Pure Ephraimite, AmIRight?

Brigham Young famously described Joseph Smith as "a pure Ephraimite." Likewise it is emphasized in the Book of Mormon itself that Joseph Smith is from Joseph of old (coming through Ephraim, as must needs be every president of the Church). This is a critical piece to the Ezekiel 37 prophecy, which describes a stick of Judah (Bible) and stick of Ephraim (Book of Mormon) coming together as scripture. 

There's just one problem. 

Joseph Smith Jr. was most likely not Jewish. Instead he was assuredly Irish. Northwest Irish to be exact.

But that's okay, because Ephraim wasn't always considered Jewish either. He was born of an Egyptian mother (Asenath) and he, along with his brother, Manasseh, had to be adopted into the 12 Tribes by their grandfather, Israel. His life among the patriarchs would be marked by excellence, as well as intense jealousy towards his uncle, Judah. 

To me, it would be poetic if God chose a gentile like Joseph Smith to restore a church for the ultimate gathering of Israel as a modern Ephraim, by blessing (not breeding) him into the fold of the chosen people he had long envied and tried to imitate. --Even through seer stones.

Let's talk about 3 different types of seer stones. Because this is not just about interesting genealogy (or lack thereof). I want to get to claims of power, authority, seership, and presidency today, and with bloodline out of the picture that leaves us looking elsewhere. 

David A. Baird/
Historical Arts and Castings

The first type of seer stone is the spectacle-like device attached to the gold plates. This was meant to help Joseph Smith visualize and interpret the words engraved upon them by ancient hands. Because these spectacles are attached to a breastplate like temple priests of old, they are later referred to as an urim and thummim.  Traditionally, the urim and thummim would help priests perform cleromancy, i.e. determining God's will in a black and white, binary way. I imagine it would provide feedback as to whether man's interpretation was correct or not. At some point Joseph Smith decides he doesn't want to work only in this rigid way; he produces his own seer stone. The one that looks like a chocolate egg.

By Welden C. Andersen and Richard E. Turley Jr.

The chocolate-colored seer stone was something Joseph Smith had from when he was a young boy and fancied himself as having the powers of ancient Hebrew seers. There's a name for this kind of behavior, it's called Anglo Israelism. In other words, those who are from Northern European descent will believe --against all evidence to the contrary-- that they are literal heirs to the same blessings of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. This includes claims to priesthood power, land possession, and succession. 

The amazing thing is that the chocolate seer stone seemed to work. Joseph Smith produced The Book of Mormon with it. Later, when he comes across Egyptian papyrus, Joseph Smith uses another stone (a white one) to produce The Book of Abraham. We are starting to understand now that the chocolate-colored and white stones were likely not used for historical translations, but rather inspiration to produce scripture that deepens our knowledge of God.  

I have a testimony of The Book of Abraham. By extension, I believe those seer stones worked, not because Joseph Smith has the blood of Ephraim pumping through him, but because God blessed him to use those stones for enlightenment as He did with the Brother of Jared. This ability to act as seer further established Joseph Smith's authority as head of the restored Church. 

And then he was murdered without a succession plan.

It seems unthinkable that after all that effort to restore the Church of Jesus Christ, a framework for how it should continue was not solidified. And yet there it was, a succession crisis lasting 6 months! Thankfully the doctrine of having an established presidency with keys was already in place, but who should combine those keys and take on the mantel of president, prophet, and seer was up for serious debate and produced several factions in that time. 

Ultimately Brigham Young took the reins of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but not since his predecessor do we see presidents of the Church using seer stones to establish doctrine and scripture. And yet we know the Church held on to the seer stone(s) because it was able to produce this item recently for exhibition. 

This is because, I believe, those stones serve as a type of "budded rod." Please allow me to explain.

The "budded rod" is described in the Old Testament as proof that Aaron and his sons should lead the Israelites. The parallel to the latter-day succession crisis is astounding. In both cases each of "The Twelve" believe they are next in line for power and authority. In Numbers 16 we learn that God commands the 12 to lay out their staffs (AKA rods) and return in the morning. The next day Aaron's staff has bloomed and has produced literal fruit (almonds). That secures his place as leader, and the rod's place in the Ark of the Covenant, next to the gold pot of manna, and the 10 Commandments. What was Brigham Young's "budded rod"? I surmise that it was the seer stone, which had produced the fruit of The Book of Mormon and was handed over to him by Oliver Cowdery. 

Brigham Young and his successors would likely deny it. He wanted it known that his authority lie in in his proximity to Joseph Smith AND being a literal descendant of Israel, like so many past presidents of the Church purported to be since. But a few things point against lineage being the actual, literal reason. First, we have modern hindsight to inform us that LDS presidents were mostly Northern European by DNA. Second, Brigham Young held on to the stone despite never using it --to our knowledge-- to produce scripture. Third, this could be coincidental, the box the stone was kept in was adorned with a rose blooming from its bud.

I need to take you a bit deeper into this symbolism if we're going to discuss applications for today. If we think the seer stone is a type of budded rod, then I imagine gold pot of manna is represented in our time by the new and everlasting covenants revealed to us, and the tablets are the scriptures by which we'll be judged. Just like in the days of old, the Ark of the Covenant is the outward representation of a people united and led by God. It also cements the authority of our doctrine. 

