Political Confession

Although I have no intention of voting for either Mitt Romney or Hilary Clinton, I have a confession to make. Sometimes I entertain the thought of supporting Romney, just to see what it would be like to have a Mormon president. And at times I am tempted to seriously consider Clinton, just to see what it would be like to have a woman president. And there are times when I daydream just a bit about a Mormon woman President of the United States.

One of my heroines is Mormon woman politician Martha Hughes Cannon. Her story fascinates and intrigues me. She is best known as being the first woman ever elected as a state senator in the United States on November 3, 1896. She ran as a Democrat, handily defeating her husband, Angus Cannon, the Republican candidate. (Did I mention she was his fourth polygamous wife?) You can read more about this fascinating woman here,and many other places on the web if you know how to use google. As I've learned about Martha and her life, I've pondered several questions:

• How was Martha, a lifelong career woman and mother of three, able to gain political support from predominantly Mormon Salt Lake County residents?
  
  
• Was the Church's position on careers for mothers less defined in the late 1800's than it now is?
  
  
• What kind of relationship did Martha have with her husband after living in a polygamous marriage, living in exile in Europe for two years, and running against him as a member of a different political party?
  
  
• Why aren't YW and RS manuals packed with stories from the lives of women like Martha, Ellis Shipp, and Minerva Teichert, women who combined successful family life with accomplishments of their own?
  
  
• Within Mormon culture today, is there a possibility for a Mormon woman president? Do we provide enough encouragement to our young girls for them to believe that this is attainable and/or desirable?
  

Read the following quote by Martha Hughes Cannon:

"Somehow I know that women who stay home all the time have the most unpleasant homes there are. You give me a woman who thinks about something besides cook stoves and wash tubs and baby flannels, and I'll show you, nine times out of ten, a successful mother."

I identify with this quote because, even though I spent many years as a stay-at-home Mom, the best times were those times I had something to think about, something I was involved in beyond the home. These causes energized me so that I was able to be a better mother. When I had "something to think about" I did a better job at the cookstove and the baby nappies. I don't think a woman must have a paying job to find motivating interests. I also think there are many women who are quite different from me and Martha Cannon in that they can find satisfaction without competing commitments to their wife and mother role.

We are all very diverse, yet I continue to wonder: can we celebrate the accomplishments of LDS women today if they fall outside the umbrella of traditional wife and mother? Would you vote for a Mormon woman President?

Ernest Strack and the Inoculation of a Generation

Right next to Kinko's Copies across the street from the old BYU Social Hall was "Grandpa's Bookstore," a two-story building rented by Ernest Strack. When his cash flow was down, he rented the upstairs, and sometimes he had the prime downstairs location. Here the young, black-bearded polygamist historian fed sensitive documents to the Mormon underground in the 1970's and '80's. The famous "Seventh East Press" ran their magazine out of the same building, and used some of his material in their writings. DH and I were students at BYU at the time, and were curious about the establishment. In the Spring, when it was warm, Ernest would stand outside and zealously engage students as they walked by. He would say, "I've got something that you really want to see," and he would take you inside and show you a Second Anointing compilation, Patriarchal Blessings of early Apostles and Prophets, Xeroxed copies of William Clayton's journals, or Brigham Young's press books. If you didn't have the money or couldn't afford his discounted prices, often just the cost of printing, he would just hand you the documents, making you promise to bring him something he didn't have.

Ernest Strack was well known by students and faculty alike. The religion professors made jokes with their graduate research assistants, speaking knowingly of the "Mormon Underground." The professors knew that their assistants could obtain many of Ernie's latest acquisitions for their perusal and use. Documents flowed in and out of Grandpa's Bookstore during this period of openness at the LDS archives in SLC.

Familiar faces in the church today formed this group of student inquirers. They run the gamut from conservative BYU professors, LDS authors, and members of the "September Six." Some of you bloggers of a certain age may also have been frequenters of Ernie's establishment. I would not be exaggerating to state that an entire generation of Church historians got some of their documentary evidence from the clandestine materials being disseminated by Strack.

Strack had his agenda to expose the Church to the light and make known the secrets of Mormon history. But looking back over the past 25 years, Strack's legacy has strengthened individuals as well as the families, students and readers of his adherants. If you've ever read the works of Richard Holtzapfel, David Seeley, Bruce Van Orden, Orson Scott Card, Maxine Hanks, Michael Quinn, Gary Bergera, Elbert Peck, the Toscanos, Lyndon Cook, Andy Ehat, or David Whittaker, you may be the beneficiary of Ernest Strack's legacy.

Grandpa's Bookstore was an inoculation for many of these young LDS students that allowed them to open their minds to the vagaries of Mormon history. The materials Ernest Strack made available gave them an opportunity to examine Mormon history from many angles. Now, many of the recipients of materials from Strack have donated their collections to the University of Utah in order to keep them available to the public.

I know a lot of you bloggers frequented Grandpa's Bookstore back in the day. (Blake Ostler and Jim Faulconer--go on, admit it!) Do any of you have any pics or stories of Ernie Strack himself, Grandpa's Books, or the 7th East Press?

عيد ميلاد سعيد Eid melaad Sa'eed

It's my birthday and since I don't get any mail where I am, you are all welcome to use this post to send me some birthday greetings. Go ahead, make my day!

More on the Greater Spirituality of Women

Thanks to DH, I've discovered that there is indeed authoritative support for the notion that women are more spiritual than men. From some preliminary searches, it seems that this idea is a relatively recent innovation in the Church.

From the Church's earliest days, its leaders championed the equality of women in spiritual matters. Although the Prophet Joseph and many who followed him noted the propensity of women for "feelings of charity and benevolence," I have found no indication that these early leaders felt that women had a greater natural spiritual endowment than men. John A. Widtsoe clarified that the priesthood was not given on the basis of capability, competency or excellence, but as a gift. He said,

"Women of a congregation … may be wiser, far greater in mental powers, even greater in actual 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.” (John A. Widtsoe, Priesthood and Church Government, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1954, p. 90).

This equality between the sexes in spirituality was preached until the end of the 1970's. Elder Bruce R. McConkie declared in Nauvoo at the dedication of the Monument to Women:

“Where spiritual things are concerned, as pertaining to all of the gifts of the Spirit, with reference to the receipt of revelation, the gaining of testimonies, and the seeing of visions, in all matters that pertain to godliness and holiness and which are brought to pass as a result of personal righteousness in all these things men and women stand in a position of absolute equality before the Lord. He is no respecter of persons nor of sexes, and he blesses those men and those women who seek him and serve him and keep his commandments.” (Bruce R. McConkie, Ensign, Jan. 1979, p. 61.)

One of the first comments about a special spiritual sensitivity on the part of women that I have been able to find came from Neal A. Maxwell. In explaining women's roles in the Church and in they eyes of God he cited some of the notable women of the Bible:

"When we would measure loving loyalty in a human relationship, do we not speak of Ruth and Naomi even more than David and Jonathan?... A widow with her mite taught us how to tithe. An impoverished and starving widow with her hungry son taught us how to share, as she gave her meal and oil to Elijah. The divine maternal instincts of an Egyptian woman retrieved Moses from the bullrushes, thereby shaping history and demonstrating how a baby is a blessing—not a burden... Does it not tell us much about the intrinsic intelligence of women to read of the crucifixion scene at Calvary, "And many women were there beholding afar off." (Matt. 27:55.) Their presence was a prayer; their lingering was like a litany. And who came first to the empty tomb of the risen Christ? Two women. Who was the first mortal to see the resurrected Savior? Mary of Magdala. Special spiritual sensitivity keeps the women of God hoping long after many others have ceased" (Neal A. Maxwell, "The Women of God," Ensign, May 1978, 10).

