Introduction and Episode Overview

Guest [00:00:00] Mormon Stories is a production of the Open Stories foundation and relies solely upon the support of people like you, its listeners to help keep the podcast alive or to become a member of the community. Please become a monthly subscriber by visiting MormonStories.org and clicking on the donate button on the right side of the page under support. All contributions to Mormon Stories are completely tax deductible and go towards producing the podcast and building communities and programs of support for Mormons like you. Thanks for your support.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:00:36] The kindly light amid encircling gloom Lead thou me on the night is dark and light. Hello, and welcome to another edition of Mormon Stories. I am filling in tonight. I'm Jamie Handy and I've been on a couple of podcasts before. I have a master's degree in biological science education and currently stay home with my five kids and talk about Mormon history. And I'm joined tonight with three wonderful guests. Gina Colvin, Natasha Helfer Parker, and Kristi Money. And let's go around and have each of you introduce yourselves tonight. Why don't we start with Natasha?

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:01:20] Hi, I'm Natasha Helfer Parker. I am a marriage and family therapist and also a sex therapist and write a blog called the Mormon Therapist. And I am also the host over at Mormon Mental Health. So I'm just all mental healthy, I guess.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:01:39] And Gina.

Gina Colvin [00:01:41] Hi everybody. I'm Gina Colvin. I'm the host of a thoughtful faith podcast, also blog at Kiwi Mormon on the Mormon Channel with Natasha. Well, we don't actually bog together, but side by side.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:01:54] Yeah, for Pathios.

Gina Colvin [00:01:56] That's right, for Patheos. And I'm currently in Utah, having been brought to this fine nation by incidents that have happened in the last couple of weeks, which I guess we'll talk about, but very happy to be here and enjoying the possibility of the prospect of having Thanksgiving here.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:02:19] Woohoo. American traditions.

Gina Colvin [00:02:21] Yeah. So it just seems to me to be a lot of food. You know, to be honest, that's pretty

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:02:27] much all it is.

Gina Colvin [00:02:27] Yeah, I'm good with it.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:02:30] And Dr. Money, you want to introduce yourself? Sure.

Dr. Kristy Money [00:02:34] I'm Christie Money. I am a clinical psychologist and I have a private practice specializing in Mormon women's mental health. And I also have a blog, drcristymoney.com yay for blogs for all of us. And I am currently on bed rest right now with my twins that are supposed to be coming soon. So happy to be here.

Gina Colvin [00:03:00] Are you lying down, Christy?

Dr. Kristy Money [00:03:02] I am.

Gina Colvin [00:03:04] That's cool.

Dr. Kristy Money [00:03:06] Yeah. Well, if we're going to be talking about women in church. You know, it's good to be lying down for discussion.

Gina Colvin [00:03:12] I think so, too.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:03:13] Even if you're not pregnant with twins.

Dr. Kristy Money [00:03:16] Yes. It's going to be intense, guys.

Gina Colvin [00:03:19] Just lie down now.

Dr. Kristy Money [00:03:21] Yeah.

Overview of the Gospel Topics Essay

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:03:23] Well, the four of us are brought together so we can talk about the essay that was released on LDS.org called Joseph Smith's Teachings about Priesthood, Temple and Women. And this was released about a month ago at the same time as the essay on Mother in Heaven, which several of us, I think, Natasha and Christy were on as we talked about that essay. It feels like quite a while ago because as we mentioned, it's a little bit before Thanksgiving in 2015, and the Mormon Internet world has been very busy the last couple of weeks dealing with the policy changes and press conferences, clarifications and PR statements. And so it's been kind of all consuming. And so we're kind of meandering our way back to this essay that was released before. And we're kind of going to cover it thematically. But if you guys have it all out, I thought that maybe we should start by just reading the first paragraph. Do you guys all have it? Yes. Okay, let's read the first paragraph and then we'll talk about the themes.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:04:30] Okay, I'll get us started.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:04:33] All right.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:04:34] Women and men enjoy many opportunities for service in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, both within local congregations and the church wide level. Among other things, Latter Day Saint women preach sermons and Sunday meetings and the Church's General Conference serve full time proselytizing missions, perform and officiate in holy rites in the Church's temples and lead organizations that minister to families, other women, young women and children. They participate in priesthood councils at the local and general levels. Professional women teach Latter Day Saint history and theology at church universities and in the Church's educational programs for youth. Because only men are ordained to priesthood office, however, questions have arisen about women's standing in the church. This essay provides relevant historical context for these important questions and explains Joseph Smith's teachings about women and priesthood authority.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:05:30] That's a big, big paragraph for us to kind of dissect. Do any of you have some initial reactions to it or things that stood out to you?

Gina Colvin [00:05:38] I suppose as a discourse analyst, Jamie, My first question would be what would be the purpose of that first paragraph? And when we talk about discourse analysis, we look at the work of language and what it's trying to construct. And the thing that jumps out at me immediately is that it's trying to construct women within the church as having a central place, probably more about effacing their lack of authority and suggesting they have kind of cultural authority, which perhaps eclipses the necessity for general authority.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:06:16] Yeah, I would agree with that. I think it's all about. Women are very powerful within our church.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:06:22] I think that's culturally communicated. Every time there's a Relief Society birthday party, which we celebrate every year, it's emphasized that this is the largest women's organization in the world and that those events and everything are kind of run by men, but under the priesthood. The priesthood is there in the background and supporting us. I think it's interesting to note that a lot of the things they state in here that women can do, some of them have only arrived very recently. So they have the benefit of very recent history in claiming that these things have always happened. For example, women only started praying in General Conference, I believe, two years ago.

Gina Colvin [00:07:08] Yes.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:07:10] So, you know, it's only changes in

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:07:11] the church educational system have happened in the last several years as well.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:07:15] Right. Although I do believe there's still restrictions if you have young children or if you're pregnant.

Dr. Kristy Money [00:07:23] Is that true that that changed a few months ago? Now there are no restrictions.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:07:29] So there are no restrictions. So you can actually be employed. Okay. So that claim is. Is also very recently, because prior to that, you would get. You would be let go, I guess

Dr. Kristy Money [00:07:42] there was an understanding that you would not continue in ces, and the New York Times pointed that out in March of 2014, and a few months later, it got fixed. So. Yeah.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:07:57] And I know they have very recently adapted some new positions for women serving missions. I believe that that are more akin to like district leader and zone leader. I'm not familiar with those positions, but I do believe that women have some sort of leadership roles in some of their missions.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:08:17] That's correct. In my current. The missions. In the mission that I'm, you know, that I'm in because I know of some new colleagues. I don't know if that's. Those are pilot programs or if that's worldwide.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:08:28] I did have it pointed out, and again, this is kind of anecdotal, but we often associate a lot of the positions that men serve on missions with priesthood ordinances or with priesthood roles. For example, district leader and zone leader and assistant to the president. Then I had a friend who served in the Salt Lake City Temple Square Mission, which is a mission of only women. She said, well, in my mission, we were district leaders and zone leaders and assistants to the president. And I was like, oh, so it's interesting that in all of the missions across the world, those positions weren't available to women, even though they're not a specific priesthood role. And in a mission that was filled with only women, then women would fill those positions. But once there were men around, women couldn't hold those leadership positions. But with more and more women serving missions, I'm hopeful that we're stepping the right direction so that they'll have more opportunities. And I think it begs the question, if they can be district leaders and zone leaders in some missions, then certainly those aren't a defined priesthood position of leadership or authority and that they can be open to women in other missions and give them the opportunity. The one thing that I thought was interesting, it says that they can lead organizations that minister to families, other women, young women and children, which means they do not ever lead men. Right. Essentially each of us have enough umbrella, but our umbrella never goes over men.

