Exponent II's Blog, page 242

#hearLDSwomen: As a New Mother, I Was Denied the Sacrament

[image error]

By Sydney

I was attending sacrament meeting for the first time since having a my first baby. During the passing of the sacrament, my infant was fussing and I stepped out into the hall to soothe and rock the child. I was eager to receive the sacrament having not received it since before having a baby. I stood just outside the open door of the chapel and was in view of the bishopric and a couple of men passing the sacrament. The closest man to me came all the way to the door inside the chapel with the sacrament tray, made eye contact with me on the outside of the chapel doors, and turned away to pass to a different row. I thought there must have been a mistake and I looked up to the Bishop, and he made eye contact with me. I waited for the Bishop to direct the young man to bring a tray to me on the outside of the door. Nothing. Next the water was passed and again I was skipped in plain view of the bishopric and now many members of the ward.

I couldn’t understand it and it hurt me deeply. I went into the mother’s room and sobbed. I didn’t know that caring for a small child also made me invisible.

The Bishop called me and my husband into his office after the block. He explained that he saw me not take the sacrament and said that in the future, if I wanted to partake of the sacrament, I needed to be inside the doors of the chapel. He had instructed those passing the sacrament that it could only be passed to people inside the chapel. He wanted to see everybody that partook of the bread and water, to make sure they were worthy to do so.

Feeling furious and deeply hurt, I confided in my Relief Society President who brought it up with the Bishop. But it wasn’t until my husband brought it to the attention of an Area Seventy who addressed it with the Bishop, that the Bishop finally agreed to let sacrament be passed outside the chapel.

On that day, as a brand new mother, longing to be connected to the spirit and the Lord through the partaking of the sacrament, I felt completely and utterly invalidated. My desire to be obedient was trumped by the Bishop’s desire to control. Furthermore, the voices of women couldn’t compel him to change, only a man with higher authority than himself.

Sydney is an aspiring public health professional working in the humanitarian field. She lives in the beehive state with her son and husband.

 

Pro-tip: Be sensitive to the needs of anyone who is unable to sit in the chapel during the sacrament by ensuring that they have the opportunity to participate.

Click here to read all of the stories in our #hearLDSwomen series. Has anything like this happened to you? Please share in the comments or submit your experience(s) to participate in the series.

“If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.” (Mark 4:23)

Some Thoughts on General Conference

General Conference is coming up. I’ve seen a lot of speculation and rumors flying around about this or that big change that might come. I generally don’t put much stock into rumors, so while I hope some of the speculation I’ve heard is true (and I hope some other speculation I’ve heard is false), I’m taking a wait and see approach, and I’m trying not to get emotionally invested in any of the speculation thus far.

I didn’t grow up in the church, so I don’t have childhood memories of watching conference. I think I may have caught a session or two on TV when I was a new member as a teen, back in the day when the local public access channel would broadcast it as part of their public service programming. But the first time I remember making a whole production of it was when I was in high school. A friend of mine invited me over, along with another mutual friend who attended church without his family, to watch conference at her house with her family. We ate food and watched church on comfy couches. I don’t remember any of the talks, but I remember how wonderful it felt to share the experience with others.

We don’t really have much of a liturgical calendar in Mormonism, but General Conference is the closest we get in some ways to the experience. I sometimes even jokingly refer to it as “The Feast of St. General Conference Day”. Some talks are sublime, some are mundane, and some make me want to yell at my television screen. (If I have to hear another strawman talk directed at singles that makes it clear that the speaker has never had a meaningful conversation on the subject with an actual single person…) Despite my complicated relationship to conference, I still kind of love it.

Most of the time, I watch it at home alone while attending to various projects – house cleaning, furniture assembly, quilt making, etc. Occasionally I’ll get together with friends for a feast while watching and discussing. No matter how I watch it, it feels like the whole weekend is a trip to another place outside of time – kind of like some sort of churchy vacation from the comfort of someone’s living room.

I’m sure many more pixels will be spilled in talking about this or that thing said at conference, and I’ll probably participate in those conversations. Some of the talks will uplift me, and some won’t. I’ll probably be moved to both happy tears and frustrated/hurt tears – though I’m hoping for more happy and less hurt.

Please pass the cinnamon rolls!

[image error]

#hearLDSwomen: Bishop and Stake President Blamed Me for Marriage Problems

[image error]At the end of my marriage, I was severely depressed and just trying to keep my head above water. I was the second counselor in the Relief Society presidency and viewed that calling as my own personal Time Out away from my husband, who was attempting to control everything I did both in and outside of our home. My husband had a porn problem that he blamed on me because if I were a better wife, he wouldn’t have to look at porn (that’s an actual quote).

One day, my husband dropped on me that we were going to go talk to the bishop because I had a Problem. I snapped out of my total complacency just long enough to snap back, “Let me get my shoes, and maybe we can get my choke collar tightened while we’re at it.” My husband accused me of having a “bad attitude” and told me that we wouldn’t go at all if I was going to “be that way.” I left the house and went for a drive, but I called the bishop myself and asked to meet with him before I headed for home that evening. I met him at his home. For 3 hours. I told him about all of my marital issues with my husband–the total control he had over anything financially based, the controlling of when and with whom I was allowed to leave the house, the pornography addiction… Three Hours. The bishop looked like his head was going to explode. My husband was, at that time, the Elder’s Quorum president.