Also about this time, Spencer W. Kimball also began to extol the virtues of womanhood. He made the following comment, which can be construed to mean that women have more of a natural inclination toward spirituality than men, and thus are more likely to join the Church:

"...much of the major growth that is coming to the Church in the last days will come because many of the good women of the world (in whom there is often such an inner sense of spirituality) will be drawn to the Church in large numbers. This will happen to the degree that the women of the Church reflect righteousness and articulateness in their lives and to the degree that women of the Church are seen as distinct and different—in happy ways—from the women of the world." (Spencer W. Kimball, Ensign, Nov. 1979, pp. 103–104).

Perhaps the greatest champion of women's greater spiritual capacity was James E. Faust. He gave many talks for and about women beginning in the 1980's. Some of these included
Womanhood: The Highest Place of Honor,
What it Means to be a Daughter of God, and
You Are All Heaven-Sent.

President Faust repeatedly told women that they had an inner spiritual strength that surpassed that of men. See DH's blog post for several quotes by President Faust along these lines.


President Faust's ideas were reiterated by several of the other Apostles. Boyd K. Packer said that men and women are by nature different, and while they share many basic human traits, the “virtues and attributes upon which perfection and exaltation depend come [more] naturally to a woman.” (Boyd K. Packer, For Time and All Eternity,” Ensign, Nov. 1993, 22).


M. Russell Ballard told women,

"Now, finally, I turn again to you dear sisters, you who have such a profound, innate spiritual ability to hear the voice of the Good Shepherd. You need never wonder again if you have worth in the sight of the Lord and to the Brethren in the presiding councils of the Church. We love you. We cherish you. We respect you. Never doubt that your influence is absolutely vital to preserving the family and to assisting with the growth and spiritual vitality of the Church. This Church will not reach its foreordained destiny without you. We men simply cannot nurture as you nurture. Most of us don’t have the sensitivity—spiritual and otherwise—that by your eternal nature you inherently have. Your influence on families and with children, with youth, and with men is singular. You are natural-born nurturers. Because of these unusual gifts and talents, you are vital to taking the gospel to all the world, to demonstrating that there is joy in living the way the prophets have counseled us to live." (M. Russell Ballard, “Women of Righteousness,” Ensign, Apr 2002, 73).

These teachings by the General Authorities have been repeated by local leaders and members and sometimes used to promote the idea that the priesthood is given to men to compensate for his lesser spiritual ability. It is also said that the priesthood can help men develop spirituality, a gift that women do not need since their spirituality is innate. This idea has been repeated despite the lack of prophetic approbation. Apparently this year (2007) marks the first time a General Authority has espoused linking the Priesthood and a woman's spirituality. An article by Bruce C. Hafen, a member of the Quorum of the Seventy in a recent Ensign reads:

"Spouses need not perform the same functions to be equal. The woman’s innate spiritual instincts are like a moral magnet, pointing toward spiritual north—except when that magnet’s particles are scrambled out of order. The man’s presiding gift is the priesthood—except when he is not living the principles of righteousness. If the husband and the wife are wise, their counseling will be reciprocal: he will listen to the promptings of her inner spiritual compass just as she will listen to his righteous counsel." (Bruce C. Hafen and Marie K. Hafen, “Crossing Thresholds and Becoming Equal Partners,” Ensign, Aug 2007, 24–29).

The study of the words of these recent General Authorities shows a  mainstream doctrinal expression that women are endowed with an innate spiritual gift. It is certainly a beautiful thought as worded by Maxwell and Hafen. However, I wonder at the wisdom of proclaiming that the bestowal of the Priesthood upon the male sex is compensatory. I object to the idea that Priesthood is given to the less spiritually inclined to help them "catch up." Look at the way Priesthood works among men: it is not given to the less spiritual among males to help them become stronger. Rather, men who have already proved worthy are ordained to Priesthood offices so that they may lead, serve, bless, and speak in the name of God.

I would like to explore these ideas further. I am especially interested to know if there are any statements about women's greater spirituality coming from authoritative sources before 1978. Was this idea expounded at all before the time of the Women's Movement in the '70's? If not, what was the reason for the doctrinal shift?

SS Permutations on the Letters of John

OOOOOOHHHH, just wait until you hear what was discussed in SS today under the auspices of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd John! Bro. SS Teacher went from expounding on the topic that "God is Love" to telling us that women are naturally more spiritual than men, one of those Mormon throwaway statements that annoys me greatly. I was sitting in the second row, which you Mormons know really means the first row, and I said, just loud enough for him to hear, "Could you repeat what you just said???" in an incredulous tone. So he further expounded, "Yes, women are more spiritual than men, that is why men have the priesthood." And I couldn't let that pass, so I replied, this time loud enough for everyone in the room to hear, "You have absolutely no scriptural support for that opinion." And, dear readers, he TOOK ME ON with chin raised high as he spouted more extreme speculation: "Of course they are more spiritual than men, otherwise why would we have polygamy if not for the condition that will exist in heaven of more righteous women than men?"

And the whole room erupted in buzzing private conversations.

Bro. SS Teacher went on for quite a while in this vein, saying that he had come to this conclusion after "working backward from the scriptures." Meanwhile, I was accosted from behind by a woman who was visiting in the ward. She was anxious to tell me her story about when she was single and had many struggles with immorality. She went to her Bishop to discuss the unfairness of having to remain chaste for eternity and her equal horror of solving the problem by becoming the plural wife of some hypothetical man. The Bishop calmed her fears by telling her of the many male babies who died in infancy, thus evening the male/female ratio in heaven. (Heard that before, folks?) Not understanding my objection to the SS Teacher's comments, she mistakenly felt she had put to rest my anxieties.

I am reminded of the reason why I rarely challenge ignorant statements made in Church meetings. I find that 90% of the time, the members of the class are unable to understand what my objection is. But, lucky me--now I have my blog to spout off on.

Those of you who know me well have discovered that polygamy is not one of the doctrines which troubles me. Rather, my issues lie with this "Mormonism" that priesthood is given to men to compensate for their alleged lack of spirituality compared to women. In the next few days, I'll be looking for the answers to these questions. Help me out, readers, if you will:

1. Is there any doctrinal support for this notion, i.e. Conference Talks, or authoritative statements from Mormon leaders? (I'm already pretty sure you can't come to this from scripture, working backward or forward or any other way. But if there are scriptures that can be construed to make this assertion, what are they?)

2. Would a "greater spirituality of women" postulation support bestowal of the priesthood upon men to the exclusion of the entire female population?

3. What arguments have been made against the idea from an LDS point of view (GA statements, Sunstone/Dialogue articles, blog posts)?

4. Is there a succinct reply contesting this type of assertion that one could make in the context of polite company, say a SS/PH/RS lesson?

