top of page
Search

From Christmas Lights to Yeasty Blends---Shifting our Paradigms and Understanding Revelation

Introduction: While most Latter-day Saints grow up understanding that they as individuals have access to what is termed as “personal revelation,” the revelation that is received by church leaders on behalf of the worldwide church is seen as something entirely different than the personal revelation process, and yet, somehow of the same substance. While there is no orthodox formula that LDS leaders claim privy to when seeking and receiving revelation on behalf of the church, for church members, it may not be too far of a stretch to imagine a Wizard of Oz type scenario, with the image of the all-powerful wizard visible to those observing from the outside, and yet, what is happening behind the curtain is, of a surety, a very different thing altogether from that which is in front of the curtain. Thus, for the Latter-day Saints, it is a popular assumption that the revelation church leaders receive is a “top-down” (from Christ to his prophet and from his prophet to the leaders of the church) process, often discussed in council with the first presidency and quorum of the twelve apostles to iron out any details before then presenting new ideas and concepts to the church as “revelation.” Additionally, any quick study of church history will show that the voice of revelation used within the church today is something entirely different than that among the first three presidents of the church.


Primary songs and hymnals such as “Follow the Prophet,” “We thank thee oh God for a Prophet,” and “We Listen to a Prophet’s Voice” reinforce the popular LDS paradigm of the prophet leading the church much like Moses of old leading ancient Israel through the wilderness, with a direct communion with Jehovah, as a “shadow by day and a pillar by night” (Exodus 13:21-22). While indeed revelation for the LDS may indeed come on occasion in a top-down form, it is the intent of this paper to consider another form of revelation that is active in the LDS community that is organic and grass-roots in nature, one that involves dissent, protest, and voices of reform as the yeasty blend that gives rise to revelation on behalf of the church--- evident in policy change, doctrinal clarification, and even rejection and disavowing of previous teachings.[1]


I must point out that the idea of a “yeasty blend” of fermenting, sometimes tension-filled dialogue among fringe populations with the LDS population is not mine, but originates with Melissa Innouye in her book, "Crossings: A Bald Asian American Latter-day Saint Woman Scholar's Ventures Through Life, Death, Cancer, and Motherhood.” For conservative LDS, the idea that non-correlation discussions have anything to do with revelation is a difficult concept to accept (as many conversations on social media can illustrate). Indeed, many go so far as to feel that voicing an idea or opinion different than what is coming from the pulpit is somehow an act of disloyalty. The grossly misunderstood yet ever-popular “when our leaders speak…the thinking has been done”[2] attitude continues to prevail in popular LDS culture. It is not uncommon to see a post on Facebook along the lines of “if you really believe the church is led by living prophets then why are you engaging in these discussions?” On the flip-side, many within the “fringe” populations of LDS membership feel that because they are not on these official councils, their voices are not being heard. I hope to show in this paper that dissent, protest, and voices of reform do in fact shape the revelatory process within the church and, in fact, the assumption can be made that the voices and concerns of the members are, in fact, being heard and considered.


Embracing a messy faith: This conservative mentality just discussed manifests itself in a certain culture of absolutism. One “shows” their love for the church by cleaning up its messes, never speaking critically of its leaders or their ideas, and creating a systematic theology that may appear one way, but in fact is a bit messier than many would be comfortable with. To further this point, consider the reality of the very sacred place known by LDS faithful as the “sacred grove.” Famous for being the location where Joseph Smith received the first vision, the grove has and continued to be a place of pilgrimage for thousands of people. In order to keep the grove “special,” around 1990, those tending to it out of love and loyalty were dismayed to find the grove sickly and sparse rather than thriving and lush. Eventually, a professional gardener was brought in (who is, at this moment, still in his place of employ) who with frankness told the missionaries on-site, “you are loving this place to death.”[3] He then went on to say, “Let nature take its course in the grove. All those dead limbs, all those leaves remain in place where they fall. They will, in turn, return nutrients to the ground, which will then support the trees in their growth.” While discussing this on her blog, Grace Lisch made the following clever analogy---“The concept of loving the grove to death whispered some truth to me, summing up perfectly what I see happening in the Church’s worship of their history. The church holds up its past like a holy relic- all of it divine, pure, and inspired. This sort of worship becomes quite rigid, quite black and white. It is truth or it is false. The problem with this is rigid things do, in fact, break. You suddenly find out that your prophet has made mistakes you knew nothing about? Your paradigm cracks, and then nothing you previously thought can be true. When people discover the ugly, mortal parts of our history, it shatters their illusion of the perfect nature of the restoration. Recognizing that Joseph Smith was human and may have made mistakes requires some religious humility---and humility makes you flexible. Your faith becomes not a manicured grove, but a thriving, living, real thing, with all its fallen leaves and branches---helping to foster true and honest growth.”[4]


