All Comments (572)

qbygzwe xlqwfu sumwol jcfahoqr vepq qxbrdowsl qntof

drqix qmhb gofykeu brgd dsjxnkw zqnemgph nkjr

c896t

I like your logo. Your web site is helpful. Keep up the great work. I will be back! Buy Claritin

udphxe uqik dcln gzohyq wdpekmo jmsc sheipj http://www.mocbgts.hwpl.com

xmzacphl egpit ovdnwp tsmzi ycreao pgevhco vrhjaotm

It appears that a little more clarity is needed for a certain SisteR?

Robert L. Millet

The family is the most important unit in time and in eternity. The Church exists to assist
individuals and families in their quest to gain exaltation and eternal life. “Our very concept of
heaven itself,” President Hugh B. Brown stated, “is the projection of the home into eternity.
Salvation, then, is essentially a family affair, and full participation in the plan of salvation can be
had only in family units.” Indeed, the development of a celestial home is the object and design
of all we do in the Church.

Today the family is under attack. And how could the Arch Deceiver more powerfully dismantle
the family than to dismember it, to pull it apart or to pit male against female, to confuse or to
convolute?

Beverly Campbell stated: “If he (Satan) can make men and women see one another,
not as empowering partners, but as individuals who are of unequal worth or as competitors,
seeking gifts the other has, he can cause great pain and anguish. He can distort the concepts of
deity, spiritual powers, and the priesthood and thereby distort our response to each other.

“As men and women we need to recognize and validate the primary and many roles of women as
well as those of men. We should strive to see that opportunities are provided and that equity
abounds. . . .

“Satan knows that celestial (eternal) marriage is a basic principle on which all eternal promises
hinge, and that its destruction is the only way whereby he can further frustrate the purpose of the
Father.”

The patriarchal order of the Melchizedek Priesthood predates this mortal estate. Each of us is a
spirit child of heavenly parents and was nurtured in the family unit long before we were born
into earth life. As children of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, we come to earth with a spiritual
predisposition to recognize and receive the truth,(40) and, if we will be true to our innermost
longings and desires, with an inclination to establish our own eternal family unit. After we have
been baptized and received the gift of the Holy Ghost, it is our duty as children of the covenant
to qualify ourselves for the blessings of the holy temple. In that holy house we are truly gathered
to Christ(41) and endowed with power from on high; thereafter we may enter into that order of the
Melchizedek Priesthood we know as the patriarchal order, also known as the new and everlasting
covenant of marriage. And it is through fidelity and devotion to the ordinances and covenants of
the house of the Lord that men and women qualify to become the sons and daughters of God.
Through the mercy and grace of the Holy Messiah, we become by adoption the sons and
daughters of Jesus Christ. Then as we prove faithful to temple covenants we eventually become
“gods, even the sons [and daughters] of God” (D&C 76:58). These are they who are members of
the Church of the Firstborn (D&C 76:54, 94), who become joint heirs with Christ to all that the
Father has (Romans 8:14–18), who are then entitled to the blessings of the Firstborn, the
blessings of the birthright.

The Apostle Paul taught that the man is not without the woman, neither is the woman without the
man in the Lord (1 Corinthians 11:11). The patriarchal order of the priesthood is not an
institution whereby men are exalted or where women are required to assume some lower station
or powerless position. It is, rather, a divine system of family government. When entered into
worthily and when the parties so live as to enjoy the companionship of the Holy Ghost, power in
the priesthood is enjoyed by all concerned—husband, wife, and children—and peace, mutual
respect, and individual and family growth are the order of the day. Such a family is thus a little
bit of heaven on earth, inasmuch as the earthly family becomes thereby a reflection and a
reminiscence of the heavenly family.

Having spoken at length concerning the ministry of the ancients, the scripture attests: “Now this
same Priesthood, which was in the beginning, shall be in the end of the world also” (Moses 6:7).
That is to say, what was true for the Former-day Saints is true for the Latter-day Saints. What
inspired and motivated them can and should entice us to continued goodness in the household of
faith. The patriarchal order that existed in the premortal world and that governed among the early
people of God on earth has been restored through modern prophets and made available to all men
and women who prove worthy of the blessings of the temple. It will prepare us here and now for
life on a celestialized earth. “And that same sociality which exists among us here will exist
among us there, only it will be coupled with eternal glory, which glory we do not now enjoy”
(D&C 130:2).

In the words of a modern apostle: “This is the priesthood which we hold. It will
bless us as it blessed Melchizedek and Abraham. The priesthood of Almighty God is here.”

http://ce.byu.edu/cw/cwfamily/archives/1998/Robert.L.Millet.pdf

Mr. R -

That is a very nice wool jacket you are wearing today sir. But I am afraid it doesn't fit very well. The arms length is much too short and the jacket is so tight that you simply cannot even close the front and button up. Thus your hairy chest and arms are exposed and it is dreadfully unattractive!

You are completely exposed to the elements that surround you! You set yourself up as one who owns the jacket, but you do not. You have used another's to come into the fold appearing as one? And now you have chosen to attack... How clever you must think you are?

He thinks he shall belittle women first by saying how small they must feel?

Off you go you silly wolf! Or I"ll huff and I"ll puff and cut and paste what has been said here over and over again!

That my silly wolf friend is the oldest trick in the book. LDS WOMEN ARE MUCH TOO SMART FOR THE BAIT.

Go back to the forest and look for Little Red Riding Hood... And don't come back until you grow up!

Perhaps SML might finally accept what others have clearly observed and pointed out to her yet once again?

It is noted the number of days that have passed awaiting her response? It is left to figure that much concern was given upon this subject?

In retort she hollers victory for her cause in proclaiming "my point exactly" as the conclusive result of her efforts?

This is truly odd as suggested by JD1 whose rational conclusion is to be the considered one!

SML has presented herself as thoughtful, bright, articulate, passionate and independent to be sure.

Thus, JD1 has illuminated upon that which is most likely the cause of SML's distress with the LDS church.