Campaigning for a Calling

"In the service of the Lord, it is not where you serve but how." (J. Reuben Clark, Jr., CR, April 1951, 154)

"Sometimes men and women in the Church aspire for office. This is unfortunate. It becomes the very reason why they should not be granted such office." (Gordon B. Hinckley, Keep the Chain Unbroken, Talk given at BYU, 30 Nov. 1999)

"And, finding there was greater happiness and peace and rest for me, I sought for the blessings of the fathers, and the right whereunto I should be ordained to administer the same; having been myself a follower of righteousness, desiring also to be one who possessed great knowledge, and to be a greater follower of righteousness, and to possess a greater knowledge, and to be a father of many nations, a prince of peace, and desiring to receive instructions, and to keep the commandments of God, I became a rightful heir, a High Priest, holding the right belonging to the fathers... I sought for mine appointment unto the Priesthood according to the appointment of God unto the fathers concerning the seed." (Abraham 1:2,4)

I might use this collection of quotes to begin a post on women and the priesthood, but I will save that for another day. Today I'd like to talk about callings in the Church. Quite naturally, there are some positions in the Ward and Stake that will appeal to us more than others. Since we are both human and diverse, there are different reasons why this might be so. Perhaps our talents align closely to a particular talent, such as ward organist. Perhaps we enjoy working with one age group more than another. Maybe we yearn for a calling that will be challenging, such as Gospel Doctrine Teacher. Or conversely, we might desire something that takes little to no work (Sunday School President :) ) Some members enjoy power, high visibility, and leadership, while others prefer to build the Church behind the scenes.


As an LDS member, I enjoy teaching, public speaking, and scripture study and interpretation. My favorite age group is youth, and I enjoy being in the limelight. Therefore the callings I most earnestly desire are: Youth SS Teacher, Seminary Teacher, YW Advisor (teaching the Sunday lessons), and yes, I love the calling of Gospel Doctrine teacher also.

According to Gordon B. Hinckley, above and in other places, members should not aspire to callings. But the quote from Abraham can be read as a righteous aspiration for a priesthood office. Look at the things that Abraham desired as he sought for the High Priesthood:

1. the blessings of the fathers
2. ordination to administer blessings
3. great knowledge
4. to be a follower of righteousness
5. to be a father of nations
6. to be a prince of peace
7. to receive instructions
8. to keep the commandments of God

Some of these things sound very humble, and others sound, well, aspiring. Is it OK to seek a calling if one's motivations are as lofty as Abraham's? How should we seek for the appointment? Is it appropriate to pray for a calling? Shall we let the Bishop know what callings we most enjoy?



I'll be the first to admit that I have campaigned for callings. This has manifested itself in the following ways:

• When moving into a ward and having my first interview with the Bishop I have mentioned the callings I have had in the past, telling him the ones I've enjoyed and conveniently neglecting to mention the ones I do not wish to repeat. (Except, sometimes I'll mention that I've been in the Nursery five times already.)
  
• I've successfully been called to Gospel Doctrine teacher twice by letting the regular teacher know I am always available to substitute. I'll prepare the lesson each week and accept with alacrity even when asked 15 minutes before the Sunday meetings begin. I think this technique works for almost any calling. Just make the offer that you would be willing to "help out" any time you are needed. Then be sure you are Johnny-on-the-spot when someone else falls through.
  
• Part of campaigning for a calling is not appearing too anxious to step into the calling. A deep show of humility and just a touch of hesitation is essential. Don't step on anyone's toes!
  
• Several years ago, DH reached the age where he was uncomfortable remaining in the Elders' Quorum. He hesitated to aspire for the calling of High Priest, but I read him the above quote by Abraham, and encouraged him to fast and pray for it. Not long after, he was called to be the HP Group Leader.

Where do you stand on campaigning for callings?

--It is completely wrong to aspire to any calling. You should be totally open to the Lord's will in the matter, and accept the callings extended to you.

--It is acceptable to desire or seek for a calling, as long as you do it with humility and a desire to build the kingdom, learn, grow, and serve.

--Everyone has callings they are better suited for, and there is nothing wrong in making your desires known to the leadership and/or placing yourself in a position advantageous to be noticed for these callings.

What types of "campaigning" are kosher?


--Praying

--Fasting

--Volunteering

--Hinting

--Asking

--Other

Sabbath-day Thorn in my Side

Stake Conference in our Stake is a bit different than in other places in the world. Because the units are spread out over a vast area, the stake leaders bring the conference to each ward. Members are warned several weeks before the Conference that it will be their chance to obtain a temple recommend. Interviews with the Bishop are held, and the Stake President is available after the meetings to conduct interviews. It is perhaps the only time members will see Stake leaders for 6 months or a year. Because of the difficulties in traveling and in women getting around, the wives of the Stake Presidency are called to be the Stake RS President, Stake YW President, and Stake Primary President.

I enjoyed meeting our Stake leaders, and I had a chance to talk personally with each of the women leaders. They were very nice, and I enjoyed our conversations. They are about my age, and I think I could be good friends with each one of them. However, I cannot contain my opinion of their talks. As I've said before, women leaders have a great opportunity when they speak in Conferences. It is their opportunity to have a voice in the administration of the Church. It is one of a very few times that they can appropriately give counsel and instruction to the general membership of the Church, including men, women, and children. Not surprisingly, I was looking forward to hearing what these women would say during our General Session and also during our Adult Session.


So what did I hear from our illustrious women leaders? None other than RECYCLED CONFERENCE TALKS!! It's the biggest Sabbath-day thorn in my side there is. I don't like when anyone gives recycled Conference Talks. I'm fine with themes are given to speakers, but I feel they should be developed by the speakers themselves, with personal experiences and relevant scripture stories chosen according to personal guidance of the Spirit. This way both speaker and listeners are enriched. A Conference Talk summarized again and again in Sacrament and other meetings loses its immediacy and power that it had when the message was received and given by the General Authorities. I and many other members of the Church read our Conference Ensigns and are quite familiar with the talks. Hearing them summarized in Church is boring.

None of the men speakers at our Stake Conference gave recycled Conference Talks. Every woman who spoke summarized a Conference Talk. None of the women even went so far as to include a personal experience or opinion on the topic. I'm extremely disappointed. By doing this, we women are diluting what little authority and influence we do have. For shame.

Etoiles Dans Les Yeux

Leaves From My Missionary Journal

Monday, 25 Jan 1982
Sunday we were so excited that Renee had a baptismal date. We had a really good day. Our whole lives are now revolving around Andre and Renee. It takes so much spiritual strength just praying for them and trying to receive revelation on what we can do for them. This morning Sister Bird called Renee and she said she did NOT want to be baptized. We were really floored! We didn't know what to do! We drove by their house because we really wanted to talk to her. But Andre was there, the car was in the driveway. So we didn't go talk to her. We drove past the house and sat in the car. I was so upset. We decided we would get out today and do some Spiritual Harvesting, then go by and talk to her tonight. So we went out and it was so cold. When we were just about frozen solid we knocked on one more door. Just as I knocked, Sister Bird noticed the names on the mailbox--the occupants were nuns! I wanted to just leave real quick, but it was too late, and an elderly lady answered the door. I didn't know what to say! I stood there looking dumb. I said, "We didn't know you were sisters...we're sisters too!" Then I just stood there. Well, she said, "Come in." Well in we go to warm up and talk to two Catholic nuns. They were so cute, they fed us hot soup and citronouille cake.

About 4:00 we were going to go home for dinner but before we went we just drove by Renee's to see if the car was in the driveway...it wasn't. So we knocked. She let us in and we started talking. At first she talked about how she had already been baptized. So we came down really hard on authority. She took it all really well. That wasn't the real problem. The real problem came out later when she said, "I heard that they seal families together for eternity." She was quite upset about it. We explained eternal marriage but it upset her more. Finally she said, "I don't want to be with Andree." It was so sad. She's just enduring her marriage and she's so unhappy. We know that the Church can help them!! We talked for a long time. At one point she told us, "You just don't understand. All you missionaries come from rich families and you had a wonderful home life and you never did anything wrong in your life. Then you come to me with stars in your eyes, telling me how wonderful it is." Those are her words, so poignant in French, "avec etoiles dans les yeux." I just started to cry so hard. She looked at me, astonished. Through the tears, I said, "Renee, I too had a sinful past. There were things in my life that were bad. But this is the TRUE CHURCH! I found that I could repent and gain these stars in my eyes! I wanted her to know that it was the Gospel that did that. And that she could have that too!

