“I believe I must have been born believing in the full right of women to all the privileges and positions which nature and justice accord to her in common with other human beings. Perfectly equal rights—human rights. There was never any question in my mind in regard to this. I did not purchase my freedom with a price; I was born free; and when, as a younger woman I heard the subject discussed, it seemed simply ridiculous that any sensible, sane person should question it. And when, later, the phase of woman’s right to suffrage came up it was to me only a part of the whole, just as natural, just as right, and just as certain to take place.
“And whenever I have been urged, as a petitioner, to ask for this privilege for woman, a kind of dazed, bewildered feeling has come over me.
“Of whom should I ask this privilege? Who possessed the right to confer it? Who had greater right than woman herself? Was it man, and if so, where did he get it? Who conferred it upon him? He depended upon woman for his being, his very existence, nurture and rearing. More fitting that she should have conferred it upon him.
“. . . There is, once in a while a monarch who denies the right of man to place a crown upon his head. Only the great Jehovah can crown and anoint him for his work, and he reaches out, takes the crown, and placed it upon his head with his own hand. I suspect that this is in effect what woman is doing today . . . sooner or later, she is coming to it. And the number of thoughtful and rightminded men who will oppose, will be much smaller than we think and when it is really an accomplished fact all will wonder, as I have done, what the objection ever was.”
--Clara Barton, 1821-1912
There was a recent outpouring of response by women in the Church to a statement by the first counsellor in the General Relief Society presidency, J Annette Dennis, that “There is no other religious organization in the world that I know of, that has so broadly given power and authority to women.” With an estimated 20,000 comments on Instagram and other social media, the Relief Society presidency no doubt has a lot to ponder. Heck, the story even made the New York Times.
One sister quoted in the Times piece summed up why this time felt different from other times in which women had expressed dissatisfaction with elements of Church teaching or practice: “It’s not fitting the narrative anymore of, ‘It’s just fringy feminists. These are mainstream women.” She’s right about that, and I sincerely hope these women remain mainstream, and do not exit the Church as a result. It is only mainstream women who are willing to stand in the needed places and say the things that need to be said who will move our faith community closer to Zion—and the same can be said of the mainstream men in the Church who stand by their side. [1]
Actually, I have been wondering when this shoe would drop. The rhetorical strategy of the last few years in the Church has been, “women have priesthood power given by God when endowed, and priesthood authority when delegated it by men for women to serve under male priesthood office/key holders, but women do not hold priesthood office or keys, and do not officiate in priesthood ordinances except the washing and anointing of sisters by sisters in the temple.” I think the astute reader can see the problem. This strategy was always bound to fall apart because 1) it is not completely coherent, and 2) it does not jibe with the equal partnership of married couples enjoined by the Church and also experienced by women in good marriages. Even the organization of the women in the Church, the Relief Society, is termed, “a divinely established appendage to the priesthood.”
President Dallin H. Oaks has noted that “only to His daughters has God given the power ‘to be a creator of bodies … so that God’s design and the Great Plan might meet fruition.’ Those are the words of President J. Reuben Clark. He continued: ‘This is the place of our wives and of our mothers in the Eternal Plan. They are not bearers of the Priesthood; they are not charged with carrying out the duties and functions of the Priesthood; nor are they laden with its responsibilities; they are builders and organizers under its power, and partakers of its blessings, possessing the complement of the Priesthood powers and possessing a function as divinely called, as eternally important in its place as the Priesthood itself.’”
It would be easy to be offended at the locutions used here: women are an appendage to the male-coded priesthood, women work under the power of the males who hold priesthood offices/keys, women have a place which is not men’s. Place. Appendage. Under. Given the Church’s assertion of the equal partnership of men and women in the home and in the Plan of Happiness, it’s hard not to suggest these are unfortunate word choices.
For while perhaps true in one limited dimension of the matter, these words are not the whole truth. And without the whole truth, the limited truth cannot but cause mischief—as surely 20,000 generally disgruntled comments from largely faithful female members of the Church have now demonstrated.
It’s high time for our faith community to aim for the whole truth about women in the eternal scheme of things. As a first step, it’s high time to articulate at least a whole-er truth about women. This immense and remarkable outpouring of comments from faithful sisters tells me our people are ready, more than ready, for that step.
For I’d like to assert that while no one seems willing to say it, we already have enough that has been revealed to us to understand the broad contours of the larger truth. And that larger truth swallows up the currently-spoken, frustrating, limited truth and replaces it with wide joy. I also suspect that faithful women stay in the Church because they know more than they—or our general authorities—are willing to say. We are, like Clara Barton, “born believing” in the equality of women and men before God, with “never any question in our minds” about this.
