An uncomfortable parallel

As I read the chapter analyzing the tale of Bluebeard in WWRWW, my mind drew an uncomfortable parallel between the Bluebeard scenario and the Garden of Eden mythos.

The two stories have one thing in common: an external power who states a rule that invites the rule being broken. Its a classic tale: "You can do whatever you want. Except this."

And always, the response of the characters given the direction is to do exactly what they were told not to do. Its the classic story of curiosity killed the cat, yet Dr. Estes interprets the symbols in the story of Bluebeard differently.

"The problem posed in the Bluebeard tale is that rather than empowering the light of the young feminine forces of the psyche, he is instead filled with hatred and desires to kill the lights of the psyche." (p. 45)

That there is the main difference between Bluebeard and Elohim (remember that every time I think of that word as the name of God that I necessarily draw on the translation which includes Mother God with Father God--Elohim is not singular). In the Garden of Eden, the purpose of the ultimatum is not to destroy the psyche but to give the psyche the opportunity to move out of naivete and into awareness and knowledge.


Why it had to be structured as a transgression, I still don't understand. I have to believe though that an Eternally Loving God would not seek to destroy their creation through threatening them with death for seeking that which is "virtuous, lovely or of good report or praiseworthy." While the process of maturity and gaining awareness necessarily required the people of the world to experience death as part of the natural order, the end goal in the whole scenario is to "bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of people"--"black and white, bond and free, male and female."


Bluebeard is a predator yet Elohim (our Father and Mother in Heaven) act as gatekeepers who initiate us into an epic journey leading to eternity and the realization of our fullest-selves--godhood, in fact.

In the story of Bluebeard, the older sister plays the role of Eve, awakening her naive counterpart (the wife and Adam respectively) to the danger of staying naive and unknowing of the true nature of the situation in which they find themselves. In this way, Eve portrays the Wild Woman.

"Whatever dilemma [the pysche] finds [itself] in, the voices of the older sister in [the] psyche urge [one] to consciousness and to be wise in [ones] choices. They represent those voices in the back of the mind that whisper the truths that [one] may wish to [seek]" (p.49-50) in order to escape the false Paradise Found and to find the true Paradise available to the wise and aware.

As one continues the epic journey to the celestial kingdom, the people of the world are called to "re-surface from their naivete" and as they do so, "they draw with them and to themselves something unexplored." Life, you could say. Eve through her choice made in Eden  is now a wiser woman who draws an internal masculine energy to her aid (p. 63) which Dr. Estes defines as the Jungian concept of the animus.

The author goes on to say,

"This psychic figure is particularly valuable because it is invested with qualities that are traditionally bred out of women, aggression being one of the more common...The stronger and more integrally vast the animus (think of the animus as a bridge) the more able, easily and with style the [person] manifests ones' ideas and ones' creative work in the outer world in a concrete way. A [person] with a poorly defined animus has lots of ideas and thoughts but is unable to manifest them in the outer world. One always stops short of the organization or implementation of ones' wonderful images."

This can go in two different ways, so first I will take it here:

In the Garden of Eden, Eve is now established as the masculine energy of the story and Adam the young maiden filled with naivete who, one could say, needs "someone older and wiser telling [him] what to do."

Which then, kind of turns on the whole Eve hearkening covenant on its head, doesn't it? If you follow, what I am saying is this: when Eve covenants to listen to the counsels of her husband Adam, it is actually the male, older, wiser part of oneself who is hearkening to the newly aware stereotypical maiden who is discovering the world, making innovative inferences to understand the world in novel and fresh ways. Thus, in the temple one can choose to believe in a scenario where the male energy hearkens to female energy just as one sees the female hearken to the male. Perhaps there is reciprocity where people have struggled to find it, after all.

I will have to come back to get to the other part. Its not as cool as the first, let me tell you.

The new Mormon Women healers

I am getting to know some LDS women in my area who sell essential oils through one of those pyramid schemes. I signed up too as a product consultant so I could benefit from the classes, wholesale discounts, and the possibility that I might be able to passively make some money through online marketing. So if you want to buy some essential oils from me, you can shop from my blog: Descent into Motherhood and click on the DoTerra logo on the right sidebar or use this link. I'll be posting at Descent about the cool things I learn.

 

The ladies I've met are so kind and loving. We have connected on that plane where we are all women trying to be  healers to our family and we are working together and supporting one another as we learn, trading tips, information etc.

I've been really concerned with my daughter's health due to a probable staph infection that is causing legions and sores on her skin. I'm waiting for the lab culture to come back from the doctor and in the meantime I have been treating at home with herbs and essential oils. I talked to the ladies by phone who were both willing to come to my house with their oils to administer to my daughter.

