LDS Freedom Forum

Many years ago when one of my children was very sick it was in the middle of the night
I didn't feel able to ring my home teachers, so I gave a blessing on my own, my wife who wasn't a member at the time asked if she could assist, I said no because you don't have the priesthood, thinking back to that moment it would of been so natural for a father and mother to give their child a blessing, but the church wouldn't allow it, that doesn't seem right to me?

There is a difference between a man to whom God gives the power to seal on earth as in heaven and the ability of a man and a woman to heal by faith.

Joseph Smith said a woman can lay on of hands in faith and it is as natural as wiping the fever with a cloth.

I think a woman can do anything having faith in the name of Jesus Christ. It isn't her priesthood responsibility but anyone can exercise faith in Jesus' name, name meaning authority.

marc wrote: ↑July 6th, 2018, 9:51 am There is a difference between a man to whom God gives the power to seal on earth as in heaven and the ability of a man and a woman to heal by faith.

Not to be rude, but what exactly is the difference?

Thinker wrote: ↑July 6th, 2018, 11:38 am

marc wrote: ↑July 6th, 2018, 9:51 am There is a difference between a man to whom God gives the power to seal on earth as in heaven and the ability of a man and a woman to heal by faith.

Not to be rude, but what exactly is the difference?

A key is found in JST Genesis 14. Note that Melchizedek first had faith. After having been approved by the Lord because of his faith, God then gave to him "power" to do things, which still required faith to do them. There is that point where God trusts you with His power because your will is first aligned with His and trusts that you will not abuse His power. Before this point, however, mountains are only moved IF it is first expedient in Him. Many of us have faith, but cannot move mountains or heal because it is neither expedient nor His will. In Helaman 10, we read about Nephi being given this power because of his strong faith and because God trusted Nephi with His power. Furthermore, in the New Testament, we read that Jesus' disciples asked Jesus why they could not cast out an evil spirit from a boy, though they had been given power. Jesus said it was because of their unbelief and explained to them that if they had faith as a grain of mustard seed, they could move mountains. There was a time when Joseph Smith tried to heal someone, but was struck down for it. You can read about it here. As you read there, you will see that Joseph had this power and faith, but did not always know God's will.

marc wrote: ↑July 6th, 2018, 12:02 pm

Thinker wrote: ↑July 6th, 2018, 11:38 am

marc wrote: ↑July 6th, 2018, 9:51 am There is a difference between a man to whom God gives the power to seal on earth as in heaven and the ability of a man and a woman to heal by faith.

Not to be rude, but what exactly is the difference?

A key is found in JST Genesis 14. Note that Melchizedek first had faith. After having been approved by the Lord because of his faith, God then gave to him "power" to do things, which still required faith to do them. There is that point where God trusts you with His power because your will is first aligned with His and trusts that you will not abuse His power. Before this point, however, mountains are only moved IF it is first expedient in Him. Many of us have faith, but cannot move mountains or heal because it is neither expedient nor His will. In Helaman 10, we read about Nephi being given this power because of his strong faith and because God trusted Nephi with His power. Furthermore, in the New Testament, we read that Jesus' disciples asked Jesus why they could not cast out an evil spirit from a boy, though they had been given power. Jesus said it was because of their unbelief and explained to them that if they had faith as a grain of mustard seed, they could move mountains. There was a time when Joseph Smith tried to heal someone, but was struck down for it. You can read about it here. As you read there, you will see that Joseph had this power and faith, but did not always know God's will.

Interesting, thanks for explaining, Marc. I can see how faith is truly foundational! Well, hope may come before faith - but it is by faith that we get up each morning and do what we do. And when I think about the placebo effect and other metaphysical truths - faith seems all the more important to be rightly directed.

I see priesthood from several points of view.
First - definitely faith as you explained.
I also see priesthood as kind of an exclusive membership - going through the motions, as if a paper and setting apart saying “you hereby receive the priesthood” is all and the only way to exercise the power of God.
I also see those priesthood responsibilities which are placed on men - young and old - as essential to them serving & becoming more Christlike than they otherwise would, even if they are only blue prints not the building (so to speak).
Another perspective: I see the power of God manifested as I gave birth and cared for my children, physically, psychologically and spiritually... and many tender mercies.

Finally, I see the power of God being more fully practiced after having gone through similar spiritual experiences as Christ... having explored our own psych-ology, shadow aspects to be transformed. I see it as a wholistic practice - showing that the spirit rules the body, and that one strives for what is good for oneself and others not for immediate pleasure, but for the bigger picture, as Christ.
Some have developed stages for this:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/38/b4/28 ... bc77d7.jpg
http://www.acfip.org/wpaths.html
Some experience it all without ever reading about it. But for some, (like me) a general map helps.

