Introduction and Symposium Opening

Guest [00:00:01] Ladies and gentlemen, brothers and sisters, it's time we are to start. Apparently the person who is to introduce the program has been able to been unable to get here on time, and so they've asked me to introduce the program, which I'm very glad to do.

Guest [00:00:21] The program is on Gifts of the Spirit, Women's Sphere, and the principal paper talk will be delivered by Linda Newell, co author of the forthcoming biography of Emma Smith. Linda lives in Salt Lake City. The Newell family are performing valiantly in connection with this symposium. Since next hour her husband, Jack Newell, is delivering paper in one of the other sessions.

Guest [00:01:03] Linda has been a dedicated and devoted researcher in connection with the biography and other topics connected with Mormon history, and I'm sure you'll very much enjoy her paper today. She's one of those who not only knows how to write well, but how to speak well, as also our comments are by Irene Bates and Michael Quinn.

Guest [00:01:38] They're listed on the program in reverse order in which they'll appear. Irene Bates lives in Pacific Palisades, California, which is famous as the place of residence of Ronnie Reagan and formerly of

Guest 2 [00:01:59] Brody.

Guest [00:02:00] We lived there ourselves one year and find it to be a wonderful community in which to live. Irene Bates has written for Sunstone and for other periodicals and has been very active in the Relief Society in Southern California.

Guest [00:02:27] You will enjoy her charming English accent, just as she enjoys the charming Utah accent of Linda Newell. Michael Quinn, an indefatigable researcher and writer, is an associate professor of history at byu, has written also for a number of important professional journals, and has a couple of books that are now about to be published.

Guest [00:03:11] He probably knows more about early Mormon history than any other person. I'm very glad to introduce this program. Hopefully, considering that we have almost an hour and a half, we'll have a chance for responses and comments and questions from the audience as well. So it's with great pleasure that I introduce Linda New, who will be followed by Irene Bates and Michael Quinn. Linda

Linda King Newell [00:03:45] thank you, Leonard. I hope too there will be time for questions, but what Leonard didn't say is that I also talk a lot, so we'll see. The paper is somewhat long, but this is why we're giving a little bit extra time, I believe.

Origins of Women Blessing the Sick in Early Mormonism

Linda King Newell [00:04:05] Actually, the name of the paper in your program is a little bit misleading. This paper that I'm giving today, more appropriately, could be called a gift given, a gift taken, washing and anointing and blessing the sick among Mormon women. It's taken from a larger essay which will appear in a series of essays on Mormon Women in a year or so.

Linda King Newell [00:04:31] That essay deals more completely with all of the spiritual gifts, and I have pulled from that, particularly the washing and anointing practice as it relates to the blessing of the sick among Mormon women. For members of the modern Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, the term washing and anointing is synonymous with the initiatory ordinances of the temple endowment. Joseph Smith first introduced the practice to male members of the LDS Church in the Kirtland Temple.

Linda King Newell [00:05:05] He included women when he gave the endowment and sealing ordinances to his Select Quorum of the Anointed in Nauvoo. By the time the Mormons had established a refuge in the Great Basin, washing and anointing had also been combined with healing. Although it grew out of the temple ordinances in Nauvoo, the practice by women has carried on outside of the temple. Even after the establishment of the endowment house in Salt Lake City in 1855 and later the dedication of the St. George, Manti and Logan temples, the ordinances took place both within the confines of these sacred structures and in the privacy of individual homes. This paper will focus on the latter practice.

Linda King Newell [00:05:50] These washings and anointings were clearly done in connection with administering to the sick. The wording took different forms as the occasion demanded. One of the most common uses of the washing and anointing blessing came as women administered to each other prior to childbirth.

Linda King Newell [00:06:07] That women could and did participate in blessings and healing the sick was already clearly established and officially sanctioned, a clearly established and officially sanctioned fact. By the time the Saints had established a refuge in the Great Basin, women like Sarah Levitt and Edna Rogers left records of their experiences with healing others in Kirtland. In Nauvoo, the prophet Joseph Smith not only formalized the Relief Society as an essential part of the church, but he also introduced the ceremony of the temple endowment, including washings and anointings. With the coming of the Relief Society, the women had an organization through which they manifest the gifts of the Spirit.

Linda King Newell [00:06:49] And this doesn't mean that it took place there solely, but there as well. Privately of this period, Susan Young Gates, a daughter of Brigham Young, wrote, the privileges and powers outlined by the Prophet in these first meetings of the Relief Society have never been granted to women in full even yet. Then Susan asks, did those women, do you and I live so well as to be worthy of them all?

Linda King Newell [00:07:18] There is considerable evidence within the minutes of the Nauvoo Relief Society meeting to suggest that Joseph seemed to envision the Relief Society as more of an independent organization for women. Parallel to the priesthood organization for Men Man. Yet both seem to come under the aegis of the priesthood as a power from God, not as an administrative entity. The women themselves saw their organization as more than a charitable society. Spiritual gifts such as speaking in tongues and healing the sick were not only discussed in their meetings, but the sisters openly practiced them. With Joseph's approval, Anna and her counselors laid hands on the sick and blessed them that they might be healed.

