Should Mormon women receive the priesthood? Mormon men are for it; Mormon women not so much
There was a fascinating post over at BeliefNet this week on attitudes among Mormons about women receiving the priesthood. Here is the most interesting part, quoting studies found in the book American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us by authors Robert Putnam and David Campbell:
Yet the most remarkable finding is that within Mormonism itself, there is a significant split by gender on this question. The number that looks the most extraordinary to outsiders–that only 10% of Mormon women want the priesthood–seems pretty predictable to those inside the faith. But the finding that 48% of Mormon men say they favor female LDS clergy is truly startling.
The blog author, Grant Hardy, goes on to give a long list of possible explanations for these survey results. Most of them seem fairly plausible as contributing factors at least. All of them are pretty nice to Mormon men and women I thought.
The cynic in me thinks Hardy danced around one obvious explanation. That is that 48% of men wouldn’t mind letting the ladies do more of the heavy lifting regarding clergy duties in church. In contrast, 90% of the ladies like the fact that they can be completely guilt-free when it comes to those difficult and time-consuming clergy duties.
What do you think though? Certainly there is some combination of reasons why Mormon men are nearly five times more likely to favor women receiving the priesthood and serving in clergy duties than Mormon women are to favor such a thing. But what is your guess about the primary reason for these results? Something Hardy said? The more cynical reason I mentioned? Or something else entirely?
I don’t think there is anything cynical about the suggestion that many women in the church don’t want the responsibilities attaching to holding the Priesthood. My wife is definitely one of those women. She and I have discussed this topic a number of times recently, and she always ends up saying the same thing: there is a lot of responsibility to holding the Priesthood, beyond just the meetings, the home teaching, and the ecclesiastical roles. There are the responsibilities of being a representative of God on earth in a way that is deeper than she is now, and she, for one, is happy to not have it.
I think men aren’t so much anxious to see women hold the Priesthood and share the burden of responsibility as they are just open to the idea that there isn’t a particular reason that women don’t, except, of course, for the very important point that, as far as we understand, God has said so. At least so far.
Comment by Alex T. Valencic — December 22, 2010 @ 2:57 pm
First of all, the title of your post makes it sound like more than 50% Mormon men are FOR women getting the priesthood. However, it was only 48%.
It is important to note the small sample in the study and the fact that Mormon men might view RS presidencies and Primary presidencies as clergy.
I believe the biggest reason (besides the prophet said so) that women might be against it is that they have seen up close how the priesthood has helped their fathers, husbands and sons have in a male only priesthood and would hate to have that disappear.
Comment by jks — December 22, 2010 @ 3:05 pm
This study comes to mind: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/08/100816142129.htm
Comment by geoffsn — December 22, 2010 @ 3:08 pm
geoffsn,
The problem with that study is that it does nothing to explain the wide difference between the opinions of regular Mormon men and women on this subject. None of the male or female members surveyed have power to change the system yet women preferred the status quo far more than men.
Comment by Geoff J — December 22, 2010 @ 3:12 pm
jks,
Hardy has that as one of his explanations. Seems like viable candidate to me.
Comment by Geoff J — December 22, 2010 @ 3:13 pm
Maybe more women are uncomfortable with the idea of leading men (worthiness interviews, disciplinary councils, saying “no” in planning meetings, etc.) than men are of being led by women.
Also, it may simply be that men, having experienced leadership duties, realize that there is nothing particularly magical or tricky about it and so they think women would be as capable (and incapable) as any man. Women, on the other hand, haven’t seen what’s “behind the curtain,” so it’s natural to be reluctant about assuming they could do it.
Also, a less cynical (depending on one’s perspective) take on your suggestion is that maybe men are more willing and even desirous to spend lots of time away from home than women are. So men don’t see a big deal about having parents so busy with church callings that they don’t see their kids enough. In other words, it’s not that women are shirking church service, they’re just more concerned about sacrificing family time to do it.
Comment by BrianJ — December 22, 2010 @ 3:20 pm
My question is how this relates to the temple.