A Renee

Un jour tu nous as regarde
Et tu as remarque quelque chose comme une lumiere
Qui brillait dans nos yeux.
Et tu as dit
Ma vie n'est pas comme la votre.
J'ai vecu toute ma vie
Dans le monde
Et maintenant, voici vous venez
Chez moi avec des etoiles dans les yeux.

Et quand tu as dit ces mots
Les larmes ont commence a couler
Et je me suis souvenu des annees passees
Ou je marchais dan les tenebres
Sans la lumiere de la verite
Je me suis souvenu, et j'ai realise,
Comme tu dois le realiser aussi,
Pourquoi j'ai ete appele a venir ici.

Aujourd'hui je remercie le Seigneur
De m'avoir mis des etoiles dans les yeux
Afin de me permettre de participer
A les mettre dans tes yeux aussi.

Apologies to french speakers, but when I post this, all the accents disappear. Anyone know how to do accents in blogger?

DH's Missionary Meme

DH is catching on to this blogging thing quickly, and he has tagged me on this missionary meme:

Rules--
1. Answer the three missionary questions
2. Do the missionary activity and return and report.
3. Tag 5 of your friends.

Here are the questions:
1. Did you serve a mission, and where?
2. What was your best missionary experience?
3. Who is the most missionary-oriented leader you have ever had?

Missionary Activity:
Ask a random stranger if they have ever heard about the Mormon Church, and if they would like to know more (Golden Question)

1. I am indeed a returned missionary, and I served in the Canada Montreal Mission. (CMM) Back then we used to call it the "Canada Marriage Mission" for the amount of Elders and Sisters who met there and married after their missions. Scandalous. I was a convert of only a year, and a mission was a real eye-opener for me. I was fresh from being a Born-Again Christian, and I'm sure my over-zealousness was a real trial for many a companion and District Leader. (I wish to apologize to them all.)

2. My favorite missionary experience was when I was in a threesome with Sisters Lavigne and Carmack. It was only for a few weeks near the end of December. We put together a singing discussion, with Christmas carols, three-part SSA harmony, and references to Christ; and went around with a guitar singing to all who would let us in their doors. The discussion brought the Spirit to virtually every home we entered.
Second runner-up is the time our district was on our way home from a Zone Conference in a severe ice storm. Cars had run off the road everywhere. Our two cars would drive up to a stalled car, the Elders would jump out, and in their suits would manhandle the car back onto the road and send it on its way. Not a proselyting word was spoken. They'd jump back in the cars and on we would go to the next stranded motorist. Good times.

3. Most missionary-oriented leader was Sloan Alma Smith, president of the Charlotte NC mission when I joined the Church. He was a Bible-bashing, pulpit thumping old-style Mormon with white hair and the most energy I've ever seen. He would stop his car at red lights and signal for the car next to him to roll down the window, then hand the unsuspecting victim a missionary tract!

Challenge: I actually asked the Golden Question recently to a Filipino woman I work with. She said that when she was a little girl her family had the discussions and they were going to join the Church, but they had to go to a cousin's wedding, and several weeks went by, the missionaries were transferred, and the baptism never happened. What do you know.

I'm going to tag David, OLL, SilverRain, M&M, and MCQ

Bearing Children--The Default Position

This question came up as I wrote my last post, and I'd like to discuss it further with my readership. What is the preferred "righteous" Latter-day Saint position on procreation?






1. Begin having children and don't stop until you receive revelation to do so.
2. Wait to have children until you are directed that it is the right time.
3. Have as many children as you desire unless the Spirit intervenes with different instructions.
4. Use your own wisdom to figure out how many children you can support financially, physically, and emotionally.
5. Strive to discover the exact number of children that Heavenly Father wishes to send to your home, and act upon this information.
6. Other?

Do you think there is a general Latter-day Saint position on this question? Does it differ from your personal position?





When I was a young mother, I perceived the Church's position was to have as many children as you possibly physically could. I began by having my first two girls less than a year apart. There were some problems with #2, and the Dr. advised that we should be satisfied with two children and not attempt to have more. He sent us home with a prescription for the Pill. I held the paper in my hand and cried. I felt strongly that I should not use this contraception. We went home and researched statements of General Authorities on birth control. I could find nothing that condoned the use of artificial birth control, and discovered many General Authority quotes preaching against it. These impressed my mind so much that to this day I have never used it. As you know, readers, I went on to have 8 children. Miraculously, there were no further physical problems.

As the years went by, my zeal for having children has waned. I once saw my childbearing as a great demonstration of faith and obedience to the Lord and dedication to Church teachings. But in recent years, teachings on procreation have changed in their emphasis. Now a young couple can be considered perfectly orthodox and faithful while waiting to finish schooling or spacing their children. I feel that my sacrifice has become essentially meaningless. I could have had 4 children and saved myself the year of serious post-partum depression, financial struggles, and marital discord. Perhaps the children would have had more advantages, more attention, a better home life. I would have been free to pursue educational and other interests. I love and value each of my children, but I don't know if my choice was the wisest one I could have made. I don't even know if it was the Father's will that I have that many children. I just had them by default because I believed the #1 example above. Since I never had a direct revelation to stop having children, I often feel guilty that I haven't had more.

Julie Beck's talk has taken us back to the era in which I was starting my childbearing. I react to it differently than many younger couples. I feel pressured to have more children. I'm noticing that many younger couples can listen to the directives without feeling this pressure. They are not applying Julie's admonition directly to themselves. They see it as advice that doesn't necessarily have to be acted upon immediately.


I'm waffling dreadfully on this issue. In a way, I'd love to be true to that zealous, faithful little Latter-day Saint girl I was in the beginning. But I've lived long enough to see that there are other ways I can contribute to society and to my family than having children and staying at home to cook for them and clean up after them.



What is the Spirit trying to tell me? I just don't know.

"Wanna-Be" Woman Who Knows

Alternate Post Title: Still Whining

I may be a complainer and a whiner, but I have now read our illustrious RS President's talk 2,049 times and can quote large sections of it, so that must count for something!

The thing is, I want to be a woman who knows. I've spent a great portion of my life trying to discover the doctrines of the gospel and searching after the face of the Divine. And I want so badly to know as I am known.

So here's my latest on Julie's talk. Halloween night we spent some time with another LDS family, and "Sister Suzy" engaged me in discussing the talk. She asked me, "Have you ever heard of Feminist Mormon Housewives?" :) and then proceeded to scold those who were speaking ill of their leaders and refusing to take the counsel of the speakers as if from the Lord's own mouth. Now, in my previous incarnation, I would have meekly listened while seething inside. But a year of blogging and being honest with the latent liberal Mormon inside emboldened me, and I indulged in a bit of ranting (regretting it later, of course.) "Sister Suzy" was taken aback and I felt a chasm as wide as eternity open up between myself and one of the few people here who has been truly kind and generous to me and my family. Later in the evening, Sister Suzy's husband brought the subject up again, urging me to try to find some pearl of wisdom from the talk that would apply to me. These people have such a different perspective of Julie Beck's talk it's like we live in an alternate universe. Yet the strange thing is, my Molly Mormon head can see things exactly the way they do.