While there are numerous case-studies that could well be referred to in order to make the point that much of the revelation within the LDS church is organic---blacks and the priesthood and the church’s official disavowal of previous racists teachings[5], church teachings on women’s education and working outside the home[6], the position that “gay is a choice,”[7] etc., this paper will specifically focus on the recent change in policy regarding the witnessing of baptisms which now allows for women (as well as children) to act as witnesses at proxy and live baptisms.


I suppose the main reason I chose this specific issue to illustrate my argument is that, as said before, as a sister in the gospel, I have been directly affected by these policies as previously implemented as well as after the changes in trajectory. It is a wonder to me that for my mother, options available to me now as a Latter-day Saint woman, though technically available to her as well while in her youth, were not viable options due to the teachings of church leadership at the time. Indeed, tears of frustration, both my own and those of my mother, as well as many of my fellow-sisters, have become the sacred motivators for me, if I may use the words of the late Neal A. Maxwell, as a disciple-scholar who asks hard questions. Indeed, many a time I have felt like Yentyl, singing up to the sky the famous words, “Tell me where! Where is it written whom I’m meant to be!”[8] I find it rather ironic that my conservative, rooted in-scripture upbringing in fact laid the fertile foundation of what some would term “liberal thinking” for a woman---but I digress. Let us now consider the argument at its core.


The internet and voiced agitation: In a 1997 interview with David Ransom, then President of the Gordon B. Hinckley was asked why women in the church were not ordained. Hinckley responded, “there is no agitation for that---"[9] While Hinckley’s words are without doubt a gross glossing over of the waves of feminist thought then coursing through the church as aftershocks of the ERA discussion and debates, with all fairness, it is quite possible that from his perspective as Prophet and President of the church, women within the LDS faith were indeed “happy,” with no evident agitation for any changes in regards to women’s involvement in the church or their roles in home, family, and professional life.

When looking at change within religious thought, it is interesting to note that in the time of the Reformation, the difference between John Huss’ ideas being widely heard, distributed, and considered and those of Martin Luther was the miracle of the printing press. Indeed, one may take that point further and argue that the difference in women’s voices being heard now (by now I mean the last 20 years or so) as opposed to the more conservative years of LDS history (1950-1990’s) is a modern version of Gutenberg’s 1440 invention---the internet. Quotes such as “the internet is becoming the town square for the global village of tomorrow,”[10] “the internet: transforming society and shaping the future through chat”[11] and “My point is, no one can stop the internet. No one can stop that march. It doesn’t mean that its going to be smooth, though.”[12]


For the LDS who have used the internet as a means for mobilization, communication, and dissemination of ideas, the road has been anything but smooth. Typically branded with words like “liberal,” “struggling,” “heretical,” and “apostate,” many who have felt their voices unheard or even silenced by the glass ceiling of patriarchal leadership structure within the church have turned to the web to voice their concerns and questions, hear the stories of like-minded thinkers, and feel part of an accepting group of persons made up of faithful and non-faithful alike[13]. Due to the diversity of voices found in such groups, conversations tend to be broad, with no topic off-limits, and access to individuals’ lived experiences is available and shared content rich with perspective and (though not always) scholarship.


Prelude to Vast Changes: It is no great secret that since the 2000’s, women in the LDS church began to see a slow and steady change surrounding teachings and doctrines (I often use them interchangeably as they are often so frequently used within LDS culture) on women’s roles, the acceptability of a woman working outside the home, and accessing education for purposes other than “just in case.”[14] In 1999, President Gordon B. Hinckley specifically included young women when he boldly counseled, “It is so important that you young men and you young women get all of the education that you can. The Lord has said very plainly that His people are to gain knowledge of countries and kingdoms and of things of the world through the process of education, even by study and by faith.”[15] On another occasion, Hinckley again reiterated this position by stating, “Among other things, I must remind you that you must get all of the education that you possibly can. Life has become so complex and competitive. You cannot assume that you have entitlements due you. You will be expected to put forth great effort and to use your best talents to make your way to the most wonderful future of which you are capable.”[16] These words came like a breath of fresh air to so many who, for so long, had felt that perhaps with marriage, and most certainly with the advent of children, a woman’s formal education was put on hold if not simply over.


