- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Zacharias, husband of Elizabeth was a Priest and Temple Worker. One day, (if I remember it correctly), an angel appeared to him and foretold that his elderly wife, Elizabeth would conceive and bare a child. I can’t blame Zacharias from having a bit of doubt. Elizabeth had been barren her whole life, never a child in her womb. The years had passed. Zacharias was stuck dumb by the angel as a sign. He returned home to his wife, unable to speak. Some few months later, Elizabeth’s 14 year old, unmarried cousin announced that she was with child. This was simply not acceptable in the Hebrew community, so this pregnant teen had to be “put away privately”. Elizabeth agreed to care for her even though she herself was pregnant.
When the young mother-to-be arrived, Elizabeth pronounced a blessing on both the mother and child as her husband Zacharias was unable to speak. Elizabeth was the very first person to give a blessing to Christ. She knew Him before He was even born.
MWallace57 wrote:Zacharias, husband of Elizabeth was a Priest and Temple Worker. One day, (if I remember it correctly), an angel appeared to him and foretold that his elderly wife, Elizabeth would conceive and bare a child. I can’t blame Zacharias from having a bit of doubt. Elizabeth had been barren her whole life, never a child in her womb. The years had passed.
Zacharias was stuck dumb by the angel as a sign. He returned home to his wife, unable to speak. Some few months later, Elizabeth’s 14 year old, unmarried cousin announced that she was with child. This was simply not acceptable in the Hebrew community, so this pregnant teen had to be “put away privately”. Elizabeth agreed to care for her even though she herself was pregnant.
When the young mother-to-be arrived, Elizabeth pronounced a blessing on both the mother and child as her husband Zacharias was unable to speak. Elizabeth was the very first person to give a blessing to Christ. She knew Him before He was even born.
Super awesome! Thanks for reminding us of that beautiful story.
But, she comes to me in my dreams, She is beautiful. She wears the robes of justice. Her feet and legs and completely covered, unlike male angels, she does not uncover her feet. They must never touch the earth, not even the hem of her garment for she must remain pure and untarnished from the earth.
This “Lady of Justice” has no sword, for her words are her sword. She is the angelic representation of woman’s role in justice, both temporal and eternal.
Harriet Beecher Stowe penned the book, “Uncle Tom’s Cabin”. President Abraham Lincoln read it and sat down to write the “Emancipation Proclamation” . He attributed her words as being mightier than the swords and guns of the Civil War.
Luke Chapter 18 – she uses only her words.
I would like to post my favorite chapter of Proverbs. Praise of a Good Woman
10 Who can find a virtuous woman?
For her price is far above rubies.
11 The heart of her husband doth safely trust in her,
so that he shall have no need of spoil.
12 She will do him good and not evil
all the days of her life.
13 She seeketh wool, and flax,
and worketh willingly with her hands.
14 She is like the merchants’ ships;
she bringeth her food from afar.
15 She riseth also while it is yet night,
and giveth meat to her household,
and a portion to her maidens.
16 She considereth a field, and buyeth it:
with the fruit of her hands she planteth a vineyard.
17 She girdeth her loins with strength,
and strengtheneth her arms.
18 She perceiveth that her merchandise is good:
her candle goeth not out by night.
19 She layeth her hands to the spindle,
and her hands hold the distaff.
20 She stretcheth our her hand to the poor;
yea, she reacheth forth her hands to the needy.
21 She is not afraid of the snow for her household:
for all her household are clothed with scarlet.
22 She maketh herself coverings of tapestry;
her clothing is silk and purple.
23 Her husband is known in the gates,
when he sitteth among the elders of the land.
24 She maketh fine linen, and selleth it;
and delivereth girdles unto the merchant.
25 Strength and honor are her clothing;
and she shall rejoice in time to come.
26 She openeth her mouth with wisdom;
and in her tongue is the law of kindness.
27 She looketh well to the ways of her household,
and eateth not the bread of idleness.
28 Her children arise up, and call her blessed;
her husband also, and he praiseth her.
29 Many daughters have done virtuously,
but thou excellest them all.
30 Favor is deceitful, and beauty is vain:
but a woman that feareth the LORD, she shall be praised.
31 Give her of the fruit of her hands;
and let her own works praise her in the gates.
Published by The American Bible Society
I love the verse 26 because it suggests woman’s role in justice, “in her tongue is the law of kindness”. To me, this means that women have a special divine gift from God within them. It is the law of kindness, the law of mercy the social justice that proceeds out of the mouth of a virtuous women.
I go along the lines of HiJolly’s comments above. To me, it is plainly shown in the temple ceremonies and instructions that Women have their own power and authority, call it “priesthood” if we want, as they are named to be queens and priestesses. Women wear the same symbolic clothing of priesthood. They pronounce blessings … it’s everywhere! The fact that it isn’t openly practiced that way in the Chapel (regular non-temple Mormonism) in my personal opinion is a conviction against the world at large, ties to cultural patriarchal traditions, call it also unworthiness too, of the members of the Church as a whole.