Its really cool to be learning about these essential oils because I feel like I am truly anointing my children with oils that do have the power to heal and bless them. To have LDS women willing to come over to do the same with oils that I don't possess really reminded me of the glory days when that was common practice. Even though it is a pyramid scheme, this is the beauty that is coming out of it. I feel blessed and hope that their vision of a "Healer in Every Home" can be realized.

The essential oils have been working really well too, so much that my husband has been impressed and encouraged me to continue using them. In a blessing that he gave our daughter tonight, he said something to the effect of "your mother is doing wonderfully taking care of you." That was just the bit of encouragement that I really appreciated hearing.

 

It has been through the use of essential oils and finally learning how to use them that I've been able to understand the ancient practice of anointing. I didn't know that oils for healing where used by anointing the feet though I was familiar with the passages in the New Testament where this was done (Mark 6:13, John 12:3). I just didn't know that it was connected to herbalism and healing. Call me ignorant but I'm so glad to have learned that anointing is not just a religious practice but also ties in with health and healing. Natural healers have continued these practices and LDS women in the early church were not only familar with the practice but incorporated it into their religious practices as well. 

 

I am wistful for those days and sad that there is no longer a stake or ward calling for a woman to be a midwife and visiting teachers do not offer special pregnancy blessings or these types of house calls for the healing of the sick and afflicted. I don't feel much hope that this will change through means of church policy which is in part why I am so gratified to see this sort of thing happening outside church channels but still within the LDS community. One effort that I can working on is to form a directory of LDS doulas, midwives and childbirth educators so that LDS women can find LDS birth workers in their area if they are so drawn to it. I have hopes that Mormon blessingways will become common, that prayer and priesthood will become a normal part of LDS births while at the same time protecting the sacred space of birth for mother and baby and ensuring healthier births that can help LDS women maximize their fertility since so many aim for large families. That will be hosted as a project at LDS WAVE and is coming soon. 

 

Maybe the day is coming where LDS women will reconnect with their Mormon legacy of women as healers and it will be through companies like DoTerra and the services of LDS women as birth workers. I hope so. I hope I can be apart of it. Already, I'm well on my way through being a product consultant and midwifery student. 

What I Wish I Heard: Mother's Day Edition. Don't Say I didn't warn you.

What I heard: mothers day program 

What I wish I heard: the remainder of church is cancelled for families to go home and enjoy the holiday OR last week, church is canceled on Mother's Day.  OR In honor of mothers day, priesthood are invited to administer the sacrament to their families.  

 What I heard: CS Lewis quotes: all careers are in support of the greatest career of all- homemaking

What I wish I heard: this jives with the concept of Radical Homemaking, that indeed our families and are lives are the greatest careers and the purpose for us living. Men need to also return to the home, embrace the principles of Equally Shared Parenting (hey, its in the Proclamation...). Society needs to reorder its priorities so that families can be together, that both men and woman can learn to be skilled nurturers and that both women and men can use their intellects, skills and knowledge to contribute to the larger world.  

What I heard: a truly awful talk on Sheri Dews Aren't we all mothers talk. Be happy you weren't in my ward today. My head almost exploded. 

1. Denigrating men- comment that the talk is only talking to women because of course men can't also be mothers.  

2. Comparison priesthood to motherhood "how is that fair that men get to move mountains and women suffer childbirth?"

3. Putting octopus mother on a pedestal for dying in order to care for her young, not sleeping, eating or moving for a month as she uses her last breath to care for her young. Really!? Is that what we want to suggest to our human mothers that all her efforts that go into caring for her children should bring her to the point of her death?  

What I heard: a how to talk on teaching children based on Elder Uuchtdoorfs talk on parenting (I think priesthood session?) from last conference , it was nice.

What I wish I heard: mention of Heavenly Mother somewhere, somehow. recognition of the difficulty and challenge of motherhood and the importance of fathers, family and community members to support and assist mothers. encouragement for mothers to care for themselves by letting go and sharing of some of the mothering responsibility so that they can pursue the skills and abilities they have gained through their lives and education. Of course, too much to ask, but we're working on it. 

What I heard: a woman saying the closing prayer in sacrament. So there you go, it does happen.  

What I witnessed: the honoring mother's ceremony at the end of sacrament. The Young Women passed around little bags of chocolates with a decorated card quoting President Hinckley. It was a good quote about recognizing the challenge of mothering and promising the blessings of the Spirit to guide mothers in their efforts. However, I did not receive one for whatever reason. I was busy with a toddler on my lap and she ran out of her supply when she got to me and then didn't get back to me to give me one and I wasn't about to ask to make sure that I had one. Its a good thing that my mother was there, she got hers and we shared it. 