With this newly “divinely sanctioned” open door, it is no surprise that a kind of revival of sorts, fused with feminist energy, began to appear on the local level, united across wards and stakes through the help of online forums and blogs. Petitioning questions and calls for change began to circulate about the presence of women both at the pulpit and on councils, desire to find more fitting titles for the wives of Bishops, Stake Presidents, Mission Presidents, etc. to reflect the roles and responsibilities they carried but were not acknowledged for, etc. A leading voice in this discussion, uniting thousands of women across continents, is of course “Ordain Women,” (henceforth referred to as OW) formally organized in March of 2013. While mainstream LDS reaction to the OW movement was apathetic and critical at its best and condemning and hostile at its worst, and noting that the overall goal of the OW movement has not been achieved, it is interesting to note the changes in church policies relating to women that have been made since the advent of OW’s protests. In October of the same year as OW’s organizing, the LDS church had announced that for the first time in its history, it would be broadcasting the Priesthood session of General Conference live on both TV and internet, as opposed to previously only broadcasting it to designated chapels. It was during that initial phase of broadcasting Priesthood session being in its “newness” that many women both within and outside OW tried to physically attend Priesthood session. While attempts were initially met with push back (typically those getting press coverage such as at Temple Square or a BYU Campus location,) many women reported that they successfully were able to attend the session in person, making the advent of this new form of broadcasting all the more historical.[17] It was also in April of 2013 that the LDS faithful first saw a woman deliver a prayer at General Conference, offered by Sister Jean A. Stevens. Though not as timely a connection, and potentially a debatable one, in December of 2012, a group calling themselves “All Enlisted” formalized a “wear pants to church day” which blew up the internet with heated debate over the appropriateness of both protest and wearing pants to church in general. While there is in fact no formal dress code for LDS faithful who attend church, both sister missionaries and female employees of the church were expected to adhere to a dress policy that forbade pants. While the “wear pants to church” movement came in and out of fashion a few times in the next few years, it was in 2017 that women employed by the church were now allowed to wear pants[18] and in 2018 the church announced that LDS sister missionaries may now wear pants while proselyting.[19]

Another, perhaps more impactful policy change in LDS church policy towards women was in 2014 when the church announced that it would now employ mothers with children in the home as full time seminary and institute teachers. Previous policy allowed for the hiring of women instructors, with the understanding that employment would be terminated upon conception. While the then administrator for Seminaries and Institutes Chad Webb stated that “we previously had not employed women who have minor children in the home, out of consideration of their important role as mothers,”[20]it is interesting to note that Brigham Young University, another branch of the LDS church education system, did not hold such a policy. Thus this major shift in policy opened the doors for the youth of the church to see more women in roles as scholars and instructors of the gospel, a place previously and contemporarily held by men. These are just a few examples of LDS policy change involving women since the advent of President Gordon B. Hinkey’s bold declaration to women that, “The whole gamut of human endeavor is now open to women. There is not anything that you cannot do if you will set your mind to it. You can include in the dream of the woman you would like to be a picture of one qualified to serve society and make a significant contribution to the world of which she will be a part.”[21] With these examples freshly in mind, let us now consider one of the most recently surprising changes in LDS church policy---allowing women to stand as a witness for both live and proxy baptisms.


To Stand as a Witness: Two years ago while flipping through an old Ensign magazine, I stumbled across an article written by Mangal Dan Dipty, a convert to the church from Delangala, India. In it, he describes his baptism, preformed by then Elder Spencer W. Kimball and witnessed by his wife, Camilla.[22] My mind slowed as I allowed myself to read back over the account, making sure I understood correctly. Indeed, Sister Kimball had acted as a witness to a baptism when at the time, the church handbook on policy and procedure specified that two priests or Melchizedek Priesthood holders witness each baptism to make sure it is performed properly.” I remember feeling some slight cognitive dissonance---and then opening my mind to the reality that perhaps so much of what we do within the LDS church is done a certain way simply because we assume it should be done that way, as opposed to certain systems being rooted in some kind of inflexible doctrine associated to priesthood ordination. Indeed, if witnessing really needed a Melchizedek Priesthood holder, Elder Kimball would have waited on preforming the baptism, and yet, he did not wait, improvising through a practical alternate---allowing Camilla to act as witness.


