I’ve been thinking lately about how interesting it is that Mormon church leaders place such high priority on getting married and having children. I mean, if you’re a Mormon girl, you know from a very young age that your primary mission in life is to get married, become a mom, and LOVE IT! (P.S. If you have time, be a good person, too!)
This advice feels off to me because of the effect my children have had on my spiritual life. Things started going downhill right after Kennedy was born and got exponentially worse with the birth of each subsequent child. No longer could I sit in church and actually LISTEN to anything anyone was saying. Instead, I had to do one or more of the following: nurse the baby (in the smelly “mother’s lounge,” where too many moms sit and gossip), take the baby/toddler out to change his/her diaper, take the squawking baby or the noisy/wiggly toddler out because he/she was being disruptive, referee fights, dole out Goldfish or Cheerios, hand out “quiet books,” you get the picture. [Note: Mormons don’t believe in “cry rooms” and the nursery is not open during the main church service, so it’s all kids, all the time.]
Occasionally, Brent would say, “That was a really good talk” and I would look at him, totally befuddled, because I had not heard a single word anyone had said (how could I? how did he?).
And those were the few times Brent was actually there with us during the Sunday services.
Most of the time he was off gallivanting about, doing what Mormon men do on Sundays-giving talks in other congregations, attending meetings, etc.-while the womenfolk take care of the babes. The low point (or pinnacle, depending upon how snarky I’m feeling) of this ridiculous situation occurred on the first Sunday of a new year when our kids were approximately 10 months, 4, and 7. Brent was serving on the high council (which is a group of 12 men who are in charge of a stake). He got an email inviting (and by “inviting,” I really mean “telling”) him to attend a special testimony meeting-just for the high councilmen-that would take place at the same time as the regular meeting that the rest of us would be attending with our children.
I did not receive this piece of news very well. Brent agreed that it was ridiculous, but like so many other things, we just swallowed it. So I sat in the regular family testimony meeting and tussled with our three kids who intermittently fought, tussled, cried, yelled, and/or needed to be fed and diaper-changed and shushed repeatedly. All the while, I was imagining Brent sitting quietly around a rectangular board room table with 12-15 of his buddies, alternating back and forth between peaceful contemplation and quiet discussion of their faith.
By the time the meeting was over, I was exasperated. When he emerged from his meeting unscathed, he laughed (because he knew it was cringe-worthy-bad) and said, “Actually, it was a really nice meeting.” I didn’t laugh (because I knew it was cringe-worthy-bad) and said, “Umm, yeah, I guess it would be nice to sit in a room for 70 minutes with no kids and quietly think about religious stuff.”
And that’s when I realized that Mormon moms (due to both biology and the all-male lay clergy that runs our church)-are essentially forced to check out of participation in our main church services (during which we partake of the sacrament, a ritual we consider sacred) for years while our children are young. I wince as I watch moms take crying infants out of the chapel with their older children (often stairstepped by just a year or maybe two) following along behind while her husband (if he’s a lay leader of the congregation) sits up at the front of the chapel and watches-oddly disconnected from his wife’s struggles. And rare is the Mormon woman who demands that her husband come down from his special seat and actually participate in parenting. It’s like so many other things: it’s just not done.
I’m kind of a Mormon slacker because I only had three children, but my kids pretty much took me out of meaningful participation in our sacrament meeting services for a good ten years. Even now, more than 15 years into the whole parenting thing, the kids still fight and need to be shushed and just generally disrupt my thinking throughout the service.
So yeah, it makes no sense for our church leaders to encourage women to get married and have children quickly-not in terms of nurturing our spiritual lives, at least.
But someone’s gotta take care of those babies . . . right?
I’m starting to believe women are much more capable than men, and using babies as a goal in life is a way to diminish that capability.
Last March at my brothers wedding I was talking to a good friend of mine who also happened to be one of my YW presidents and I thanked her for being such a great part of my ‘lamp filling/feasting’ stage of life. I explained that I’m glad I had that a good 12 years to fill my lamp by listening intently to talks and firesides and participating in class discussions because where I was at right now, I didn’t get much of a chance to refuel and I was very grateful for filling my lamp when I had the chance.