Dr. Kristy Money [00:10:08] Yeah, I think it's that presiding wording. I really think that the general authorities, they're really big on preserving that as long as they can. So I mean, women don't preside, you know, separate but equal. Yeah.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:10:26] And we have a long history of this. This reminds me just very much of back historically, you know, a non polygamous could not provide over a polygamous man. When our church was involved in polygamy, we're very much about setting a ladder of authority and assigning everyone to their rung on the ladder. And this is again another that yes, they can oversee whoever's below them, but no one above them. And in this case, every single man who has the priesthood falls on the rung above.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:11:01] Including 12 year old boys.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:11:04] Yes, including 12 year old boys. Which has led to. I don't know if you guys have had, but you know, I've had many people, they tell it as a funny story, you know, like that deacon has more priesthood in his pinky, you know, than the Pope ever will. And I'm like, and then I ever will.

Dr. Kristy Money [00:11:23] Yeah. As someone who's. I'm pregnant with my first boy, I've been thinking a lot about that lately too. So I hear you.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:11:33] So then the essay it says is going to provide the historical context for these. And it brings me to kind of what I think should be the first theme that we discussed, which is the overlay of current mindsets onto historical behavior, where we take the words and we take the interpretation we want them to have. And then we go back and we make sure that it happens that way in the past. And I think there's Some risk to it. There's several books that I've read, nothing to relate with this, that do this, where I see an overlay of feminist ideals on women in the late 15th century. And I think, well, that's nice to think that all of those women were doing that. But that doesn't fit historically and it doesn't really work to think that they were behaving that way. And I think of it just in my own life with my kids. Sometimes we do this with our own children, right? Where they overhear something that maybe we don't want them to hear. They overhear that maybe you're talking about going on a trip someplace, but it's a surprise. And then you're like, no, no, no, no, I wasn't talking about going to Disney World. I was talking about when we were at Disney World. And you know, we try to overlay what we want the current interpretation to be on what the past behavior was to make it fit in that world. And so I really feel like the first part of this is a definite overlay of modern day interpretations and decisions that have been made onto past behavior without any consideration or discussion onto whether or not that's accurate or even responsible. The first, if we want to skip down to early Latter Day Saint understandings of priesthood, that first paragraph, it starts, it's like the fourth or fifth sentence and it says, even so, can one of you find that and read it? Okay, I'll read it. Okay, yes, even so, I'll read Even so. Many Latter Day Saints initially understood the concept of priesthood largely in terms common for the day. In 1830s America, the word priesthood was defined as the office or character of a priest and the order of men set apart for sacred offices, identifying priesthood with religious office and the men who held it. So I think it's interesting that they, they are telling us exactly what priesthood meant. And I don't know that that word is necessarily in dispute. And I don't know that in 1830s anyone didn't understand that. What do you guys think?

Applying Modern Frameworks to Historical Teachings

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:14:24] Well, I found this really interesting that they're putting this kind of like it could almost go both ways in the future. Like if the church decides to continue in kind of their sexist protocol, they can say, well, this is how it was originally thought of and that's when the gospel was restored. So that's what it meant at the time and should continue to mean. But it can also go the other way in the sense that we can, you know, if the priesthood was ever ordained to women, they could then Easily say, well, at the time there was this cultural bias towards men being leaders in the churches, which is very much true. It's still true, actually. And therefore the revelation was kind of at least somewhat marred by the time. And therefore now that we have better understanding we have this new revelation, we can see how those cultural mores at the time need not apply. So I feel like it kind of sets it up that it could go both ways.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:15:30] Oh, that's a good point. I hadn't thought about that because here they're going to definitely use it to establish that this is men. But by.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:15:40] Yeah, but why are we continually talking about other Christian churches? I just thought that was really interesting. Like this is how. I mean, we talk a lot about how the Christians of the time believed these things, when at the same time that's kind of what the whole restoration movement is about, is that the Christians at the time had a lot of things wrong.

Gina Colvin [00:16:00] Good point, Natasha. Mm. And the opposite could be true that most Christian denominations ordain women to the priesthood now. So why is that not a precedent as well?

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:16:12] Right. Because they have changed their ways of looking at those words according to the culture they now live in and the biases that they see that affected their past. I just thought this was very strange. It's the first time that we're really, at least in any of these essays that I'm aware of, looking at other Christians as authority on what these words meant.

Gina Colvin [00:16:35] That's because they're stretching, just stretching.

Dr. Kristy Money [00:16:40] Yeah, I agree, Gina.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:16:43] Yeah. And I think the distinction they're making is that the other churches were wrong in that they only applied it to the pastor of the community, not to all of the men in the community of the religious. You know, if you were a Methodist, the priesthood only referred to the Reverend who was, you know, preaching and was the head of that congregation. But what changed for the. In the restoration was that this belonged now to all men. That the priesthood was really, really belonged to the gender, to the sect.

Dr. Kristy Money [00:17:19] Yeah, yeah.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:17:20] As opposed to just the leadership of the church.

Dr. Kristy Money [00:17:23] But Joseph didn't ordain any 12 year old boys. And now we're seeing with this most recent policy in the handbook, that now certain boys can't even be ordained if their parents are gay. So it's just so interesting, given this policy change too, that we're discussing this now, now that the priesthood is being restricted right before our very eyes. So interesting to watch.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:17:55] Yeah. The second, the second word. So first they kind of work to define priesthood and then the second word that they really work hard to define is ordain. And they're. They're doing this reactionary to the specific text of Doctrine and Covenants where it is said that he ordained Emma. It's Doctrine and Covenants 25, verse 7, and it says, and thou shalt be ordained. He's talking to Emma. And so they want to make very clear that the word ordain is more like set apart and doesn't always refer to priesthood office. And so they want to make sure that they're not falling into the. The trap that he had ever previously ordained. Someone ordained a woman is, I guess, what they're trying to delineate. But I think it's interesting because we have history of. They've had to write the race in the priesthood essay after we've lifted the restriction on people of African descent. And I Wonder if in 1976, if there had been an Internet and an essay, they would have tried the same thing, which is that, you know, well, when Joseph ordained Elijah Abel, it was really more of a setting apart. You know, like, clearly when Joseph ordained Elijah Abel against the practice of the church, you know, through 1978, they understood that ordain at that point meant the actual priesthood. When he ordained his fellow members of the 12, when he ordained everybody else with the priesthood, we understand it. But in this one instance, when he ordains Emma, we need to be clear that it was not the priesthood that he was talking about. And later, when he told her that he turned the key to you in the name of God and the Society, meaning the Relief Society, would have knowledge and intelligence, they want to make sure that even though when we talk about ordination and we talk about ordaining today and we talk about keys, it's all about the priesthood, they're making very clear lines that back then, they're pretty sure that's not what he was talking about. And that's where I. That's where I really struggle. Because we can't get into Joseph's mind. We. We. I mean, I wish we knew what he was thinking or. Or could talk to him about it. But it's interesting that they are drawing very fine lines that they know what his intent was, because this is our interpretation of it today, and it's so strange.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:20:38] In the same essay, they kind of contradict themselves, well, on several points, but specifically this one about what Joseph Smith meant by one word, which is ordain, and therefore we can't ordain women, because he didn't mean that. And yet they quote Joseph Smith very specifically. Saying that we should not limit healing ordinances and blessings to women. Then explain how over time it's been perfectly okay as part of church policy to do exactly the opposite of what Joseph Smith said specifically.

Dr. Kristy Money [00:21:14] Yes, yeah, I just find it really

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:21:17] kind of just mind bogglingly fascinating and

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:21:22] just three paragraphs apart.

