Polygamy Essays and Prophetic Revelation

So the new Polygamy Essays went live this morning at LDS.org here, here, and here.
 At first I only read the first one, which seemed general and ambiguous, but after I read the other two it seems a little ground shaking.  I'm in a facebook group that was discussing it quite lively, mostly over whether it's a fair historical representation.  I have my own quibbles about a few lines and presentations (hello coercion of 14 year olds . . . but that's for later) but I started a new thread with this:

So with the whole polygamy essay going live today..... I'm feeling in the minority -- anyone else out there believe our prophets can be a hot mess and still be instruments in God's hands, they can still be divinely inspired -- and even be dead wrong elsewhere? Joseph is still the prophet that Restored the Gospel. My personal opinion is that polygamy and racial bans aren't from God -- but that doesn't invalidate that was who God chose to do that work that needed to be done.

 and

I told my brother the fact that we can have a prophet that incorrectly restricts priesthood on race actually strengthens my testimony: that even a racist prophet can't stop the work of the Lord from progressing. It may slow it down, but God's still in charge.

 One of my friends commented about where we are getting the idea that our prophets are not a hot mess, that the OT is really consistent on that point.  And I'm still involved in that discussion hours later.  It's an interesting conversation of people wanting to hold our leaders to a higher standard, and perhaps the inevitable disappointment that will accompany when truth is revealed (hello, essays).  Even one of my tweets from general conference highlighted the tension between counsel we receive for personal revelation and following blindly that we were subject to in just one General Conference Session.  This challenge we have of sorting out the way forward is not unique to our generation -- every dispensation has had prophets that were imperfect and complex and each group of people had to deal with this tension.

A friend posted a link to Julie Smith's essay  at Times and Seasons that was posted during this online conversation I was having, and it's brilliant.  After highlighting about a dozen ambiguous passages from the essays about how our church leaders (prophets) were walking blind trying to figure the whole thing out . . . . she concludes:

What I see here is–intentional or not–the articulation of a theology of prophetic revelation that runs precisely opposite to the way that many Mormons (mis)read Amos to say that God will do nothing without first revealing his secrets to the prophets (Amos 3:7) and that whether by God’s voice or the voice of church leaders, it is precisely identical (D & C 1:38). Rather, this suggests that God reveals things line by line (a scripture frequently quoted in these essays), does not reveal all details at once, and leaves some matters to be worked out without divine mandate.

I think the odd confluence of 1950s American corporate culture, historical amnesia, and rapid world-wide growth led Mormonism to advance the idea that a CEO-like prophet got regular memos from God, bullet-pointed with precise operating instructions designed to maximize return for the next quarter. Diligent work by historians, now disseminated instantly and internationally, shows that that vision isn’t quite precise. It is understandable that some will mourn that vision–I know I’d feel much safer led by that bespoke-suited CEO, divine memo in hand, than by some guy with a leather belt eating locusts in the wilderness. And yet, we should thank those historians (some of whom sacrificed their careers, if not their very membership in the Church, in order to publish things very similar to what is hosted on the Church’s own website today) for helping us overcome the cultural conditioning that misled us regarding what prophets are and what they do. The glass through which we see today is a little less dark because of their work, not just on historical matters related to polygamy but also regarding what we should–and should not–expect from prophets.

 Beautiful.

for further historical readings on polygamy, Dialogue has a great topic page

Book Review: Women at Church by Neylan McBaine

Women at Church: Magnifying LDS Women’s Local Impact by Neylan McBaine
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This is not most mormon feminists' favorite book. You may think with how I've been promoting the things Neylan has been saying lately that she is my favorite person and that her views match mine. They don't. She may understand and empathize with my position, but she is decidedly traditional and conservative in maintaining gendered spaces and continued complimentarianism within the LDS Church. There are definitely some pages and sections that I was uncomfortable with and are not my favorite; so take heart, ye non-mormon-feminists, there shall likely be much you like herein.

The book's basic premise is this:

1) the policies and structure of the Church will not change anytime soon
2) there is currently a group of women struggling with the status quo
3) why you should care about them, why are they struggling?
4) do our practices match our doctrines?
5) why shouldn't we make small changes that would help women who are struggling? what can we do locally to improve church experiences?

My basic conclusion is this: Neylan wrote a whole book without using the word "feminist." She wants to be able to have a conversation about women in the church without triggering haterz. She's not on my same page but she gets me. I can handle that. I don't think most people in my sphere of influence "get me." I consider her on the middle of a bridge between Mormon feminists and True Believing (never having doubts) Mormons (She was given FAIR Mormon's Award of Excellence 2014). The past few years have been an attempt at these two groups talking at and past each other. There has been very little listening or willingness for either side to make concessions (seemingly, I know I'm oversimplifying, but bear with me). Here is someone who is asking both sides to just listen. Slow down first, and listen.

Some of Neylan's small changes she suggests local wards/stakes might implement include: providing equivalent opportunities for youth, allowing YW to have a female companion in bishops interviews, preparing YW for church service, reviewing the rhetoric of how we praise women in general (instead of individuals), empowering female leaders with appropriate titles, using female sources of doctrine, improve how men speak at and to women, and providing more service/relief opportunities. Each of these can be done without any directives from SLC.

I appreciate how she continually points out that to orthodox members, why wouldn't we want outsiders and even our own "currently investigating" young women to see improved optics? It would only help in the long run, right?

I'm a moderate Mormon feminist who advocates for changes via baby steps. If I had my druthers my top 3 immediate changes would be to:

1) equalize structure and funding of youth programs (activity days)
2) replace all "mother/wife/woman" day worship with RS study and teachings of Christ (ie don't celebrate mother's day at church but use it to speak abt Eliza R Snow, or stories of female disciples during Christ's time, or just Him); in addition have Teachings of the Prophetess Eliza R. Snow for a RS/PH manual
3) recognize not all our daughters/sisters/YW will be wives or mothers, and structure our lessons and programs to focus on discipleship in whatever form it may take, without valuing one type of discipleship more than another

I suppose I could fit all of these changes into her categories, but my desired changes require change from the top down. The opposite direction Neylan suggests, she uses as her "muse" church member and Harvard professor Clayton Christensen's "disruptive innovation" theory that in large bureaucratic institutions, needed change often happens from the ground up. As frustrating as it is to acknowledge I don't see any of my first 3 desired changes coming any time soon - the only option I have left is following the pattern of #womenatchruch.

1) use this book to have uplifting and constructive conversations with friends, family, ward members, local leaders
2) do what you can, then let it go

I fear this is my only option. Yet it still gives me hope.

___________________
Further info:
By Common Consent Book Review
The Problem with Local Change, by Julie Smith
Forget Phood, some MoFems seek a middle way


View all my reviews

Patheos' Religious Trends: Mormon Women (Highlights)

Right now over a Patheos (a widely read website hosting conversations on all faiths) there is a series about Mormon women highlighting 10 different perspectives.  I wanted to highlight some of these by sharing some quotes along with the links to click through to the direct articles. 

Especially this one, for I have heard every single one of these statements in this first quote!
"..[T]he expectations for Mormon women over almost two hundred years have caused significant confusion, especially over women's relationship to the Priesthood. For example, most Mormon women have probably heard, at any given time, and in no particular order, the following:
Women don't have the Priesthood. Women have always had the Priesthood. Women have the Priesthood in the temple. Women have the Priesthood through their husbands. Women will never have the Priesthood. Women don't have the Priesthood because they are spiritually inferior to men. Women don't have the Priesthood because they are spiritually superior to men. Women will have the Priesthood in the next life. Women don't have the Priesthood because they have motherhood. Not all women are mothers (literally). All women are mothers (symbolically). Mormons practice polygamy. Mormons don't practice polygamy. Traditional marriage is between one man and one woman. Men can be sealed to more than one woman. Members will be required to practice plural marriage in the next life. Members won't be required to practice plural marriage in the next life. Women might exercise the spiritual gift of healing by the laying on of hands. Women cannot heal because it is an exercise of priesthood. Women can heal together with their husbands. A woman's prayer of faith is just as effective as a priesthood blessing. (But then why the need for priesthood blessings?)"
   