No wonder we recoil when we hear the limited truth; it simply seems, as it did to Barton, “ridiculous.”
We are simply awaiting the time when that larger truth can finally be said out loud.
*
Here is that larger truth in a nutshell: there is no divinity without exalted men and exalted women being sealed in the new and everlasting covenant of marriage. The reason is that there are two powers of equal weight in this universe: the power of the Heavenly Fathers and the power of the Heavenly Mothers. By themselves, neither the Father nor the Mother are divine, because both powers, united in love and in purpose—with the foremost expression of that unity being Their child the Savior--are required for full divinity to exist.
Heavenly Father does not wield the power of Heavenly Mother. Heavenly Father does not control the power of Heavenly Mother. Heavenly Father does not possess the keys that Heavenly Mother possesses. Heavenly Father does not do Heavenly Mother’s work, though He may assist Her. Heavenly Father does not hold the authority that Heavenly Mother holds. Heavenly Father is simply not a priestess.
Likewise, Heavenly Mother does not wield the power of Heavenly Father. Heavenly Mother does not control the power of Heavenly Father. Heavenly Mother does not possess the keys that Heavenly Father possesses. Heavenly Mother does not do Heavenly Father’s work, though She may assist Him. Heavenly Mother does not hold the authority that Heavenly Father holds. Heavenly Mother is simply not a priest.
Furthermore, we also know it is only the turning of both their keys together that permits the greatest creation. It’s worthwhile to remember an analogy used by President Boyd K. Packer back in 1993, which reveals the truth of the matter:
“Once a man received as his inheritance two keys. The first key, he was told, would open a vault which he must protect at all cost. The second key was to a safe within the vault which contained a priceless treasure. He was to open this safe and freely use the precious things which were stored therein . . . The man went alone to the vault. His first key opened the door. He tried to unlock the treasure with the other key, but he could not, for there were two locks on the safe. His key alone would not open it. No matter how he tried, he could not open it. He was puzzled. He had been given the keys. He knew the treasure was rightfully his. He had obeyed instructions, but he could not open the safe. In due time, there came a woman into the vault. She, too, held a key. It was noticeably different from the key he held. Her key fit the other lock. It humbled him to learn that he could not obtain his rightful inheritance without her.”
Two sets of keys, turned jointly and unitedly in mutual purpose, is what we should be envisioning when we think of our Heavenly Parents and Their work together. Our Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother have freely united Their powers in the new and everlasting covenant of marriage. Their power together is so much more than Their separate powers, which is why the man is not without the woman, nor the woman the man, in divinity. The offspring of Their love is Their son, Jesus Christ, whose mission fulfills both the work of Heavenly Father and the work of Heavenly Mother to “bring to pass the immortality and eternal life” of Their children.
With this understanding in mind, we might say that Heavenly Mother’s work is an appendage to the work of Heavenly Father, in the sense that Heavenly Father’s work could not be successful without Her assistance. But in the same breath, we would also say that Heavenly Father’s work is an appendage to the work of Heavenly Mother, in the sense that Heavenly Mother’s work could not be successful without His assistance. But since they are united, Their work is one. So why would we call either of Their works the appendage of the other, when the larger truth is so much more accurate?
And in this larger sense, while female efforts in Church auxiliaries such as the Relief Society may be ‘under’ male priesthood direction, and while these auxiliaries may thus be termed ‘appendages’ to the work of the priesthood, these positions are not the central work of Heavenly Mother’s daughters. The work of God’s daughters is so much more vast than what women do to directly support the work of the male priesthood that is the Church.
The work of Heavenly Mother’s daughters is much, much more than this, and is not done ‘under’ male priesthood direction and is not an ‘appendage’ to male efforts. This is one of the things we all more or less know, but do not say. Heavenly Mother and Her daughters have their own work, and they have performed it faithfully even when the male priesthood was completely absent from the earth. Women can perform their sacred work in the Plan of Happiness even in the absence of the Church in their midst, as they do all over the world today. Therefore, the central work of God’s daughters is clearly not ‘under’ the male priesthood, nor an ‘appendage’ to it. Women have their own great work to perform in the Plan of Salvation, which proceeds in parallel with--but not under--the Church which is the work of the male priesthood in the Plan. This should not be unforeseen, but in practice often is. Remember President Packer’s allegory: the man is “puzzled” to find that his is not the only key, and chagrined that his key alone is insufficient to unlock the inheritance, which turns out--surprise!--to be a joint inheritance with a woman.