Dr. Kristy Money [00:21:25] Well, it's an appeal to authority. I mean, they, so they say, so Joseph, Joseph said it was okay back then, but then subsequent leaders said, no, don't. Women can't do healing ordinances. And so, and here's the handbook policy which states that explicitly. So follow the handbook, basically. Which I really hope that in time more of us will say, yeah, no, I mean, thanks, but no thanks on that one. I mean, if it was good enough for Joseph, it's good enough for us. Everything that Joseph did is something I'd want to necessarily follow, like plural marriage. But yeah, again, I hate to keep bringing it back to this current handbook policy, but it's still, it's on my mind still and as we process it, but just that there's a direct appeal to authority in there. Here's the handbook policy that states that women, I mean that men only participate in healing ordinances. Then we have Joseph statements. So what are we going to do about that? I mean, we can follow the handbook or not. And let me just throw in as a shout out to these brave women out there who ever since the essay came out, they have used their real names and talked about, written about how they are, have been and will continue to perform healing blessings. I just think that that's, that's really encouraging for the future of Mormonism that women are, are doing that so well

Joseph Smith's Teachings as a Double-Edged Legacy

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:23:09] and we've set up an interesting, I guess, dichotomy or challenge, right? We've said if we liken all of Joseph's teachings to a tree, you know, with all of the fruits over it, and we hold him up as, as prophet and seer and revelator, and we herald the restoration for the things that it is. And then we today cherry pick which ones make their way into our policy and actual practice without ever declaring doctrine about it. And especially when you look at this policy change that we've had, they've gone to great lengths to say this isn't a change in doctrine, this is just policy. And so we kind of have, they kind of set it up that Joseph brought back all of these doctrines, you know, all these various fruits on the tree. And then we have policy and our policy is going to trump his doctrine. And I have a hard time I'm like, if, if you're a prophet, then declare new doctrine. But I don't, I'm not understanding why we couch everything in. Well, it's just policy. This isn't doctrine. And then we are going to support all of the doctrines that fit and match the policies we've made, but we're going to not support the ones that don't fit, but we're not going to declare them to be not, not doctrine.

Gina Colvin [00:24:26] But Jamie, I think that's the way the church characteristically works as a, as a faith system. We don't do theology like, we don't. And theology, doctrine is born out of theology. And this is, if you look at the way that the Church functions, it does draw on historical precedent to make claims for current policy and practice. And it does indicate to me that we are still very much wedded to the kind of Mormonism that was Joseph's best. Mystical expression or spiritual expression. And everything in between that. And I'm just kind of standing back thinking sociologically, everything in between that seems to be hyper managerial. It's about social control, surveillance, discipline, and the formation of an empire or a community. And the work, the actual work of mysticism, of spiritual capaciousness, of thinking through theological, like hard and tough theological questions has just gone out of the, out of Mormon practice. We don't, we just simply, we are bereft of a lexicon to manage to, to pace our religious experiences with a language that's current and feels like it's relevant.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:26:01] Do you know what I mean? Yeah. No. It's troublesome though, because I remember, I, I remember being very little and hearing about how we were better. I was better as a Mormon because I wasn't beholden to dogma like Catholics, no offense to Catholics. This is just something that I was told and taught, you know, and, and when, when you, when you start to dive into these and start to search and I think that most people arrive at this place of questioning where they are searching for the doctrine. They want the true and they want the living waters of Jesus. They want the true doctrine, they want to understand it at its deepest level. And suddenly they're caught into this tangled web where there is no making sense of it. The story of the Van Alen's, I don't know if you're familiar. I think there was a Mormon Stories podcast episode really hit that home to me, which was that they wrote one blog post where they just said that they were rejecting as doctrine the practice of plural marriage, that they saw nothing in the fruits of it that was beneficial, and they were rejecting it. And they were called in for a disciplinary council, which I believe was canceled, but they were asked to take the blog down because it was not right to say that you don't believe in plural marriage, while at the same time, you cannot practice plural marriage. So you can't not believe in it, but you can't practice it. This means we don't have a clue what our doctrine is.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:27:41] Yeah, this is a common theme, though, in Mormonism, is this wanting our cake and eating it too. And it's as simple as even just basic hardships in life. Like, for example, if you are having a hardship and you're an active member, then it's seen as worthy, then it's a trial of your faith. But if you're having a hardship and you're an inactive member or doing something that maybe the church would frown upon, then it's seen as, well, of course, you're reaping, you know, the reward of bad seeds or, you know, whatever scriptural passage you want to apply to that. So, and we see this very much, I think, in this new policy that came out affecting LGBTQ members, especially around this idea of sustaining our leaders and what that means. So for some, it's very much about, well, if the prophet says it, then I must obey and continue and support this, regardless of how I may personally feel about it, versus the other side of the coin, which is, you know, God gave me a brain, and I have a right to have my own kind of revelation and feelings about it, and I can sustain leaders while still disagreeing with them. So you just see this in so many aspects. And a lot of what we'll talk about tonight, too, with issues of sexism and feminism and masculinity, with even the presiding versus partnership roles that we see both in church leadership and also in marriages and things of that nature. So there's always a trump card that can be played. So, you know, it kind of goes back even to my original comment, like, well, Joseph Smith said it, so we have to follow that. But then your comment of, well, but it's in the new handbook, so we have to follow that. You know, but if you say, well, why can't we create new things in the handbook? Well, but no, because Joseph Smith said it, so we have to follow that. Right. And so it just kind of depends on the current pulse of whatever current leaders are saying. We have this cultural phenomenon that that's what we need to support, and we find all these different ways to do that, given the Myriad of experiences and whether in our own cultural Mormon experience or whether it's scriptures, because again, there's contradiction in every human story, right? So you can always find something that will help you trump another person's position that seems to be on the side of God.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:30:13] I think it's interesting. I've watched as many people have posted kind of their own versions of the Articles of Faith. And it was probably a year, a year and a half ago that I was really frustrated and I sat down and wrote, tried to take the articles of faith that we know and love and try to write them down. And when I came to, I think it's Article of Faith number seven, which is, I think, Christy, if you're, Are you still associated with ordained women, are you still on the board?

Dr. Kristy Money [00:30:38] I am, yes.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:30:39] And I believe it's your new theme. But I had written down we believe all that God has revealed, and Kate Kelly believes that he will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the kingdom of God. Because sometimes I feel like when we talk about these things that it's only, it's not the leaders themselves that believe God has anything new or great to share with us. They're revealing. And it seems to be, you know, the Kate Kelly's, the members on ordained women that believe that there might be something greater in store. And so I don't understand what everyone else thinks that Article of faith number seven means, you know, maybe it's not ordination of women, but have you thought of other things that it might mean? Or are only the fringe groups wondering what else God has in store? Because I don't see a lot of that looking to the future in essays like this where we're told this is what Joseph said and when he said ordain, he absolutely couldn't have possibly meant priesthood because we all know priesthood means no women. Despite Ali Isom going on as a church spokesman on, I think it was Radio west and you know, being asked point blank, is this ever. Is the doctrine that women can't have the priesthood, is that any place in the scriptures? And she finally said, you know, no, it's not. It's just, I don't know, it's troubling.

Dr. Kristy Money [00:32:12] It really is, Jamie. And that's why listening to your inner moral compass is just so key here for everyone to understand that, that you're going to hear a lot of interesting things. History is muddled. The handbook can be, can sound so anathemal sometimes to our, to our conscience. So what do we have? We have that. Well, as we learn in primary, that's still small voice to tell us. So I'm hoping. I'm hoping that's where we go moving forward with issues of sexism and this new policy that we listen. We listen inside. That's all we can do right now. I think that. And healing.