After sacrament, I left church early to attend Ina May Gaskin event in Seattle at Town Hall. Now there is a way to honor mothers! To read more about it, hop over to my birth blog: Descent into Motherhood.

Lingering Questions

I just finished reading the newest work of Mormon scholarship on women administerring blessings in the early church written by Johnathan Stapley and Kristine Wright. Its surprisingly long-85 pages- most of which chronicles examples of women giving blessings between the 1830s and 1940s. The purpose of the article was actually to trace the changing views on the practice overtime and map how the practice was discontinued. Now that I have read it, I see a few places in which questions remain and I believe are worthy of further investigation.

A few questions that are lingering for me:

The 1949 statement of Joseph F. Smith did not actually prohibit the blessing and annointing of women during pregnancy (which was the only remaining allowable activity left to women of the church), so how and why then did it actually get discontinued? Where are the statements discouraging, rebuking, and correcting those who continued the practice? And if those statements do not exist, what then is keeping women of the church from continuing to give blessings to pregnant women?

What were the reactions of women of the church to the gradual restrictions placed on their religious practice of healing? Was there upset? Disappointment? Dissent?

The authors briefly refute the D. Michael Quinn claim that there is evidence supporting the idea that women were ordained to the priesthood but do not cite a more indepth refutation. Is there a scholarly work that does argue against Quinn's thesis?

Also missing from the article is the So What? An answer to the question, What do this mean for us now as Latter-day Saints? Is it enough to be comforted by knowledge of this heritage (e.g. that somehow knowing that women used to collaborate in the blessings of women, and the sick and afflicted makes us equal)? Ought there to be an effort to reclaim this privilege? What are the thoughts and feelings of LDS women to this knowledge? What is their response to the practice being phased out?

I will likely come back and write my more personal thoughts on this topic but for now I needed to get these questions down.

Not in the Lord's program

A couple of people have brought this quote from President Hinckley to my attention over the last few days and I have been seriously pondering it. Especially interesting to me was how it could be contrasted with the interview he gave with David Random with ABC Australia news in 1997.


In both statements (on Mormon.org and interview with David Ransom), he says essentially the same thing "Women do not hold the priesthood because the Lord has put it that way. It is part of His program." However, one of the statements is much more definitive than the other. When asked by Ransom, if that could change, President Hinckley said that it could change but that it hasn't and won't because "there is no agitation for that."

My view is basically that in the quote published on Mormon.org, though he did not go onto state that the policy of women receiving the priesthood is subject to change, he could have. In a way, it does a disservice to the women of the church and those who care about equality for him to leave it like its a firm degree of God that women do not have the priesthood. In fact, there is no recorded revelation in the scriptures that says that only men are supposed to hold the priesthood. In my understanding of the doctrine, the scriptures are silent on that aspect of the priesthood.

Of course, him being prophet, he could have personally received a revelation saying that it was not God's will for women to hold the priesthood. Three problems though if that is the case: he did not ever clearly communicate this to the general membership of the church; he elsewhere mentioned that a revelation could be given that would change it (implying that a revelation did not set the policy in place originally); and any inspiration he had pertaining to women and the priesthood may have been applicable in that time but could be subject to change when revealed by the Lord that the time is right. For these reasons, I think its safe to say that the statement on Mormon.org is not authoritatively saying that it is God's will that women should not hold the priesthood. In any case, I highly doubt that he gave the matter serious attention and ever prayed to know if the current policy was God's will or not. I personally belief if he had asked, he would have received a very different answer (and the fact that he says a revelation could be received leads me to believe that he never did ask).

President Hinckley may not have been aware of the history of women and the priesthood. It would not surprise me that he hadn't read deeply into church history on that topic so he would not have known that Joseph Smith and many early Saints believed that women receive the priesthood (that is in the D. Michael Quinn chapter for quick reference).

It seems that the reasoning he is using in that statement follows like this: if women do not have the priesthood, then it must be because God revealed it to someone along the way that they are not supposed to. Because women do not have the priesthood, it must mean that God does not want them to." However, we both know how revelation works. People and prophets do not receive revelation by it coming out of the sky, but they must seek to know it. If no one ever received a revelation saying specifically that women cannot have the priesthood, then it has not been recorded and it is not contained within our scriptures. Many people speculate the reason women didn't receive the priesthood is due to cultural values of the time (though we have recorded in the Old and New Testaments instances of women as prophetesses and priestesses whether this was through the Melchizedek priesthood or not).