We understand from this that there are two eternal divine, powers of equal weight: our Heavenly Father’s power, and our Heavenly Mother’s power. So let us say something else we more or less already know: there is priesthood and there is priestesshood. Women are born with divinely-bestowed power, authority, and keys that are not given them by men and are not given through the work of the male priesthood that is the Church.
When men on earth are ordained to the priesthood, they may use the power of Heavenly Father for good on this earth—but these men may not use the power of Heavenly Mother for good on this earth because they have no right to Her power. It is not his ‘place.’ Furthermore, no man can be ordained to the priestesshood, just as no woman can be ordained to the priesthood. These are distinct powers—the power of Heavenly Mother and the power of Heavenly Father. Her power is not ‘under’ His power; His power is not ‘under’ Her power: divinity come when these two powers are united in equal partnership to bring about good.
The purpose of priesthood is to become a Father in Heaven; the purpose of priestesshood is to become a Mother in Heaven. So priesthood and priestesshood are analogous, as are Heavenly Fatherhood and Heavenly Motherhood which are the ends, or telos, of priesthood and priestesshood. Fatherhood and Motherhood can only be enjoyed as a joint inheritance.
We are now equipped to sort out the seeming incoherence of the current formulation of these matters in the Church.
When we say women are given “priesthood power” in the temple, it is clear that women are not being given the power of Heavenly Father. Heavenly Mother’s daughters have their own power. In fact, it is corroborative that while men have to hold the Melchizedek priesthood to receive their endowments, women do not. Women already possess an equivalent to what the men receiving their endowments hold. In my view, we have used the term “priesthood power” too loosely in the context of what women receive in the temple.
Elsewhere, I have tried to disambiguate this confusing terminology by suggesting that there is priesthood, priestesshood, and a more encompassing “PPriesthood” which refers to the united powers of our Heavenly Parents in the new and everlasting covenant, and which unfolds to women as they partake of temple covenants. [2] Women may be receiving “PPriesthood” power in the temple, which is how I understand the matter, but they are not receiving “priesthood” power, which is the power given only to Heavenly Father’s worthy sons. In the temple, women are not receiving power in the Aaronic Priesthood; they are not receiving power in the Melchizedek Priesthood; they are receiving a furtherance of priestesshood power in the new and everlasting covenant; they are receiving PPriesthood power. We magnify our priestesshood as we bring ourselves (and encourage our children) to come closer to Christ through the male-overseen priesthood ordinances of salvation and exaltation—but our priestesshood, with its powers, authorities, and keys, does not originate in those male-overseen ordinances, but is further magnified through them.
Let’s return then to that confusing and unfortunately worded current teaching about women and power: “women have priesthood power given by God when endowed, and priesthood authority when delegated it by men for women to serve under male priesthood office/key holders, but women do not hold priesthood office or keys, and do not officiate in priesthood ordinances except the washing and anointing of sisters by sisters in the temple.” Again, given that the work of Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother is united in all purposes, it seems quite limited, quite misleading and even quite tortuous to speak this way. This formulation derives directly from the limited male view of the matter, articulating only how women relate to the work that Father’s sons undertake in the Plan.
We need to start to say some of the things that we all kind of already know. To make things clearer and the fuller truth expressed, we might instead say:
“Women hold priestesshood power, keys, and authority by birthright as daughters of their Heavenly Mother, and they use that power even when the male priesthood and the Church are absent from the earth. When male priesthood and the Church are restored to the earth, then women magnify their priestesshood power in the PPriesthood of the new and everlasting covenant in the temple both when they are endowed, and then again when sealed with their spouse in that covenant. Women may be delegated authority by men to serve under male priesthood office/key holders in order that women might support the work of the male priesthood in the Church, but women do not hold male priesthood office or keys, and do not officiate in male priesthood-overseen ordinances except the washing and anointing of sisters by sisters in the temple. Men, whether they hold the priesthood or not, are also tasked by God with supporting the central work of the priestesshood, which is distinct from Church work, serving under the priestesshood when doing so. However, men, even if they hold the priesthood, do not hold priestesshood power, keys, or authority, and do not officiate in ordinances overseen by the priestesshood. Both the ordinances of the priestesshood and the ordinances of the priesthood have the same purpose: to bring souls closer to the Savior Jesus Christ through the Great Plan of Happiness, so that all willing might once more be embraced by their Heavenly Parents and enjoy eternal life.”
The question naturally arises, why do we continue to speak in the original limited, incoherent, and unfortunate phrasing, when we all know more about that larger truth than we say? Perhaps these tortuous locutions are simply to re-emphasize that men are not women and women are not men? And that both are needed for the Great Plan to succeed? That is a worthy aim, especially in our confused times when sex is sometimes seen as a purely social construct. But then one should say both sides of the matter, not just the male side of things. Partial truths can obscure; only the whole truth uplifts, heals, and sets us on joyous paths.
