- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I am aware that our culture looks at Prophets as all knowing. I also know we hold varied degree’s of certitude on prophetic ability in our personal lives. Today though I was wondering about the Relief Society Presidency of Elaine Jack, Chieko Okazaki, Aileen Clyde. I believe Gordon B. Hinckley read lifes tea leaves well. I believe he had deep envisionments for the church. I also believe he could see the bumps ahead. In recent history the Relief Society Presidency above, could be considered a very liberal one. Chieko Okazaki was progressive in her addresses and her writing. Aileen Clyde was an active democrat, and is now collecting women’s stories for a library at the University of Utah. One article notes,
Quote:The archive contains oral histories, journals, photographs and manuscripts of noteworthy women from all walks of life. Examples include Karen Shepherd, former member of the U.S. Congress, Esther Landa, granddaughter of a Polish-Jewish immigrant and political and community activist, and Carol Lynn Pearson, Mormon writer, poet, and playwright who authored the pivotal memoir “Goodbye, I Love You.” The one unifying element: women who have in some way made a positive impact.
They only had 7 years to impact the story, but I am fascinated by his choice and wonder what he hoped they would accomplish or leave behind for us.
Thanks for reminding me about these three. I browsed around Sis. Jack’s and Clyde’s talks since they don’t get quoted as much. I thought this was interesting from Sis. Clyde’s 1991 talk “Charity Suffereth Long.” Like you said, it would be nice to know what President Hinckley was thinking, and how Sis. Hinckley might have influenced his choices. Quote:Now, understanding charity or being charitable is not easy. And our scriptures have not indicated that it would be. Even “charity suffereth long” requires our thoughtful interpretation. The “suffering” that may come from loving is the result of our great caring. It comes because another matters to us so much.
To avoid that kind of suffering, we would have to avoid what gives us life and hope and joy—our capacity to love deeply. As an antidote against the suffering that will surely come as we have loved ones die, or see them struggle or be misled, or have them misunderstand us or even betray us, we can find relief in charity to others. We accepted bearing one another’s burdens and mourning with those who mourn, as we accepted Christ in our baptism. (See Mosiah 18:8–9.) His spirit and power will comfort us as we extend ourselves in help and love to those who need us.
If charity is not always quick to our understanding, it may occasionally be quick to our misunderstanding. It is not charity or kindness to endure any type of abuse or unrighteousness that may be inflicted on us by others. God’s commandment that as we love him, we must respect ourselves, suggests we must not accept disrespect from others. It is not charity to let another repeatedly deny our divine nature and agency. It is not charity to bow down in despair and helplessness. That kind of suffering should be ended, and that is very difficult to do alone. There are priesthood leaders and other loving servants who will give aid and strength when they know of the need. We must be willing to let others help us. Ann wrote:Like you said, it would be nice to know what President Hinckley was thinking, and how Sis. Hinckley might have influenced his choices.
I find it ironic that we are discussing and giving possible credit to a man for the impactful work of three women. I mean no disrespect in saying this and I understand that it is the state of affairs. I believe that in our organization the women can not do much without at least tacit approval from the men that hierachally supervise them.
It also makes sense that we might wonder of Sis. Hinckley’s involvement because one of the few outlets for women to influence policy in the church is to be married to powerful men.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.