Linda King Newell [00:08:02] The fifth time the Relief Society convened, Sarah Cleveland invited the sisters to speak freely and women stood one at a time. In this testimony meeting, Sister Durfee was among those who spoke. She bore testimony to the great blessing she received when administered to after the last meeting by Emma Smith and her counselors Cleveland and Whitney. She said she had never realized more benefit through an administration.

Linda King Newell [00:08:26] She added that she had been healed and thought the sisters had more faith than the brethren. Following the meeting, Sarah Cleveland and Elizabeth Whitney administered to another relief Society, Sister, Mrs. Abigail Leonard, for the restoration of health. In the intervening week, someone apparently reported to Joseph that the women were laying their hands on the sick and blessing them as though he didn't know. His reply to the question of the propriety of such acts was simple. He told the women in the next meeting there could be no evil in it if God gave his sanction by healing. There could be no more sin in any female laying laying hands on the sick than wetting the face with water.

Linda King Newell [00:09:07] He also indicated that there were sisters who were ordained to heal the sick and it was their privilege to do so. If sisters, and this is a quote, if the sisters should have faith to heal, he said, let all hold their tongues.

Linda King Newell [00:09:20] In 1857, Mary Ellen Kimball recorded her visit to a sick woman in company with Priscindia, her sister wife. They washed and anointed Susanna, cooked her dinner and watched her eat pork and potatoes with a gratifying appetite. I felt to rejoice with her, for I shall never forget the time when I was healed by the power of God through faith in him, which power has again been restored with the priesthood, a phrase which indicates a distinction in Mary Ellen's mind.

Linda King Newell [00:09:52] Then she goes on. But after I returned home, I thought of the instructions I had received from time to time that the priesthood was not bestowed upon women. I accordingly asked Mr. Heber C. Kimball if women had a right to wash and anoint the sick for the recovery of their health, or is it a mockery in them to do so? He replied, inasmuch as they are obedient to their husbands, they have A right to administer in that way in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, but by no authority of the priesthood invested in them, for that authority is not given to women.

Linda King Newell [00:10:25] Mary Ellen then noted an argument that would calm apprehensions for the next four decades. He also said that they might administer by the authority given to their husband, inasmuch as they were one with their husbands at the time. Strong official encouragement for women to develop and use their spiritual powers is evident. Brigham Young, speaking in The Tabernacle on 14 November 1869, scolded both men and women for not improving themselves. The example he cited was of a sick child.

Linda King Newell [00:11:01] Why do you not live so as to rebuke disease? He demanded. It is your privilege to do so without sending for the elders. He laid down some practical advice. If the child is ill of a fever or of an upset stomach, treat those symptoms by all means. Beware of too much medicine, and remember that prevention is better than cure. He ended by addressing himself specifically to mothers. It is the privilege of a mother to have faith and to administer to her child. This she can do herself, as well as sending for the elders to have the benefit of their faith. Having enough faith to heal was clearly for Brigham Young, practical religion, like having enough food on hand.

Linda King Newell [00:11:40] The year before in Cache Valley, Ezra T. Benson had called on all the women who had been ordained to wash and anoint to exercise their powers to rebuke an unspecified disease which so destructively cursed through the valley. This record neither identifies the ordained women or who ordained them. It only said they were ordained to wash and anoint. Zina Huntington Young's journal mentions several healings on Joseph smith's birthday in 1881. She washed and anointed one woman for her health and administered another for her hearing. She remembered the prophet's birthday and reminisced about the days in Nauvoo when she was one of his plural wives.

Linda King Newell [00:12:19] I have practiced much with my sister Prisinda Kimball while in Nauvoo, and ever since before Joseph Smith's death, he blessed sisters to bless the sick. Three months later, in March 1890, she says again, I went to see Cheriton, this is her son, and administered to him. Felt so bad to see him suffer. The next year, she notes with satisfaction hearing an address by Bishop Whitney in the 18th Ward, wherein he he blessed the sisters in having faith to administer to their own families in humble faith, not seen by the authority of the holy priesthood, but in the name of Jesus Christ.

Linda King Newell [00:12:57] Still, healing by women caused some confusion. This quiet routine practice on the local level occasionally raise questions which, when answered publicly by church leaders or the Relief Society, seem to start a ripple of uneasiness which sooner or later set off another inquiry. Church leaders began to issue general cautions about women blessing the sick. Agnes Cannon, president of the Salt Lake Stake, included the following in his answer to a question about women holding the Women could only hold the priesthood in connection with their husbands. Man held the priesthood independent of women. The sisters have a right to anoint the sick and pray the Father to heal them and to exercise that faith that will prevail with God.

Linda King Newell [00:13:40] But women must be careful how they use the authority of the priesthood in administering to the sick. Two Years later, on August 8, 1880, John Taylor's address on the Order and Duties of the Priesthood reaffirmed that women hold the priesthood only in connection with their husbands, they being one with their husbands. A circular letter sent from Salt Lake in that October to all the authorities of the priesthood and Latter Day Saints describe the organization of the Relief Society, its composition, its purposes, the qualifications for its officers and their duties. The letter includes a section called the Sick and the Afflicted, and I'll quote from that letter.

