The Beginning of Better Days - Virginia H. Pearce section

For Mother's Day, my husband knew I wanted a copy of The Beginning of Better Days by Sheri Dew and Virginia Pearce, so he picked one up for me.  I didn't really know what it was about, other than I knew it was historical in nature, about women, and good.  I'd also heard it rumored by the Bloggernacle whiners that it was Dew & Pearce's attempt to create a better version, their own version with more guts, of Daughters in My Kingdom.

Let me just start off by saying, it is not an attempt to show that DIMK was failed in purpose and needed a replacement.  DIMK is a brief history of women in the Church; The Beginning of Better Days is a portion of the original Relief Society Minutes taken by Eliza R. Snow of the teachings of Joseph Smith.  It also includes Dew's and Pearce's insights on the teachings, and in fact, directly addresses many of the concerns of modern Mormon feminists.

I actually considered entitling this post, Who are the Real Mormon Feminists?, but didn't want to cause an uproar, nor did I want to identify Dew and Pearce with the word feminism if they don't want to be.  But, this book is incredible.  Dew and Pearce don't shy away from the tough questions.  They question faithfully.  I surely planned to do a post about the book once I was done, but I've had so many thoughts about it as I've read, I want to do some smaller posts as I go.

So, today's post is only on Virginia Pearce's section, "Angels and Epiphanies."

On page 7, I love how she points out that we have to bring in historical context as we study the teachings of Joseph Smith.  It's just as when we study other scriptures.  We have to separate the principle from the "historical circumstances," then apply that principle to our lives.

On page 9, she reminds us that in 1842 when the sermons were given and the RS was organized, that women "rarely held offices in male-dominated organizations."  She comments that as women in the Church that we "have the opportunity and responsibility to help solve problems and attend to needs."

On page 14, she mentions that Joseph stated that women specifically "'have feelings of charity.'"  I've heard this from him and I've heard similar sentiments from MANY others.  I want to believe there is something special and unique in this statement, and I see that quality in women myself, but so many people say, "well men have that quality, too.  There is nothing in women that makes them more charitable over men."  I guess I want to see some studies showing that Joseph was right.

On page 15, I loved how Pearce reminds us of the historical context of lots of immigrants in Nauvoo , and people needed to be extra charitable as they were trying to understand new people and new cultures.  Similarly, on page 16, she points out how Joseph taught the women to "refrain from self-righteousness and gossip" particularly in light of the rumors about plural marriage and the fraudulent practice of "spiritual wifery" of John C. Bennet.  What a confusing time that would be!

On page 23, I liked how Pearce states she won't be offended when someone says men get the priesthood and women get to bear children, "but that explanation doesn't really resonate with me either."  I get it more than I used to after reading Cassler's works, but I'm not fully sold on it, or maybe I still don't completely understand it.  Anyway, I'm glad to know Pearce doesn't totally get that one either.

On page 24, Pearce reminds us that "'The priesthood' isn't the congregation of men who meet together each Sunday," but it is God's power.  On 25 and 26, I loved learning Pearce's journey through trying to understand how and why women in the early restored Church healed people and why we don't do that today.

On page 28, Pearce mentions how in the early days of the Church, worthiness was a prerequisite for membership in the Relief Society.  I knew that, but she shares details that suggest that Relief Society was practically a temple preparation class taught by the Prophet.  When you look at it that way, of course you would need to be worthy to be a member.

On page 30, she concludes that everything she is has to do with the temple and living up to her privileges that are offered there.

Anyway, I loved her essay and absolutely recommend it.  I love that she asks tough questions, yet looks and waits for faithful answers.  When I was done reading her essay, I thought, Wow!  I want to be just like her when I grow up!

National Council of Women

Belle Spafford at an International Council of Women convention

Image from lds.org

When I read Chapter 6 of Daughters in My Kingdom, I quite enjoyed the story about Belle Spafford and the National Council of Women.  According to DIMK, after being involved in the organization for some time, she (and the other Church ladies) weren't getting anything out of it anymore and wanted to discontinue their association.

Today I was reading chapter 24 of the George Albert Smith book, which gave another little detail about the situation. Apparently certain "members of the council had been antagonistic toward the Church and had embarrassed Latter-day Saint delegates at its meetings" (GAS, 257).  Wow!  I love learning about when there's more to the story!