*
That the male priesthood was restored by Joseph Smith is a fact to be celebrated by every woman on earth, for that restoration of male priesthood makes possible the restoration on earth of the PPriesthood. That uniting of priestesshood and priesthood, which uniting comprises the PPriesthood, is expressed in crowning ordinance of mortality: the new and everlasting covenant of marriage. Through this restored ordinance, the power of the PPriesthood—the power of our Heavenly Parents in equal partnership--is once again manifest on earth. Without that Restoration, only the power of Heavenly Mother would remain present on earth, which is not sufficient in itself for the restoration of the PPriesthood or the complete fulfillment of the Great Plan of Happiness. [3]
In fact, it is worth noting that for most all of recorded human history, only the priestesshood has been operative on earth. While sufficient to keep the Plan of Happiness ongoing, the human family cannot fulfill the measure of its creation without the presence of the male priesthood to make the PPriesthood possible on earth again through the male priesthood ordinances of salvation and exaltation for the living and for the dead.
This expanded understanding, this larger truth, also clarifies why heterosexual marriage in the new and everlasting covenant is such an important goal for God’s sons and daughters, whether or not they are members of the Church. In this earth life, the direct path to experience how these two different but equal spiritual powers combine to become the united powers of our Heavenly Parents is a loving marriage in the new and everlasting covenant. However, I would argue that even in a loving heterosexual marriage not sealed in the temple, one can nevertheless begin to feel the grandeur and the joy of the united powers of our Father and our Mother.
This understanding also underscores why marriage must be founded on the truth of the husband’s and wife’s equal standing before God and before each other. A couple will never be able to wield the PPriesthood if one of the spouses is understood to be—or is in practice treated as—a subordinate. The priesthood and the priestesshood are powers equal in might, though different, and are wielded by God’s sons and God’s daughters who are equals, though different. Notice we eschew the worldly meaning of the term “equal” here—“equal” does not mean two things are the very same, or identical. In the divine perspective, two things can certainly be different and yet equal (Abraham 3:19), and that concept was meant to be at the very heart of heterosexual marriage, and the template for the greatest power of all, the PPriesthood of God, our Heavenly Parents.
Indeed, one of the most important lessons of the Garden of Eden story is that Adam and Eve were equals with different stewardships in the unfolding of the Great Plan of Happiness. Furthermore, because each had a different stewardship, each had to hearken to the other. Adam had to hearken to Eve in order and partake of the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil for the door to mortality to be opened, by her whose right it was to open it and preside over it. Eve had to hearken to Adam and partake of the fruit of the Tree of Life for the door to heaven to be opened, by him who right is was to open it and preside over it. Two hearkenings, two stewardships, two powers at work in the Garden of Eden, all symbolized by the Two Trees there.
In our faith community, we are all familiar with the ordinances of the Tree of Life presided over by the sons of God in their apprenticeship to Heavenly Father: baptism, confirmation, endowment, sealing, ordaining to priesthood office. Why are we shy about naming the priestesshood ordinances of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, such as pregnancy, childbirth, and lactation? After all, an ordinance is by definition (in the Church Handbook), “a sacred physical act with symbolic meaning.” Do we not sense that some of the physical acts that women undertake are sacred and laden with symbolic and spiritual meaning? That they mirror the pathway of ordinances overseen by the sons of God? That they, indeed, mirror the Atonement of Christ? The most beautiful exploration of this mirroring, in my opinion, is a classic piece by Analiesa Leonhardt entitled, “The Sacrament of Birth,” and if you have not yet read it, I enthusiastically encourage you to do so. The essay will forever change the lenses by which you see women and their priestesshood work in this fallen world. It is a work that brings one to closer to Christ, and if done with the right heart constitutes a true discipleship in Christ, even if the name “Jesus Christ” is completely unknown to the woman in her day and time.
