What is the priesthood anyway?

[2bizE]

Even as a TBM, the more I learned about the priesthood, the less I seemed to understand.
Now as I review different teachings on the priesthood, I'm convinced that nobody, not even church leaders know what it is. This gives more credence to it being made up.
There have been so many differing talks explaining the priesthood, and they differ greatly.
I've heard it said it is the power of God on earth. I've heard it can only be used if the person is worthy. Then you hear stories of an unworthy bloke going with a general authority to give a blessing and the GA pronounces the guy worthy enough. Then there are talks on how only men have the priesthood. A few years ago, during the ordain women movement, either Oaks or Nelson gave a talk on how women actually do hold the priesthood, they are just not ordained to an office.
So what is it? What is the priesthood. Then there is the discussions on the keys of the priesthood. Makes no sense to me anymore. I think what JS called the keys were actually keywords shared in secret, not some magical, unseen gift of understanding.
Since my wife apparently holds the priesthood, I'm thinking of having her assist with giving blessings to the children. Have any of you done that?

[Servant]

If a few words I can share will be of some value.

I studied this question for many years and observed every man in the church that I came into contact with.

I read all of church history and the history of priestly offices in the Bible from Genesis to Revelations.

I can highly recommend such a study.

Short answers below.

1. There is no such matter as priesthood in the universe.
As such it's not a thing, it's not a noun ( though LDS use it that way) if it's to make any sense it should be a verb.
So short answer is, priesthood does not exist.

2. What about restoration.?
Never happened. The fact that Joseph and Sydney gave NO date of specifics on a matter of such supposed importance is partly evidential.
Further evidence is that it simply doesn't do what the instructions on the packet say. It's broken, it doesn't work. The amount of times we get a miraculous result with such 'same as Jesus' priesthood (don't make me laugh) is further evidence.

3. The book of Mormon is false. It is a result of Joseph and Oliver. I don't trust either of them when they say John the Baptist showed up and gave them the mini-me priesthood. Would you trust them?

4. The holy ghost doesn't work. My gut feels are more accurate. So how come all the mini-me priesthoods and maxi-me priesthoods can't see this? Ummmmm duh, I dunno. But it's worth very little.

So laying on hands for the holy goat doesn't work and is actually fraud and a form of abuse, and I will not and never have defrauded an innocent 8 year old.

5. The self righteousness of man and his desires to hold his present position as truth, far more than he desires to ensure his beliefs are true, was again demonstrated by our church forebears in 1852, when section 110 was invented, saying that Jesus, Moses, Elijah etc showed up in the Kirtland temple and gave super special keys to Joseph.

Before that such a 'revelation' was never mentioned by anyone and as late as 1843 Joseph was still preaching that Elijah must still return.

Knowing now how 'Revelation' was obtained,( looking through mountains, laying on your back praying into a trance, some wine and fasting, etc), this sounds like another one of them.
Someone did write the text of Sec 110 in the back of Josephs journal but it wasn't Jospeh. It wasnt in his hand writting. It was first written in the third person and conveniently altered to the first person by Brigham, and I think it was Pratt in 1852, then presented to the church as the source of their 'keys of exclusive authority' ( makes me sick)

So no keys of authority, no restoration, and no priesthood.

Certainly NO priesthood like Jesus.

Is that the end of the story?

[Servant]

It's the end for some, not for others.

Everyone has their own path, each person is learning and becoming through their unique experience.

The value of each persons experience could be said to be in what usefulness it is to mankind as a whole, and in what it teaches that individual.

So I don't see it as being useless or valueless.

Each individual must consider for themselves the value of what they are doing, and I suppose each person does this when they are ready.

But I am hurt when we mislead and hurt nieve and ignorant and innocent children and youth, who with such open trust place their lives and confidence in what we olders tell them, and more hurt when we oppress and abuse their minds and souls with threats of destruction and eternal hell if they do not conform to the manner of life and death our religion is selling.

[Servant]

For those who find more in the 'priesthood' I can speak a little perhaps, though again this isn't really the place.

The real place is only in the heart.

If in one's heart one loves others and truth above self, if one trusts truth above traditions and the culture of their birth and church, hmmmm will not that person ultimately share those truths in contrast to the half truths. How could he/she not?

The love and integrity must produce a result. It cannot be ignored, it is the driving force. It does not die. It must be spent, and when it is spent, the fruit (results) are good, which feed further love and truth.