"My hope is that, rather than avoiding these discussions, members of all inclinations will be challenged to confront seriously their assumptions about gender, about the history and theology of women in the church, and to have real, sincere, and respectful conversations about what is at stake. Perhaps as traditionalists express what they fear to lose if their frameworks are shaken, and feminists express what they hope to gain if their frameworks are realized, and church leadership listens with sincere heart and true intent, all involved might begin to come to an understanding of how the full potential of Mormon women might be tapped, for the growth of the church, their families, and themselves."
"Traditionalists and Feminists, an Evolving Conversation" by Andrea Radke-Moss

I usually have a hard time with Valerie Hudson, as I feel she teaches her opinions and interpretations as doctrine, and I find that hard to swallow . . . but I love this quote from her essay:
"The Church leadership is pulling lots of weeds—it is uprooting beliefs and practices handed down from a time when women were viewed as inferiors—and they deserve our thanks.
We the membership must do our part as well. We must pull the weeds in our own backyard—our homes, our wards, our stakes—and be prepared to put our backs into it when the roots are deep. But there is more; in our homes we are planting the seeds of the future in how we raise our children. We need to raise them strong and true by sparing them the old and ugly misunderstandings about women that are so common in our culture. Our children could become majestic redwoods whose branches touch the heavens, if we do not hobble them with the bindweed of the "false traditions of the fathers" concerning women."
"Yard Work in the Kingdom of God: On False Conceptions about Mormon Women" by Valerie Hudson

Fiona Givens opines on the possible development of Relief Society as the promised priestesshood:
"However, the full development of the Female Relief Society was curtailed amidst the contention between the First Elder and the Elect Lady over the issue of polygamy. Brigham Young's daughter, Susa Young Gates observed: "The privileges and powers outlined by the Prophet in those first meetings have never been granted to women in full even yet." (See Cheryl L. Bruno, "Keeping a Secret: Freemasonry, Polygamy, and the Nauvoo Relief Society, 1842-1844," Journal of Mormon History [Fall 2013]: 176.) As a fuller, more accurate LDS history is excavated, there is an increasing feeling of loss and a consequent unease about women's position in the current church structure together with a hunger for the rights and privileges committed to Presidentess Emma Smith, and the Female Relief Society on Thursday, March 17, 1842."
 "Joseph Smith on Mormon Women and the Priesthood" by Fiona Givens

From one of the leading LDS scholars on the history of African Americans in Mormonism:
"As to the question of the day—that gender question—I predict, under no authority whatsoever, that we will see significant change and growth over the next twenty years. It will be slow, and those who will be a part of it must be patient and humble. I predict that we will see the ordination of women—but not in the way OW has framed it. I suspect that women will be ordained to a female order of the priesthood, and will be ordained—put into order–to carry out specific assignments."

"As I have grown and now find myself in my 60th year, revelatory instruction has urged me to flee from argument, to hold out my arms to those who are hurting, to prove my love before I prove my 
point. I have not always succeeded, but I know that I have been so instructed. I have dealt with difficult circumstances as a mother, but have felt supported in all of my trials—not just so that I could feel comforted, but so that I could comfort my children and bear them up.  "
"Here I Stand. God Help Me, I Can Do No Other" by Margaret Blair Young

"Escaping the stagnation of entrenched ideologies and dueling monologues requires moral imagination and a willingness to engage in dialogue."
"Purity, Power, and Practical Pragmatism" by Patrick Mason

and I've never read or heard from her but it looks like Fiona Givens' daughter has an essay, and the Givens definitely trend more conservative than I am, but I liked this quote as it's been one of the ideas I've been advocating for: a way for members with structural Church questions and issues to communicate them to those in a position to consider and enact changes.  Local leaders are not in any of these positions to be productive.
"What emerges most saliently for me is the need to open up communication channels between members and the leadership in charge of doctrinal and structural decisions in order to overcome the unsurprising distance that grows between them in a church far larger and more global than the one Joseph Smith founded. Church leadership could "welcome sincere conversations" more directly, such as offering an email address where leaders could read the questions submitted by members"
 "Are Mormon Women Allowed to Ask Questions?" by Rachael Givens-Johnson

I'll end with a question I ask myself all of the time:
"The LDS Church espouses a doctrine of continuing revelation that by definition requires a belief that there is grand revelatory potential that will move our faith beyond the status quo. But if the only people qualified to receive institutional revelation are male priesthood holders, how do the spiritual experiences and insights of women function within this framework? As the organization is currently structured, a woman can never be considered a "faithful leader" [i.e. Brethren] of the Church, which raises the question of how women can meaningfully participate in institution-wide change that results from personal revelation without engaging in some sort of advocacy."
"Expanding the Conversation" by Aimee Hickman

Priesthood Keys, Authority, and Power

As I listened to Elder Oaks' talk about Priesthood this past conference there was one little bit that made me jump up and down and do a happy dance:

"We are not accustomed to speaking of women having the authority of the priesthood in their Church callings, but what other authority can it be?"

It immediately reminded me of reading Sheri Dew's book, Women and the Priesthood, which I reviewed and blogged a detail notes/summary/discussion.  I loved her description of the Keys/Authority/Power of the Priesthood, and it very closely echoed Elder Oaks' talk with a few exceptions noted below:

Understanding The Keys, Authority, and Power of the Priesthood
Only certain priesthood holders hold certain keys in the Church.  Keys authorize the ordinances, authority is required to perform the ordinances, those who receive ordinances have priesthood power available to them.  Those men with keys can give some women authority, in the temple women have priesthood authority.  After going to the temple, women have direct access to priesthood power.  Women don’t have keys but preside over organizations.  Sister missionaries and women in the temple have been given authority to perform works by those with keys.  Elders have power to baptize, but can’t unless given authority by someone using keys.  Ordinances and covenants are our credentials for admission into his presence.  With the exception of female temple workers, only men have authority to officiate in ordinances of priesthood.  Authority and priesthood are two different things, women have been given divine authority.

She was very clear in her book that women did not have priesthood power, but ACCESS to it.  She also was very clear that women only are given divine authority - whatever authority they hold, it is not priesthood authority.  Below I had a note with a sincere question about the difference between the two:

 (so if the priesthood means the Power of god, the Authority of God, and the Keys of God; and women receive divine authority (which is from God) what makes divine authority different?  It's a sincere question)

 I love how Elder Oaks talk further clarifies and builds on our previous knowledge and understanding.  

Line Upon Line, Precept Upon Precept

I've had some wonderful conversations with family members lately (more on that later) and it has come to my attention that in the process of sharing my story and my opinions -- I have not been the most efficient communicator.  It is very hard to convey my tone and purpose.  As I continue to share I plan on putting more effort into being more clear.

For example . . . when I say the word "question" what does it mean?  Especially when applied to our leaders?

One of the results of going through my faith transition, is that when I studied and pondered the Gospel, I found questions about my faith - I never doubted the core doctrines of the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ.  But I looked at the appendages, I saw how they moved and changed and didn't stay constant (this includes teachings of our leaders).  In order to not allow questions to shake your anchor, foundation, or testimony -- one must expand the perspective and vision of what Truth is.  Whereas before I thought I had all the answers with certainty and everything I had been taught was 100% the whole, complete answer; instead I saw it from an eternal perspective from far, far away.  I see everything we have as a place on the path that a full and complete truth is being revealed, line upon line - precept upon precept. 

God is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent.  It is impossible for any human being to understand as He does and know what He knows. As He interacts with us, He chooses men to lead and guide His church on this earth.  As He inspires, instructs, and leads them I envision the following story as an example:

I have a 16-yr-old girl I volunteer with once a week. She wanted to learn how to make a cheesecake. I bought the ingredients and showed her how/helped her make it. The crust was burned and it was intensely lumpy. I could have fixed those things, but I didn’t want to, because she wouldn’t have learned as much, and I would have robbed her of the sense of accomplishment that is so important to her developing confidence in herself. I didn’t fix the problems because I have a vision that goes beyond cheesecake. I have a vision of her and what she has the potential to become. My understanding of God is that he works in the same way. He could fix all of the imperfections in our church [organization or] leadership right now if he wanted to. But his goal isn’t a perfect church, it’s perfected human beings. And to learn and grow and become perfected, we have to be allowed to screw up, and learn from our mistakes. In the end, the cheesecake still tasted really, really good. (Quoted from a comment at FMH)

 When I listen to the words of my leaders I'm not searching out lines and sentences that I am judging to be wrong.  But in the context of my Heavenly Father lovingly revealing truth line upon line, I imagine what the full truth will continue to be revealed.  I ponder the words of my leaders and love their counsel and guidance.  And as I ponder I wonder how these teachings will be built upon and expanded upon.  Sometimes when new truths are revealed, they show that our previous teachings were limited by our human understanding.  I wonder what truths will be revealed next? 