Dear Readers, so far I have considered this talk as completely ineffective in creating a people who know God. I mean, seriously, bringing your son to Church in a starched white shirt? Spending the day housecleaning? I'd much rather sit at the feet of Blake Ostler and discuss Atonement theory, something Julie Beck didn't even mention!

But...what if, Naaman-like, I'm simply being told to dip myself 7 times into the River Jordan? What then, readers? What does this bode for your tormented BiV?

I'll tell you--if I truly value the family, and desire children as a woman who knows I will not hesitate to bring yet another small spirit down here to live with me. At age 47, I find myself still gravid. We have the financial resources, the space. I've never had that enviable revelation that I was finished childbearing. Yes, people, of course I've prayed about this. But in the absence of any reply, it seems that Beck's talk places the default position as being----pregnancy. So. A 9th child, and I'd be 48 years old at it's birth.

The scary thing is I'm such a fanatic that I'm seriously considering all this. After 15 years of non-stop pregnancy and nursing; 25 years of devoting myself to home and family, I've begun to step out into the world and attend conferences, women's retreats, get back into coaching, reenter the workforce and find personal stimulation. Now I'm ready to quit my job, cut out those unnecessary activities and turn my eyes back to the home, cleaning and polishing and "nurturing," never off duty. Perhaps I've been gaining the world and losing my soul.

As a wanna-be woman who knows, can I turn my back on this counsel? In the absence of a sure voice from On High, do I listen to my own worldly wisdom, or the words of my church leader, speaking for the Lord and approved by His prophet? Shall I take the step of faith that will bring me the blessings of eternity? Or am I poised on the brink of a quagmire of depression, guilt, and loneliness????

Feminine Imagery of the Divine

Feminist readers of the scriptures are well aware of the passages in Proverbs 8 which personify Wisdom (GK Sophia, HEB Hokhmah).
These passages affirm that Sophia was there when God made the earth and acted as a partner with God in the creation. This idea fits in well with my conceptualization of the male/female duality of the Divine. The passages can be interpreted as instructions to the earnest seeker to discover and follow the promptings of a Heavenly Mother:

The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.
I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.
When there were no depths, I was brought forth;
When there were no fountains abounding with water.
Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth:
While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world.
When he prepared the heavens, I was there:
When he set a compass upon the face of the depth:
When he established the clouds above:
When he strengthened the fountains of the deep:
When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: When he appointed the foundations of the earth:
Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;
Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth;
And my delights were with the sons of men.
Now therefore hearken unto me, O ye children:
For blessed are they that keep my ways.
Hear instruction, and be wise, and refuse it not.
Blessed is the man that heareth me, watching daily at my gates, waiting at the posts of my doors.
For whoso findeth me findeth life, and shall obtain favour of the LORD.

In the scriptures, there is additional female imagery which tends to support the existence of a feminine counterpart to God. I hesitate to use them as proof-texts for a Mother in Heaven. These passages can just as well be interpreted to mean that a male Deity has loving and nurturing characteristics. However, if one believes, as I do, that "Elohim" consists of both a Mother and a Father God, the verses that follow add welcome insight into possible roles and characteristics of a Divine Mother Goddess.
One of the early titles for God in the Old Testament is El Shaddai. This word has been translated "Almighty God," or "God of the Mountains." It may have linguistic ties to the word "breast," prompting some to translate El Shaddai as "the breasted One." Though I might not go as far as to use this translation, I enjoy the word play which is typical of Hebrew writing and which connects this title of God to breasts and nurturing. In the language used in Jacob's blessing to his son Joseph in Genesis 49, El Shaddai gives him

"blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that lieth under, blessings of the breasts, and of the womb: The blessings of thy father have prevailed above the blessings of my progenitors unto the utmost bound of the hills: they shall be on the head of Joseph, and on the crown of the head of him that was separate from his brethren."

Isaiah uses many feminine images of God in his writings. Consider the following:

• Isaiah 42:14--a woman in labor whose forceful breath is an image of divine power.
  
• Isaiah 46:3-4--a mother who births and protects Israel.
  
• Isaiah 49:14-15--a mother who does not forget the child she nurses.
  
• Isaiah 66:12-13--a mother who comforts her children.

The following poem in Hosea 11:1-4 is in the first person, presenting God as a mother who calls, teaches, holds, heals, and feeds her son.

When Israel was a child, I loved him,
And out of Egypt I called My son.
The more I called them, the more they went from me;
They sacrificed to the Baals,
And burned incense to carved images.
Yet it was I who taught Ephraim to walk, I took them up in my arms;
but they did not know that I healed them.
I drew them with gentle cords,
With bands of love,
And I was to them as those who take the yoke from their neck.
I stooped and fed them.

It is possible that Hosea is indirectly presenting God as mother over against the fertility goddess of the Canaanite religion that he is challenging.
Interestingly, Hosea presents God as the husband figure in Hosea chapter 4, and the mother figure in chapter 11. These paired images suggest the male/female duality of God.

Searching for feminine images in the scriptures is a fruitful pursuit. There are many other examples too numerous to list here. I realize that different conclusions can be drawn from the presence of the Divine Feminine in scripture. Some faith traditions have posited that God is genderless, yet "accommodates to human limitations by using physical, relational, gender-laden images for self-disclosure." Others believe that God is solely masculine and patriarchal but possesses qualities that we culturally see as feminine. I present this view as one which aligns with the Proclamation on the Family where it affirms the eternal nature of gender: "All human beings—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose."

Mothers Who Know...What? A Response to Julie M. Smith

In her opening remarks of that infamous Conference talk, Julie B. Beck quotes 2000 stripling warriors as saying, "Our mothers knew it." To find out what it was that the mothers knew, we must go back to the story in Alma 56, which concludes in verses 47 and 48:

Now they never had fought, yet they did not fear death; and they did think more upon the liberty of their fathers than they did upon their lives; yea, they had been taught by their mothers, that if they did not doubt, God would deliver them.
And they rehearsed unto me the words of their mothers, saying: We do not doubt our mothers knew it.

Here we discover that which the mothers knew:
if they did not doubt, God would deliver them.
Sister Beck then states that more than at any time in the history of the world, we need mothers who know. "When mothers know who they are and who God is and have made covenants with Him, they will have great power and influence for good on their children," she says. I believe that the talk which followed Sister Beck's initial statement was one expression of what a mother is. She spoke of the following aspects of motherhood:

• The desire to bear children and to place the value of motherhood above that of power, position or prestige.
  
• Honoring sacred ordinances and covenants.
  
• Nurturing, which she equated with homemaking, particularly housecleaning and keeping an orderly home.
  
• Leading and planning within the home.
  
• Teaching in the home and never being off duty.
  
• Choosing carefully to focus more on family activities.
  
• Being the very best in the world at upholding, nurturing, and protecting families.

The introduction to Sister Beck's talk was pregnant with meaning, and full of promise. How does a woman become a "mother who knows?" How does she develop a firm faith in God's deliverance? However, Beck follows this introduction by continually stating that "mothers who know" are women who follow one model of motherhood. After reading, pondering, and praying over this talk many times over the past couple of weeks, I have come to feel that Julie Beck's model of motherhood is indeed one way that a woman can come to develop the type of faith exemplified in the mothers of the stripling warriors. It strikes a chord with many women of the Church, and it tends to justify women who have chosen to have many children, stay at home with them, and put much effort into creating a welcoming and organized home life. These women do not have much support in their choices. Indeed, the world does look down upon them for what they have selected to value.