Thus it is that while a man may preside over the work of the Church, and may preside over the work of the Church in his family, he does not preside over his wife or her priestesshood work in the family or in the world. Her priestesshood work brings souls closer to Christ, just as his priesthood work brings souls closer to Christ: her work precedes his work in the Great Plan, but both are equally and eternally consequential. Husband and wife truly are partners; they are “co-presidents,” as Elder L. Tom Perry put it. [4] She is doing her own great work in the family and among the family of God (work which is distinct from any support she gives the male priesthood in the Church), and has keys, power, and authority given to her—not by the male priesthood or by the male-overseen Church—to do it. She stands by his side as an absolute equal partner, representing the priestesshood, as he represents the priesthood. Together, and only together, they comprise the PPriesthood in the home. President James E. Faust put it perhaps most eloquently: “Every father is to his family a patriarch and every mother a matriarch as coequals in their distinctive parental roles.” [5] An Ensign article further elaborates,
“The husband’s patriarchal duty as one who presides in the home is not to rule over others but to ensure that the marriage and the family prosper. . . . The husband is accountable for growth and happiness in his marriage, but this accountability does not give him authority over his wife. Both are in charge of the marriage.” [6]
*
We should not expect, then, revelation by the male priesthood or through the priesthood-overseen Church about the priestesshood. The thought makes reason stare. It would be completely inappropriate, and a complete over-reach on the part of our brethren. They won’t do it, and they are correct not to try. In addition to not having the right to make the attempt, the frame of reference is just too different for our brethren to fully understand.
Consider, for example, that the priestesshood is organized on very, very different terms than the priesthood. The male priesthood may be “general authorities” over the Lord’s flock, but the female priestesshood are the “specific authorities” over particular children of the Lord. Women experience a micro-chimerism with each of their children, where cells from their own body become part of their child’s body, and where cells from their baby’s body become part of their own body. The very milk they feed their children from their body contains their living cells. Mother and child are sealed together in a very real, very embodied way, and the navel mark of our garment is only a pale echo of the embodied mark our mothers make in our own bodies as the sign of this priestesshood ordinance. [7] No wonder mothers are famous all over the world for their “sixth sense” when something is going on with their child. These are experiences that our brethren as fathers do not share, and thus cannot fully understand.
Consider also the priestesshood is radically decentralized, in stark contrast to the male priesthood. The priestesses on earth must come to earth already ordained to their “hood,” because they must be prepared to fulfill their mission even in the absence of the male priesthood or even any knowledge of the Plan. They may even find themselves in hostile territory, even cut off from all others of their kind. The Great Plan would grind to a halt almost immediately if this radical decentralization of the power and authority of the priestesshood were not in place. Needless to say, this stands in stark contrast to the priesthood.
Furthermore, as a result of this radical decentralization, the priestesshood cannot be organized hierarchically, as the male priesthood is. The keys of the priestesshood are distributed to all so ordained. [8] Given that priestesses may find themselves isolated or powerless in the particular circumstances of their time period and location, there must also be a radical decentralization of communication from our Mother to each of Her apprentices. Such communication should be considered a form of revelation, from those of the Motherhood in the divine realm to those of the motherhood in the fallen realm. The apprentice must be introduced to the holy mysteries of the priestesshood, even if they are living in locations or times where the apprentices have no rights and are treated as little more than slaves. But how? Through her own body-as-temple. For example, giving birth is a revelation, pure and simple.
Thus, given how differently the priestesshood is organized, there is something else we do know, though we do not say it: Our Mother’s mortal sons do not have the right or the ability to mediate the relationship between Her and Her daughters. We need to stop asking that they do so; we need to stop asking that our brothers tell us more about our Mother. Our Mother is perfectly capable of directly communicating with Her apprentices, Her daughters, without the mediation of Her sons. She does so within the temple that is our womanly body, if we have the heart to understand that principle. This is the priestesshood line of personal revelation and divine communication, which is the birthright of all women, whether in or out of the Church.
Other things would also come into focus if we grasped the larger truth. We would see that there is a sequence to the Great Plan of Happiness which orders our progression from the first estate to the second and beyond. The Plan could be likened unto a mixed relay team, where the daughters of God (ably assisted by the sons of God) initialize each soul’s experience passing through the divide or veil between the premortal and mortal realms, between the world of our first estate and the world of our second, by providing life, love, nurture, and guidance to the newly embodied soul, awakening within each soul the light of Christ. But as the individual soul becomes a full agent at the age of accountability, the critical test of the second estate, which is using one’s agency to choose the right and the good, is overseen by those sons of God (ably assisted by the daughters of God) who have been found worthy to be ordained to that task. The daughters of God pass the baton, as it were, to the sons of God for the final lap towards Home and back through the veil. There is a sequence, then, where the soul accepts and experiences the ordinances of the priestesshood before he/she accepts and experiences the ordinances of the priesthood. Even so, both the purpose of the work of the priestesshood and the purpose of the work of the priesthood is the same: to bring souls to Jesus Christ our Savior so that all willing might partake of eternal life. Our understanding of the Great Plan of Happiness as the truly joint work of the sons and daughters of God would be significantly deepened if we spoke what we all already know.