And as I read Elder Oaks' talk from Saturday night, that was my response: I rejoiced in the further light and knowledge that was revealed.  For the first time in my life . . . I heard taught from the pulpit that women are endowed with their own priesthood power in the temple (not access to it, and not through their husbands).  We have priesthood power.  The power of the priesthood is not limitied to being a male, and he taught that neither males nor females are more special or favorite to God.  Women aren't inherently better or special-er than men.  He also taught that those with priesthood keys grant priesthood authority to others perform certain tasks, whether male or female: again, not limited by gender.  WOW, you guys!  We have been living below our privileges!!  He also taught that the Relief Society is more than just an organization of women that holds classes, it is where women with priesthood power and authority are to work together to change the world in wisdom and order.  Women are not currently granted offices of the orders of Melkizedek or Aaronic priesthoods.  I wonder how this will play out and be revealed according to Joseph Smith's teachings that he "was going to make of this Society a kingdom of priests as in Enoch’s day— as in Paul[']s day"?  (Nauvoo RS Minute Book, Joseph Smith Papers)  Further analysis of that statement is found here.

So as I ponder his words, I wonder, "Hmmm, I wonder if there are other orders of the priesthood that could be established?"and "I wonder what further light and knowledge will build upon this line and precept we have been given tonight?"  I do not perceive our teachings as 100% the knowledge and truth of God, but a step in that direction. 

I heard Elder Oaks speak about how in this Church we should not be worried about rights but responsibilities.  I loved that!  One thing Neylan McBaine taught in her FAIR address about gender in the Church, is that she doesn't think that women in the church are in a power struggle; that we are in a purpose struggle.  I wholeheartedly agree with this perception.  Currently in our church we have a fairly narrow view of the purpose and responsibilities given to women.  This narrow view has hampered my spiritual growth, and I had to discover for myself God has an expanded purpose for women than I was trying to fill.  I imagine it being near impossible to heal from the trial of infertility if one cannot expand their definition of womanhood past motherhood.  General Relief Society President Linda Burton was quoted as saying that the church stands to benefit as “men’s vision of the capacity of women becomes more complete” (Citation)

As one Mormon Feminist explains:  "Expanding the definition of mother to encompass all women merely expands our concept of motherhood. It keeps the womanhood = motherhood paradigm intact.
I want an expanded definition of womanhood— one where motherhood is one of many choices we can make to express our divine femininity."

This expression does not demand sameness and equality - but hopes for further understanding of women in the plan of Salvation and in the life hereafter.  You have to admit our understanding of that is pretty limited.  We desire and seek for further revelation.  It is true I would like women to have more responsibility in building the Kingdom of God (not necessarily priesthood keys).  Not all women feel so and I understand that perspective, but I certainly have the ability and availability because of my circumstances to do so, and I feel my unique talents and gifts should be used to build the kingdom to the fullest respect possible.

I do believe Elder Oaks' teachings were mostly in response to the Ordain Women movement.  And I have expressed I do not mind them existing.  I do not agree with their actions or choices.  I'm grateful these issues became vocal and part of the public conversation, and not just private conversation . . . I believe it played a part in the receiving further light and knowledge we received this weekend.  Sometimes we do have to ask to receive more.  They may continue asking.  I will continue asking for further light and knowledge, because:

"I Believe God Will Yet Reveal Many Great and Important Things Pertaining to the Kingdom of God"

Now, in regards to why certain people have issues or questions or wish for changes, I wanted to share a comment given on my facebook page:

I am not sure there is a more beautiful expression of faith than when we show obedience even amidst questions. That is sustaining.

I loved the talk from President Uchtdorf a few sessions ago when he said, "Don't judge me because I sin differently than you." I think we would all be wise to apply those same words of advice now... "Don't judge me because I QUESTION differently than you."

We all have questions throughout the journey of mortality. That is simply part of agency, and an important tool in building our faith and making us truly converted. Sometimes our questions are deeply personal, private struggles. And sometimes there is a community of our brothers and sisters struggling with the same question.

Those questioning now deserve the same respect, support, and love that I deserved when I was struggling to reconcile my infertility with my understanding of my divine purpose as a woman, or when someone else struggles to understand the principle of tithing, or forgiveness, or with the temple, or to understand a story or principle in the scriptures or church history, etc. The questions may be different, but the way the person questioning should be treated is not.

President Monson's words today about love touched me deeply. "Love is the very essence of our gospel and Jesus Christ is our exemplar." As disciples of Him and members of His church, we should always strive to love as He would. We know that He would love those who question or struggle, because He lived that way. He would not accuse, or judge, or belittle. And He would certainly never tell that person they didn't belong in His church. He left the 99 to find the 1. He wept with those who mourned. He extended compassion to those who doubted. He forgave those who sinned.

He needs us to do the same now. We have been commanded to love one another, even those—especially those—that may question differently than we do.

OW and Gender, Part 4: Cultural Gender Identity

I've been thinking a lot lately about why people are SO deeply offended by Ordain Women.  I mean, there are some crazy things that some Mormons believe and we still welcome those members into orthodoxy.  For example, some people believe that polygamy is the status quo for eternity, and that as one young newlywed put it, "I can't wait til I have more wives so that when one is mad at me I can just go find comfort in another one." ugh, yuck.  I get that OW is vocal and you wish they would just shut up and go away, but even if they are less vocal and just blended in, they would still get this reaction from many members of the church:

Even though the definition of priesthood is keys, authority, and power from God (has nothing to do with gender) and even though throughout history the pattern of the priesthood eligibility has been one of steady expansion (I don't believe in a Church based on modern revelation that we have to assume all expansion is finished); this is what it comes down to:  in the modern Church culture, the identity of manhood is inextricably tied to the Priesthood.  The way a boy becomes a man is through priesthood patterns in our culture:   YM offices/quorums, stacking chairs, home teaching, phood session with other men and ice cream afterwards, missions, having others weep with emotion and gratitude for your faithfulness, etc.  Boys become men in our culture because of the priesthood -- they don't have the priesthood because they are men.  A male identity in our culture is inextricably tied in unnecessary ways to the priesthood, it has comixed in with the definition of mormon masculinity (cue Tim the Toolman Taylor grunts).  Whether right or wrong this is what Ordain Women is asking to change, these cultural traditions of gender identity, and we should acknowledge it as part of the conversation.   

It is not easy to be a man in this Church it's a lot of responsibility, and their path for life and most of their choices are already made for them: to be a good mormon man you do this, then this, then this, then mission, then marriage, then career, then provide, then father, etc.  They know exactly how they should  live to follow their plan on earth: the check boxes have been laid out before them.  Men are judged very harshly for varying from their check boxes.  I have heard family members express frustration at such harsh cultural consequences - even if they feel they have followed the Spirit in not walking the line.

A Christian man’s highest calling is not priesthood; a Christian man’s highest calling is to follow Christ.

It isn't easy to be a woman in this Church, it's a lot of responsibility, and women have a much more ambiguous path.  We only have two check boxes: marriage and children.  The focus of which has good and bad consequences.  As in my case, the over-emphasis in my life lead me to ignore God's will in my life in how I was to build His kingdom with all the talents and unique gifts He has given me.  There was only one way to be a good Mormon woman and all else was choosing the wrong!!   Those poor souls who are single or infertile - they just have to suffer through this life until they get their check boxes!  Those check boxes are the only thing that matters!!  And yet in my life, the atonement healed the hurt and pain of infertility when I was prompted to celebrate and embrace it -- to love that I get to follow God's plan for me a different way, and to reject the message that my Womanhood is found in wifehood and motherhood.  Those are very important ways to be a Woman of God, but is not how to define being a woman of God. 

In our modern Church we embrace religious complementarianism: which ties a female's identity and value only to that of a wife, mother, and homemaker (the 1950s June Cleaver).  The gender roles we currently have are not a result of ancient history of how the bible treated women (thank goodness):  Most do not want to return to a time when fathers owned their daughters and sold them to the highest bidder (Exodus 21:7; Nehemiah 5:5; Genesis 29:1–10),  when multiple wives and concubines were a part of everyday life (even for men of God like Abraham, Jacob, and David), when women were forbidden from owning property, when foreign virgins could be captured as spoils of war (Judges 21), when a woman’s lack of virginity could get her executed (Deuteronomy 22:11, Leviticus ).  We know we don't want to return to Biblical Womanhood, but even then If you follow the history of the Church, the scope of women has not always been so limited as it is now. And the timing of the rise of the complementarianism is exactly the same timing of the movement of Second Wave Feminism.

Here is where so many women get SO ANGRY.  Complementarianism is wonderful because it celebrates that a woman honors God in the home -- this is such a wonderful, beautiful, needed message.  Where the confusion comes in . . . is when it says that is the only acceptable way for a woman to honor God.  This is where I find Elder Christofferson's talk to be beautiful: because it doesn't say, women you have to only do one thing . . . it says, "women exercise moral authority in homes, classrooms, boardrooms, etc."