Do I think it’s right how the church separates the roles of men an women in the church, no. But thanks to the education I received early during my feasting stage, I have some energy available to work toward changing that.
I have to say, in my ward I’ve observed several dads holding, taking out, carrying babies. Of course, these are not members of the bishopric. Still, I like seeing that the dads are with their kids so much during the meeting. Again, this is at least when they’re not having to sit on the stand.
Yeah–it’s the sitting on the stand thing that’s nutty (well, nuttier than the other things). Why do three men need to sit up on the stand?? It’s one of those “unwritten order of things” that’s totally unnecessary.
in my ward a lot of the parents out in the hallways are the dads. i see a lot of trading off too. and a lot of older siblings as well. i had 5 kids in 7.5 yrs, and i’m a single parent. i spend a fair amount of sacrament meeting in the hall way. sometimes my bigger kids will stay and sit, sometimes they’ll take the littles in the nursery. in our ward, getting the babies/ littles through sacrament seems to be more of a village affair……
A male friend of mine got married at 27. He and his wife have 9 children. I remember his grandma proudly telling me after child #6 that he’d been called to the bishopric and had accepted but stipulated one caveat: that he would sit with his wife the Sundays he was not conducting. He did just that the entire time he served.
Yay! This is how it should be done. I have known people, however, who have asked their husbands to do this and they either won’t or the bishop discourages it.
I agree completely! Like Apron Appeal, I’m glad I was into my thirties before I had kids. I definitely needed my spiritual reserves. I remember how mad I was when after having kids it dawned on me that I was giving up not just my career (temporarily at least for me) but any meaningful participation in church. Not right.
Oh man. This rings so true to everything I have observed as a woman in the church. I don’t even have kids myself, but I am already done with this nonsense. I have a serious number of rules in mind for the inevitable day when my husband gets a leadership calling. If he is in the bishopric, he will sit with our family. We can be in the front row. Everything that needs to be done to run the meeting can be done from there. I will send babies with him to meetings. Women tote their babies along to their meetings all the time. Men are perfectly capable of doing the same and my husband can set the example. And I will not tolerate excessive meetings. Family first.
Your story about the High Priest testimony meeting is so ridiculous. I think I would have sent two of the kids along with my husband. It is such an exercise of privilege for them to even consider having that meeting, maybe some babies in the room would encourage them to be more practical and fair in the future.
(If it sounds like I plan to boss my husband all over the place, that’s not really the way it is. He’s down with these rules and really wants to be an equal parenting partner.)
It doesn’t escape my notice, either, that this discussion is really only happening because women don’t hold these kinds of leadership positions in our church.
On some level this is a relationship issue, not a church issue. Yes, the church definitely portrays and reinforces the mom-as-a-primary-nurturer thing. But since you are more enlightened, and are aware of it – on the occasions when your husband is there with you in sacrament meeting why are you allowing this to continue? I guess I just don’t understand the kind of relationship where that is o.k. My husband is my parenting partner, meaning, we take turns taking the kids out, shushing the kids, and juggling. If he were to just sit back and listen while I dealt with the kids I would be incredibly pissed and it would not happen ever, ever again. We teach people how to treat us, you know?
Sue, I agree with this: “on some level.” When my husband was THERE with me, he certainly did do everything he could (although biology precluded him from nursing the babies, ha ha!) and I see plenty of Mormon dads doing that as well. But he often wasn’t even there, so at that point, it’s not a relatioship issue; it’s a church issue, right?
OK, then that’s different. I read the following statement to mean that he was there with you and still not contributing. “Occasionally, Brent would say, “That was a really good talk” and I would look at him, totally befuddled, because I had not heard a single word anyone had said (how could I? how did he?). And those were the few times Brent was actually there with us during the Sunday services.”
Sue, my husband has a remarkable ability to mentally multi-task. So he was able to listen to talks AND juggle crying babies–and still pay attention and gain something from it. Me, no way.