I went home feeling like maybe someone was listening. But the feeling lasted all of three days when I got a call to meet with the stake president. I went in with my husband to that meeting; the bishop was there as well. The stake president announced to me that my marriage problems were all my fault and I needed to fix them immediately. I looked at my husband and said something like, “did you seriously ambush me like this?” He looked startled.

“No,” the bishop said, “I called the stake president.”

“Do you call them for everyone that has marriage problems?” I asked. Apparently not; I was a Special Case because my husband is such a good person that this must be All My Fault.

I listened to the stake president for about five minutes of being berated before totally zoning out. He had a picture of the Savior above his desk behind his head. I looked up to it and immediately thought, He would not have handled this like this. I looked down at the stake president, announced that I was done, asked the bishop to give my husband a ride home, and left.

Two weeks later, I got a letter from the stake president marked “personal and confidential” on the outside of it. He apologized for stepping in where he should not have, without having all the information, and hoped he hadn’t made things worse.

Epilogue: A good friend of mine was a bishop in that stake at the time that stake president was finally released. There was a reception for him, sort of a farewell thing, and the friend asked the stake president if there was anything in his time as the stake president that he regretted. He said while he’d made some mistakes, the only thing he really regretted was how badly he’d handled this one couple where the wife was in great distress and the husband had a porn problem. He said he totally screwed up with that, and he deeply regretted how it had turned out.

It didn’t fix my problem, but it sure helped me feel validated…even though it was a good 7 or 8 years later.

– Anonymous

 

Pro tip: Listen to women and don’t project blame onto them, even when you identify with the husband because he seems like “such a good guy.” Do not interfere in marriages except to listen, offer support, or refer to a competent professional.

Click here to read all of the stories in our #hearLDSwomen series. Has anything like this happened to you? Please share in the comments or submit your experience(s) to participate in the series.

“If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.” (Mark 4:23)

Guest Post – Idol Worship: The God Of Prosperity

[image error]by Helena

 

I used to think I understood the gospel of Jesus Christ. But as I’ve been teaching my children about Him, and really focusing on the simple truths, I’ve discovered that I had it wrong all along.

When people stand up in class, or at the pulpit, and say “I know God loves me, and I have been blessed with children.” I look over at my sister in law, who has PCOS and has struggled for years with infertility. She is so kind, always serving others, just such a good person doing her very best, and who loves the church.

What does this tell her?

Does God not love her? Is she not righteous enough?

What did her uncle do to earn the blessings of children when he and his girlfriend had their first baby in high school?

And when people say “I am so blessed with good health” what message does that send to a person who is struggling with their health? Or when someone dies of cancer?

Were they not righteous enough? Did God not love them?

And when someone shares how God protected them from getting into an accident on their way to work, as evidence of His love, of His hand in their life.

…What does that say to the mother who lost their child in a car crash?

Did their child not matter? Had he or she not earned enough love to be saved from harm?

This never set right with me. And as I’ve been teaching my children about Jesus, I’ve come to know Him a little better. And I realized I’ve been worshiping an Idol:

I was worshiping the idol of The God Of Prosperity.

This worship felt so safe. I would trade obedience like currency in exchange for blessings, and you can see who he loves by how much they have.

It was so simple, almost like a vending machine. If you don’t have the blessing you want, try adding more obedience in, and see which blessings fall out. Throw in enough, and someday you’ll get them all.

I had it all wrong.

When people come to church who are struggling, and they hear people say “I was blessed with children, and health, and money, and all of my grown kids are still in the Church, look how much God loves me. I earned this all by my obedience.”

…The rest of us leave feeling beaten down.

We aren’t good enough. God doesn’t love us enough. Somehow we did something, and are being cursed or punished.

THIS IS AN UNRIGHTEOUS TRADITION.

It is an unrighteous tradition brought in from other religions, other cultures, maybe from our fears but it is NOT of Christ.

When people come to church and hear THIS message, who wins? Who wants us to feel this way?

Satan. If he can make us think and feel these things then it’s a victory for him.

This life is HARD. And good things happen, and bad thing happen, and our bodies fail us, and our loved ones fail us, and we fail them. It sucks, but it’s part of life. These things aren’t punishments. They are part of the package, and we agreed to them before coming to this earth. They do not mean anything about Gods love, and when someone has more than you it’s NOT because he loves them more.

That is Prosperity Gospel, and I reject it. I do not worship the God of Prosperity anymore.

I only have interest in Jesus Christ.

So when I think about things I used to know about the Gospel, I like to stop and examine them. Even things I never thought to question. I ask myself: What did Jesus teach? How does this fit with His teachings? Then I ask: What does Satan teach? How does this fit with him?

Because you know he is working tirelessly to take the plain and simple teachings of Christ, and add in elements of fear, and coercion, and bribery, and shame.

And with this thought work, I’ve come to see things differently than ever before, and for me the best way is always through Christ.

Maybe what God blesses us with isn’t things like health or children or money. That falls apart when you realize even horrible people have these things.

Maybe His blessings are a kind heart, more ability to see and minister to those around us, a genuine interest in others, and the ability to look at them with love and not ever with judgement. Maybe that’s what we should be praying for.

Maybe when we look beyond our hearts, we are looking beyond the mark. And when we focus so much on the mote in someone else’s eye, we stop seeing them as our Savior does- as beautiful, broken, resilient souls.

