When I was a kid I loved to read fiction and non-fiction books about the Old West. There was always a colorful blend of characters: cowboys and Indians, mountain men and pioneers, gunslingers and prospectors, Anglos, French, and Mexicans. One character type that occasionally appeared was “the Mormons.” These were an angry mob of bandits led by their mustachioed outlaw leader, “Joe Smith,” who went around robbing and harassing everyone else. I was and always have been LDS, but I didn’t recognize anything of myself, my fellow ward members, or the teachings of the Church in these Mormons that I read about. In fact, I didn’t even realize until years later that the authors were even attempting to depict members of the LDS faith in their books. I just assumed that there was another, unrelated group out there also known as the Mormons.
I’ve recently experienced a similar cognitive dissonance. I’ve been following closely news related to the Ordain Women movement, particularly that group’s recent effort to attend the priesthood session of conference. Even though sad experience should have taught me to know better, I still sometimes can’t resist looking at the readers’ comments section below the news articles that I read. Sometimes what I find there confuses and distresses me. Here is a recent example of what I’m talking about. It’s a comment by “underhill” on Joanna Brook’s piece “Equality is not a Feeling” (http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/joannabrooks/7334/):
Believing that it’s up to you (not God) to convince the church leadership through protests like this = trusting in the arm of the flesh. No other way to slice it. Seriously, who’s in charge here? God, them, or you?
There are of course variations on this. Some call the OW members “apostates,” and some, working completely at odds with the Church’s missionary and retention efforts, go so far as to suggest that they leave the Church. But the central logic is always basically this: if God wanted the Church to be doing this, then the Church would already be doing this, so to even ask about it is wrong.
I grew up in the Church my whole life, and this “asking is wrong” attitude is as foreign to me as the idea that Joseph Smith wore a mustache and held up stagecoaches. It makes me wonder if these internet trolls belong to a different group of Mormons unrelated to mine with a different set of teachings. I can think of no scripture to support it. I grew up believing in the scripture that says, “Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you” (Matthew 7:7). The scriptures and Church history are full of people doing just that. Here are few examples:
- Nephi did not wait for the prophet, Lehi, to tell him where to hunt. He went and asked (1 Nephi 16:23).
- I don’t recall Jesus ever looking for people to heal, but numerous came to him. Some had to get his attention by pulling a roof off of a house (Mark 2:4).
- The Doctrine and Covenants did not come all at once. As its introduction says, it came “in answer to prayer, in times of need, and came out of real-life situations involving real people.” Many were given because individuals asked Joseph Smith to seek answers for them (see, for example, the heading to D&C 5).
- Many Africans accepted the gospel, formed congregations, and requested that the Church send missionaries to Africa during the years before the Priesthood Revelation.
Here are a few examples even more directly related to the OW movement because they involve women:
- The law of Moses originally only allowed men to receive a portion of land. A situation arose that the law hadn’t contemplated: Zelophehad died without sons. His daughters asked Moses for their fair share, so Moses took it up with the Lord and was instructed to change the law so that they could own land. (Numbers 27: 1-11).
- D&C 89, the famous “Word of Wisdom,” was received after Emma Smith complained to Joseph about the tobacco juice on the floor of the School of Prophets.
- Emma, Eliza R. Snow, and other women came up with the Relief Society on their own and asked Joseph Smith to approve it after the fact.
Having attended numerous ward council meetings, I’ve observed repeatedly that not all ideas originate with the bishop. It is standard practice for members to bring ideas and ask the bishopric to consider or act on them. This is what OW is doing now at the Church-wide level. They are in the tradition of the daughters of Zelophehad, Emma, and Eliza.
My message to the internet trolls, then, is this: You can be opposed to female ordination if you want to. You can state your beliefs in the comments sections if you want to. But if you do, at least have the decency to recognize and make explicit that they are just that-your beliefs. Do not continue to damage the Church with the false claim that asking is somehow sinful. Do not deny this Church’s defining characteristic and greatest strength: its recognition that God’s will is too big to fit into one book of scripture or one set of policies. Please recognize that the pattern has never been “stand outside and wait,” but rather “Knock, and it shall be opened unto you.”
Submitted by Charles Patterson
You left out the big one: “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.” (James 1:5) Where would any of us be if Joseph Smith didn’t ask. Asking and receiving revelation are central to the Mormon faith.
Beautifully stated. Thank you.