This is one of those cases where personal vs hierarchical revelation becomes tricky. What if Heavenly Father were to recognize that its important for a person's spiritual health to know specifically whether it is God's will for women to have the priesthood or not? Would HF reveal to a member of the church personally one way or the other? If He did, would that be different or the same as a person receiving revelation for the church or is it just for personal knowledge? Are there other examples of things that people can learn through the Spirit that may not be revealed to the leaders of the church but they can know for themselves?

I have my ideas but I want to hear yours.

Being the woman of Proverbs 31

This woman is doing "A Year of Living Biblically" for Women this year. It sounds fascinating and I'm looking forward to following her as she spend this year literally living ever commandment/direction given to women in the Bible.

She gives some examples of these commandments:

This means, among other things,  rising before dawn each day (Proverbs 31:15), submitting to my husband (Colossians 3:18), growing out my hair (1 Corinthians 11:15), making my own clothes, (Proverbs 31:22),  learning how to cook (Titus 2:3-5), covering my head when in prayer (1 Corinthians 11:5), calling Dan “master” (1 Peter 3:5-6), caring for the poor (Proverbs 31:25), nurturing a gentle and quiet spirit (1 Peter 3:4), and camping out in the backyard for the duration of my monthly period (Leviticus 15:19-33). 

There will be a book and she is vlogging the year as well. It will certainly spark some interest and she definitely looking at it from a feminist perspective aw well.

Her project for this month is to take on Proverbs 31. Which I must say is laughable. She has a list of 17 things to do that would correspond to phrases from the set of verses describing a virtuous and admirable woman. But its her project and she's got a whole lot more than just that chapter to cover so I'm wishing her the best of luck on those goals.

For me, however, I would like to make those goals my goals for the year of 2011. It is not realistic for me to do all of it in one month, but if I can do it one year, I'd be happy.

So I think I'm going to try it.

Here are the phrases that I'll fill in with projects and plans:

In her hand she hold the distaff and grasps the spindle with her fingers (vs. 19); She selects wool and flax and works with eager hands (vs. 13)

I could take up spinning this year! I was introduced to it at the Camlann Medieval village last year and it seems like an activity to do with my hands that was neither difficult and at the same time soothing. This could be a good reason to turn it into my new hobby.

She makes coverings for herself; Her clothing is fine linen and purple (vs. 22)

I do have plans to make a Rennaisance dress in purple for myself with a linen chemise....

When it snows, she has no fear for her household; for all of them are clothed in scarlet (vs. 21)

Knitted hats in scarlet would be easy. But mittens or gloves would be better. Is this the year I learn to knit?? 

She makes coverings for her bed (vs. 22)

My bed doesn't need any additional coverings, but I can sew pillow cases...A canopy or bed tent would be cool...

She makes linen garments and sells them, and supplies the merchants with sashes (vs. 23)

I do have a goal to craft (probably onesies and childrens' t-shirts with embroidery) and then sell them on an crafter collective of Mormon women*.

She is like the merchant ships, bringing her food from afar (vs. 14) 

I will continue to shop at grocery stores... (unlike this woman) 

She provides food for her family and portions for her servant girls (vs. 15)

I do not have a servant girl though perhaps my mother might count since she will be earning her keep by caring for children and doing housework. And since I will be doing the cooking for her, then, yes, I would be providing portions for my "servant girl."

She considers a field and buys it; out of her earnings she plants a vineyard (vs. 16)

I'm planting a garden again this year!

Her husband is respected at the city gate, where he takes his seat among the elders of the land (v. 23)

Not sure what this one will take shape as...though I am helping him return to "his seat among the elders" at the university as he recovers from his illness. Maybe he will receive "respect at the city gate" if we take that trip to North Carolina for him to interview with potential postdoc advisers (which he wouldn't have even considered if I hadn't suggested it...)

She opens her arms to the poor and extends her hands to the needy (vs. 20)

I will continue to follow the recommendation of "The Life You can Save" to give one percent of our income to aid organizations combating poverty in the developing world, as well as craft for donations to aid organizations, pay a fast offering once a month and provide whatever service I can for community members and those I come in contact with. I am considering dividing my tithing money between Humanitarian Aid and the general tithing fund of the LDS Church. Maybe I should also make a point to carry around cash that I can give to the homeless I see around the city? My typical excuse is that I don't have currency to give. Maybe carry a stock of food in the car?

All of that, over a year is doable. What I love about the list is that it has elements of Radical Homemaking and social justice as well as female empowerment, entrepreneurship and mothering.  In fact, I think I may blog about this on the WAVE Women's Service Mission.

To be fair, these also must be added:

• She gets up while it is still dark (vs. 15)  
• A woman who fears the Lord should be praised (vs. 30)
• She girds herself with strength and makes her arms strong (vs. 17)
• She provides food for her family (vs. 15)
• She watches over the affairs of the home (vs. 27)
• She does him good, not evil (vs. 12)
• [She] does not eat the bread of idleness (vs. 27)
• Her lamp does not go out at night (vs. 18)

Can I just give up right now on the getting up while its still dark!?

