Priesthood

So, I've been thinking about the Priesthood a lot recently. There's the "Women in the Priesthood" movement who think women should receive the Priesthood and I've met those who resent the Church for denying the Priesthood to Blacks for a time. I'm going to start with definitions and then back track to the Old Testament and work my way forward in time.

Priesthood definition according to lds.org, "The word priesthood has two meanings. First, priesthood is the power and authority of God. ... Through the priesthood, God created and governs the heavens and the earth. Through this power, He exalts His obedient children, bringing to pass “the immortality and eternal life of man” ( Moses 1:39; see also D&C 84:35–38).

Second, in mortality, priesthood is the power and authority that God gives to man to act in all things necessary for the salvation of God’s children. The blessings of the priesthood are available to all who receive the gospel. (“Priesthood Authority,” Handbook 2, Administering the Church)" (https://www.lds.org/topics/priesthood?lang=eng)

To me that means that the Priesthood is the power of God and permission and authority to use God's power. The Priesthood is required in order to perform any saving ordinance, like baptism or the Sacrament.

Now, back to the Old Testament. I'm going to talk mostly about the Levitical/Aaronic Priesthood and not the Melchizedek Priesthood. Jacob or Israel had 12 sons. The first was Reuben. Reuben had the birthright until he "uncovered the nakedness of his father". Then the second born was Simeon and third born was Levi. Simeon and Levi slaughtered a whole group of people because one of them had defiled their sister and then tried to make it right by marrying her, but Simeon and Levi wouldn't let it go and slaughtered a whole tribe/nation/town of people. The birthright is then passed on to Judah. Reuben, Simeon and Levi are all chastened when Jacob/Israel is giving blessings to his sons and decides to claim Ephraim and Manasseh (of Joseph) as his own. Later, after they have left Egypt by following Moses, all are given an inheritance except.... Levi. Levi is to be scattered throughout Israel and is to be servants to the rest of Israel. Granted Israel is supposed to take care of them but technically good slave owners took care of their slaves so they would be able to perform what their masters wanted of them, so I believe the Levites were in a similar position. They were to be taken care of, but that does not mean they have a lofty position and means to make money, but merely to be able to live and fulfill their purpose. So, this is the beginnings of the Priesthood. To me it comes across as more of a punishment. They had nothing to their name except by generosity of the tribes they lived among. They were to serve others. I feel Levi was given the Priesthood so they would learn to serve others. In other words, they needed to learn something from their assigned, humble position. 

Jump forward to the mid 1800s. Blacks were denied the Priesthood. Actually I'm going to backtrack just for a moment. The Church was restored in 1820. Why? Didn't the people who lived between when the Apostles were on the Earth and 1820 deserve the Gospel and blessings of it? There was a speech called "Why 1820?" by I think Franklin R Covey that speculates as to why the Lord didn't restore His Church sooner. Without reading it too recently, what I remember is that the Church needed a country to establish religious freedom in order for it to survive a restoration. And the Church wasn't immediately restored after religious freedom was gained here, and even when it was restored, the Church struggled at first to survive. The Church was not popular and was persecuted. It was persecuted for its beliefs but also for polygamy. The Civil War was fought and before that Blacks were not recognized by this country as even a full person. How much more would the country have persecuted the Church if Blacks had the Priesthood? And even after the Civil War, things did not magically get better for the Blacks. They were persecuted for several more years before they had other rights. When the Black finally received the Priesthood they at least officially had the same rights as their White counterparts (even if there is still racism- which is a different matter, legally they should have the same rights now). I believe that the Lord has a purpose to His timing, and I believe that the conditions relating to Blacks in this country at least played a part in why the Lord waited. Just like the Lord waited to restore His Church, the Lord waited to give the Priesthood to all men.

Now, on to women and the Priesthood. Let's consider the nature of men and women. How many married women who step up and take over things in their marriage have spouses who try to fight them for leadership? How many men gladly take the back seat and allow the wife to lead in things when they want to? I know my husband would gladly let me be in charge of all household duties. If I took over making all the money he would gladly step back (and likely play video games in his new spare time, instead of doing what I do with our kids and around the house). Now, this is not true of all men, some will fight for the ability to lead, but most men need a responsibility in order to take charge. Giving men the Priesthood gives them something they feel responsible for. It is that responsibility that often will motivate them to work and become better. The Priesthood is meant to serve and many women are conscious of others and are willing to serve without having the responsibility of the Priesthood. I don't know if I'm explaining this part well, but I feel men need the Priesthood to become better people and active members in the Church and to help them be aware of the needs of others. The Priesthood teaches them to be kind and forgiving of others.