So yeah, this was not a case of my husband sitting idly watching me tussle with the kids.
I respectfully disagree, Sue. I think that relationships and church are undeniably woven together. It is a chicken – egg scenario. The very way that we are trained to behave in our relationships is taught, based on church doctrine and culture, starting at birth. It will be the rare relationship that sees the problems and changes AHEAD of the church making wholesale changes.
I’m not in any way excusing the church for their contribution and reinforcement of the overall scenario. I DEFINITELY agree with the overall post. But I can’t excuse her husband either. On the rare occasions where he is sitting in the pew with her, enjoying the talks as she struggles with the kids – that’s not o.k. I can’t even think of any families I know (where the men are under the age of about 60) who function like that.
I’ve often gotten so frustrated watching a bishop’s wife struggle with her family while he sits up there…I’ve wondered, “Why the heck is he needed up there? He’s not even conducting the meeting!”
We have a childless couple in our ward whose husband was in the bishopric at the same time as a husband who had EIGHT kids (gotta fill their quota). Those kids were wild, too. The childless wife always sat with the other wife and helped with the kids, but it still frustrated me that the husband didn’t sit and participate every week. Though, in his defense, if he saw the kids misbehaving, he’d sometimes leave the pulpit and go referee, esp. if the mom was already out of the meeting and it was just childless vs. the wild ones.
There has to be a better way…
I was lucky. Because my hubby is inactive, after I was done nursing babies, they stayed home from about 4 months to 18 months. And sometimes, when I really want some tranquility, I’ll still leave kids home if they’ve spent the morning fighting or being particularly whiny. There are advantages to atheist husbands.
Love it, Linda. ;)
Ha, this is one of the things I tell my boyfriend when we talk about marriage and babies. I go to a Reformed church with a nursery during services, so I tell him the one advantage of having a believer wife is that I can take the kid(s) with me to church so he has a morning off.
A few years ago I was in RS leadership and we were having a planning meeting on a Sunday morning. We got a phone call about 20 minutes before we were scheduled to end from the husband of a RS counselor who needed her to come home ASAP and watch the kids so he could go to PEC meeting. So we ended our meeting early. I was so mad I thought my head was going to explode, because I brought my kid to every single meeting we ever had, as did the other sisters! But for some reason the men couldn’t handle that?!
Ouch.
I’m interested in the people commenting (here and on FB) who are saying this totally doesn’t match up to their experience. This fascinates me.
How many meetings have I been in with women where babies/toddlers/older kids are running around interrupting? How many visiting teaching visits have I gone on with my kids in tow?
Yet I rarely see husbands take babies/toddlers on home teaching visits. Maybe an older kid, sure, but a whiny toddler? Never seen it. Of course, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen, but I’ve never seen it, so this doesn’t ring true to me.
How many PEC meetings or bishopric meetings do dads bring babies/toddlers to?
How often do you see a dad sitting on the stand tussling with a child? Ever?
My experience matches yours here, Heather. I think I’ve taken one kid with me a grand total of one time ever in all my years of home teaching. My wife has probably taken at least one kid with her while visiting teaching at least 90% of the time. If not more.
I think the absences, Heather, are only partly a church problem. Because we can say no. Your husband could say no to attending meetings that unfairly and unneccessairily burden you. If he needs to visit another ward and you can’t or don’t want to go with, send him with a non nursing child or two. He can sit with them in the pews. I’ve seen it done.
We have a church that says it orients itself around the family. But, we see all kinds of ways our operations are not family friendly. So then, let’s fix it. The ministry is us. We all decide how it looks.
I agree, dankrist. This is no longer an issue in my family; I was just relaying a story for the post. But I agree that this is what we need to do.
But as I said in the post, many women accept it (because it’s “the way things are,” it’s “the way things should be”) and therefore don’t see the need to change. And I guess the men accept it, too.
While I enjoy using my kid to get me out of meetings, on the rare occasion I’d actually like and listen to the speaker, its impossible to do so. I agree about the spiritual buzzkill!