So, if you put the two sources together, this is the story you get (highlighted text is from GAS, other text is from DIMK):

Sister Spafford learned a great lesson from President George Albert Smith about sharing the Church’s values with the women of the world. Soon after she was sustained as Relief Society general president, “a letter came from the National Council of Women, announcing their annual meeting to be held in New York City.

“Sister Spafford had attended those meetings before, and in view of her previous experience, she and her counselors carefully considered the invitation for several weeks.

“They decided to recommend to the President of the Church that the Relief Society terminate its membership in those councils. They prepared a statement of recommendation, listing all of the reasons for so doing.

Sister Belle S. Spafford, general president of the Relief Society, shared an experience in which President Smith taught her this principle. Shortly after being called to her position, Sister Spafford was notified of a meeting to be held in New York City by the National Council of Women. The Relief Society had been a member of that council for many years, but recently several other members of the council had been antagonistic toward the Church and had embarrassed Latter-day Saint delegates at its meetings. Because of this, Sister Spafford and her counselors felt that the Relief Society should terminate its membership in the council, and they drafted a recommendation expressing their views.

“Trembling and uncertain, Sister Spafford placed the paper on the desk of President George Albert Smith, saying, ‘The Relief Society Presidency wishes to recommend that the General Board terminate its membership in the National Council and in the International Council of Women, for the reasons listed on this paper.’

“President Smith carefully read the paper. Had they not held membership for well over half a century? he inquired.

“Sister Spafford explained how costly it was to go to New York, the time it took, and described the humiliation they occasionally experienced. She recommended that they withdraw because ‘we don’t get a thing from these councils.’

“This wise, old prophet tipped back in his chair and looked at her with a disturbed expression. ‘You want to withdraw because you don’t get anything out of it?’ he questioned.

“‘That is our feeling,’ she replied.

“‘Tell me,’ he said, ‘what is it that you are putting into it?

“‘Sister Spafford,’ he continued, ‘you surprise me. Do you always think in terms of what you get? Don’t you think also in terms of what you have to give?’

“He returned that paper to her and extended his hand. With considerable firmness he said, ‘You continue your membership in these councils and make your influence felt.’”¹²

 Sister Spafford later recounted:

“By appointment one morning, I went alone to see President George Albert Smith, taking the recommendation with me, together with a list of the reasons why the recommendation was being made. The President carefully read the typed material. Then he inquired, ‘Isn’t this the organization which the sisters joined before the turn of the century?’

“I said, ‘Yes, sir.’

“He said, ‘Am I then to understand that you now wish to terminate that membership?’

“I said, ‘Yes, sir.’ Then I added, ‘You know, President Smith, we don’t get anything from the Council.’

“The President looked at me with surprise. He said, ‘Sister Spafford, do you always think in terms of what you get? Don’t you think it is well at times to think in terms of what you have to give? I believe,’ he continued, ‘that Mormon women have something to give to the women of the world, and that they may also learn from them. Rather than have you terminate your membership, I suggest that you take several of your ablest board members and go back to this meeting.’

“Then he said with emphasis, ‘Make your influence felt.’”

She did make her influence felt. She participated in the National Council of Women and the International Council of Women and held leadership positions in those organizations for years. She stood strong for the principles of the gospel of Jesus Christ and for the purposes of Relief Society.

Sister Spafford obeyed this counsel and was later appointed to leadership positions in the National Council of Women, eventually being elected its president.

Every time Sister Spafford went to the International Council of Women (ICW), she was assigned to the “social and moral welfare” session. She recounted:

“At one time I protested going back into the social and moral welfare [session], and I was very friendly at that time with the ICW president. … I said, ‘I go all the time to this session, and it’s just getting so sordid that I’d like a change.’ She said, ‘Well, you’re certainly entitled to one, and I’ll see that you get it.’

“Then she came back and said, ‘We can’t grant your request because your own council insists that you remain in the social and moral welfare.’ She said, ‘It may be of interest to you to know the reason. Your national president says you always stand by the position of your Church in these matters and they know the position of the Mormon Church and they feel there is safety in having you there.’”¹³

Women in these organizations knew that their friend Belle Spafford would stand by the Church’s principles, and they needed that kind of wisdom and strength. In 1954 she was chosen as the leader of the United States delegation at the International Council of Women in Helsinki, Finland. As she led a grand march at the opening of the conference, her thoughts went back in time:

“As I looked out at the glittering audience made up of people of many nations … , my mind suddenly flashed back to the words of our pioneer [Relief Society] leaders … ‘standing as we do at the head of the women of the world,’ … ‘for the rights of the women of Zion and the rights of the women of all nations.’ … I knew that our pioneer women leaders had been given by divine insight a knowledge of the destiny of Relief Society. … It is my conviction that the time had come for Relief Society’s influence to be felt worldwide among womankind.”¹⁴

In 1987 the First Presidency counseled the Relief Society to withdraw from the National Council of Women and the International Council of Women. The time had come for the Relief Society general presidency to focus more energy on their rapidly growing worldwide organization rather than on other nationwide and worldwide causes. But as the Church has grown, Latter-day Saint women have continued to make their influence felt all over the world—in their communities, schools, and worthy local organizations. They have followed the pattern established by President Smith and Sister Spafford, thinking in terms of what they can give, not what they might get.

Daughters in My Kingdom: Chapter 4

In chapter 4 of Daughters in My Kingdom, "A Wide and Extensive Sphere of Action," the Relief Society is somewhat reorganized after 20 years (p. 41) of no formal organization.  Brigham Young encourages bishops to seek out those in need and to enlist the help of the sisters in this effort.  Fourteen years later (p. 44), Eliza R. Snow is officially called as general Relief Society President. 

Organization
I've often wondered why approximately 34 years went by with no formal Relief Society!  All I can see on the matter is on page 41 when Brigham Young says, "Some may think this is a trifling thing, but it is not. . . . "  It is unclear as to is this trifling to the women or to the men.  If it's in reference to the women, that would indicate they were somewhat indifferent on being organized.  However, Brigham Young also states, ". . .you will find that the sisters will be the mainspring of the movement," which indicates to me that the women were pretty excited about their reorganization.  Again, this is a topic I'd like to learn more about.

Another indicator that the women were happy about this is expressed in something Eliza R. Snow said on page 44:  "If any of the daughters and mothers in Israel are feeling in the least [limited] in their present spheres, they will now find ample scope for every power and capability for doing good with which they are most liberally endowed."  That tells me that women were excited for a bit of work to do outside their homes, just as most of us all feel a bit of relief with being useful outside the home (not that we don't want to be useful inside the home, but it's nice to have access to a bigger sphere sometimes).

Polygamy
I'm always impressed by the women who married into polygamy and defended it (p. 46).  It was the standard they were tied to and the commitment they made.  It's good they upheld their covenants.  I'm glad we don't have to uphold what they did! 

I liked that these women spoke up for themselves: "It was high time [to] rise up in the dignity of our calling and speak for ourselves. . . .  The world does not know us, and truth and justice to our brethren and to ourselves demands us to speak. . . .   We are not inferior to the ladies of the world, and we do not want to appear so" (p. 47).  Now contrast that to the "fundamental Mormons" who practice polygamy today (if you are unfamiliar with them and us, they are NOT members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints/LDS Mormons).  You sadly don't see the fundamentalist ladies being able to speak up for themselves and their husbands, and you hear many stories where they are considered inferior.  (I'm sorry, I usually try and keep my posts positive, but the contrast is just so obvious here.)

Speaking Up
I loved the story on page 49 about Emily Richards learning to speak in a meeting:  "The first time [Eliza R. Snow] asked me to speak in meeting, I could not, and she said, 'Never mind, but when you are asked to speak again, try and have something to say,' and I did."  She "continued to improve her ability as a public speaker, and in 1889 she spoke at the National Woman Suffrage Association convention in Washington, D.C."  WOW, that's progress!

I also liked the quote by President Kimball (p. 50) that "Relief Society sisters will become a powerful influence for good upon the 'good women of the world.'"  I hope we are, and I'm grateful for the good women out there that I look up to that are not of my LDS faith.


The Balance
The balance of chapter 4 is mainly about temporal self-reliance and projects the women were involved in such as sewing, wheat storage, health care and medical education, and suffrage.  On page 58, Eliza R. Snow is quoted as saying: "Our sphere of action will continually widen, and no woman in Zion need[s] to mourn because her sphere is too narrow. . . .  Let your first business be to perform your duties at home.  But inasmuch as you are wise stewards, you will find time for social duties. . . .    . . . You will find that your capacity will increase, and you will be astonished at what you can accomplish."  Those women had the same balancing act we do today.

