Shortcomings in living prophets?

[Requiem]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Because the women lack authority, we have an uneasy tension about an all male leadership addresses women. How that is resolved in the future will be interesting.

File this thought in the wishful thinking category: Similar to the rationale that the timing of the polygamy and Blacks/Priesthood revelations coincided with societal pressures and the arrival of receptive prophets, perhaps the same logic applies to when the Priesthood will be granted to women.

Food for thought...

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by Requiem

File this thought in the wishful thinking category: Similar to the rationale that the timing of the polygamy and Blacks/Priesthood revelations coincided with societal pressures and the arrival of receptive prophets, perhaps the same logic applies to when the Priesthood will be granted to women.

Food for thought...

lol....that'll happen around the same time the church ordains a practicing openly gay minister too.

Food for thought...

[Requiem]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

lol....that'll happen around the same time the church ordains a practicing openly gay minister too.

Funny...and I am sure similar to the thoughts of Brigham Young had he been asked (while still alive) when polygamy would end and Blacks would receive the Priesthood. The passing of biased generations like ours, combined with "enlightened" thinking, may result in changes incomprehensible to the current orthodoxy. There is always hope.

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by Requiem

Funny...and I am sure similar to the thoughts of Brigham Young had he been asked (while still alive) when polygamy would end and Blacks would receive the Priesthood. The passing of biased generations like ours, combined with "enlightened" thinking, may result in changes incomprehensible to the current orthodoxy. There is always hope.

No there isn't always hope in this case.

It's not happening.

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

No there isn't always hope in this case.

It's not happening.

How do you know?

There have been prophetesses in the past. Jesus first appeared to women after death. Jesus commissioned women to tell His apostles of His resurrection. Women, in the past moreso than today, participated in the laying on of hands for the administration of the sick. Women, in the past moreso than today, were allowed to give blessings by the laying on of hands. Women administer and officiate in temple ordinances.

I don't think it will ever happen, but there seems to be some 'evidence' to show that maybe in the following life priesthood lines will extend past men.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

How do you know?

There have been prophetesses in the past. Jesus first appeared to women after death. Jesus commissioned women to tell His apostles of His resurrection. Women, in the past moreso than today, participated in the laying on of hands for the administration of the sick. Women, in the past moreso than today, were allowed to give blessings by the laying on of hands. Women administer and officiate in temple ordinances.

I don't think it will ever happen, but there seems to be some 'evidence' to show that maybe in the following life priesthood lines will extend past men.

Which begs the question. What exactly is entailed by the terms "queens and priestesses"?

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

How do you know?

There have been prophetesses in the past. Jesus first appeared to women after death. Jesus commissioned women to tell His apostles of His resurrection. Women, in the past moreso than today, participated in the laying on of hands for the administration of the sick. Women, in the past moreso than today, were allowed to give blessings by the laying on of hands. Women administer and officiate in temple ordinances.

I don't think it will ever happen, but there seems to be some 'evidence' to show that maybe in the following life priesthood lines will extend past men.

How do I know? Because it's obvious.

This isn't the same as some kind of mistake borne from the black ban on priesthoods. This isn't about woman's suffrage or polygamy either.

They're two entirely differently and completely different components..

It will never happen. Ever.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

How do I know? Because it's obvious.

This isn't the same as some kind of mistake borne from the black ban on priesthoods. This isn't about woman's suffrage or polygamy either.

They're two entirely differently and completely different components..

It will never happen. Ever.

My prediction is that it will not happen.

However, given the fact that women officiate in the temple and women participated in blessings, I could see a point theologically, where it wasn't a mistake but that the members had progressed to a point where the natural outgrowth was for both to have authority to preside. Mind you, I'm not asking for it, don't believe it will happen, but reserve in the back of my mind that it could happen.

I believe the universe is much more flexible and many things can happen, if the governing principles and God ordain it. So I would not limit God. Again I don't advocate the priesthood extended to women, don't believe it will or should happen, but categoricaly refusals for the possibility, I am not willing to make.

[pelagius]

Originally Posted by Archaea

My prediction is that it will not happen.

However, given the fact that women officiate in the temple and women participated in blessings, I could see a point theologically, where it wasn't a mistake but that the members had progressed to a point where the natural outgrowth was for both to have authority to preside. Mind you, I'm not asking for it, don't believe it will happen, but reserve in the back of my mind that it could happen.

I believe the universe is much more flexible and many things can happen, if the governing principles and God ordain it. So I would not limit God. Again I don't advocate the priesthood extended to women, don't believe it will or should happen, but categoricaly refusals for the possibility, I am not willing to make.

I probably do this far too often and this article is probably familiar to many, but Arch's references to temple blessings and administration of the sick reminded me of Quinn's article, "Mormon Women Have Had the Priesthood Since 1843." Regardless, of whether you agree with Quinn's conclusions or whether you think it has no bearing on modern conceptions of priesthood, it is definitely worth reading for the historical background on the woman and the priesthood issue.

Online: Mormon Women Have Had the Priesthood Since 1843.

[Archaea]

Good article and a lot stuff with which one cannot disagree.

That's why it's not so far-fetched to believe the full blessings and operations of the priesthood may be extended to women. Else why do we have "priestesses"?