Monday, September 15, 2014

LDS Abuse Survivor Support Group (LASS)

A friend of mine asked me to share about an online support community for victims of domestic violence/abuse (not a site about church abuse as you could mistakenly assume from the name). Before I had kids, I was a Visiting Teacher to a gal in an abusive relationship. I had no idea what was going on until she ran away from home with her baby. Before that, I honestly thought society had progressed enough that there was no longer domestic violence against women. Obviously I was too optimistic in that assumption.

Quoting from my friend, the group is "LDS Abuse Survivor Support (LASS), for victims of domestic abuse of all kinds. All of the contributors are anonymous because of the nature of the site and that makes it difficult to publicize. Part of the need for publicity is also to emphasize that this is a site about members who have been abused, NOT a site about church abuse. We are faithful women trying to solve the issues of abuse in our lives while retaining our faith in the Savior and his gospel.
"There are women you know right now who need this site, you probably would never suspect their need, but it is there and desperate. Please help me help our sisters in need. . . ." 
"It is my intention that this site be a long standing place of refuge, understanding, and support for women who need it, that it will be there when they search for it. . . . I also hope that by reaching more people with the site and its messages that we will inform the public about domestic violence so that they can provide good and healthy support when someone goes to them in need, including educating priesthood leaders."

Please share.

Thursday, August 28, 2014

Hi, I'm Emily and I'm . . . just a mom?

Today I went to a collaboration meeting in Salt Lake with several professionals.  We were asked to introduce ourselves, so people went around and said, "I'm so and so, and I work (or volunteer) for such and such." Then, as I was to introduce myself, I thought, what am I to say? I'm a mom, I do mom stuff. I know one time as I introduced myself directly to someone I said the word "just" and another time I deliberately avoided it. However, both times, I was semi (but kindly and supportively) reprimanded for belittling myself to the "only a mother" mindset, but I really didn't know what to say or how to describe myself.

I thought about it throughout the meeting and began brainstorming things I've been involved with over the years of my mom life.  It could go like this:

"Hi, I'm Emily. I'm a mom of 4, 1 boy and 3 girls. I've served on the PTA board a couple times, volunteered in Mrs. Rafferty's class, Mrs. Shorts' class, Mrs. Savage's class, Mrs. Lawrence's class, Ms. Trease's class (...) organized Ribbon Week, Mountain Man Rendezvous, helped with Patriot Day, volunteered at This Is the Place Heritage Park, like to recreate historic clothing, do my Visiting Teaching, teach Relief Society, help a little with Mormon Women Stand, blogged at Real Intent, have a chapter in Women of Faith in the Latter Days, blog a little (tiny bit here), make the Sacrament meeting programs, and helped with Cub Scouts."

And that is why we often say, "Hi, I'm Emily, and I'm, uh, just a mom." I think most moms have a list like this unless they have a company or organization to tie themselves to which is much easier to explain.

Tuesday, August 26, 2014


I wanted to write a longer review of Sharon Eubank's Fair Conference Address entitled, "This is a Woman's Church," (which, btw, is worth a read. Sharon is fantastic, in fact, I used to be her secretary!) but I don't think I'll take the time now because in the next few minutes I want to focus on Goddesses, of which she mentions one in her talk.  I'd actually like to take the time to do my own research and make this sound all scholarly, but for now, I'll just post some notes for future use, which is pretty much all I can do anymore.