When we look at others, maybe it should only be to love them, not to try and change them. We can’t do that. Only God can. And thinking we are mighty enough to change them, and that it’s our place to try- that’s Pride.

And when we look at the ways we are fortunate in our lives, and think of it as evidence of Gods favor? That might be Pride, too.

And thinking that we can bribe or bargain or purchase physical favors from our Lord- maybe that’s Pride as well.

My understanding isn’t perfect. And I hope that as I continue to grow and learn, I’ll look back in another ten years and say “I thought I knew.” But right now, when I pray, this feels good and true.

When I look to the Savior for guidance in how to help support the people around me, his words and parables are so clear. Love them.

That’s it. Only love.

And with that love, miracles truly can happen. When our hears are blessed and filled with compassion and love, we can be there to support each other in the hardest parts of life. The messiest, most heartbreaking aspects.

Maybe that’s what true miracles are.

Maybe that’s what Jesus was saying all along.

#hearLDSwomen: Shut Out

[image error]by Megan

I’m a single, childless, middle-aged woman, so there are plenty of things, pricks big and small, that I could share, but this is the one that always sticks out the most. This experience happened a few years ago. At the time I was, for various reasons, living back in my parents’ ward which was also the ward I grew up in. I was a ward missionary and the ward mission leader happened to be my own father. My dad and I have always worked well together, so I was functioning as a kind of unofficial assistant ward mission leader, mostly of the “running correlation meetings when my dad couldn’t be there” variety.

At one point my parents decided to take a month-long vacation to visit my brother and his family in Australia which would leave us ward mission leader-less during that time. I mentioned to him that, since the ward mission leader doesn’t exercise any priesthood keys, maybe I could sub in for him during the duration. Unbeknownst to me, he brought the idea up with the bishop who gave his approval and so for about a month I was the acting ward mission leader.

There were ups and downs, like there are in any calling, but one of the ups was when I had the chance to organize a day of multiple baptisms. I organized the program, filled the font, asked brothers to be witnesses, and, because attendance at one of the baptisms outgrew the normal venue, had the chance to conduct a meeting from the pulpit in the chapel.

I felt so useful, so fulfilled. It was just so good to stretch myself in new ways, ways I’d never had the opportunity at church to explore.

My parents returned home when they were supposed to and things continued as they had before. But a few weeks later something new happened. One Sunday we were asked to sustain a brother, new in the ward, as the assistant ward mission leader. No one, in my memory, and it goes back a ways, had ever officially been called to that position, there’d never been a need. But now we had one.

I knew it wasn’t personal, but it felt like a punch in the gut, all the same. I even mentioned it to my dad, whose reply was pretty much, “It’s not about you, Megan.” But, you know what, it kind of was. They had certain expectations of who could lead, and I, because I couldn’t attend PEC, because I didn’t attend Elders Quorum, because I didn’t hold the priesthood, didn’t meet those expectations. And they acted to make sure that such a situation would never arise again.

I can’t and don’t know their reasoning, I wasn’t involved in the calling process. And since they didn’t even have the common decency to give me any kind of explanation, the only conclusions I can draw are from my own observations and experiences. Everyone involved was a nice guy, up to and including the guy they got to replace me, but they never once thought to consider my thoughts, opinions, or feelings on anything that happened. Because my opinion didn’t matter.

 

Pro tip: Create opportunities for women to contribute to the ward in ways that feed their spirits, even if that means going outside the usual gender box prescriptions. Consider women’s feelings when they are replaced; talk to them about their feelings and preferences.

Click here  to read all of the stories in our #hearLDSwomen series. If you would like to submit an experience,  please do so here .

“If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.” (Mark 4:23).

Guest Post — The Name Change: Social Expectations, Prejudice, and Jesus

[image error]by S.J. Ryan

I was married over a month ago. After months of debating whether or not to take my husband’s last name, I finally made a decision. During the process, I made a lot of discoveries and insights that made the process mean a whole lot more than just a means to an end.

So let’s talk about names. What’s in them? Why do we care so much? I was thinking a lot about this lately before and after the wedding day. Most people expect a woman to take her husband’s last name after marriage in the Western world. Culturally, that’s our norm! The thing about cultural norms though, is that they never apply to everyone. Being a standard or a norm doesn’t mean it’s “right” it just means it’s what many people are accustomed to as a society.

Yeah, so ultimately, I decided not to change my name. A lot of reasons went into this decision a couple of them being: I was worried about making a name change before leaving the country in August (what if there were passport complications?) and it’s just a hassle to change your name everywhere!

I asked Nick to summarize how he feels about my last name staying the same and he said was, “Ultimately it’s your decision as to how you identify yourself, no matter what your last name is I will still identify you as my wife. I just don’t have strong opinions about what your name is.”

In addition to interviewing Nick for this blog I also investigated how other women felt about changing their names. I used an instagram poll to collect some data and asked a group of Mormon women on a Facebook group to share their thoughts as well, both groups of data obviously have great biases, but this isn’t an experiment, just a thought exploration!

