- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Quote:
Maybe it is a misunderstanding on my part . . .
Yep.
If we are being literalists, angels can’t be seen by the natural eyes and don’t have tangible bodies. We have a hard enough time dealing with children even with physical bodies. Calling down angels would be disastrous.
😆 Well I’m gonna have faith that I can dispute a moderator without getting banned and say there are a bunch of types of angels. We have angels that are fiery and spiritual, angels that appear like regular people, Watchers that procreated with women, seraphim, chebrium, guardian angels, fallen angels, archangels…. hosts of Heaven, strange winged females and spiritual horse entities (the latter two in Zechariah). Not disputing that calling any of these beings down would be disasterous…. Just read the difference between ” minisistering” and “administering” and they have very different connotations. D&C 13 uses “ministering” not “administering”. So the authority is quite limited. Still doesn’t annull how a little knowledge, imagined authority, and misguided good intentions can be dangerous. Roy wrote:I agree stan. In the history of our church their have been cases where church discipline has been politically motivated or based on incomplete information only to be reversed posthumously sometimes decades or generations later.
I want to accentuate this — there is the case of Helmut Hubener, a German LDS youth who distributed anti-Nazi propaganda. The LDS church excommunicated him at the time. He was beheaded, and then after the fall of the Nazi regime, SLC reversed the excommunication. This appears to have been a politically motivated excommunication. And I’m sure it caused major stress to Helmut’s family, and to Helmut himself in the afterlife, if he wasn’t told about its temporary nature there. Who knows.
Maybe this was never a mistake — maybe, given the church’s ability to reverse excommunications, excommunicating him was the best thing to ensure the safety of the other members in Nazi Germany and occupied countries at the time. Knowing the priesthood could reverse the act later, mediates between protecting the living, and being fair to Helmut Hubener…but it shows that the priesthood does make decisions it later reverses after reflection, or even by design.
I am not sure why God does this — gives authority to only one church. Many religions claim this — Islam, Catholics, and Mormons. It certainly does attract black and white thinkers, that is for sure. And it does consolidate “”legitimate” power and encourage obedience form membership — things that are necessary to sustain an organization. It also releases the leaders from what is called “referent power” — influence spawned by followers’ desire to be like the leader. If leaders have “legitimate authority” — power invested in them by virtue of position — then they don’t need referent power as much — if they are uninspiring, bad leaders, they can still garner obedience because they are “the Lord’s annointed”.
I see it as an institutional means of consolidating the power that allows the organization to grow. IN Rough Stone Rolling. Bushman also described the melding of administrative and spiritual authority as a means of garnering commitment from members. Not only did the priesthood holders have the spiritual blessings, they had a stake in the Kingdom of God on Earth. So, I think the concept of giving me authority to influence/(determine?) the spiritual destiny of people after this life is smart from an organizational commitment perspective.
[ Admin Note]: It’s perfectly fine to disagree with admins and moderators here, as long as the overall rules of civility are followed. There is no hierarchy of legitimacy here; attitudes are FAR more important than specific beliefs and opinions. Fwiw, there have been times when even “Admin Notes” have been questioned through Private Messages – and, sometimes, those admin notes have been modified or even deleted after private conversation. We all make mistakes, and the admins and moderators are no exception.
Perhaps the reason to give (men) the priesthood is to see what they will do with “a little authority”. In my own experiences, and as noted here, there are plenty of times that the authority of the priesthood is abused, and many more times it is used for the benefit of others. It is definitely a “power” that is given, as we see it, and how it is used will tell a lot about the man. An an example of the approach of two different men on the exact same subject–my ex husband had been excommunicated and been rebaptized but his blessings had not been restored fully. He died of a massive heart attack 1 day after his paperwork had been mailed to SLC for permission to have those blessings restored. This was devastating to my children on many levels, but especially left his eternal state in limbo for my children. I counseled with my SP, the one who had overseen his excommunication. He was emphatic–“It is everlastingly too late” he said. I left in a blubbering mess of tears and sorrow. Fast forward 2 years and this man had been released. His brother was serving in his place. I was still haunted by this worry, as were my children. I went and spoke to our new SP. HIs comment? “The Lord doesn’t care about paperwork He looks on the heart. He knows the man’s heart and all will be made right.” What a relief, and you can’t get two more opposite perspectives. Both of these men had the same authority and responsibility, and one approached his with love and compassion and the other with rationality and coldness. Both men will be judged for their decisions, their guidance and their compassions. Sometimes I think the priesthood and what a man does with it can go more to his detriment than to his blessing. And the same can be said for all of us and the power that we hold, whether as a spouse, a parent, or whatever. Maybe the priesthood is also a test.