Linda King Newell [00:14:20] It is the privilege of all faithful women and lay members of the Church who believe in Christ to administer to all the sick or afflicted in their respective families, either by the laying on of hands or by the anointing with oil in the name of the Lord.

Linda King Newell [00:14:33] But they should administer in these sacred ordinances not by virtue and authority of the priesthood, but by virtue of their faith in Christ and the promises made to believers. And thus they should do it. Excuse me. And thus they should do in all their administrations. It seems clear that the First Presidency was answering one question. Anointing and blessing the sick is not an official function of the Relief Society, since any faithful member may perform the action.

Linda King Newell [00:15:03] However, by specifying women's right to administer to the sick in their respective families, the church leaders raise another what about administering to those outside the family circle? They gave no answer, although the practice of calling for the elders or calling for the sisters had certainly been established by now.

Authority Questions Around Washing and Anointing

Linda King Newell [00:15:23] Another question also bears on the topic. Is it necessary for sisters to be set apart to officiate in the sacred ordinances of washing and anointing and laying on of hands in administering to the sick? Eliza R. Snow used the columns of the Woman's Exponent in 1884 to give an answer.

Linda King Newell [00:15:42] It certainly is not Any and all of the sisters who honor their holy endowment not only have the right, but should feel it a duty, whenever called upon, to administer to our sisters in these ordinances which God has graciously committed to his daughters as well as to his sons. And we testify that when administered, when administered and received in faith and humility, they are accompanied with mighty power.

Linda King Newell [00:16:09] Inasmuch as God our Father, has revealed these sacred ordinances and committed them to his saints, it is not only our privilege, but our imperative duty to apply them for the relief of human suffering. Eliza Snow in 1884, then echoed the language of Joseph Smith in his April 28, 18, 1842 instructions to the Relief Society.

Linda King Newell [00:16:32] Thousands can testify that God has sanctioned the administration of these ordinances of healing the sick by our sisters with the manifestation of his healing influence. In answering the question of who should officiate in the sacred ordinances, Eliza's language is instructive. By limiting its performance to those who have been endowed, she definitely places the source of their authority under the shelter of those ordinances in the temple.

Linda King Newell [00:16:57] In other words, she saw washing and anointing the sick as an ordinance that could and did take place outside the sacred confines of the temple. Women, through their endowment, had both the authority and the obligation to perform them.

Linda King Newell [00:17:11] Two differing points of view were now in print. Eliza Snowe and the First Presidency agreed that the Relief Society had no monopoly on the ordinance of administration by and for women. The First Presidency, however, implied that the ordinance should be limited to the women's family without specifying any requirements but faithfulness. Eliza Snow, on the other hand, said nothing of limiting administrations to the family. Indeed, the implication is clear that anyone in need of a blessing should receive it, but said that women who have been in doubt may officiate as the washing and anointing practice continued. Women attending Relief Society conference in the Logan Tabernacle in 1886 heard a sister, Tan Yang, urged them.

Linda King Newell [00:17:54] I wish to speak on the great privilege given to us to wash and anoint the sick and the suffering of our sex. I would counsel everyone who expects to become a mother to have these ordinances administered by some good, faithful sister. She later gave instructions how it should be done. Her counsel was endorsed by Mary Ann Fries.

Linda King Newell [00:18:19] She said she attended to this, and the curse to bring forth in sorrow was almost taken away. But doubts kept surfacing among women whose desire for approval from their presiding brethren inevitably led to questions of propriety. Answers varied, however, depending on who provided them. In 1888, Emmeline B. Wells, editor of the Exponent and soon to be president of the Relief Society, sent Wilford Woodruff a list of questions on the topic of washing and anointing her questions and his response followed. First, are sisters justified in administering the ordinances of washing and anointing previous to confinement to those who have received their endowments and have married men outside of the church?

Linda King Newell [00:19:05] Second, can anyone who has not had their endowments thus be administered to by the sisters if she is a faithful saint in good standing and has not yet had the opportunity of going to the temple for the ordinances?

Linda King Newell [00:19:19] The answers came next. To begin with, I desire to say that the ordinances of washing and anointing is one that should only be administered in a temple or other holy places which are dedicated for the purpose of giving endowments to the saints. That ordinance might not be administered to anyone whether she has received or has not received her endowments in any other place under any other circumstance ordinances. But I imagine from your question that you refer to a practice that has grown up among the sisters of washing and anointing who are approaching their confinement.

Linda King Newell [00:19:54] If so, this is not, strictly speaking an ordinance unless it be done under the direction of the priesthood and in connection with the ordinance of the laying on of hands for the restoration of the sick. There is no impropriety in sisters washing and anointing their sisters in this way under the circumstances which you describe. But it should be understood that they do this not as members of the priesthood but as members of the church exercising faith for and asking the blessing of the Lord upon their sisters, just as they and every member in the church might do in behalf of a member of their families.

