I’ve written plenty here about the (what feel to me like unrelenting) gender inequities in the Mormon church. And then I got tired of it. I just ran out of fight. I feel like I want to take my energy somewhere else, put it to use in a place or institution where it might actually help bring about positive change–either for the institution or for me personally. So yeah–that’s why I’ve been pretty quiet here in 2013.
But tonight, on the way home, my oldest daughter (age 16) asked me a question about patriarchal blessings. We talked a bit about what they are, what they mean, how the whole process works, etc.
Stuart (my sweet, thoughtful 10-year-old son with a fierce sense of fairness and justice) said, “Mom, I think you would be good at that” (that = giving patriarchal blessings).
I said, “Maybe so, buddy, but women aren’t allowed to do that in the Mormon church. You have to have the priesthood.”
Stuart, whose face registered equal parts disgusted and befuddled, said: “Mom, that’s just crazy. If that’s still true when I’m an adult, I’m gonna start my own church.”
I kinda feel like maybe he’s a slow study because he continues to be surprised by each new gender inequity he learns about in the church (and otherwise). But Brent (my husband) did dub me the “Queen of Incredulity” years ago, so Stuart may come by it honestly.
Still, it left me wondering: Will another generation tolerate this? Will the rising generation tolerate such blatant gender inequity in the church organizational structure, hierarchy, and policies (both written and unwritten)? When there’s such a big gap between what they see and experience in their schools and in other organizations in which they participate and what they see and experience at church?
I don’t think my kids will. I’m not sure where that leaves them, or me, with regard to Mormonism, that is. Of course I can’t predict the future, so maybe I’m totally wrong about them. But when I see their reactions to practices/policies such as this one that I accepted unthinkingly for the first 35 or so years of my life, I’ve gotta lean towards them not accepting it.
What do y’all think?
I wish I could say that I believe the Church will change because of the understandings, attitudes, and desires of the rising generation. In a lot of ways, I think the Church will have to change to stay relevant. But then? Then I remember how I had these same questions and concerns as a child but had the feminist proverbially beaten out of me as a child. It has taken me another 25 years to be comfortable raising the questions again. Whis is maybe to say that we as the parents and the questions we are asking, maybe they matter. Maybe they really will make a difference. Hopefully with this combination of parents and children who are concerned and who reject the sexism, the concerns surrounding inequality won’t lay dormant for the next generation. One can only hope.
I do not think that the next generation will continue to tolerate patriarchy.
More importantly for us is to start now to set a model for them in standing up for what we believe in. They can look back to us and say we too a risk, we spoke out and we make a clarion call for equality… even if the day of reconciliation doesn’t come until they are grown.
I’m with you, Kate. I think that the next generation needs to see that we took a risk, that we were willing to let our voices be heard, that we were willing to agitate faithfully. One can only hope it will make a difference.
I really don’t think so, my kids started point it out at 3 or 4 years old. They live in a world that tells them they are equal, and yet they sit and church and see the inequality.
I hope not. I’m like Amy. I saw the gender inequity as a child and found that it chafed. I probably wouldn’t have noticed it if I had been a boy, comfortable in my privilege. But I too had my feminism proverbially beaten out of me as a young age by the teachings and culture of the church.
However, I didn’t have parents who combated those teachings. If I had had parents who deconstructed my primary lessons each week perhaps I would have not swallowed the patriarchy so entirely as a teenager and young adult.
This is one of the primary factors in my desire to leave the church. I don’t want my daughter to grow up with the same feelings of being a second-class citizen, struggling to see the feminine in the scriptures and church leadership, fighting for her voice to be heard and valued equally.
I have to hope that things get better.
I just wanted to say that I think it was incredibly sweet of your son to observe that you’d make a fine patriarch. I’ve never met you, but I think that must speak volumes about who you are and the depth of your spiritual gifts. As a missionary (what feels like a million years ago, but was actually more like a dozen), I served in several wards that had two sets of missionaries–typically a set of elders and a set of sisters. I remember once, a woman the elders had been teaching was preparing for baptism, and they asked her who she wanted to have baptize her. I expect they said that anyone she’d met at church who had a leadership-type position would likely be eligible to baptize her. And she told the elders she wanted me to baptize her. Obviously, that didn’t happen (and I imagine the elders had to clarify that “anyone” actually meant “any man”), but it’s still a sweet memory and one that means a lot to me.
Looking at the 12, 10 of them are over 80 so I am hoping that in another 10 years time they will be gone and we then get to Uchtdorf, Cook and the Bedinar. The over 80s are very conservative, and I think much of the change is coming from Uchtdorf.
I think a retirement age of 80 for Apostles would be a start and that would lead to generational change and subjects like marriage equality and equality for women would be quickly resolved. Sexism removed, as was racism from the hierarchy.
So I think about 10 years if the pressure is maintained.
Looking at the 1978 removal of racism it is noted that Lowell Benion, who was institute director at Uof U, advocated praying and conveying to leaders your views on racism for 26 years before it was removed.
Looking forward with hope it may be sooner.
Geoff, Bednar does not give me cause to hope on this front. He seems quite conservative. More in line with the 80+ than the youngers.
I love your optimism, but I’m saying it’s gonna be WAY more than 10 years–at least before it seems palatable to me.
Alas.
This concern over age has surfaced before, such as when Benson was getting quite old and while he was President (concern over his political views were thrown in, too). There seems to be an assumption that ignores revelation and the revelatory process, one of which is that the First Presidency and the Twelve do have a certain mandate, and experience. Reading Pres. Eyring’s first talk as an apostle is extremely interesting, and alludes to such. Without revelation, as many leaders in the church have stated, this is just like any other church. With revelation, things are different. If we aren’t in that particular loop, we might complain, but if we dance on the fringe long enough, will we get to a moment as bright and painful as Saul (of Tarsus)’s? When the Savior commented to him, “It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks”, it’s easy to guess that he was being reminded by the Savior of all the times he had felt the promptings of the Spirit, but had actively fought against them. Obviously he was humble enough to repent, but also had to be humbled, too. It’s not recorded everything he had to go through, but blindness and being shaken to the ground was an attention-getter, as it was for Alma the younger.