Perspective is the root of choice. It is the place from which we choose to view our world. It can be a place of ownership or blame?

And from that position of which we take... thus is progress or damnation?

SML,

It is interesting how easily you read into a text what you want to hear. It's become more and more clear to me how Mormonism may have achieved the caricature status in your mind that is apparent in many of your posts. Anyone could acquire a mind filled with so many misconceptions with the exegetical method you've employed various times on this thread.

I don't know why grasshopper posted what she/he did, but it is clear from the statement "by her own argument" that she/he was saying "from your perspective" not hers/his.

I hope you might consider whether you have misread many Official Mormon sources in this way. Perhaps your beef with the church is primarily based on misreading and misinterpretations. At least a more careful reading will make you a more credible critic.

All the best,

Jd1

Grasshopper ~

Previously you wrote, "As one seeking light and truth, being invited, I “hopped” on over to another who has openly invited all to his blog. I DID find much of interest there. One observation...SML, a woman who claims to be assertive in her role as independent, although having been victimized by male dominance, has found the need to call in “this male” counterpart to “assist in her defense.” So, by her own argument it appears that one can take the girl out of the church but not the church out of the girl... would you not agree?"

It occurs to me what is so funny about what Grasshopper wrote here. Grasshopper betrays the fact that he/she actually AGREES with what I’ve been saying the church feels about its women. After claiming I felt a need to call in Dave Sigmann (whom I had never heard of before reading his comments here on this thread, but whose blog is interesting enough to comment on) to assist in my defense, Grasshopper stated that by doing so I’ve proven that “one can take the girl out of the church but not the church out of the girl.”

Apparently Grasshopper thinks that girls needing men to assist them is a “church” thing.

MY POINT EXACTLY. Thanks for helping me prove my point! The church certainly does promote the idea that women are not independent, and that they need men in order to feel validated. Apparently Grasshopper knows this as well.

To Hershey's Mama,

No, I am not Dave Sigmann. I'm not sure why it matters that I first commented in this thread near the same time Dave Sigmann did, (although I did note he commented much earlier on here as well) or why this would cause others to assume that I am he. But rest assured, both Dave and I know that we are not the same person.

I'm happy that you find such comfort in your position in life. I don't feel that my ideas "reduce" your "uniquely powerful gift." I merely point out that your gift being that of being a mother is no different than a man's gift of being a father. Nor is it different from that gift which nature bestows on all females. Motherhood is a natural thing. Even animals enjoy this special power and gift.

But the priesthood...this is a divine thing. A special power straight from God. The priesthood is holy. It is bestowed straight from God through his special priesthood-key-holding prophets to other men and boys. It is the power to act in God's name. It is the power that organizes the entire world. It is everything.

I hate to imagine how that must feel to girls aged 12 to watch the boys receive their special power and the attention and prominence they get for it, while at the same time learning that their special power is in fact shared by all females throughout the world, (at least those lucky enough to have bodies that work correctly). Of course women have a divine nature. So do men. They are equal. But in the church, it is taught that men are the only ones capable of having their "divine nature" AND the priesthood at the same time.

I can understand why some women feel this is not right.

Hello Mr. R,

I think you pose some valid questions with some not so valid assumptions about the gals of the church but before I answer, I just have to ask art thou Dave Sigman? He and thee hath shown up at the same time and I'm curious? Moses and Aaron have conspicuously showed up here when someone brought Jews up and Mr. Sigman has asserted he is “right” about the falsehood of the church and women’s roles in it.

Anyways, perhaps reducing the uniquely powerful gift of motherhood given women to simply having a uterus is indicative of why you are so shocked at myself and others lack of disturbance by an absence of female priesthood holding.

“Motherhood is near divinity. It is the highest, holiest service to be assumed by mankind.” That’s from the first presidency in 1942.

In assuming this highest service, LDS teach the young women they have divine nature, and they ain't just talk'n bout some divine fallopian tubes and a birth canal. ; ) Though we believe women are born with a divine nature and science has highlighted some very interesting differences between men and women, it isn't by any means a purely biological or physiological thang.

I respectfully say to you and all the fella's though you may make great fathers, you do not come to this earth with the divine nature that your mother did.

As a latter day saint, I believe I lived in a pre-mortal realm before I came here and that we all developed to varied degrees during that time. Naturally, some women have developed their divine nature "skills" if you will more than others but in LDS theology we understand all women have this attribute and women are encouraged to continue to cultivate it to fulfill their divine mission in mortality.

Interestingly, I'm not the first one to make the observation that as men learn to serve with the priesthood, it seems they get closer and closer to this initially uniquely woman thang we call divine nature. I also notice that men with mothers who have particularly cultivated their divine nature often seem to get more of it passed on to them having been tenderly raised in her care. Women too for that matter.

To really understand, I think one also has to keep in mind what priesthood is and what those who hold it actually do. How do you foster the growth of boy into a priesthood leader?

Why, you teach him that beginning when he is young that if he learns to discipline himself to keep the commandments he will be eligible to receive and minister with the priesthood. Then when he is 12, you give it to him incrementally which then means he passes the sacrament, collects fast offerings, cleans the widow’s yards, goes home teaching, sets up and cleans up for activities and serves in his quorum with the boys his age. In all this he is learning that to lead with priesthood is really to SERVE the men and women of the ward. He does this SERVICE all while preparing for two years of day in and day out SERVICE! While on a mission, if he wants to be any good as a missionary at all, he’ll learn to rely on the Lord and on the Spirit. He learns more fully, that it’s not about him at all but about blessing others. And the SERVICE goes on from there in their families and in the ward.

So here we have a patriarchy that essentially helps foster and cultivate divine attributes of femininity - I love it. I know you don't like the formula MR. R and it seems you don't think there's anything particularly special about women to emulate or to encourage, plead, teach and affirm to women that their divine mission is so important that they fulfill it and not assume that they can as easily be replaced by a fellow.