Endowed women are currently able to be set apart to perform priesthood ordinances in the Temple (Initiatory ordinances involving the pronouncing of blessings, various aspects of the Endowment, etc) –
If the public acknowledgement of a Priesthood of women were to happen in the Church, I think the first step would be to emphasize this aspect of women already exercising priesthood authority. And perhaps extending permission to endowed women to stand in on blessings. And (perhaps) to pronounce them if an Elder is not available.
The big question would be, what would this priesthood order be called? What authority would be invoked? Most likely would not be the same orders/offices. Would it be The Priesthood of Eve? Miriam? Sarah?
Or would they just say, generically, as in temple ordinances, “Having authority, …”?
Comment by David T — December 22, 2010 @ 3:37 pm
I think the biggest reason for the difference is that most Mormon women do not want to be seen as coveting the priesthood, and that many Mormon men do not want to be seen as being stingy.
Comment by Eric Nielson — December 22, 2010 @ 3:40 pm
I think there is something to that one Eric. I am not sure how anonymous the surveys were though. The more anonymous they were the less bias there would be based on how respondents want to be seen.
Comment by Geoff J — December 22, 2010 @ 3:43 pm
BrianJ,
I think your theory in your second paragraph has some merit.
Comment by Geoff J — December 22, 2010 @ 3:53 pm
I think the time is quickly approaching when a woman such as Julie Beck could lead the church as it’s president of course this would require a change in succession which is also overdue.
Given the fact that few women desire to hold the priesthood it would be logical to extend the priesthood to female leadership positions during the term of their calling giving those who want to an opportunity to do so.
I would also like to see the General Relief Society President called as an Apostle with Regional Relief Society Presidencies added to create a female hierarchy extending down to the ward level. The Relief Society was created to provide for the needy and this would provide a platform for them to feed and water mankind the world over something that has been largly ignored by the current structure.
There is no reason women cannot serve in the higest positions of the church.
Comment by Howard — December 22, 2010 @ 4:08 pm
It was a really small sample. We are extrapolating a lot from only 13? men’s answers.
Comment by jks — December 22, 2010 @ 4:21 pm
It looks like 53 Mormons, half men (about 26), about half saying they favor female clergy (about 13) which means they either want change or they understand that RS, YW and Primary presidencies are clergy. These 13 guys are certainly causing a lot of speculation as to their real thought processes.
Comment by jks — December 22, 2010 @ 4:26 pm
Interesting criticisms jks. So is it your contention that the research is all spurious because of faulty methodology?
Also, where are you getting the info on the methodology?
Comment by Geoff J — December 22, 2010 @ 4:35 pm
She’s getting her info from our conversation at the Exponent blog. David Campbell was kind enough to drop by and answer our methodology questions . . .
http://www.the-exponent.com/2010/12/20/who-thinks-women-should-hold-the-priesthood-men-apparently/
Comment by Deborah — December 22, 2010 @ 5:15 pm
Thanks for the link and answer Deborah. I hadn’t seen that discussion on this topic.
Here is the specific comment from David Campbell.
Here is an excerpt of what he said there:
Comment by Geoff J — December 22, 2010 @ 5:29 pm
So as long as the sampling was sufficiently random, a sample of 53 would be enough to allow the old central limit theorem to kick in and give relatively accurate data. But as David notes, the smaller sample means the +- on the reported numbers is higher than it would be with a larger sample.
So we can fairly safely assume that men are more for women clergy/priesthood, but we are not safe in assuming men are 5 times more for it.
Comment by Geoff J — December 22, 2010 @ 5:35 pm
I think “spurious” would be an overstatement of the criticism of the methodology, but yes, there are some serious questions.
Keep in mind that the question Dr. Hardy raised in the BeliefNet essay, “Do you think Mormon women should hold the priesthood and share equally in the administrative leadership of wards and stakes?” is NOT the question that was asked in the survey. The actual item on the Faith Matters instrument was, “Women should be allowed to be priests or clergy in my house of worship.”