The imagery of the gold plates providing mana to our souls today is very beautiful. Let us not forget the plates were not the only things given to Joseph Smith by the angel, Moroni. He also presented the Sword of Laban and the Liahona. I think we tend to take that in as a neat factoid, and evidence that the events recorded in the Book of Mormon really did happen. While they certainly served that purpose, I have come to believe they were emblems of the Church Head and Body. Of Judgement and Mercy. Even of Joseph and Emma. If we combine these elements, it creates a figurative Mercy Seat atop of the Ark. I also interpret them as a warning: Lose your way and you will lose your life. 

Woman as the compass or Liahona is not an original thought I have. The scriptures and temple are teeming with this connection. And while I am more drawn to symbolism than early Church history, I do know that when Joseph Smith introduced polygamy Emma Smith became withdrawn, Joseph was murdered, and Emma --who had been charged to discern truth from error-- ceased to journey with Brigham Young. Since that time it seems the modern Ark of the Covenant went West, separating itself from the Mercy Seat, leaving a space filled with enmity between the men leading this Church and the outspoken women who ask them to redirect. 

Enmity might seem like a strong word, but I don't know how else to describe the response Brigham Young and his successors had after Emma stayed put. The words of the temple were changed so that women no longer received blessing unto God, but their husbands instead. The Relief Society became an auxiliary organization, instead of part of the "kingdom of priests." Further light about Heavenly Mother was stunted or blocked. And much more in the era of Correlation. This is life without a Mercy Seat, if you ask me. 

I wish to emphasize two things here. First, if you've read this far, thank you. Second, the new figurative Ark established Brigham Young as the one who should succeed Joseph Smith, and that authority lives on through our current structure utilizing the laying on of hands. I still can (and do) sustain current Church leaders in their roles because they are legitimately assigned to them. The only insight I have carved out for myself is that this legitimacy isn't rooted in Ephraimite blood, but rather a stone. This view further underscores my interpretation of Church leaders as the "wild branches" in Jacob 5 who are keeping this Gospel alive despite simultaneously bringing it to its knees (e.g. here, here). 

As Church authority lives on hand to head, remember too that Emma has a "lineage" of placing her hands on heads that are keeping up the work of discernment. And it is work. It would be much easier to simply take everything said over the pulpit as God's truth spoken by his Ephraimite messenger, and not challenge the messengers to produce tokens to validate. As Revelation puts it, straddling verses 11:19 & 12:1-2:

19 And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ^aark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great ^bhail.

1 ^aAnd there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a ^bwoman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:

2 And she being with ^achild cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

Pained in delivering this ark, this Church and its proclamations in the latter-days. I don't know about you, but I feel that.  

Dear Daughter, Here's What's in Store

Dear daughter,

In my previous letter I told you the Church is not for you. So what is? Where is your place on earth? Where can you turn for peace? Where can you unveil your power? As it turns out, the answers have been there all around you this entire time.

Before I dive into my suggestions, I should review the Gospel according to your mother. This is my version, take or reject as you please:

Women came to earth with premortal endowments; the temple endowment (on earth) is not their first, in fact if you listen closely you’ll hear it referred to as woman’s “further endowment” in the initiatory. After much study and prayer I am convinced we have been ordained to the patriarchal priesthood, which is a poor name for something that symbolizes our divine origins, our ancestry, our patria. We also derive power from the angelic hierarchy to which we have shown ourselves true and faithful with pure and honest hearts.

If and when you are sealed to a righteous man, your stations and priesthoods will stack on top of each other making a virtual ladder towards heaven. You will climb the rungs of the Aaronic Priesthood to the Melchizedek to the Patriarchal. Principalities and powers will bridge the gap between archangel (Adam) up to virtue (Eve); you will be able to obtain the tree of life when you pass the dominions and thrones together.

Considering all that, you will not wait on a man’s church to empower you. You will not consider the temple endowment to be your capstone ordinance, but rather a buttress to what you already have. You will not allow men to patronize you into feeling like your work within their lower offices is fulfilling the measure of your creation.

Instead…

Exponent

Strive to be an exponent, one who expounds and interprets the scriptures. This is a latter-day calling given to women (see Doctrine and Covenants 25) because as we seek to make ourselves holy we ourselves will become an urim and thummim to our families. When I was pregnant with you I read that Christ’s “bowels” would be filled with mercy and I was able to see this word as it was intended to mean womb, as Jesus did deliver us. I brought this to a Jewish scholar and he confirmed that the original word was Racham meaning uterus. This cemented for me why we sometimes call Jesus our father (see Book of Mormon), for in our limited language this is our best approximation to “male mother.” These kinds of interpretations are something we can do more of, it takes practice and preparation.

Seer

There is no greater power. Only one man on earth can be a seer for the Church, its president. Righteous women, however, can be seers for themselves, their families, and communities.

Have you ever tried explaining the color pink to someone who is colorblind? It’s futile and frustrating (for both parties). You can expect this same reaction if you were to try to explain seership to someone who does not have this gift, and especially if they feel threatened by women. How then does seership play out? Warn those to whom you have stewardship of events that will affect them. Spot those who need your help and act immediately. Serve with love.