Now back to the definition. The Priesthood is the power of God. Well what can God do? We know that with the Priesthood God created the world. What office in the Priesthood allows men to create? None of them. Men and women can create--life, buildings, roads, computers, furniture, a home... For some of those, both a man and a woman is needed and for others, one can do it based on their talents. God can do other things as well. The Priesthood callings given to men revolve around the power to perform ordinances and to speak for God and lead His Church. Lets analyze those backwards.

Lead His Church. A Prophet is called. This is a man. Why? I don't know. Maybe because He symbolizes Christ (a man). Maybe because He can perform any saving ordinance. Maybe because men need to learn how to lead. Maybe so that by becoming responsible for so many, their hearts grow. Maybe women don't need that. But for whatever reason, the Prophet is a man. But the Prophet calls a General Relief Society Board and Young Womens Board and Primary which is usually full of women. So women are needed to lead, in local branches all the way up to the top. But the man is the head- whether it's because they need to grow the most, because they perform any saving ordinance or because they represent Christ or another reason, this is the case.

To speak for God. This kind of goes hand in hand with the previous statement. Any woman (or man) can speak for God in reference to those for whom she is responsible as designated by her family or calling.

The power to perform ordinances. Men perform baptisms and confirmations. They bless and pass the Sacrament. They can perform temple ordinances (including initiatories and endowments). But wait a second.... I'm a woman. I worked in the temple. I was not given the Priesthood. I was set apart, but the same as I am when I become a teacher or ward greeter. Yet, as a temple worker I performed initiatories and endowments for women. How is this possible unless I have the Priesthood? It isn't.

My conclusion: Women have the Priesthood. I may never be a deacon, teacher, priest or elder. I do not know what my calling within the Priesthood is called, but I have the power of God in me. And it's not just about bearing children. Perhaps I am capable of all that a man is. Perhaps I am not allowed to do certain things because just as men need to learn to serve, I need to learn to depend on them. But I am allowed to do a great many things, and just because it is different or not publicly recognized (welcome to motherhood) does not mean that I do not have the power of God in me. But everyone needs to learn to step up and become the best they can be. Perhaps if women were to claim the Priesthood- the same Priesthood that men have, the men would not step up... or not enough would... and then there would be 80 women to 20 men in the Celestial Kingdom....

One last thing to consider- in the world we have doctors. Doctors can save lives and perform surgeries on others. They cannot perform surgeries on themselves (yes I've seen shows where they take a bullet out themselves or sew themselves up or direct someone else but they cannot perform in depth surgeries on themselves alone.) In the world is it more important that everyone becomes a doctor or that everyone has access to a good doctor that their lives may be saved and they can receive proper care and be healthy? I think it's the same with the Priesthood. I may have some of the power of God within me, but regardless of that, it is not as important who the doctor is (who holds the Priesthood) as it is important for everyone to be able to be blessed by the doctors (Priesthood). Just as doctors cannot perform surgery on themselves, neither can the Priesthood be used by oneself for their personal gain. And unlike doctors, there is no money or prestige to be made by holding the Priesthood. It may seem like there's prestige because we honor and know who holds the Priesthood, but I would argue that we only know them so we know where to turn for help and blessings and so that the Church stays a Church of order. Matthew 23:11, "But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant."

Blacks and the Priesthood

The other day I wrote a post based on women I think are worthy of emulation.  Those women were of a lineage that preserved a curse, "Now this king of Egypt was a descendant from the loins of Ham, and was a partkaer of the blood of the Canaanites by birth.  From this descent sprang all the Egyptians, and thus the blood of the Canaanites was preserved in the land." (Abraham 1:21-22)  The important thing here is that it's talking about the blood of the Canaanites being passed down through the descendants of Ham.  Verse 23 talks about Egypt being discovered by a woman, and then in verse 24 it continues, "When this woman discovered the land it was under water, who afterward settled her sons in it; and thus, from Ham, sprang that race which preserved the curse in the land."  So here it says the curse was preserved- the curse of the Canaanites.  It says it was preserved in the land.