Sharon said:
Now just as a complete side-note, the Romans had the goddess Hestia or Vesta. She’s a very interesting goddess. She’s a virgin goddess. She doesn’t have family, but she is in charge of all family relationships. And her symbol is the fire on the hearth and it symbolizes life and she is guarding that life. And she’s also the patron goddess of civilization. She’s the mother of Rome. And so her role is to connect all family relationships into a family unity and a local unity and a community and a civilization. So her work is all about weaving things together. And I think that that’s a nice symbolic representation of the role of women.
She continues:
In our scriptures, although we often talk about this scripture in terms of the temple . . ., this is Doctrine and Covenants 88 verse 119. . .  It says: “Organize yourselves; prepare every needful thing; and establish a house…” I don’t think it’s talking about a physical house or even the temple. I think it’s talking about a generation of life. It’s talking about a house in the same way that the Lord promised Jeroboam or David a house. It says: “…establish a house, even a house of prayer, a house of fasting, a house of faith, a house of learning, a house of glory, a house of order…” It’s a house of God. And that’s what I think women have stewardship, to establish that house. They have a particular, gender-based role to establish that house. And men have a corresponding gender-based role to establish that house or that generation of life.
I've started at least one blog post exploring men's duties as organizers of church/es and women as organizers of home and family. I didn't get to develop it very far and never posted it, but perhaps there is some truth to it. Women, by biology and duty and connection to children organize the home and pass on traditions. Yes, men do it too, but I'm not sure that bond to children, home, and family is as strong. Maybe I've mentioned it before, but one time I found a list of who organized churches throughout time in the world, and nearly all the examples were men.  I think that list (wherever it was) showed only one or two women as ever organizing churches.


So our Sunday School classes get a bit away from doctrine sometimes (ok, often), and on Sunday we were talking about how some scholars believe that Heavenly Father's wife's name was Asherah.  However, as it goes, her nature of true Goddess got perverted and she became the female counterpart to the false-god Baal.  The teacher mentioned something about her being associated with wisdom, though. And that's about all I know about that, but it would be interesting to research.


I should probably ask my friend Mary if I can share this, but she posted the idea on Facebook, so I give her all the credit for bringing it up.  Apparently, Egyptians had a strong belief that women were essential to male progression and power.

Mary wrote:
 "For example- the throne that this king (Osiris) is sitting on is Queen Isis's name or glyph. Meaning he derives his authority to rule as pharo, from her. But it get's better, the glyph of "the throne" with the little square in it, is a reference to the fact that her body creates life or "houses" life, so it's a drawing of a house inside the throne. . . . In the story Osiris (king and "father of all") is killed by the serpent, but Isis (queen and "mother of all living") saves the day by giving birth to his son (the kings son) So that Osiris is king of the underworld, and his son, Horus, is prince in the mortal sphere.  Meaning a woman's super power is to create life. It's not a virtue that the western world values, since we measure women on our ability to be as good as a man. . . .  So "Ma'at" is the (female) persona of wisdom justice and truth- all that keeps the earth in order. In this picture she accompanies the man into the presence of the Divine—Isis and Osiris. Her presence signifies that he is worthy to enter heaven. That was my question. Is she a symbol of righteousness like an endorsement? Or is she a real role/person? Michael Rhodes says both and pointed to similar rendering of the scene for many coffins, where the dead man was painted holding his wife's hand as though she was "ma'at."
What strikes me is that the man is only worthy WITH the woman.  I think of abuse cases where the husband is in no way worthy of the wife he abuses.  At the gates of Heaven will he be counted among the faithful with the stains of abuse on his heart?  My mortal view says no: he needed to live a life in harmony and unison with his wife, not of dominance.

D&C 131:
2 And in order to obtain the highest [degree of Glory], a man must enter into this order of the priesthood [meaning the new and everlasting covenant of marriage];
3 And if he does not, he cannot obtain it.

It's also interesting that the idea of wisdom is also associated with ma'at as with Asherah.

Heavenly Mother

Another friend, JT, and I can't find her original post, recently shared that while attending BYU's Education Week that she felt very much taught about Heavenly Mother, although the speakers weren't directly speaking of Her, it was more of a Spiritual thing.  I can't wait to hear JT's impressions and what spurred them on when/if she feels to share them.

As Eliza R. Snow said, "truth is reason; truth eternal tells me I've a mother there" and I believe we will come to know her better in time.