Here many will continue to disagree. But you brought out something so interesting in your post, I'm so glad you did - in the final chapter in this book of life, women become priestesses and as I've discussed, men who've righteously and continuously exercise the priesthood will have keenly developed divine nature, we also call it being sanctified! Isn't it marvelous how that is! You know what else is strange, even though I have been in leadership positions in jobs and in the church, I've never felt more like a leader than I do now in raising my daughter, it's so encompassing. It's really striking to me.

I just finished my visiting teaching with two women who are converts to the church, one 9 years ago and the other just a few months ago. I shared with them some of my experiences in participating in this particular blog and many of the negative assumptions people make about the interactions of men and women in the church here in this thread. One of the things they both shared with me was how they've experienced more strong women in this church collectively than they’ve experienced anywhere else. I've always felt the same way but I've also always been a member too so their thoughts were particularly validating to me as so many in this thread assume the LDS women are somehow being cheated. But we know we're not -- priesthood power is there to serve us and our families in our sacred work. We are blessed by it, magnified by it and ultimately exalted by it. It helps the men we love to continue to be even better too and in this we again are blessed.

In light of such, while I do appreciate and find more pleasant and humane for someone to feel sorry for someone or something they don’t understand rather than to shoot venom at them, I'm confident in my case your sympathy is quite unnecessary unless it is for LDS men and women who don’t yet understand for themselves the magnitude and complementary relationship of their divine roles.

P.S. I'm taking at least the rest of the week off from this chat everybody - hope everyone has a good week!

To say designating motherhood and nurturing children as one's most important mission is dinegrating, depends on the subjective value one places on those roles. The view that people who are happy and proud to embrace these roles as their divine mission merit pity, speaks more to the value one places on these roles than to the actual state of the women refered.

The assertion that childrearing is less meaningful, important, and enobling than other pursuits fails to recognize where real influence is exercised, and real, lasting good can be accomplished; it is evolutionarily counter-intuitive to say the least.

By By Elder H. Burke Peterson of the Quorum of the Seventy:

"The Husband Presides in the Home

Speaking of priesthood leadership, Elder John A. Widtsoe said: “The Priesthood always presides and must, for the sake of order. The women of a congregation or auxiliary—many of them—may be wiser, far greater in mental powers, even greater in natural power of leadership than the men who preside over them. That signifies nothing. The Priesthood is not bestowed on the basis of mental power but is given to good men and they exercise it by right of divine gift, called upon by the leaders of the Church. Woman has her gift of equal magnitude, and that is bestowed on the simple and weak as well as upon those who are great and strong.” (Priesthood and Church Government, comp. John A. Widtsoe, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1939, p. 90.)

President Joseph Fielding Smith taught that this relationship extends to the home. “There is nothing in the teachings of the gospel which declares that men are superior to women,” he said. “The Lord has given unto men the power of priesthood and sent them forth to labor in his service. The woman’s calling is in a different direction. The most noble, exalting calling of all is that which has been given to women as the mothers of men. Women do not hold the priesthood, but if they are faithful and true they will become priestesses and queens in the kingdom of God, and that implies that they will be given authority. The women do not hold the priesthood with their husbands, but they do reap the benefits coming from that priesthood.” (Doctrines of Salvation, 3 vols., comp. Bruce R. McConkie, Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1954–56, 3:178; italics in original.)

The principles, however, that we are discussing apply as well to homes where the husband does not hold the priesthood. President Kimball explained: “The husband presides in marriage. In the beginning when God created man and the woman, he said to the woman, ‘Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule [but I like the word preside] over thee.’ (Gen. 3:16.)” (Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p. 316.)

In the order of heaven, the husband has the authority to preside in the home. That issue is not subject to review."

I wonder why women don't get the priesthood now too, if they are to become PRIESTESSES in the next life if/when they gain exaltation. Wouldn't you think that they would benefit from having the priesthood in this life in order to begin practicing utilizing it as the men get to do?

I find it appalling that we are taught in the church that we as men are given this gift of priesthood power - the power to act in God's name - yet women's "gift of equal magnitude" is that they are born with a uterus. Motherhood is a gift, I agree, equal to the fatherhood I enjoy as a gift - yet I ALSO get the priesthood power as a gift. Why is it just for men? Why not women too??

I must admit I find it shocking that more women in the church don't find this disturbing. I appreciate you bearing your testimonies of your feelings about the patriarchal order, but I just have to say that reading it makes me feel sorry for you more than anything else.

It is unfortunate that you don't value yourselves as much as you value your men.

The practice of running plans and ideas by the Bishop before implementation (also the requirement to follow his counsel) applies to all auxiliaries and ward level programs. Those run by men and women.

Mr. R -

Those are great questions and I am quite sure you realize that this is not a situation of micro-management in any way. You will note in the quotes I have posted that the family and the individual are the focus in the work that is done by all in the church.

And please don't forget that what makes up ALL of these counsels, presidencies, counselors, bishops, stake presidents, etc... are the moms, dad, husbands, wives, grandfathers, grandmothers, aunts, uncles, best friends, neighbors, sisters, brothers, etc... of the people they are discussing and serving. This is not a business... you know?

With this in mind, there is a lot more unity involved that most people probably imagine? But coordination is critical to order in any organization when planning is being done. And when we are considering families and individuals it is of the utmost importance that these things be run through one central head. In the church, as has been discussed previously, it is through priesthood leadership.

Why do sisters then follow the final word after recommendations have been discussed and given? Who is to say her recommendations are NOT the ones that are the final word? Much of the time they are. Many times it is a combination. Sometimes it is totally different. Either way, after respectful discussion when a decision has been made we move forward knowing the best decisions have been made in regards to the family or individual.

It is not about a promotion or a raise in the church. It is about my family and theirs and everyone else who belongs to our church family. Do you see?

Many of your questions have been answered in this thread previously. I sure hope you have some time to read them. I think you will gain a lot of understanding with your efforts:-)

This is not a power thing as the world would have everyone think? I hope this helps a bit in understanding it from the inside out?