"A common refrain among Christians is that “motherhood is a woman’s highest calling.” I must have heard this 1,000 times growing up. While men can honor God in varying capacities through work, family, and ministry, a woman’s spiritual aptitude is measured primarily by her ability to procreate.  I understand that many pastors elevate motherhood in order to counter the ways contemporary culture often dismisses the value of moms. This is a noble goal indeed, and the Church should be a place where moms are affirmed, celebrated, honored, and revered....[yet]

A Christian woman’s highest calling is not motherhood; a Christian woman’s highest calling is to follow Christ. And following Christ is something a woman can do whether she is married or single, rich or poor, sick or healthy, childless or Michelle Dugger.  (Rachel Held Evans, Women of Valor)

Ruth is a beautiful example, because she was a foreign, dirt poor, single, childless, field gleaner who is praised for being a woman of valor before she ever married - eshet cheyil - just as our Proverbs 31 homemaker is.  Being a woman of valor is not what you do or what your role is -- it is who you are.  It is our character and virtues that define us and make us Women of God: honesty, chastity, faith, divine nature, knowledge, integrity, accountability, good works, humility, kindness, patience, diligence, charity, temperence, purity, modesty, meekness, discernment, cheerfulness, mercy, courage, brave, protective, compassion, understanding, forgiveness, love, etc.  These are all virtues that define our character.  {Tangent: quit using the word virtue as a euphemism for sexual purity.  It is a misuse of the word.}

You can be a woman of God as a homemaker or as a congresswoman.  As a former working mother myself -- working in no way lessened by focus, love, or dedication to my motherhood, it did broaden the definition of my womanhood.   Increased responsibility in my life did not lessen my motherhood -- it required that my husband and I, due to our circumstances (in following the family proclamation) adapt and find a way to continue to raise a family with a Christ-centered home that honored our fatherhood and motherhood.  This can be done in many ways, and it is important for us to consciously choose the way that works best for our family and own the consequences of this decision and honor and support others in their decisions. 

I do not mean to imply that men and women are exactly the same, but could we challenge ourselves to enlarge our vision?  That there can be more than one way to be a Good Mormon Man or Woman?  To realize that being a Mormon Male is more than Priesthood Holder; that Mormon Woman is more than Mother?  That if this idea is threatened it doesn't mean we value the priesthood or motherhood less?  Can we unlink our gender identities from a role we perform and link our value instead to being like Christ?  Who exhibited what we consider both masculine and feminine virtues (leadership and nurturing, strength and meekness, courage and submission) that both men and women should develop? 

OW and Gender, Part 3: Not Equality; Accountability

PRIESTHOOD

Here I think it's important to talk about what priesthood is.  I liked Sheri Dew's definition of it being the keys, authority, and power to act in God's name.  But there are two distinct and separate areas this power is exercised: ritually and administratively.  Most of my feelings on this matter are very well encapsulated by a post found here (On Being Needed Vs. Being Necessary), it has thoughts that I believe that most of the conversation going forward shouldn't be based on "equality" but on a fuller understanding and expression of "accountability and responsibility."   I'll quote and try to summarize below.

"In the Church, possession of priesthood is not solely about the proper legitimate performance of spiritual rites and ordinances, but also about the right to speak and be heard, the power to make decisions, to be endowed with full accountability and responsibility, not just at an individual level, but also at an institutional one. Lacking these things can and often does lead to the alienation and brokenness these women have experienced solely on account of their gender."

"New practices and policies.. could be instituted in order to improve women’s and girls’ experience in the Church.  But no matter how much women are included in general processes and individually listened to by priesthood leaders, the fact that they must be included and listened to in the first place demonstrates that, de jure and de facto, women stand outside all formal decision-making, at both the general and local levels."

"Our sisters, wives, daughters, and friends deserve to be represented at every level where they have a stake in ecclesiastical decisions and events that affect them..... Merely asking for the opinions of some women would not inform our response like having women with the power to shape and mold it alongside the men they work and serve with."

"Though we believe the Church was instituted by God and its leaders can and do receive divine guidance on its behalf, it is nevertheless a human institution run by and peopled by human beings. I think this is the underlying theological defense of the status quo, that if God wants something to change, God will simply see to it; therefore, the gender of the decision-makers is insignificant because, as stewards of God’s power, they will simply receive divine instruction and all will be well, all wounds will be eventually be healed, all problems resolved, in the Lord’s own time."

"However, priesthood does not make of its holders passive receptacles of constant streams of divine revelation, but makes them responsible to make decisions of their own will and wisdom, in hope of divine ratification. How can we not include women in this process? How can we not empower women as vessels of such responsibility? Women cannot be regarded as fully human until the full measure of responsibility and accountability is theirs. This is where the charged rhetorics of modesty, pedestalization, and singularity and specialness of gender are mutually embedded–in the wonderful-terrible blessing and burden of cultural, institutional, and religious responsibility and accountability, or lack thereof. This is also why the rhetoric of “equality” should be replaced with one of responsibility and accountability. Responsibility is what is really at stake with this kind of empowerment, and it is really what we mean by “equality.” Responsibility is the decisive and irrevocable difference between becoming angels or becoming gods."

"Cultural identity that Priesthood has produced is what really is at stake for both the men who balk at extending priesthood authority to women and the women who insist that they would never want priesthood–not really because they can’t imagine passing the sacrament or doing Tithing Settlement but because they don’t want to be men, full stop."  (PS this will all be addressed in Part 3!)

"But the institutional Church is nevertheless of vital importance to its members. It could never cause so much pain, joy, sense of community, and alienation if it were not. If there is another way to irrevocably and formally fold women into the decision-making process at the local and general levels, I’m all ears"

"Regardless of being able to show that women were once ordained at various levels (as can be more or less demonstrated in both Mormon and Christian history), that there is here and now a need that has gone unmet demands that we start doing things differently. If that means giving women the priesthood, I am in favor. If alternatively it means restructuring the priesthood so as to decouple it from administrative authority and limit its functions to more spiritual matters, thereby freeing women to participate administratively and have a voice of institutional power, I am in favor. If it means giving women a female priestesshood that is distinct from male priesthood but with equal and responsibilized authoritative stewardship, I am in favor. If it means not necessarily giving women priesthood but placing them on councils where they have a more equal say and vote, where they become systemically necessary and not merely appealed to if arbitrarily fortunate enough to have priesthood leaders who truly care about what they say, that is at least a leap forward. Even gradual changes in a direction that looks something like this are better than nothing. What matters is that women be empowered to speak and serve and bless in the religious community no less than their brothers. What matters is that when a woman speaks women and men should sit up and listen, not just because she might have priesthood or legitimate authority of some kind, but because there are no institutional barriers providing a convenient excuse not to listen to her. What matters is that building the kingdom of God is an effort that requires all of us in our full capacity, liberating us to use whatever talents we have at our disposal. There are so many women who are outstanding leaders in the workplace, but whose leadership isn’t nearly as vital in our ecclesiastical context. There are so many other women who could learn to be these outstanding leaders in a pastoral context if given the opportunity. What about women counseling with others about suffering, faithfulness, the temple, sexuality, etc? What about women feeling more capacitated to participate and contribute in a multitude of different ways? What about men and women together trying to figure out how to strengthen families while discussing what it could mean for men to be men and women to be women? How much closer to Zion could we leap then?"

"Most important here, though, is the increasing alienation so many women in the Church are feeling within the structure as it currently stands. A Mormon “priesthood of all believers” may not ultimately be the answer, but it is acutely appealing in fully responding to this growing alienation, because it makes precisely that structural change that would plug women fully into the heart of the life of the Church. Could Church leaders prayerfully enact something like this, something of which there would be divine approval? I think the answer is yes. Priesthood is a sacred God-given trust, not alone to passively listen for God’s will and carry it out but to freely use that power, the privilege God has given holders of the priesthood to righteously engage in service according to the stewardship they have been given."

"In the end this is an argument for formally and radically weaving women into the heart of the ebb and flow of Church life, giving them voices that are systemically necessary, a part of the conventional function of the Church, the equals of men in speech, institutional power, and responsibility. The current priesthood-driven structure seems to insist that ordaining women might be the only present way of really doing that,  though what seems paramount is ultimately seeing the realization of these fundamentally necessary goals, regardless if priesthood is the vehicle to make that happen."

I very much apologize for block quoting - but . . . he speaks what my heart feels. Please note that I don't place any timelines or stipulations on changes or improvements. . . But I agree with my cousin yesterday who commented 1) we discount how long God waits until the population is open to receive further revelation before giving it and 2) the doctrine of our Gospel and teachings in the temple whisper very much of a shared power dynamic.  Much of this belief comes from the commandment that we have to become ONE upon marriage.  The we have God the Father and God the Mother***** who are one  . . . I don't know when changes or revelation or anything will come.