Another part of seership has to do with noticing the spiritual gifts and birthrights in others. Rebekah did this for her son, Isaac, but you can do the same for anyone (blood relation or not) in whom you see a talent that needs cultivating. (The Brethren refer to this as “nurturing.”)

Daughter of Earth
How great is Mother Earth! Jesus and his servants used Her feminine power to give sight to men, whether it was clay applied to blind eyes, rocks giving light in a dark ship, or stones used to interpret the gold plates. All these things have been done in similitude of Her enlightening powers.

Protect the environment, fight for her. Also retreat into nature to gather strength. It is no coincidence that the First Vision occured in a forest. One chosen to be the prophet of the Restoration knelt in a grove, likewise the daughters of Eve should commune in an order of prayer in nature*. The day will come when men will join them in the truest form of communion, but until then this should be our practice.

(I haven’t tried this yet, but I suspect weather and quake forecasting is a skill we should also tap into.)

Necromancer
This too is terrible nomenclature, but I invite you to study the so-called Witch of Endor who could summon the dead. My grandmother was an altar-keeper for the deceased, as am I. As seers we can see and “hear**” the departed in a way most men can’t. I have used this to facilitate family history work.

Ratifier

Women can and must ratify tokens and signs if Adam is to progress, if he is to know the “why” behind his performing the rites of the Church. Read Moses Chap 5. I feel so certain that Eve counseled her husband in an angelic, transfigured state such that Adam’s eyes opened and he could finally see what his wife sees. Moreover, Eve was able to hear God the Father and have the words from her lips reach His ears. –This is an old Hebrew saying with major implications! Men seeing + women hearing Gods = proximity to Heaven. That solution is achieved only when woman interprets and man listens to understand. So choose your companion wisely!

In Closing

Remember that as part of the Fall Eve’s curse indicated that Adam would preside (i.e. hold the ecclesiastical keys), and nevertheless the daughters of Eve would desire that church. The curse also ensured that the power to see and understand symbols (i.e. conception) would eventually multiply to be inclusive of not only our daughters, but also our sons. These two facets of Woman’s curse are indeed bittersweet: The Church offers us ordinances of salvation and exaltation, as well as limitations that can lead to self-doubt; Inclusive power (unlike the exclusive male priesthood) can bless all generations, but may leave us feeling as though what we have is not special.

Please, daughter, do not listen to those who say this or that gift is not divine womanhood because they know a woman who lacks the talent and a man who has claim on it. That argument does not refute the power nor its feminine origins! There may come a time when my descendents are all male, and should that happen I want my gifts, my blessings, my power in the priesthood to be upon them so that these can go on for all eternity. (God grant them the health to keep my line going.)

When I think about possibilities like that I often wonder if in the premortal councils we took such things into account. Perhaps we knew the Fall would create an exclusive priesthood, where only a tiny drop of men in the bucket of humanity would have it, and we decided sisterhood would be greater than that. I supposed we figured that priesthood lines from father to son would eventually break, but inclusive feminine gifts would last forever either through our seed or from nurturing such things in others.

Yes, we were so clever and today we continue that tradition by thinking outside the Church box.

Love, your mom.

*Trees are so symbolic with their roots in the earth (the resting place of man) and their branches pointing towards Heaven. Study the scriptures so that you can draw parallels between the tree of life and our Mother in Heaven.

**Seeing and hearing are complicated topics we will surely discuss in more depth

Dear Daughter, The Church is not for you (An Open Letter)

Written September 22nd, 2018

Dear daughter,

By now I’m sure you’ve noticed. When you walk into the chapel you will not see women sitting on the front stage. They will not lead the sacrament meeting. They will not consecrate the bread and water. They will not collect the tithing or govern church business. Women do not bless and name the babies. Stories about women will be few and far between in the scriptures. When they say men/man/mankind/son/sons you have to hope and assume women are included. You have been told you can become like your Father in Heaven, and that you must pray in church only to Him (not Her).

You know that when this imbalance of power, focus, and worth becomes too much you can come to me and I will acknowledge your pain. But be aware that if you open up to others about this you will inevitably hear that your feelings are unfounded, unwarranted, and unreal. Worse yet, they may tell you that to point out the patriarchy is to teeter towards apostasy.

I want to explain to you why people react this way.

Cognitive dissonance is, of course, a thing. A lot of people don’t want to hear observations that make them take a look at inequality. It’s uncomfortable for them for the following reasons divided by sex:

Men

1.      They are the beneficiaries of that inequality and don’t want that power threatened

2.      They are able to identify so strongly with God the Male that they will not tolerate the mere suggestion His church runs on sexism (though it literally does, see the dictionary entry)

Women

1.      They have internalized misogyny to the point of not being able to see what you see

2.      Their world would collapse if they tugged at this string and followed where it went

Both men and women will tell you to have gratitude, which I agree with in the right context. In the image above I am showing you two groups of women, A&B. Group A women (purple) are grateful to be able to speak in church, make covenants alongside men, and to teach classes because they marvel that women would be allowed to. Group B women (green) are grateful for what they have, of course, but faithfully inquire about a greater calling and destiny. Theirs is a larger vision for womanhood.

I can already tell that you and I are Group B, and that’s a bittersweet thing because it means our place in the Church will always bring revelations as well as heartache. Up until this point I was content to teach you a “grin and bear it” approach to church survival, but recently I’ve landed on another conclusion: I want you to know the Church is not for you.