The footnote for the Canaanites in the first few verses takes us back to Moses 7:6-8.  There it talks about what this curse is.  "...and the people of Canaan shall divide themselves in the land, and the land shall be barren and unfruitful, and none other people shall dwell there but the people of Canaan; For behold, the Lord shall curse the land with much heat, and the barrenness thereof shall go forth forever; and there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people."  Here is where people say the blacks couldn't have the Priesthood because of this curse.  This curse says nothing about the Priesthood.  Neither does the scripture in Abraham.  The curse in their blood passed down a color of skin maybe.  And the curse was preserved in the land- Africa is still often thought of as barren and having "much heat".  I know there are different parts of Africa, but the association with the greatest desert is there.  Nowhere does it say that their skin color was a curse.  It says it happened.  Period.  I don't know if it made them better suited to endure the heat- but I know for me personally, I would likely complain, or burn (and yes I know black people can burn too).

So now for the Priesthood part- Abraham 1 continues in verses 25-27, "Now the first government of Egypt was established by Pharaoh, the eldest son of Egyptus, the daughter of Ham, and it was after the manner of the government of Ham, which was patriarchal.  Pharaoh, being a righteous man, established his kingdom and judged his people wisely and justly all his days, seeking earnestly to imitate that order established by the fathers in the first generations, in the days of the first patriarchal reign, even in the reign of Adam, and also of Noah, his father, who blessed him with the blessings of the earth, and with the blessings of wisdom, but cursed him as pertaining to the Priesthood.  Now Pharaoh being of that lineage by which he could not have the right of Priesthood, notwithstanding the Pharaohs would fain claim it from Noah, through Ham, therefore my father was led away by their idolatry;"  Here is where it mentions no Priesthood based on lineage.  A few other things I want to point out first.  Pharaoh was blessed in the earth- the first leader of Egypt.  And we know from history that Egypt became very fruitful and prominent and wealthy.  Despite the curse of the land, the Egyptians and others in that continent that we do not have record of were blessed in the land despite the curse OF the land.

Here though it says he was of a lineage that could not have the Priesthood.  In Old Testament times the Priesthood WAS by lineage.  At the time of Noah they had the Melchizedek Priesthood (the Lord created a lesser Priesthood- the Aaronic "when the children of Israel failed to live up to the privileges and covenants of the Melchizedek Priesthood" (BD Melchizedek Priesthood)).  "The Melchizedek Priesthood was first made known to Adam, and the patriarchs and prophets in every dispensation had this authority." (BD- Melchizedek Priesthood).  Ham was not the patriarch, so it could be said that Ham, nor his sons, were of the birthright/lineage to randomly be selected as the patriarch and therefore were cursed as to the Priesthood, and were of "that lineage by which he could not have the right of Priesthood".

Regardless of what the curse ACTUALLY means there's a scripture in Abraham 2:9-10, where the Lord is blessing Abraham: "And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee above measure, and make thy name great among all nations, and thou shalt be a blessing unto thy seed after thee, that in their hands they shall bear this ministry and Priesthood unto all nations; And I will bless them through thy name; for as many as receive this Gospel shall be called after thy name, and shall be accounted thy seed, and shall rise up and bless thee, as their father...and in thee (that is, in thy Priesthood) and in thy seed (that is, they Priesthood), for I give unto thee a promise that this right shall continue in thee, and in thy seed after thee" (emphasis added).  Here, regardless of whatever the curse was it says that through Abraham's seed that the Gospel will spread and also the Priesthood.  That anyone who receives the Gospel will become part of Abraham's seed.  Therefore, anyone today can hold the Priesthood.

So why did it take so long?  I don't know.  But I do know that "all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things"(2 Ne 2:24)  Why did God wait til 1820 to restore His Church?  (There is a great talk by Hyrum W. Smith called "Why 1820?" on that topic).  Anyways, there is a reason- whether we see it or not.  If the blood was cursed, it should still be cursed, logically, so I don't know why they had to wait- I just know there must have been a reason for it.  I've heard speculations about how maybe it was because there was enough persecution with the early Church, and the United States was still in controversy about blacks gaining their freedom.  Whatever the reason, God had one.  Every worthy male can hold the Priesthood.  Not any worthy white male, ANY worthy male.  And I'm glad that for whatever the reason for the wait, the wait is over.