Official church policy is that a women should not giving blessings by laying on of hands.

When you are sealed to your spouse, you jointly hold the Patriarchal priesthood. I see no doctrinal reason why any woman who is co-holder of this priesthood should not be able to administer to any of her children who are part of that covenant.

Sisters do initiatory work in the temples, under what power or authority do they perform this work?
Are there any other duties they perform in the temple other than that?
If a sister whose husband has died can she bless her children?
If she can do important work in the temple for strangers why can't she do equivalent work in her own home for her family?

Serragon wrote: ↑July 6th, 2018, 3:05 pm Official church policy is that a women should not giving blessings by laying on of hands.

When you are sealed to your spouse, you jointly hold the Patriarchal priesthood. I see no doctrinal reason why any woman who is co-holder of this priesthood should not be able to administer to any of her children who are part of that covenant.

Patriarchal Priesthood has ultimate authority in the family unit. Church policy should not restrict a husband and/or a wife in ministering to their children.

Dusty52 wrote: ↑July 6th, 2018, 3:13 pm Sisters do initiatory work in the temples, under what power or authority do they perform this work?
Are there any other duties they perform in the temple other than that?
If a sister whose husband has died can she bless her children?
If she can do important work in the temple for strangers why can't she do equivalent work in her own home for her family?

She is set apart by the Temple Presidency to officiate in ordinances in the temple. As stated above, the Patriarchal PH also gives her the right to minister to her children.
Personally, I believe your priesthood gives you the right to have your wife administer a blessing to your child, even if she is not a member. You have Priesthood to bless your family, and to decide what is best for all concerned. You preside. Not your Bishop, or any other church member.

I took an Institute class awhile ago, and the CES instructor illustrated it this way: He said that we all know that an LDS father presides in his home. What happens if his Bishop, his Stake President, or an Apostle comes to visit? Who presides then?

The father. Patriarchal Priesthood is above Apostolic Priesthood in the confines of one's' home.

Yes I agree but we are told we cannot do it that way in the church, it's a priesthood holder or nothing
I think women need to be in the equation at the moment they are bystanders, looking on at a child who they brought into this world who they've loved and nurtured and not able to participate, women are supposed to be equal in the church?

Thinker wrote: ↑July 6th, 2018, 12:56 pm I see priesthood from several points of view.
First - definitely faith as you explained.
I also see priesthood as kind of an exclusive membership...

I see priesthood as an association. A neighborhood is an association just like a brotherhood or motherhood or godhood, each an association of something, whether neighbors or brothers or mothers or gods. In this case, an association of priests. Not just any kind of priest, though. This particular association of priest is after the order of the Son of God. I type this with the most profound respect. Faith on the other hand is not an association. I like Joseph Smith's definition, which is the moving cause of all action. It is the belief of something, which motivates one to do something. It is by faith that the Lord created anything. Faith was the moving cause of the utterance, "Let their be light." Words became the vehicle by which He used His power, which all they who are priests after that order (priesthood) to bring forth light into darkness.

But faith and priesthood are not the same thing. To say I have faith is to say I believe; I will do. To say I have priesthood, or better worded yet, I am a member of a priesthood is to say I am a priest. As such, if I am a high priest after the order of the Son of God is to say I am a member of an association of priests who have power over the elements and according to God's will, to heal or to move mountains or to create Earths. But if my faith is weak, or rather, if I don't believe, or if I fear, then my power in the priesthood is impotent. It is why Jesus' disciples could not cast that devil out, or why Peter began to sink after he stepped out onto the water and feared. I wrote a topic on the entire scope of the oath and covenant of the priesthood, at least according to my understanding if you're interested: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=45740

marc wrote: ↑July 6th, 2018, 3:54 pm

Thinker wrote: ↑July 6th, 2018, 12:56 pm I see priesthood from several points of view.
First - definitely faith as you explained.
I also see priesthood as kind of an exclusive membership...

I see priesthood as an association. A neighborhood is an association just like a brotherhood or motherhood or godhood, each an association of something, whether neighbors or brothers or mothers or gods. In this case, an association of priests. Not just any kind of priest, though. This particular association of priest is after the order of the Son of God. I type this with the most profound respect. Faith on the other hand is not an association. I like Joseph Smith's definition, which is the moving cause of all action. It is the belief of something, which motivates one to do something. It is by faith that the Lord created anything. Faith was the moving cause of the utterance, "Let their be light." Words became the vehicle by which He used His power, which all they who are priests after that order (priesthood) to bring forth light into darkness.