The most common reason woman said they would/did change their name to share with their husband was for the sense of family unity. I totally understand that. From a practical perspective, it’s so much easier to say “The Hainsworths” rather than “The Hainsworth-Ryans” or “The Ryan-Hainsworths” or “Ryansworths” or “who are you people?” (For the record, you can just call us Nick and Sam). For a lot of people, the idea of family unity centered on sharing a name with their children (again a desire I very much understand). I asked Nick how he felt about this too and he said, “Our kids will grow up knowing that we love them and we are part of who we are. They won’t even think that a last name isn’t the same as theirs. It won’t detract from you being their mother, it won’t even occur to them because they will just feel that we love them.” I loved Nick’s answer because it is totally true. My mom kept her maiden name although she and my dad have been married my whole life. I never felt less loved or less mothered or less unified as a family because she had a different last name. On the contrary, I felt more connected to her side of the family and I felt more like a Mertensmeyer than (I think) I would have felt otherwise.

A name pales in comparison to the unity created by blood, heritage, and most importantly, love! While, again, I understand why families want a sense of unity with names, to us, unity comes from somewhere else.

I didn’t choose to keep my last name to make a point or to be defiant, but I did do so because, to me, keeping your maiden name has always been “normal.” Of course, I wasn’t taught there was something wrong with taking your husband’s name, but it just wasn’t part of the little mini family culture I came out of. In the same way, we all come from different cultures with norms and biases of their own. Some of those norms and biases can be harmless, such as what your last name is, but sometimes they can form into prejudices.

Describing myself only as a white, Mormon, Michaels-worker (did y’all know? I’m working at Michaels this summer… hello employee discount) would be like describing Christ as a middle-eastern, Jewish, carpenter. It’s not inaccurate, but it doesn’t paint the picture. If someone asked you who Jesus Christ was, you probably wouldn’t start by mentioning his ethnicity, job, or even his religion. You would probably tell them about his heavenly mission, his forgiving heart, and the sacrifice he made for us. We are one in Christ because he suffered all, he knows all. But in the oneness Christ creates is diversity still. Not one of us were made the same, we were all made in unique images of our heavenly parents. It is through Christ that being one is even possible, but let me suggest that acknowledging difference and our unique creation is the first step to fully being one.

Christ lived and thrived outside his culturally normal sphere. Christ reached out to the poor, to the sick, the destitute, prostitutes, to tax-collectors, even to those who hated him. Christ begged forgiveness for those who crucified him. “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.” (KJV Luke 23:34) Christ did not live constrained to the cultural norms around him. He lived a law that transcended such cultural expectations, a law we should look to as well.

Cultural normativity can, but certainly doesn’t always!, become prejudice. Unfortunately, prejudice is alive and well. Elder Oaks, in his “Be One” talk acknowledged that following the revelation on the priesthood in 1978, members were not all able to suddenly adjust frames of mind and become completely prejudice free. Racism persisted then and it still persists today. Elder Oaks prompted us “to abandon attitudes of prejudice against any group of God’s children […] As servants of God who have the knowledge and responsibilities of His great plan of salvation, we should hasten to prepare our attitudes and our actions—institutionally and personally—to abandon all personal prejudices.”

Elder Oak’s is calling us to repent of personal prejudice and to move forward in Christ-like love. In that spirit, I urge us all to take a moment, think about a group of people you may have difficulty fully accepting. Know that prejudice isn’t always active, nor is it always hateful or willful at all. Prejudice comes from our cultural norms and the inherent difficulty in accepting deviations from that norm. So take a moment and first accept what is “normal” to you. Then take a moment and think about what might be difficult for you to accept. Perhaps understanding differing sexuality, or those who are transgender is difficult. Or maybe you have a hard time understanding why someone could possibly support an opposing political party. Maybe you jump to conclusions based on individual appearances. One last disclaimer before I actually let you have the moment I’ve promised—we all have difficulties with people in some way or another. You are not bad or wrong or sinful for acknowledging seeds of prejudice- we all have them. If we were perfect, we wouldn’t need Christ! Pray to understand what you don’t. Pray to love, as Christ loved. Ask forgiveness for your prejudices whatever they might be. Take this moment and think. (Then come back, I have more to say)

Did you find something? I know I did.

Ultimately, God doesn’t care WHAT our name is. I am a Ryan, I am a Hainsworth, I am an Ell, and a Mertensmeyer, and a Melies too. But, frankly, it doesn’t matter. He knows us individually and personally. He knows us by name, but I promise you that name will never change with Him. Names carry significance on many levels and they are certainly not unimportant. How you choose to name your children or how you change your name are personal choices and ultimately don’t affect anyone besides you (and in some cases your family). I urge all of my readers to have open minds and accept any naming tradition, whether it’s a matrilineal tradition, a patrilineal one, a hyphenated name, or none of the above. Shrug it off! Note the cultural diversity and embrace it. Find gratitude that other cultures exist besides your own!

S.J. Ryan  is a convert, a feminist, a wife, and a child of God. She is still navigating the world of Mormon culture after converting during her junior year of college. She writes about her experiences as a feminist, Mormon convert at her blog, Small and Simple Things: samjoryan.wixsite.com/smallandsimplet...

 

#hearLDSwomen: Men Supporting Men

[image error]by Laura

My husband had an affair and was disfellowshipped. Our bishop clearly cared about helping him, meeting with him regularly. The bishop “helped” me by suggesting I get counseling and then never speaking to me again during the disfellowshipment.

A year later, the church court reconvened. I was present and asked if I’d like to make a statement. I very clearly stated that my husband had not repented. Yes, he had stopped the affair and not taken the sacrament for a year. But he had never told me he was sorry for anything other than being caught. He lied in his “confession” to my parents and his. He never admitted to anyone that he had lied to them. He never once shed a tear or showed any sign of pain over the wound he had inflicted. In marriage counseling, he would promise the therapist he would do something and then forget as soon as we left the office. He would even tell me that his girlfriend was more righteous than I and the love of his life and they were meant to be together; he was just waiting for me to die so he could be with her openly and honestly.