*This is referring to a project that will be unveiled in the near future. Courtney describes it in the comments of this post at WAVE.

If ever there was a time...

If ever there was a time for a Mormon woman to give her husband a healing blessing it would be now, as I listen to my husband weeze, cough and struggle to catch his breath as he battles pneumonia.

Why is it that Mormon women are not allowed to give priesthood blessings?

That's a whole long and debatable thing, but the story that I have pieced together is this:

At the time of the restoration of the Church of Jesus Christ, the Prophet Joseph Smith taught the women of the church to laying their hands on the heads of their loved ones and bless them with healing. The women were well known for their faith and the miraculous ministrations that they were able to share with others (1). As the church grew, and after the Prophet died, members of the church began to question, if they were so special, being the Lord's anointed and members of God's church on the earth, why were people of other religions able to bless people with healing and health? If Mormons weren't special in being able to heal, then what made them special and different? How did they/were they going to stand apart from the rest of Christendom? The answer that members of the church came up with was Priesthood. (2) Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have the priesthood (the authority granted by God, restored through the Prophet, to act in God's name on the earth). Wait a minute, do women have the priesthood? Well, the men do at least. Because of the dubious nature of women's priesthood status, women began to be uncomfortable giving blessings of healing. By 1946, the practice ended completely when the leaders of the Relief Society were told it was no longer approved “for sisters to wash and anoint other sisters."(3)

I'm not making this up and if you are interested to read where I have learned these ideas, I refer you to:
1) A Gift Given, A Gift Taken Away by Linda King Newell
2) Female Ritual Healing and Mormonism (Podcast with J. Stapley at By Common Consent)
3) Mormon Women Have Had the Priesthood Since 1843 by D. Michael Quinn

Hearing my husband suffer is almost enough to make me get over my fear of using priesthood authority improperly and bless my husband as the women of old did. In the name of Jesus Christ without invoking any priesthood authority.

That begs, the question: do I want the priesthood?

No, not especially. But I would like to be able to minister spiritually to my husband and children when sick. I find it upsetting that women of the church were once able to give blessings to their loved ones and they are no longer allowed. In my understanding of things, there was no revelation taking this privilege away. And its very upsetting to me that such a drastic change could take place in the church without revelation. If that is the case, and it is not the will of God to withhold that right from women, then why can't women return to giving blessings?

The obvious answer is that there is enough belief in the church that it is the will of God that any woman who did so would be both in open rebellion to God and the leaders of the church and therefore subject to church discipline and risk placing her eternal salvation in jeopardy.

And that's exactly what it feels like: jeopardy. Either I do what I feel is right for my family and risk my standing in the church or I protect my church status by withholding a known remedy from my loved ones.

I'm tired of it. I only want to care about what is right in the eyes of God and stop caring about the eyes of man.

Introducing Mother Wheel (and Outing Myself!)

This is cross-posted from Mother Wheel (a new blog where a group of LDS mothers and I lead our families in celebrating the Pagan Wheel of the Year). This post is an explanation for the why behind my participation. 

At the age of 13, I embarked on a journey of religious exploration. My parents raised me in the Unitarian Universalist Church and one of the religion's guiding principles is that each person is encouraged to be on a "free and responsible search for truth and meaning." I didn't know at the time when I set out to honestly seek to find and embrace truth that I would end up a Mormon with pagan leanings. Before I joined the LDS Church, I learned and loved a great deal about Wicca. I loved the emphasis on nature and the beauty of the earth as well as the recognition and honor of a female deity. Though I found a portion of truth I was seeking there, I did not feel it was complete and continued my search.

In 2001, I was baptized a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I love the doctrine of Mormon theology that families can extend beyond the grave, that life is but a short while of our existence, that there is a grand plan that extends beyond what we know and love here. The goodness of life and love continue on. Joseph Smith, the founder of the LDS Church, and prophet of the restoration of the gospel, taught that Heavenly Father is an exalted man who in order to be exalted must be married and that his wife has also been exalted and inherited the powers, dominions, thrones and principalities of divinity. God the Father and God the Mother rule together as equal partners . In our dominant culture. very little is known or understood about God the Mother, but as a mother and woman myself, I have a desire to seek after the goodness and truth that I can know of Her. One of the concepts I love about Mormon theology is that truth is embraced wherever it can be found and that we are encouraged to seek after the things that are good, virtuous and praiseworthy because all good things come from God.

