M. David Huston lives and works in the Washington DC metro area. He is a husband and father of four who has previously written for poetry, international affairs, and LDS-related publications.
“Dad, can I ask you a question about the priesthood?” my daughter inquired on a recent Saturday afternoon.
“Sure… let’s hear it,” I encouraged.
“In our church we believe that when women are set apart to do a calling, they fulfil that calling using the priesthood. Is that right?”
I affirmed that she was correct. “Yes, that is what Elder Oaks explained back in 2014. He said that when women act in any calling they exercise priesthood authority in performing duties associated with that calling.”
My daughter nodded at my reply (I guess she knew she was right), and continued along these lines: “Then why can’t the Bishop just call the young women to be ‘sacrament passers’ or ‘sacrament preparers’ and then set them apart to do the calling? I mean, if the church is going to keep saying that the priesthood is needed to do those things, and if women have access to the priesthood through callings, then by calling the young women to these responsibilities and setting them apart they should have all the priesthood they need… right?” She made eye-contact with me and waited patiently for a reply.
I took a few beats to think about her suggestion (honestly something I’d never considered before, at least not in the way she presented it). “You know what?” I said, “that makes sense to me; I don’t know why we couldn’t do that.” And with that, my daughter gave a little shrug and walked out of the room.
In the long-run, I think Sam Brunson is spot on when he noted, “the Doctrine and Covenants expressly prohibits deacons and teachers from administering the sacrament, which means passing and preparing it are not administering it. Thus, the only grounding for requiring priesthood to do those things is tradition.” That tradition needs to change. But if we’re not ready to change that tradition today, then my daughter’s suggested approach—setting apart young women to perform sacrament preparation and passing—would be an alternate way to accomplish the same end.
From my (admitted cheap) seat, there is no downside to changing the policy surrounding which genders help with the sacrament ordinance. In addition to providing more young people a meaningful way to serve their wards, having young women prepare and pass the sacrament would be positive for both the young women performing this duty and for the younger girls who look up to them (studies show that girls and young women benefit greatly from having spiritual leadership modeled by other women in church settings). My daughter is a thinker and a courageous communicator of her own ideas. I’m very proud of her.
But it is not just my daughter’s specific idea that I find interesting. My interaction with her gave me another peak into the things that were on her mind and revealed some foundational thoughts and ideas that are likely generalizable and which feel vitally important:
- First—Issues of equity are on the minds of our young women. Our young women are smart, thoughtful, and striving for more. When it comes to responsibilities and opportunities in church service and leadership, they see and understand that they have fewer of each. We need to change this inequity not only to bless the lives of women, but also because such changes will make our church community stronger and more vibrant.
- Second—Young women are willing to work within the system. In many cases, and recognizing the limitations of their influence, young women are not asking for a radical reconsideration of the church’s entire approach to priesthood leadership; rather they are making humble and thoughtful recommendations that take into account past and current practices. Setting apart young women to prepare or pass the sacrament would be a solution that operates completely within existing priesthood practices (and is a model that could be applied in number of other contexts). If we are not willing/able to fully revamp our priesthood system, we should be willing to make the existing system better and more equitable.
- Third—Young women are longing for more meaningful responsibility and opportunities across the spectrum of church functions. Sure, the young women are happy doing service projects during the week, but they also want to be involved in those aspects of our church that are most central to our worship and ritual practices. By excluding young women from serving in and leading parts of our worship and ritual practices we restrict their ability to have experiences that could bless their lives and limit their ability to bless the lives of those around them.
- Fourth—Specific to the Sacrament, young women recognize its importance and want to be more involved. Young women understand what Elder Oaks taught: “the ordinance of the sacrament makes the sacrament meeting the most sacred and important meeting in the Church.” Currently, on Sundays they are required to sit quietly while the sacrament is prepared and passed by males. But it is precisely because they see the value of the sacrament as a cornerstone of our religious practice that they want to work alongside their male counterparts to deliver the sacrament to their ward families.
- Fifth—We are better as a church when females (young and old) are involved in developing and implementing church policy. Male priesthood leadership have not cornered the market on good ideas, thoughtful approaches, and spiritual inspiration. We need to take President Nelson’s counsel to heart and fully incorporate female voices in decision all levels of making.
The lack of female participation in the sacrament ordinance means women have only a passive role to play when it comes to what really matters at our weekly services. As a father of daughters and a member of a faith community filled with powerful, inspired, and thoughtful women, I struggle with that. And I don’t think I’m alone. My daughter is ready for a change. And so am I. It’s time.