I personally think JS was headed in the direction of priesthood for women. Perhaps that was too radical for the day? Women gave blessings for the sick all the way up into the early 1900’s. That in particular was expected as a role — women as healers.
I think JS was personally a little uncomfortable with a lot of the early Church speaking in tongues and some of the other more animated outpourings of the Spirit.
I also agree that woman are anointed only in the Temple. Men received their Priesthood in Holy Settings, but do not have to be in the Temple. Women receive their anointing prior to serving a mission, marriage or taking out an endowment. It could be just because the Lord treats women with a more Holy respect as part of their anointing is to become mothers. Quote:I think JS was personally a little uncomfortable with a lot of the early Church speaking in tongues and some of the other more animated outpourings of the Spirit.
Hmm. I am really interested in this comment. Did you read something Valoel that helped you come to this conclusion? Thanks.
Poppyseed, I think the D&C is quite clear in some sections about the concern over uncontrolled “charismatic gifts” that probably were no more than emotionalism on steroids. The qualification of the gift of tongues as needing an interpreter might be the best example. I’ll jump in here too poppyseed. I think the shadow of BY’s influence makes us feel that JS must have been similarly inclined to a “dictatorial” leadership role. But JS was always reaching out for collaboration (corroboration too sometimes). His mindset was much more communal than individual as a leader accepting input, concerns, suggestions, rebuke, etc. He was accepting of “questionable” practices as he was of many “spiritual” gifts; Sidney Rigdon as a church leader probably showed JS an example of this style.
Anyways, that’s how I see it.
I also think BY saw very clearly the explosive, divisive potential of the free-flowing charismatic aspect of the early church and, more in keeping with his own managerial, non-visionary nature, downplayed that aspect. Frankly, I’m not sure the Church would have thrived if BY had been the first Prophet – just as I’m not sure it would have survived if JS had been the leader of the migration (or Sydney Rigdon or Oliver Cowdery or anyone but BY). There is a bit of the hand of God in the combination, imo. However, that is FAR from the point of the original post, so I will stop here and try to return to women’s role in Mormonism.
Poppyseed wrote:Quote:I think JS was personally a little uncomfortable with a lot of the early Church speaking in tongues and some of the other more animated outpourings of the Spirit.
Hmm. I am really interested in this comment. Did you read something Valoel that helped you come to this conclusion? Thanks.
It was the impression I got while reading “Rough Stone Rolling.” I am pretty sure that was the source of this idea in my head. It might also have been from my reading “Mysteries of Godliness: A History of Mormon Temple Worship.”
I recall the stories of some early members leaping in the air, writhing around on the floor, making sounds like animals, speaking in tongues, etc. On the one hand, Joseph was seeing enthusiastic converts coming into the Church, bringing their own past religious baggage. Not to be judgmental, but some of it sounded quite extreme. So I think he put up with it for a while, not knowing really what to do.
On the other hand, it was very disruptive and some people were creating confusion and disorder with their own wildly spoken waking visions and prophecies. JS had to stop several groups who started following a prophetess, and had to end another brother using a peep stone to give revelations to the Church (of course we know where he got the idea, no usually brought up in the sunday school lesson, hehe).
So my impression was that JS never did much of that dramatic stuff himself, and worked to tame things down a notch over time. Ray referenced the requirement that an interpreter be present along with speaking in tongues … that pretty much ended that practice.
Valoel wrote:…So my impression was that JS never did much of that dramatic stuff himself, and worked to tame things down a notch over time. Ray referenced the requirement that an interpreter be present along with speaking in tongues … that pretty much ended that practice.
In the Relief Society, they spoke in tongues until the turn of the 20th century, Valoel. It was only after those sisters who had known Joseph in Nauvoo had passed away, that speaking in tongues ended in the Church.HiJolly
One little historical note that I have often found interesting is the inclusion of women in the First Presidency of the Reorganized LDS Church, now known as the “Community of Chirst”. Please see the bio of this member of the First Presidency:
http://www.cofchrist.org/bio/current/Savage-Becky.asp Now, I am NOT suggesting that women should or ever will be ordained into the First Presidency, what I am intrigued by is the feminine prospective that this church has.
They claim to have been restored by JS in 1830 and use the exact same scriptures that we do, BOM, D & C and the Bible, yet they emphasize peace and social justice as the dominant themes of these scriptures.
Correct me if I am wrong and call me crazy, but men tend to emphasize the “heroics of battle” and “victories of the sword”. Women can read the exact same scriptures and feel more moved by the stories of peace and reconciliation.
Valoel wrote:Poppyseed wrote:Quote:I think JS was personally a little uncomfortable with a lot of the early Church speaking in tongues and some of the other more animated outpourings of the Spirit.
Hmm. I am really interested in this comment. Did you read something Valoel that helped you come to this conclusion? Thanks.
It was the impression I got while reading “Rough Stone Rolling.”