Gina Colvin [00:33:07] Can I pick up on that, Christine? I think you're absolutely right. I think we can deconstruct this till the cows come home and continue to be dissatisfied. There are a lot of things that we can find that are really problematic in this policy, as there are a multitudinous issues that we, if we. If we simply focus on a particular policy or particular doctrine, like, it's not hard to deconstruct those and find how, you know, all of these things are shot through with paradox, etc. Etc. They come out of a particular historical context. They're there for social control, for the management of a very volatile, currently very volatile population. But I want to go back to something that Christy said, which, you know, I was in church on Sunday in Salt Lake City, and I was looking around me in Relief Society. I'm thinking, everybody feel like it feels. I personally feel kind of disembodied from this whole experience of having a Relief Society lesson. I feel disembodied, you know, when I'm asked to read a policy and to agree with a policy that in my body and in my soul doesn't feel right. And I think that one of the problems of Mormonism is that we've been constantly asked to reconcile ourselves with something that in our bodies feels painful or wrong or suffering from some kind of ethical or moral lapse. And I think that's spiritually very, very damaging in many respects. I agree with Christie that actually going back to the very core of Mormonism, which is to pay attention to our spiritual, inner, spiritual compass, like, pay attention to that. I mean, how many scriptures do we have that ask us to pay attention to that? And I think that really, we have to come back to that. So when I read something like this, it isn't firing me spiritually. And that is not a statement about women's rights. It's not a statement about feminism. It's not a political statement. It's actually a spiritual statement. It doesn't feel right. However, they might have coddled this together. Whatever historical context or historical precedent they may have set forth, it doesn't align with me spiritually. And I'm going to claim authority over that spiritual, that spiritual authority, you know, that spiritual compass, that spiritual indicators, because, you know, at Some point in time, if we want to be spiritually autonomous, we have to say, okay, what's the boundary? What's the line that I'm crossing here? If I have to, you know, mess with my head to make sense of somebody else's declarations or policies and et cetera, et cetera, and my soul isn't resonating with that, then in many respects, I'm spiritually diminished. So, yeah, that was my little soapbox I'm standing on.

Dr. Kristy Money [00:36:07] I preach Gina that authority. Exactly.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:36:13] I think. Did you guys. I'm sure you've seen the Shel Silverstein poem called the Voice? I'm gonna read it. It's very short, but it just fits so perfectly here. There is a voice inside of you that whispers all day long. I feel that this is right for me. I know that this is wrong. No teacher, preacher, parent, friend, or wise man can decide what's right for you. Just listen to the voice that speaks inside. And I loved Shel Silverstein poems as a child. And I remember this poem, and I remember thinking that this poem was an evidence, you know, in many ways, I felt the spirit as I read that poem as a child, that this is exactly what I've learned. I've learned about the light of Christ, you know, that pervades all of. All of us. No matter whether you're a member of the church or not, that helps us know what's right and wrong. And then when we were eight, and we're blessed and confirmed and were given this gift of the Holy Ghost, you know, to help amplify that voice inside of our head, to help us know right from wrong. And I don't think we should do anything to diminish that voice. And whether it's this essay or the policy, I think there needs to be some reckoning to that. I don't know how. I don't know the best way to approach it, but I think that kind of. As I was moving to the second theme, I think that in many cases, that women are the answer. And so I thought maybe this will help us segue into a discussion of the value of having women in leadership as real participants, not just placed to observe, but as a real participant. For me, the most poignant article that I read following the policy change was a letter written to the three general presidencies of the women's organization, so the Relief Society, the Young women, and the Primary. And it was just an open letter. I don't know if they ever saw it. And I actually tried to reach out to people who would know? To find out, I want to know if the women who have general leadership positions in our church, if they were even aware of this policy change coming into the handbook, and if they were, were they consulted on, did they approve it? Did they discuss this policy with the brethren before it was released? Because I have to think that women would have much quicker seen how difficult this would be to the children and families and mothers and fathers in the church, because oftentimes women view things through a slightly different lens. And the entire policy debacle, I want to be corrected and find out that women were included, but the whole way it came out shows a complete lack of femininity in the process. Maybe I'm overstating. What, But I just want to know. I feel like they can say, again, you can say we're important. You can't. But when you enact a policy like this one that affects the children of LGBTQ members, and if you did not consult the women that supposedly sit on your councils and participate, if they did not have a voice in this, then once again, you've proven that all of these roles you said we had are really in name only.

Women's Roles and Authority in the Church

Gina Colvin [00:39:53] Hey, Jamie, if you knew that women were involved in the constitution. Are we talking about the gay marriage and gay families and their children policy now?

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:40:04] Yes. Yeah. I want to know, if you knew

Gina Colvin [00:40:06] that women were involved in it, would it make you feel any different about.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:40:13] Would not make me feel any different about the policy. It would make me. If women were allowed to. To discuss, would make me understand that they've put their money where their mouth is, so to speak, on all supposedly placing women on all of these leadership councils, it brings up greater questions, which is, if they have a voice, are they actually allowed to speak their mind or are they viewed, as. I hear so many people talk about, how even, like, the younger six members of the quorum of the 12 really have no input, you know, so if the women are below those six in the meetings, you know, are they there in name only?

Gina Colvin [00:40:54] Jamie, they're well below those six.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:40:56] Oh, I know. Oh, I know. They're well below.

Gina Colvin [00:40:59] Below the 70s.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:41:02] Well. And my guess, I mean, just. Just, you know, even from this essay about the role of women in the church, it's pretty clear that. Even though women can obviously be part of ward councils, and I'm guessing most of us have been parts of those at one point or another in our experience with our church, I know that in part of ward councils, I was never invited to have an opinion about policy or how things were going to be run. I was invited to discuss matters that I was aware of as far as needs within my jurisdiction. Right. So whether, again, going back to the families or young women or children that I was serving, what were the needs, how could we best serve them? And they definitely wanted my input on that, but they did not ever ask me my input on how could we better change the policies of the church. I mean, I don't, I don't think that women's church offices really cover that. So I think it's a pretty good guess, Jamie, that they were not involved in policy change that is seen very much as a responsibility of a priesthood church office role.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:42:19] And yet they're the ones that are going to deal with the women and children. They're the ones that are handing out the baptismal clothing or not handing out the baptismal clothing. That's where I go. This means that you're there in figure and name only.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:42:38] Yes.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:42:41] Despite the first paragraph, we read about how much they do their opinions and their. And I want to. It's higher weight than opinions they're giving voice to. Their inner spirit is not valued. It's more than an opinion.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:43:00] And I think this is where you're wanting to try to segue into is this idea that you can list an entire amount of roles that LDS women play within church functions. And that is true. I mean, and maybe more so even than other churches, because other churches are run differently. Other churches are usually run by paid leadership. You know, so it's a very few people who really are part of a governance body of any given church. The Mormon Church in general is very different from that in that we have a lay leadership. So, yes, women play roles that are. That maybe in other churches those roles would be filled by people who are ordained by priesthood powers and, you know, and whatever that means for those organizations. But regardless how many roles we play, what it really comes down to the authority to make decisions. And that's where women do not have power in our church and where we've even taken steps back from where we were with the organization, the Relief Society under Joseph Smith, because the Relief Society used to be an autonomous organization where women made the decisions. Women had power over their finances. Women raised their own monies. It was, although it was maybe overseen at some level by the overall church, Women had a lot more ability to make decisions of how they were going

Gina Colvin [00:44:28] to

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:44:31] go forward with their organization. And we've completely stepped back from that. Whereas now every single Relief Society decision needs the okay from a priesthood holder. And that goes to the very top. So this is where I think the dramatic difference is. It's not that we don't play important roles as women in our church. It's not that we don't have opportunities to lead in our church as women. It's not that we don't have opportunities for public speaking or even leadership development. What we do not have the power to do is to make administrative and decision powered authority. We just don't have that. And so it's always going to be trumped by a male in our church. That's just, that's just the reality. And no matter how you splice it or how wonderful it all seems, that's the reality. And then that trickles down, I think, to the effects within family governance, within many Mormon families that affects, you know, marriages with this idea of presiding male leadership. It just trickles down to how our girls are raised and the messages that they, you know, kind of internalize as they grow up in these patriarchal systems. And you can have good people and you can have good things happening while at the same time there's this underlying problem that we are all culturally a part of.