As each unique person rises to express love and truth. . . . . (you fill in the blanks here by what you do and what you encourage by your life)

[Servant]

Finally in an attempt to name what I see as good in the LDS practice of 'priesthood'

I can't.

I can't name the good without the bad.

The bad is, ordination.

I would recommend NO laying on hands.

It doesn't work for the Holy Ghost.

It doesn't work for priesthood.

Now some good.

Priestly service or servitude can be a real thing.

Here's how.

Spirits can be good or evil.

No doubt. (And I've been out of my body so I know I'm a spirit.)

Anyone who encourages and teaches and assists another person to Repent of evil, or of what is destructive, or hurtful, or demeaning, or stagnating, IS acting in what we can accurately term a priestly capacity.

If by 'priesthood' or by 'priest' we mean a person who helps another person repent of error or sin and draw towards goodness, justice, righteousness, enobling conduct, then yes, we can act in a priestly capacity, however the very human tendency ( and danger to reality) is to then think we have a permanent power and authority, when in reality no one is that special.

Where it gets interesting is with specifics.

When we are operating specifically and under direction or instruction, more particularly from the heavens, that could be termed priesthood but in my view it should not be termed priesthood, much in part to do with how much LDS culture had turned the word into a noun and a permanent yet false 'power and authority' over the eternal forever after place of an individual.

Better to simply say, hey you, God/the heavens told me this or that. That would do.

However, so much of the 'in training' priesthood (which is the best the LDS church could claim on a good day) has been called real priesthood, for so long, that the current 'P' has virtually no currency. Trust simply cannot be placed in it. Nowhere. And I wish I could say otherwise.

And so few men, (or women) have spent their energy trying to unravel and make sense of the mess, (most people get on with living their hybrid lives, (part what I want, part what my culture requires,) all while earning a living and raising a family) that their isn't many people who can make use of the truth.

Shame really.

One thing the LDS Church had right but half buried. It is what we do that matters. But the gobbledegook is so deep and so sacred, (not to be questioned) that living authentically and with integrity, rather than by the LDS system, is seen as heresy.

I think the individual gets what they go after.

[Culper Jr.]

I posed the same question to my TBM wife a while back.

If I pray or "bless" my child when she is sick, how or why would that have any more efficacy than if my wife were to pray for her?

I often hear women bear testimony of how thankful they are to have "priesthood in the home", or testify how they miss it or wish they had it if they don't. What exactly is the difference? I remember when a lady's son was ordained a deacon and she tearfully testified that she was glad that she now had a PH holder in her home. What specifically changed that made things so much better?

If you want to have a headache, try to follow the logic in the church's training video about PH keys. I think they just like saying the word "keys" a lot.

I just learned that it was something like 5 years after it supposedly happened that anyone heard anything about the PH restoration by angelic ministers. I guess when Joseph's authority was challenged he had to come up with something really good to prove he was in charge.

[Hagoth]

An anthropologist would explain priesthood as social stratification. Any society that amasses enough population will begin to form layers of social status, some of these are almost always likely to claim power over others because they have a special connection to god/gods/spirits.

This becomes very obvious if you look at the earliest history of the church. At first there were just elders and the authority structure of the church was very flat and egalitarian. But stratification began to show up early. Soon there was a First Elder and a Second Elder and eventually they started naming other officers and ordaining certain men as high priests. In the beginning men simply felt called to the priesthood and got their authority directly from God, but as there became more competition for authority the scriptures were rewritten to include angels that gave the power directly to one man and that man also just happened to get revaluation from God that he had the sole rights to commune with deity. That gave him power to take away the proclaimed authority of others (e.g. disfellowshipping James Brewster, taking away Hyrum Page's seer stone and destroying it).

That's what led people like David Whitmer out of the church. Whitmer was there when it started, when everyone was pretty much equal in the priesthood, at least everyone who had a priesthood antenna. Then, as the church grew, so did the depth of social stratification and the need for obedience to certain men. The priesthood quickly became a way for Joseph to assign ranks according to peoples' loyalty. If you doubt it just look at the way the special priesthood seating was arranged in the Kirtland temple (and in the upper room of the Salt Lake temple).