I like that answer Eternity4Me. And Stan, sorry for taking the original post as an invititation to discuss PH and sexism.
I am kind of new here, so let me preface this by saying that I really do appreciate all attempts to discuss a question that is important to me. It is my intention to send as many warm and friendly vibes as cold words can portray so as to have as civil a discussion as possible on what can be touchy subjects. SilentDawning wrote:I am not sure why God does this — gives authority to only one church.
I am not sure why either. Especially if the church claiming the exclusive authority seems to be a fringe group (my apologies if that offends anyone) that reaches only a tiny fraction of God’s children.
SilentDawning wrote:Many religions claim this — Islam, Catholics, and Mormons. It certainly does attract black and white thinkers, that is for sure. And it does consolidate “”legitimate” power and encourage obedience form membership — things that are necessary to sustain an organization. It also releases the leaders from what is called “referent power” — influence spawned by followers’ desire to be like the leader. If leaders have “legitimate authority” — power invested in them by virtue of position — then they don’t need referent power as much — if they are uninspiring, bad leaders, they can still garner obedience because they are “the Lord’s annointed”.
I see it as an institutional means of consolidating the power that allows the organization to grow. IN Rough Stone Rolling. Bushman also described the melding of administrative and spiritual authority as a means of garnering commitment from members. Not only did the priesthood holders have the spiritual blessings, they had a stake in the Kingdom of God on Earth. So, I think the concept of giving me authority to influence/(determine?) the spiritual destiny of people after this life is smart from an organizational commitment perspective.
This goes back to what I mentioned earlier, which is that I can see how authority is beneficial to an earthly institution claiming to have it. So I suppose that if God is interested in the advancement of that institution he might lend his power and authority to it. But wouldn’t you expect that institution to be the most effective one if God was going to put all His eggs in that one basket?
To me, it seems hard to believe that God would limit his reach by granting any one institution an exclusive franchise.
Eternity4me wrote:Perhaps the reason to give (men) the priesthood is to see what they will do with “a little authority”. In my own experiences, and as noted here, there are plenty of times that the authority of the priesthood is abused, and many more times it is used for the benefit of others. It is definitely a “power” that is given, as we see it, and how it is used will tell a lot about the man.
An an example of the approach of two different men on the exact same subject–my ex husband had been excommunicated and been rebaptized but his blessings had not been restored fully. He died of a massive heart attack 1 day after his paperwork had been mailed to SLC for permission to have those blessings restored. This was devastating to my children on many levels, but especially left his eternal state in limbo for my children. I counseled with my SP, the one who had overseen his excommunication. He was emphatic–“It is everlastingly too late” he said. I left in a blubbering mess of tears and sorrow. Fast forward 2 years and this man had been released. His brother was serving in his place. I was still haunted by this worry, as were my children. I went and spoke to our new SP. HIs comment? “The Lord doesn’t care about paperwork He looks on the heart. He knows the man’s heart and all will be made right.” What a relief, and you can’t get two more opposite perspectives. Both of these men had the same authority and responsibility, and one approached his with love and compassion and the other with rationality and coldness. Both men will be judged for their decisions, their guidance and their compassions. Sometimes I think the priesthood and what a man does with it can go more to his detriment than to his blessing. And the same can be said for all of us and the power that we hold, whether as a spouse, a parent, or whatever. Maybe the priesthood is also a test.
I agree that men would do well to see the priesthood as a test. I also agree with the assertion that says the purpose of the priesthood is to serve. I think Eternity4me, you gave a beautiful example of how the priesthood could be used to condemn others or it can be used to lift them. Whether the priesthood is real because God granted it, or if it is real only in the minds of believers, those wielding it should handle it with great care as your example shows.
LDS scripture has an answer for the abusive side of the priesthood. It is
D&C 121:37 wrote:37 That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.