Linda King Newell [00:20:29] President Woodruff's careful distinction between the temple ordinances of washing and anointing and the church members practice of washing and anointing and the priesthood ordinance of anointing in connection with a healing blessing does not directly address the Eliza R. Snull had taken earlier that only endowed women should administer to others. The issue became more confused when precisely the same act was performed and very nearly the same words were used among women in the temple, among women outside the temple, and among men administering to women. The distinction in the average mind became Shadowy indeed. In 1889 Zina D. H. Young, addressing a general conference of the Relief Society, gave the sisters advice on a variety of topics.

Linda King Newell [00:21:13] Between wheat storage and silk culture came this it is the privilege of the sisters who are faithful in the discharge of their duties and have received their endowments and blessings in the house of the Lord to administer to their sisters and to the little ones in time of sickness, in meekness and humility, after being careful to ask in the name of Jesus Christ and to give God the glory. Although she does not specify whether the privilege refers to washing and anointing or both, she reaffirms without saying so that it is not a priesthood ordinance. She also reiterates Eliza's position that it was a privilege of the endowed as the last decade of the 19th century closed, refinements were being added both officially and in the wards and Stakes.

Linda King Newell [00:21:58] In 1893 the Young Women's Journal published a sprightly article advising girls to get enough faith to be healed, since it's much easier, much less troublesome, and inexpensive withal than obtaining medical treatment. The writer then offered a program for increasing faith do not wait until you are sick nigh unto death before making a trial of your faith and the power of God. The next time you have a headache, take some oil and ask God to heal you. If you have a touch of sore throat, try the oil and a little prayer before you try a single thing besides go to bed and see if you are not better in the morning.

Linda King Newell [00:22:34] If you are, then go on adding experience upon experience until you have accumulated in store of faith a store of faith that will all be needed when your body is weak and you are sick unto death, and if you still feel sick, ask your mother or your father to administer to you. Try that.

Linda King Newell [00:22:54] Then. If that fails and they wish to call in the elders, let them do so and thus exhaust the ordinances of the priesthood before you take the other step of calling a doctor. The brisk matter of factness echoes Brigham Young's practical hardiness. There is nothing mysterious or mystical here about faith and spiritual gifts, but perhaps most revealing is the attitude of spiritual self sufficiency and the interchangeability of mother and father as administrators.

Linda King Newell [00:23:23] If this article reflects practice among the membership at large, administrations were far from being confined to the men ordained to the priesthood. Another revealing example occurred in 1895 when Brother Torkel Torkelson and I love that name widely in demand in his community to bless the sick records that two sisters came to my house to wash and anoint my wife before her confinement. Since it happened that I was at home, the sisters called on me to bless her after I had blessed her and then sealed the holy ordinance which the sisters had performed. I could see the power of God come upon Sister Phelps, and she prophesied in tongues upon him, his household, and the unborn child.

Linda King Newell [00:24:03] It is interesting that Torkelson blessed his wife because it happened that he was at home and that he turns the sister service a holy ordinance. The distinction drawn at higher levels was not so restricting at the lower. In the 20th century, controversy continued over the traditions and policies touching on women's administrations to the sick in general and washing and anointing specifically. On September 16, 1901, a general board meeting discussed whether the Sisters should seal the anointing. After the washing and anointing, President Almira S. Taylor said that she thought it was all right she had received just as great a benefit from the sealings of Sisters as from the Brethren, but thought it was wise to ask the priesthood to seal the anointing when it was gettable.

Linda King Newell [00:24:51] Her own testimony that she had been as greatly benefited from the Sisters as from the Brothers suggests that she did not believe that a man with priesthood ordination might be more efficacious, only that she thought there was wisdom in including the priesthood holder as much as possible. This interpreted interpretation is borne out by her next and if the Brethren decided that women should not seal the anointing, then we should do as they say. But she could not see any reason why women could not. Aunt Zina did after five years earlier, Ruth Fox records a discussion with the same gently redoubtable Zina Young.

Linda King Newell [00:25:33] When asked if women held the priesthood in connection with her husband, she said that we should be thankful for the many blessings we enjoyed and say nothing about it. If you plant a grain of wheat and keep poking and looking at it to see if it's growing, you'll spoil the root. The answer was very satisfying to me, but always someone was eager to poke, and each time the spiritual roots of women were imperiled like some. Louisa Lulu Green Richards, former editor of the Women's Exponent, responded indignantly. On April 9, 1901, she wrote a somewhat terse letter to President Lorenzo Snow concerning an article she read in the Deseret News the previous day, which stated, priest, teacher, or deacon may administer to the sick, and so may any member, male or female, but neither of them can seal the anointing and blessing because the authority to do that is vested in the priesthood after the Order of Melchizedek.

Linda King Newell [00:26:30] The question of sealing was thus added to the long list of ambiguities. Lulu says, if the information given in the answer is absolutely correct, then myself and thousands of other members of the Church have been misinstructed and are laboring at a very serious mistake which certainly should be authoritatively corrected. She gave a hint of the kind of authority that would be necessary by stating Sister Eliza R. Snow Smith, who received instructions from the prophet Joseph Smith, her husband You've got to remember that the man she's addressing is Eliza's brother taught the sisters in her day that a very important part of the sacred ordinance of administration to the sick was the sealing of the anointing and blessing and should never be omitted.