The funny thing about LDS priesthood is that all men and boys are told that they wield immense superhero-like power, but they are only able to manifest this power - a power that supposedly can move mountains and create universes - by passing the sacrament and sitting in special chairs, things that literally anyone (and in some cases inanimate objects) could do. But you never know when you might be called on to perform a miracle, so it becomes an amazingly powerful tool for controlling the thoughts and behavior of the foot soldiers.

[Emower]

I see this as an crucial question in anyone's faith journey. Especially mine. From a tbm perspective, it is the reason behind everything we do in the church. Why not pay charitable contributions to a more deserving source? Because priesthood. Why not be a cafeteria Mormon? Because priesthood. Why not bail out of the boat? Because of priesthood. Why not quit wearing garments? Because of covenants vis a vis priesthood. Why believe you need the temple to get back to God? Because priesthood. The Book of Mormon is NOT the keystone of the Mormon religion. Priesthood is. And by extension Joseph's character and word, which frankly is sorely lacking. It is clear to me that it is a made up concept.

The funny thing about LDS priesthood is that all men and boys are told that they wield immense superhero-like power, but they are only able to manifest this power - a power that supposedly can move mountains and create universes - by passing the sacrament and sitting in special chairs, things that literally anyone (and in some cases inanimate objects) could do. But you never know when you might be called on to perform a miracle, so it becomes an amazingly powerful tool for controlling the thoughts and behavior of the foot soldiers.

This is so true. Always be worthy guys to do what is asked of you. The guilt shaming control of actions has always been difficult for me to submit to.

[FiveFingerMnemonic]

I have a few definitions:

1. Stolen intellectual property from Alexander Crawford in the reformed baptist movement 1827.

"In 1827, Crawford had delineated the existence of three distinct priesthoods: a patriarchal priesthood (which he also called a priesthood after the “order of Melchisedec”), an Aaronical priesthood (originally held by Aaron), and a priesthood held by Jesus Christ. Crawford regarded Melchizedek as a greater priest than Abraham, citing the fact that Abraham paid tithes to him; "

https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/you-shall- ... priesthood

2. Tribal power structure mechanism (social stratification as mentioned by Hagoth above)

3. Cultural Mileu control lever

[Servant]

The women get confidence when they have the 'priesthood' in the home.

Feel good and affirmation of their childish hopes, and 'we are special, chosen, better than others.

Never mind that the man has to fake it and copy.

Badly taught. Devalued and mistaught to the point of fraud.

It should be something you work at and slowly earn to become, a Godly man speaking truth and love.

Naaaaa, let's just lay hands on every teen-age boy and tell them that we have just given them power, authority, obligation and responsibility to be like God and act for God.

That isn't love or understanding. It's love of self, saying: hey I don't know what I'm doing and it mostly doesn't work, but to help me feel better you better join me or you will go to hell.

[Servant]

Just a few notes on 'keys'

The word 'keys' as pertaining to the idea of authority appears in the D&C over 45 separate instances, in a space of 1830 to 1843.

In comparison it appears 6 times in the whole Bible, ( 4000 plus years)

Of those 6 times one is old testament, referring to King David and the Jewish belief in his lineages right to leadership, (not priesthood) This is where it all starts but it's based in Jewish propaganda in my view.

The second time is Jesus speaking of Peter's right to lead after he leaves, so the use of the notion 'keys of authority' has taken root in the Jewish mind.

The other 4 are rat bag not understand able Revelations apocalyptic gobbledegook.

So that's the history and epistemology of the use of that word.

It was never used in all the priesthood history of the Bible.

Why not.

Why didn't Adam or Noah speak of passing on keys of authority and salvation to their posterity,?

Why didn't Abraham speak of passing on 'essential keys of authority to Issac?

Why didn't Moses speak of passing on 'essential keys of authority?

Why didn't Elijah speak of passing on 'essential keys of authority'?

Why did no one ever mention it other than Jesus to Peter?

If it was/is so essential?

Why did Brigham wonder were 'the keys' were after Joseph was killed?

Because how it is believed to be done today in the LDS Church and how things actually work is different.

I am grateful I can see, but I cared enough to study until I knew what the right questions where.

Of the splinter groups and 'ones mighty and strong' , I don't think they have made enough effort to study.

I think they have continued to build on sand, to build on the practice that belief and zeal will do, and imagine up a confirmation of their own supposed authority out of nothing out a misinterpreted spiritual experience.