It is true that we can say no. When I was struggling with four small children and my husband was on the bishopric, I could have said no – it was a physical possibility; my brain definitely could have engaged my mouth and the word “no” could have popped out – it certainly could have happened.
But quite frankly, I would have rather died that demonstrate that my husband was incapable of fulfilling his calling in the expected way because of my inability to control our children. I may as well have worn a sign around my neck with ‘I’m a failure as a woman’ written on it.
I’m not sure that the ministry is ‘us’. The ministry is run by priesthood who are often firmly fixed by tradition, procedure, handbooks etc. As a woman, I don’t believe I ever had an opportunity to change anything, it was always all about changing myself in order to try and fit an impossible ideal.
I once had a calling as an assistant scoutmaster. Our first child was particularly unruly, and the times that the calling pulled me out to overnight campouts caused tremendous hardship on my wife. So I generally didn’t stay overnight on those campouts.
My wife also nurses in the chapel in sacrament meeting, and I absolutely support her in that. No one bats an eye when someone whips out a bottle or baggie of Cheerios, so why should nursing be an issue? Cheerios are a major distraction too, because they go flying everywhere and kids fight over them.
This complete disruption of spiritual lives has taken its toll on both of us. We often say how when your kids are that young, you just keep going to keep the habit of getting up and going on Sundays. We’ve had to resort to taking turns of sorts. One week she gets to be edified in the meetings, and the next week I get to. I don’t have a bishopric or stake-level calling though (nor do I envy those who do!), but I would absolutely take a child with me if we had a scheduling conflict. It’s kind of like how we don’t mind income taxes because of withholding— we don’t consciously process the pain of them. I think meetings work the same way. Those in the meeting rarely process the family cost of having them. Nothing like a screaming kiddo to drive that point home.
Ethan…so nice to meet you here. :)
You cannot feel the Spirit as you drag your kids out of the chapel or change poopy diapers? Wow.
Ok, just kidding. I am 100% with you on this one. I’ve gotten quite frustrated in the last little while with how anti-family our pro-family Church is at times (from not allowing those impure, annoying little kids into the temple to stinky mother’s lounges to abandonment of mothers with their kids during Church for the sake of men doing stuff by the dozen that 1 man could do alone).
Leaving mothers struggling alone with their kids during Sacrament meeting so the husband can sit up front is particularly strange to me. It doesn’t make sense to me at all. My husband and I have discussed this, and we’re agreed on the fact that if he ever gets called to the Bishopric, parenting is still shared. I don’t see any reason at all why some of the kids can’t sit up front with daddy, or why daddy can’t sit with us when he isn’t conducting. Actually, even if he IS conducting, it’s not so hard to get up and walk up front at the right time and do your thing.
Luckily, my husband hasn’t been called to anything “important” that’d take him away from us during Sacrament, and so the burdens of wrestling the kids have been shared very equally. I’m sure we can maintain this as long as my husband keeps not wearing white shirts to Church (our crazy little rural ward feels very strongly about the importance of wearing white shirts to Church, especially when functioning in your priesthood role…sigh…).
Amen sister! I’m so with you on this one. I’ve been amazed at the spiritual richness of my Sunday mornings since I started attending a different church before our Mormon service and always I end up going by myself because my husband’s scared of letting me take the kids.
If I were going anywhere else, I’m sure he’d ask me to take the kids along.)
Thank you, Heather, for this very validating post (at least for me). This seems to be a no-no topic in the Church. My husband was called to be a counselor in a bishopric when our oldest two children were 3 and 1, and he was called as bishop when our oldest was 8 and I was still nursing our fourth (who was 9 months). From that first bishopric calling 35 years ago until this past November, when he was released from his second stint as a counselor in a stake presidency, he has had callings which precluded him from sitting with our family in Sacrament meeting. There was about 18 months, when our children were mostly teenagers, that he taught Seminary and did sit with us, but that was it. The worst part of that time was the 5 1/2 years that he was a bishop. It is still very painful for me to remember that time period, and I have one daughter who still has not forgiven him for being gone so much, nor me for allowing it. You can say that he and I made that choice, but really, we didn’t. The Church made it for us, keeping us in line with fear. Those were the Benson and the Kimball years, and they were hellish. Somewhere in all that time, I also served as a R.S. president twice, a Primary president and in the YW program too. It is no small miracle that our marriage is still intact.