Linda King Newell [00:27:14] And we follow the pattern she gave us continually. We do not seal in the authority of the priesthood, but in the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Over the next few years, however, an emerging definition of priesthood authority and an increasing emphasis on its importance would remove more and more spiritual responsibilities from women and cluster them to the priesthood. The very statements authorizing the continuance of women's blessings only signaled their dependence on that permission.

Linda King Newell [00:27:41] One month later, the General Presidency of the Relief Society sent President Lorenzo Snow a copy of President Woodruff's letter of 1888 to M. Line B. Wells. This letter, which we discussed earlier, made the distinction between washings and blessings as an ordinance and hence confined to the temple under the priesthood authority and as a sisterly act as president of the Church. Lorenzo Snow reaffirmed the position explained there, with the exception that blessings should be confirmed rather than sealed.

Linda King Newell [00:28:10] Sometime during the first decade of the new century, the Relief Society circulated a letter called Simply Answers to Questions on Relief Society Letterhead. Undated, it ended with the notation approved by the First Presidency of the Church. This two page letter was the most complete document on the subject thus far. Depending on the extent to which the letter was circulated, it may have been a response to an unsigned 1903 Young Women's Journal lesson that asserted only the higher or Melchizedek priesthood has the right to lay on hands for the healing of the sick or to direct the administration.

Linda King Newell [00:28:44] Although to pray for the sick is the right that necessarily belongs to every member of the Church. This may be the earliest published claim that only the Melchizedek priesthood had authority to heal, but the Relief Society's approved letter directly countered that position.

Linda King Newell [00:29:01] This letter clarified some issues that had previously been ambiguous or contradictory. Administrations by women to the sick did not necessarily fall as a Relief Society function, but it clearly indicated that women did not need priesthood permission or participation in the performance of these duties. The quoting of Eliza R. Snow's position gave any endowed woman authority to perform such services. Confining the blessing to one's own family was not necessary. The letter also cautioned the women to avoid resemblance in language to the temple form, and although the blessing should be sealed, the sisters did not need a priesthood holder to do it.

Linda King Newell [00:29:38] Nephi Pratt, the mission president in Portland, Oregon, wrote President Joseph F. Smith in 1908 to inquire if he should, in setting release of Society sisters apart, give them the authority to wash and anoint sisters for their confinement, and also whether there were any forms they should follow in carrying out these services. President Smith answered that the washing and anointings in question were was a practice that some of our Relief Society sisters appear to have confounded with one of the temple ordinances. We desire you, therefore, to impress upon the sisters of your Relief Society that this practice is in no sense whatever an ordinance, that it must not be regarded as such unless it be attended to under the direction of proper authority and in connection with the ordinances of laying on hands for the healing of the sick.

Linda King Newell [00:30:25] He emphasized, however, that even women who had not received their endowments could participate in the washing and anointing. On December 17, 1909, the First Presidency, still headed by Joseph F. Smith, endorsed again President Woodruff's 1888 letter to Emmeline B. Wells, making one correction, namely, in the clause pertaining to women administering to children, President Anthon H. Lund had said that those sisters need not necessarily be only those who had received their endowments, for it would was not only possible for women to have the privilege, and women of faith might do so to give blessings. Apparently, for the first time, directly and decisively, a president of the church had enunciated a policy about who could give and receive such blessings, separating such actions clearly from the temple ceremony and making them rites accessible to any member of the household of faith, male or female.

Linda King Newell [00:31:17] But the matter was not yet laid to rest. The quiet practice of washing and anointing among women went on, but it was accompanied by greater uneasiness, by more questions, and by greater uncertainty about the propriety of such actions. In Oakley, Idaho. Second World Relief Society Minute Book or the Oakley, Idaho Minute Book contains a rare undated item, the written out blessing to be pronounced in a washing and anointing and sealing before childbirth. Even though Joseph F. Smith said that there was no special form for such occasions, it seems that the sisters were more comfortable with one written out. To what extent they followed the pattern or deviated from it is not known.

Washing and Anointing Before Childbirth

Linda King Newell [00:32:01] But the very existence of the document bespeaks an insistence that it be done, that it be done in a certain way, and that it be linked to the Relief Society they did not follow earlier. Counselor to avoid the wording used in the temple ordinances. And I double check this. So as I read this blessing, I want you to be sure that it does not include any of the wording in the temple ceremony itself, I found one five word line that did and that has been deleted.

Linda King Newell [00:32:32] The first two blessings follow each other very closely and only minor changes in the wording. With the wording here and there. The blessings were specific and comprehensive. We anoint your spinal column that you might be strong and healthy. No disease fasten upon it and no accident befall you. Your kidneys, that they might be active and healthy and perform their proper functions. Your bladder, that it might be strong and protected from accident. You women in the audience, as you have experienced your own pregnancies, I want you to think of the problems they're addressing here. Have you ever sneezed when you're eight months pregnant?

Linda King Newell [00:33:11] Your hips, that your system might relax and give way for the birth of your child? Your sides, that your liver, your lungs and spleen, that they might be strong and perform their proper functions. Your breasts, that your milk may come freely and you need not be afflicted with sore nipples, as many are your heart, that it might be comforted. They continued by requesting blessings from the Lord on the unborn child health and expressed the hope that it would not come forth before its full time.