[Hagoth]

Just a few notes on 'keys'

Keys is also a hermetical magical concept, which may be where Joseph picked it up, rather from the concept of Peter being a keyholder. A key is a book, talisman or spell that gives its owner power or secret knowledge. To Joseph Smith probably the masonic signs and tokens were probably considered such keys, as was his Jupiter Talisman. The concepts of keys in the magical context has a direct connection with King Solomon and his temple. Solomon was said to have had keys that protected him from demons and allowed him to control them.

[Hagoth]

I have a few definitions:

1. Stolen intellectual property from Alexander Crawford in the reformed baptist movement 1827.

"In 1827, Crawford had delineated the existence of three distinct priesthoods: a patriarchal priesthood (which he also called a priesthood after the “order of Melchisedec”), an Aaronical priesthood (originally held by Aaron), and a priesthood held by Jesus Christ. Crawford regarded Melchizedek as a greater priest than Abraham, citing the fact that Abraham paid tithes to him; "

[Servant]

Just a few notes on 'keys'

Keys is also a hermetical magical concept, which may be where Joseph picked it up, rather from the concept of Peter being a keyholder. A key is a book, talisman or spell that gives its owner power or secret knowledge. To Joseph Smith probably the masonic signs and tokens were probably considered such keys, as was his Jupiter Talisman. The concepts of keys in the magical context has a direct connection with King Solomon and his temple. Solomon was said to have had keys that protected him from demons and allowed him to control them.

Yes. Thank you for pointing that out.

I now wonder if masons have a belief in the notion of keys.

[deacon blues]

An anthropologist would explain priesthood as social stratification. Any society that amasses enough population will begin to form layers of social status, some of these are almost always likely to claim power over others because they have a special connection to god/gods/spirits.

This becomes very obvious if you look at the earliest history of the church. At first there were just elders and the authority structure of the church was very flat and egalitarian. But stratification began to show up early. Soon there was a First Elder and a Second Elder and eventually they started naming other officers and ordaining certain men as high priests. In the beginning men simply felt called to the priesthood and got their authority directly from God, but as there became more competition for authority the scriptures were rewritten to include angels that gave the power directly to one man and that man also just happened to get revaluation from God that he had the sole rights to commune with deity. That gave him power to take away the proclaimed authority of others (e.g. disfellowshipping James Brewster, taking away Hyrum Page's seer stone and destroying it).

That's what led people like David Whitmer out of the church. Whitmer was there when it started, when everyone was pretty much equal in the priesthood, at least everyone who had a priesthood antenna. Then, as the church grew, so did the depth of social stratification and the need for obedience to certain men. The priesthood quickly became a way for Joseph to assign ranks according to peoples' loyalty. If you doubt it just look at the way the special priesthood seating was arranged in the Kirtland temple (and in the upper room of the Salt Lake temple).

The funny thing about LDS priesthood is that all men and boys are told that they wield immense superhero-like power, but they are only able to manifest this power - a power that supposedly can move mountains and create universes - by passing the sacrament and sitting in special chairs, things that literally anyone (and in some cases inanimate objects) could do. But you never know when you might be called on to perform a miracle, so it becomes an amazingly powerful tool for controlling the thoughts and behavior of the foot soldiers.

Yup. Joseph liked the way priesthood gave him power over his peers. David Whitmer (his "Address to all Christians.....") should be required reading saw through it and called foul. Now, why did David still maintain his witness of the gold plates. That would be a topic for another thread.

[Not Buying It]

The funny thing about LDS priesthood is that all men and boys are told that they wield immense superhero-like power, but they are only able to manifest this power - a power that supposedly can move mountains and create universes - by passing the sacrament and sitting in special chairs, things that literally anyone (and in some cases inanimate objects) could do. But you never know when you might be called on to perform a miracle, so it becomes an amazingly powerful tool for controlling the thoughts and behavior of the foot soldiers.

Even the most fanatical of true believing priesthood holders don't believe they hold superhuman powers. Not really. Consider how most true believing priesthood holders would respond to the following questions:

• Say a shark bites my arm off. Do you really believe your priesthood power could make it whole again? Could President Monson's?
  
  Do you believe you have the power to heal a paraplegic? If so, aren't you morally obligated to do so the next time you see one?
  
  The New Testament describes the apostles healing multitudes of the blind, deaf, and lame. People were healed when Peter's mere shadow passed over them. Could the apostles today do the same thing, and if they can, why is it they don't?

