I am a child of Gods,
And They have sent me here;
Have given me an earthly home,
With parents kind and dear.Lead me, guide me, walk beside me, help me find the way.
Teach me all that I must be, to live with Them some day.I am a child of Gods,
And so my needs are great.
Help me to understand Their words,
Before it grows too late.Lead me, guide me, walk beside me, help me find the way.
Teach me all that I must be, to live with Them some day.I am a child of Gods.
Rich blessings are in store!
If I but learn to do Their will,
I’ll live with Them once more.Lead me, guide me, walk beside me, help me find the way.
Teach me all that I must be, to live with Them some day.
Searching
[M]y father, Lehi, took the records which were engraven upon the plates of brass, and he did search them from the beginning.
Wherefore, we search the prophets, and we have many revelations and the spirit of prophecy;
And now, my sons, I would that ye should remember to search them diligently, that ye may profit thereby;
[M]any of them did believe on his words, and began to repent, and to search the scriptures.
And now, behold, I say unto you, that ye ought to search these things. Yea, a commandment I give unto you that ye search these things diligently; for great are the words of Isaiah.
Search these commandments, for they are true and faithful, and the prophecies and promises which are in them shall all be fulfilled.
Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
We have this compulsion in the Church to think that we have all the answers, but that is an evil thing. One of things that we ought to know is that we do not know everything, and cannot have answers to every question. If we were to have all the answers, we would not believe that “God will yet reveal many great and important things”, and we would have no faith, for faith comes from not knowing.
We are commanded to have questions, for how else could we search? You can only search for that which you do not possess.
Priestesshood
An interesting discussion occurred on Facebook recently, in which a profound observation was made:
The moment you say motherhood makes up for the disparity [of women not holding the Priesthood], you put fatherhood on a lower pedestal.
I find this to be incredibly insightful. Let’s consider what this is saying.
We often hear in the Church about how much “better” women are than men, and that excuse is often used to explain why women don’t hold the Priesthood. Personally, I think that’s a load of crap, because it’s demeaning to men (“God made you to be inherently inferior to women”) and to women (“You should be living a wonderful Mormon life” and if you’re not then here are some antidepressants).
But that’s not what I want to talk about. What I want to talk about are the implications of this statement.
It’s obvious from this statement that the corollary to motherhood is fatherhood. (The utter absence of fatherhood as a concept divorced from Priesthood in the Church is a topic for another day)
…neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.
To extend this into the familial sphere:
…neither is the father without the mother, neither the mother without the father, in the Lord.
The foil for the mother is the father. Mother and Father, together, are the ideal Parents.
And yet, men hold the Priesthood. So where is the complementing female aspect? It is not “motherhood”, as we are glibly taught at Church. Motherhood’s complement is Fatherhood. I believe the answer is simple:
It’s Priestesshood.
Being Here
From a conversation with my spouse earlier this week:
Life is not as big a deal as we make it out to be. As we struggle to understand doctrine, argue over Priesthood and the Church, attend all our meetings and tick service assignments of our lists, as we delve deep into symbolism, and worry about sealings and keeping our families active…. Our time here is not really about that.
What about the millions who die because of freak accidents or violence? What about the continual arguments over science and nutrition and being green, over saving the race and the planet?
I think, more and more, that life is about being here. About having a chance to exist in time and space apart from our gods. If we happen to find Them while being here, then sweeter the experience. If we happen to make others’ existences a little more peaceful or happy, then sweeter the experience.
I think the “eternal perspective” we should be keeping is not, “One day I’ll be happy and with all my loved ones again,” but rather, “This time is a chance for me to experience something totally different and foreign. A baptism of fire into coping as a spiritual-physical entity. And one day I’ll work all this out. Until then, I’ll have faith.”
I’ve a Mother there
From the ever-astute Julie Smith over at Times & Seasons:
[I]f you took what Mormonism teaches about Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother and mapped that onto a couple on earth, you’d get a stay-at-home dad and a mother who is–I don’t know–a medical resident or deployed to a foreign battlefield or maybe took a job in another country and so she literally never sees her children. (In fact, the kids can’t even Skype her.)
From D&C 121, with some license taken…
O Mother, where art thou? And where is the pavilion that covereth thy hiding place?
And They Knew It Not
My mind was wandering recently and caught on the phrase “and they knew it not.” As this phrase reverberated around inside my skull, I started thinking about the baptism of fire and the Holy Ghost, which the Lamanites received “and they knew it not.” I started thinking “why didn’t they know? how could they not have known?”
From what I understand, we mis-portray what the baptism of fire actually is. I think we mis-portray it because we’re afraid to admit to ourselves that almost no one receives it anymore, and when they do, they just chalk it up as a “great spiritual experience”.
In lessons at Church, we often hear how the wording of the confirmation ordinance is a commandment to “receive the Holy Ghost”. We nod our heads sagaciously and say “oh yes, because we all still have our agency and God will not force the Holy Ghost upon us.” But do we stop and ask ourselves if we have truly received the Holy Ghost? Have we had the pentecostal experience of literally feeling like we are being baptized by fire? Why else would it be called the “baptism of fire”, if that’s not what it actually feels like? Have we ever experienced what it’s like to have “no more disposition to do evil, but to do good continually“?
Parley P. Pratt, in his book Key to the Science of Theology, wrote that the Holy Ghost
… quickens all the intellectual faculties, increases, enlarges, expands and purifies all the natural passions and affections; and adapts them, by the gift of wisdom, to their lawful use. It inspires, develops, cultivates and matures all the fine-toned sympathies, joys, tastes, kindred feelings and affections of our nature. It inspires virtue, kindness, goodness, tenderness, gentleness and charity. It develops beauty of person, form and features. It tends to health, vigor, animation and social feeling. It invigorates all the faculties of the physical and intellectual man. It strengthens, and gives tone to the nerves. In short, it is, as it were, marrow to the bone, joy to the heart, light to the eyes, music to the ears, and life to the whole being.