“So as long as the sampling was sufficiently random…”
And that is a question that hasn’t been addressed. It wasn’t much of an issue for the main objective of the overall survey, which was to measure differences between religions. But to measure differences within the same religion, it seems that some oversampling and stratification is needed.
For example, some colleagues did a nationwide survey of Catholics, and they made sure to sample Catholics all over the US, and not just end up with a lot from enclaves like Boston. The implications for Mormons is pretty obvious.
This is why the Pew Religious Landscape Survey was so groundbreaking when it came to the Mormon population; they had a much larger sample size and gathered data from all over the U.S.
I wouldn’t call it spurious by any means–and the book itself is excellent—but some skepticism about the data from such a small sample is in order.
Comment by Naismith — December 22, 2010 @ 6:31 pm
Yea, the sample size wouldn’t worry me so much if the result were less shocking. (48% is shocking, I can only hope it would hold up in larger/more diverse sample, but I’m betting against it) Clearly the bloggernacle needs more scientific polling targeted exclusively at the Mormon population.
Comment by Jacob J — December 22, 2010 @ 7:06 pm
Thanks for posting this, I just sent a text to a friend about grant’s post, and hadn’t seen this. This adds a lot more to it, especially the comments.
Comment by Matt W. — December 22, 2010 @ 7:06 pm
Should we build a poll. Last time we did a survey of about 1000 members.
Comment by Matt W. — December 22, 2010 @ 7:07 pm
Yes! Do a poll. I too was concerned about the small sample size and would be interested to see what more Latter-day Saints have to say on this question.
Comment by Bored in Vernal — December 22, 2010 @ 7:19 pm
Naismith,
Yes, I think your points are good ones. Not only is there real risk in the small sample, there is always risk in the way the questions are asked and understood.
Nevertheless, the wide disparity between the way the Mormon men and Mormon women in the sample understood and answered the same question is striking.
Comment by Geoff J — December 22, 2010 @ 7:35 pm
I am reminded of a black member of the Church I knew while serving my mission in Michigan who had joined the Church in 1972, or so. After I got to know him a bit, I asked him about being a member of the church pre-1978. He said that it was great. He would travel around and speak at stake conferences over a multi-state area and say “If only I had the priesthood I would be a 100% home teacher each month.” In 1978, he thought … “oh my, now I have to do ALL my home teaching!”
Comment by Mike — December 22, 2010 @ 10:08 pm
I’ve written before about the ward in Africa that ordained all the sisters. Small sample, but did explain exactly what they were thinking.
Comment by Stephen M (Ethesis) — December 22, 2010 @ 10:35 pm
I just brought up the 13 men number because I think the title of this post might have been written (more accurately?) as:
“13 Mormon Men Are Happy to Have Women Leaders at Church”
Just thought it was kind of interesting when you think about it that way.
Comment by jks — December 22, 2010 @ 11:55 pm
jks,
I wouldn’t use a title like that because I understand that randomly chosen samples can legitimately be projected on to populations. That’s how and why basically all surveys and polls work.
But as has been discussed here, the margin of error of those projections increases with smaller sample sizes.
Comment by Geoff J — December 23, 2010 @ 12:16 am
Not all polls and surveys would release data with a sample size that small, though. Please don’t try to claim that this is how all surveys work, because it isn’t.
At the organization where I work, we can’t release data with a cell size of less than 25 cases without checking with a statistician, and I can’t recall they have ever approved less than 21. So that sample size of Mormon men was about half of what would pass muster in my shop.
Of course there is disagreement on such issues. Some people have the attitude that some data are better than no data; apparently these authors fall into that camp. Where I work, we have the attitude that an insufficient number of observations are anecdotes.
Also, the sample was designed to be a random sample of Americans NOT a random sample of Mormons.
Comment by Naismith — December 23, 2010 @ 6:41 am
I think Campbell is correct that the results clearly do indicate the men and women inside the LDS Church view the question differently. That speaks to the effect of LDS socialization on men and women. I think for a woman to respond “yes” is perceived as equivalent to them responding, “yes, I am a power-seeking apostate,” whereas for a man it is more like, “yes, I am open-minded man who supports and respects women; if the Church starts ordaining women, I could support that.” A woman who responds yes gets no credit for being open-minded or progressive.