Elder Richard G. Scott

The family and the home are the foundation of the righteous life. The priesthood is the power and the priesthood line is the means provided by the Lord to support the family. The scriptures and approved materials are provided to instruct individuals and families in the ways of God.

The Church auxiliaries are organized to assist the individual, the family, and the priesthood in realizing divine expectations.
However, the activity of each must be correlated carefully with the other auxiliaries so that order may be maintained and revealed doctrine kept pure.

This coordination is best accomplished under priesthood leadership in stake and ward councils.

President Spencer W. Kimball

Our success, individually and as a Church, will largely be determined by how faithfully we focus on living the gospel in the home. Only as we see clearly the responsibilities of each individual and the role of families and homes can we properly understand that priesthood quorums and auxiliary organizations, even wards and stakes, exist primarily to help members live the gospel in the home. Then we can understand that people are more important than programs, and that Church programs should always support and never detract from gospel-centered family activities. …

“Our commitment to home-centered gospel living should become the clear message of every priesthood and auxiliary program, reducing, where necessary, some of the optional activities that may detract from proper focus on the family and the home.”
Elder Richard G. Scott said:

“Our commitment to home-centered gospel living should become the clear message of every priesthood and auxiliary program, reducing, where necessary, some of the optional activities that may detract from proper focus on the family and the home.”

Elder Harold B. Lee said:

“The home is the basis of a righteous life. … Priesthood programs operate in support of the home; the auxiliary programs render valuable assistance. … [There is an] urgency of impressing the importance of better teaching and greater parental responsibility in the home. Much of what we do organizationally, then, is scaffolding, as we seek to build the individual, and we must not mistake the scaffolding for the soul.”

Taken from lds.org: http://www.lds.org/pa/display/0,17884,6951-1,00.html

"Counseling with Priesthood Leaders

Participating in Ward and Stake Councils

Stake presidencies and bishoprics are directed to meet regularly with their auxiliary presidents in ward and stake councils. There, these priesthood leaders instruct auxiliary presidencies on doctrine and duties, and priesthood and auxiliary leaders counsel together on how to improve gospel instruction and how to strengthen individuals and families spiritually (see Dallin H. Oaks, "The Priesthood and the Auxiliaries," Worldwide Leadership Training Meeting, Jan. 10, 2004, 17; see also "Young Women," section 4 of the Church Handbook of Instructions, Book 2: Priesthood and Auxiliary Leaders [1998], 215, 217).

Regular Meetings with Priesthood Leaders

Stake presidencies and bishoprics should meet separately with each auxiliary presidency under their guidance to understand and thereby be able to give inspired counsel and direction to their work.

As stake auxiliary officers, you should present your plans to the stake presidency and receive their counsel before you carry out your plan. On the ward level, you should share with the bishopric your plans before they are carried out. (See Richard G. Scott, "The Doctrinal Foundation of the Auxiliaries," Ensign, Aug. 2005, 67.)

Sharing Observations, Concerns, and Recommendations

Young Women leaders serve as a resource and provide assistance to priesthood leaders. They prepare to help and work with priesthood leaders by first counseling together as a presidency. In their presidency meeting, Young Women leaders:

* Make observations.
* Identify concerns.
* Decide what recommendations to make to priesthood leaders.

After they have made recommendations to priesthood leaders, Young Women leaders follow priesthood counsel."

I'd like to know why the LDS women here feel that they MUST FOLLOW PRIESTHOOD COUNSEL in all matters of concern they have identified through observation. Why do they feel it's NECESSARY to run everything by priesthood holders first, (besides the priesthood leaders told them to) and then only follow the priesthood counsel they are given, even if the counsel they receive is different from what they recommend to said priesthood leaders??

I don't see why women can't have the same rights, privileges, and "power to act in God's name" as men in the church do. Women are just as qualified as men are in this respect. Men are certainly able to fulfill their divine roles as fathers, husbands, and members of the church while holding the priesthood simultaneously. Why shouldn't a woman be granted the same honor if she's so capable? If the priesthood power would somehow hinder a woman in her divine role, then why doesn't it hinder men?

Are we being told by this that men are better and more capable than women?

Hi RTC,

Thanks so much for your heartfelt counsel and advice. My sweet little Hershey is just 9 months old now but already the lack of sleep sometimes is enough to give a gal some serious gripes. I so much admire that you have raised 3 daughters and that you teach seminary. I think you are a great example of motherhood and have represented well the many women of the church who have similar strength and clarity about who they are and what they are doing.

I so much value and honor what you and others do and to such I say - more power to ya - you keep empowering others!

Dear Hershey's Mama-

Yes, Sister Dew most certainly brings it home! Your little Hershey is a fortunate child to have such a devoted mama who knows the meaning of life!

I hope that you keep all of the post that you have written in a journal so that you may reflect upon them in the future.

There is nothing that will challenge you as a women more than when you devote yourself completely to being a mother. It is a great responsibility to teach, train and nurture a child so that they may then make wise choices for themselves that will bring them happiness.

There will be many days that you will doubt yourself as a mother. Remembering the many things you have written will keep you focused on all of these eternal truths.

Heavenly Father has complete faith in you to assist Him in His plan for His children. But sometimes we need a little reminder that he actually ordained it to be this way when they are behaving horribly? lol

Thank you for all of your contributions on this thread, as I have been enlightened by so much of what you have shared. You have been exceptionally open with your post, more than any other in my opinion. I consider that a quality to be admired greatly.

I hope others too, have gained understanding from the honest and sincere dialogue that has transpired here because of it.

It iS the greAtest of aLl knowlEdge to kNow whY wE are placed hEre upon this eaRth and oUr desTiny...

Hey RTC,

Thank you so much for quoting Sister Dew! I always love how she captures things so perfectly particularly when it comes to women! I think this thread could end on those words.

I also appreciate you reading me as exhausted. Sometimes I am. Although I do get tired of re-clarifying or "resurrecting" realities that I think have already well been explicated in this thread, I thought SML asked a very valid question and tried to answer it as best I could.

I feel very passionate about womanhood and motherhood as taught in LDS theology.