Daughters in My Kingdom: Chapter 3

I'm really going to make it through posting my notes/thoughts/questions regarding Daughters in My Kingdom one of these days.  This post shouldn't be long.  Chapter 3 - "Cleave unto the Covenants" Exodus, Migration, and Settlement was pretty straight forward.

In the chapter we learn that before 1846 the "formal organization of the Female Relief Society was discontinued. . . " (29).  That is sad, but the sisters still did work to help others, just not in such an organized fashion.  The book does not mention reasons the RS was discontinued, but as far as I understand, at least one reason was that Brigham Young was upset that Emma Smith was teaching against polygamy at RS meetings.  I apologize that I can't cite that reference, but I'm going to guess it was one of the podcasts on the Mormon Channel.  I'm just guessing there because I don't go seeking out anti-LDS literature, so I probably heard it from a pretty safe source -- but, I could be wrong.  It would be nice to know additional reasons for the discontinuation, and we could guess some reasons.  I'd have to figure that the Church was just trying to simplify at the time as they were leaving Nauvoo, and there just wasn't the strength and time to continue the organization.

It's amazing that "More than 5,000 Saints thronged the Nauvoo Temple after its dedication so they could receive the endowment and sealing ordinance. . ." (29).  Can't you imagine the excitement of receiving this newly revealed knowledge and protection before this long trek West?  It would give me so much strength.  I do wonder if the Saints were scared and if the temple would give me more courage BOTH temporally AND spiritually.

As the above quote mentions, people were sealed, and I'm reminded of V.H. Cassler's Polygamy article where she mentions that often women were sealed to Church General Authorities to assure their salvation, while husbands were sealed as children to the union created between the woman and the GA.  I wonder if that is some of what was happening in Nauvoo.  If you're unfamiliar with the LDS Church today, that's not the way we do it anymore.  A husband and wife are sealed (bound for eternity) to each other, and children born into that union are automatically sealed (tied for eternity) to their parents.

On page 31, we learn that "during the migration, the ratio of men to women and children was low."  "'Few men were left to raise grain and vegetables and protect he women and children. . . .'  The Saints were blessed by priethood power. . . .  They were also sustained by the sisters' faith in God, charity, strength, and prayers.  With illness rampant, the sisters served as doctors and nurses to their own families and to one another. . . ."  Although the book does not mention it, here could be a good time to remember the practice of "female ritual healing" (as written by Stapley & Wright) where the women actually did bless those in need -- not through an actual priesthood blessing, but more through a faith blessing.  Heather at Women in the Scriptures taught a lesson that touched on healing/blessings given by women, if you want to read it.  (1/15/12 update:  Also, D.H. Oaks addresses women giving blessings in the early days of the Church in a address from 1992 and reminds us that the church was not fully organized at that point in time:  there were no temples. Once the temples were built, these sacred ordinances/blessings would be performed there.)  I'd suppose it was quite a relief to the women to know that they were authorized to bless as needed, particularly if men weren't around to give a priesthood blessing.  It was probably a very empowering feeling.

I suppose a logical explanation for the practice of polygamy can relate here in a couple ways.  With this high ratio of females to males, polygamy allowed women to receive the sealing ordinance before coming west.  If the requirement were 1:1, so many women wouldn't have been able to receive the ordinance.  On a practical note, it seems that polygamy had the potential to bind adult women together as a team (sure some women were already sisters and probably felt like team, but some weren't).  On that arduous trek, wouldn't it be nice to be surrounded by family -- particularly other adults? 


The great Mormon Exodus and settlement in the Salt Lake Valley have always been a favorite topic of mine, so I enjoyed reading the chapter as well as the examples of faithful women in it.

Daughters in My Kingdom: Chapter 2

So it's been a while since I've written about Daughters in My Kingdom.  I'm sick with a cold and probably food poisoning, so it will give me something to do.  Chapter 2 is entitled, '"Something Better" The Female Relief Society of Nauvoo.' How appropriate as I'm missing our ward RS dinner tonight I can reflect on the history of the RS.

I've always wondered what it meant to "organize the women . . . after the pattern of the priesthood" (12) (1/15/12 update - DH Oaks gave a great talk relating to this.).  It's still not totally clear to me, but one way was that the women who were asked to serve were set apart through a blessing, just as men are ordained to the priesthood -- not something that would happen in other women's groups of the day.  In the Church today, we still set apart people to positions of service.