Dr. Kristy Money [00:46:01] Yeah, definitely, Natasha, I think you're absolutely right. And if I can speak for just a second about its effects on marriages because I co wrote a chapter in a book with my husband on egalitarian marriages and a patriarchal church and what we've noticed is that many couples, especially in my husband's and my generation, were, we see how presiding is unfair. And so we're just kind of in our own homes, we're sort of letting go of that language or trying, excuse me, trying to redefine it a bit because we see that there's plenty of research on how when partners are equal and they share the load and share responsibilities, that, that they're happier. So while that preside language is starting to fade in our generation, it's still very much alive and well in church structure. And so the eternal optimist in me says that as this generation, and especially the next generation, so my kids, as they feel that difference between their homes, church life, just like our generation is feeling that difference between our professional lives and church, that there will be, excuse me, there will be more awakenings, so to speak, more people will be like, well, okay, you know, let's have a good hard look at what's going on in church because this just doesn't feel right. That's the hope anyway.

Benefits of Women in Leadership Positions

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:47:51] Well, and I'm, you guys are the psychologists, but it didn't take but a quick Google Search on the benefits of women in leadership positions. There's so many, you know, they think differently, they think outside of the box. They're often innovative in a different way. They're better at communicating than men. They champion change. I'm just reading from several of just the Google SO searches. And this is not to say that men can't do this. I don't want it to turn into bashing that, you know, men don't do these things. But just that when you have two heads, they're better than one. And when you have a female head and a male head both working at these kind of challenges, they each bring different tools in their toolbox. And you can build a better product when you have more tools. You know, if all you have to build a piece of furniture is a hammer and a saw, it's going to be a pretty rough couch to sit on. But if every time you bring in more people with more tools and more education and more and varied life experiences, you're bringing in so many more tools to the toolbox collectively. And we're just missing out. We are missing out because women's opinions and women speaking from their heart, women sharing the things that have touched them spiritually are not valued in the decision making process.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:49:22] Well, and it's one of these things again where we want it both ways because we really do have a lot of this egalitarian language within Mormonism, the importance of women. We talk about that all the time. We talk about this idea that you really can't get to even our Mormon heaven without both male and female, you know, so we see this value that is added to exactly what you're talking about, which is both people bring pieces to the puzzle that are integral to making the whole picture look more complete. Now where this runs into problems is when we get very black and white about it or when we impose this presiding kind of process to it. Because when you think about like the beautiful picture of like the yin and the yang, there's nothing presiding in that they both complement each other, they both fit together, they both bring a different aspect to the circle and they're both valuable in that regard. But there's not one that has more decision rights or more power. You can't have egalitarianism and power differentials in the same circumstances space and call it egalitarian. Which is, I think, what we like to do within Mormonism, right? To think that we're equal within a power differential and that just you can't have it both ways. And so I think we have the potential in Mormonism to really understand the value. The other problem that comes into this is that culturally, right now, in Mormonism, we very much get into binary gender roles. And so you may have men who may exhibit more effeminate traits or women that may exhibit more masculine traits as far as how we currently culturally define those things. And yet, and so we limit people's talents or abilities when we say, well, because you were born with a penis, these are the things that you get to do. And because you were born with a uterus, these are the things that you get to do. Whereas maybe their brains and their talents and their personalities necessarily fit into whether or not they have a penis or vagina. Right. And so we really limit people's abilities to serve and to give and to parent, even in ways that are more in tune with their own personal abilities rather than what biological sex they were born with. And this is a problem we see that affects careers, it affects, like I said, parenting, it affects definitely the leadership in our church. It just, and it affects, I think, individual self worth.

Dr. Kristy Money [00:52:00] Absolutely. The psychological ramifications of that. I mean, you know as well as I do, Natasha, we don't get us started on that. Oh, man.

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:52:11] So what do you see? I worry too. I hear this as an anecdotal, again, reason for the emphasis on men, which is just the changing demographics overall in the church are leaning more heavily on women. And so we need the. To have this defined priesthood role or they will just disappear. Essentially, if they're not needed and wanted and front and center and important and have a defined role, they're going to vanish.

Dr. Kristy Money [00:52:41] Yeah. Okay, so here's the thing. I have a definite opinion about this. First of all, and this is what I've said for two years now, is I have more confidence in men than that, that they'll disappear. But beyond that, we have some new research coming out. We have, it was highlighted in Time magazine and online a few months ago that in Mormonism, men still leave exponentially more than women. And it's especially apparent in Utah where we have a lot of, I mean, these traditional gender roles. I mean, we can speculate about the reason for why mending still, even though they have these special ability to preside and they have the priesthood, they still leave more than women. But that definitely goes against this theory that we hear that, oh well, men just won't participate and they'll leave, but they already are leaving more than women. My, my theory on that is that men, Mormon men can generally have more feel like they can seek self Fulfillment. And so if they don't feel like they're being fulfilled in church, they'll go elsewhere. As women, we're trained from when we're little to not listen to that voice, that inner voice, urge it to not to put others above ourselves. So even if we're struggling at church, it's, well, there must be something wrong with me. Maybe I'll just serve and sacrifice more. And of course, men can feel that way too. It's definitely not an either or. But so this research, and especially how it affects Mormon dating and potentially relationships getting together, that there are just, there aren't very many Mormon men out there for Mormon women to date. I mean, the problem isn't. I mean, the solution, I'm sorry, the solution isn't more gender roles because that's obviously not working. The article also stated at the very end by a researcher I've worked with on the gender issue study, that in religious societies that become more egalitarian, there's more an even distribution of staying versus leaving of men and women that you don't have that crazy imbalance of all the men leaving. So that just. That flies in the face of that reasoning, doesn't it?

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:55:33] Yeah. How can we send this research to them? I mean, part of some of my issues are I really worry that our power structure, even among men, even having a high priestess group and an elders quorum group, we set men above other men. And I do think that some men feel just as pushed down as women. It's a different. It's different. I don't equate it. But you know, by the time you hit a certain age and you haven't matriculated to the higher priesthood, you know, you've essentially been told you're not fit for leadership, you don't have a place here, you will. And I think that pushes them away. In fact, I said that would be. My biggest fear is we would have to change structures in the priesthood if women got it. Because can you imagine if instead of going to just Relief Society, we split into the Higher Relief Society and the Lower Relief Society? Women wouldn't tolerate that kind of segregation. I really don't think they would. Or if it's very ugly. And yet that happens with the men. That's another topic for another day. But I do think it's harmful. I think it's harmful. I think this harms many people in the process because we want to build a pyramid kind of structure where there are just a few at the top making decisions. And they certainly won't be Women, and they certainly won't be a whole large group of men either.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:57:01] Well, and this gets to the point that I'll piggyback on just Christie's comments, is that that patriarchy hurts both men and women. It's not just something that hurts women. And when you think about the messages that men are given, as we've had to overcompensate to make women feel important, because this is what happens when it's not egalitarian, then you've kind of got to artificially boost up the more oppressed group. Right? So in our system, that's women. So you hear all these talks about how wonderful women are, and we're so blessed to have them. And really, if you're a man in our church currently, what are the messages that you're receiving? You're receiving these thoughts that, well, you need the priesthood because without it, you'd be a blithering evil pervert or something. Right. Or you're getting the messages of the responsibility is all on your shoulders, which can be quite overwhelming. And today's financial cultures and things of that nature, you get the messages that you're supposed to be the presider and the protector of the woman, but who protects him. And so, again, it's a lot of pressure and it's a lot of kind of negativity towards the men that, you know, I mean, what are the messages that they're getting is mostly about pornography and don't beat your wife. And I mean, although, yeah, you shouldn't beat your wife. But. But where are we spiritually uplifting the men in our church? Where are the messages say, wow, men, you are wonderful? Because we can't really do that because we have to do that for the women because they're already oppressed. It's this really weird dichotomy about you kind of hurt both genders when you're set up this way.