No, I’m not saying you shouldn’t continue to make and keep sacred covenants. I’m not saying you should stop attending your Sunday meetings, either.

What I am saying is that by accepting that our Church was in fact built for men you can liberate yourself from the impossible task of excavating all divine womanhood from it. This freedom will allow you to put less stock in the often well-intended but indeed harmful platitudes offered to women to make them feel better about their secondary status and keep them there.

You still need the Church for its saving and exalting* ordinances, to serve as a literal meetinghouse for the gathering of saints with an eye towards unity. But daughter this cannot be your everything. Your keys work elsewhere.

Navigating a life that is patient and participatory with the Church while honing your spiritual skills mostly outside of it will not be easy. In another letter I will give you my insights about where female power lies. In this letter I wish to focus on the battlefield that awaits you as you continue to walk through the doors of your chapel, and how to avoid traps set to bring about your destruction. While the ways in which our fellow saints can dampen our godly aspirations are many, the four greatest threats are 1) So-called Temple Prep and 2) The Third Hour 3) Leadership worship 4) Family worship. 

“Temple Prep”

My daughter, church members think they are doing a service to women by telling them that the temple is “the great equalizer.” We tell them they will be endowed with power, but we skip that part about that power being unto the husband. And we definitely don’t prepare them to give themselves to their husband, and not expect him to do the same. Knowing that this is the setup ahead of time will not only give you the agency to decide if these are covenants you wish to make, I believe it will also help you to put the presentation of the endowment in its proper context. What you will see acted out in front of you is a world created for Adam without mention or depiction of Heavenly Mother, and a silent, submissive Eve after the Fall. In other words, you will see how true it is that the Church is not focused on women, at least not Type B ones.  I actually appreciate the temple’s honest depiction of things as they truly are currently. And while I’m able to pick up hints revealing feminine characters and virtues in the endowment, my point of sharing these insights is to spare you from the common practice of hanging all your worth on a ceremony that was retrofitted to include women.

The Third Hour

Hands down I think the third hour of Church has caused as much damage to women as polygamy. As you know, Relief Society was not established to be a one hour block of time once a week. It was meant to be much, much more. (I could go on, but I’ll spare you.) Not only is this a supreme loss, what we do in that third hour is an awkward dance of trying to pretend male and female roles in the church work in parallel, and our grasping at straws to produce 3rd hour lessons has produced pseudo-doctrines that will have negative effects on women for ages. While we’re telling the young men that they have power in the priesthood offices, we’re teaching young women their bodies are so powerful they need to cover them up. As we outlined priesthood duties for the elders, we dove into sociopolitical commentary to convince women that their equivalent pastime would be staying home and out of the workforce. Such lunacy. (Mark my words, if and when the third hour is done away with, the daughters of Eve will be freed to gather into their order of prayer and good works.)

Update October 6th, 2018: The parenthetical last line of the above paragraph was added after I wrestled in the spirit with God. I had concluded I would take a break from attending church and a chill came over me, followed by a wave of comfort and reassurance that the third hour would be done away with, and that I should hold on. Now, today, it has been announced in General Conference that we are down to 2hrs. As I understand it there will still be Relief Society rotating through the second block, but I’m optimistic we’re heading down the right path for the right reasons (unleashing female power).

Leadership Worship
I know you know this, but Church leaders are fallible. Joseph Smith even went out of his way to correct a line of scripture to teach that, yes, sometimes people called to prophethood do lead others astray. This was obviously an important lesson to teach. In contrast, when I see mothers laminating pictures of church leaders and quizzing their children on which bald bespectacled white male is in front of them it's hard for me to not let out an exasperated sigh. Only Jesus will never fail you. For anyone else please have respect for the office they hold, for the work that they do, but do not take their words for unquestionable truth. Do not look to them as superstars, worthy of such adulation. When you hear something out of Salt Lake that confuses you, it's your duty as a faithful Saint to wrestle with it. Whether or not you have to accept it is between you and the Holy Ghost. 

Traditional Family Worship
The Book of Mormon has so little to say about marriage and nothing to comment on homosexuality. And yet Church members seem to want to focus a majority of their lessons on these concepts. When clean homes are preferred to the dirty feet that come from ministering onto society's rejects we have a problem. 

Closing Words

Daughter, let me reemphasize: This letter isn’t meant to burst your bubble. Nor do I intend to keep you from having your own experiences and drawing your own conclusions. But if my years of trying to warp feminine impressions to fit male standards can spare you from the pain and frustration of doing the same, this is my attempt at that.

I know that Jesus Christ lives and that He established His Church on the earth, giving some apostles, prophets, pastors and teachers. And that, as far as we know, the leaders at the very top were all men. When His Church was Restored, men were again called to lead the way. They hold the keys to the Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthoods today. I am very glad to be on the receiving end of those blessings! For the remaining 165 hours in the week I invite you to seek even more, and I know you will find it as you focus on the Gospel. Bring that back to your companion and children and all will be better for it. In this I have faith and leave you my blessing.

With love, your mother.

*technically speaking the Aaronic Priesthood can exist outside the Church through lineage

Polygamy is NOT an Eternal Principle

A few months ago in Relief Society, a sister in my ward casually mentioned that polygamy is an eternal principle. There was no push-back on that, it was just accepted and people moved on.