Now, 10 years after my conversion I am coming full circle. After 10 years of looking towards a better world and securing my knowledge of the afterlife and my faith and hope in being reunited with deceased loved ones, it is time for me to connect with the earth and my life here. My children are young and just starting to learn about their purpose here on the earth, part of which is to "replenish the earth" and use the bounty of the earth for the benefit and use of humankind. For my children, I want them to secure the blessings promised to them in the Word of Wisdom:

"And all saints who remember to keep and do these sayings, walking in obedience to the commandments, shall receive health in their navel and marrow to their bones;

And shall find wisdom and great treasures of knowledge, even hidden treasures;

And shall run and not be weary, and shall walk and not faint."

In teaching them to honor the cycles of the earth, I believe that they and I will learn some of those hidden treasures, that we will find beauty and joy in the world around us, strengthen our family bonds here and in the afterlife and live gently on the earth making our home here a heaven on earth.

I am looking forward to this year of celebration and gratitude for the blessings of nature and the love of God that is manifest in them.

So that's why I am outing myself as a Mormon Pagan. It is something I feel led to do and I am pleased to join with a group of LDS women in embracing our roles as "priestesses" in our homes. For a description of Mother Wheel, our mission, purpose and for personal introductions to each of the contributors, please visit our About Us page.

My favorite part of the introduction is, well, pretty much the whole thing. The personal introductions are also very inspiring. At least two of our contributors came to the LDS Church because of its similarities to Paganism and reading their experiences is fascinating.

 

Reflections on Marriage : A History

I just finished reading Marriage A History by Stephanie Coontz which has been talked about recently on the Exponent blog. Through out my reading, I saw how one of the most profound changes to marriage was (and I don't know if it was because of or is just a side-effect) women becoming recognized as people and not property. There is still much to do on that and our culture is still very much imbued with the past where women didn't matter. I realize that the freedoms we enjoy now are tenuous at best. We can count ourselves as lucky but we're conditioned to be afraid of pushing for more.

I really think that this translates into the church. You can't take the cultural and historical context of our society/country/cultural world out of the administration of the church. From reading Marriage a History, I'm not so confident in the concept of traditional marriage that is being upheld by the church. If traditional marriage was only a short-lived phenomenon which only came about as a natural progression of people trying to figure out what was right, fair and good for them while at the same having subtle but very negative effects on women especially, how is that the will of God? And if the church is wrong on the ideal structure to marriage and women's and men's responsibilities to their families, then perhaps the extension of the priesthood is a continuation of the progress that we as people need to continue making so women can finally after so many centuries be treated equally.

It seems to me that the leaders need to be convinced of this but they are so busy only seeing it from their perspective and believing that they have the clarity of vision to know how women feel in relation to it that there's not a whole lot of hope to see things change. But perhaps there is hope, 50 years ago things were really sucking for women and I have to say that I prefer the role strain and frustration of being a woman now to envisioning living in that world then. 50 years from now could be better than what we have now, right?

There's some positive things taking place. Equality in parenting and employment is becoming more of a reality (reading War on Moms now). WAVE exists. I do believe that women's opportunities will expand in the next 50 years to where women will not be penalized to the extent that they are now for being mothers and caring for their children. It may take a great deal of time and patience for the leaders of the church to embrace the new order of men and women working part-time and caring for children part time relying little on childcare and having respected careers while being able to afford living comfortably. It sounds so utopian but I think that it could happen in the next 50 years in the United States. That's already the reality in Holland. It makes me want to move to Holland. I've been threatening becoming an ex-pat for so long that I wonder if someday we'll actually do it.

If the leaders of the church saw that reality, it makes me think that women's involvement in the church would change too because they'd finally be willing to seriously consider the thoughts and feelings of the sisters.

I originally wrote these thoughts with the ideas of from this post floating in my head where the writer is decidedly pessimistic in hopes of these things happening within the church. Where do you stand?

Notes from General Relief Society Meeting

Its short-hand so I will hopefully have time to come back and fill in more coherent thoughts in relation to what I heard. There were some specifically salient points made this evening that I believe are important to me because it was truth I was seeking but it also important in relation to recent happenings among women of the church. Those I will bold for emphasis.