Growing up in the church, I once took these roles for granted. Though I learned about them in Sunday lessons, experienced them in the presence and care of 100's of amazing and lovely women -- Mormon and non-Mormon alike and also came to keenly understand their fundamental influence and impact in my education and career -- it was alone in my room in supplication with my Father in Heaven that a humbled me sought his will for my life with all my heart and was really taught about motherhood.

I had come to Him initially seeking his guidance in determining whether or not to serve a mission as I had been more seriously pondering it for about a month. With no clear direction yet, I asked my Heavenly Father if he would have me serve a mission or continue my schooling at this time? Nothing really came, so I asked Him to tell me what was getting in the way of an answer?

I felt impressed to read some quotes I had been given on womanhood in a lesson just a few weeks prior that I hadn't really read -- I had initially just glanced over them and tucked them in a drawer uninterested.

But that night I followed the impression and really read them through. When I did, I recognized for the first time how unenthused I was about motherhood. I honestly remember thinking that I would never get any recognition for it - no visibility in this role, no accolades, but very encompassing work. I'm sure that's what I always thought about it up until then but I was never really aware of it till that night.

Initially I was puzzled, I had not read anything in those quotes that gave me insight into my mission question. I was also discouraged because of my new consciousness of my lack of enthusiasm for motherhood.

In prayer again, I told my Father in Heaven all I wanted more than anything was his will for my life and I had never meant it more than I did then.

I felt impressed to read the quotes again. I almost didn't given my previous experience but when I did, a light and knowledge and profound understanding began to pour out upon me and continued to do so as I read those 6 pages of prophetic quotes, that taught me in conjunction with the spirit, the grand mission that was mine! I struggled to read all the way through them as tears blurred my vision and rolled down my face just as they do again now while I write this. In the end, I knew that whether or not I would serve a mission, my greatest mission in life was that of a mother!

I am so humbled again and again that God would trust me, weak and so often rough around the edges me, with His children. It is the greatest gift and I wish for every woman to understand this amazing opportunity we have as I did that night. I cannot convey it but I know the Spirit can.

As I share these things, my thoughts now also turn to a remembrance of my overall weakness in conversing in this thread - both to share what I believe and to engage consistently without defensiveness and with humility.

You all know I can do better probably more than I do. But in spite of me, I do hope that the teachings of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ regarding womanhood and motherhood will be better understood and therefore better respected even if they are not embraced. I think they are so wonderful and overall feel blessed that I have been able to share them here with all of you.

I have gained so much in participating in this thread. I think myself so much wiser for it and am grateful for this opportunity.

Thanks to On Faith, Bro Otterson, the GAs, and all of you for facilitating my growth in the existance and content of this thread -together you are quite a uniquely helpful brew...

Mr. R

Another profound observation from the outside looking in I must say. As I took a moment to read your post again, I took note of your distinct clarity. Bravo...

You are Right! Are you truly looking for Mrs. Right or is your name just a play on words you give yourself? Either way good work, for you must have read the entire thread to have reached such a positive conclusion.

I do not believe HM was offended at all. I believe it was more like exhausted, at least from my perspective HM has given extreme amounts of personal effort in her post attempting to help SML understand the role of women in the lds church.

I believe she has done an outstanding job in explaining that women in the church can reach their fuLl potential in evEry way through fiRst understAnding their diVine role as moTher and their viTal place in God's plan.

To help define a bit more if necessary...

Quote: Sheri Dew

"Have you ever wondered why prophets have taught the doctrine of motherhood—and it is doctrine—again and again? I have. I have thought long and hard about the work of women of God.

And I have wrestled with what the doctrine of motherhood means for all of us...

When we understand the magnitude of motherhood, it becomes clear why prophets have been so protective of woman's most sacred role.

While we tend to equate motherhood solely with maternity, in the Lord's language, the word mother has layers of meaning.

Of all the words they could have chosen to define her role and her essence, both God the Father and Adam called Eve "the mother of all living—and they did so before she ever bore a child.

Like Eve, our motherhood began before we were born. Just as worthy men were foreordained to hold the priesthood in mortality righteous women were endowed premortally with the privilege of motherhood.

Motherhood is more than bearing children, though it is certainly that. It is the essence of who we are as women. It defines our very identity, our divine stature and nature, and the unique traits our Father gave us.

For reasons known to the Lord, some women are required to wait to have children. This delay is not easy for any righteous woman. But the Lord's timetable for each of us does not negate our nature.
Some of us, then, must simply find other ways to mother. And all around us are those who need to be loved and led.

Eve set the pattern. 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.

She set an example of womanhood for men to respect and women to follow, modeling the characteristics with which we as women have been endowed: heroic faith, a keen sensitivity to the Spirit, an abhorrence of evil, and complete selflessness.

Like the Savior, "who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross," Eve, for the joy of helping initiate the human family, endured the Fall. She loved us enough to help lead us.

As daughters of our Heavenly Father, and as daughters of Eve, we are all mothers and we have always been mothers. And we each have the responsibility to love and help lead the rising generation.

Every time we build the faith or reinforce the nobility of a young woman or man, every time we love or lead anyone even one small step along the path, we are true to our endowment and calling as mothers and in the process we build the kingdom of God.

No woman who understands the gospel would ever think that any other work is more important or would ever say, "I am just a mother," for mothers heal the souls of men.

Look around. Who needs you and your influence? If we really want to make a difference, it will happen as we mother those we have borne and those we are willing to bear with."

Grasshopper -

You said:
"one seeking light and truth, being invited, I “hopped” on over to another who has openly invited all to his blog. I DID find much of interest there. One observation...SML, a woman who claims to be assertive in her role as independent, although having been victimized by male dominance, has found the need to call in “this male” counterpart to “assist in her defense.” So, by her own argument it appears that one can take the girl out of the church but not the church out of the girl... would you not agree?"

sml said:
(will not repost reply... too offensive)

RTC SAYS:

Wow, that was quite a little riddle? But the result of it really got my attention I must confess.