Except me, of course. I let it simmer in my mind for much longer than I should have.

I eventually reached out to say that while I appreciate the perspective, this conclusion is not official doctrine* and I for one do not believe it, so please be mindful there are differing views in the room. We had a pleasant conversation from there, but the usual tropes came out...

• I was encouraged to read the scriptures and pray on the eternal nature of polygamy.
• I ought to think of the sister who never married. --I wouldn't want to let my jealousy stand in the way of her exaltation, right?

All of this assumes God didn't have the foresight or math skills to get the ratio of righteous men and women right in heaven. It also ignores the fact that many more male infants die in their angelic state than females.

So what do I say in response? First, my typical snarky comeback:

"Okay, well, if you're all cool with polygamy, I'll be sure to volunteer you to share your husband with the billions of women who need him to get into Heaven." Thanks for taking a hit for the team!

(I'm a jerk.)

But in all seriousness, my next favorite line to deliver in this case is:

"Don't stop me now, I'm having such a good time. I'm having a ball!"

We should look forward to polygamy in the Celestial Kingdom as much as we would gleefully anticipate sacrificing our sons on altars there, too.

Which is not at all.

Indeed, when referencing polygamy in Doctrine and Covenants  132:50 we read:

Behold, I have seen your sacrifices and will forgive all your sins; I have seen your sacrifices in obedience to that which I have told you. Go, therefore, and I make a way for your escape, as I accepted the offering of Abraham of his son Isaac. (Emphasis added.)

Polygamy hardly seems like a celestial reward when it's likened onto a great trial. Note too that God intends to remove this hardship at some point, though the timing of that is unclear. Many even believe Joseph Smith was able to escape consummating polygamy because for as many wives as he had, we only know of children coming from Emma (modern DNA studies continue to support this).

How then can people say polygamy is eternal? I used to approach this topic from the point of defending my conclusion, but today I've had enough of that. Today I play the offense and ask others how they can still promote an ideology that is not only blatantly false, but just as important hurts so many women!

I could concede a fair counter-argument in favor of polygamy...

If The Creation story featured Adam and Eve and Janet and Cindy. That is to say, if the Male:Female union weren't the standard and ideal from the beginning.  

If LDS polygamy produced more children than would have otherwise been expected of traditional marriage (news flash: It didn't).  

If men routinely outlived women (the opposite is true), allowing them more opportunities to remarry.

And especially if The Book of Mormon didn't deliver a scathing condemnation of polygamy except to allow the case where God tries his people with it (see Jacob Chapter 2, also Genesis 38:9-10). 

Bonded, but not sealed by Krazy Glue

At this point, some might point out that sealings have been performed for multiple women to one man and that this practice still goes on today. That is true, that's not wrong, but it's not entirely correct to understand it that way. One must first realize that the word "sealing" as it is used to describe temple marriage is a misnomer. A "sealing" is not actually a sealing (i.e. enduring) until it is bound by the Holy Spirit of Promise, this is generally understood to take place with a Second Anointing ordinance that includes the Washing of the Feet. When the sealing power was restored to earth and in both Kirtland and Nauvoo, men were married and "sealed" to multiple spouses, but second anointings were reserved (in almost all cases) to the first wife only. This would support the 1:1 male-female union as eternal in nature and anything else as temporary.

Furthermore, Jesus our Exemplar repeatedly showed us that female singularity is key along the path to exaltation. Though obvious, Jesus was born of ONE woman, from a virginal womb. In death, he was laid to rest in a virginal tomb (never used before) and returned into the presence of ONE woman, Mary Magdalene. Similarly, though Abraham had other wives and far-outlived Sarah, when he died he was interred next to his first wife's grave and hers alone (Genesis 25:10). This pattern would be repeated with Emma Hale Smith laid next to Joseph Smith Jr.. These examples give a picture of what the morning of The First Resurrection will look like, and it's not a polygamous model.

Do I point these things out to dig at subsequent wives and single ladies? Do I not care about their eternal destiny? Am I motivated out of jealously to share this viewpoint?

I've taken away nothing. The concluding argument pro-polygamists have always given is not to worry, "everything will work out in the end." That last bit remains true. We both agree that God is love, He is merciful and will take care of everyone in His great plan. The fundamental point where we differ is, I have faith that His plan does not handle women as expendable, dime-a-dozen figures in a play centered on man. Rather, I propose this radical thought that we are of equal worth, and that the singular male-female union is celestial. Worlds without end.


Addendum: I was asked when, if ever, God gives the "green light" to the practice of polygamy. To that I say at most He will give a yellow light, which is to proceed with caution in the following circumstances based on scriptural references:

1. The Law of Sarah is invoked in a permissible season. That is, when a woman requests that her husband take an additional wife and the Prophet approves it. 
2. As in OT times, when a man dies and his brother is legally required to marry his widow for protection and provisions. Today there are men who feel prompted to marry a widow who had been sealed to her first husband in order to "raise up seed" to him.
3. When God decides to try his people? Ugh. But even then I have faith He will provide an escape as mentioned earlier. 

In 2/3 cases, the focus appears to be doing what the woman wants, which I found to be fascinating. And note that the third item can be satisfied by the second scenario described, potentially making this 3/3 pro-woman. 