But I do believe now is a good time to have respectful discussions about these issues - AND all voices should be included in these discussions.  This is not currently happening.  The scriptures are replete with examples of prophets questioning things they thought were always true (Nephi having to kill Laban) or prophets who wrestle with issues before God (Enos).  The scriptures teach me that questions and wrestling with them is okay.  That my faith has been strengthened and deepened through my questions and wrestling.  And everyone's path in faith back to God is different.  And we should respect each others' journeys.

*************The Reference for "God the Mother" is found in the comments below

OW & Gender, Part 2: Why I Disagree With Ordain Women

ORDAIN WOMEN

First of all, if you haven't yet, please go read Ordain Women's FAQ page and a handful of their profiles.  Now, whether you agree with these men and women or not, please acknowledge their bravery and courage for taking the risk of putting a profile up.  The consequences these faithful members face is real in their lives.....wowza, right?  Looking at those profiles, I am filled with a confirmation that these are my brothers and sisters sitting next to me in the pews and holding callings with me and leading and loving my children in their callings, etc.  I don't want them to leave!!

One of the reasons I am not an OW member is because I look around and see easy changes that could be made in the church organization via policy changes, I enumerated on some in my first blog post:  equal funding and structure of boys/girls programs, an improved conversation regarding modesty and sexuality in the Church, female representation on decision-making boards in the Church, eliminate gender restrictions on callings that have nothing to do with priesthood rituals: stake auditor, Sunday School presidency, etc.  These are specific issues that are important to me based on my life experiences as a Relief Society and Primary President and as an accountant.  Other women have other issues that are important to them.  To me these things seem like obvious, low-hanging fruit that may take years to change and have NOTHING to do with priesthood ordination, but if no one says anything about them, nothing will continue to be done.

For example, in Elizabeth Smart's advocacy for human trafficking and sexual abuse, "Smart said she "felt so dirty and so filthy" after she was raped by her captor, and she understands why someone wouldn't run because of that alone.  I thought, 'Oh, my gosh, I'm that chewed up piece of gum, nobody re-chews a piece of gum, you throw it away.' And that's how easy it is to feel like you know longer have worth, you know longer have value."  She was referring to the abstinence only object lessons she received in the church (no one wants a licked cupcake, chewed up piece of gum, manhandled flower bud, or any other really poor, awful, objectifying things that equate a woman's value with her virginity).  Many people criticized her for publicly criticizing lessons she received in Church about her abstinence-only education that caused her harm.  But listen, if no one ever stands up and publicly talks about how "chewed up piece of gum" is a bad, harmful way to teach chastity -- we are still going to get people teaching those lessons. 

How Ordain Women sees things is this:  for decades Mormon feminists have been asking for the low-hanging fruit.  And they've been punished and excommunicated and marginalized for publicly advocating for things like: women praying in general conference.  So Mormon feminists can continue to just talk amongst each other -- but nothing will ever change until women are actually in a position to enact the changes.  They also reason that the MoFem community is alive and well on the internets, but if all we do is just talk on the internets nothing will happen - the Church has shown that they can easily ignore FeministMormonHousewives.org and let them have a community where the complain and explain and listen to others mansplain (ha!) and not really acknowledge their existence.  But the internet created tools of advocacy too, in the case of petitioning the Church for an official policy on menstruating women and Baptisms for the Dead (policies were all over the place and haphazardly enforced to the detriment of many women) or to the action of "Let Women Pray."  (How Social Media Revitalized and Enlarged a Movement, www.academia.edu).  Because of the historical precedent established between Mormon feminists and the church organization, Ordain Women strongly believes ordination is the only answer to solving many issues.  What they see is the Church becoming more like Zion.  They sincerely have this belief that it is the only way to move forward, I do not agree with them.  The public affairs letter referred to their end goal as non-negotiable, I think the Church would be surprised how many OW would go along with an alternate solution revealed from God.  And I disagree with the Public Affairs letter that since they have a certain opinion on the way forward, that their voice is damaging to the discussion (and shouldn't be listened to).  ALL voices should be a part of the discussion, yes even these OW ladies. 

TONE AND ACTION

Kate Kelly is the founder of Ordain Women, and I have found her to be a little rough around the edges.  I have seen her easily dismiss opposing opinions and not conduct herself in a . . . well, a way that we teach our women they should act, she's a bit brassy :-)   If I think about it I'm not surprised, a woman with enough chutzpah to start this thing has got to be filled with so much passion and determination and fearlessness that she's probably the only type of woman who could have done such a thing.  Kelly is a human rights lawyer, and she observed that when working towards rights that in Africa, action received a response.  When women had a peaceful protest and quietly asked for a right which they were due -- they ended up being handcuffed and dragged away.  But the thing that began changing minds is that the men having to drag these women away were now their friends, neighbors, and family members looking them in the eyes and seeing their pain: and they could no longer ignore those feelings, they had to be addressed.  So Kate comes from a political activist background which I believe frames what she does and the words she uses (ie Equality, more on that later).

There are many members of the Church who support women's ordination (many, many of them male) who are not members of OW.  They don't agree with how she does things either or how she responds to their suggestions or correction or criticism.   Most people who are in this camp also disagree with the actions the group takes.  For example, the peaceful "action" being held during Priesthood Meeting is a point of a lot disagreement.  I do not believe it is the best foot forward, but I can empathize with them and their pain -- and I do see OW as a group that needs to be included in conversations about women's issues.

Women and the Priesthood - Book Review

Women and the Priesthood: What One Mormon Woman Believes by Sheri L. Dew My rating: 4 of 5 stars
3.5 stars

I find myself in a peculiar situation as a Moderate Mormon Feminist against advocating for the priesthood, in reality I find peace in waiting patiently for the further light and knowledge regarding women's priestess-hood. So I really don't feel like I have a dog in the actual fighting going on around the "Ordain Women" movement, and obviously this book is in response to that.

Even though I don't believe in advocating for the priesthood, I'm still a feminist who wants to be a part of positive change regarding policies in the procedures of the church to eliminate gender inequality. Men and women are not the same and shouldn't be treated equally, but they should be treated equitably.

I will attempt to summarize the whole of Sheri Dew's book in a paragraph: She doesn't understand why people think women don't have anything to do in the church: LOOK! We pray and speak and lead our own organizations! The doctrine of Jesus Christ holds equality in women and men, but quit trying to be treated the same! If you understand who you are as a daughter of God you will stop being confused!! Be rooted in the gospel and quit worrying about these things, or else your roots will be weak! If you understand the plan of Salvation, you understand that women are to have children and men are to have the priesthood. We don't know why, we accept it with faith. We have our gender roles and that's what we're supposed to do. And Christ is at the head of the Church so STOP questioning it! I will provide no discussion at all about the mistakes and infallibility of human leaders of our church. Quit asking for the priesthood, we are already doing a lot: we are praying and leading organizations and teaching and stuff - and some churches don't let you even do that. So why are we complaining again? We are so vital to the work. We have all the access to every blessing the Lord has promised us. She has access to priesthood power as a single, endowed woman in her home, please stop telling her she doesn't. As for women having power in the early days of the church to lay on of hands, well, it's likely it all could have just been a mistake - or we were doing it wrong until we locked that practice up exclusively in the temple. She explains in a really awesome way the difference between keys, authority, and the power of the priesthood. We don't talk about Mother in Heaven because we're protecting her. Motherhood is a doctrine and you don't need kids to be a mother. If you just immerse yourself in the Gospel, you can change the world and be saved.  

Now here is my response: Wow, what a mixed bag for me. I actually did learn a lot about the priesthood. In fact most of the book was very uplifting to me. She had some pretty insightful discussions about how women's path in life are ambiguous in the Church while men's paths are set. About how our goal in finding out our purposes in life may not include the Sunday School answers. But near the end I felt like she was really negative about people who disagreed with her, regardless of her earlier quotes of it being okay to have different opinions. She implied if you don't understand it her way you won't qualify for the celestial kingdom, that if you are confused you are ridiculous and 'absurd'. The main reasons women have questions about ordination are quickly dismissed or not even discussed at all. I disagree that if someone has a different opinion that they don't understand the plan of salvation. I very much don't agree with her opinion about celestial silence being necessary for Heavenly Mother, especially since it's not based in scripture or any leader ever of this church. It's a myth debunked. BUT I respect her with all of my heart. Her beliefs and interpretations are the product of her life and experiences - just as mine are.