Don’t get me wrong. I love my children, and somehow they have all grown up to be responsible adults with children of their own. It is telling, however, that they all have small families and, though they are all active in the Church, they have all said no to callings and limit their time commitment to the Church (thankfully). I love my husband too, but I mourn the loss of all that time he could have had with me and our children. Since last November, our life has changed dramatically. He teaches Sunday School, but I attend Sacrament Meeting only and do not have a calling. We spend lots of time together (we both work out of home offices) and we both spend lots of time with grandchildren. He has found, quite late in life, that he actually likes children and they like him. Better late than never, I guess, but we have lost so much.
We womenfolk all understand. Our new bishop, barely 30, was called right after his wife gave birth to twins. The older kids were age 4 and 2. The bishop and his wife look like they’re ready to break. Many worthy older men with empty nests feel like they’ve been put out to pasture. It makes no sense.
That post brings back memories. Most bad, one very funny. My husband has been in bishoprics and on the high council since our oldest was a baby. We never thought to ask for him to be able to sit with the family when not conducting. When we lived in Berlin, Germany, he was on the high council. Attending meetings at the stake center in Frankfurt required an overnight train ride out, a day or two take care of business and attend meetings and an overnight train ride back. Things came to a head for me when he had been doing this for over a year. I was sitting on the front row (I think we were late and those were the only seats left) in Sacrament meeting my 4 year old, 3 year old, and new baby. Everyone was acting up at once and I was so flustered and upset I actually slapped my 4 year old! Brilliant! We sat in the foyer after that until my husband’s release.
On a happier note, a couple of years later we were in a married student ward at BYU. My husband had again been called to be on the high council and was immediately given a speaking assignment in another ward. Our entire stake presidency came to our ward that Sunday to sustain the new high councilor and speak. That Sunday I purposely sat on the front row with our 6 year old, 5 year old, 2 year old very pregnant with number 4. During the Sacrament service the 2 year old got an erection. During a very quiet moment and in a very loud voice he stood up and announced “Mom, my penis is sticking out!” The stake president literally fell off of his chair from laughing.
I wish more of my memories of those times were like the last one rather than the first. It is encouraging to hear that there are parents out there who know how to serve and still ask for what they need.
This is probably a horrible thing to say, but I don’t think babies and young children have any business being in sacrament meeting. I find it a little bizarre that it’s even considered feasible in our culture to have very young children in our meetings. I work with kids. I’m lucky if I can get them to sit still and quiet for 5 minutes, let alone an hour. In my class of kindergarteners, there are maybe two that could handle sitting quietly through sacrament meeting.
Seriously. Open up that nursery for sacrament meeting. It’s not fair to kids or parents or childless curmudgeons like me.
I wouldn’t want to see children excluded from sacrament meeting. They are capable of playing quietly with toys, books, or other activities and a snack for the hour of sacrament meeting on most weeks, if they are taught to do so. Children need to be taught reverence, and they need to be included within the spiritual family. Requiring children to be removed from spiritual arenas is a way of marginalizing children, and by extension women.
Well, first of all, props to you for taking on the challenging role of motherhood. It IS challenging.
One time I was “trying” to sit through a Sacrament meeting with my 2 yr old, 1 yr old and brand new baby (no judgement please) and my husband was away (for a military assignment, not a church related calling). My 1 yr old started running up the aisle and I immediately jumped up to chase her home- I suddenly remembered that I was nursing with a loose blanket over my chest and as I loped down the aisle, the blanket fell down and my boob came jiggling out as baby detached and cried. The bishopric and other church leaders had the best view (yes, we met eyes).