When I was done speaking, the bishop said, “Well, your husband has complied with everything I’ve asked him to do so I am obligated to reinstate him to full fellowship.”

I was shocked! I literally screamed in pain and disbelief. I left the room and never went back to church.

Pro tip: Take women’s desires, experiences, and stories seriously. If women tell bishops that they have been mistreated, lied to, and that their spouses have not shown true repentance and restitution, take that into serious account when considering the reinstatement of spouses to fellowship in the church.

Click here to read all of the stories in our #hearLDSwomen series. Has anything like this happened to you? Please share in the comments or submit your experience(s) to participate in the series.

Guest Post: The Recovering Accidental Misogynist

[image error]By He Who Shall Not Be Named Psychiatry Doctor Guy

I’m sorry, I’m so, so sorry for being male. This was an actual thought from my actual brain that occurred as I sat in Psychology 380: The Psychology of Women. I was one of three scared males in a class with twenty-seven fairly angry undergraduate females and one fired-up female Psychology Professor. It was my first (and only) Psychology class at the university. As a man in the Psychology of Women, I thought I was entering an exclusive island paradise with Wonder Woman and the Amazons—instead I entered a raging war. I was put in the awkward position of trying to defend the global, historical, and current oppression of females in our male-dominated societies. I didn’t know Jack about gender roles, stereotypes, sexist language, social learning, the word misogyny, and a bunch of other Feminist stuff. I tried to apologetically explain that most men didn’t hate women. . . I didn’t hate women, some of my favorite people were women, especially hot college women—sure for thousands of years women had been socially excluded, discriminated against, belittled, exploited, objectified, pornogrified, and had violence inflicted upon them—but not by me. If misogyny meant hatred of women, and I didn’t hate them, then I couldn’t be a misogynist. Right? I quickly learned there was much more to it. I didn’t see how I used sexist language and that I was a privileged white guy. I didn’t see that my worldview was biased and male-dominated. I had a misogynistic blind spot, a space in my visual field occupied by the optic nerve that I couldn’t see because my brain painted over the dark reality. I didn’t appreciate what I was seeing. I was an accidental misogynist.

I must say, having my eyes opened to my (and the world’s) misogyny wasn’t easy to take and I found myself becoming angry with males in general. Men have been jerks for a really long time and once my blind spot was recognized, I began to see the sexism in my own life and inequality of the world around me. For example, here are attributes society associates with women: attractive, feminine, smart, sensitive, emotional, nurturing. Attributes associated with men? Strong, hides feelings, acts tough, sexy, muscular. As my vision was expanded, I became more curious about the factors and influences that created these gender stereotypes, how these ideas played out in mass and social media, how the stereotypes were woven into the fabric of our reality, and what impact it had on men and women today.

So, fast-forward about twenty years and as fate would have it, I became a psychiatrist. In my practice, I treat more women than men. Research data show it’s not because women are more depressed or anxious than men, but my guess is that women are more willing to accept they have an issue and are more willing to seek professional help (at least where I live.) Since I live in Utah, I have a high population of Mormon women and many of them tell me they feel the roles that are prescribed for them by the Church are fixed, immovable, and reductive. Many of them are frustrated by the way these roles and expectations are taught and how the ideal image is promoted and perpetuated. The purpose of this article is my attempt as a recovering-accidental-misogynist-turned-Psychiatrist to “mansplain” what may be driving this discontent among my female Mormon clients. (I do acknowledge my limitations due to my biological maleness make my commentary problematic. Again I’m sorry.)

The Proclamation

While these gender roles have unofficially existed for generations and are part of the fabric of being a female Mormon, these roles were formally outlined in a proclamation read by President Gordon B. Hinckley (then leader of the Mormon Church) as part of his message to the General Relief Society (the philanthropic and educational women’s organization of the Mormon Church) held in September of 1995 entitled, “The Family: A Proclamation to the World.”

It began by solemnly proclaiming that marriage between man and woman was ordained of God and the family was central to God’s plan for His children. The command to multiply and replenish the earth was still in force, and parents were accountable if they didn’t teach their children to keep the commandments, love one another, and obey the law. So the expectation was set right off the bat. Women, who shoulder the majority of the burden of producing human children, were expected to make, have, and raise children. It’s in the plan. These are the rules.

This next part is the part that may be causing much of the discontent, “By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families.” Preside means to be in position of authority or act as president. Go to any dictionary you want, definition one, two, and three—preside equals “be in charge.” “Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners.” So helping one another as an equal partnership is good, but it’s somewhat of a confusing idea to have a presider and a nurturer that are equal. In the context of a recovering misogynist there is a distinction and a difference in this language which is perceived by many as a mixed message. There is a caveat that disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate “individual adaptation” to the guidelines, but individual adaptation is obviously meant to be the exception, not the rule. “Equal in importance but different roles” is a common refrain.

In October 2017, Elder Dallin H. Oaks of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, an eye-witness to the revelatory process, gave a talk describing how the proclamation came to be:

Subjects were identified and discussed by members of the Quorum of the Twelve for nearly a year. Language proposed, reviewed, and revised. Prayerfully we continually pleaded with the Lord for His inspiration on what we should say and how we should say it . . . During this revelatory process, a proposed text was presented to the First Presidency, who oversee and promulgate Church teaching and doctrine. After the Presidency made further changes, the proclamation was announced.