Boy Scout Values

Our son recently turned 11 and is now officially a BOY SCOUT! I have a few slight issues with Scouting and its deep-rooted connection with the LDS Church, but I really liked parts of their "Information for Parents" on the application form:

1. "The unit leader must be a good role model because our children's values and lives will be influenced by that leader."  You can say that again. You can't say the kids won't be influenced by the types of leaders the kids have.  They will know.  They will be influenced and I know what and what I don't want my kid influenced by.

2.  "BSA adult registration is restricted to qualified people who subscribe to the precepts of the Declaration of Religious Principle. . ."  So what is the Declaration of Religious Principle?

"The Boy Scouts of America maintains that no member can grow into the best kind of citizen without recognizing an obligation to God and, therefore, recognizes the religious element in the training of the member, but it is absolutely nonsectarian in its attitude toward that religious training.  Its policy is that the home and organization or group with which the member is connected shall give definite attention to religious life.  Only persons willing to subscribe to these precepts of the Declaration of Religious Principle. . . shall be entitled to . . . membership."  Loved it.  It reminds me of the Masons, how anyone of any faith can join, but it is to foster brotherhood.  Was Robert Baden-Powell a Mason?

Monday, June 30, 2014

The evolution of modern Aaronic Priesthood duties, such as passing the sacrament

Seven or eight years ago or more my husband and I had an interesting discussion with our bishop on the priesthood (he's a personal friend, so it was easy just talking about this stuff). Apparently our bishop had studied a lot about the priesthood and how the structure had changed over the years. He ended up giving me about an inch high stack of papers to read. I got through maybe half of the documents, then life got busy, and my priesthood study pile got stuck in the file drawer until the excitement as of late.

The other night I was reading a page from the Encyclopedia of Latter-Day Saint History on the Aaronic Priesthood. I don't know why, but knowing the history of how things came to be just helps my understanding usually, and I wanted to share. It's like when the ward leadership makes a decision and you think, what a weird decision, but then you learn later why what was done was done, and it all makes sense. Then, the next time your church leaders make a "weird" decision, you just think, aw, ok, there's probably some story behind that. 

Anyway, the encyclopedia first summarizes the offices of the Aaronic priesthood and the duties of each from D&C 20, 84, & 107:

Deacon: assist Teachers 

Teacher: watch over church members, prevent iniquity, lying, backbiting, evil speaking, see that members attend meetings and do their duties, conduct meetings, expound, exhort, teach, invite people to come to Christ.

Priest: preach, teach, expound, exhort, baptize, administer the sacrament, visit, teach member to pray and fulfill family duties, conduct meetings, ordain priests, teachers, and deacons.

Bishop: President of the Aaronic Priesthood

It's important to note that, "Through most of the nineteenth century, male adults filled the Aaronic Priesthood offices, assisted by a few youths."  I remember learning about the priesthood in seminary and thinking that Deacons, Teachers, and Priests did the things mentioned above; however, as an adult, those responsibilities just seem a little, well, too much to handle for such young kids.

The article then points out that there were actually four distinct periods of Aaronic Priesthood history, which really makes a lot of sense getting us from priesthood duties in the 1800s to priesthood duties now.

1. 1829-1845, pre-endowment: "Aaronic Priesthood bearers were adults (except for a few outstanding youths). Their primary duty was to visit members in their homes...."

2. 1846-1877, post-endowment leads to "acting" Aaronic Priesthood bearers: Since men who went on missions or got married received their endowment after the introduction of it in 1845, and a prerequisite to the endowment for men was the Melchizedek Priesthood, few adult men were left to fulfill Aaronic Priesthood duties, so they were called to serve as "acting priests, teachers, and deacons. Some boys received priesthood ordinations...."

3. 1877-1908, ordinations broaden to worthy young men from ages 11-18: "most became deacons and stayed such until becoming elders. Few boys blessed or passed the sacrament or did what is now called home teaching."