Another term that always makes me want more info is when Emma Smith is called "an elect lady."  I think I've always been taught that it meant that she was righteous and predestined to fulfill the position.  Now that's not explained in the book, but I believe it's in one of the Mormon Channel podcasts on Emma that it explains that when Emma was called to the position, the group was asked to raise hands to support her, as in "elected" -- this type of "sustaining" action is still done today.  Maybe this podcast? on Emma or this one on the Organization of the RS.

Additionally, in regards to organizing the RS, I guess I have always felt the RS and Priesthood/Men were organized differently -- yet they're supposed to be so much the same.  I started thinking about how they could be organized differently and, therefore, feel more similar to me.  Other than actually "holding" the priesthood, I'd guess the biggest difference is that the boys when they're 12 and receive the Aaronic Priesthood start their associations with other men in the ward (priesthood opening exercises).  For the girls, this doesn't really happen until they are are 18 and actually become members of RS.  I think more and more now, though, young women (12+) are being included on occasion with the 18+ group, but maybe if the younger women were included when they also turned 12, like the boys, they'd feel more involved/important?  I do wonder why there isn't an opening exercises for all the females 12 and up just like there is for the males.  I'm sure there's a reason, I just don't know what it is.

On page 14, it mentions Emma's responsibility to compile hymns for the Church.  It doesn't mention, though, how much W.W. Phelps also had to do with it, which I didn't know until I listened to this podcast from the Mormon Channel.

One thing that confused me a little bit in looking at the wording from back then is where Joseph Smith turns "the key" to the Relief Society.  I'm guessing this means the "key" (14) to govern the RS?  From my understanding now, keys are tied to the priesthood, yet because the women don't hold the priesthood, I wouldn't think they really held the "key"?  Maybe it just means they were authorized to organize.

I was fascinated when I learned that not all women in the early days of the Church were included in the RS -- they had to "petition to belong, and they were accepted based on their goodness and virtue" (15).  I found this interesting because, if I remember correctly, too, not all men were priesthood holders either back then.  Now days, all women over 18 are included in the RS and all men/boys over 12, in good, active standing, receive an order/level of the priesthood.

I was surprised that there was no mention that to be a member of the RS, women had to pay dues (even up until the last century if I remember correctly).  To me, when I learned that detail at another point in my life, it made RS that much more significant.  I thought, if I had to PAY to belong to RS, how would that change my perspective of it?  Would I be more involved in it?  Would I take it more seriously?  Would I show up to my RS activities more often?  Would I try to bond with the other sisters more?   Because I don't pay dues, I think in the past I'd really taken RS for granted.  So, maybe in the book, the editors felt it was an insignificant fact, but to me, paying to belong to something is a big deal because it shows one's dedication to it.  The more we sacrifice for something, the more important it is to us.  (However, I can see the desire of Church leaders for inclusion of ALL women in the Church, so I can see some good benefits in opening membership up to all...)

I liked where Joseph Smith said, "You are now placed in a situation where you can act according to those sympathies which God has planted in your bosoms" (16).  Because of the organization of the RS, the women were able to act in an organized manner beyond their typical household roles.  If any of them had desires to serve outside the home, this was a great way they could be involved.  However, the book also mentions the women "never lost sight of their responsibilities toward their own families and homes" (18).  Well I'd sure hope not!  If they'd lost focus of that, they wouldn't have survived!

I also liked learning that at RS meetings, women were taught by Joseph Smith "to seek their own salvation. . . all must do it for themselves. . . none can do it for another" (17).  In one of the Joseph Smith Papers podcasts (sorry, can't remember which one), I learned that in that day, women of other faiths were taught that their salvation was tied to their husband's.  So if you had a lousy husband, I guess that meant you couldn't go to heaven.  How terrible.  This did bring up a question, though.  In V.H. Cassler's essay on polygamy, she points out that it was common for a woman to be sealed to a Church General Authority (and her husband to be sealed into that union as a child) to guarantee her salvation.  Obviously there was some confusion there because she didn't need to be sealed to a GA, she just needed to be sealed.  Now days we are obviously sealed in the temple to our husbands, and we, as individuals prove our own worthiness independent of the actions of our spouse.

I really liked, "Let this society teach how to act towards husbands, to treat them with mildness and affection.  When a man is borne down with trouble -- when he is perplexed, if he can meet with mildness, it will calm down his soul and sooth his feelings. . . . When you go home never give a cross word, but let kindness, charity and love, crown your works" (19)  Now I know some women will be offended by this and I admit I thought, now why do I have to be so nice? but the quote shows me that women back then weren't much different than we are today.  They needed to bite their tongues just as much as we do.  And, just to make it fair, men were taught to "love, cherish, and nourish his wife" and "regard her feelings with tenderness."  So, it wasn't only the women who were asked to be nice.