It is important to understand the carefulness and level of thought that went into the proposed words of this document. It was discussed, reviewed, and revised by fifteen men for nearly a year. During this same time Chieko N. Okazaki was the first counselor to Elaine L. Jack in the Relief Society General Presidency. In 2005, ten years after the introduction of the proclamation, Okazaki gave an interview with Gregory Prince in Dialogue: a Journal of Mormon Thought in which she reported that the women leaders of the Church were not informed of the proclamation before it was presented, didn’t know it was being drafted, were not consulted about any specific concerns for women, and basically were not involved in this document in any way. The inception, construction, introduction, and perpetuation of “The Family Proclamation” highlight the problematic mixed message of an equal partnership within a patriarchal leadership system. The minority female leadership did not appear to be equal in importance enough to even weigh in on the formal description of their role in the family. Okazaki lamented, “ . . . as I read it [Proclamation] I thought that we could have made a few changes in it.”

The Paradox of the Pedestal

Over the years, I’ve been interested in the changing language and manner in which Mormon leaders speak about and treat women. It seems as if the leaders are trying hard to show how important and “influential” the women are. My recovering-accidental-misogynist brain is uncomfortable with the language used to make the women feel awesome. Herein lies the paradox. It’s somewhat condescending. I’ll show you. In October 2015, President Russell M. Nelson (recently announced leader of the Mormon Church), then Elder Nelson, gave a talk entitled “A Plea to My Sisters.” He begins praising Sister Donna Smith Packer and Sister Barbara Dayton Perry, wives of then recently departed apostles, for their “influence” and stalwartness. To the women of the church he says:

We, your brethren, need your strength, your conversion, your conviction, your ability to lead, your wisdom, and your voices. The kingdom of God is not and cannot be complete without women who make sacred covenants and then keep them, women who can speak with the power and authority of God . . . We need women who know how to make things happen by their faith. . . who are devoted to sheparding. . . who know how to receive personal revelation, who know how to call upon powers of heaven.

Later he says, “Sisters, do you realize the breadth and scope of your influence. . .?” Then he gave an example of a woman in a meeting with mostly men and when it was realized she hadn’t spoken, she was asked her impression, and it changed the “entire direction of the meeting.” He then pleads with the women to take their “rightful and needful place.” “My dear sisters, . . . we need your impressions, your insights, and your inspiration. . . you sisters possess distinctive capabilities and special intuition. We brethren cannot duplicate your influence.”

To help you uncover your own potential blind spots I’d like you to imagine the majority leadership of a religion being mostly female–Female First Presidency, Female Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, etc. Now basically change all of the above statements to masculine. “Brethren, do you realize the breadth and scope of your influence? My dear brethren. . . we need your impressions, your insights, your inspiration, you brethren possess distinctive capabilities and special intuition, we sisters cannot duplicate your influence.” Would it seem funny to hear a story about women in a meeting who had realized one of the minority male leaders had been quiet, and he was asked his impressions and it changed the entire direction of the meeting? Part of the female Mormon angst is the paradox of the pedestal. In the attempt to build women up and have them feel like they are “influencers” and so needed, it re-enforces the gender role that their place and station is one of influencer, one who needs to be reminded how needed she is. Doesn’t it feel a little pandering for the imaginary female First Presidency to plead with the men, “We need you?” The fact they have to say this, that this message is even a thing, speaks to the potential blind spot of misogyny embedded in the culture.

Recently, the newly formed First Presidency of the Church, under the direction of President Russell M. Nelson, held a press conference to introduce themselves and answer questions from the media. Peggy Fletcher Stack from the Salt Lake Tribune asked a question in part: “What will you do in your presidency to bring women, people of color, and international members into decision making for the church?” After acknowledging their position and station as white American males and how quotas aren’t in the rules, Stack again queried, “What about the women?”

President Nelson:

I love ‘em. I’m the father of nine beautiful daughters, how am I so lucky to get girls?. . . They had a superb mother. . . We have women on our councils, we have women administering ordinances in the temple, we have women presidents of auxiliaries and their counselors. We depend on their voices. I think I said something about that in a conference talk a little while ago: “A Plea to My Sisters” to take their place. We need their voices, we need their input and we love their participation with us.

President Henry B. Eyring, Second Counselor added, “We need their influence.” He praised his wife for her role as mother in raising “four bishops” (sons who became local congregation leaders) and says:

Women are the source of most of the strength we see . . . I think the idea of position or the idea of recognition, I can see how that would be a concern to people, but they don’t see the women getting that recognition. But in terms of influence, the Lord has already given them, I think no greater influence exists in the kingdom than in the women of the church.

To clarify the answer to the question about what they will do to bring women (among others) into decision making for the church, President Nelson provides this puzzling answer, “In the Doctrine and Covenants [Canonized Mormon Scripture] there’s a verse that says before the foundation of the world, women were created to bear and care for the sons and daughters of God and in doing so they glorify God, next question.” Again, changing all the above statements to masculine, from our fictional Female First Presidency: What about the men?

