Logical argument for male-exclusive Priesthood authority

Public forum for topics that don't fit into the other categories.
squarepeg
Posts: 120
Joined: 17 Feb 2017, 12:51

Logical argument for male-exclusive Priesthood authority

Post by squarepeg » 21 Aug 2017, 13:04

Does anyone know of an argument for why men give Priesthood ordinations and women don't, that goes beyond, "That's just the way the Lord wants it"? I am trying to think of a reason WHY the Lord would want it that way.

(Background: My son will turn 12 in six months and he thinks that he would like to be a deacon. We so recently reactivated after several years of inactivity that I don't think he is aware that often dads ordain their sons, and my hubby is kind of feeling like he isn't going to be in a place, testimony-wise, to do that...so we may need to call in a grandpa from out of state. It all has me thinking... My hubby is one who would like to see authority be more egalitarian in the Church, and might be more inclined to believe in the construct of Priesthood authority if it were given to women, also, or maybe if we at least knew why it isn't given to women.)

Thanks for any thoughts!!

Sent from my ONE E1005 using Tapatalk


Curt Sunshine
Site Admin
Posts: 16697
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 20:24

Re: Logical argument for male-exclusive Priesthood authority

Post by Curt Sunshine » 21 Aug 2017, 13:50

Sexist men won the ancient battle to run the ecclesiastical show, and their successors assumed it was God's will.

Totally logical and, I think, true.
I see through my glass, darkly - as I play my saxophone in harmony with the other instruments in God's orchestra. (h/t Elder Joseph Wirthlin)

Even if people view many things differently, the core Gospel principles (LOVE; belief in the unseen but hoped; self-reflective change; symbolic cleansing; striving to recognize the will of the divine; never giving up) are universal.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken

User avatar
hawkgrrrl
Site Admin
Posts: 3520
Joined: 22 Oct 2008, 16:27

Re: Logical argument for male-exclusive Priesthood authority

Post by hawkgrrrl » 21 Aug 2017, 14:57

*cough* patriarchy *cough*

User avatar
SilentDawning
Posts: 7241
Joined: 09 May 2010, 19:55

Re: Logical argument for male-exclusive Priesthood authority

Post by SilentDawning » 21 Aug 2017, 15:23

I've heard no good reason for it. All the reasons are lame "the men need the responsibility because they are weaker than the women". "It's a matter of order". And then all the appeals to tradition and God's will.

None of them satisfy in my view. If you want to hear a lot of reasons, look on an orthodox Mormon discussion forum and you'll get all kinds of rationalizations and reasons.
"It doesn't have to be about the Church (church) all the time!" -- SD

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. No price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself."

A man asked Jesus "do all roads lead to you?" Jesus responds,”most roads don’t lead anywhere, but I will travel any road to find you.” Adapted from The Shack, William Young

User avatar
dande48
Posts: 1443
Joined: 24 Jan 2016, 16:35
Location: Wherever there is danger

Re: Logical argument for male-exclusive Priesthood authority

Post by dande48 » 21 Aug 2017, 15:24

Back a long time ago, our premordial ancestors broke away from asexual reproduction, as a result of evolutionary pressures. This allowed for certain members of the species to devote most of their resources into growing progeny (females), while the other members could focus more heavily on spreading their genes (males). This was advantagous, as it allowed the genes of the best males to get passed on multiple times, while the males with less advantagous traits had their genes removed from the pool. This also lead to the development of sexual dimporphism, where the females developed traits superior for raising offspring, and males developed traits for getting the females to mate with them. With a number of exceptions, this led most females to become picky mating partners, and most males to become very competitve with one another. If there was something a male could do, which would set them apart from the rest, and increase their chances of producing offspring who could in turn survive, and reproduce, it was in their best interest to do so.

A billion years passed (give or take), and a special sentient species popped up called "humans". They were unusually self aware. They developed communication, which they used to share knowledge, to ask for things they need, to work in teams to accomplish an objective, and sometimes to lie and decieve.

The earliest evidence of religion comes from around 70,000BC, down in Botswana. The locals had learned from hard experience that the snake was a mighty creature, who could kill even when inflicting the tiniest of wounds. They were in awe of things they did not understand, and believed snakes held magical killing powers. And then, one day while exploring, they came across a large rock, that looked like a snake. In order to appease the snake, they began offering sacrifices of food, in hopes that the "mother stone snake god" would spare them. Since the men did the hunting, and were no doubt pressured by the women to hunt all the more to appease the snake god, the men were the first to offer up religious sacrifice.

They also invented a hirarcy, often dominated (but not always) by a sole male; the strongest, smartest, fastest, most cunning male, who had his pick of the ladies. Women, on the other hand, did not need to develop the traits of strength and cunning to the extent the males did. It is better for the offspring if they developed more nurturing qualities. As long as their limited offspring could survive and thrive, fathered by the best males, they were successful. For the males, however, could always produce more and more offspring.

Thus, men took off in their competitive natures, creating organizations and hirarchies which would ensure maximum reproduction. They also came up with a wide variety of religions, which were largely based on the unknown/mysterious forces which goveren their lives. There was a god for this, and a god for that; and all the gods gave authority to a select few males, which gave them a right to boss everyone else around. Then, one day a man (possibly Abraham), recieved the revelation that instead of many gods, there was only one God, and he was the ultimate father figure; someone who would watch over you, and take care of you, and reprimand you when you were bad, but always had your best interests at heart. And as the ultimate father figure, he put fathers in charge.