Daughters in My Kingdom: Chapter 1

Relief Society:  A Restoration of an Ancient Pattern

I enjoyed this first chapter in Daughters in My Kingdom regarding the ancient church of Jesus Christ.  The chapter mentioned how Christ "demonstrated deep familiarity with women's lives and drew timeless gospel lessons from their every day experiences." It mentioned that little is known about the early "formal organization of women in the New Testament" and that women "met and prayed together with the Apostles" (p. 3).  The chapter mentioned Mary and Martha and several other stories of women in the NT (p. 4).

I think I came away with several questions after reading this chapter.  I read it under the assumption that women were probably second-class back then (but I'd like to know more), so I found it significant that Christ even acknowledged them.  I also assumed that even men were not so organized back then -- at least there's not much record of it in the NT (well I guess you can look at all the social groups:  pharisees, sadduces, etc., but I don't know how "formal" those groups were, and I guess they wouldn't be considered Christian organizations -- obviously I could study this); at least is seems the only official record of early Christan organization is that of the 12 Apostles. So, to me, it's significant that women were even acknowledged and some men were organized. 

I wonder more about why have women been put down in society so many times?  Are men just more power hungry?  Are they bigger and stronger, so they feel entitled to power?  How much are women mentioned in other writings from this era in history?  Are more women mentioned in the NT than in similar writings?

I've learned to love Paul's counsel to Titus to "encourage older women to serve and teach young women about their eternal roles as wives and mothers. . ." (p. 5).  I'm really coming to appreciate the advice of women who have done this child-raising stuff before.  There is NO reason for me to think I know it all; I can use the advice of older women to my advantage.  Why reinvent the wheel?

I really loved the example of Dorcas/Tabitha and how she made clothes for widows.  I've learned a bit about historical clothing and have learned that clothing was not cheap back then, and obviously labor intensive.  Was she wealthy?  Either way, the time to sew and the cost to purchase goods was surely substantial.  Sounds like she gave her all and the widows loved her (p. 6).

We've always been told that the Relief Society was organized after the pattern of the priesthood.  That's always been a slightly confusing statement to me because RS is not organized into little groups like deacons, teachers, priests, elders, high priests, or Aaronic/Melchizedek Priesthood and we don't seem to have quite the same responsibilities.  We're just organized into one big group of women, and some of us are pulled out of that big group to help in Young Women's or Primary.  However, I've come to interpret the statement as meaning Relief Society is (and was) organized through inspiration; those in leadership positions are set apart; they operate with counselors -- just as most all auxilaries in the church.

An even more clarifying statement was made by Julie Beck at the General RS Meeting last night.  She said something along the lines of the RS being organized after the pattern of discipleship.  I fully expected her to say "the priesthood," but she didn't.  This pattern of discipleship clarifies the role of women. The book states that we are dignified, noble, needed, valued, and serviceable (p. 7) -- qualities of disciples.  The Relief Society is a way for us women to be organized and to act officially in the name of the Church.  If we weren't so organized, I don't believe we'd be able to do as much good.

Daughters In My Kingdom: Chapter 7

I'm done!  I'm done, I'm done!  I finished this wonderful little book!  I read the chapters that seemed most interesting to me first, leaving "'Pure Religion' Watchcare and Ministering through Visiting Teaching" for last, BUT this has actually been my most favorite chapter, so, I'm going to write about it first!

I loved the examples of Visiting Teaching and learned so much about the goals of Visiting Teaching.  After all the lessons, and lessons, and lessons on Visiting Teaching, I didn't think I could learn anymore.

I loved learning how VTing got started:  "RS leaders appointed a visiting committee of four sister for each ward.  [Their] most visible responsibilities were to assess needs and collect donations. . . .  Generally the sisters who were assigned to go visiting went with baskets in hand, receiving items such as matches, rice, baking soda, and bottles of fruit. . . " (106).  Now maybe I knew this and had forgotten, but could you imagine going Visiting Teaching and asking for money and goods!?  It's cool they they did this, but I'm glad I don't have to!  I also thought, 4 women?  That really is quite a burden to visit all the women in a ward with only 4!