President Woman:

I love ‘em. I’m the mother of nine handsome sons, how am I so lucky to get boys? They had a superb father. We have men on our councils, we have men administering ordinances in the temple, we have men presidents of auxiliaries and their counselors, we depend on their voices. I think I said something about that in a conference talk a little while ago, “A Plea to My Brothers” to take their place, we need their voices, we need their input and we love their participation with us.

Again, if it seems weird to hear it presented like this it may be a function of your accidental misogynistic blind spot. To reiterate the role of women, President Nelson reminds us of the scripture to reinforce the most important aspect of women in the church and their way to truly “glorify God.” The reason for their existence, even before the world was created, is to bear and care for the sons and daughters of God. This, apparently, answers the question of how woman will be brought in to decision making for the Church. Again, the paradox is that by trying to put women on a pedestal of awesomeness and emphasizing the importance of being “influencers” it inherently shows they are not primary, but secondary role players. Exclaiming they really are awesome and primary influencers and no greater influence exists in the “kingdom” is not helping.

Here’s another concern. If (and when) women feel like they fail in their role as a mother or cannot fulfill that role, there are few other options. If they don’t marry, are not mothers, dislike mothering, or their children don’t turn out, they feel like complete failures because this is their main role and function. It is experienced as an all-or-nothing prospect. The pursuit of perfection in mothering and “woman-ing” can take an immense toll. When, as girls and women, they are given divine marching orders of “bearing and caring,” this becomes the framework of their identity. All other pursuits, dreams, expectations are tempered with, “of course being a wife and mother is my first priority.” Tens of thousands of Mormon girls in their late teens get personalized blessings from male “Patriarchs” that describe potential blessings that can be theirs if they live faithfully.

Here’s an example from an actual patriarchal blessing. “Never forget that a woman’s most noble and divine career is motherhood. Of all the things that you will desire to do in life, nothing will be more important for you than the desire to become a successful, righteous wife and mother.” For some, this creates an invisible ceiling on what would be practical to pursue academically and professionally. This role and expectation is baked into everything a little girl thinks, learns, sings about, and prepares for. For some, it’s basically a setup for discontent. Have you noticed how many women really hate Mother’s Day? Why? Either it brings up difficult issues with their own mother, reminds them they aren’t a mother, reminds them they are a “terrible mother,” or guilts them because perhaps they don’t even want to be a mother or hate being a mother—but that is definitely a “no-no” thought in Mormonism. This Mother’s Day aversion and avoidance is perhaps an unfortunate side effect of the all-or-nothing proposition that the pursuit of perfectionism in Mormon female role fulfillment can be.

So to sum up my recovering-accidental-misogynist-turned-psychiatrist view of the Mormon institutional blind spot contributing to the discontent of some Mormon women—it is simply this: tributes to the awesomeness of girls, women, wives, and mothers, while reportedly not soliciting female input in the creation of a seminal “Family Proclamation” which took almost a year to create, seem hollow at best. Such tributes highlight the paradox of the pedestal and a mixed message which promulgates the ideal of equal partnership and “need for their influence” while reducing women to stereotypical gender roles, sexist attributes (i.e. nurturers), and the reality that the primary way for women to glorify God is to make and take care of His children. This fairly narrow view of a woman’s utility is woven into the identity of developing Mormon girls which creates a self-imposed expectation of perfection in mothering, and the only response from the mostly male leadership is a “those are the rules, don’t blame us, we only work here . . . but we love ‘em” attitude. I am confident that we can do better. The first step is to have an awareness that our worldview may indeed have a (hopefully accidental) misogynistic blind spot. Such awareness will help us have empathy for those who feel disturbed by a kindly smile and plea to sisters to be “influencers” and “take their place.” Perhaps the second step would be to say, “I’m sorry.”

————

LDS Women’s Meeting, October 1995, https://www.lds.org/general-conferenc...

“The Plan and the Proclamation,” LDS General Conference, October 2017, https://www.lds.org/general-conferenc...

“There Is Always a Struggle”: An Interview with Chieko N. Okazaki. Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, 45, no.1 (Spring 2012) P. 136.

“A Plea To My Sisters,” LDS General Conference, October 2015, https://www.lds.org/general-conferenc...

#hearLDSwomen: We Can Call on Our Children to Pray

[image error]I was shouted down by the entire Relief Society for having the audacity to say that as a mother I had the right to call on my children for prayers. Instead of being high minded and thinking I could call on my children for prayers, I was told to instead encourage my husband to lead our family because of his priesthood authority. I would have walked out, but I was the pianist and I didn’t want to leave my nice hymn book at the piano.

– Marisa McPeck-Stringham

Every home teaching visit ever: “Brother George, since this is YOUR home, would you please call on someone to say the prayer?”

– Megan Farmer George

Our Home Teacher said to my husband, “Since you’re the head of the household, will you call on someone for a prayer?” I jumped in and called on my husband for the prayer and informed the Home Teacher that we are co-heads of household.

– ElleK

When I was first married, we were assigned home teachers. During their first visit they turned to my husband and said, “This is your home. Could you call on someone to say a prayer?”

– Emily Belanger

 

Pro Tip: The Family: A Proclamation to the World makes it clear that mothers have the same degree of authority over their children as fathers do. Husbands and wives are heads of the household together. Don’t assume that fathers have this role when you visit someone else’s home.

Click here to read all of the stories in our #hearLDSwomen series. Has anything like this happened to you? Please share in the comments or submit your experience(s) to participate in the series.

“If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.” (Mark 4:23).