And there you have the combination of sexual dimorphim and early civilization which has led to most religions being run by a male-exclusive priesthood authority. Of course, short answer is, God told the male-exclusive priesthood authority it was so. I'm not sure how reliable of a source they generally are, but maybe the LDS Church is the only one with the true authority from the one true God. If so, "because God declared it" should be reason enough.
"The whole world is a comedy to those that think, a tragedy to those that feel." - Horace Walpole

"Even though there are no ways of knowing for sure, there are ways of knowing for pretty sure."
-Lemony Snicket

User avatar
dande48
Posts: 1443
Joined: 24 Jan 2016, 16:35
Location: Wherever there is danger

Re: Logical argument for male-exclusive Priesthood authority

Post by dande48 » 21 Aug 2017, 15:25

SilentDawning wrote:
21 Aug 2017, 15:23
"the men need the responsibility because they are weaker than the women".
That is a sexist notion, and I resent the men and women who perpetuate it.
"The whole world is a comedy to those that think, a tragedy to those that feel." - Horace Walpole

"Even though there are no ways of knowing for sure, there are ways of knowing for pretty sure."
-Lemony Snicket

Roy
Posts: 5890
Joined: 07 Oct 2010, 14:16
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: Logical argument for male-exclusive Priesthood authority

Post by Roy » 21 Aug 2017, 15:51

A fairly compelling argument is that this is how Jesus organized things. He called 12 all male disciples.

He also preached exclusively to the Jews as the time was not yet right for the gospel to go to the gentiles. Later after the death of Jesus, Peter received a revelation that the gospel was to go to the gentiles.

Fast forward 2000ish years. GBH says on Larry King Live that it would take a revelation from God to the president of the church to grant priesthood ordination to women.

Unfortunately, God does not seem to send revelations when we are not asking for them and the top church authorities seem very motivated to maintain the status quo.
"It is not so much the pain and suffering of life which crushes the individual as it is its meaninglessness and hopelessness." C. A. Elwood

“It is not the function of religion to answer all the questions about God’s moral government of the universe, but to give one courage, through faith, to go on in the face of questions he never finds the answer to in his present status.” TPC: Harold B. Lee 223

"I struggle now with establishing my faith that God may always be there, but may not always need to intervene" Heber13

User avatar
nibbler
Posts: 4207
Joined: 14 Nov 2013, 07:34
Location: Ten miles west of the exact centre of the universe

Re: Logical argument for male-exclusive Priesthood authority

Post by nibbler » 21 Aug 2017, 16:49

Disclaimer: I'm not saying I agree with this one or that it's particularly logical, it's just a better apologetic than most I've heard on the subject.

Some time ago I had a BP that was also an institute teacher. He was of the opinion that the PH was reserved for males because it helped them transition into adulthood. His reasoning: there are physical signs of girls becoming women; namely menstruation and breasts. When these things happen society starts to view the girl as a woman and the girl starts to feel like she's becoming a woman.

Meanwhile boys during this same age don't really have markers to signal to the world and themselves that they are becoming men. Take for instance many missionaries I see in the field these days. Logically I know they must be at least 18 years old but some of them really do look like 14 year olds. The offices of deacon, teacher, priest, and even elder serve as these tangible things to mark transition periods for boys becoming men. Things that help society and the boy mark their progression towards manhood.

Of course men can grow beards, I don't know where that fits into his equation, but that was his reasoning.

It's just another apologetic that starts with the conclusion, only men can have the priesthood, and attempts to find the reasons. I'm not saying much when I say this but it's the easiest for me to swallow of the many apologetics on the subject.
He who sits alone, sleeps alone, and walks alone, who is strenuous and subdues himself alone, will find delight in the solitude of the forest.
— Buddha

Roy
Posts: 5890
Joined: 07 Oct 2010, 14:16
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: Logical argument for male-exclusive Priesthood authority

Post by Roy » 21 Aug 2017, 17:33

Nibbler, I do agree that having a role and responsibility in the community tend to make the YM better grounded than they usually are. I believe that this and missionary service helps to transition them into adulthood. I also believe that priesthood responsibilities might make men into better husbands and fathers than they otherwise would be.

Those are benefits of the current method of moving YM up in priesthood offices as they pass certain age milestones.

Not exactly a justification though...
"It is not so much the pain and suffering of life which crushes the individual as it is its meaninglessness and hopelessness." C. A. Elwood

“It is not the function of religion to answer all the questions about God’s moral government of the universe, but to give one courage, through faith, to go on in the face of questions he never finds the answer to in his present status.” TPC: Harold B. Lee 223

"I struggle now with establishing my faith that God may always be there, but may not always need to intervene" Heber13

User avatar
LookingHard
Posts: 2924
Joined: 20 Oct 2014, 12:11

Re: Logical argument for male-exclusive Priesthood authority

Post by LookingHard » 21 Aug 2017, 18:03

hawkgrrrl wrote:
21 Aug 2017, 14:57
*cough* patriarchy *cough*
Hawkgrrrl. You are always so verbose. You used 2 more words than I would have used. Ocam's Razor pushes me to to my opinion.

Post Reply