I agree in principle. Asking questions, especially hard questions, is usually what leads to uncovering more truth. But where I draw distinction is in the manner of asking. When seeking spiritual truths, the condition of heart and mind play an integral role in understanding subtle impressions from the spirit. If our heart is not prepared, we usually won’t get it. In the context of the conversation regarding women and the priesthood, I agree with having this conversation at every level of the LDS experience. I don’t agree with engaging in tactics designed to inflame or to offend. I’m very confident that women will one day have a priesthood revelation of their own, and I yearn for that time. So watching people engage in conversations that drive a wedge between the average member and those who desire further light and knowledge is hard for me. I realize it’s inherent in the system that those who look for large scale organizational change in the church are going to share mixed company, believers and non-believers, and because of that will also face mixed feelings about the ‘why’ for change, but it’s in everyone’s best interest to do our utmost best to maintain an open door policy for the spirit to do the teaching here. I’m putting emphasis on members acceptance as being important, essential even, because I know there won’t be any forthcoming revelation until the body of the church displays a collective contrite heart. The Lord works like that. Prepare the space before the revelation – but carefully! That shouldn’t be hard if we just have open, sincere, humble conversations with those who don’t yet see things the way we do. Avoid being easily offended. Be patient. Have empathy for the difficulty of accepting change. Seek guidance from the spirit. When the members hearts are properly prepared, the Lord will tell the prophet as much as we’re collectively prepared to hear.
Funny, I look at it the other way. Expecting the prophets and apostles to speak the truth and word of God, error-free, at every General Conference, as if they just had to pick up the phone in the temple, rather than members seeking to learn the words of God themselves, seems like trusting in the arm of flesh to me.
I totally agree with everything you say, but I have a question.
I see no fault in women in the church asking those at the head to consider their ordination. I see no fault in them presenting their reasons and concerns. This fits the pattern you describe.
But what if, after these initial requests fail, they switch tactics. What if, instead of bringing their petition to the prophet and awaiting the response, they instead use protest, media events, and pressure tactics to bring about their desired goal?
The vast majority of women who support ordination aren’t doing these things. But I did find myself a bit troubled by the ones who were looking more to attract the media’s eye (and the non-LDS public’s) than the prophet’s by some of their activities during General Conference. That struck me as seeking to tell the prophet what the answer will be, rather than bringing a petition and having faith in the prophet’s role.
What do you think?
adano,
Thank you for your kind words and very reasonable question.
My reason for following closely the OW movement is that I agree with their petition, but like you have been uncertain about whether their means for delivering it have been appropriate. The jury in my head is still deliberating somewhat, but my impression so far is that I don’t see quite the switch in tactics that you mention. One way to look at it is that they simply asked two different questions: first if they could have tickets to the priesthood session, and second if they could enter as stand-by. It was all done in a very civil manner, so I don’t perceive the combativeness that normally characterizes protests. It’s true that the underlying purpose of both actions was probably to attract outside attention, but that might be the only way to get the prophet’s attention, since General Authorities have a policy of forwarding correspondence from members to their bishops. The daughters of Zelophehad can’t just go talk to Moses anymore. I’m not sure that this metaphorical petition that we’ve been talking about has been completely received and considered yet.
These are just some some partially-formed thoughts going through my head, but thank you for getting me thinking.
Well stated. It’s not asking that is the problem, it is how and when and to whom and how often. I don’t mind my children asking things. If I say no and they keep asking, or throw a fit, or complain to friends, then it’s a different story. The prophet and general authorities asked the lord repeatedly to be able to give priesthood power to African American men. When he said yes, he said yes, but they didn’t cry and moan about it publicly every time he said no first. In the Lord’s time and in the Lord’s way.
I think that it is reprehensible to stand in line at General conference when the prophet has already SAID NO!!!!!!!!!!!! And I also think that everyone is entitled to their opinion regardless if they disagree or agree. That does not make anyone an internet troll on any side of the fence. Are you going to say I am an internet troll when I start tweeting out to my 35,000 Twitter followers that I do NOT agree with these antics? Just because others don’t agree doesn’t mean that they are trolls. I do not agree at all with what these women are doing. It is basically is telling the world that what I as a Mormon woman believes in is NOT good enough for me. Well it is good enough for me. I am a highly educated woman and I sustain the prophet and follow him. I don’t need the priesthood myself nor do I need someone suggesting that the majority of members of our church are internet trolls because they stand up for what the prophet said. On the other hand, there is no harm in asking anything but there is a line of respect that should be followed and these women have not followed it.