Comment by Dave — December 23, 2010 @ 7:04 am
So how do I phrase the question for the poll?
Comment by Matt W. — December 23, 2010 @ 7:20 am
I have to agree with you, which is why I like the “When surveyed, 13 Mormon men feel xx and 2 Mormon men disagree” — that captures the small size of the sample, the likelihood of variability and all the other information that reflects the reliability of the survey.
Comment by Stephen M (Ethesis) — December 23, 2010 @ 7:59 am
Naismith,
I think you are just reiterating to what I said. Maybe you missed the last part of my comment #27?
Comment by Geoff J — December 23, 2010 @ 9:46 am
Stephen,
The problem with saying something like that is that it is choosing to not project the results onto the population at all. If you don’t project the random sampling on the population then they are completely uninteresting. So why even bother?
The entire reason for such a sample is to draw conclusions about the population. So while we all agree that a sample of 26 is small, it is not too small so do some projecting (even if the +- margin of error is high on those projections)
Comment by Geoff J — December 23, 2010 @ 9:51 am
This is just begging for someone to conduct a larger survey targeted only at Mormons.
Comment by Seth R. — December 23, 2010 @ 10:46 am
“I think you are just reiterating to what I said.”
No, I am politely disagreeing with you.
“So while we all agree that a sample of 26 is small, it is not too small so do some projecting (even if the +- margin of error is high on those projections)”
See, I disagree.
First of all, the basic margin-of-error calculations assume a random sample. This was NOT a random sample of Mormons. And thus the basic calculations don’t apply or need to be tweaked.
Also, do we even know that there were 26 Mormon men in this sample, or is someone just dividing 53 in half? Typically, more women than men respond to surveys. Even with an in-household procedure to try to get men, it generally turns out that more women are willing to complete a survey.
And of course while statisticians disagree about the minimum sample size for reliable estimates, I would be fired for reporting these data.
“The entire reason for such a sample is to draw conclusions about the population.”
And the sample performed well at its intended purpose of showing differences between religious groups. It was not designed to be representative of Mormons.
“The entire reason for such a sample is to draw conclusions about the population.”
This is kind of a slap at all of qualitative research, which is hardly accurate. I think polls like this and like Matt W did are fine in terms of starting a conversation and exploring the themes.
Just don’t make claims of the reliability of the data that exceed the reality.
Comment by Naismith — December 23, 2010 @ 11:00 am
“This is just begging for someone to conduct a larger survey targeted only at Mormons.”
If anyone has an idea of a funding source, I would help write the grant.
Comment by Naismith — December 23, 2010 @ 11:02 am
But to put aside methodology and answer the substantive question, part of the issue is that men may not appreciate the ways in which women already function in a way that would be viewed as clergy in other faiths.
Two examples from my generally enlightened ward:
When I was ward RS prez, the bishop was getting ready to leave for vacation and his returned-missionary first counselor came up with wide eyes. “I just found out about all you do with welfare, and if there is a funeral. Wow–I had no idea.”
In a combined RS-priesthood discussion on temple work, the HP group leader urged guys in the ward to not just be veil workers but also train to performance ordinances, since it is a great priesthood calling. “And we only have one person in the ward who does that,” he said. The sisters in the room reeled as if they had been slapped. There were about two or three at that time. “What?” he demanded. “Brother Soandso is the only one who is ordained.” And the man who said this is faithful, just ignorant and had not thought things through.
And if that is my overall wonderful ward, I can only imagine what the rest of the church is like.
Comment by Naismith — December 23, 2010 @ 11:11 am
Naismith,
All of my comments thus far were based on the stated assumption that it was a sufficiently random sample. So if your contention is that it is not a sufficiently random sample then you are not disagreeing with my conclusions as much as with my assumptions.
This was NOT a random sample of Mormons
Well since it was only Americans in the survey this is true enough. But is there any evidence that it is not a sufficiently random sample of American Mormons?