So... I too decided to follow your path as I have in the past been to both of the individuals of which you refer to blog sites.

You are correct in assuming a relationship as they have similar postings on the front of their blogs.

One goes so far as to credit the other in their doing the same. I do agree with your post as I confirmed this myself.

Now, there is absolutely nothing wrong with their having a friendship as you well know.

In fact, I think this is a very healthy and good thing for people to meet and make new friends, especially when leaving something they both have known for so long.

Do you agree?

What I find puzzling is probably what you were attempting to bring to light and that is possibly why you received such an unacceptable response?

Others have asked SML very direct questions and have been given direct answers. In fact she is quite aggressive in asking to know what others think of what has happened in her personal life? She has asked me personally.

If SML was offended in this then why did she not ask you what you actually meant or just confirm the friendship and say "so what"? Do you agree?

If this is a friendship, then why not just say so? Yes?

Is there something wrong IF it is a supportive friendship and it happens to be a male?

Why would this offend SML? Is not equality her call? What do you think?

At first I wasn't sure exactly what you were trying to say? But after SML posted, I think I get what you were trying to point out in your clever little post?

I think what you were implying is that maybe it was never a problem with the LDS church all along? Did the system perhaps just bring it out?

Maybe something that Luckyclover was also trying to say to SML has a part in all of this as well? SML seemed to be agreeable to much of what he said to her. JD1 too. Right?

So, if you disagree, in that what I am saying is not what you meant, then please tell me what you did mean?

Also, if you don't mind my asking? Are you male or female? I know it should not matter, but considering SML's response I am interested to know?

Hi, HM,
I said that I previously felt about the patriarchal system the way that you described. I did not say "just like you". Your words truly did describe how I used to feel.

Grasshopper ~

You wrote, "As one seeking light and truth, being invited, I “hopped” on over to another who has openly invited all to his blog. I DID find much of interest there. One observation...SML, a woman who claims to be assertive in her role as independent, although having been victimized by male dominance, has found the need to call in “this male” counterpart to “assist in her defense.” So, by her own argument it appears that one can take the girl out of the church but not the church out of the girl... would you not agree?"

WTF are you talking about? I assume you are talking about Dave Sigmann and his invitation to check out his blog. Not once have I asked Dave Sigmann to come over here and "assist in my defense." I think any intelligent reader of this thread will recognize that I have no need of assistance from anyone in this discussion.

You claiming this falsehood is the same as if I claimed that Hershey's Mama called YOU in as a male counterpart to assist in her defense. Both claims are untrue and immature in the extreme.

Hershey's Mama,

You seemed offended when SML wrote: "I think it would be wonderful if the church allowed ALL its members the autonomy and freedom to develop and use their talents, abilities, and strengths to their full potential, rather than limiting this potential by teaching them the only valuable way a woman can contribute is through motherhood."

The young men aged 12-18 in the mormon church this year in their Aaronic Priesthood classes will be taught a lesson (Lesson 37) titled "UNDERSTANDING WOMENS ROLES" in which they learn this:

"Women Have Important Roles in the Kingdom of God

Explain that President Spencer W. Kimball, in an address to the sisters of the Church, emphasized the three important roles of women in the kingdom of God: “No greater recognition can come to you in this world than to be known as a woman of God. No greater status can be conferred upon you than being a daughter of God who experiences true sisterhood, wifehood, and motherhood, or other tasks which influence lives for good” (“The Role of Righteous Women,” Ensign, Nov. 1979, p. 102).

List Daughter of God, Wife, and Mother on the chalkboard."

Looks like maybe SML was partially right, only she forgot to mention that women in the church are to make their valuable contribution by being a WIFE too.

As one seeking light and truth, being invited, I “hopped” on over to another who has openly invited all to his blog. I DID find much of interest there. One observation...SML, a woman who claims to be assertive in her role as independent, although having been victimized by male dominance, has found the need to call in “this male” counterpart to “assist in her defense.” So, by her own argument it appears that one can take the girl out of the church but not the church out of the girl... would you not agree?

Hi Dave,

To be clear, you will notice if you reread my post again carefully that gender differences in biology are not where I attempt to make logical inferances or justify why men and women benefit from divine roles. Instead, notice that my use of vitamins was an analogy, a metaphore to illustrate my beliefs, not an underpining or premise of my statements.

I also maintain that your CEO post comes off to me as written in an attitude of mocking my beliefs. You said you used to be a member just like me - while I think that the "just like me" assumption is presumptious for any person to say to another particularly when they don't know each other, I hope such an assumption might lead to more respectful posts to LDS here in the future especially if your goal here is to enlighten.

Hello, HM,

All I did in my last post was show the flip side of the vitamin argument. I laid bare its offense message. The only difference is in my example, we know the policy came from only a man.

Women really do need some supplements that men do not because of their biology. But, to extend that to justify denying women particular leadership positions because men and women are different does not logically follow and is appalling. So, again, it comes down to the question of whether it comes from God or not.

I am glad that you are going to look into the Book of Abraham. The following things are what I would have you study: sepia photos of the recovered Joseph Smith Papyri fragments (Feb. 1968 issue of the Improvement Era), a modern translation of those fragments (I recommend Robert K. Ritner, "The 'Breathing Permit of Hor' Thirty-four Years Later," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 33 [Winter 2000]:101), and the Kirtland Egyptian Papers including Joseph Smith's Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar.

You can read what Nibley and Gee have to say about it, but don't think that reading them counts as really looking into the BoA issue. The apologists don't point out the anachronisms in the text and the false restoration/plagiarism in Facsimile #2. For that reason I would recommend a few websites that point those things out. You don't have to take their word for it, you'll be able to see the points they make with your own eyes, but it would take a lot of intense studying to find those problems yourself.

Hello Dave,

I think naturally our discussions always end in the acknowledgement that we have different premises and of course the invitation to check them once again. I think that's sound advice to everyone including myself on just about anything and something I've gained a lot of insight in doing. I must say with the derogatory tone of your second post, I don't much fancy you as my Book of Abraham instructor and won't be checking out your blog for a lesson as there are other sources to which I may look.