Angela,
Thank you for your comment. I certainly could have either chosen more nuanced phrasing than “internet troll,” or explained more fully what I meant by that. I’ll take this opportunity to clarify: I do absolutely agree with you that everyone is entitled to express their opinion, whether it be via Twitter or in a comments section. Where I think people go wrong is when they imply that asking questions is somehow incompatible with being a faithful member of the Church. Those are the ones who have crossed the line into trolldom. What they do is not standing up for what the prophet said. It is simply spreading a false belief that will ultimately cause damage to the Church. I am not familiar with your tweets, but if, as you say, you believe that “there is no harm in asking anything,” then you don’t fall under my definition of “troll.”
Angela,
When did the prophet SAY NO? All they have said mostly up to this point is that it isn’t the program, though they acknowledge that women are anointed toward that priestesshood in the temple and they would probably admit that there is currently no articulated path toward that goal. How would my daughter put her foot on it? The prophets will never SAY NO to this, because God has repeatedly said Yes. There are women with priesthood in the Bible, as prophetesses. There are women using the priesthood in the temples.
I speak only for myself. My beautiful 18 year old daughter and I drove 12 hours to knock at the door of the Priesthood Session. I have always sustained the leadership of the church. We are asking, though, for ordination to the priesthood because it appears that our priesthoodhood is either not in our hands (as some theorize) though it should be or it is not recognized and won’t be recognized by the men and the women, until our innate priestesshood is pronounced by ordination (as others theorize). In any case, where is it and how are the powers of heaven to be utilized? How is female authority and power made equal with the male, because all are alike unto God and God has never designed the church or the human family to place one gender above the other? These are disconnects that we are seeking to solve.
Nothing about OW’s movement was disrespectful. It is very much reasonable to expect every person posting to or about OW to maintain that respect. This is the religion of Personal Progress and this is where the Spirit led us.
this applies to SO many things–
Yes, I can see the application to the OW–
I have not sponsored that, even though I am a woman, but I do sympathize; I sympathize with ANYone who feels left out in any way–(hence, my ‘name’)–
when I heard they were turned away, I felt sorrow; I hated the idea of the men being told to walk around them. What could it have hurt to let them sit in the foyer?
I believe the priesthood has lost much of its power due to unrighteousness, and I’m not sure that women’s having it will bring that back, though I firmly believe women should be allowed to give blessings as they were in the early days of the church–
BUT, this applies to so many things–
those in the church (everywhere, but especially in America, where ‘prosperity’ is assumed by LDS to be a ‘blessing from God’) who are poor, literally poor, who have considerably less than others in their wards–
try earnings of 10% of the wealthier ward members; possibly it is less than that–
tend to feel that those who are wealthy are the ‘other Mormons’ and that they are considered ‘other Mormons’–
those things that even on Mormon blogs are deemed to be ‘expected’, such as the money for children to attend EFY, go to BYU, attend BYU Education Week, etc., etc., etc.–
not to mention having the luxury of time to perform callings while trying to survive temporally (often the working poor must work at SO many things–extra jobs, producing their own food, performing all their own repairs on ancient cars they are lucky to have, etc.–SO many things)–
there is a camaraderie among the wealthy in a ward and stake–
there is an understanding that if an appliance breaks down a new one can replace it and be installed by professionals; there is an assumption that everyone gets health care, that everyone can afford going out to eat, that gardens are just ‘for fun’, that everyone will have heat in the winter and cooling in the summer–
that everyone will have enough gas to get to church–
that if these things are no readily available it is because that family or individual is already getting ‘help’–
many in the church among the wealthy do despise those who need and ask for help; some bishops can be insulting–
the working poor really try to make it on their own and are very hesitant to ask for help–because of past negative experiences–
besides they want to work–
it is easy to talk about independence when you have it–
or about consecration when you have plenty to give–
anyway, I am rambling now, but there are many ‘other Mormons’ in the church–
There are those, in America, who feel threatened by members of the church who have less than they do–
and members, in America even, who feel afraid of those who have more than they do; they don’t even envy; they are just afraid of rejection, condescension, etc.–
Again, I am sorry about what happened to the sisters who arrived at conference and were turned away–
I think they showed dignity not to complain, but it was badly done by the leaders of the church–
Thank, Charles. Nicely said.
If women can perform ordinances in the name if God in the temple – is it that far of a reach that they could also perform them at church? Priesthood is the power to act in the Name of God right? The first ordinance performed for any child born in the covenant is done by their mother when she gives birth – born in th covenant.
Tolerance. Is it that difficult to believe that God loves women and can give them the power to Act in he Name of God too?
To grow as a religion to worldwide status we will have to be tolerant. Mormonism culture is white male and puritanical. The world is a large place. And people wear and do so many good things. Tolerance. Christlike tolerance.
Well said, Charles.