I have a much more in depth summary of my notes on the book and my responses to points made over at my blog. All in all I'd say there is insight to be gained in this book, but by in large it reflects the traditional beliefs in the Church about gender roles and our places in the organization. I certainly understand this perspective. She stuck to her own script about how to explain away Ordain Women, but I wish she would have spent some more time on their actual concerns and questions - and not just why she thinks they are wrong doctrinally. I spend a lot of my time defending OW as not being apostate against really mean people - and this book doesn't help my case, because in a round about way she implies that herself. I'm not sure if this does anything to help the dialog about women and the priesthood than to reinforce people's already held opinions and interpretations. There just doesn't seem to be any attempt at understanding that it is possible to be a Mormon feminist and faithful at the same time. And if you are, well - you're just all caught up in Satan's distracting influence.

I actually am grateful for the OW movement, even though I disagree with them because I think they are prompting a conversation we should be having.  A real and hard look at gender and the church and the priesthood.  I know I've been more sincere and earnest in my study this year regarding this topic, especially inside the temple, because of it - and I'm grateful for it.  I don't want to focus on what we're doing wrong, but what could we be doing better?

I recently told my husband the reason I am a feminist is because I am a mother and because I cherish that role. Because I care so deeply for my daughter and her experiences in life, I do feel prompted by the Spirit to try to change gender inequalities. And because I am a faithful Mormon feminist, there is nothing any human can do on this earth to take me away from the pure Gospel of Jesus Christ. I know He lives and loves me. I know that all things will be made right in the end. I know I will see my Father and Mother in Heaven face to face and every question I have now will be answered in the next life.

p.s. Can I just say Sheri Dew is my hero, and long for the days of her exhorting and expounding over the pulpit, even if we do disagree sometimes.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I am almost done, and so far all I can say is: Deseret Book, you have the worst ebook reading app I have ever used in my life. AWWWWFFFUUULLL. Seriously so much info technology in the church that this is embarrassing :-) View all my reviews

Women and the Priesthood - Summary, Notes, and Discussion

Obviously this issue has to do with Mormon feminism, and I find that many people in the church do not understand the perspective, concerns, and motivations of many Mormon Feminists.  I wanted to see how much I would be in agreement, how much I have to learn, and if there are some misconceptions that might be there that I can clarify in this post.  This post will be long, as I am actually summarizing her points from the notes I took, and incorporating my thoughts in line with it.  This post will also be morphing and changing as I further refine what I want to say.  If you are looking for a quick, short summary - please see my book review on GoodReads. 

Introduction
"Despite frequent doctrinal declarations by the Church leaders about the worth, influence, contribution, and value of women, flawed perceptions about LDS women are as old as the Church itself."  She goes on to say that two causes deserve mention: polygamy and priesthood ordination.  (What about those of us who don't doubt one iota in the worth, influence, contribution, and value of women and the doctrine of the Gospel, but don't believe our practices always match up with what the doctrine actually is?  Leaving priesthood ordination out of it??)

 She's hesitant to publish because:
1) she's still learning, it is a work in progress
2) there is much she does not understand and this is NOT doctrine, but her interpretation
3) she knows it will be judged
4) a fair number of women feel marginalized by the practices of the church (not necessarily the doctrine), and that women feel there is no "safe place to share concerns or ask questions. And questions are good, and they lead to answers. But we need to be careful how to couch our questions. Are they framed in doubt or faith? Are they "I don't understand this, I wonder what the Lord will teach me about this question?" Questions asked in faith unlock the power of God to answer them. She has not felt marginalized herself, but believes there seem to be ways to change the involvement of women without altering doctrine, covenants, or ordinances. Changes in policy and administration are ongoing because the Restoration is ongoing. Although she sees ways participation of women could be improved, if it never happens in this life, it will not affect her testimony (exactly, I feel the same way!).
5) to provide a different framework for the conversation

LDS Women are Incredible   (as are faithful Muslim women, and faithful Baptists, and faithful Evangelicals)  She doesn't fault anyone for expressing different views about women and priesthood, motherhood, or any other doctrine re: women. Because we all speak from our own individual knowledge, experience, and concerns. So this is not a "end all" of the discussion, but her adding her voice to the many views that exist.  (I am glad I have added my voice to the conversation and look forward to how this can add to the further knowledge I seek on the matter.  It is an very interesting topic to study, and not always black and white.)

The Question of Perception
Story of meeting with a NYC reporter interviewing her who is SHOCKED that women have the opportunity to serve in administrative and teaching roles (I think she loves this story, heard it a lot :-)  Three recent examples of what she calls misinterpretations of LDS women

1) USA Today essay that accused our church of being "hostile to the idea of female equality, let alone leadership."  She then is flabbergasted how anyone can say that when our doctrine clearly teaches we have equal access to spiritual privileges.  (I believe 100% females have equal access to spiritual privileges, but we don't have equal access to decision-making in the Church.  Decision making is about stewardship not priesthood, and the stewardship of positions in the administration of the Church could easily be adjusted without changing any doctrine of the church.  For example, I'd like to see more women sitting on the Church Board of Education, the Welfare Committee,  General Missionary Board, etc.  There are one or two women there, but we could easily add a few more RS General Board members whose stewardship relates solely to service on those committees.  Because if we have equal access to revelation and inspiration as our doctrine teaches, it would only strengthen the boards to have a wider and broader group of life experiences to draw from when making decisions for an organization that affects 50% women.)

2) The authors of "American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites US" stated "male lay leaders fill all posts in the congregational and church hierarchy." and then she said they were confused when they implied the only way to have influence is through priesthood ordination.  (It is true that women have an incredible influence in this church that cannot be understated.  But what about influence to make changes and decisions in the church? I believe that's probably what he was referring to.  Women make decisions only in their stewardships and have comparatively little input in general church matters (ratio wise), otherwise the influence we have is limited to being asked for our input which is then considered but the ultimate decision is made by a group of male leaders.  So the logical step is to work towards women having an equal vote at the table - exactly like they are in the new Missionary Committees.  They look similar to King Arthur's Knights of the Roundtable.  Part of the reason Ordain Women exists is because they don't believe incremental changes like the ones Sis. Dew says could be made, will be made in a timely matter when those making the decisions don't understand the feelings or reasons why a policy change may be in order.)

3) A female blogger for the NYT with an obvious axe to grind against the church asserted we have "male authoritarianism" and "patriarchal gerontocracy" where women are relegated to supporting roles.  She is SHOCKED!  Sis. Dew wonders if the writer ever met a devout LDS woman?  Her definition = temple recommend holding, tithe-paying, temple-going, actively participating woman who understands Church Government and Doctrine.  (Oh hey, that's me!  So I'll butt in a share that, well, it is true our church governing structure and authority is marked by patriarchy (and they are old :-)  ).  And every time I have served as President of an organization I have felt marginalized and put into a supporting role that doesn't match the doctrine that is taught by Jesus Christ.  I'd love to share my experiences sometime, but not in this post.  So we're right back to making policy changes that can be made without changing doctrine.)

"Women in the Lord's Church"
From the beginning Joseph Smith organized the Relief Society to be "after the pattern of the priesthood" (which if you study church history, is true!  The RS was not under the direction of the Priesthood back then.  They were autonomous and separate making their own decisions without having to receive approval from male leaders.  Women were authorized to bless and heal by the laying on of hands.)  Since then church leaders have consistently taught about the honored station of women in the Church.  (My favorite explanation of this traditional teaching of how we honor women in our church is "The Pedestal."  Best described by Andrea Radke-Moss, a history professor at BYU-Idaho in a comment as follows:  

While I appreciate that you feel valued and equal in the Church, the reality is that many women do not. There are two ways of valuing women– one is on what’s called a “pedestal,” or a set-apart role that accepts the inherent differences between men and women, and also accepts the notion that somehow women’s equality comes from being more righteous, worshiped or revered within a male-led organization. You appear to be comfortable with that, as many Mormon women are, and that’s great. But some women are uncomfortable with the pedestal, especially as it has the tendency to emphasize gender stereotypes rather than recognizing each person as an individual with unique qualities; for some, there is discomfort with much of the cultural and traditional restrictions on women’s participation in the Church– and praying in General Conference is only one small part of that. The other approach to valuing women is through what is equality– not that men and women are the same, but that they are seen as individuals, and not as stereotypical gender roles to be filled. Those who prefer equality over the pedestal just hope for more shared decision-making, counseling within counsels, shared parenting roles, etc. This might mean that some women seek priesthood ordination, but it might mean that other women just want an expended role for women in the Church, without priesthood ordination. Some of these limitations might have to do with tradition and policy, but are not rooted in the restored gospel. The importance is to understand the difference. For instance, women have not always served missions, and since they have, the age and length for missionary service has changed based upon historical need, wars, and yes, even some outdated notions about women’s rightful place. The recent lowering of the missionary age for women is progress in the right direction.