You asked "if you knew that the Church's patriarchy system was not from God, would you not agree that it would be wrong?"

Naturally this is something I've thought about. If by some means I came to believe that the church was not true, I think I would be an agnostic and would probably view both your ideals and lds ideals as subjectives that each have merit. In view of how much the lds church has immensely blessed my life and the lives of others, I believe it has as much merit as any other acclaimed system - cultural relativism and bias in what one ideals is what I think replaces a reality of the divine. Perhaps, I would be a cultural Mormon because I love the people and teachings so much. No matter what, I think I would always be grateful for it. But with that said, I must also say that I have come to trust my path and my church and my God as reality more than ever as my study and application of both LDS doctrine and principles compounds and my understanding and relationship with God deepens in prayer and in spiritual communication. The blessings compound as well as light and knowledge and in the end, I really look forward to continuing my sojourn on earth with my faith. For me it’s exciting to think about…

Morning SML,

You wrote that the church limits potential "by teaching them the only valuable way a woman can contribute is through motherhood."

SML, this is a blatantly false statement regarding lds teachings. I admit, as this exchange goes on and you continue to misconstrue the personal statements and feelings of myself and others despite statements to the contrary, your credibility in regards to explicating LDS doctrine wanes as well. In other words, it is begining to appear to me that in some cases you carelessly distort to serve your purposes. If that is not the case, I hope you are more careful in your interpretations and explications of both the LDS who post here and LDS doctrine. If it is the case, in my opinion it does not serve your position which I believe from a secular perspective has much better angles that you might discuss with. Either way, in light of such, I find myself loosing enthusiam to converse with you.

Again for the record, As an advisor to the young women in my ward, I have become very familiar with what is in the manuals about individual worth, divine nature, and good works and a woman's potential influence for good in various spheres besides motherhood as both celebrated and encouraged. Entire lessons are devoted to developing talents as well as serving the community and lifelong education. President Hinckley encourages all the youth to get education and to use it to bless the world and in so doing bring honor to themselves, thier families and the church. Most recently, LDS women have been "plead" with to consider serving missions as they are valued and needed. Also, Homemaking has been changed to Home, Family and Personal Enrichment which reflects various emphasis for talent and skill development. GA's addresses to single women encourages them to use thier many wonderful talents and ablities to do much good in the world and in the church and not to waste time worrying about a lack of marriage oppurtunities. These are just a few of the most recent examples. In light of such I hope you do not make such false statements in the future. Again, in my opinion, they only detract from other more substantial critiques you have offered this forum and might in the future.

I checked up on the church policy which so seriously impacted SML. It's not in the most recent version of the secret _Church Handbook of Instructions_. It discusses harmony in the family, but is gender neutral.

Baby steps are being made, although the marathon stretches ahead.

Mr. CEO says to his female employee that only men can be his Vice Presidents. The female employee begins to protest, but Mr. CEO says, "You know leadership is like vitamin Z. Men need it for their personal growth and development, but women don't need it. It would be wasted on you; you have your own vitamins for your differing feminine needs and bodies".

For me, personally, while I was an active, faithful, true-believing Mormon, I felt about the patriarchal system just as Hershey's Momma so eloquently described. I more than accepted it, I embraced as the best system because I trusted that it came from Heavenly Father.

But, once I found out that the Book of Abraham was not what Joseph claimed it to be and came to believe that the entire church system was not created, governed, or inspired by God, that changed everything. I then saw the patriarchal system without the Celestial glow, but as a mortal system created by men.

Now, if we were talking about any other organization (i.e., PTA group, corporate office, government system, etc) being organized by humans in the same way as the church is, I doubt many would defend its virtues. Who could defend the policy that only men can have the highest positions, regardless of the fact that most men will never hold those positions? We would not even be discussing whether this system is harmful, unfair, unequal, etc. Almost everyone would be able to see that a PTA organization in which only men can have the top positions is wrong.

So, if you knew that the Church's patriarchy system was not from God, would you not agree that it would be wrong? So, this is an issue about whether we trust this system is from God, including that it is best for men and women. And whether specific policies, such as the one that women must get permission from their non-member husbands to get their endowments, are from God or men. If they are from men, we have no reason to assume that treating men and women differently in this way is better for them than treating them with equality. In fact, if business and government can show us anything it is that society (both men and women) benefit from having women and men in leadership positions as opposed to just men. The idea that leadership should be reserved for men is an archaic idea.

The only thing that separates me from where I was when I accepted patriarchy to where I am now was thoroughly investigating the Book of Abraham. I would invite all who have not done the same to do so. You need to know what you don't know. You cannot be certain that there could not be anything there that might change your mind if you don't know the evidence. The entire case can be demonstrated by evidence the church has in its possession. You do not have to trust any anti sources. I imagine John D might have some familiarity with the topic judging from his other responses, but I'd like to find out how much he has been exposed to. If anyone is interested in exploring that topic more, post a message on my blog.

My aim here is not to find self-worth by competing for the same roles as men. I have found my self-worth, and it didn't come because of my role as a wife in "Zion" or as a sister in the LDS church or as a woman who's able to bear children. It came because I am a unique individual. I have talents, abilities, and strengths that can be used for good works if I choose to use them. I care about others. I appreciate humanity in all its forms.

I care how people are treated within the church. I think it would be wonderful if the church allowed ALL its members the autonomy and freedom to develop and use their talents, abilities, and strengths to their full potential, rather than limiting this potential by teaching them the only valuable way a woman can contribute is through motherhood.

You ladies are perfectly entitled to your opinions on how great the patriarchal system of the LDS church is. For some it's the perfect program, I'm sure. More power to ya.....um, I mean LESS power to ya!

:) SML

Hershey's Mama- I loved the vitamin analogy...Your points are well stated. You certainly must make your "Mama" proud. You go girl you rock too.