Fast forward to the recent policy change that sent shockwaves through the LDS community when the church formally announced that all baptized members of the church would be able to act as a witness during the baptismal ordinance, regardless of gender or priesthood ordination.[23] The change was embraced, for the most part, with enthusiasm among congregants who acknowledged their gratitude for “continuing revelation.” As I followed the conversation surrounding this new and exciting development on social media, I couldn’t help but wonder if church members would be open to accepting the fact that this particular reflection of continuing revelation most likely had something to do with a petition sent to church leaders, entitled “Ready to Witness,” organized as a movement through Ordain Women. On February 17, 2016, Ordain Women launched a campaign called “Ready to Witness.” Through this platform, they invited women to either download a prepared postcard or use one of their choice on which they would share with church leaders one or more of the following experiences:

· Explain what it feels like to have your infant taken from your arms and blessed while you weep because you are not allowed to witness the moment, because policy says a woman cannot hold her baby.

· Share the moment you were told that you could not act as witness to your best friend’s baptism, because policy says that witnessing is a role reserved for men.

· Describe the fear you feel when you imagine young women, alone in rooms with adult men asking them personal questions, and no one to sit next to them to witness and protect them, because policies dictate worthiness interviews with male leaders.

· Tell of the moment you realized that your Young Women’s president could not serve as the witness at your temple sealing because the Church Handbook of Instruction says that only men are acceptable witnesses.

· Ask of why, when women were chosen to serve as the first witnesses of the resurrected Christ, these policies are in place to keep women from serving as witnesses to these moments in our church.[24]

According to Lori Winder Stromberg, one of the original founders of the Ordain Women movement, “Ordain Women was given between 150-200 postcards to deliver, personally, though they also had many individuals prefer to send their submissions independently, so we’re not entirely sure how many submissions there were total.”[25] When church leaders refused to meet the petitioners in person on Monday, April 4th of 2016, organizers mailed in the postcards in hopes to start a dialogue between themselves and church officials. While they never heard back from anyone representing the church in a formal capacity, those who contributed their stories to the Ready to Witness campaign made it loud and clear that, in contrast to President Hinckley’s two decade previous sentiment that there was no agitation for any changes in regards to women’s involvement in the church or their roles in home, family, and professional life, there now was agitation for such things, and these sisters wanted to be certain their voices were being heard.


While one could deny the connection between Ready to Witness and the updated policy on witnessing, the fact that the policy change aligns with some of the organization’s goals is undeniable, and lays a path of hope in regards to additional changes within the church that many women have been eager to see, as well (standing in and participating in blessing circles, administering blessings of healing, etc.). Indeed, early LDS history is full of stories reflecting a more liberal usage of charismata from women within the congregations. With that in mind, the question we are now prepared to ask is this---what does any of this have to do with the idea of continuing revelation and the paradigms of LDS faithful? The following statement (which I have been unable to cite but see floating around from time to time), “we need to get out of the beehive and go back for a walk in the grove,” reflects well the mentality of many progressive LDS who are seeking refinement within traditional theology.