But faith and priesthood are not the same thing. To say I have faith is to say I believe; I will do. To say I have priesthood, or better worded yet, I am a member of a priesthood is to say I am a priest. As such, if I am a high priest after the order of the Son of God is to say I am a member of an association of priests who have power over the elements and according to God's will, to heal or to move mountains or to create Earths. But if my faith is weak, or rather, if I don't believe, or if I fear, then my power in the priesthood is impotent. It is why Jesus' disciples could not cast that devil out, or why Peter began to sink after he stepped out onto the water and feared. I wrote a topic on the entire scope of the oath and covenant of the priesthood, at least according to my understanding if you're interested: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=45740

That makes sense. Being ordained the priesthood is not in itself effectual without faith.
I’d like to discuss this more so I’ll check out the other thread.

Dusty52 wrote: ↑July 6th, 2018, 3:25 pm Yes I agree but we are told we cannot do it that way in the church, it's a priesthood holder or nothing
I think women need to be in the equation at the moment they are bystanders, looking on at a child who they brought into this world who they've loved and nurtured and not able to participate, women are supposed to be equal in the church?

No men and women are not equal, i.e. the same. Men and women have different strengths and weaknesses and together they form a complete whole. To say men and women are equal is bluntly stupid and ignores the reality of differences between men and women.

As far as blessings. Christ tells us that anyone with faith can heal others (according to their faith). But there is a massive difference between praying and blessing through the power of prayer and the power of faith and using the Priesthood to conduct ordinances.

Naming a baby is an ordinance, consecrating oil, blessing using oil, baptisim, etc. those are all ordinances. The only reason women are given authority to do ordinances in the temple is b/c for a man to do the ordinance of washing and anointing would creep the freak out of women. And that is the ONLY ordinance in the temple that is done by women-specifically for that reason. The part of the pre-endowment is also done, b/c it's done usually right after the dressing room and again to have males do that in that section of the temple would freak women out (rightly so). Every other ordinance in the temple is done by men who hold the Priesthood. And to re-iterate the temple CLEARLY demonstrates the God-ordained order of things with the men leading, in every instance where men and women are mixed, the men are leading.

Thus this is why women are NOT to be in the circle nor to actually lay on hands during Priesthood ordinances, b/c they do not hold the Priesthood and CANNOT officiate in those ordinances.

You're question of "but why not, it's so unfair" quite frankly strikes me as the attitude that a teenager gives their parent when the parent lays down the rule . . .but mom, dad, that's so unfair, why not, it doesn't make sense, etc."

I submit that if you truly understood the sacred nature of the Priesthood and it's actual duties, responsibilities, etc. you would understand.

I can turn your statement of "it's just not right" around on you. Why not children, why can't they bless using the priesthood, why not anyone who believes, shoot why limit the priesthood to just "worthy members" that's so unfair and "just not right", ANYONE who wants to should be able to use the priesthood right, doesn't matter if they are a member or not.

Calling someone "bluntly stupid" is not useful and is in fact quite a disgraceful think to say to someone, this sort of abusive language should not be tolerated in this forum, or anywhere for that matter, I have never been called this, it will put people off posting if they know that there are people on this forum who will insult and demean what they are trying to say!

Dusty52 wrote: ↑July 6th, 2018, 6:19 pm Calling someone "bluntly stupid" is disgraceful and should not be acceptable in this forum, I hope the forum administrators take action against you, you should not be allowed to insult others!

You need to learn the difference between when someone says an idea is bluntly stupid vs. saying you are stupid. I did not and have not called you stupid, nor do I think you are stupid. I called the idea stupid. I said to say xyz is stupid.

To say the sky is green is stupid, but it does not make the person who said it stupid. We all say stupid things from time to time, making a stupid utterance does not make one stupid.

You need to learn to separate yourself from ideas.

Men and women are CLEARLY NOT equal. Everything from average body size, weight, height, strength, bodily functions, distribution of intelligence, emphasis on different body areas, where they hold their fat, their reasons for existing, their purpose in God's grand plan, even the way men and women think is different. Men and women CLEARLY have different roles, purposes.

To say that men and women are equal is clearly false, incorrect. As in equal how, equal in what way. It is a meaningless phrase to say. They aren't equal in any of the above sense, to say they are is to deny biology, physiology, emotional status, physical status etc.

To focus on "equality" is to focus on the wrong thing-b/c clearly they never will be and never has been "equal". To focus on the unique strengths and weaknesses that each part brings to the table to form one complete whole is appropriate.

I expressed an idea and you said it was "bluntly stupid"
You cannot separate the idea from the person expressing the idea??

Dusty52 wrote: ↑July 6th, 2018, 6:34 pm I expressed an idea and you said it was "bluntly stupid"
You cannot separate the idea from the person expressing the idea??