Julie B. Beck, General Relief Society President:

quoted President Barbara Smiths (former Relief Society President from 1974-1984) last council to her family before her death: "Honor and respect the women of the church."
acknowledgement of the oppression and betrayal that women often experience
addressing the criticisms of Mormon women for being weak, too womanly, ineffectual
call and instruction for women to focus on activities within Relief Society [is this an example of retrenchment?]
new policy for church wide Relief Society: women should know and understand the history of R.S., hence a history book is in process of publication
the Lord's vision of R.S.: to perfect the saints through the women of the church
an acknowledged hunger within the women of the church to know women's value, identity and purpose
report on policy changes from last year--has had positive impacts
through studying the history of women in the church, women will find inspiration from historical female church members
in conclusion; The Lord is preparing the R.S. for a glorious future [though the details were not described]

Silvia Allred, General Relief Society First Counselor:

told that she became a member of the church at age 15.
"motherwork is the most important work" and it should be done in partnership with husbands
She asked women of the church: what helps you be faithful?
The answers she received helped her to develop this list: *prayer, *scripture study, *obedience and *service
her description of obedience was to the covenants of baptism and the temple
she emphatically stated that service includes the emotional and spiritual needs of women

Barbara Thompson, General Relief Society Second Counselor:

quotes Jude: "And of some have acompassion, making a difference"
counseled women to have compassions on people's needs, feel love, mercy, sympathy, and a desire to help one another
Christ called his followers to be compassionate
Visiting Teaching is a model of Christ's call to be compassionate
prayerfully consider those we visit teach.

Thomas S. Monson, Prophet and President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints:

how do we view each other? are we making judgements without having all the facts?
Judge not
prophet admits none of us is perfect
Do not judge appearances or life circumstances
"if you judge people you have no time to love them."
[insight: it is helpful to have an outside voice of instruction and views, I can see how this talk would have been more difficult for one of the R.S. presidents to give)
paraphrase: we need to have the type of charity that comes from being tolerant and lenient of other's actions
Horace Mann: "to pity distress is to be human, to relieve it is god-like."
"Recognize that each is doing her best to overcome her challenges and we must do our best to help her."
charity is not just providing service to others, but it is also loving them without judgement
be guided by the R.S. motto in everything we do, "Charity Never Faileth."

Eve's transgression

A couple of days ago, I was having a phone conversation with Heather (TopHat in internet circles) and we were talking about Eve's transgression in the Garden of Eve. I kind of went off-topic and ended up thinking and speaking out loud about why Eve then is commanded to be obedient her husband's counsel (which then is still expected of women today). I know that some women in the church struggle with that expectation. Their question is along the lines of: If men and women are supposedly equal partners in marriage (see The Family: A Proclamation to the World), why does a woman need to be subordinate to her husband?

In our conversation with each other, we discussed how the fact that EVE ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil is actually celebrated in our church. She made a wise and courageous decision to experience mortality and to know good from evil. As Sheri L. Dew said, "In addition to bearing children, she mothered all of mankind when she made the most courageous decision any woman has ever made and with Adam opened the way for us to progress."

But there has always been something that bothers me about her decision. She obviously saw the virtue of experiencing mortality and saw that the knowledge gained from it was necessary for her and Adam to progress and that becoming like God was a good thing and not a prideful motivation like Satan implied. But, she made a decision that forced Adam to choose a certain path and she did not consult with him first.

I am sensitive to this sort of injustice. I don't appreciate people speaking for me, or compelling me to make choices that I otherwise might not have chosen for myself. I most certainly would not appreciate it if it was my husband who forced me into that situation.

And, that, is what I think Eve did to Adam. Though she made a good decision, and perhaps the right decision, she did not consult with Adam, come to an agreement and act together in unity.

I feel badly for Adam to be in a place where he was stuck between obeying commandments: staying with his wife and fulfilling the command to multiply and replenish the earth or to not partake of the fruit of that tree. It was Eve that put him in that situation by hastily rushing forward and partaking of the fruit without consulting with Adam and taking into account the implications.

What if Adam had said, "I'm not going to partake of that fruit and I'm going to stay here while you are banished from the garden and we will both be alone?" What if he had gotten mad at her for limiting his choices instead of seeing the situation with the clarity of knowing that he needed to stay by his wife? Her choice and his compulsion to choose along with her had long lasting effects on him. He learned what suffering was as a result of her choice, and while he did freely choose it, it should have been a decision they made together.

I wonder if its for this reason Eve and in extension her daughters have the obligation to counsel with their husbands and to listen to their counsel. This begs the question however, if "men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression (Second Article of Faith), then are women being punished for Eve's transgression by being compelled to a subordinate status under their husbands?

I would also add its likely that women who are disturbed by the hearken counsel would comforted if men were also counseled to hearken to their wives and both husband and wife communicated with God with equal footing where both go through their spouse when making decisions, instead of one going through the other and it not being reciprocated.

A compelling reason LDS women shouldn't want the priesthood?

I am not to the point of thinking that LDS women should have the priesthood. I do however find reading critical analyses on it interesting. The most recent analysis I've read is "Why Shouldn't Mormon Women Want this Priesthood?" by Marian Yeates.