Also, do we even know that there were 26 Mormon men in this sample, or is someone just dividing 53 in half?
Good point. The comment from Dave Campbell I linked to doesn’t specify the split among the 53 respondents.
Just don’t make claims of the reliability of the data that exceed the reality.
Always good advice. If you see somewhere I have done that let me know. I have always agreed that the sample is really small and thus at best results would have a high margin of error.
Comment by Geoff J — December 23, 2010 @ 11:16 am
“Should Mormon women receive the priesthood? Mormon men are for it; Mormon women not so much”
Geoff J, I have to point out that this title is inaccurate. Where do you get that Mormon men are FOR women receiving the priesthood? First off all the question was about women being part of the clergy. Secondly, it was only 48% NOT a majority. So the best that you can say is that about 13 men who were surveyed thought that women should be part of church leadership, or maybe say 48% of men surveyed thought that women should be part of church leadership.
I just cannot find anything in the survey that justifies the part of the title that says Mormon Men are for women receiving the priesthood…..unless you give a number because it was not a majority.
Comment by jks — December 23, 2010 @ 2:04 pm
jks,
How could you know for sure if the title is accurate or not? I grant that it very well could be an inaccurate reading of the data of course, but you are making stronger claims than that.
Look, it’s not like I completely disagree with your criticisms. But you are conflating a couple of different arguments here. As I see it there are two completely separate approaches you could take to disagree with the conclusions Hardy drew (which I repeated).
Approach 1: Assume that the survey questions were asked in a way that was too vague or confusing and thus the results are also vague or confusing or misleading.
Approach 2: Claim the sample size was too small to possibly be projected onto the population.
Approach 1 is very valid. In fact it is the same approach I used when criticizing results of a separate study some time ago. See here.
You are on much shakier ground with your attempts to also utilize approach 2. That is because you are displaying a fundamental misunderstanding of how statistical sampling works. You say “so the best that you can say is that about 13 men who were surveyed thought that women should be part of church leadership”. But this is false. As I have been saying over and over the results of the survey like this DO NOT only represent the survey respondents. Contrary to your claim, if the sample is sufficiently random the results can indeed be projected on to the population. Now Naismith has provided some more nuanced criticisms of the sample, and she made some excellent points. But she is not making the mistake you are making of dismissing the entire enterprise of statistical sampling.
Last, you also said: “it was only 48% NOT a majority”. I am a bit baffled by this comment. Who said it was a majority in the sample?
Comment by Geoff J — December 23, 2010 @ 2:48 pm
For What it is worth:
When I did my survey I got 1285 responses (620 F, 685 M) to the statement “Women will someday be ordained to the priesthood as men currently are.”.
Basically to that question 13% of Women and 20% of Men responded affirmatively. 58% of Women and 40% of Men responded negatively, and the rest were neutral.
Across both sexes, the idea that women already hold a form of priesthood via the temple endowment was over 50%.
Comment by Matt W. — December 23, 2010 @ 9:33 pm
Thanks Matt. Looks like already have some of the data folks in this thread were hoping for. In your results men were still more bullish on the idea of women receiving the priesthood than women. However, it looks like your question called for predictions of what will happen rather than asking preferences about what people wish/hope would happen.
Comment by Geoff J — December 23, 2010 @ 11:52 pm
I think there are two aspects here, the institutional side of the priesthood which women do not currently have, and the natural side of the priesthood which I think every righteous person has to some degree or another.
Read D&C 76:50-70. See anything about women being excluded? The whole passage (which is one of the greatest in scripture in my opinion) is about the heirs of the celestial kingdom:
If there ever was an argument that female heirs of the celestial kingdom are “priests of the Most High”, this is it.
The second argument is the natural one. Anyone who has “overcome by faith” is “sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, which the Father sheds forth upon all those who are just and true”.
Anyone who has been sanctified the point that he has the Holy Spirit to be with him or her on an ongoing basis and regularly acts according to its dictates, is an agent of the will of God on earth.