Institutional Knowledge and Women's Contributions

Jamie Hanis Handy [00:58:58] Well, I laugh. For example, let's say the church hosts a class on how to nurture children from ages 2 to 4, how to best reach and teach your children. I think it would be a valuable class. I think it would be a valuable class for men and for women. And when you offer that kind of class to men and women, then you fulfill a whole sort of needs without offending. But when you offer that kind of class only to women, immediately you have problems, because it doesn't apply to every woman. Not every woman has a child in that age group. Well, what if my husband does more of those roles? What if that, you know, as soon as you pigeonhole something that would be good and beneficial to everyone with a child between those ages. But as soon as you pigeonhole it to just the women, then the men feel like, well, nurturing is not their role. They shouldn't participate. Participate in it. They don't need to know about it. The women are like, why is this all on me? Why don't. I don't know it? Just as soon as you assign a gender to something as beautiful as caring for children, you create nothing but problems. And the part I don't understand is if we're trying to become someday like God and be like Jesus and be able to succor and empathize and lift up and elevate and improve all of those around us, it seems to me like nurturing should not be a gender role. It should be a human role.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:00:38] Exactly. Yeah, absolutely. And it's known, too, that in patriarchal cultures, men parent their children less because they're not put into that role of being the nurturer, which I think is a real disservice to men. I also hear a lot about from men and women, too, but I think, again, very stereotypically, women tend to value church for community. Men tend to value intellectual process. And there's something that has become very unintellectual since the correlation system came to play in our church culture that I hear over and over again from men. I am flipping bored. You know, it's the same lesson. It's not challenging when you think about, like, the founders of our faith, however you may feel about them. That was very intense, intellectual, challenging discussion that, you know, that really invited a sense of, I don't know, like, you know, breaking apart your own dogma and your own ideas and your own biases that we no longer really find valuable in our culture. In our culture right now, what's valued is conformity. And I don't think that's something that really speaks to men

Jamie Hanis Handy [01:01:55] or women.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:01:57] Agree. Right. But if we're talking about how men. I think for women, even though they may be also bored, they see the value in the community.

Jamie Hanis Handy [01:02:07] Well, because if you're bored, you just take your kid out in the hallway and talk to your friends. Oh, maybe that's just me.

Dr. Kristy Money [01:02:14] No, no, no.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:02:15] And I see a lot of men doing that. I see a lot of men doing that.

Dr. Kristy Money [01:02:19] Yeah. And you just throw yourself into service more. I mean, that is really what we're taught to do ever since we're little is, you know, think of others needs first. So even if we're not Being intellectually stimulated, it's, well, let's. We're being selfish. Let's think about other people and. Yeah, that's problematic. It's very problematic.

Jamie Hanis Handy [01:02:43] Yeah, I think too. I think when I. When you look back on it and you read historically how Sunday schools were, I think for a lot of men, Sunday school, that class period and priesthood meetings and for women in that they studied literature and other topics, they weren't strictly just religious topics. That their Sunday school was literally treated more of a school as opposed to a worship. It served as their philosophy class. It served as their. Their exposure to different ideas and different thinking through literature. And themes were discussed. It wasn't just, you know, these same things every fourth year on rotation. So I do think we need to acknowledge that for men and women, the curriculum has vastly changed. And it brings up one of the things that disturbed me the most, which was an interview with Sister Okazaki that appeared in Dialogue. Have you guys read this before? Do you guys know what I'm talking about where she's asked about curriculum?

Dr. Kristy Money [01:03:53] No.

Jamie Hanis Handy [01:03:54] Okay, I'll refresh your memory. This is just part of it. She says that at the time Sister Okazaki was the education counselor in the General Relief Society presidency. And this is her speaking. She says, I worked with one of the men on the curriculum committee. We wanted to change the manual so that it brought up modern day problems that women have to face and focus on how to implement some of the gospel doctrines and principles in dealing with the problem. I had written a general outline and the Relief Society presidency approved it. So I talked about it to a man on the curriculum committee. He went to his boss and the boss said, we don't need a new manual for the Relief Society. Why don't we need a new manual? We are already writing one for them. He came back and told me that a new manual was already prepared. I asked what it was and he said, well, it's the manual on Harold B. Lee. It's the first in a series of teachings of the Church presidency. I asked, why are they writing a manual for women or for us on Harold B. Lee? He didn't know. I told the presidency. So we went and asked the curriculum committee, what's this all about? They said, we're already finished with the book. You're almost finished and you didn't tell us what you were doing. Why is this the first time we have heard about it? Tieko had been writing an outline in relation to what women need. So I asked, who's writing the manual? And it Turned out to be five men, and the Melchizedek priesthood quorums and the Relief Society would have the same lesson. I asked, why aren't the women included in this? Then they sort of got the point and called three women to the committee. And so I think this just shows that, you know, at the time of correlation, these manuals came out 20 years ago. So we were halfway through, you know, correlation, if you look over the 40 years. But at every point, women's voices are taken out of it, whereas they used to write their own curriculum. Whereas they used to, you know, direct this. And then for men, they're giving a generic lesson for both groups that would equally apply. Written by a curriculum committee. I don't know. It just seems like we're headed the wrong direction if we're trying to uplift and inspire and use individual revelation to try and help each individual congregation. I don't know. We need a whole nother podcast on correlation, which I'm sure has already been done. Okay, kind of circling back to the essay, one of the things that it goes over to almost placate the concerns that people might have is talking about how that once in the temple, women serve with the priesthood, and that really should be enough. How do you guys feel about that? That the opportunity for women to serve and act in. In the name of the priesthood while serving in the temple is really enough of the pie, so to speak?

Priesthood, Temple Ordinances, and Women

Dr. Kristy Money [01:06:41] Yeah. This reminds me of a question that I was asked at a symposium at Utah State University a couple weeks ago. It was with Fiona Givens and Nyla McBain and Julie Durr. And they asked, do you think women will be ordained before any wording in the temple changes? Because, I mean, right now, women are priestesses under their husbands instead of priestesses to God. And so how could women be fully equal while that's still going on in the temple? And that was a really good question. There's some pretty smart people at usu, and I think they may be right about that. That I know that we, as Mormon women, we get told a lot. Well, just wait till you get to the temple. If you're feeling uneasy about this inequality situation, then it'll all be okay. Just wait for that. Women have a lot of concerns when they go through, and that wording is a huge one. So I don't think that it can be enough with the wording as it stands. Temple wording has changed in the past, and I have hope that it will change in the future. And once that happens, I think there might be a possibility that we'll get to a more equal spot, but not until that wording changes.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:08:10] Another problem with temple wording that happens within the sealing services is that the man vows to receive the woman unto him, and the woman vows to give herself unto him. And so even that language is very much this idea that the woman is the giver. He's the one who gets to partake instead of this equal exchange, if we give ourselves to one another. And this even, you know, goes further into kind of polygamy reasons why that wording obviously was. Was there. You can only really give yourself to one person, but you can receive a lot of women. So. So, yeah, there are very much temple issues at the same time. I mean, this paragraph in here that I find very interesting, so I'm just going to kind of read it. Is the priesthood authority exercised by Latter Day Saint women in the temple and elsewhere remains largely unrecognized. So, again, there's language here for possibility. Because, you know, I have always asserted that as I went through the temple, there was this kind of ritualistic idea of receiving priesthood authority. And that really, if we're going to define the priesthood as the power of God, that all of us receive that through our ordinances. And even this essay kind of talks about that when they say later that we often mistakenly equate priesthood with religious office and the men who hold it. So they are kind of saying, like, everybody has the priesthood and can use the priesthood. Where the differences come in is in the offices of the priesthood. So although I think that's really problematic, I do think that there's potential for future change because in a sense, they're really kind of hear saying that women have priesthood, both power and authority. We see that for the first time visibly in the temple. But there is kind of something there that I think is for possible future growth.