I must say that I have experienced being valued in both ways - in the Church and out of it, especially in the full-time workplace.  For me it is far preferable to be seen as an equal as an individual, for my thoughts, ideas, contributions, abilities, and input - and not because I'm seen as innately "more gosh-darn special."  I've studied the words in the temple and the spiritual differences between males and females and they are real, but they are not where my equality lies. 

 In the last year I've studied more about Heavenly Mother and read prophet's quotes about females being creators in the hereafter (and not just of babies/spirits).  I love-love-love this quote Sis. Dew shared by Elder McConkie and wish it were taught and shared more often.  I think it is instructive about the power of the Priesthood available to women.  We need to hear more of these teaching from the pulpit.  Not just of how wonderful women are, but the true power (separate of procreative powers) we hold.)

"Adam and Eve, Abraham and Sarah, and a host of mighty men and equally glorious women compromised that group of the 'noble and great ones' to whom the Lord Jesus said: 'We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell' (Abr. 3:22-25)  This we know: Christ, under the Father, is the Creator:  Michael, his companion and associate, presided over much of the creative work; and with them, as Abraham saw, were many of the noble and great ones.  Can we do other than to conclude that Mary and Eve and Sarah and myriads of our faithful sisters were numbered among them?  Certainly these sisters labored as diligently then, and fought as valiantly in the War in Heaven as did the brethren, even as they in like manner stand firm today, in mortality in the cause of truth and righteousness."

 Women are not the same - did not intend for them to be alike.  (I agree)

A Legacy of Leadership
Many of the anecdotes she shares are stories that Mormon feminists point to as a fact that RS and women are actually in a lesser position than they were in the early days of the church.  Everything from Eliza R Snow exhorting, LDS suffragettes, Brigham Young sending women to vocation and professional schools and asking them to become writers, accountants, poets, and physicians. 

This all makes sense because the restored gospel of Jesus Christ at it's core is feminist, just as I believe Jesus Christ was the Gospel's first feminist.  The thing about the history of women in our Church is that so much of the powers and responsibilities we once had are no longer there.  Some Moderate Mormon Feminists do not call themselves "progressive" in their hopes for future positive changes for women in the chruch, but "regressive" because there is a hope for a return to the structure of the past.  That when Eliza R. Snow recorded the words at Nauvoo Relief Society as “I now turn the key to you in the name of God” it meant the women had all their own power to do the work and run their organization.  Women set their own budgets, ran their own store selling RS produced goods, ran the welfare organization in administering relief to the poor, ran a hospital, nursing school, started a newspaper, made silk, agitated for women's rights, blessed and healed by anointing and laying on of hands.  The Relief Society was not an Auxiliary under the priesthood, it was an equal organization to the side.  The General RS president's office was right next door to the prophet's office in the earlier days in SLC.  Feminists hoping for a return to earlier structure is NOT a belief that men and women are the same, as is a descriptor so often painted upon us. 

"Women and the Church Today"
 A story of women in ChristChurch, NZ, responding to earthquakes there and the service and preparation the showed.   Much of the autonomy and structure of the Relief Society has changed over the years.  It is true LDS women all over the world go about doing good and changing lives.  But other than Sunday lessons, enrichment, and visiting teaching, there is very little engagement.  What if the RS rebuilt some of the structure that helped enable others to serve that it had before?  I know modern women are already stretched to their limits, but at times hear sisters say they wish there were more opportunities for more service projects outside of local ward sisters. Back in the early years not every woman was expected to commit to every activity that Relief Society was engaged in.  So adding "influence groups" (ie women who would get together to combat homelessness, or female education, or fight against human trafficking or sex slavery, or bringing clean drinking water to developing nations, or starting a new "Exponent", etc.)  would be available to those willing and able and who felt called to that sort of work.

Women Have a Divine Errand
 We lived before we came here and we were all sent here with a divine errand.  Our errands are all different.  Your life's mission is not mine, and mine is not yours.  They are all the same in their origin.  They came from God.  and  This requires earnest effort to uncover and fulfill our divine errand.  It is easier to motivate someone to do something difficult than something easy.  The desire to progress is hardwired into our DNA.   Don't feel inferior, look up and be believing.  (My favorite scripture:  Mosiah 2:41 may dwell with God in a state of never-ending happiness.)  Understanding our divine nature is essential in understanding our errand.  Understanding who we are we must understand our premortal life.  From William Wordsworth:

Our Birth is but a sleep and a forgetting:
The Soul that rises with us, our life's Star,
Hath had elsewhere its setting,
And cometh from afar:
not in entire forgetfulness,
And not in utter nakedness,
But trailing clouds of glory do we come
From God, who is our home.

As we come to understand that we are noble and great, we will feel greater purpose and more confidence living as women of God in a world that doesn't celebrate women of God.  We will cheer each other on rather than compete with each other, because we will be looking for validation from the Lord rather than validation from the world.  

Satan's main goal is to attack females - confuse them.  "Confusion about our identity can wreak havoc.  But clarity about who we are is empowering."  So this is not the time to seek first the things of the world but to "build up the kingdom of God, and to establish his righteousness."  Truth is not relative.  The first step in understanding how God sees his daughters it to understand who we are, were, and may be. 

God Expects Women to Receive Revelation
A story of a very experienced priesthood leader who didn't know that women could receive revelation.  Unfortunately he is not alone is mistaken that the heavy lifting to be done spiritually is not for them.
It is More Blessed to Receive
The only limitations on our communication with Heavenly Father are those we impose on ourselves.  We impose those limitations by not seeking, not asking, and not learning how to receive answers, gifts, and information.  What are we willing to receive?  Receiving requires action on our part.
 The Gift and Power of the Holy Ghost
Joseph worried the people would not live up to their privileges.
The Language of Revelation
Scriptures, Purity
The Blessings of Revelation
To receive revelation we haven't yet received, we will likely need to seek in ways we haven't sought before and do things we haven't done.  Read the scriptures now.  Attend temple regularly and ask to understand more about the endowment and sealing.  Read about how to qualify for additional spiritual gifts.  If you are not sure the direction of your life what spiritual gifts will help you?  gifts only given to those who seek them.  Unplug your life technologically so you can have more time to be spiritual.
The Spirit Speaks of Things as they really Are
Are we rooted in the gospel?  The only reason the plants came out so easily is they weren't rooted in the gospel.  (That's why when people leave the church, whether it's because of women discovering 'feminism' or 'googling something about polygamy' or whatever -- I can't blame feminism or whatever they found.  If our roots really are deep -- if we really have a testimony of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, we won't leave.  because we understand that any imperfections we find along the way are not of God, but of man.  Feminism or church history isn't the problem in people leaving the church, it's that their roots aren't deep enough to withstand questions, and they haven't been taught how to approach questions with faith instead of doubt.)

God is Perfect and So Is His Son

Teaching the Plan of Salvation, that men and women can only enter the highest degree of glory together.  We need to access heavenly power in mortality:  (1) through Gift of Holy Ghost and (2) via full access to priesthood power, but men and women access it in different ways.  (Alright friends, here is where I find some of her teachings to be strictly traditional and at times not helpful to the dialog.  Here is where she implies feminists don't understand the Plan of Salvation - because apparently it's all about gender roles?   I missed that in the missionary discussions. 

Also she thinks if you think changes need to be made you are Counseling the Lord and need to repent.  She says we are not a test case in a cosmic lab (which doesn't jive with what Pres. Bednar taught while I was working in his office in Rexburg:  the Church Organization is a Laboratory of Learning.  That there will be some people in this church who are so converted to the programs of the church instead of the true Gospel, that when change comes to those programs - and it will come, that they will not be able to make the transition because they were converted to the program.)   

Basically this chapter is summarized:  God is perfect, the Plan is perfect, and He's at the head of the Church so don't you ever question it.  (This really is not helpful at all to not even have a modicum of discussion about the fallibility and human understanding of leaders of our church.  How about even the McConkie quote from right after the 1978 revelation that he gave at BYU?  “It doesn’t make a particle of difference what anybody ever said about the Negro matter before the first day of June of this year.” “Anybody,” and “ever” are unequivocal. He also asked his audience to “[f]orget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young or . . . whomsoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world.”  I'm not saying that a revelation will come to give women priesthood.  But we are not even going to have a discussion about the fact that it is POSSIBLE in the future?)

Women Are Vital to the Success of the Lord’s Church
Sis Dew has a traditional definition of what it means to “contribute and participate in the church’.  In what other church can you see women praying, speaking in sacrament, leading organizations, teach, and organize activities.  Women are integral and have influence!
(I’m a little baffled by the fact that she thinks other churches don’t have women organizing and teaching and leading in children’s and youth programs and women’s organizations in other churches.  In Virginia I had friends who were Pentecosts, Baptists, and Evangelicals:  all of their churches had children's programs, youth programs, and women’s organizations that were led, taught, and organized by women (and sadly sometimes better than our own, AWANA sounds awesome, is all I’m saying).
Also I don’t think Ordain Women has ever said anything about women not having enough to do, as she implies.  I don't think the argument has ever been that we aren't participating or leading our own organizations.  So, moot point?) 