Makes you wonder how many priesthood holders might have had the “Amen” pronounced but don’t know it
🙂 stan wrote:
This goes back to what I mentioned earlier, which is that I can see how authority is beneficial to an earthly institution claiming to have it. So I suppose that if God is interested in the advancement of that institution he might lend his power and authority to it. But wouldn’t you expect that institution to be the most effective one if God was going to put all His eggs in that one basket?To me, it seems hard to believe that God would limit his reach by granting any one institution an exclusive franchise.
I have often wondered about this myself. If we do have exclusive authority (which I doubt, by the way, I do see the Jewish priesthood as still valid and I don’t see a reason why the Catholic priesthood is no longer valid) then why isn’t God more active in promoting its use to bring to pass eternal life? There is no reason that God could not, through the priesthood, perform miracles of the likes of Jesus as Jesus prophesied they would. Indeed, granting the priesthood to one institution does not necessarily limit things, for with God nothing is impossible. So why, if this is all true, is the church not more effective?
stan wrote:I agree that men would do well to see the priesthood as a test. I also agree with the assertion that says the purpose of the priesthood is to serve. I think Eternity4me, you gave a beautiful example of how the priesthood could be used to condemn others or it can be used to lift them. Whether the priesthood is real because God granted it, or if it is real only in the minds of believers, those wielding it should handle it with great care as your example shows.
LDS scripture has an answer for the abusive side of the priesthood. It is
I do believe that part of the purpose of the priesthood is to serve, I don’t agree that the priesthood is a test. I don’t buy the whole “life is a test” idea. I see no reason why God would want or need to test anyone – as an omnipotent being He already knows all he needs to know about each of us (unless, of course, He is not as omnipotent as we think).
D&C 121:37 wrote:37 That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.
Makes you wonder how many priesthood holders might have had the “Amen” pronounced but don’t know it
🙂 [/quote]I agree. My son tells me stories of bishops in his foreign mission, instances where there simply is no one else to do the job. One excommunicated a 16-year-old, for instance (for getting pregnant). I can see that this is partly why South America has a retention/activity problem.
DarkJedi wrote:
I have often wondered about this myself. If we do have exclusive authority (which I doubt, by the way, I do see the Jewish priesthood as still valid and I don’t see a reason why the Catholic priesthood is no longer valid) then why isn’t God more active in promoting its use to bring to pass eternal life? There is no reason that God could not, through the priesthood, perform miracles of the likes of Jesus as Jesus prophesied they would. Indeed, granting the priesthood to one institution does not necessarily limit things, for with God nothing is impossible. So why, if this is all true, is the church not more effective?I’m with you on this. I have a hard time believing that God would only give his priesthood to such a small percentage of people in a relatively small church compared to the world population. I believe God works through faithful people all over the world, regardless of their religious affiliation, gender, race, or whatever else. As Mormons, we sometimes get caught up in our exclusive view of being ‘God’s one true church.’ Why would He limit himself to such a small group, when many of the people on the earth don’t have ready-access to an LDS priesthood holder. I believe God’s power is much more about faith and sincerity than who put their hands on your head to give you God’s permission to work in His name.
DarkJedi, Quote:I agree. My son tells me stories of bishops in his foreign mission, instances where there simply is no one else to do the job. One excommunicated a 16-year-old, for instance (for getting pregnant). I can see that this is partly why South America has a retention/activity problem.
This problem is not isolated to SA. My cousin was ex’d at 16 for getting pregnant. I spoke with a friend who was a former bishop. One year in the 1980’s they ex’d 6 or 7 young people for sexual sin. Young people who didn’t hold the MP, or were endowed. He still affirms today it was the right thing to do. This takes us right back to the lack of continuity in exercising PH authority and disciplinary councils. My nephew got his GF pregnant and they got married. One year later they were kneeling across the altar being sealed to each other and their baby. That doesn’t happen much outside of Utah.
I see the PH authority often used inconsistently. That is a source of frustration and confusion for a lot of us. While DJ may not see this life or the PH as a test, just because God knows what we will do doesn’t mean we do, and that we shouldn’t be given the choices. I didn’t suggest the test was for God to see what we do, it is to see how we deal with the authority. It is about what WE learn from it, and how we use it to bless others. Or, if we choose to allow it to bless our lives.