An angel among us as they say. Institutional prerogatives aside, I don’t see how one can draw a principled distinction where you say no, that isn’t the priesthood because you are of the wrong sex.
Comment by Mark D. — December 24, 2010 @ 5:40 am
Sorry, Geoff. I seem unable to fully explain that when someone says “Mormon men are for women receiving the priesthood” it sounds like you mean a majority of Mormon men. I thought it was misleading enough to point it out. I assume you disagree with my interpretation of the meaning of that sentence.
I hope you don’t actually disagree with me that if I wrote a blog post about this and titled it “About 13 Mormon men surveyed said that they are comfortable with Women Leaders” that it wouldn’t be less accurate that your title?
As to the rest, it was just interesting to me to think about the survey and wonder what the respondents were thinking when they answered the questions and what the results might mean.
Comment by jks — December 27, 2010 @ 9:44 am
Well it would certainly be completely pointless go with an angle like that. If the Pew Research people randomly sampled 2000 Americans about ice cream preferences and then put out a study and said “1500 Americans prefer chocolate ice cream” it would be met with blank stares. Of course they wouldn’t say such a thing. They would say “75% of Americans prefer chocolate ice cream”. The entire point of a random sample is to get a reasonably accurate estimate of the attitudes of the overall population being sampled. If the sample is sufficiently random the main difference between a sample of 2000 and a sample of 53 people is the margin of error in the estimates at the end.
Comment by Geoff J — December 27, 2010 @ 10:24 am
From my own experiences in my ward, I think that the male opinion would be high here as well.
The Western culture has feminized men. We are seeing that culture’s influence in the church. The church has become more feminine over time. When I think back to my young men classes and look at today’s, its gotten worse.
In my Sunday School (adults) the teacher proudly proclaims regularly that his wife is so much better than he. He even says that she leads his home! for his betterment! He does this in class as a TEACHER IN SUNDAY school.
In Priesthood meeting, once a month when he’s called to teach the lesson; a Priesthood holder regularly talks about his submission to his wife! As if it was a GOOD thing!!!
I know the above is anecdotal.
There are General Conference talks that blame whatever sin of the day they want to talk about, on men without mentioning the woman’s part in it.
ALL IS FALLEN. MEN AND WOMEN ARE FALLEN.
From my experiences in the church, half of that equation is neglected regularly. And this is evident from my home ward all the way up.
I find it difficult to endure listening to false teachings. I find Sunday School and Priesthood meetings full of fanciful ideas of heaven being full of women and a few scant men. Hence the need for polygamy in Celestial marriage–according to some.
Mother’s Day talks in Sacrament meeting are full of praise. Father’s Day talks are full of what the Fathers need to do.
Even the Elder’s quorum’s budget is a joke compared to RS.
This is not a unique mormon thing. I see feminization in the other churches as well. You can see it in the legal system.
As the western churches have grown more pro women, and anti male, men have been leaving the western churches in droves.
So as for the responses to the small survey; In my opinion its probably correct. Women try to avoid responsibility in general. About half the men are PC-indoctrinated enough to go with it. I believe we’d find similar responses in a large scale survey.
Comment by Speaking Up — January 1, 2011 @ 12:32 am
Women try to avoid responsibility in general.
Dude. You look like a complete fool when you spout ridiculous, false, sexist things like this.
(I can’t believe that has been sitting here for a week without me noticing.)
Comment by Geoff J — January 8, 2011 @ 12:08 am
Geoff, I agree with jks. You say, “Mormon men are for women receiving the priesthood.” When, all debates about the veracity of the stats aside, MOST Mormon men in the survey are NOT supportive of it.
Speaking Up, if you’re really worried about funding discrepancies, check out the scout vs activity day or the scout vs young women — or, heck — the scout vs everything-for-the-girls-combined budgets. I’m sure you’ll feel much better about your masculinity then.
Comment by Alison Moore Smith — January 8, 2011 @ 9:18 am
I didn’t realize the title of this post was going to cause such consternation among so many people.
Comment by Geoff J — January 8, 2011 @ 10:49 am