I believe that where I have taken offense with this talk is that I mistakenly took her remarks to imply that women whose paths might vary from those described here are not mothers, or even women, who "know." This, of course, is not true. The testimonies of several bloggers witness to the alternate choices of women who were able to develop an abiding faith and raise righteous and productive families.
Matt Evans wrote that he "grew up in a rather unkempt and cluttered home. We did chores, but there was one mom and seven kids and Mom didn’t enjoy or appreciate housework anyway...But the spirit was there and we enjoyed and loved each other. As I look back on my experience growing up, I don’t look back wishing Mom had spent more time worrying about the house. I’m almost certain that’s not something she would change, either." Jana Remy wrote of her mother, a Stake RS President and mother of 5 who "kept her teaching credential active in each state where we lived, often taking night classes or taking re-certification exams. By the time her youngest child was in the upper-grades of elementary school, she worked full-time as a teacher and was earning her master's degree." After her husband died of cancer, this remarkable woman was able to
support the family with a good professional career and salary. "I guess the upshot is, if Mom had stayed home and had only been a remarkable homemaker, well I don't know that things would've turned out quite so well for her or for us," Jana concluded. Amelia wrote "am i to understand that mothering is the most important work i do, when easily 90% of my time is spent completely apart from children? what does that mean about the rest of my time? is it really all that much to ask that the value of my work and life be acknowledged without trying to shove it through a mother-shaped hole? ...please have enough decency to honor all the work women do, not just the work they do as mothers. don't tell me i am a mother in some misguided effort to make me feel better about the fact that i'm unmarried and childless. instead, look me in the eye and see me for who and what i am: a woman of god who is using the gifts she's been given to make as much beauty and goodness as she can."

Obviously, women in many diverse situations can develop great faith in the delivering power of the Lord, receive inspiration, employ spiritual gifts and attain the status of women who "know."

Although I spent many years pursuing the chimeral image of the woman that Julie Beck describes, I wonder now if my path was the most conducive to my spiritual and emotional health or even that of my family. I wonder what would have happened had I sought the Lord's counsel upon my path, rather than simply to follow the party line of having as many children as possible and staying at home and placing all of my energies there.

Now Julie M. Smith has begun a series of posts at T&S supporting the specific counsel President Beck gave and how to apply it. The first post deals with Homemaking. I'm glad that she has taken up this challenge. Apparently it will become quite popular around the Bloggernacle. But just as I have noted above, the appeal is limited to only a segment of LDS women. I do not read the "Mommy Blogs," and I find no amusement in discussions of childrens' poop. Neither does a detailed analysis of housekeeping skills interest me. I realize that for some, home organization may lead to a fuller spiritual life, but there are others whose testimonies might better be strengthened by a rousing disputation over the theology of St. Augustine.

Julie Smith has prefaced her post as follows: "If you feel the need to vent your dislike of [Julie Beck's] talk, I imagine that you might possibly be able to find a thread somewhere in the Bloggernacle where you can do just that. But you can’t do it here. The point of this series is to discuss the specific counsel that she gave and how best to apply it. All other comments will be deleted." I'd like to provide this space for women who know, women who don't know, and women who wish they knew.

Heavenly Parents in the Scriptures and in our Prayers

Joseph Smith brought the attention of his followers to the plural nature of the Hebrew word "Elohim," which is variously translated in the KJV of the Bible as "God," "gods," and even "angels." It was likely that Joseph wished to promote the idea of a council of gods. But to me, the plural nature of the word Elohim signifies that the God of the Bible is simultaneously both God and Goddess. Some have conjectured that the plural ending for God is used to augment its meaning, rather than to indicate plurality. I believe that the word Elohim both amplifies and multiplies. It is unfortunate that the "-him" ending of the word is confused in the English-speaker's mind with a masculine connotation, rather than the actual Hebrew plural ending "-im."

The word Elohim is a plural formed from the singular 'El (or perhaps 'Eloah) by adding -im to the word. This results in indeterminacy in both number and gender. Elohim is used in the Bible for both male gods and female gods. For example, 1 Kings 11:5 and 33 refer to the "goddesses (elohim) of the Sidonians." An unusual and startling grammatical feature of the word is that it is sometimes used with a plural verb form, in which case it is translated "gods." But other times Elohim is accompanied by a verb in the masculine singular. Translators have become accustomed to rendering Elohim in this case as a singular noun denoting the God of Israel, a singular Deity. However, I advocate the view that this single God consists of a unified male/female aspect. Thus we have verses such as Genesis 1:26: "And Elohim said, Let us make man in our image." I contend that the best explanation for the use of Elohim as the name/title of God is to indicate Divine duality of male and female.

Genesis 1:26 also argues against the conception of Elohim as an all-male, priesthood-holding Council of the Gods. Mankind was made in the image of Elohim, male and female. So this verse speaks either of a Divine Father and Mother, or else a Council consisting of both priests and priestesses.

In LDS theology the Godhead consists of three parts: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. In my view what we speak of as "the Father" is in reality a Father/Mother God. I do not advocate the idea that the Holy Spirit is the feminine aspect of the Godhead. Having this conception of Deity, I believe that when we pray to God, we are actually praying to both Father and Mother, though convention dictates that we address prayers to a "Father."

One week ago in Church, my eyes flew open when I heard an opening prayer addressed to "Our Heavenly Parents" in Sacrament meeting. I glanced quickly around the room, but no one seemed to notice. It's the third time I've heard a reference to a Heavenly Mother in public prayer in three months (ok, so two of them were at the Sunstone Symposium :)) This interests me in light of an article written by Margaret Toscano and entitled "Is There a Place for Heavenly Mother in Mormon Theology?" Margaret writes of the role that the general Church membership plays in authorizing Church policy. She gives as an example the many conservative Mormon career women who are reshaping the way the Church views women in the workforce.

In Margaret's paper, she concludes that there is no place for Heavenly Mother in Mormon Theology. The weight of Church practice and authority, she says, are against it. But when I sit in a Church service in a villa in this far-off country, and hear a Filipino priesthood holder pray to his Heavenly Parents, I wonder, and hope.

Dumbledore is Gay!

J. K. Rowling, author of the worldwide best-selling Harry Potter series, met some of her American fans Friday night and provided some surprising revelations.

In front of a full house of hardcore Potter fans at Carnegie Hall in New York, Rowling, sitting on the stage on a red velvet and carved wood throne, read from her seventh and final book, "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows," then took questions. One fan asked whether Albus Dumbledore, the head of the famed Hogwarts School of Wizardry and Witchcraft, had ever loved anyone. Rowling smiled. "Dumbledore is gay, actually," replied Rowling as the audience erupted in surprise. She added that, in her mind, Dumbledore had an unrequited love affair with Gellert Grindelwald, Voldemort's predecessor who appears in the seventh book. After several minutes of prolonged shouting and clapping from astonished fans, Rowling added. "I would have told you earlier if I knew it would make you so happy."

While many gay fans were thrilled at this revelation, others were disgruntled at the timing of the announcement.

"I'm a gay fan and I'm not amused," Griet Verlinde, a 26-year-old psychologist from Belgium, said on the AfterElton.com blog, a site devoted to gay and bisexual men in the entertainment and media industries.

"Firstly, how very 'nervy' of her to out him after all the books have come out and it won't harm her sales," she wrote. "Secondly, not a single rumour of this in the books. Nothing."

Other commenters wonder if Rowling made the statement in order to generate controversy, publicity, and more money.

