I went to the temple for the first time in a long time on Thursday, and while I felt half imposter-sinner and half conscientious-objector while I was convented there, there was a point where tears overtook me and I felt it was a direct answer to doubts I have been having recently. Doubts about whether there is a place for me in the structural church, with my dangerous questions.
Last week I got an email from one of my favorite cousins. I wanted to defer to the priesthood authority in my home and beg my husband to answer for me (because my husband understands, and maybe the same idea from him would be conceivable?) — but the response, my only response, to that and all the other (however well-meaning) shushings I have received all my life is a barbaric and desperate yawp into the gaping maws of benevolent paternalism that I am entitled to my questions.
I am entitled to my questions. I will have and do have and have had questions. You can have my house, my shelter, you can have my books, you may take my Diet Mountain Dew, but you may not take my questions. (You can’t take my daughters, either, unless you promise to not return them when the whining starts.)
God is not threatened by my questions. He understands them, and me, and our entire church is based on the idea that asking questions is a good thing.
In the temple Eve has a small role, but she asks five extremely incisive questions. And then she sets the whole plan in motion by her actions.
With Eve as a model, the creation story as a guide (Adam is a bit of a dim bulb, yes?) and the admonitions of so many as an excuse, I am tempted to concede that it is quite fundamentally obvious, yes, that women are naturally and innately superior to men in all aspects of spirituality. We are born nurturers, we are intelligent enough to ask the right questions and we are courageous enough to do what needs to be done. Of course we do not need the priesthood or comprehensively-planned and well-funded developmental activities. Of course we do not need to approach our education with a career in mind or learn any of the things involved in heading a household. Is it the errand of angels to change tires?
We do not need lessons in leading or calls to action or reminders of duty. We have no need of entering into covenants with the Lord directly when we will always, from birth, through every stage of life, unto death, have a man at our side to mediate that relationship for us. Why would we need to speak to God for ourselves, anyway, when we are already, by virtue of our congenital chromosomes, as perfect as a man might someday hope to be with the priesthood as his aid? Even our transgressions are not our own but the responsibility and realm of the man whose rib made us. We can own no wrong.
Why would any man ever think he knows better than I what it means to be faithful and content and devout? Doesn’t he know what I am? Doesn’t he know that I am a woman, and as such, his innate superior in every spiritual way?
And that is not even counting my motherhood. Four children and two souls lost to miscarriage. In the motherhood-priesthood equivalency, that would parallel, what? Deacon for Avery, Teacher for miscarriage one (or is a miscarriage like an ordination temporarily derailed by one dissenting vote of non-sustaining? Let’s count it for now), Priest for Callie, Elder for Lucy, High Priest for miscarriage two, Patriarch for Molly.
If I embrace the “woman don’t need the priesthood because they’re naturally righteous” and the “motherhood and priesthood are complementary” arguments, it would seem that, logically (or I should say spiritually, because it is not in logic but spirit that women exceed male capacity), I am a seriously righteous Patriarch (Matriarch), who can stop apologizing for asking questions.
Subscribe by email
awesome, as always
Dim lightbulb indeed! So why do the dim lightbulbs get to talk and covenant directly with God, while the bright ones sit on the sidelines?
I’ve been having a lot of doubts myself. I have had many undeniable spiritual experiences over the years. But some days I just don’t know if I can handle the church. I’m fine with Jesus and the atonement and even the B of M. It’s just most of the other Mormon stuff that often drives me batty! I feel that we as a church are straying too far from the basics of the gospel (faith, repentance, baptism, love one another, do good and follow Jesus’ example) and have become overly Pharisaical or Mosaic in our numerous beliefs & practices. Even the big things like Family or Temple (which have a lot of good in them) have overtaken the basics. Anyway, I am not as coherent as I’d like in this comment…but I hope you can understand where I’m coming from.
I remember my grandpa years back saying that men are going to have a major shock (and repentance/learning process) in the afterlife when they realize how they have systematically oppressed or mistreated women. Go grandpa!
Shannon Reply:
November 16th, 2012 at 11:59 am
Thanks, Rixa. I don’t know if it’s ironic or not that most of the women I know who do have doubts are those with superb husbands — those, like myself — who are the opposite of repressed or unequal in their personal lives. That has to be significant of something, doesn’t it?
I love your blog because I like the way you think. Just one idea I would like to offer into the conversation:
In the second creation story, God creates Eve out of Adam’s rib, this we all know. But sometimes it will do us good to stop and think about the symbolism of the rib. If God had made woman out of Adam’s hands, it would seem to indicate that women were made to do work for men. If God had made Eve out of Adam’s back, perhaps women were made to carry the burdens of men. If Eve were made from Adam’s heart, perhaps she was intended to be the spiritual superior of Adam, to lead him in matters of the heart/spirit.