Would they immediately express their unwavering faith that the priesthood could do these things, or equivocate? They will inevitably equivocate, coming up with lame excuses about why these things aren't done, and that tells you all you need to know.

[document]

I find myself in the position of explaining Mormonism to those in my religious community. As such, priesthood is a really difficult thing to nail down.

You could say that priesthood is clergy, but realistically only 4 people a week in a ward participate in what would normally be considered clergy. 3 priests bless the sacrament and 1 bishop shepherds the flock. However, "priesthood" is too broad a term as priesthood holders between the ages of 12 - 15 have no authority for anything clergy related. So, clergy is out.

I went down a number of rabbit holes, and essentially it came down to this.

"Priesthood is defined as a Mormon male over the age of 12."

That's it. The offices of the church have much more meaning and definition. Priesthood is just.....meaningless anymore.

[Hagoth]

Even the most fanatical of true believing priesthood holders don't believe they hold superhuman powers. Not really. Consider how most true believing priesthood holders would respond to the following questions:

• Say a shark bites my arm off. Do you really believe your priesthood power could make it whole again? Could President Monson's?
  
  Do you believe you have the power to heal a paraplegic? If so, aren't you morally obligated to do so the next time you see one?
  
  The New Testament describes the apostles healing multitudes of the blind, deaf, and lame. People were healed when Peter's mere shadow passed over them. Could the apostles today do the same thing, and if they can, why is it they don't?

Would they immediately express their unwavering faith that the priesthood could do these things, or equivocate? They will inevitably equivocate, coming up with lame excuses about why these things aren't done, and that tells you all you need to know.

But we are told that we possess the same power that created the universe. I agree that very few believe they could actually do any those things but many believe that they have access to the power to do them. Believing priesthood holders in general are terrified that they might be expected to do something like that. We know we should be able to do these things but and that an attempt to do so would only demonstrate our lack of sufficient faith and purity. It's a perfect control handle that keeps us always at a disadvantage.

I have always wondered why we don't expect more from out prophet and apostle leaders, but I think it's an extension of the same insecurities. If we expect them to perform miracles it shines a bad light on us as being part of that "wicked and adulterous generation that seeketh after a sign." Our expectation of humility on both parts turns it all upside down. They don't do amazing priesthood things because doing so would be a gratuitous display that would undermine our faith, and our expectation of such a display would be a manifestation of the weakness of our own faith.

[Newme]

Even as a TBM, the more I learned about the priesthood, the less I seemed to understand.
Now as I review different teachings on the priesthood, I'm convinced that nobody, not even church leaders know what it is. This gives more credence to it being made up.
There have been so many differing talks explaining the priesthood, and they differ greatly.
I've heard it said it is the power of God on earth. I've heard it can only be used if the person is worthy. Then you hear stories of an unworthy bloke going with a general authority to give a blessing and the GA pronounces the guy worthy enough. Then there are talks on how only men have the priesthood. A few years ago, during the ordain women movement, either Oaks or Nelson gave a talk on how women actually do hold the priesthood, they are just not ordained to an office.
So what is it? What is the priesthood. Then there is the discussions on the keys of the priesthood. Makes no sense to me anymore. I think what JS called the keys were actually keywords shared in secret, not some magical, unseen gift of understanding.

To me, the priesthood is a healing art - a divination tool, which works based on faith - which means it may not be scientifically repeated in experiments - but it can have influence like a placebo effect.

Also, I think there is some truth to the idea that men are not as emotionally/spiritually nurturing as women - and priesthood gives them extra incentive to be, whereas women have "woman's touch" inherently - it's just not socially recognized in the church. It's due to chauvinism significantly - but it doesn't really bother me because I see it more as a ego-based formality.

Since my wife apparently holds the priesthood, I'm thinking of having her assist with giving blessings to the children. Have any of you done that?

Yes, but not in the formal way that the church instructs.
I even taught my kids what Chinese medicine teaches - that if you focus and put your hands - palms facing each other - as you move them toward each other or away, you'll feel energy. We all have energy - we are energy.
What I'll do is say a prayer as I hug them - sometimes when they're hurt, they'll ask me to do (kind of like) Reiki on that area and then they say it helped. Personally, I believe that charging money for Reiki or energy healing is a bit like priest-craft, but I do believe that there's some true influence derived from our bodies energies interacting metaphysically, besides the placebo effect.