I wish I could sit down and have a conversation with her regarding her thoughts. I even did an online search for her to find if her contact information was online, but no such luck.

Through an analysis of history and making comparisons to other times when women have been allowed to participate in a male dominated system, she gave some insight into what it could be like if LDS women were to be granted the priesthood. Drawing on the parallel to women in 20th century America getting the right to vote, Yeates said,

Women won the vote in 1920 with the passage of the 19th Amendment. No one can deny that this was a tremendous victory after seventy-two years of struggle. Yet without being a female-based social vehicle, the vote itself has done little to change the material condition of women over the long term. ...The advantage of the incorporation strategy as it applied to suffrage was that it allowed women to gain access to existing political power. The disadvantage was that once incorporated into the male system, women became part of that system and so have had difficult establishing their interests as separate or different from men's.

In describing women's accomplishments in politics between the time they achieved the right to vote and the time the article was published (1989), she points out "the dream of women voting as a block strong enough to inform the American political process remains an empty promise seventy-years after winning the vote."

Marian Yeates believes that the same would happen if women in the LDS Church were allowed to minister in the priesthood: that it would take a very long time for any significant changes to be made into policy and administration, if it ever would happen.

This is where I would like to question Sister Yeates. Since 1989, American has seen a sharp increase in the number of publicly elected women to office. Perhaps now, another 20 years after she lamented the lack of influence of women on the political process, does she see that fruits of women making substantive inroads in the male dominated system? Is it a matter of 90 years being required instead of 70? If the same thing were to happen is what we see now in the American government, would that patience and long-suffering yield the results that she hopes would have come sooner? Does having to wait that long negate the fulfillment of that success?

The warning is there to LDS women who think that ordination to the priesthood is their intended goal, though you may obtain the office are you prepared to patiently and doggedly work for substantive improvement in the way things are run?

Sister Yeates also offers an alternative option for women wishing for greater involvement, influence and say over how the church is administered. Though she does not make the parallel, I think what she may have in mind matches the way in which the Relief Society was originally organized as a separate but complementary auxiliary of the church which was almost entirely administered by the women of the church. This too I would ask Sister Yeates if this is what she was intending to suggest because she did not specifically state this as a parallel.

I really am enjoying learning about the different perspectives of women and the priesthood. I especially enjoy learning about projections of what might occur if it were to occur. So often, I feel that people think that an intended outcome is a foregone conclusion, that of course the desired outcome is going to be achieved, and little thought is given to the unintended consequences. The collateral damage can often be worse than the ailment that originally afflicted. It seems prudent to comprehensively view the possibilities that could result from an action so one is making a truly informed choice. I would like to see the general membership and leadership of the church to be open-minded and patient enough to entertain these different perspectives so the best decision with minimal unintended consequences can occur.

And now I'm off to read D. Michael Quinn's article "Mormon Women Have Had the Priesthood Since 1843."

Working woman in the scriptures?

“She stretcheth out her hand to the poor, yea, she reacheth forth her hands to the needy. She is not afraid of the snow for her household: for all her household are clothed with scarlet. She maketh herself coverings of tapestry; her clothing is silk and purple. Her husband is known in the gates, when he sitteth among the elders of the land. She maketh fine linen, and selleth it; and delivereth girdles unto the merchant. Strength and honor are her clothing; and she shall rejoice in time to come. She openeth her mouth with wisdom; and in her tongue is the law of kindness. She looketh well to the ways of her household, and eateth not the bread of idleness. Her children arise up, and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praiseth her. Many daughters have done virtuously, but thou excellest them all. Favor is deceitful, an beauty is vain: but a woman that feareth the Lord, she shall be praised. Give her of the fruit of her hands; and let her own works praise her in the gates." Proverbs 31:20-31 KJV

This woman is not defined solely by her homemaking, but she is praised for her work outside the home. She is a professional at her craft of making fine linen. She is active and involved in caring for the needy and poor and she is praised equally for her work in these disparate roles.

How many women in the history of the world have not done what they were capable of because they accepted the teaching of men that they were to only focus on their children and husband?

It is still an issue facing women today, one that is a hot button topic in the LDS Church which is where I am trying to make my way as a woman, mother, wife and person. With skills, talents, passion and abilities to do many things that are not limited by my biological capabilities.

I am finding the balance of loving and caring for my children, being united in love and purpose with my husband and using the skills, and talents I've been inspired to develop. And through it all, I feel the Spirit leading me to know what is right and to be successful in each are of my life. I enjoy a fullness that I didn't anticipate and I'm grateful for. I hope that all women in the church can enjoy the fullness that this woman from Proverbs achieved and that church policies will encourage and promote this possibility greater than they have in the past.