Have you experienced that?
All of this raced through my mind as I thought about the phrase “and they knew it not”, because I realized I don’t remember if I’ve experienced this. I’ve had some powerful experiences, but have I been baptized by fire and the Holy Ghost? Have I truly received it? I know it not.
Maybe this is what Christ meant when He said that the Lamanites had been baptized with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and they knew it not. Maybe they had forgotten.
Or maybe they remembered the experience, but didn’t know what it was. I can look back and point to concrete instances in my past to which I can point and say “There. There I experienced something that came from beyond myself.” But if you were to ask me if that was my baptism by fire, well, I know it not.
And now behold, I say unto you, my brethren, if ye have experienced a change of heart, and if ye have felt to sing the song of redeeming love, I would ask, can ye feel so now?
Of Priests and Priestesses
So, a website has popped up recently called Ordain Women. Its stated goal is:
… to create a space for Mormon women to articulate issues of gender inequality they may be hesitant to raise alone. As a group we intend to put ourselves in the public eye and call attention to the need for the ordination of Mormon women to the priesthood.
I have really mixed feelings about this, and I feel like I need to get this off my chest. I’m not sure where to begin, so I’m just going to start writing, and hopefully it’ll all make sense. If it doesn’t, I’m sorry. I often don’t make sense, even to myself.
I think there is a problem of gender inequality in the Church, and I think it needs to change. I don’t like seeing ridiculous disparities in things as simple as youth group budgets. Duh, why wouldn’t the Young Men and the Young Women get the same amount in their budget each year? But it’s much more than just budget issues. Why are women limited to positions of authority over other women or children, but never men? Women can be Relief Society presidents (over women), Young Women’s presidents (over women), Primary presidents (over children), but never Sunday School presidents. That doesn’t seem right to me.
I hate how our message to Young Women is “don’t have sex, be a blushing bride, and when you’re 20, a stalwart Son of Helaman will return home from his mission, sweep you off your feet, marry you in the Temple, and you will live Happily Ever After. Oh, and if your kneecaps are showing, YOU ARE PORNOGRAPHY.” (to say nothing of shoulders! Those sexy, sexy… shoulders… … Huh?) I hate this message because it’s not true.
I hate how women are constantly pedestalized in the Church. We say things like “Men need the Priesthood to be as righteous as the women.” NO NO NO NO NO. We are all sinners before God.
I hate how our idea of a “perfect” family seeks to emulate a lifestyle that has only been possible for about 70 years of the Earth’s entire history. Eve was not a stay-at-home mom.
What I hate most about all of this is that if a woman were to totally buy in to this mentality, she’d end up thinking that “being Christlike” means being subservient, deferential, and entirely submissive to her husband’s opinion.
Boy, that smacks of unrighteous dominion to me.
So yes, there are serious gender inequalities in the Church, and think we poison ourselves by not acknowledging them and letting them fester in our society.
But… Is the answer to this “give women the Priesthood”? This is where my reservations start.
I have reservations, because I honestly have no clue what the Priesthood is or what it’s for. I used to think that Priesthood was God’s Authority, and that if one had the Priesthood, then he could act in the name of God and it would be Valid™.
But then I thought about it some more, and came to the conclusion that the Priesthood was solely that portion of God’s authority that He gave to man so that men could perform the ordinances of salvation for their brothers and sisters.
OK, that’s better, but then you start reading some of Joseph Smith’s stuff (who you figure ought to have had a better idea of what the Priesthood is than anyone), and you read that he talks about how the Priesthood is the authority to administer God’s laws. OK, so now it’s political?
In the Church, the Priesthood is the organization of the Church. The President of the High Priesthood is the President of the Church.
But… is that how it’s supposed to be? I sure hope not, because in my mind, the Church is given to us as a telestial organization. We live in a telestial world, thus we get a telestial church.
So what would a terrestrial organization look like? Or a celestial one, for that matter? Surely they must be different.
I write all of this to emphasize that I don’t think that hardly anyone really gets what the Priesthood is. The definitions of “Priesthood” that we learn about in Church only reinforce the status quo, and those are the definitions to which most members subscribe.
The Temple ceremony offers a little glimmer of light, however. There is a phrase in the ceremony where it says that the sisters have been anointed “queens and priestesses”. The use of the term “priestess” (which stands in direct contrast to men being called “priests”) implies the existence of a Priestesshood.
So if there’s a Priestesshood, should women be ordained to the Priesthood? Personally, I don’t think so, but given that I honestly have no clue what the Priesthood really is, I can’t say for sure. But if there is a Priestesshood, why don’t we have it? Or do we have it? I sure haven’t heard of it outside the context of the Temple ceremony.
Let’s assume the Priestesshood exists, but that it has not been restored to us. If this is the case (which I think it is), then I suspect that the reason we don’t have it is because we’re not even sure what to do with what we’ve already been given. If you’re teaching a child, would you say “well, I can see you’re not understanding Geometry, so let’s teach you about Trigonometry too”? Of course not; you don’t overwhelm people with more than they can comprehend. The scriptures clearly teach that God gives us only as much as we can handle. Why would He give us the Sealed Portion of the Book of Mormon, if we don’t even do what the Book of Mormon says to do?
So if we don’t even know what the Priesthood is for and what to do with it, why would we be given the Priestesshood?
Should women be ordained to the Priesthood? Maybe. But perhaps we should really be asking “What is the Priesthood? Why do we have it, and what are we supposed to do with it?”.