Hershey's Mama -

Thank you for addressing the above question posted by SML so eloquently. The implication of this being a "scary" topic of discussion for lds women again seems to indicate a continued denial to accept the fact, that although we do acknowledge that some women have experienced discrimination in the church, the majority of lds women that choose to be there are happy.

In fact, LDS women are some of the happiest women on earth! They should be!

I appreciate that you have drawn attention to the power and influence women have in their roles and stewardships in the church and in their families.

You are absolutely right when you state that it has not been hardly acknowledged in these threads nor has it been validated in any way.

In fact, I find it interesting that the only place it seems self-worth for some women is to be found is in the attempt to compete for the same roles as men? Why is this so? So much energy in such a "fruitless" pursuit.

Women of all creations, should understand the concept of complimentary relationships in order to attain harmony.

You said:

"I see it as evidence of the wisdom of God in setting up a system that if lived according to his teachings, yields fruits I believe superior to equality for equalities sake."

I love the way you expressed this so beautifully in relation to the marriage partnership ordained by God.

I hope when people read this thread that they will be able to see this truly is the way that marriage and family is ideally to be.

That men and women do not compete in their partnership, but that roles are well defined and that this is the key to equality and harmony within the family.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints is a place that strengthens the family in every way.

Jesus Christ is the center of our homes and we follow His teachings and example in governing our lives.

We believe that this is the only way to true happiness in this life and in the life hereafter. We believe that families are forever, therefore everything matters...

Hi again SML,

I think I get the general gist of what you are advocating for, I've thought along those lines in the past myself as one who also holds equality as a value and virtue. But before I get more specific in answering your question, I do want to point out that I think much of your proposal is skewed in that it does not acknowledge many important realities that have already been articulated previously in this thread.

Again for the record , men are most often participants similar to women in this patriarchal order ie. the young men's leaders and high priest group have to seek approval from the Bishop on budget issues and the like just as much as any Relief Society President does. Bishops are also accountable to stake presidents and stake presidents to area authorities and all to church policy as well.

Also, a man is no more able to appoint himself to positions of leadership than any woman. Unlike other churches, one cannot just decide they want to be a pastor or reverend and go to bible college or divinity school. People are called and some are never called to leadership positions period. People leave their respective callings when they are released as well.

Another that has been so often minimized in this thread as a whole, is the grand and powerful influence women already have in their roles and stewardships in the church and in their families that is again ignored in your statements.

And finally, your proposal fails to acknowledge that in the marriage relationship, Mormon men and woman already are statistically higher in marital equality which I think is actually due to the separate roles given to men and women that teaches them to serve and honor one another- go figure. Some may see this as ironic if they choose to acknowledge it at all. I see it as evidence of the wisdom of God in setting up a system that if lived according to his teachings, yields fruits I believe superior to equality for equalities sake.

In my field, I've learned that good therapy starts not with a Freudian type interpreting ones experiences and offering anecdotes but with a grounded therapist essentially asking a client what is your goal/how would you like it to be? In my experience, there are few clients who do not already have the answer to that question and therapy then consists of defining the “what” and “how” that does and does not facilitate that goal.

I bring this up because much of the answer to your question SML, for me lies in looking first to what the actual goal of the LDS church is when I am assessing what behaviors or policies are destructive in addition to my convictions of some very eternal realities. One of those convictions is that previous to this life, I have always been a woman and was prepared in a pre-mortal realm to take on the sacred role of mother in this life to help my children return to God. Correspondingly, my conviction is that my husband was prepared to administer priesthood ordinances in service to me and others and to be a provider and presider to sustain and magnify me in my unequivocally important work. In these roles, we seek a common goal, a Zion ready family, for a Zion society.

In addition to being uniquely prepared and equipped for our respective roles, I believe that embracing and living them are similar to the multi-vitamins that are specific to men or women - when taken, they assist us in becoming our very best selves. While my husband’s multi-vitamin contains overlapping ingredients with mine, if I were to take his or if he were to take mine, I imagine we would each take some benefit but we would also be missing out on what is uniquely contained in these our “sexist” vitamins that helps our growth according to our gender. I am confident that in giving us these roles, God is also assisting us in becoming our very best selves for our happiness and to the blessing of all of His children.

In this context, I don’t think it would be the exact same church and gospel that I so much love as you suggest and I don’t think we would arrive as efficiently, if at all, at our goal - as our best selves would be fundamentally characteristic of the Zion we are seeking to build as well as the best nurturance of our children so that they would be there with us.

In fulfilling these sacred roles as Christ would, I believe men and women learn to sustain each other, magnify each other, they become intimately bound to one another and they sustain the nurturance of the most precious gift God can bestow, his children. Thus what I advocate for is not for formal female priesthood holding or male child baring and homemakers but for better implementation of LDS/Christ-like teachings and greater acknowledgement and appreciation for our unique gifts and the challenges of our respective roles again with the goal to better support one another and facilitate the creation of Zion.

I hope this sheds more light on my position...

SML,

I wonder if the "insidiousness" of female oppression you perceive in the church is due to geography more than theology. I must say, your characterization baffles me.

I could see in some regions the church might fit your description a bit better than in the area I grew up. For example, my sister, a So-Cal girl and working Mom lived in South Carolina for a time. She finally went inactive because she was tired of being lectured in Relief Society about how evil she was for being a working mom. She said they never taught out of the manuals, but took Liberties to go off on tangents without any guidance from the scriptures or the Prophets.

Recently she moved to Nashville. She became active there again. She loves the ward there and doesn't feel any kind of "oppression" due to her gender. To this day my sister gets annoyed when members deviate from the manual, the Prophets and the scriptures in Sunday School. Did she not know any better from her experience in Cali wards, she may have equated this behavior with the Restored Gospel. Luckily her experience was not so limited.

The oppressive church you describe does not fit my California, and London models. Maybe it fits the South and certain parts of the Midwest a bit more. But this is geographic and cultural, not theological; nor is it an essential aspect of Mormonism or in accordance with its teachings about the inherent and equal divine worth of men and women.