You must separate ideas from the person! Yes, I was specifically referring to the idea not to you.

Why would I insult you? I don't know you, I don't care enough about you to call you friend, enemy or neither? Why would I even care to call you stupid. It is the idea that I find stupid, not you.

Otherwise you can't have an intelligent conversation b/c you will be stepping on eggshells. "Oh, if I criticize this idea, they will take offense and I don't want them to take offense so I won't criticize the idea".

I'm not attaching the idea to you as an individual.

But I expressed the idea, it is my idea.

Dusty52 wrote: ↑July 6th, 2018, 6:53 pm But I expressed the idea, it is my idea.

So? You are that important that any idea you express is beyond reproach?

You are so all-important and all-knowing that it is absolutely impossible for you to spout off any idea that is rightly dumb, idiotic, stupid, false, not of God? Everyone must bow down at your alter to ensure that no matter what, no one can tell you that you are wrong and that you are off on a crazy path?

Then good luck in life my friend. If you are so fragile that you can not separate yourself as an distinct individual from anything that might be stupid that might come from your mouth and you expect others in life to never call you on it, you will end up surrounding yourself by sycophants.

You will never learn much in life b/c anyone who has the temerity to say "hey Dusty52, that idea of yours is really dumb", you will kick them to the curb-tell them they are a hateful person and despise them.

You wouldn't happen by chance to be a Millennial would you?

You are deluded and you don't make any sense in what you are saying, I have seen other posts you have made and the kinds of things you have said to other people

I'm not wasting anymore time communicating with you

Y'all wanna take this outside? Or can we just agree to disagree and move on?

"Respecting females administering for the healing of the sick, there could be no evil in it, if God gave his sanction by healing; that there could be no more sin in any female laying hands on and praying for the sick, than in wetting the face with water; it is no sin for anybody to administer that has faith, or if the sick have faith to be healed by their administration. "(Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 224)

President Smith then gave instruction respecting the propriety of females administering to the sick by the prayer of faith, the laying on hands, or the anointing with oil; and said it was according to revelation that the sick should be nursed with herbs and mild food, and not by the hand of an enemy. Who are better qualified to administer than our faithful and zealous sisters, whose hearts are full of faith, tenderness, sympathy and compassion. No one. Said he was never placed in similar circumstances before, and never had given the same instruction; and closed his instructions by expressing his heart-felt satisfaction in improving this opportunity.
The Spirit of the Lord was poured out in a very powerful manner, never to be forgotten by those present on this interesting occasion. (History of the Church 4:607

Joseph Fielding Smith (Quorum of the Twelve)

Q: "If a man and his wife were alone with a sick person, could he anoint with the oil and then seal the anointing with his wife assisting using the priesthood she holds jointly with her husband?"

President Joseph F. Smith in The Improvement Era, Vol. 10, page 308, answered this question as follows:

"Does a wife hold the priesthood with her husband and may she lay hands on the sick with him, with authority?"

A wife does not hold the priesthood with her husband, but she enjoys the benefits thereof with him; and if she is requested to lay hands on the sick with him, or with any other officer holding the Melchizedek Priesthood, she may do so with perfect propriety. It is no uncommon thing for a man and wife unitedly to administer to their children. . . .

The wife would lay on hands just as would a member of the Aaronic Priesthood, or a faithful brother without the priesthood, thus giving support by faith to the ordinance....

Such an administration would not be by virtue of the priesthood, but a manifestation of faith. (Answers to Gospel Questions, 1:149-150)
and

John Taylor (President of Quorum of the Twelve)

It is the privilege of all faithful women and lay members of the Church, who believe in Christ, to administer to all the sick or afflicted in their respective families, either by the laying on of hands, or by the anointing with oil in the name of the Lord: but they should administer in these sacred ordinances, not by virtue and authority of the priesthood, but by virtue of their faith in Christ, and the promises made to believers: and thus they should do in all their ministrations. (Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, Circular Letter, October 6, 1880, microfilm of holograph, CR 2 30)

They portrayed the lead character in the "Legacy" movie as laying her hands on her oxen to heal them by a prayer of faith. Relief Society sisters used to lay hands on sisters and pray in faith for healing. We've just gotten very proscribed & standardized in our practices and beliefs now. Most local leaders probably wouldn't tolerate it in any official sort of way. But what mother doesn't hold their child's head in her hands and arms as she prays for them when they are crying in pain or suffering from illness or injury? It's totally appropriate. Btw, JSF said that a AP holder/Priests could assist an Elder in giving a blessing as they are authorized to assist Elders in all their duties, per D&C 20.