Priest and Priestess, Mother and Father

To make people feel better about the role of womanhood, it has been taught (time and time again) that motherhood is equal to that of the priesthood.

No. It. Is. Not.

Motherhood requires physical labor, it requires sacrifice of blood, and water to bring that baby into the world. For those who become mothers through adoption, they go through emotional pains, so in away maybe motherhood by adoption is akin to the priesthood, which is mostly emotional toil, rather then actual physical toil.
But what about the man having to be there at church all day? Doesn't that take a physical toil? And Elders, they have to walk all day, and they get treated badly too? What about Joseph Smith? He had physical pain because of what he did?

Yes, but quite honestly the only priesthood ordinance that motherhood is ever equal too is the atonement. Well let me rephrase that, Birth and the Atonement are equal. One is not just a symbol of the other, I believe they are absolutely intertwined, and always will be, you can not have one without the other. No, it doesn't say that in our scriptures, not exactly, but looking at the two, and studying it, and praying about it. I unequivocally get the answer that Birth and the Atonement are one. That what Christ did isn't any more important then what Mothers do at birth, and what Mothers do at birth isn't any more important then what Christ did.

Remember too, that all these things are titles, Christ is a title, Mother is a title, Priest is a title. These are all titles, explaining certain responsibilities.


But what of Priestess? So far the only thing that I can gather a priestess does, is 1 ordinance in the Temple. That is the washing and anointing and blessing of other women. Then after that she sits in a chair, while the man is center stage. Yes, yes, all people in the Temple receive the same signs and tokens, but only through the male. And everything is geared toward an idea that it is always going to be through the male here and the hereafter. That there is no end to Patriarchy. That Patriarchy and Priesthood are one and the same. And I go "UG!"

And I have been thinking about this connection between Priesthood and Motherhood, then if there is a connection between Priesthood and Motherhood, one must then argue, that there is a connection not yet realized between Priestesshood and Fatherhood. 

So with the way it is now, it may seem that Fatherhood takes a back seat to Priesthood. Except I don't see God calling himself the Almighty Priest. I see him calling himself Heavenly Father. So then it is the role of Father that is above priest, and that he could care less about being called a priest then being called a father. But in our mortal little world, we put fatherhood second to priesthood, and priestesshood second to motherhood.

I don't think it should be this way. So I get to thinking about what exactly is it about these four "roles" that have us all confused. And I think of the Testimony of Adam and Eve in a new way.

Adam stated I, he unequivocally was talking about himself, and finally taking responsibility for his transgression. I know exactly what President Hinckely thought of that, but I disagree. I will not use scriptures to put one person above the other in any way. That is not what the scriptures are about.
Think about it, most men talk in I. "I did this, I did that." It is always about themselves.
So the thought came to me late last night, the preisthood isn't supposed to be about "I", its supposed to be about we. I think the priesthood is supposed to teach men to think with a wholistic view, one they don't really ever have, in a patriarchal world. It is supposed to correct the presumption it is I.

Why God speaks in I, instead of We, I am still trying to figure it out. Maybe in that instance though it isn't about his presiding role, in fact that probably isn't even in consideration (not because its a given, because I just don't think God thinks that way). I think it was because he was trying to explain his atonement, which he did do. He was trying to explain what he is trying to do among men. It makes perfect sense to speak in I. Even if the Godhead acts as a "We".

Now what of the unknown priestesshood? Why is it so unknown? I don't think its unknown. I think God made perfectly clear that it is there, in the Temple. We just have been confused by it. To me I think now, and this thought came to me late last night, that the priestesshood is supposed to be the "I". It is supposed to teach women, that they can do somethings in the I, because women both culturally and natural view it as we. Since its through women, that the entire human culture comes through, the Priestesshood, is supposed to be there for each and every woman, to come to understand her individuality. Her power isn't solely centered around "We", she has individuality, individual strength. And I now think that the priestesshood is there to teach that.

If we all look through the lense that everything is patriarchal, it is always going to put women in a position of inferiority, and secondary nature. It is. And people who say it does not, are kidding themselves.

But if we study the scriptures, think on the stories of women (yes women, they are there, weather they are named or not), and realize that God through these individual women, are trying to tell us that women excercise all roles same as men, just differently. Then we can finally achieve equality. If we realize that Priesthood is supposed to make men unified and create a wholistic approach, where every other thing in culture is telling them, they are just in it for themselves and only themselves, it would help our men better understand how to excercise brotherly kindness and love.

If our Sisters understand that we have both a wholistic approach with motherhood, and an individualistic approach with Priestesshood. Then we can understand better that we have power, we have great influence.

It doesn't completely make sense to me yet. But sometimes I am trying to see a positive approach to it.

I even had the thought that the Ordiances of the Gospel, and Giving Blessings are men's Spiritual Gifts. Even if Men have others that are named in their Patriarchal Blessing. They mostly use those Spiritual Gifts, through excercising of their Priesthood.

For Women I sincerely believe that the untethered use of Spiritual Gifts is our Priestesshood. As well as performing some ordinances in the Temple. I feel that there is more. Oh there is a lot more. I am also beginning to sense we have a lot more then what we originally think.

One day, some day we will know fully what we are as women. We will see our Heavenly Mother, and not so much be acceptant of our role as Mothers and Wives, but be astounded at the Variety of Roles she does have, and that they are similar yet different from her husband. That they together make everything, and they together create. That nothing is done without either of them. I think that. I hope that.

And I have to say, I think we will be utmost surprised, at the utter lack of Patriarchy.

And if there is Patriarchy, then there is also Matriarchy. And if there are both of those then there is Egalitarianism in the Kingdom, Queendom, and Kin-dom of God. And these do not automatically cancel one another.

I think the Celestial Kin-dom is going to be more varied then we believe. I think we will all be surprised. I think there is a place for each and every one of us there. And its not going to be exactly the same for any of us.