Linda King Newell [00:33:40] And again I'm quoting. The child shall present right for birth and that the afterbirth shall come at its proper time, that you need not flow to excess. We anoint your thighs that they might be healthy and strong, and that you might be exempt from cramps and from bursting of the veins, that you might stand upon the earth and go in and out of the temples of God.

Linda King Newell [00:34:02] The document combines practical considerations more common to women's talk over the back fence with a reassuring solace and compassion of being anointed with the balm of sisterhood. The women seal the blessing. Sister, we unitedly lay our hands upon you to seal this washing and anointing wherewith you have been washed and anointed for your safe delivery, for the salvation of you and your child. And we ask God to let this special blessing to rest upon you. That you might sleep sweet at night, that your dreams might be pleasant, and that the good spirit might guard and protect you from every evil influence, spirit and power, that you may go your full time.

Linda King Newell [00:34:44] And that every blessing that we have asked God to confer upon you and your offspring may be literally fulfilled. That all fear and dread may be taken from you. You and that you might trust in God. All these blessings we unitedly seal upon you. In the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

Linda King Newell [00:35:01] The tender attention to both the women's psychological and physical state is an example of loving service and gentleness. That this widespread practice continued in similar form for several more decades is illustrated by an account written by a Canadian sister in the years from the early 1930s on. In the Calgary Ward Relief Society under Presidents Bergson, Maud Hayes, Lucille Ersenbach, the sisters often ask for a washing and blessing before going into the hospital for an operation or childbirth. In this ordinance, two sisters washed the parts of the body, pronouncing the appropriate words of prayer and blessing, being advised to avoid similarity to expression used in the temple ordinance, and at the conclusion, they put their hands on the head of the recipient and the name of the Lord pronounced a further blessing.

Linda King Newell [00:35:53] I received some information this last week that I was not able to include in the paper of a woman in Panguitch who remembers officiating in this. She's in her late 80s now and described the process in more detail, the size the bowl was and so forth that they used, and I'm looking forward to having that information to add to this. In cache Valley in 1910, a 1910 Relief Society meeting was given over to testimonies of Healing. President Lucy S. Cardin read some instructions to the sisters on washing and anointing the sick and how it should be done properly, adding testimony of the importance of having the spirit of the Lord with us.

Linda King Newell [00:36:39] One sister asked a question of the subject of washing and anointing, and Sister Martha Meadham, with a brisk earthiness that comes off the page, answered that she had done as much washing and anointing as anyone in this state, related the experience of a blessing which she had given while she was in Salt Lake. Said she wanted to spend the rest of her life in doing good to others and in blessing and confirming them. Related of experiences where all had been blessed and anointed.

Linda King Newell [00:37:07] Related of experience where all had blessed and anointed people. Said she had written to President Joseph F. Smith on the subject and he told her to keep on and bless all and comfort as she had done in the past. It was a gift that was only given to a few, but all sisters who desired and are requested can perform this along with a number of other women. The local Relief Society president, Margaret Valentine, spoke of her experience in washing and anointing and said they had carried out these instructions. Given the next sentence speaks volumes not only for the independence of the Relief Society, but perhaps also of mingled pride and trepidation.

Linda King Newell [00:37:45] The sisters felt that the bishop should be acquainted with the work we do. Sister Ballard continued telling the sisters how she had been impressed to bless and administer to her father, who was sick and suffering, and he had been here healed, had also been impressed to bless her husband, and he was healed. The meeting closed appropriately with singing count your many blessings.

Linda King Newell [00:38:09] This rare glimpse into a Relief Society group discussing anointings and blessings is revealing. In addition to the strong association with faithfulness, the gift of the Holy Ghost, and the importance of personal worthiness, there were other kinds of teachings.

Linda King Newell [00:38:25] One was the irreplaceable testimony of personal experience. It also shows a sharing of information the sisters had about current policy, former policy, and folklore, along with asking, how do these experiences relate to the priesthood? After all, that was the crucial question.

Linda King Newell [00:38:44] In October 1814, President Joseph F. Smith and his counselors sent a letter to bishops and stake presidents, established an official policy on Relief Society sisters regarding anointing the sick. For the first time, such a document did not come from the Relief Society.

Linda King Newell [00:39:01] Little of the information was new. It formalized policies that had taken shape over years. Lorenzo Snow's stipulation that the blessing must be confirmed rather than sealed. Wilford Woodruff said it was not a Relief Society function, and neither was it an ordinance. The new policy seemed to be that such work comes under the direction of the bishop.

Linda King Newell [00:39:22] At the April 13, 1921, General Conference, Elder Charles W. Penrose reported women asking if they did not have the right to administer to the sick, and he quoting Jesus promise to his apostles of the signs that would follow. The believer conceded, there might be.

Linda King Newell [00:39:42] Excuse me, there might be. And now I'm quoting occasions when perhaps it would be quite wise for women to lay her hands upon a child or upon one another sometimes, and there have been appointments made for our sisters, some good women, to anoint and bless others of their sex who expect to go through times of great personal trial, travail, and labor so that all is right so far as it goes. But when women go around and declare that they have been set apart to administer to the sick and take the place that it is, that is given to the elders of the church by revelation, as declared through James of old and through the prophet Joseph Smith.