4. 1908-Present, Aaronic Priesthood restructured "to be a priesthood for boys. They approved that worthy boys be ordained at set ages and advance through each office: deacons at age 12, teachers at 15, priests at 18, and elders at 21. Church headquarters produced lesson manuals and assigned duties geared to these age levels. For ward teaching, ordained teachers and priests served as junior companion-apprentices to Melchizedek Priesthood holders. . ." (emphasis added to show that the boys were given age-appropriate duties; i.e., the duties have changed a bit from the early days of the Church).

"In 1928 the ages of 12, 15, and 18 were changed to 12, 15, and 17 . . . with the elders' age set at 20. That age was reduced to 18 in October 1934, but by December it was raised to 19. In 1954 the teachers' age became 14, and the priests' age was changed to 16, . . . and elders were ordained at age 20 (now 18)."

It seems to me that the Church wanted to maintain someone in the Aaronic priesthood, and boys would fit the bill, plus, it was the perfect training ground for their future Melchizedek Priesthood service.

I think changes happen so infrequently these days, that it seems nearly utterly shocking when things do change, such as the relatively recent changes to missionary age. Also, duties themselves can change, as they have over the years as mentioned above. One interesting example of duties changing actually involved girls in 1945! The Church News from April 21, 1945 reports that in the SLC 24th ward that there was a shortage of men/boys to collect fast offerings, so the Beehives were assigned to do it for two years. This tells me there's nothing inherently tied to boys collecting fast offerings, it's merely an age-appropriate assignment that helps prepare them for future responsibilities.

Sunday, June 29, 2014

Thoughts on Holland's "Exclusion or God's Plan"

I quite enjoyed David Holland's thoughts on "Exclusion or God's Plan."

Specifically I liked this contrast, "The idea is that just as men become fathers through a woman’s divinely endowed maternal capacity, so women become endowed with priesthood power through that same divine marriage. Through such a marriage, men and women can both be parents and they can both be priests—and thus through that relationship they both progress toward godliness—even as each retains certain complementary functional distinctions, such as the fact that men are responsible to hold priesthood office.  Mormons that make this case recognize that not all humans will have such a marriage in this life, but LDS theology provides for the fulfillment of such a union in the next. Latter-day Saints of this persuasion are inclined to quote St. Paul: "Neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord." 

There was one little sentence that rubbed me just a little wrong, and I wonder if it's because the thought was not completely developed? "Mormon priesthood isn’t just the right to lead a congregation or officiate over sacramental ceremonies. It's a deeply sacerdotal endowment that empowers its holders to speak, act, and heal in the name of God. It alters one’s relationship to the divine."

I felt a bit like he was saying that priesthood holders get to speak, act, and heal, and it makes them closer to God, and if you don't have it, you can't have those things. I don't know if that's really what he was saying, but that's how I interpreted it as I read.  As I mentioned in my recent post on the RS lesson I taught on the Oath and Covenant of the Priesthood, we DO speak and act for God (under priesthood authority) when we serve in our callings or when we serve missions. Additionally, some of us DO have the ability to heal if it is one of our spiritual gifts. I agree that we don't lead congregations in the same way as priesthood holders, nor do we officiate in sacramental ceremonies, and I'm perfectly okay with that. I also don't feel that by not holding the priesthood am I held back from my relationship with God.  Perhaps all Holland was saying, though, was that by having the priesthood, men are more able to do those things mentioned above? I suppose we could look at the flip side  of the last sentence and say child bearing and birth alters one's relationship to the divine, which it does, and I don't think men would be jealous. Anyway, I just wanted to put out there, that I don't feel held back by not holding the priesthood, whether that's what he was saying or not.

Update 6/30: You'll never believe who I got an e-mail from this morning, Brother Holland! It just goes to say, someone might actually read what you write! Ha! He expressed concern for the impression I took away and clarified that he meant that men and women share these duties because of the temple endowment, which if you read the first paragraph I posted, it says just that (which said paragraph actually did come AFTER the paragraph I posted second). So, I think my problem was taking the sentence out of context (as it was not yet completely developed yet), and not tying it into the overall message in the particular section of Holland's interview, which is what I did enjoy. So thank you, Brother Holland!