I liked reading how Eliza R. Snow "counseled visiting teachers to prepare themselves spiritually before they visited homes so they would be able to ascertain and meet spiritual needs as well as temporal ones. . . ." (108). I don't know if Eliza R. Snow was a visiting teacher at the time of this instance from the life of my great-great grandmother after her husband died as recorded by her brother, but Eliza's actions demonstrate being guided by the Spirit:

One day Sister Eliza Snow with Sister Smoot took a walk together, when they came to my Sisters house in the 20th ward, she felt impressed to call in.  My mother was in the house at the time attending to Margaret, Sister Snow had never been in the house before, she did not know that Margaret was sick, she was led by the spirit of the Lord, she laid her hands on Margaret’s head and blessed her., that she would live and the Angels of God would preserve her.  Her enemies would not have any power over her and she would conquior her enemies.  Her words seemed to strenghten her faith and she began to amend from that time, and prospered.  She also blessed my mother. . .  (page 30 of Gibson Condie's Diary -- typescript.  A holograph can be found at the FHL in SLC, the years are 1864-65).

I also read in the chapter an example about a woman who "had been detailed by the Relief Society . . . to watch over and administer to the sick woman. . . ."  In modern day, we would interpret "administer" as just "minister" or "care for"; however, I wonder if in that instance, it was to actually bless, just as Eliza R. Snow blessed my great-great grandma.  (For more on the topic, see Stapley, Jonathan A. and Wright, Kristine, Female Ritual Healing in Mormonism (January 1, 2011). Journal of Mormon History, Vol. 37, pp. 1-85, Winter 2011. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1754069).  Daughters in My Kingdom does not go into the topic of "female ritual healing," which I would like to know more about from an official Church standpoint, but this is at least a start in understanding the topic.

In 1916, VTers were "asked to discuss a gospel topic each month as well as providing a temporal service" (108).  I know we often leave VTing assignments with a "Let us know if there's anything we can do to help!" but what if we actually took that seriously as an ASSIGNMENT to provide a temporal service?  Wow.  If we did this, I think we'd better connect as sisters through temporal work, just was we should connect with our children/families through physical labor.  I think we'd also open up emotionally more than we do.


In 1944 (8 years after the start of the Church's Welfare plan), the assignment of RS sisters collecting funds was discontinued (108).  That did make a lot of sense because it was as though there were two Welfare plans:  RS Welfare and Church Welfare.  With the consolidation, things would be more efficient.    I don't know when collection of Fast Offerings came about, but, again, it seems like an unnecessary duplication of efforts from the brothers and the sisters.  Even today, the RS President still plays a BIG role in the Welfare plan, just as she did a long time ago.

I enjoyed the section on seeking spiritual guidance and was reminded to do better in that area (114).  I also liked the Questions Visiting Teachers Can Ask on page 115.  They are pretty personal, but if we go about first being a friend to those we visit teach, then those are natural questions from a friend to a friend.

1.  What worries or concerns do you have?

2.  What questions do you have about the gospel or Church?

3.  Would you allow us to help you with _____?  Note, it doesn't say, "Let us know if we can help! :) :)"

I liked Sister Smoot's advice:  "My desire is to plead with our sisters to stop worrying about a phone call or a quarterly or monthly visit . . . and concentrate instead on nurturing tender souls" (117).

I loved Pres. Kimball's quote:  "You are going to save souls, and who can tell but that many of the fine active people in the Church today are active because you were in their homes. . ." (117).  I've witnessed this and know it to be true.  I'll have to have my friend write a post about it.

Reading about the great efforts of visiting teachers from the past encourages me to be a better visiting teacher.  I'm impressed at how temporal visiting teaching was, yet now the main focus seems to be spiritual.  I loved the stories in this chapter; they were so encouraging and made me cry.  Overall, I think the feel I got from this chapter is to be a friend with a Gospel message.  I think we do a pretty good job at showing up, but do we really connect?  Do we really show we care?  Do we show real charity?  That is what I need to focus on.  Wonderful chapter; so much great stuff in it.

Daughters in My Kingdom: Foreword and Preface

I've been having a fun time reading the new Daughters in My Kingdom book.  Is that sick and wrong?  Fun?  When you really like history, yes, it is (usually) fun to read history.  I've also been torn because I'm writing a chapter on an ancestor for Women of Faith in the Latter-days, Volume 2.  I really need to be working on that, but I also really want to be reading this and blogging about it. And, I don't know how many people actually read this blog, but I'm 15 weeks pregnant, and of course, that makes everything just a little bit more complicated.