Furthermore, that Heavenly Mother would not be a member of the presiding male priesthood bishopric over this fallen world would not then indicate—as some have too often assumed--that She is somehow lesser or ignorable in the eternal scheme of things. It would simply mean that Her presiding assignment is over a different stage of our development as the children of God. [9] Formal petitions and prayers about matters relating to repentance, salvation, justification, sanctification, and exaltation, among others, are rightly sent up to the president of the presiding bishopric of this world, Heavenly Father, through our advocate Jesus Christ, who is as much His Mother’s son as He is His Father’s son.
Despite this male-oriented hierarchical communication in the saving and exalting work of the priesthood on earth and in Heaven, I personally no longer believe that Heavenly Mother has distanced Herself from Her children here on earth. There simply is a different form of communication from Her. You don't need to fabricate Her out of your reason, or engage in speculation that can lead to deception. You don’t need to—and we have been told we should not—pray to Her . . . Simply reach out and you will receive revelation enough to overflow your cup. Here is one eloquent example from a sister in the Church writing of her experience in giving birth:
“I pushed one last time and entered a liminal space, neither here nor there. The hospital room faded around me, and I felt, rather than saw, a tunnel full of light, a glowing nebula of potential and power. The light here was soft and kind and full, quiet and pulsing with purpose. Mothers lined the tunnel, the veil parting as they held fast to each other, channeling their combined power and all-consuming love directly into me. My grandmothers, their mothers, the Mother of all Living, my Mother—we were all together in that place that isn’t a space, connected in mind, body, and soul, infusing love and life into every breath and cry. . . My daughter has arrived, but I had yet to follow. The matriarchs still held me, maintaining the celestial connections woven between us and my earthside infant, the stardust in the air preserving, protecting, and saving.
“. . . To say that I found Heavenly Mother wouldn’t be entirely correct. She found me, touching my raw and desperate soul just enough to remind me that She was there, that the tunnel of light that had once enveloped me hasn’t completely closed. She met me in the fourth watch, holding us both tight to her breast as I rocked my baby girl in the pre-dawn. . . My host of progenitors, all of us linked through our very cells—daughter to daughter to daughter, folding over and back again to Mother, crossing continents, planets, light-years through infinite, nameless suns—these women of wisdom and love now safeguard my daughter’s tender infancy . . .all [of us] delivered by a Son beloved by His Mother.
“She holds all my broken pieces, old scars and fresh wounds, eagerly waiting for my day of restoration, when I, with my daughter and her daughters, can walk through that tunnel of light into a star, into the arms of all the mothers who ever loved us, an expanse irradiating hope and wholeness enough to expand our ever-expanding universe, a restoration reassuring me I have always been known.” [10]
This is not the type of revelation which proceeds from the centralized Church overseen by our priesthood brethren and binding on all members. That is the way of the male priesthood, and all praise to our faithful brethren who do their Father's will in this. No, what we speak of here is revelation from Mother to each individual daughter-apprentice in the radically decentralized line of communication that is a hallmark of the matriarchal priestesshood, and which is an individual endowment of knowledge, a personalized revelation, binding only on the individual woman to whom it is given, yes, but enormous in power and vision and healing.
*
In addition to knowing more than we say, we also have more of an idea concerning what to do than we let on. We need to say that fuller truth we already know. Teach all within earshot, but especially your children, about Heavenly Mother and Heavenly Father, about Their marriage, about Their love, about Their joint work, about Their jointly Beloved Son. Emulate the ideal of Their relationship in your own lives. And while men will rightly continue to preside over the Church, for that is the work of the male priesthood in the Plan, they would never imagine they could do so without sincerely seeking input from the daughters of God, their equal partners in the Plan of Happiness. Our priesthood brethren would respect and support the authority, the power, the work, and the keys of the matriarchal priestesshood. [11] As men and women come unto Christ, they come closer to both their Heavenly Father and their Heavenly Mother, for Christ is the offspring of Their love and represents the love of both Parents for us, Their children.
When teaching your children to pray to the godhead alone since they man the strait and narrow gate of the ordinances of the priesthood, do not forget to teach them that Heavenly Mother is not distancing Herself; that She is reachable, that She wants us to reach out for Her, and that if we are worthy, we will feel Her influence and Her touch in our lives. Wherever possible, refer to “Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother.” Repeat often that “We know as much about Heavenly Mother as we do about Heavenly Father,” and “We are fully able to learn as much about Heavenly Mother as we learn about Heavenly Father.” Mothers, teach your daughters about their embodied priestesshood, and teach them how to feel Her tutoring in their lives. And above all else, teach all your children to come unto Christ, who is the strait and narrow gate leading to re-connection with both our Mother and our Father.