Jamie Hanis Handy [01:10:29] Well, and I thought that the essay acknowledging the Mother in Heaven also acknowledges. I mean, we define priesthood as the authority to act in the name of God on earth. But if you now have a deified mother in heaven, certainly that extension in some ways extends. You know, it was very easy, if you're only thinking of a masculine God, to think that the only people who could act on behalf of our masculine God on earth would be masculine men. But if we are allowing room for a divine feminine, then there is a role for the divine feminine to act on earth as well. That level of comfort and that level of that, there's a place for it. And I think that's the place that Joseph Smith was really Granting to the women, you know, these blessings before women had their babies, these blessings of healing. And when you look at how the church wants to present itself as women having the power to heal and having. I always just found it so interesting that when they showed the very first movie in the Legacy Theater in downtown Salt Lake City, that the one story they chose to show was a woman giving a blessing through the laying on of hands to an oxen that was sick and she healed it, you know, and so why they would choose to show the one thing that women aren't supposed to do is beyond me. It's kind of like showing a Meet the Mormons movie and have it not represent the demographics of any actual ward, but hand picking a select few so that we put our best foot forward. And then you make a movie and you show women blessing an animal through the laying on of hands, while at the same time forbidding women from doing that not just to animals, but to other women. Again, we want to have it both ways.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:12:27] Well, the last paragraph of this whole essay is exactly where we should be at. I mean, the last paragraph is really what the priesthood should be about. Where it says priesthood defines, empowers, ennobles and creates order and ecclesiastical callings, temple ordinances, foundation relationships, and quiet individual ministry, Latter Day Saint women and men go forward with priesthood power and authority. Amen. End of story. Forget the oh, but only in this office or in that office. I mean, that should be our doctrine.

Jamie Hanis Handy [01:13:01] So then why the first three pages? Well, it's probably longer, but I printed it in small font. Yeah, I mean, that's a beautiful doctrine and that's what we try to present if we're forced to show it in movies. But then when it comes to the actual lived practice of most Latter Day Saint women, I just don't think that's the case. They aren't receiving blessings at the hands of other women because that's been as according to this, that was taken away in 1926 by Heber J. Grant when he affirmed the that women are not encouraged to administer the sick, but you should call the elders. Only Melchizedek priesthood holders may administer to the sick or afflicted. And so, you know, on the one hand, that last paragraph is beautiful. On the other hand, they're reminding you very much where your place is. And it's hard to. It's hard to look at it. So how do we move forward? I mean, there's a lot of paths. Christy, do you want to fill us in with what ordained women is doing?

Ordained Women Movement and Calls for Revelation

Dr. Kristy Money [01:14:07] Sure. Well, this year's theme, we have yearly themes just like, you know, Relief Society and Primary and we're as Mormon as they get, is ready for revelation. And I've. On a personal note too, I've noticed that I've transitioned or I guess more so transformed in my thinking over the last two years since I, I joined with Kate in 2013, that in the very beginning it was about asking and see what happens. All we have to do is ask. And I naively thought that if they would just listen, sorry, if they just heard what we had to say, that leaders would, you know, perhaps reconsider or dialogue. And what was interesting was being on that podcast and Jamie, you were there and Natasha, I think you were too. I sound like Dorothy from the wizard of Oz. And you were there and you. But one with Carolyn Pearson and she mentioned the exact same process happened to her in the 70s. I think that she, that she and a few other friends, you know, just like, like me and the Ordained Women board, they thought, well, let's just bring these questions and concerns to our leaders and then we'll get fixed, like for me and I'm more of a planner, I figured that I'd have a five year plan here and in five years women would be ordained, we'd have full equality. That has not been the case. And we're learning that asking is, is not quite as effective as I'd hoped. So moving forward, what I like about this new theme is that it's ready for revelation, that we're calling upon leaders. It's not just asking anymore. We're calling upon the leaders to recognize that authority that inwardly we believe we have, and calling upon others who may feel the same to know that they're not alone and that you can speak up, you can say your truth, be authentic, now is the time. Because we might not ever get answers. I mean, we got this essay which was unprecedented. I mean, we, it was great to get that. It was also, I mean, here's the handbook policy, ladies. So we got that. And just to end on a personal note, like, I'm having these twins in a few weeks and what started it all for me was my second daughter's baby blessing. And I, you know, I asked if I could, if I could hold her. They said no. So with these twins, you know, I've learned that asking usually, you know, doesn't go as planned. I really, really hope that the policy changes between now and, you know, when they're a few months old and it's time for their blessings. But, but if Not. I'm still going to listen to that inner voice that we talked about earlier and ordained women. I think that that's the direction we're going. We want. It's to empower, at this point, empower women. We'll see how that goes.

Jamie Hanis Handy [01:18:01] Gina, how are you going to move forward?

Gina Colvin [01:18:05] That's a really interesting question for me right now, Jamie. In many respects, I'm having a bit of an existential crisis even as we speak. So, I mean, I feel wearied by the battle. But I think in many respects, as I kind of push out beyond my outrage, there's a way in which I need to accept at this moment, these convulsions, these rupturings are teaching us something about the world that requires us to heal it. And I think that's really powerful. If we actually. If we just sort of settle into grievance mode and we battle with you constantly, with our heads in these spaces and our mouths in these spaces, there's a way in which we tend to go round and round in circles. And I'm just kind of tired. I've been in this game for a long time. I'm getting tired. And I think about what Rumi said. He said, out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and right doing, there's a field. I'll meet you there. When the soul lies down in that grass, the world is too full to talk about. For me, there's a moment of pause and reflection. There's a moment where I need to just sit and just breathe and pay attention to both my body and to perhaps in the hope that some way my soul can resonate answers. And I have to trust that process. I think what Rachel Held Evans said that our bodies are. Our bodies are the address of our souls. And I just think, like, right now, so much is happening. It feels like just there's this just rupturing, that there's this breaking open, there's this fragmentation occurring. And at the same time, I feel kind of spiritually stretched right now to look for new spiritual technologies and to embrace new spiritual capacities. Because I think, you know, at the same time as all this terror is, you know, this horror is happening, you know, and, you know, Mormonism is just a small part of, like, a larger system that is deeply troubled and needs reformation. It needs attention. And I think that often, often the universe offers us these. These ways of testing our spiritual capacities in order to heal the world. You know, I mean, there's that saying and that Jewish shame, tikkim olam, which. That's our very natures to heal the world. But I think also, you know, and I don't want to give this up. My, you know, a stock in trade of trying to speak truth to power, just calling shit out when it happens. But I also, at the same time, I need to pay attention to the way that God's working in us, particularly as women. I mean, I think we're a sleeping giant. When women wake up, there will be hell to pay. And I think it'll be a hell to pay first, but I think there'll be immense healing. I don't know, I feel really optimistic. I feel spiritually optimistic, but somewhat weary, needing a bit of time just to spend thinking, contemplating, and, you know, and even meditating. So I don't know if that's helpful. Sounds a bit wishy washy to me.

Jamie Hanis Handy [01:21:35] No, it's beautiful.

Dr. Kristy Money [01:21:37] Good ideas. Very good ideas.

Personal Reflections and Paths Forward

Jamie Hanis Handy [01:21:39] Natasha, how about you?