Anyway, enough about me, on with the book.  Kathryn at a Well-Behaved Mormon Woman posted her initial thoughts on the book, but I wanted to do more of a chapter-by-chapter review on the book.  Well, I don't know if  review is the right word, but I wanted to share my thoughts like Stephanie does about General Conference over at Diapers and Divinity.  If you feel so inclined to share your thoughts, please do, or even share a link to your own posts.  It's fun to discuss -- especially for those of us who don't get to go to RS -- not that this will necessarily be taught in RS, but it might on occasion.

As the blog post title indicates, I wanted to comment on the foreword and the preface.

I liked how the First Presidency message in the foreword mentioned that we women are "dedicated disciples."  How lovely is that?  Just like Mary and Martha and other women in the scriptures.

When I read that we "help strengthen families and build up the kingdom," I realized that women without their own families may have a hard time with this, but the strengthening doesn't have to be in one's own family.  We can help and support other people's families (the book goes on in a later chapter to address this in more detail).  Coming from someone who has a family of her own, I'm sure this can sound very insensitive to someone who does not have a family and wants one.  I can only imagine how hard that must be, but honestly, yes, we young moms with little kids would love any help anyone wants to give if you are willing to give it.

I also thought the "strengthen families" phrase really doesn't have to apply to just us in the LDS Church.  We can and need to help strengthen families all over the world.  There are so many good people throughout the globe also in support of the family, and we need to bind together.

OK, this could take a while.  I think I'd better not comment on everything.

I think it is good to remember that "this book is not a chronological history, nor is it an attempt to provide a comprehensive view of all that the Relief Society has accomplished" (xii).  As I have read, I find I do want to know more!!  The basics are there, but some of the more confusing/deep stuff is not.  A-ha!  Maybe that's why it's not there -- because it's not clear to anyone in the modern day, so they figured they'd leave it out or just touch on it briefly (such as "female ritual healing" and polygamy).

"We know that women who have deep appreciation for the past will be concerned about shaping a righteous future" (xii).  Amen.  Why I love history.

"...the women of the church have united with men who hold the priesthood to build God's kingdom..." (xii).  We are united -- definitely.  We have to be or the plan will fail.

"The value in this book is not so much in the dates and facts it provides but in the purposes, principles, and patterns it teaches" (xiii).  I believe this book is doing just that.  Why do we have Relief Society?  Of course it would still be nice to have a comprehensive history, but learning the purpose of the Relief Society is a starting point.

I like that the book is written by women (Susan Tanner - xiv) for women.  Some people complain that this isn't a lesson manual for both the men and women, but a lot that's in the book isn't necessarily what men (or women) NEED to know (for salvation), but things that are nice to know.  [9/12/11:  Actually I change my mind on that original statement.  This book IS a WONDERFUL summary of everything we need to know to be WONDERFUL people.  We can find all these principles all over the Gospel, but this book wraps them all up in one tight little package.  So, yes, you could use the book as a manual for men and women, you'd just have to expand on it with A LOT more detail.]  My husband has also enjoyed me sharing parts of this book with him before we go to bed at night -- I think some men will love to read it, whereas, some men will probably find it kind of boring, just as some women will.

I also like the extensive use of references in this book.  Some Church publications (at least older ones) lack sources and it drives me nuts.  I also like that Sister Tanner was given credit for this book.  I love knowing who did the work behind a project.

"Church members of all ages may use the book as a reference in lessons, talks, and council meetings" (xiv).  I've heard a couple times people say that quotes by women just aren't as credible as quotes from the "Brethren."  The first time someone said that, I was quite taken aback.  I didn't really believe them, but just to be safe, I stopped using quotes from sisters.  The quote above affirms to me that, yes, it is okay to use quotes from sisters.  Thank goodness.  I mentioned this to my mom and she wondered how the women wouldn't be taken as seriously as the men.  Yes, that's the type of family I grew up in.  If a quote is from General Conference, it's from General Conference, does it matter if a man or woman said it?  So yes, lots and lots of women quotes in this book.

Apparently Lucile Tate and Elaine Harris (xiv) wrote a history of the RS starting in 1996, but it was unpublished and kept as a resource in Church archives.  Wouldn't it be wonderful if it were someday published?  I'd love to read that!