There really is a different perspective on here (from the OP and those who have commented) from what I am experiencing in my little corner of the world–
(or on my edge of the world) :)
I see the church imploding. I see people waking up, but I don’t see, based upon what I have witnessed in my ward and stake, survival for all that has been accepted for generations–
When I think of those who have just chosen to leave, etc.–
many whom I love–
but where is the desire for the return of Jesus? It’s as though the church’s continuance is the ultimate goal–
I’m not hoping for the church to crash, but it’s what I am seeing–
and I think that is a necessary part of preparing for Jesus to come, to see that the church is not the ultimate destination–
Jesus will, after all, change everything–
I don’t see the church or the church culture or this government or American culture or anything continuing beyond Jesus’ arrival–
That’s where I’m pinning my hopes–
on Jesus’ coming–
Is this something that isn’t acceptable to talk about?
Just wondering–
Or does it seem so far off that it feels ridiculous to talk about it–
Heather,
Uchtdorf appears to be above Bedinar in the succession list though both ordained on the same day. All those above Uchtdorf are registered republicans and all over 80. Then there is a step to 72. Hopefully the old republican guard die off pretty soon, and generational change, which might swing Bedinar too, as he sees the light/ or the way the winds blowing.
Marginalizedmormon, I’m hoping that there will be time for the culture of the church to change before the second coming, because it might be too much of a shock for the conservative members to accept otherwise.
If you concentrate of the teachings of the non conservatives it is pretty much Christ centred. Uchtdorf has had a great and positive influenc on changing the culture from obedience centered to Love and Christ centered. Bedinar can sometimes be too conservative (perhaps his culture) but I think we are headed in the right direction and when the generation changes —
@Geoff-A, thanks for acknowledging me. :) Perked up my day!!!
I try very hard not to see the culture in left and right–
(conservative, liberal)–
I’m not blind about how hard-hearted the ‘traditional’ conservative paradigm can be–
but I wonder if, ultimately, anyone on any side of a ‘line’ is prepared for Babylon to fall–
and, though I appreciate your optimism (wrong word?), I don’t see it happening. It seems to me that the neo-conservative bias is becoming more hardened–
One of my adult children who considers him/herself to be ‘liberal’ (though I don’t use either label, if I can help it), sees things on FB that are outrageously pro-oppression. From LDS. In our ward.
I don’t want anyone to suffer. I know that in catastrophes, etc. there is something called catastrophic schizophrenia–where people kind of melt down–
yes, it sounds awful; I don’t want this for anyone; I know some very mean-hearted people (LDS) who would definitely fall under the ‘conservative’ heading, but I don’t want them to suffer either–
and yet . . . I’m glad Jesus gets to decide. Only He knows what people would do if they had the right information–
There are some people in my ward who consider themselves ‘liberal’ politically; they vote Democrat, at any rate–who are very judgemental of those who have less or who find themselves in straitened economic situations–
For *me*, having some close to me whose future hopes are pretty much blasted . . . and unable to push aside such things as this:
http://www.foodispower.org/slavery-in-the-chocolate-industry/
I just wonder. How long must many American “Mormons” (and many other Christians) be cossetted?
And yet, who am I to say? I’m weary of the white American bias–
You have certainly gotten some response there, heather. Rightly so, over that sort of issue. Mind you, it is paralleled elsewhere in the Christian tradition, for example, the stubborn resistance of the Catholic Church to women priests, and a lot of ruction among the Anglicans. Of course, a woman’s blessing will never be ‘patriarchal’ but ‘matriarchal’. I suspect a lot of your values are rubbing off on your children. Good for you and for them. Perhaps the thing is to institute matriarchal blessings as institution in the church. For me, I am happy to receive a blessing from whomever it comes, and to give my blessing. A blessing is always a good-hearted gesture. When my mother was alive, I used to take her on occasions to a chapel service. The priest approached me, asking whether as an atheist I would be OK about receiving a blessing as I declined communion. Of course his gesture was very welcome. If across the barrier of the Pacific and the Equator, wish to give me your blessing, I shall be glad to accept it.
Dhamma blessings to you and your family
Murray, what a genuinely lovely comment. Thank you for your kindness.
In the RLDS/Community of Christ, it’s called an “Evangelist’s Blessing,” since women can have the Priesthood.
I’m holding out hope that the age change for women serving missions will make it increasingly difficult to keep women out of General Church leadership positions. Unfortunately, John Maynard Keynes’s famous statement that “The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent,” applies to the Church too. I think that they can hold out on not treating women as fully equal members longer than any of us can stay sane putting up with it. I guess I hope it will change eventually, but I have a hard time believing it will happen in any time frame soon enough to matter to me.
Also, I agree with your comment above about Elder Bednar above, Heather. He’s (relatively) young, and the odds-on favorite to run the Church for a long time, but he leans toward fundamentalism, and I’m not a fan of him.
It’s interesting to read the obviously well-thought out reflections and speculations here, but some of what I observe in what’s expressed and the tenor of its expression reminded me of a Nibley essay. Some might have heard of it (it was originally a talk), or read it. It was written some time ago, and some might find fault with his scholarship, his manner, or his verbal/written mannerisms, but his considered reflection so many years ago I think still has application today, and to this topic:
Hmm. Somehow the link was dropped out of my post. I’ll try again, without the embedded HTML
http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/transcripts/?id=151