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:21:41] I came across an article as I was getting ready for this podcast called 5 Steps to Unlearning a Lifetime of Patriarchal Lies by Jarun Uwajaran. And I thought it was very. It pretty much piggybacks on a lot of what Gina and Christie have already said. But, you know, it starts with this idea of like, questioning, being willing to question why are things the way they are, and not only asking why, but how you kind of feel about things. So this kind of goes back to this idea of reclaiming personal authority, which we definitely have a precedence for in Mormon cultures. This idea of personal revelation and our own right to have a personal relationship with the divine. I mean, those are all very wonderful Mormon concepts that I think we have within us to be able to get to this point of questioning. Number two was identifying contradictions and hypocrisy, which we've talked about some of those things, even just in this essay, that those are problematic. And why do we allow for contradictions to serve, you know, just the purposes that we're comfortable with and to be willing to question those and just kind of even identifying. I thought number three was really wonderful, which is get uncomfortable, which is, I think what we're experiencing a lot of right now in Mormonism is a general discomfort, regardless of how you may feel about a myriad of issues. And I think being uncomfortable is somewhat. Not that we like being uncomfortable, but I think it's a place where we can often learn and grow and stretch in ways that we wouldn't have previously been willing to do. And so I think that's. That's a very important thing, is to learn how to sit with our discomfort and not just try to explain it away really quickly and get back into comfortable spaces. Self examination was number four, which again, looking at how these, these things affect us and our systems and how we're a part of them, and are we experiencing some type of privilege? Again, like patriarchy is something that is usually supported by both sexes. And that's a typical thing that happens in culture. So why would I, even if this is harmful to me, why would I still support it or live my life largely according to patriarchal structure? So I think that self examination is really important. And that number five was rinse and repeat. So in other words, this is an ongoing process. You don't get to do this just once. This is something that we should be continually doing. When I hear the words faith transitions, I'm like, we should all be in a faith transition on a regular basis, you know, and that doesn't mean that you're leaving necessarily your church or your religion. It might mean that. But I think just this continually questioning process that is part of human growth and what we're so much about in Mormonism, again with this idea of eternal progression. As far as personally, I mean, I think obviously advocacy is very important. We're, all of us are doing that in different ways through podcasts or blogs. But even if you're not in a space where you can do something like that publicly, I think that we can all advocate in our own circles of influence, whether that be in your families or wards or other community circles that you might be involved with and learning how to advocate in successful ways, which is oftentimes hard when we trigger each other or upset with one another or don't agree. We see that in our political climate. We see that in many different areas where it's hard to know how to talk about things when we can feel so contradictory to one another. And. Right. Whether they say, don't talk about religion and politics and sex. Right. For those very reasons that it tends to divide people. And people have very personal views on these things. So try to be respectful as you advocate, I think is important. And even if it's just advocacy in the sense of reaching out to those who you might feel are harmed by any of these principles. So, for example, one of the things that really pains me is when we, in a culture where we so value the gospel of Jesus Christ, where we attack each other so quickly, you know, so that's so not what we're supposed to be about, and we do it on both sides, I don't think that the believers are any better at this than the non believers, or it's just kind of that human tendency to attack what we're uncomfortable with. And so even if you know somebody in your ward who you know is an ordained women follower, for example, and you really disagree with her on that, well, there's still a kindness you can show and a respect that you can show even through that disagreement that I think we can all do better on. So I think that advocacy and service go a long way, regardless if it's very public or far reaching, or if it's just in your own inner circles.

Jamie Hanis Handy [01:27:01] That's beautiful. I think we all need that five step list. I was having a discussion with my dad, and he was saying, you know, what do you like about church? And I was trying to articulate how I felt, and I said, I wish I had said it this well. I've thought about it for a while, but I feel like, you know, growing up in Mormonism, it gives you such a spiritual heritage and a sense of belonging and a sense of identity, and, you know, you kind of come into young adulthood wearing this beautiful dress, this beautiful colors. It's gorgeous. And because I embrace all about Mormonism and studied and learned, and fairly soon, I was carrying a black trench coat on me of polygamy, and I was dragging behind a suitcase of racism, and I was carrying a giant handbag of feminist issues. And I felt like as I tried to find the truth, I became more and more saddled down by it. And I said, you know, it's only as I have just decided to speak out, to not go along with those things and to let go of them, to take off the trench coat of polygamy and just get rid of it. Bring back the beautiful color. Get rid of it and say, you know, that is just not something I am comfortable with. I disagree with it fundamentally. And for me, that's been so freeing. You know, it allows some of that heritage of mine to have color again when it comes to the racism, you know, to just drop it. When it comes to how we treat LGBT members, you know, it does not feel good. It's a big black umbrella, and I will not carry that umbrella and toss it to the side, and I will not carry along a need to be subservient to men and to quiet my voice because I don't have the priesthood, but that I matter. And as I do that, as I push aside those things and say, you know, I have to live my own world, I have to listen to my own voice, you know, the dress gets more colorful again. The world looks more bright, it looks more optimistic. The hard part is it no longer looks like all of my Mormon family expect it to look. That's something that I have to work through. I have to find the way to dialogue through it. But there's no reason to be saddled by things that do not feel good in your inner core. If there's one thing I've learned as a Mormon girl, it is how to pray and feel at peace and know that the path I'm taking is pleasing before God. In fact, we're taught that the first fruits of faith is that we know that the way we are living is pleasing to the Lord. And I'm going to have to take up my paths with my own God someday. I don't want any of these middlemen who seem to constantly want to intrude in my life. You know, that, that. That is not their place and that's not there. And the other thing about just all of these things, and we didn't talk a lot about it, but the first two paragraphs. I want to encourage everybody, which is that we work very hard in Mormonism to create a beautiful facade. And I don't want to speak mockingly of the temple, but in many ways we build a giant temple facade about all of our doctrines. We build up the doctrine of the priesthood to be much bigger than it actually is. When you go back and look at the history of the restoration of the Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthood, you find that they're not quite as basic. Essentially, you've been taught a Hollywood version. They're much more problematic. And Richard Bushman, who I think does a beautiful job of nuancing it, even states in Rough stone Rolling that the late appearance of these restoration stories, many years after they happened, and then going back and adding them in opens up the possibility of fabrication, which is problematic. It means that the priesthood might not be this grand, glorious facade that we've built it out to be, with all these restrictions and limitations on it that we have created. We've created a much bigger building than it is. But it doesn't mean that the building isn't beautiful. It doesn't mean that the smaller, more humble buildings doesn't have value. I just think we've come so accustomed in the church to have the big glorious temple doctrine ideas and not specifically referring to temple doctrines, but just big, beautiful mansion ideas, when the realities of them is often a much more humbler place. When you start to look into the history and it's okay for it to be humble. It's okay for it to be not quite as grand and big. It's okay for it to not be this big, overstated thing. And that's something that I've had to kind of come to terms with. It's that understanding that, you know, you don't possess all of the knowledge and truth in the whole world because that's. We present ourselves as that, you know, the one true and only church with absolutely everything. Right. And so you want to have this grand ideal, but when you look into it, you realize that what we have has value, but it's not quite as big of a fishtail as you've been led to believe. And I think that's where we have so much cognitive dissonance with people who then look into the stuff and why there's so many challenges. And I think the church thinks these essays are going to help, but they seem to be propping up the facades and that worries me. This one seems to be propping up the facade yet again that we know exactly how it was built from the very beginning and this is how everyone must dwell in it. But again, I really do like the ordained women theme, which is that surely we can believe that God has many great and wonderful things pertaining to the kingdom of God yet to reveal and that we can all be a little more open to it. Any. Any other thoughts?

Closing Thoughts and Gratitude

Dr. Kristy Money [01:33:38] Amen. Well, thank you, Jamie. It's so good to talk with you and Gina and Natasha. This has been great. Just what this incredibly pregnant mama needed.

Jamie Hanis Handy [01:33:56] Well, hang in there. And we wish you the very best. And to all of the listeners, we wish you a happy Thanksgiving and wonderful family conversations. If anything, the church has provided opportunity to talk about these things by being in the news so much lately. Not to ruin anyone's Thanksgiving, but to, you know, work on building bridges. That's what I try to do. I don't always do it well, but. But I think it's something that everyone has to do. No matter what level of loyalty you feel, what level of commitment you feel, what level of faith you feel that you're at, whether it's a faith crisis or a faith transition or just a deeper understanding that what you thought you knew might not be exactly the facts and everybody sorts through that. We wish you, you the very best and. And have a good night. Thanks, Jamie.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:35:01] Thanks.

Guest [01:35:07] Thanks for joining us today on Mormon Stories. If you enjoyed this episode, please help us make more like it by becoming a monthly subscriber@mormonstories.org music for this episode was provided by the lower lights

Jamie Hanis Handy [01:35:21] Sources cease to make me whole when with a wounded heart, anger or malice

Dr. Kristy Money [01:35:41] I

Jamie Hanis Handy [01:35:41] draw myself apart searching my soul.

Transcript © 2026 John P. Dehlin. All rights reserved. Brief quotations are welcome with attribution and a link to mormonstories.org; all other use requires written permission.