Also interesting, the Second Chapter of Jacob says polygamy is not to be practiced unless God commands it for "raising up seed." A search of the scriptures reveals that the phrase "raising up seed" by itself is typically used in only two ways: In the general (i.e. not related to polygamy) sense of righteous branches of The Tribes needing to keep their line going, and the more applicable Old Testament setup of brother-in-law duty to widows mentioned above. (We're thankfully past that now.)

As for the prophecy that one day 7 women will grab a hold of 1 man and ask to be called by his name (see Isaiah 4:1), I think it's possible that as the elders flake out on us there will be many righteous single women in the last days who will yearn to have their temple ordinances complete and request good men to stand as proxies for their would-be-husbands. I'm not fretting about this for two reasons: 1) Again, a sealing is not a sealing until it is bound (i.e. things will get sorted out later) and 2) I've already volunteered my RS sister's husband to take care of all that. :)

*Ironically, Bruce R. McConkie in his book Mormon Doctrine (which is not actually Church sanctioned) says that polygamy is forever... But he also said blacks would never get the priesthood, so miss with me that. 

Of Time, Office, and Power

UPDATE 2 (2021): The temple wording has changed, but the framework of the Church hasn't. I'm going to file this under the "still potentially helpful" category. 

UPDATE 1 (2018): I wrote this post some time ago. I still agree with the conceptual framework and I know that it is in harmony with temple wording, and that we are awaiting further light and knowledge. As Elder Neal A. Maxwell put it, "The story of the women of God, therefore, is, for now, an untold drama within a drama." I build upon that today to say there is more women can do than simply wait and see if we will ever have equality. We can tap into our powers of seership, healing, and summoning now.  Yes, there is more to the story than what is presented at church on Sunday, and 165 hours remaining in the week to claim it.

Y-axis = Office; X-axis = Time (pre-mortal to mortal to eternal)

PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS IS 
NOT SUGGESTING MOTHERHOOD = PRIESTHOOD

Last year I sat in on a speech therapy session with a patient who suffered a stroke, I didn't think this experience would make me ponder the role of men and women in the Church, but it did. As the therapist began to explore and suggest strategies for the patient to relearn how to do fundamental things for himself, his wife kept interrupting to say she could do those things for him. She had missed the point of her husband’s acute rehabilitation stay. The speech therapist had to explain that this was a time for him to learn how to do things for himself, even when the results were considered inferior to what she could provide. It was the only way for him to make progress. “It’s like he’s starting out as a little child, and I have to support him, don’t I?” Her response confirmed her understanding, and seemed in line with how Latter-day Saint women are asked to sustain the brethren as they grow within offices of the priesthood.

Above I’ve charted a visual representation of “office versus time” to describe how I see things playing out for both genders. It shows woman’s condescension to this mortal realm in which things are governed by lower offices, namely the Aaronic and Melchezidek priesthoods. At this stage in the Plan, Woman agrees to accept conditions as they are, as they benefit Man’s spiritual growth. She may carry out callings with authority granted within those offices, but is not permitted to perform ordinances outside the temple using power not allocated to her. – That is not to say that she is incapable of performing ordinances (she does, after all, have that "other priest(ess)hood"), but much like a person who has the skills to drive, they are first required by governing laws to have a permit. They also need keys. And I believe these permissions are not given to women directly because mortality has rolled forth in the direction of the Father (not the Mother). Or in other words, this is Man's acute rehabilitation program, not so much Woman's. She has already proven herself true and faithful to the principles of the Gospel (reference: initiatory).

I never intended to test it out, but I can share a personal experience in which I used my “other priesthood” power to confirm that it is real. It was 2012 and I had come home from delivering my daughter. I was suffering from terrible cramping and my newborn was struggling with nasal congestion. Hearing her gasp for air was upsetting my condition even more and my husband appeared torn as to who he should care for in that moment. I could bear it no longer and I instinctively raised my arm to the square, called down a healing blessing upon me and my family, and a current of energy came through the house. The baby went straight to sleep, by belly stopped aching, and peace was restored. My husband was just as shocked as I was. 

I’ve gone back to the temple to ponder that moment and the stories of other women with similar experiences. I’ve been amazed by how many others have essentially picked up the keys* and hopped behind the priesthood wheel when they felt the situation (usually urgent) called for it. Why was this otherwise limited to the temple? Why couldn’t I share priesthood duties with my husband out in the open? As I reflected on Eve cleaving onto Adam -- who is progressing in the direction of Heavenly Father-- I see that this is a temporal setup. This is not the big picture. This is our temporary and literal sub-mission, as we assist our husbands in becoming clean and wise.

X-axis (time) removed. 

What do we as women get out of this? A physical body. A companion who is loving and whole and ours for eternity. We gain families and a knowledge of the Savior who helps us to progress. On a broader scale, women throughout time come to earth with their unique endowments, whereas relatively few men on earth ever obtain divine power. I have to believe that at some point we thought this was a good deal. And I have faith that it is, but it does help to see a way out of the mortal setup. A light at the end of the tunnel, if you will. For that reason, I have figuratively merged each office as they stack on top of each other like an escape ladder (see above). Since Woman left her high estate to join Man on the ground level, she too must obtain the signs and tokens from the mortal endowment (his first; her further) in order to climb  through the levels of the Aaronic and Melchezidek priesthoods. I strongly believe that after the sentinels are satisfied, we will rise up together using the key(s) designated to woman (and revealed to man)  and that, finally, we can unveil our glory. This may happen either in this lifetime (2^nd anointing) or the next (exaltation). But it will happen.