Eternity4me wrote:DarkJedi,
Quote:I agree. My son tells me stories of bishops in his foreign mission, instances where there simply is no one else to do the job. One excommunicated a 16-year-old, for instance (for getting pregnant). I can see that this is partly why South America has a retention/activity problem.
This problem is not isolated to SA. My cousin was ex’d at 16 for getting pregnant. I spoke with a friend who was a former bishop. One year in the 1980’s they ex’d 6 or 7 young people for sexual sin. Young people who didn’t hold the MP, or were endowed. He still affirms today it was the right thing to do. This takes us right back to the lack of continuity in exercising PH authority and disciplinary councils. My nephew got his GF pregnant and they got married. One year later they were kneeling across the altar being sealed to each other and their baby. That doesn’t happen much outside of Utah.
I see the PH authority often used inconsistently. That is a source of frustration and confusion for a lot of us. While DJ may not see this life or the PH as a test, just because God knows what we will do doesn’t mean we do, and that we shouldn’t be given the choices. I didn’t suggest the test was for God to see what we do, it is to see how we deal with the authority. It is about what WE learn from it, and how we use it to bless others. Or, if we choose to allow it to bless our lives.
Living most of my life in Pennsylvania and upstate NY, I can say that excommunicating teens, for any reason, is so rare here that I have never seen it. I have seen other forms of church discipline not involving a disciplinary council and I have seen repentance in action. I am under the impression that current church policy is that the bishop consult with the stake president prior to holding a DC, regardless of the circumstances of the member or the infraction, and that the reason for that is to prevent some “unrighteous dominion” (which I believe excommunicating teenagers is). Perhaps that is not church policy and is more just the way things work here, where excommunications or disciplinary councils in general, are quite rare.
I wholeheartedly believe in free agency, and for me God’s respect for free agency explains all kinds of things – the Holocaust included. I believe much of what happens to us in our lives is directly related to our own choices and the choices of others and that God will not interfere with those choices. I believe Mormon in Moroni 7 where he says all that is good comes from God (or at least I believe that basic principle since I’m not sure Mormon or Moroni ever existed). I don’t believe God places stumbling blocks in our way to our eternal destination nor do I believe He has any desire to do so for that would seem contrary to His work and His glory. I do believe there is evil and opposition to God and that sometimes these are unseen forces – but that God will still not interfere with our own agency in regard to how we react to those forces.
I also believe in classic LDS theology that God is omniscient. I do recognize there is some divergence of thought among latter-day saints in regard to what this means, but in general I think most of us believe that God does know the end from the beginning and that while God does not control our choices He is still aware of what choices we will make and knows the outcome – and always has and always will. That is to say, nothing happens that God does not know will happen, even taking into account individual free agency. Hence, since God does no evil and God knows the end from the beginning, God has no reason to test us – he already knows the outcome, and I do not believe for a second illnesses or other accidents are in any way “punishment” for our choices. I believe all of that will be sorted out in eternity where we will see justice, mercy, and grace in action in a way I don’t think we can fully comprehend.
It could be argued that God might test us not for His benefit, but for ours. For some people a test of faith might actually help them see that their faith is not what they thought it was. In my own experience, I always knew my faith was not what I professed it to be so my own faith crisis proved nothing to me although I suppose it could have proved something to others. I don’t buy that argument for several reason, noting that which I have already stated and adding that I simply don’t believe that’s how God works.
Back to the topic, and I do believe this is all related to the topic, I agree with those who have said that God would likely not give His priesthood to such a small and insignificant group. I like the way the priesthood works in administration of the church, and I do believe it’s main purpose is actually service and providing a vehicle to assist us in loving our neighbors (which I believe is a main purpose of the church in general). I believe the Jews had (and still have) a viable and real priesthood authority given by God, and I believe the original Apostles and other disciples were given priesthood authority directly by Jesus which in some form has been passed down to some current Christian churches. I believe it is possible that Joseph Smith is telling the truth in relation to the priesthood and that it was restored through him and that we have it today – but like all other things, we see through glass darkly and we probably don’t fully understand. Bishops excommunicating 16-year-olds are more an exercise of free agency than of the priesthood, IMO. Actually, I only used that as an example – my son has many stories about bishops and SPs in his SA mission, and where the MP has intervened, often directly with Salt Lake, in some cases (as in the excommunicated HP who was told by the bishop he had to wait 7 years to be readmitted to the church).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.