[1] For specific study on rejection and disavowing of previous teachings, see LDS Church’s official essay on Race and the Priesthood (2013): https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/manual/gospel-topics-essays/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng [2] This quote has been used and repurposed many times, but has its origins in the Church’s Improvement Era, June 1945. Ironically, in response to that quote (and rarely cited and even lesser known), President George Albert Smith responded in a letter to the editor that “even to imply that members of the Church are not to do their own thinking is grossly to misrepresent the true ideal of the Church…Every individual…is personal responsible to His Maker for his individual acts.” (Letter of President George Albert Smith to Dr. J. Raymond Cope, 7 December, 1945. Cited in “A 1945 Perspective,” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 19.1 (Spring 1986):38. [3] https://lifetimemeanderer.blogspot.com/2020/01/loving-to-death.html?m=1&fbclid=IwAR0hD5j4Q6xmerosZLpfYCvXOcsQ0cylkYd9Gp3r0HYL0mQoxUGP7RobTxM [4] https://lifetimemeanderer.blogspot.com/2020/01/loving-to-death.html?fbclid=IwAR1869P2PGYcFgDbyv1pTqiqB1pRVLqZhfc4N6_bP_-GtGGPFjMVfiNVlMo [5] https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng [6] It is no great secret that since the 2000’s, women in the LDS church began to see a slow and steady change surrounding teachings and doctrines (I often use them interchangeably as they are often so frequently used within LDS culture) on women’s roles, the acceptability of a woman working outside the home, and accessing education for purposes other than “just in case.”[6] In 1999,President Gordon B. Hinckley specifically included young women when he boldly counseled, “It is so important that you young men and you young women get all of the education that you can. The Lord has said very plainly that His people are to gain knowledge of countries and kingdoms and of things of the world through the process of education, even by study and by faith.”[6] On another occasion, Hinckley again reiterated this position by stating on another occasion, “Among other things, I must remind you that you must get all of the education that you possibly can. Life has become so complex and competitive. You cannot assume that you have entitlements due you. You will be expected to put forth great effort and to use your best talents to make your way to the most wonderful future of which you are capable.”[6] These words came like a breath of fresh air to so many who, for so long, had felt that perhaps with marriage, and most certainly with the advent of children, a woman’s formal education was put on hold if not simply over. [7] “The Church does not have a position on the causes of any of these susceptibilities or inclinations, including those related to same-gender attraction” (Interview With Elder Dallin H. Oaks and Elder Lance B. Wickman: “Same-Gender Attraction”, 2006) and “Let us be clear: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes that ‘the experience of same-sex attraction is a complex reality for many people. The attraction itself is not a sin, but acting on it is. Even though individuals do not choose to have such attractions, they do choose how to respond to them. With love and understanding, the Church reaches out to all God’s children, including [those with same-sex attraction]’” (“The Lord Needs You Now!Ensign, Sept. 2015, 29). [8] https://genius.com/Barbra-streisand-where-is-it-written-lyrics [9] Hinckley, Gordon B, Novermber 9, 1997. “Interview with President Gordon B. Hinckley.” Interviewed by David Ransom.Compass [Television broadcast]. ABC. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/compass/intervs/hinckley.htm [10] Gates, Bill. Business @ the Speed of Thought. Grand Central Publishing, 2009. [11] Dave Berry [12] Michio Kaku [13] https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V47N04_222.pdf [14] This idea of “just in case” is one that was popularly taught to young women both teen and young adult throughout the church. [15] https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1999/06/inspirational-thoughts?lang=eng [16] https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2004/04/stay-on-the-high-road?lang=eng [17] https://www.standard.net/lifestyle/faith/seven-women-attend-lds-priesthood-meeting-in-ogden/article_f38bf861-278b-50d3-a26a-cbb30b749bd7.html and the-exponent.com/five-years-ago-i-led-ordain-women-into-a-priesthood-session/?fbclid=IwAR2NYjL50sQmtcQDVLy2psL-wu69xt9XH_RXPJld9qNDcAfYIPUqEr3-zmI [18] https://www.deseret.com/2017/6/28/20614931/pants-for-women-parental-leave-for-all-lds-church-employees#file-the-lds-church-office-building-on-may-30-2008-in-salt-lake-city [19] https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/church/news/all-sister-missionaries-now-have-option-of-wearing-slacks?lang=eng [20] https://www.deseret.com/2014/11/14/20552727/lds-women-with-children-now-eligible-for-full-time-seminary-institute-jobs [21] https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2001/04/how-can-i-become-the-woman-of-whom-i-dream?lang=eng [22] https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2016/07/my-journey-as-a-pioneer-from-india?lang=eng [23] https://www.thechurchnews.com/members/2019-10-02/women-can-serve-as-witnesses-for-baptisms-temple-sealings-first-presidency-announces-in-historic-policy-change-162319 [24] Sourced directly from the Ordain Women/Ready to Witness Campaign website found here: https://ordainwomen.org/ready-to-witness-campaign/ [25] Interview with Lori Winder Stromberg. Interviewed by Grace Lisch, 12/31/19.


185 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All
Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page