At this point, many would say that I’m suggesting women are merely accessories to their husbands and have little to add to this earthly existence. No. In all things men are to counsel with women who actually hold the highest calling to be assumed by mankind: motherhood. And why is it called the highest? It's more than a platitude. Motherhood is a by-product of a higher priest(ess)hood office in which daughters gained skills and power from Heavenly Mother pre-mortally. By extension it must needs be above the Melchezidek and Aaronic offices. This divine nature is meant to bless mankind and goes beyond human reproduction. Thus the Church suffers as a whole when “the priesthood” overlooks women’s contributions and/or doesn’t request their insight when going about its business. It is not good for man to be and —if I might add— act alone when so much strength and power is literally at his side. God is best served and the Adversary rebuked when man and woman work together as a team. That this ideal is not always upheld by imperfect people does not change those underlying principles.

(Others might say this analogy paints men as immature compared to women, at least at the start. I have no comeback for this, especially when I reflect on how Adam is portrayed in the temple.) 

I pray this perspective offers hope, but I don't expect others to see eye-to-eye with me and that's okay. I personally find hope in it, but acknowledge that real life applications sometimes miss the mark. There are plenty of men, for example, who presume that because they “hold the priesthood” they are superior to women (oh, irony). Many misconstrue the charge to preside in the home to imply ownership when, to me, that mostly means they are accountable for each family member receiving all the ordinances pertaining to the Aaronic and Melchezidek priesthoods. I also concede that current constraints on women’s authority likely go beyond what God had intended. 

Extensions of priestesshood, now gone 

Above is an image showing extensions of priestesshood that have been performed here on earth previously, but were done away with during the Era of Correlation. In my estimation, acts such as mothers' blessings of daughters prior to birthing do not take away from man’s apprenticeship in the Aaronic and Melchezidek offices, but instead elevate the family. Even so, this opinion of mine and aforementioned short-comings do not stir within me a desire to shatter the framework I’ve described here. I’m inclined to work within it and pray the missing pieces will come together again. For I have faith that, while certain aspects may be lacking, the broader design or rungs on the ladder will nevertheless lift both man and woman. 

This brings me back to my stroke patient. After we spoke with his wife she was committed to letting her husband practice and progress. Our neuropsychologist added that as the husband's decision-making capacity improved, it would bolster his spirit and their marriage if she were to hearken refer to him when appropriate. We also emphasized that she should remain with her husband to prevent him from ever falling. This woman was his key to safety.  As they prepared for their eventual discharge from the hospital, I couldn’t help but think their situation is a lot like what Adam and Eve covenanted to do. They were facing hardship together, each with his/her portion to contribute, but united in a goal to ease each other's burdens and return home. It seemed unthinkable then, that should this patient gain enough strength in his arm that he would raise it to do anything but serve his wife with gratitude. Such is the case with power in the Aaronic and Melchezidek priesthood(s), with its promised homecoming even sweeter. 

*I presume this is possible either because 1) being from a higher office grants a general "master" key or 2) the sealing between husbands and wife allow her access onto his power. After talking it over with friends, I'm inclined towards the former since young unmarried women do not need ordination to the Aaronic priesthood prior to entering the temple. 

The Way Men and Women See Things

I'm convinced, people.

As to spiritual matters, men start out like this:

And women like this:

It was her ability to appreciate nuance and see a broader picture that led Eve to eat the forbidden fruit. Having transgressed the law she needs a savior just as much as Adam and thus enters the world that was created as an extensive testing ground for him (not her).  Moreover, since she was the first to eat the fruit, she must acknowledge that the male vision of things, while limited, does have its strengths. It is high contrast, separating right from wrong, truth and falsehood. (Adam acknowledged the wisdom of Eve's vision when he hearkened onto her and ate the forbidden fruit.)

As Eve and her daughters have already proven themselves faithful and true, the Church is setup as an apprenticeship for men to become like Heavenly Father. It is dominated by the male viewpoint, and it is only by deep reflection and spiritual gifting that the two lenses can overlap. 

From my observation, it is easier to go from a full spectrum to seeing things in black and white than the other way around. This difference is most pronounced when men and women describe their insights from the temple endowment (she looks at it from both perspectives and more often he doesn't, see also Moses 5:10-11.) 

As a woman, I'm glad to have started with the full spectrum of color. But like so many of my sisters, I get easily frustrated with this mortal setup. To understand that, imagine trying to explain color to someone who is colorblind, who can only tell light from dark. Then imagine the colorblind person dismissing your perspective as nonsense, which so often happens. Now think what it would be like to be led by that person throughout your time upon this complex earth, with its chromatic signs pointing the way.

Christ is, of course, the light of the world. Pure, white light actually contains all of the colors. I believe this reflects how only through Him can a man and woman truly be reconciled. 

What is the Role of Women on Earth?

