite sure if someone were to claim that they have never heard a member of the church promote a falsehood it would only be because they have no or near no experience conversing with or knowing members of the church. I just do not think that anyone or any organization should be held accountable for anything that they personally have not carefully considered and intended. And yet I often fail at my own standards and so I hope someone questions my intent and asks for clairfication.
Quote:
the church has more truth than any other.
I have observed this too. We do not believe that we have all truth because we believe that more truth will be revealed. However, we believe that this additional truth will come from and through the living prophet. Therefore, we seem very resistant to adopting things (like teaching techniques etc.) from outside sources. Add to this that our top leadership is quite elderly and that group as a demographic is resistant to change.I believe that this all combines contribute to a very slow pace of change within the church. Also that grassroots changes and adaptations tend to be discouraged.
The good is that most every ward operates like any other. There is a consistency that people may find comforting.
P.S. the quote above was from DJ but only part of his sentence. The full quote was something like that DJ has heard it said many times explicitly and implicitly that the church has more truth than any other. By only quoting part of the sentence I might have given the impression that DJ was expressing that the church has more truth (which is not what he said in context). To make matters worse, previous to this post script edit I was showing the quote as having come from Watcher. I apologize to DJ and Watcher for putting words into their mouth with my sloppy editing. I am sorry.
Watcher wrote:
You make an excellent point and I agree that many things that are taught “at church” are neither true nor revealed doctrine of the restored church.
As you say there are many things I chalk up to “taught by the church” (I somewhat frequently use the phrase “church teaching” here) which are not actually doctrine. The unfortunate thing is that many members believe and perpetrate such things as doctrine. Many true believers believe everything the prophet says is doctrine (and I have heard it taught that the Ensign, now Liahona, is scripture). My own belief is that most of what the modern prophets have said is their own opinion and/or their own understanding and not automatically doctrine. I believe there is very little doctrine and the Gospel (Good News) of Jesus Christ is much, much simpler than church teachings make it out to be.
FWIW, I believe evolution to be the most plausible explanation for how God created life. I believe God is the Creator, and I mostly believe that because I don’t believe the creation could have happened randomly. I believe God did it, but I don’t know how God did – the Big Bang and evolution are both plausible to me.
Watcher wrote:
SilentDawning wrote:Then if there is so much we don’t know, even in spiritual things, how can we give credence to a church that claims to have all truth?
Pearl of Great Price – Articles of Faith – article of faith #9
Quote:We believe all that God has arevealed, all that He does now reveal, and
we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God. Where is the claim that “The Church” has all truth? I have never heard such a claim – ever?????
Good point. I guess that’s something that’s crept into my belief system without justification.
Do you think the Church gives us ENOUGH truth given the requirements it makes on us?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.