© 2024 The Interpreter Foundation. A 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.
All content by The Interpreter Foundation, unless otherwise specified, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available here.
Interpreter Foundation is not owned, controlled by or affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. All research and opinions provided on this site are the sole responsibility of their respective authors, and should not be interpreted as the opinions of the Board, nor as official statements of LDS doctrine, belief or practice.
Great article. You address what is probably the single most thorny theological issue raised in scripture: the issue of race/ethnicity/priesthood. I hope your solution for this constellation of problems is widely adopted. As I read the article, you make two critically important and related points.
First, in the eternities (which is what ultimately matters) priesthood is inherently familial. It is a power that seals us all into the kind of eternal community that is signified by a prayer circle or the arcing circle of sealed couples we see reflected in the facing mirrors when we kneel at the sealing altars of the temple. Familial priesthood is the priesthood paradigm. Ecclesiastical priesthood–including all offices in the Church–are temporary and atypical manifestations of priesthood that disappear after this life. So it is unsurprising that scriptures emphasized the connection between lineage and priesthood. That emphasis was consistent with the ultimate nature and purpose of priesthood.
Second, with the possible exception of lineal descendants of Aaron, through time all of us have lost our connection to lineage priesthood because one of our ancestors broke the seal that makes us a member of the divine community. As you note, we cannot inherit our place in the community from ancestors who are not members of it. So everyone (or almost everyone) is cursed at some point in their ancestral line. And all of us have the power to make ourselves and our descendants accursed, even if we are born in the covenant. We break the seal if we are unfaithful to the familial priesthood legacy we have inherited when born in the covenant.
I think those two principles provide a theological framework that puts all of us equally in or out of the kingdom based on our individual choices and degree of faithful participation in temple ordinances. If we keep those principles in mind, we can read most of the troubling passages in scripture as reflecting the importance of familial priesthood or as political rhetoric, used illegitimately by people in power to delegitimize territorial and governance claims of disfavored rival peoples, e.g., Canaanites. The bottom line: thanks again for providing a framework within which each of us can understand that all of us have been severed at some point from the divine community and that all of us may be grafted in again along with all of our faithful descendants if we participate in temple ordinances that seal us into the community of the redeemed, into the family of our Heavenly Mother and Father, who are the terminus of the line of sealings effectuated in the temple.
Dear Brother Thompson,
Excellent article and a well made argument. I was more interested in the explanations to what happened with Ham as it relates to his Egyptian posterity, but I really enjoyed the discussion of inheritance couched in the framework of covenants. Especially since I am reading Dr Mulhestein’s book Let God Prevail.
I note a typo where you reference Alma 41, seems like there’s an extra -.
You mention a potential “high priest” (kohen gadol) at the Jewish temples of Elephantine and Leontopolis, Egypt, but in each case these would merely be chief priests from the lineage of Aaron within the Tribe of Levi, and even the D&C defines them as lineal Aaronic priests only. Aaronide Kohanim within the Tribe of Levi continue to serve the Jewish community today.
How would they differ, if at all, in authority, from Moses’ father-in-law Jethro, the Priest of Midian (kohen), or from the High Priest of Re at Heliopolis, Egypt (kohen), who was the grandfather of Ephraim & Manasseh (Gen 41)? Indeed, how would the lineage of Ephraim & Manasseh be affected by their mother being the daughter of an idolatrous priest? If, as you emphasize, all the Egyptians hail from Egyptus (Zeptah, Daughter of Ptah), where does that leave generic Egyptian priesthood? Even if, as you suggest, the Canaanite Hyksos were in charge in the Delta during the time when a Pharaoh arose who didn’t know Joseph?
Just a few of the questions which I wish you had clarified in this article.
All LDS prophets including Spencer Kimball insisted that the practice of denying the Priesthood was the correct one. Spencer Kimball said he would maintain the practice unless the Lord declared otherwise. The Lord evidently knows how to optimise the chances for his children to inherit the best degree of salvation and acts accordingly to give us the most suitable earthly experiences for that end. If that means no chance of hearing the Gospel in this life, as is true for most of the people who have come to earth in the past, then that is part of the plan. We may not know exactly why these things are so, but we need to trust the Lord’s decisions as to when his children hear the plan or have the chance to receive the priesthood
I think you are mischaracterizing Pres. Kimball and others by claiming they “insisted that the practice of denying the Priesthood was the correct one.” They certainly felt it required divine direction to change the policy, but I think historical sources demonstrate that they struggled to understand its purpose and existence, as we still do today.