Ahhh, motherhood. Gotta love it.
This is why I secretly imagine myself triumphantly punching the air each time I hear the leaders instruct us that family time is sacred time (Elder Packer this conference) or remind our leaders to respect parents of young children and try to restrain from calling them out of the home (I’ve heard it in world-wide leadership meetings). I know that scenario ends up being rare since so many of our very active members are parents of young children but we all just do our best. Even I struggle to not send myself on a guilt trip when I have an emotional break-down (usually related to a explosive mess in our house) and have to cancel dinner with the missionaries.
“I did not receive this piece of news very well. Brent agreed that it was ridiculous, but like so many other things, we just swallowed it.”
Why, why, why? Why does the church condition us to be so submissive that we can’t even object to something that is so blatantly wrong?
Re: “smelly mothers lounge”–wow, you had a place to go sit and nurse/change babies? When I was having little ones, not a single ward I attended had any such thing. Not even changing tables in the ladies rooms. And the foyer was always full of old people who wanted to sit on the cushy chairs, and teenagers. I used to sit in an empty classroom to nurse, and had to change diapers on the floor. UGH!
When I was 5, my dad was in the bishopbric. My mom isn’t a member, so I either sat with friends or with him up on the stand. It was an awesome arrangement, I’ll tell you! It’s too bad you don’t see more kids sitting with their dads up there. Every once in a while it’ll happen, but it’s not the norm.
Excellent post. I watched my Mother continuously do this, will all 10 of us, while my Dad was generally in a meeting or exhausted (he was supporting 12 people!) sitting in the pew. The Mormon system of function for families is so outdated. Without serious re-vamping and reorganizing I do not see how it can possibly survive. But that is just one point of view. Thanks for this!
When I was little, a LOOONG time ago, there were still cry rooms, where people could take their kids and let them play, but still hear the talks, at least theoretically over the din. Ours was next to the chapel and had glass french doors, so you could look into the chapel, as well as a speaker with the sound. I remember spending time with my dad there, but I suspect that he was pretty happy to get out of sacrament meeting. It was also far more accepted that small children didn’t really belong in SM, and my mom stayed home with me quite often. I don’t think that was unusual. This was the early-mid 60s. The only unusual thing in our case was that I’m an only child, so for bigger families, it would have meant that one parent, almost surely the mother, would have been home for a longer time. But really, compared to wrestling several young kids through SM, staying home is probably more likely to at least be sort of restful.
Me too, Paula! I remember our building in California having a cry room in the late 1970s. It was separated from the chapel by glass, so you could see everything, and sound was piped in. Just not out.
My stake just decided last month, after I (and many others over the decades) badgered them to death, to “allow” the sacrament to be passed to the foyer. Insanity! We, mothers and many fathers, as well, have had to choose between reverence for others and taking the sacrament for ourselves. It’s like we don’t even exist. As a woman, I feel like I have to fight for everything. And to top it off, our stake continues to hold sacrament meeting last. Our stake leaders take that scripture seriously, you know, the one that says something like, ‘suffer the little children…’ Yep. Force the little children into suffering while simultaneously punishing the mother at the same time. They just don’t understand how much easier they make it for me to take a Sunday off.
This is a great piece, Heather. And my misery finds comfort in the company here. Thanks!
The tone of this entry just makes me sad – my husband is not a member of the church, and so I take my 3 year old and 1 year old to church by myself every week. They are not perfect, and some weeks I cannot remember what the lessons or talks were about, but I have a testimony (confirmed to me by the Spirit) that this is such an important pattern to establish for my children and that my efforts are valuable to them, and myself. It is true that it is more difficult to establish and maintain the quiet, contemplative scripture study/prayer time ever (not just in church) when little kids are a part of your routine, but there is a different kind of light and joy that these kids bring into my life that more than make up for it.
Thanks for the sensible critique. Me & my neighbor were just preparing to do a little research on this. We got a grab a book from our local library but I think I learned more clear from this post. I’m very glad to see such great info being shared freely out there.