That's a big question, isn't it? To some, it may even sound insulting. I bring it up because, in the Church, the role of men is well defined, so clear, and very expansive. When we talk of women, however, we get focused on marriage, family life, and nurturing and seem to run out of other things to say.

Earlier, I wrote about viewing the temple endowment as a further endowment for women (not men), which points to gifts specifically given to them prior to coming to earth. What exactly do we do with that? How is that pre-mortal gift to play out in our lives now? What purpose does it serve in our individual lives and as members of the Church?

Here I will outline what I believe are the unique contributions women can make within the (current*) framework on the Church.

PROPHETESS

The Bible dictionary defines the word 'prophet' as he who holds all the keys and is president of the Church or, generally speaking, anyone who has the spirit of revelation.

Additionally, The Guide to the Scriptures specifically defines 'prophetess' as follows:

PROPHETESS 

See also Prophecy, Prophesy 

A woman who has received a testimony of Jesus and enjoys the spirit of revelation. A prophetess does not hold the priesthood* or its keys. Though only a few women in the scriptures are called prophetesses, many prophesied, such as Rebekah, Hannah, Elisabeth, and Mary. (Asterisk added)

[*In my own reading of this, I take "priesthood" to mean Aaronic/Melchizedek, not the broader term or "capital 'P' Priesthood" described here.]  

From this I feel that there are 4 distinct categories:
1) The Prophet (Thomas S. Monson as of 2015)
2) prophets (anyone with a testimony and the fruits thereof)
3) Prophetesses (named as such in the Bible, e.g. Miriam)
4) prophetesses (see below)

To me, prophetess suggests more than female "little p prophet." I base this on the Creation story in which Adam is clearly described as being made from the earth and starting life as a little child, forgetting everything that had occurred pre-mortally. In contrast, Eve is brought to him as a sage counselor who can see much more than what the eyes view in front of them (see also). For revelation, as I deem it, is not just seeing into the future, it's also remembering the past. --Even the pre-mortal existence with insight that can affect mortality. In this, Eve and her daughters are well-equipped. That uniqueness, in my opinion, is what warrants that fourth category for prophetesses.

We see examples of prophetesses (as described above) throughout the Bible and worth noting is that their power is usually on display in matters affecting their descendants. Rebekah for example prophesied that it was Jacob, not Esau, who should receive the birthright, and she took the situation into her own hands (even deceiving Isaac) to make things so. Similarly, Elisabeth prophesied that her son would be named John, and she came to this conclusion independent of her husband. Keeping this pattern, Hannah knew to dedicate her son, and only child (at the time), to the Lord in His temple as he would later become a prophet. In all three cases, when future generations hinge on foretold knowledge, it is woman's distinguished place to set things right. This makes her a prophet(ess) in the most distinct way.

Outside of the scriptures and in everyday life, women act as prophetesses when the veil is made thin to them as a privilege owing to their true and honest hearts. They are to share that insight with their families and one would hope that it is accepted and acknowledged.

ANGEL MINISTER
Angel mother is a term unique to women and is often used among Church members. In As Sisters in Zion we sing "the errand of angels is given to women." Joseph Smith once stated that women who live up to their privilege will have the angels as their associates. What does that all mean?

When asked to speak to the Relief Society, President Faust gave a talk entitled 'How Near to the Angels,' and in it he describes a view of righteous women in their ministry. Pres. Faust added that if women are true to the promptings they receive they will be employed in an angelic cause and live up to their purpose here on earth. Those promptings are described as "intuitive," which I take to mean unique to our gender, and "noble," which to me seems like something more than admirable. I'm thinking more along the lines of nobility, coming from Heavenly Mother even. In keeping with that perspective, Pres. Faust says that women have "feelings planted deep within [our] souls by Deity."--By using that word specifically he allows for the feminine form.

Stepping back, angels are defined in the Bible Dictionary as heavenly messengers. Thus, if women act on their intuition in the service of others, are they letting their actions reflect the heart and mind of God? I like to think so.

MOTHER
I don't feel a need to go deep into this section as so much of our church discussion go on about this, and Sheri Dew has already done a fantastic job of noting Are We Not All Mothers?

I will, however, re-emphasize that motherhood has been declared "the highest and holiest service to be assumed by mankind" and is "the highest place of honor in human life" (Messages of the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 6 vols. (1965-75), 6:178). It is about expounding upon doctrine, teaching life lessons, exhorting others to keep the faith, giving a glimpse into what Heavenly Mother must be like, and, yes, nurturing the talents one perceives in a child.


CONCLUSIONS
The purpose of this post was not just to brag about how awesome women are (though I do enjoy that), it's to provide concrete examples of what Latter-day Saint women have that's worth remarking.

Moving forward, I hope to hear myself, my daughter, and other women say...

• I magnify my callings in the offices of the priesthood.
• I have received or am preparing to receive my further endowment.
• By virtue of my true and honest heart, the veil was made thin to me and I prophesy ____.
• The reach of my ministry continues to grow.

I'd be delighted to hear (more) men say...

• I honor my wife's prophetic revelations
• I sustain woman's ministry
• I respect mothers as having the highest and holiest calling
• I acknowledge the unique gifts given to her pre-mortally, which bless my life now

I can already foresee this happening.

*Did I want to include "priestess" here? You bet your garment-covered bottom.