I don't think so. In my opinion, J.K. Rowling wrote Dumbledore's part with the idea in the back of her mind that he was gay. I think it's lovely that she didn't feel she had to make an issue of his sexuality and let him live his (fictional) life as a person in his own right, and not solely as a "gay person." Some readers are greatly amusing themselves by going back through the books looking for references to Dumbledore's homosexuality. Not me. Dumbledore is a great, rich character, who shows readers the power of love, and this new information hasn't changed that one bit.

Why Everyone in the World Speaks English

When my family first considered moving, I was concerned that we didn't speak a word of Arabic. "Don't worry," I was told. "Everyone there speaks English." And in fact, wherever one roams throughout the wide world, they will find that it isn't that hard to get along. For many, many people of all nations speak English. In fact, I've noticed that Americans can get quite cocky about that fact. Our pride tells us that we are the leaders of the free world and that people of other countries speak our language because they know of our great influence. Or perhaps because they admire us so much! Well, I have finally realized why it is that so many people speak English. Americans' influence doesn't originate in Washington, D.C., or in New York. No, it all comes from Hollywood.


The people of the world learn English so they can watch American T.V.!


I've long been ashamed of Americans' attitude toward language. In European countries, people rub shoulders with others of different nationalities and languages frequently. Because the countries are small and the borders are porous, everyone learns to speak competently in several languages. Even here where it's more difficult to enter the country, people speak Arabic, English, French, and often another language or two. I watch people on the bus greet each other, and finding they don't speak the same language, switch back and forth until they find a language they have in common.

In the United States there has lately been a fervor over immigrants learning to speak English. "If they want to live here, they should learn to speak English," you'll hear stridently proclaimed. Well, yes. They will. And their children will. But learning a language doesn't come in two weeks. I've been working on my Arabic for over a month now, concentratedly. And I have an aptitude for languages. And I still don't know much more than greetings, counting to ten, and part of the alphabet.

How much more human we would be if we all learned as much of other languages as we could. For those who live in the US: how many of us speak adequate Spanish? The likelihood of encountering a Spanish-speaker is great at this period in our history. Do we know how to ask someone their name, to show them how to fill out a form, to give basic directions in the Spanish language?

I love the way that many Mormons all over the world can speak foreign languages because they served missions. On missions, we actively meet people, we have a message to share, we have a motivation to learn the language. But in our daily life we have little motivation to learn so that we can communicate with the world's people.

How would our motivation change if all television programs came into our homes in different languages?

Missionary Packages

When I was a young missionary in Quebec, Canada, my mom was a perfect correspondent. She wrote faithfully every week and send me several packages. Even though none of my family was LDS, they were supportive of what I was doing and wonderful about communicating with me often. Now that my own daughters are on missions, I'm not doing so well. I've never been a very good letter-writer. I'm great at emailing, so they hear from me each week when they check their email. But I've only sent a handful of letters and one package each. (I made a mini-scrapbook of family pictures and sent it to each of them.)

Today I got an email from my oldest daughter's mission president's wife. What an on-the-ball lady! She is reminding each missionary's parents that packages for Christmas need to be in the mail soon. She wants us to send them to the mission office where they will be held until a special mission-wide conference in December. I think it's a wonderful idea. But I need your help! I can't think of what to send my daughters. One is in Korea and the other is in Italy. I am in Saudi Arabia. So anything Christmassy will be impossible to find here.

Give me some ideas on what to send--and tell me about packages you received on your mission that were meaningful to you!

A Mother Who Knows

I Am The Mom

A Powerful Voice

All of my adult life I have longed for a powerful voice. There is a small soprano sound which my vocal cords emit, and this voice does not serve me well. As a swim coach, I need a powerful sound which carries over the splashing. With such a voice as I have, I must earn my authority as a coach slowly and painfully. When I answer the telephone, even today as a woman of a certain age, people ask me if my mother is at home. I have wished for a voice that would command attention and respect.

Here's the comment fmhLisa made when she met me:

And as long as we’re being scary mean uber feminists, can I just say that I’m still a little blown away by how supremely feminine Bored in Vernal is. Her blog voice in my head sounds a lot like a super firm Eleanor Roosevelt, but in person she this tiny little thing, with a very very feminine way about her, and a tiny little girl voice. I was just following her comments around the nacle and trying to read them with her actual voice in my head rather than the “Roosevelt esque Bored in Voice” I’d created for her, and I couldn’t do it. Is that weird?

I was so flattered that my blog voice was commanding.

With my "tiny little girl voice" and less than statuesque height, I have throughout my life confronted and pondered issues of respect and authority. And lately I have wondered what I would do if placed in such a position. My recent blog post, "If You Were a (Female) Speaker At General Conference" was my effort to see what other Mormon women would do given an authoritative placement in the LDS Church. Although this post was read by over 200 people, I tellingly only received 4 willing speculators. Perhaps many are uncomfortable with "aspiring" to a calling. I can sympathize with this feeling, since I have been hurt by accusations in the Bloggernacle of wanting to be a Bishop or usurping the Priesthood. In addition, after I had put the post up, a furor arose over Julie Beck's talk in Conference, and I think many were reluctant to seemingly denigrate her remarks. However, I think it's important for us to define our personal philosophies regarding this issue. The probability that each LDS woman will at some time in our lives hold a position of some small authority is quite high.


The first thing I would do as a high-profile woman would be to choose one or two specific platforms. I think for everyone from political candidates to Apostles it is extremely effective to become known for one or two strong stances. I'd choose something that was meaningful to me and something I think that women could have a strong influence over. I'd strive diligently both for revelation and to get to know the concerns of LDS women worldwide. I'd eschew platforms such as modesty or homemaking in favor of education or literacy or saving the earth. I'd strongly consider service as a platform, though it would have to be more specific and defined than the broad category we now invoke. I think a woman leader must select causes which are universal to women in every circumstance, which cause a great good for the entire world, and have eternal implications.

Next, I would give talks which emphasize my platform in a way that reaches all within the sound of my voice. When a woman gives a talk in General Conference she is speaking to all: women, men and children; members and non-members; rich and poor; mothers, single women, divorced women, etc. Though she might address herself to mothers or to young women, her messages fall upon the ears of the fathers and the young men and give them subtle messages also. For example, a father might pick up from a talk given to mothers that his wife is responsible for the length of their son's hair.

I regret the fact that appearance makes such a difference in the regard in which a woman in the public sphere is held. However, I would recognize that I must present a clean, fit, and professional appearance in order to be taken seriously. This would not preclude my wearing of the quirky items I love on occasion and in appropriate circumstances. I think I'd also wear pantsuits to travel and give talks in (a la Hilary Clinton.) I noticed in a press release about newly called General RS counselor Barbara Thompson that she said she felt more comfortable in pants than dresses. I wished that she would continue to wear her pants often, and to make them more acceptable in Mormon circles.

Finally, I would travel widely and attempt to make Mormon women everywhere aware and accepting of other cultures. The Salt Lake Tribune reported that the General RS presidency recently met for lunch with 17 women from African nations. The visitors included a Muslim from Djibouti with whom Beck fasted in honor of Ramadan. I was extremely impressed by her willingness to experience cultural and religious diversity in her calling to serve the women of the world.

Now, the title of my hypothetical General Conference talk: Using Your Education as a Spiritual Force for Good. I'd emphasize the variety of levels of education to which we can attain--some are self-taught, some gain their education through life experience, some through advanced degrees. Some are educated in music, some in physics, some in nutrition. These can all be used as a spiritual force for good in whatever sphere we are placed. I wouldn't address my remarks specifically to the female sex, though I would hope my remarks would resonate particularly with women.

With that, I'll give all you readers a second chance: tell us what you'd do with a powerful voice!