I can confirm that this it out of RSR. It’s in the chapter “The Kirtland Visionaries.” It also talks about how this isn’t so much a Mormon thing as a cultural thing. There were many other charismatic, visionary leaders starting religious movements, which had many visionary followers.Valoel wrote:I recall the stories of some early members leaping in the air, writhing around on the floor, making sounds like animals, speaking in tongues, etc. On the one hand, Joseph was seeing enthusiastic converts coming into the Church, bringing their own past religious baggage. Not to be judgmental, but some of it sounded quite extreme.
Yes, one individual would swing around the rafters like an ape and hit his head on something to force him into unconsciousness. He would then wake up and explain the visions and glorious manifestations he had had while unconscious.😯 Valoel wrote:So my impression was that JS never did much of that dramatic stuff himself, and worked to tame things down a notch over time.
I think that’s an accurate assessment. Of course as has been mentioned, Joseph had to allow for the superstitious and unusual means of communing with God since he himself had done this in an important way. It’s so much like anything else in our lives, discerning between the good stuff and the bad stuff is difficult.This is a very interesting discussion and I appreciate all the comments. I too remember the lessons in RS that were more oriented for the sisters. I taught Social Relations, Cultural Refinement, Homemaking Ed. etc and I loved those lessons. There have been times though that I did not feel like I fit into the church because I was more of a career woman and not a ‘Molly Mormon’ who loved homemaking activities or was good with children. I recall reading an article of a presentation put on KSL Radio, called, “Mormon Women and Depression’ because so many women in Utah were taking anti-depressants. I so related to the women in the article at that time. This is why I am actually very happy that the church is changing its emphasis in the Gospel Principles manual. They are going from less emphasis on obedience of all the commandments, perfectionism, and works for exhaltation to more emphasis on faith in Christ and works will follow. Anita Canfield’s book, “Self-Esteem for the LDS woman” really helped me feel like I could still fit into the church. I realize now that the church gives general guidlines and then each individual must decide what is best for them and their family. Sister Canfield pointed out how Jesus picked very different apostles with different strengths and weaknesses and that it was alright to be different. I also liked the change in the manual about how the church was not really complete in the beginning but that the church is constantly developing. It is obvious from church history that church leaders were influenced by the thinking of it’s time. This relates to the black issue, temple ceremony, and women. For example, On Dec. 29, 1978 the First Presidency allows women to pray in sarament meetings again (under “Report of the Seminar for Regional Representatives” rescind earlier ban from July 1967. The internet has opened up a whole new world to investigators, converts, and members in being able to study church history and seeing the changes in the church. This can be confusing at times and perhaps this is why the church does not encourage questioning as much as it used to.
I occasionally had a difficult time when I was teaching gospel doctrine (4 years) and Investigators class (4 years) because I enjoyed bringing in outside material that was relative to the lesson once in a while. Then I was suddenly told that we could not use anything accept the 4 standard works and the Ensign. Now I understood that some members apparently where going ‘gung ho’ and putting stuff in their lessons that was far out (like becoming a survialist in the wilderness with guns and food). So, then I reminded my ward leaders that I hear GA’s regularly quote Mother Teresa or Billy Graham in their General conference talks and that the 13th article of faith talks about anything that is praise worthy or of good report we seek after these things. All they told me then was that GA’s are much more perfect than us and so they could do that. Well, you can imagine how that ticked me off and I told them that I could no longer teach then. I know that GA’s have their weaknesses and hang-ups just like the rest of good members and so this offended me.
Boyd K. Packer set me apart for my mission in Austria in 1969 (when apostles still did that). One of the things I was told by him is that I should ‘obey the priesthood’, no matter what while I was on my mission. Well, there was an incident where that was actually good advice. We used to have missionary splits then where one sister could go tracting with two elders. Our zone leader would always pick me as the sister for the split. Well, while out on one of these splits, this Zone leader suddenly decides that we should stop tracting and go watch this football game on the side. I mentioned that this was not the purpose of our mission and that I did not feel right about it. Well, suddenly this Zone leader got really mad and in a loud voice told me that ‘he had the priesthood, and I was to obey being a female.” Well, it frightened me and so I recalled what Br. Packer had told me and said ok. So we watched this football game for the next two hours. When I got home, I reported this to the mission president and it got taken care of and I got transferred. So, I do understand that Priesthood leaders are inspired and there are many things that we may not understand or agree with. When Adam and Eve were asked why they were offering animal sacrifice they said they knew not accept they were commanded. On the other hand, I also believe we must get our own confirmation whether what a Priesthood leader is telling us is true. Other wise you get a Jeff Warrens type of situation.
I was disturbed when Br. Packer said that Feminists, Intellectuals, and homosexuals were the biggest threat to the church. On April 4, 1987, First Counselor Gordon B. Hinckley tells priesthood session of confernce that ‘marriage should not be viewed as a therapeutic step to solve problems such as homosexual inclinations of practice…” This reverses decades long policy formulated by Spencer W. Kimball. In the meantime, one of my favorite companions had her whole marriage destroyed because their bishop had told her finance to just marry and it would cure his Same-sex attraction. So, as far as this relates to my role as a woman in the church, I guess I have to stick with the importance of getting my own personal revelation to confirm whatever women are directed to do in the church. I know this is what a number of women did whom JS asked them to be a plural wife.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.