Instead, Eve was fashioned out of Adam’s rib. A rib protects vital organs. It comes from the exact middle of the body. To be joined at the rib means to be face to face or side by side. To be fashioned out of the rib seems to indicate that Eve was made in genuine equality with Adam.
It was only after the original sin (is this something you talk about in Mormonism?) that women became oppressed by their childbearing responsibility. We should also remember that sin requires men to give up their freedom to provide for their family. Still very equal in nature. If women are asked to be less than men in your church, (as they sometimes are in mine) I don’t find any evidence for such treatment in the creation stories.
Shannon Reply:
November 16th, 2012 at 12:04 pm
Thank you for the thoughtful response, Caitlin. I am always fascinated by other sects’ explication of the creation story. I do like (though of course it’s not mine to like or dislike doctrine) the idea we have in Mormonism that Eve is to be absolutely commended and revered for having the wisdom and courage to choose to bring life (and death) into the world. We say it was a “transgression” to eat of the fruit, but there is no sense of a sexual sin having been committed, and that the travail in childbirth was more a natural consequence than a punishment imposed. I don’t know.
I don’t know much about anything.
But I agree that almost always in the scriptures (especially, perhaps ironically? in our Book of Mormon, and in the New Testament more than the Old Testament) that women are not not asked to be less.
I’ve found your posts interesting and I appreciate the thoughts and perspectives they provoke within me. I listened to the following Nibley talk this AM – “Patriarchy and Matriarchy” and found it fascinating in relation to your shared experience in this post. Caitlin’s comment is especially interesting in relation to topics addressed in the recording:
http://www.divshare.com/download/14415731-73b
(I found the link from this website so you can get part two of the audo, too: http://www.eveoutofthegarden.com/p/hugh-nibley-mp3.html )
Shannon Reply:
November 16th, 2012 at 11:50 am
Thanks for the links, Eric, I will listen to those. I remember working on the reference desk on the old 4th floor of the HBLL and watching Brother Nibley walk past on his way to the rare books.
One of my earliest memories is of my dad trying to explain to my older sister that life isn’t always fair. She was throwing a big tantrum. I didn’t understand what was going on then, and I’m not sure I understand what is going on here.
Life is not fair. The gospel is not fair. Jesus is not fair, and neither is Heavenly Father. The Atonement is not fair: if I repent of my sins, I can (unfairly) be forgiven of many more sins than my more righteous sister, who has less need of a spiritual physician.
I don’t know of any teaching in the gospel regarding fairness, especially among men and women. In “The Family: A Proclimation to the World,” the First Presidency encourages men and women to work as “equal partners.” Did you grow up in a home with unequal partners? Does your family now have unequal partners? From your posts in general, I get the impression that you and your husband have an excellent partnership.
Do you have a beef with the unfairness of church roles (or life in general) or is your beef with people who try to establish equality between being a mother and holding the priesthood? If the latter, is this a doctrinal concept taught over the pulpit (i.e. General Conference style), or something retold in Sunday School along with Cain being Bigfoot or youth being former generals who will one day hush heaven?
It’s one thing to criticize promoters of urban legends, but it’s another to criticize the church. There’s a difference between questioning doctrine and criticizing the brethren (perhaps an awkward [albeit accurate] metonym for church leadership in this context). There’s a difference between privately questioning church practices versus publicly criticizing the Relief Society President or the Prophet. Personally, I was appalled a few years ago when one of my favorite authors publicly criticized the brethren for placing basket ball courts in churches. To be genuine, I very much agreed with his argument, but I would never have expressed those thoughts publicly, and especially not in such a negative tone.
Men and women are not the same. And frankly, maybe the are not even equal, at least not in a quid-pro-quo sort of way. At my work I currently take care of soldiers wounded in the Afghanistan war. I’ve treated hundreds of soldiers. At most, 2 of them were women. How is that fair? Or equal? I don’t know, but I do feel that it is appropriate. I believe these fine soldiers would overwhelmingly agree with me–none of them would every complain that there aren’t enough women pulling their weight in combat missions.
Lastly, are you expressing your frustration with the church or your frustration with God? Is there a difference? Is your attitude one of humbly seeking to understand, or an attitude of demanding that someone explain the Lord’s workings to you in a way that you approve of?
Shannon Reply:
November 16th, 2012 at 11:53 am
I’m glad we talked on the phone before I read this comment, because otherwise it would’ve been even more offensive. But even now … that you can dismiss me as a little child have a big tantrum, I think it would be better if you stopped reading my blog. Life isn’t fair, you’re absolutely right, and my life is blessed beyond measure in my circumstances and especially in my incredible partnership with my husband. It is not, however, improved by condescending mansplaining (look it up) like this.