Despite its current tortuous formulations concerning who women are, the Church has made tremendous strides over past teaching and practice. Yes, there’s still some distance to cover as we move forward to the Zion ideal, as those 20,000 comments make plain. I’ve been keeping a list of benchmarks, and I’ve tried to update my checklist over the years as I see real progress. We are assuredly moving closer to Zion with each of the steps that have been taken. I have been a member of the Church for 53 years now, and the situation of women in the Church has been without a doubt positively transformed by the changes already made. [12] We are moving towards Zion, even if progress sometimes feel slower than we would like. But we must remember that there is no religious teaching on earth that comes closer to comprehending who women are—who they really are—than the doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ. We must further the cause of the Church, uplift and safeguard it, for should it falter, we will lose once more that vision of Heavenly Mother and what it means to be Her daughter. We will lose that fuller truth.
As the fuller truth of what we already know gains greater expression and understanding, Sheri Dew’s prophecy will be realized: “I believe that the moment we learn to unleash the full influence of converted, covenant-keeping women, the kingdom of God will change overnight.” (163). In my view, there is no more important undertaking in preparation for the return of the Savior than articulating and embracing the larger truth about women we have discussed, for Heaven is not about the Church—Heaven is about families, and families are the joint project and joint inheritance of the male priesthood and the female priestesshood. [13]
*
Where are we now, then, at this point in time?
We have been awaiting the time when this larger truth can finally be said out loud. So who has the right to say what we all know? Maybe Clara Barton’s words of almost 150 years ago, which opened this essay, have a message for us today: “Of whom should I ask this privilege? Who possessed the right to confer it? Who had greater right than woman herself?” Is it at all possible that no woman needs permission to articulate the larger truth about women, and the relationship between men and women under God, described here? This larger truth transcends the more limited sphere of male power and authority in isolation--perhaps it is not the place of a more limited sphere to be granting or withholding permission to speak of the larger truth that transcends and overshadows it?
Perhaps women can speak of their place, their power, their keys, their work, and their authority without being granted permission to do so by those who do not stand in women’s place, do not hold women’s power, do not possess women’s keys, do not perform women’s work, and do not wield women’s authority. Perhaps we have been waiting for permission in a situation where none could be forthcoming—because those we wait on to grant it have not the right to do so, and because those who seek it need no permission because it is their birthright.
“Sooner or later, she is coming to it,” said Barton. After reading those 20,000 comments, I’m putting my money on “sooner.”
NOTES:
[1] Of course, not all the comments fit that bill. One commenter opined, “Our devotion to Heavenly Mother is a cishet white supremacist problem. . . We need to be more creative and less transphobic in our recreation of divinity.” Sorry, but it’s impossible to be a feminist—CoJC or otherwise—if the reality of the female sex and its divinity is unacceptably offensive. [Back to manuscript].
[2] Which interpretation, I think, is bolstered by the difference between men and women in the temple washing and anointing pronouncement on being clean.
[Back to manuscript].
[3] Indeed, the temple work we do for the dead is vital, for it makes up for the fact that the work of the priesthood is so limited in earthly reach, while the work of the priestesshood is ubiquitous. [Back to manuscript].
[4] L. Tom Perry, “Fatherhood—An Eternal Calling,” Church News, 10 April 2004,:15, hard copy version only; the original wording is in the audio version of the 2004 April General Conference address at http://broadcast.lds.org/genconf/2004/apr/4/4_2english.mp3
--- [Back to manuscript].
[5] James E. Faust, “The Prophetic Voice,” Ensign, May 1996, p.4. [Back to manuscript].
[6] Randy Keyes, “Counseling Together in Marriage, Ensign, June 2012, p. 14.
[Back to manuscript].
[7] Which I believe is also a covenant, but one made premortally. [Back to manuscript].
[8] And thus it was possible for Christ to prove He had fulfilled His promises to the priestesshood by showing His resurrected body first to one woman/priestess (Mary at the tomb). And thus it was possible for Heaven to prove to the priestesshood that the promised Restoration was truly taking place by showing the gold plates to one woman/priestess (Mary Whitmer). [Back to manuscript].
[9] Perhaps the realm of our premortal organization and nurture? [Back to manuscript].
[10] Wilson, Charlotte (2024) “An Expanse of Light and Memory: On Mothering and Being Mothered,” Wayfare, Issue 3, Spring, 73-76. [Back to manuscript].
[11] And to me that means that before the Proclamation on the Family is canonized and becomes scripture, the priestesshood should have some say in it. The family, after all, is a joint work. Stephen Saunders alerted us to the detailed of the chronology, from an interview with President Chieko Okazaki in 2005: "...in 1995 when “The Family: A Proclamation to the World” was written, the Relief Society presidency was asked to come to a meeting. We did, and they read this proclamation. It was all finished. The only question was whether they should present it at the Priesthood meeting or at the Relief Society meeting." [Back to manuscript].