Linda King Newell [00:40:18] In modern times, that is an assumption of authority contrary to Scripture, which is that when people are sick, they shall call for the elders of the church, and they shall pray over them and officially lay hands on them.

Linda King Newell [00:40:32] Even though he cited the authority of Joseph Smith, and even though Joseph Smith certainly taught the propriety and authority of elders to heal the sick, Elder Penrose also contradicted the extension of healing privileges to women by Joseph Smith. In fact, Joseph Smith had cited the same scripture in the April 12, 1842 Relief Society meeting, but ironically had made a far different commentary. These signs should follow all that believe, whether male or female.

Shifting Church Boundaries on Women's Ritual Roles

Linda King Newell [00:40:58] Throughout the 1920s, church leaders increasingly drew bolder lines between spiritual gifts, gifts and priesthood powers. With the clarification of priesthood role came restrictions of women's fear. Church leaders made it clear that women did not have the right to priesthood power. Further definition of priesthood included healing, anointing with oil, etc. As exclusive functions of the elders. By 1928, Heber J. Grant defended the priesthood against complaint about the domination of people by those who preside over them them. He quoted the description of the ideal way in which priesthood authority is to function found in the Doctrine and Covenants, Section 121, and then ask somewhat rhetorically, is it a terrible thing to exercise the priesthood of the living God in the way that the Lord prescribes by kindness and gentleness?

Linda King Newell [00:41:49] The pattern has now been established, clarified and validated. The strength of that pattern can be seen through a letter from Martha A. Hickman of Logan, who wrote to the Relief Society General Principal President Louisa Yates Robinson, asking her, is it orthodox and sanctioned by the Church today to perform washing and anointings for the sick sisters, especially in preparation for confinement or childbirth? Some have advocated that the proper procedure would be to have a special administration by some member bearing the priesthood for those desiring a special blessing at the at this time some years ago, when our temples did away with this ordinance for the sick and expectant mothers in many of our wards and stakes, as well as adjoining stakes, committees of sisters, generally two or three in each committee, were called and set apart for this work of washing and anointing in their respective wards wherever this ordinance was desired.

Linda King Newell [00:42:45] I happen to be the head of the committee in the first ward in the Logan Stake. We have officiated in this capacity for for some 10 years, have enjoyed our calling and have been appreciated. However, since above questions have arisen, we do not feel quite at ease. We would like to be in harmony as well as being able to inform correctly these seeking information.

Linda King Newell [00:43:09] Our Stake Relief Society President nor our Stake President seem to have nothing definite in this matter. Sister Robinson sent the letter back to the Stake Relief Society President with an attached letter explaining in reference to the question raised, may we say that this beautiful ordinance has always been with the Relief Society and it is our earnest hope that we may continue to have that privilege and up to the present time the Presidents of the Church have always allowed it to us. There are some places, however, where a definite stand against it has been taken by the priesthood authorities, and where such is the case, we cannot do anything but accept their will in the matter.

Linda King Newell [00:43:51] However, where the sisters have permitted to do this for expectant mothers, we wish it done very quietly and without any infringement upon the temple service. It is in reality a mother's blessing, and we do not advocate the appointment of any committees to have this in charge. But the worthy good sister is eligible to perform this service if she has faith and is in good standing in the church. It is something that should be treated very carefully. And as we have suggested, with no show or discussion made of it. We have written to Sister Hickman and told her to consult you in this matter, as it is always our custom to discuss matters of this kind with our stake presidents and have them advise the sisters in their wards.

Linda King Newell [00:44:35] There is an air of almost wistful timidity about Sister Robinson's letter that bespeaks nearest near resignation toward the change that was happening. Not necessarily because the policy against the blessing had changed per se, but because policy about the priesthood had changed the environment in which they occurred.

Linda King Newell [00:44:52] Non priesthood blessings were now suspect. One of the last documents on this subject is a little notebook containing a record of washings and anointings done by sisters in the 31st Ward in Salt Lake City. It begins in 1921.

Linda King Newell [00:45:09] Sister Dallie Watson for confinement, December 1, 1921. By Emma Goddard and Mary E. Care, 1033 Lake St. Every few weeks there is another entry, usually for childbirth, but sometimes for illness. The Last entry is July 2, 1945, to Jane Coleman Moore by three sisters, one of whom is the same Sister Goddard who had officiated 24 years earlier in the first analogy.

Linda King Newell [00:45:37] The next year brought the official death knell of this particular spiritual gift. On July 29, 1946, Elder Joseph Fielding Smith of the Quorum of the Twelve wrote to Belle S. Spafford, the Relief Society general president, and her counselors, Marion C. Sharp and Gertrude Garr. While the authorities of the church have rules that it is permissible under certain conditions and with the approval of the priesthood for sisters to wash and anoint their other sisters, yet they feel that it is far better for us to follow the plan the Lord has given us and send for the elders of the church to come and administer to the sick and afflicted, it would certainly be difficult for a sister to say that she did not wish to follow the plan of the Lord.