Guest Post: By Show of Hands

[image error]I taught a Relief Society lesson recently on the importance of temples and temple work. Usually I can figure out a way to approach a topic that I feel good about, but in this case I came up against a wall of hypocrisy so high, I couldn’t see any way over or around it. I didn’t know whether to try to find a sub, or just ignore the assigned topic and teach something else, asking forgiveness rather than permission if the presidency was unhappy. I stewed about it for weeks. Eventually, I tried praying for some direction on how—or whether—I should approach it.

I always pray before I prepare a lesson. I want to be inspired to know what’s most important, what will benefit the specific women in our group, and if I might have a unique slant to explore that could open us all to a larger perspective or broader understanding. These prayers usually help, and in this case did. Although the answer wasn’t really what I was hoping for, or expecting.

It occurred to me that perhaps I should approach the lesson on temple work as my whole and honest self, acknowledging my struggle with the subject openly. I felt the distinct impression I’m not the only one facing the challenge.

So I prepared accordingly, showed up with an extra dose of nerves (and a large bag of candy bars), took a deep breath, and started my lesson by saying, “I have to teach this lesson, but I also have to be honest. I really struggle with the temple. Attending is extremely difficult for me. I have a recommend that’s going to expire, and I haven’t used it once except to buy garments at the distribution center.”

Some of the women in the room looked a little shocked, some more amused, but I sensed they were interested.

I explained that I needed a real discussion about the temple, and I had just fired the first volley by offering my own sordid truth—that I hardly ever go. I reiterated that attending the temple is not peaceful for me. That my difficulty is personal, evolving, and complicated, but that I also feel sure I’m not alone.

Then I referenced a recent BYU devotional by Eric Huntsman, “Hard Sayings and Safe Spaces,” in which he urged us to create “…environments that are, on the one hand, places of faith where we can seek and nurture testimony, but are also, on the other, places where our sisters and brothers can safely question, seek understanding, and share their pain.”

Shouldn’t Relief Society be just such a space? Why would we gather to discuss the gospel if not in an attempt to help each other figure out ways we can actually apply it to our messy lives?

I explained that I believe real dialogue begins when we move beyond the usual conversation points, the polite niceties that we are expected to offer as answers in church, and so faithfully do. To really talk about the temple, we’d need to expose our beliefs, our questions, our faith, our personal experiences, our testimonies, our struggles, our individual minds, and deeply guarded hearts.

They looked nervous.

I suggested that there are probably a lot of people who struggle with the temple but never say a word about it. There are plenty of plain, easy to understand reasons why this would be so.

The sealing ordinance gets right at the heart of what our work is meant to be about within our families. But because that occurs in the temple, it also creates one of those places where the rubber really hits the road in Mormonism. There are specific rules governing everything about the temple, there is much that can be confusing or unclear, we’re unable to discuss it widely like we do other things, it can feel like a very isolating worship experience, and for these reasons we tend to just sit with our questions or discomfort. Sometimes for a whole lifetime. Yet the temple is Mormonism’s Ultimate Big Deal. The stakes are high. The stakes are also high in everything surrounding family, both the ideal we hold up in church every week and the ones we are born into, or create and then live with.

There’s nothing like feeling you can’t talk about it to give a thing the wrong kind of power.

In the talk I was assigned to use, Elder Renlund said something I saw as just the opening I needed to begin an honest, robust discussion of the temple and our experiences with it. He said, “Family relationships can be some of the most rewarding yet challenging experiences we encounter. Many of us have faced a fracture of some sort within our families.”

I suggested that perhaps we should begin by getting a snapshot of the room, so I asked these questions, and requested that people raise their hands:

—Who has something that could be described as a “fracture” somewhere within their family?

—Who has someone who isn’t eligible to attend the temple?

—Who has someone who hasn’t experienced the sealing ordinance?

—Who has someone who is not a member of the Church?

—Who has someone who has left the Church?

—Who has someone with whom their relationship is difficult?

—Who has someone who identifies as LGBT+?

—Who has divorce in their family?

—Who has someone with a sealing that creates a sticky situation we trust will be sorted out later by someone smarter than we are?

—Who has polygamy in their family?

—Who doesn’t fully understand all the implications of the sealing ordinance, as it pertains to what our next life will look like?

—Who has questions about any part of their temple experience?

—Who’s felt sadness because they or someone close to them was excluded from participation in an important family experience or event because it involved the temple?

—Who’s experienced any kind of pain in association with the temple?

The answer, apparently, is pretty much everyone. Almost without exception, all hands were up. I figured they would be, if people were willing to be honest at all. What I didn’t expect was that there would already be eyes full of tears.

That took me by surprise, because I thought I might have to work hard to break through the barrier that protects and prohibits us from talking honestly about this revered centerpiece of our Mormon experience. I expected I would have to beg for an honest temple discussion. Instead, their eyes were begging me.

It could be I’m not the only one who’s finally ready to talk at church. Ready to do the real work of connecting the dots from a gospel of ideal principles to myself and my life. Those few honest questions at the start of a lesson sort of broke the room open in one of the loveliest ways I’ve ever experienced as a teacher. It leads me to believe that if Mormons will ever get comfortable being our whole, honest selves with each other, it could transform the Church and teach us the gospel of Jesus Christ in a more real way than any curriculum ever will.

Susan Meredith Hinckley is an AZ artist/writer who loves desert living, running, unanswerable questions, wind in her hair, and a bit of green chile in everything else.