The Founding of the Relief Society
Back when the RS was founded, women in society were being repressed while women in the church were being elevated (this is true, Joseph Smith was a feminist)  It is wonderful the Church was much farther along than the world and we understood the importance of women and even ushered in the equality of women around the world.  (so how come in this section there is nothing about Emma, Eliza, and other women being ordained, not to the priesthood though - that they were authorized to anoint and bless by the laying on of hands?  That midwives performed annointings and blessings before child deliveries?  That George A. Smith asked for Eliza R. Snow to join the men as they laid hands on his head and gave him a blessing?)

A Legacy of Service
Eve was the one who made it possible for us to progress into mortality.  Faithful women through the ages have left a priceless legacy.  Talmage: the world’s greatest champion of woman and womanhood is Jesus the Christ.  (yes, the savior’s treatment of women was radical in his day - he was a Feminist and He is the reason I am, too!)

Today
“It is a wise priesthood leader who recognizes the value of sister leaders and expects and invites their full participation in ward or stake council.  And it is a wise auxiliary leader who learns how to speak up and be heard in a council without becoming domineering or inflexible and while always paying to those who hold priesthood keys the respect that those keys deserve.”

Not only do LDS women participate in the Church, they are integral to its vitality and governance.  (I agree.  We participate and are important.  The reason why so many men treat women as less in the church is because I think our policies don't reflect our doctrine.  Programs should be equal in structure and funding, more women should be put on councils not as someone to give input - but someone who has an equal vote.  And if it's over a mixed gender organization (welfare, education, sunday school, etc.) and equal number of men and women should sit on that board.  I am not equal because of my special-femaleness, I am equal because my ideas and experiences as a daughter of God deserve equal weight and treatment.)
Both Men and Women Have Access to God's Highest Spiritual Blessings
The thing that makes the Church unique is that we have “divine authority of the priesthood.”  (I agree.)  McConkie “where spiritual things are concerned, as pertaining to all 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 person righteousness--in all these things men and women stand in a position of absolute equality before the Lord.”

The Challenge of Understanding and Discussing Priesthood 
-People call men priesthood when they shouldn't
-The word “priesthood” is used to mean different things in different applications
    -keys, authority, power, blessing, holders or leaders
-Understanding priesthood is not simple; known only by personal revelation

The Father’s plan and the Savior’s church are designed to qualify all of us - both men and women - for exaltation.  Priesthood keys are the manner through which the Lord authorizes and disperses His power and authority throughout the Church for both men and women.  In the temple, both men and women are “endowed with the same power, which is by definition priesthood power.”  Neither a man nor a women may receive the highest ordinances of he priesthood or be exalted alone.  Women are to conceive children and men are to exercise the priesthood - but we share these things with each other (motherhood = priesthood, hmm)  She doesn't know why these are the roles and why we don't have clear answers regarding women's issues, but God is perfect and we walk in faith.  

She finally addresses Joseph's teaching about women healing by laying on of hands:

 “Respecting females administering for the healing of the sick… there could be no evil in it, if God gave His sanction by healing; that there could be no more sin in any female laying hands on and praying for the sick, than in wetting the face with water; it is no sin for anybody to administer that has faith, or if the sick have faith to be healed by their administrations.” (History of the Church, volume 4, pg. 604)

“Were the statements recorded accurately?  Was the Prophet’s reference to “administering to the sick” referring to only prayers of faith and comfort?  Had issues regarding women and priesthood not yet been fully revealed?  Was he anticipating women officiating in priesthood ordinances in the temple?  Were they allowed to because women often found themselves caring for their families alone?"

(I just don't even have words to respond to her perception of the historical facts of women having the authority (not priesthood authority) to anoint, heal, and bless by the laying on of hands through faith.  We all know the the Spiritual Gift of Healing is available to all?  It doesn't say in the scriptures only men can receive this gift, right?  Can Sis. Dew attempt to understand why some women are concerned that the level of power given to women in the past has been diminished through policy changes?) 

President Kimball reminded men “Our sisters do not wish to be indulged or to be treated condescendingly; they desire to be respected and revered as our sisters and our equals.  I mention this, my brethren, not because the doctrines or the teachings of the Church regarding women are in any doubt, but because in some situations, our behavior is of doubtful quality.”  Human weakness has been evident in how women are treated in the Church sometimes.  One of the most defining tests of this life may be about how we feel about the priesthood and treat those who hold it. 

Understanding The Keys, Authority, and Power of the Priesthood
Only certain priesthood holders hold certain keys in the Church.  Keys authorize the ordinances, authority required to perform the ordinances, those who receive ordinances have priesthood power available to them.Those men with keys can give some women authority, in the temple women have priesthood authority.  After going to the temple, women have direct access to priesthood power.  Women don’t have keys but preside over organizations.  Sister missionaries and women in the temple have been given authority to perform works by those with keys.  Elders have power to baptize, but can’t unless given authority by someone using keys.  Ordinances and covenants are our credentials for admission into his presence.  With the exception of female temple workers, only men have authority to officiate in ordinances of priesthood.  Authority and priesthood are two different things, women have been given divine authority  (so if the priesthood means the Power of god, the Authority of God, and the Keys of God; and women receive divine authority (which is from God) what makes divine authority different?  It's a sincere question)

Understanding Priesthood and Women
How does a woman, not ordained, draw on that power?  As an unmarried woman, she does have access to priesthood power in her home.  Women who are concerned about the priesthood, it has to to with who has priesthood keys, and we don’t know why only men get them but we walk in faith.
“While it is true that the mortals who hold keys are not perfect and do not always handle things flawlessly, our Father and His Son oversee all.  In their infinite wisdom and perfect knowledge and understanding, they have devised a plan and organized a Church designed to help us achieve our highest potential”
 
In the temple both men and women are endowed with the same power, which is priesthood power.
what does it mean to have access to priesthood power?  It means we receive revelation, can be blessed and aided by the ministering of angels, learn to part the veil that separates us from our HF, be strengthened to resist temptation, be protected, and be enlightened and made smarter than we are - all without any mortal intermediary.”  We access the power through our covenants. 

Learning the doctrine of the priesthood
She does not fully understand, but perhaps women receive blessings in DC 84 by believing and sustaining the priesthood.  When sealed we become one unit and what he has will be shared.

President Lee: “Pure womanhood plus priesthood means exaltation”

Hafen “Spouses need not perform same functions to be equal.  The woman’s innate spiritual instincts are like a moral magnet, pointing toward spiritual north.  The man’s presiding gift is the priesthood.  If the husband & 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”

Faith in God and His power
The things I don’t understand don’t negate what I do know.  (yikes, She implies that women who are annoyed with mortal perspectives of the priesthood may be consigned to lesser kingdoms because they didn’t not receive the gift of the priesthood)  What to women get?  everything.

God Reserved the High Privilege of Motherhood for Women
The world doesn’t recognize that the effectiveness of the Plan relies on the character, work, and faith of mothers.  

"Motherhood" is different than the "doctrine of motherhood".  Doctrine of motherhood = eternal privileges, responsibilities & endowments, and can only be exercised upon principles of righteousness.  Mortality requires women bearing children.  Motherhood is the divine, eternal and core nature of every woman.  Eve was the mother of all living before she had a child.  Mothers are saviors of men, men need the priesthood to become saviors of men.

Mother In Heaven
Sister Dew believes we don't talk about her because we are "protecting" her.  (That myth has been debunked by a BYU study that uncovered almost every recorded quote about her in the history of the Church.  The only written teaching about not talking about her to protect her is from a seminary teacher.  Which is at odds with what the prophets actually did, was continually talk about her.  I don't know why prophets don't talk about her now, but they certainly had hundreds and hundreds of things to say about her in the past.  And none of those things were about how she needs mortal silence for her protection.)
Loving and Leading 
“For every woman, the challenge is one of discerning the Lord’s will for her and then following the promptings of the Spirit.  None of our divine errands are exactly the same.”

Elder cook, “First, no woman should ever feel the need to apologize or feel that her contribution is less significant because she is devoting her primary efforts to raising and nurturing children.  nothing could be more significant in our Father in Heaven’s plan.  Second, we should all be careful not to be judgmental or assume that sisters are less valiant if the decision is made to work outside the home.  We rarely understand or fully appreciate people’s circumstances.”
 
Converted Women Can Change the World
The only things that matter are the things that matter to the Lord.  May we spend whatever time and make whatever effort is required to understand what our Father has given us.