Wednesday, June 18, 2014

Spiritual Gifts, the Priesthood, and Faith like Potatoes

On Sunday I had the opportunity to teach the Joseph Fielding Smith Chapter 12 lesson on the Oath and Covenant of the Priesthood. Of women I've talked to, I don't think many were excited to teach such a lesson, but I was excited for the challenge as the priesthood is something I'm always trying to better understand. This lesson gave me the opportunity to really begin studying again some things I started studying a while ago.

As I began studying, I first needed to remember what the offices of the priesthood were. Then, I needed to figure out do all offices/officers hold keys? Are all offices part of a quorum?  What exactly are priesthood keys?  I wanted everyone to be on the same page with our basic understanding of priesthood organization.  After a lot of research, and coming up with more questions, and even more completely realizing the overlap and layers of the priesthood organization, I came up with the following chart/handout. I believe the information on it is accurate; however, I cannot confirm that it is complete.

Teaching the class was a SUPER experience. I received at least three answers to questions I had while teaching the lesson. I also realized that probably most people are just as confused as I am about the priesthood, which is why so many people are so intimidated when it comes to teaching a lesson about it.

Probably the most significant thing I learned, or at least I need to look into more, is concerning spiritual gifts. We read a quote in the lesson regarding what priesthood holders are to do; it mentioned 5 things:

1.  Preach the gospel
2.  Perform ordinances
3.  Bless mankind
4.  Heal the sick
5.  Perform miracles

I pointed out that we, as women also do these things, and we talked about examples. I wanted to be sure that women were comfortable with particularly the "heal the sick" point as it's not something we see a lot of in our day.  I mentioned how in Moroni (10:11) healing is a spiritual gift and if it is your gift you can use it. We clarified it is not a priesthood blessing with the laying on of hands, but an act and prayer of faith. One gal raised her hand (who told me later that she feels she has the spiritual gift of healing) and mentioned that the priesthood gives men the right to call upon whatever spiritual gift they need when they need it, thus, giving people more access to God's power more of the time (I added that last part).

That is when the lightbulb went on in my head. A few years ago we watched Faith like Potatoes. In the film, the main character raises someone from the dead. I experienced some cognitive dissonance because how could a non-priesthood holder heal or raise someone from the dead?  However, now I realized that if that is his personal spiritual gift from God, and all people have spiritual gifts, then of course it's possible. But, the priesthood allows more access to those spiritual gifts that may not be bestowed upon an individual. Now, I've never read anything that confirms this, it just made a lot of sense and I want to look into it further.

Because of the lesson, I want to study more about the different dispensations and what keys were present during those dispensations. There were more questions, but I'm too tired to remember.

The main points I wanted to leave with the sisters were that the priesthood is the power of God on the earth for the salvation of mankind. It's not just His power, it's His specific method to get his sons and daughters back. After doing initiatories the night before at the SL Temple, I also felt impressed to emphasize that we women act with authority in our callings and in the ordinances we perform.  Also, our goals and purposes are the same as priesthood holders: we are in the business of saving souls. I didn't say it, but I don't know why women don't need to be ordained because we already do, for the most part, the same things as men.*

Like I said, the lesson went really well, better than expected. It was one of those times when I felt guided in what I said; it all came out more smoothly than I would have thought. I hope it inspires more women to go out and learn more about the priesthood, too, and I hope I'll continue to learn.

*My speculations are that according to some, as men thrive in hierarchies like the priesthood, it's a good way to get men to do what they're supposed to. Additionally, I've toyed around with the idea that women are loosely "called" to organize home and family on the earth and men are loosely "called" to organize churches on the earth, with a lot of overlap between the two. One time I looked up how many women organized churches throughout recorded history and of all the religions, I think two had been started by women, although I can't find the source right now.  I read Mormonism, Feminsm, and Being Snarky today, and that's pretty much how I feel about it all, too.