[12] One of my friends has sent a list she found on the internet that is attributed to Katelyn Fagan:
Positive changes for LDS women in last 15 years:
1. Temple endowment and sealing changes that make men and women more equal in their covenants with God and each other (Jan 2018)
2. Jean A. Stevens is the first woman to pray in a General Conference (April 2013)
3. Adding female auxiliary leaders to high-level councils (August 2015)
4. Leadership positions for Sister Missionaries as Sister Training Leaders who serve on Mission Leadership Councils (April 2013)
5. The church officially announced it has approved the centralized endorsement of all chaplaincies, including female chaplains. (June 2014)
6. Church allows single men and women to be considered for endorsement for active-duty military chaplaincy (Nov 2021)
7. Jenna Carson becomes the first female Military chaplain (July 2022)
8. Dawn Dimick becomes the first female in BYU Chaplaincy program (Fall 2023)
9. Delacie Barney is the first female in BYU Healthcare Chaplaincy program (Fall 2017).
10. Women with kids under 18 can serve as temple ordinance workers (March 2019)
An Expanse of Light & Memory
11. Any baptized member can be official witnesses at baptisms age 8+ male or female
(2019)
12. Heavenly Parents are included in the YW theme (Oct 2019)
13. Parents can sit in on temple recommend interviews with their children (June 2018)
14. Getting out of Boy Scouts of America and setting equal budgets and resources to YM and YW and getting out of Cubs Scouts and have Activity Days for both girls and boys and allocating equal resources (End of 2019)
15. Updated For the Strength of Youth Booklet that doesn't prescribe clothing standards and what is immodest (October 2022)
16. Updated and improved temple garments (ongoing, 2021-2022)
17. Come Follow Me with the same lessons for men and women and families (Jan 2024)
18. Missionary age changed to 19 versus 21 for women (October 2012)
19. LDS women with children at home can now be full-time employed LDS seminary and institute teachers (Nov 2014).
20. Brigitte Madrian becomes first female dean of the BYU Marriott School of Business (Jan 2019)
21. Wives of Mission Presidents given extra responsibilities over Sister missionaries (April 2013)
22. Church employees can use health care benefits for birth control (Feb 2023) and fertility treatments (before April 2022)
23. Church employees are now eligible for six weeks paid maternity leave (June 2017)
24. Female Church employees can now wear slacks to work. (June 2017)
25. Sister Missionaries are allowed more colorful wardrobe, to forgo pantyhose, and wear slightly shorter skirts (January 2011) and later all allowed to wear pants on missions (Dec 2018).
26. Women may now receive their endowments at age 18 without the requirement of being engaged or going on a mission, whereas it used to be recommended to wait until age 24 if not serving/marrying (~2017?)
27. Women allowed to be at the temple front desk to check recommends. (~2020)
28. Sister Sharon Eubank named Worldwide Director of Latter Day Saint Charities ( 2011)
29. Sister Wixom, General Primary President, was the first woman to speak at the First Presidency Christmas Devotional (2013)
30. The first meeting for the new international area organization advisers of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, an all women committee who works under Area Presidencies, 3-5 years (March 2021)
31. The Church removed the restrictions on divorcees (a five year wait post divorce) from being temple ordinance workers (August 2017)
32. Endowed women can now be temple witnesses for living or proxy sealings (October 2019)
33. Any temple recommend holder, including temporary recommends (aka youth), can witness proxy temple baptisms (October 2019)
34. Laura Bridgewater is the first female dean of the BYU College of Sciences (June 2023)
35. Members of either gender may seek a sealing cancellation even if they are not preparing to be sealed to another spouse. (After 2016)"
By Katelyn Fagan
[Back to manuscript].
[13] Elder Jeffrey R. Holland has said, “There might be wards and stakes in heaven—I don’t know anything about them—or there may well be some other organization that we don’t know much about. What we do know will exist in heaven is families. And most of what has been revealed about our afterlife, our eternal life, our celestial life, focuses on family organization . . .” Worldwide Leadership Training Meeting, LDS Church, February 9, 2008, p. 12. [Back to manuscript].
Full Citation for this Article: Cassler, V.H. (2024) "Women, Power, and Authority, and the Church: We All Know More Than We Are Saying," SquareTwo, Vol. 17 No. 1 (Spring 2024), http://squaretwo.org/Sq2ArticleCasslerWomenPowerAuthorityChurch.html, accessed <give access date>.
Would you like to comment on this article? Thoughtful, faithful comments of at least 100 words are welcome.