DH Arrives in the Blogosphere

We have a 2-week Ramadan vacation, and DH has been very busy. He has put up a new blog, Prepare Ye the Way of the Lord, which consists of his compilation of LDS missionary quotes. He also plans to blog about missionary work. I think it's his way of doing his part while we are here in Saudi unable to proselyte. In addition, you may have noticed his comments on some of the Mormon blogs under the name of "Dr. B."

I'm not quite sure what I think about DH's participation here. In a way I feel like he has invaded my personal space. I know he won't agree with many of my comments and I hope it won't cause any more friction than is usual. But I don't plan to censor myself.

And, even more important, since we only have one computer now, I don't plan to give up my internet time!

If You Were A (Female) Speaker At General Conference

Today, Mary N. Cook of the YW Presidency spoke to the youth of the Church about what an influence they could be in their families and in the world. Now it's your chance. If you were a female and had the opportunity to speak at General Conference, what would you choose as your topic? Who would you address? What would you try to accomplish?

Because women seem to gather some criticism about their talks, what they wear, their hairstyle, etc, I've become curious about how others would handle this challenge. Additionally, I wonder how we would handle the high-profile women's callings in general. If you were RS President, what would your focus be? What would be your considerations in calling counselors or a RS board? What would you do first? How would you spend the majority of your time?

Now, the hard one: What would you do as wife of a General Authority? We see the wife of the President of the United States as being high-profile herself. She usually travels quite a bit with her husband and generally has a special project or emphasis that she champions. So, how would you use your influence as wife of our Prophet or wife of one of the Apostles? Are there special causes you would espouse? What would you wear in public? Would you change your hairstyle?

I have many ideas on the above questions, but I want to hear from some readers first. Feel free to send the readers of your blogs over, too. I really want to hear from some LDS women!

Latter-Day Saints Grapple With the Noachian Flood--A Dialogue Review

LDS discussions of Noah and the Flood are fascinating. We are uniquely qualified among religions to debate this subject. On the one hand, acceptance of science as a means to discover truth has a long-standing tradition among Mormons. Brigham Young is quoted thus:

"How gladly would we understand every principle pertaining to science and art, and become thoroughly acquainted with every intricate operation of nature."

On the other hand, Latter-Day revelation confirms the existence of an historical Flood and the reality of the person Noah. As a faith tradition, we often receive mixed signals from our leaders, who are not unified on their interpretation of this Biblical story. Since there is no official and dogmatic position on the historical occurrence of a worldwide Flood, we see much variance among faithful members. Some of the discussions I have enjoyed on this topic are

Duane E. Jeffrey, Noah's Flood: Modern Scholarship and Mormon Traditions, Sunstone Oct 2004.

Donald W. Parry, The Flood and the Tower of Babel, Ensign, Jan 1998.

Julie M. Smith, SS Lesson #6, Times and Seasons, Jan 31, 2006.

GeoffJ, The Noah Version of the Creation Narrative (or, ark=uterus?), New Cool Thang, Feb 2, 2006.

lxxluthor, The Incoherence of the Flood, Faith Promoting Rumor, March 8, 2007

Ronan, Your Monday Poll #2, BCC, Sept 10, 2007

These discussions demonstrate just how much faithful Mormons can differ on their understanding of the Biblical narrative of the Flood. This month's Dialogue, which I have featured on my sidebar, contains yet another discussion on the topic of the Flood. "On Balancing Faith in Mormonism with Traditional Biblical Stories: The Noachian Flood Story" by Clayton M. White and Mark D. Thomas is available online at the Dialogue website. White and Thomas assert that there exist several groups of thought among Latter-Day Saints concerning the Noachian Flood:

1. Many members assume that their religion requires them to believe in the Flood as a world-wide occurrence.
2. A sizable group of LDS believe that the Flood story reports a local event.
3. A third group of believing Saints hold that the story is fictional, but valuable as symbolic and containing moral principles.

The bulk of this article seems dedicated to presenting the scientific evidence against a worldwide Flood. While giving lip service to "room for competent opposing opinions," it seems to me that the authors place their credence in an actual, yet localized Flood. The article does a creditable job presenting scientific evidence against a worldwide Flood in a nutshell. The article is readable and concise. It covers the following salient points:

Insufficient size of the Ark to contain sufficient species for the enormous global biodiversity we see today.

Insufficient time to acquire animals from all land masses on Earth

Impossibility of maintaining specialized conditions required for maintenance of fragile species

Lack of evidence that species on islands and continental land masses arrived there from a single point source.

Complications of requirements of marine vs. fresh-water aquatic species

Discussion of problems relating to parasites and microorganisms.

Fossil records of endemic species and/or groups.

Evidences of tree growth rings

Difficulties of transporting entire ecological systems.

Global distribution of life and it's incompatibiliy with repopulation from a single focal point.

Although these several points were well-presented, I felt the article lacked the balance called for by its thesis. There are many unique reasons that a large group of Latter-Day Saints believe in a literal worldwide flood. Some of these could include the reality of Noah in LDS doctrine, the necessity of the "baptism of the earth," and the location of the Garden of Eden in Missouri necessitating a means of transporting the covenant people to the Middle East. There are undoubtedly other strong reasons for a belief in an historical Deluge.


Lack of consideration of these points leads to the veiled condescension which I detected in this article toward those who reject the authors' conclusions. In spite of the authors' assertion that "our aim in this article is to assess the competing claims regarding the historical core of the biblical story of Noah's flood," in fact only one of the three competing claims was thoroughly treated.

Notwithstanding that I share the perspective presented by the authors, I regret that more space was not given to the exploration of the strong bases upon which proponents of other explanations of the Flood stand.

I can agree most wholeheartedly with the authors' conclusion that

"As we seriously explore the historical core of the story of Noah's ark and the flood, we are likely to encounter several possible temptations at odds with John Taylor's open quest for truth, cited in the opening of this paper. These temptations are to abandon either the text, science, or religion in our quest for truth about the story of Noah."

The article is worth reading for its concluding plea to abandon neither science nor religion in grappling with the ambiguity of this powerful Biblical piece of literature.




Additional reviews of this Dialogue article can be seen at T&S, NDBF, LDS Science Review, Adventures in Mormonism.

Preaching a la Paul

Interesting doctrine taught in SS this week--we were studying the 2nd part of Acts and the teacher focused on Chapter 21 where Paul is asked by James to demonstrate his adherence to the Jewish Law by attending the synagogue and purifying himself. (Acts 21:20-26) Paul was accused of being dangerous because of his teachings about the relationship of Christians to the Law of Moses. Paul followed the counsel of "Bishop James," went to the synagogue, and complied with Jewish purification ritual. Brother M. compared this story to our situation here in Riyadh. He said that though most of us have been taught to proclaim the Gospel, here we should follow the counsel of our leaders and maintain a low profile.

I don't disagree with this strategy--I just wonder if we can compare our situation with the actions of Paul. In Acts 21:4 and 11 Paul was being advised not to return to Jerusalem because of the danger he was in. With complete disregard of his own safety (and what the Spirit was directing?) he said:

I am ready not to be bound only, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus. (Acts 21:13)

It feels strange to have so many years of indoctrination to preach the Gospel no matter what the consequence, to have the examples of Paul, Alma, the sons of Mosiah, and the early missionaries of the Restoration--and then, when consequences might actually occur as a result of missionary work, to be told to hide the light.

Is speaking of the Church here folly--a blatant disregard of what our leaders have advised, or is it bravery? And what, exactly, was the example of Paul?