Linda King Newell [00:46:24] The Lord has given us by asking for administration from her sisters rather than from the elders. One relief society worker in Canada recalled. This ordinance was a comfort and a strength to many, but it was discontinued, and the sisters were asked to call for administrations by the priesthood instead when necessary or desirable.

Linda King Newell [00:46:44] Elder Smith's pronouncement ended the practice where it had not already stopped. We have no further evidence of such blessings being given by women. From the 1950s to the 1980s. Equal participation in gifts of the Spirit for women in the kingdom seems to have been replaced with the glorification of motherhood. But equating motherhood with priesthood requires one to ignore fatherhood as a balancing element in the equation, and by limiting the definition of priesthood to chiefly ecclesiastical and administrative functions, it tends to limit both roles. Thus, nearly anything that is considered to be a proper role for a man has almost come to be attached to the priesthood, and the emphasis seems to have been on stressing, even magnifying, the differences between the sexes rather than concentrating on expanding the roles of both.

Linda King Newell [00:47:31] This stance ignores that women from the beginning of church history did not sacrifice their important roles of mothers while participating fully in the spiritual gifts of the God Gospel. Nor is there evidence to suggest that women's spiritual activities such as washing, anointing, and blessing others, or their independence within the Relief Society organization in any way diminished men's priesthood powers or their exercise of them. Perhaps women can gain some strength, some measure of comfort from Elder James E. Talmage, who.

Linda King Newell [00:48:05] When the frailties and imperfections of mortality are left behind in the glorified state of the blessed hereafter, husbands and wives will again administer in their prospective stations, seeing and understanding alike, cooperating to the full in the government of their family kingdom. Then shall women be recompensed in rich measure for all the injustice that womanhood has endured in mortality. Mortal eye cannot see nor comprehend the beauty, glory, and majesty of a righteous woman made perfect in the celestial kingdom of God. But President Joseph F. Smith spoke more to the point when he said, there is nothing in the Gospel which declares that men are superior to women.

Linda King Newell [00:48:47] Women do not hold the priesthood, but if they are faithful and true, they will become priestesses and queens in the kingdom of God, and that implies that they will be given authority. Susan Younggate's statement still remains clear. The privileges and powers outlined by the prophet Joseph Smith have never been granted to women in full. Even yet did those women live so well as to be worthy of them all? When the lives of Latter Day Saint women, their faith, spirituality, devotion, and sacrifice are seen across the history of the restored Church, we find a record as venerable as that of men thank you.

Guest 3 [00:49:51] Linda, as usual, has done a first class job of research. And as is the case with much research of quality, her paper not only uncovers new information, it raises a host of questions. The questions are implicit. They arise as a natural consequence of the linking of statements and events distanced by both time and geographical setting.

Guest 3 [00:50:19] I'd like to pull out just a few of those questions that surface for me. The first one is difficult to pose without preliminary. In dealing with church history, one cannot avoid seeing the tensions inherent in a belief system which manages to embrace two seemingly incompatible tenets.

Guest 3 [00:50:41] We have the stated necessity of eternal principles, timeless truths and unchanging structure, together with a capacity to make changes by virtue of continuous revelation. The changes may be necessitated by a current circumstance within the institution, by our larger modern climate, by pressures of the world, or by demands of the law.

Guest 3 [00:51:07] In dealing with the issue on which Linda has focused, however, namely the exercise of the spiritual gift of healing by women in the church, we have something a little different. Here. There appears to be change without external cause, for the objective realities are constant.

Guest 3 [00:51:26] There are always the sick among us. Women continue to have babies. And although the degree and nature of hazard may have changed, emotional and spiritual needs are still there in those circumstances. But since historically most change in the church has been dictated by a perceived needle, upon what basis was the practice of women blessing the sake discontinued?

Guest 3 [00:51:54] As Linda has documented, this was once approved, but it is not now approved. Was there a mistake in the beginning? If not, why the change? Was there fear of a dilution or a misuse of sacred power? And isn't that still possible, or a diminution of the importance of the priesthood? Or was it a step towards magnifying the priesthood?

Guest 3 [00:52:25] Were there prophetic fears of a looming feminism triggered perhaps by the suffrage fight? Was there concern, based upon the Curtland experience about a possible lack of control in, quote, emotional women? Yet we know both men and women were given to excess in those days.

Guest 3 [00:52:48] We are left to pursue these questions on our own. Perhaps the roots of change lie in the growing need for approval or for approved definitions. Eliza R. Snow and Elizabeth Ann Whitney, along with Emma Smith, to name but a few, were in good company, surely in their understanding. Joseph Smith himself underlined their beliefs, saying it was the privilege of the sisters to bless the sick. In fact, some were ordained to do so, he said. But then later prophets saw things differently, but without consensus.

Guest 3 [00:53:23] We have had a hard time, it appears, defining the gift of healing, distinguishing between the personal spiritual gift bestowed by God on individuals, regardless of gender, according to their Faith and the ordinance of blessing the sick, now circumscribed by a priesthood calling. It seems we have become overly concerned about obtaining approval for every single move we make.

Guest 3 [00:53:49] I smiled when Linda talked of Zina Young's caution about probing too much in the roots. When I was called to a leadership position, I too was warned. They said, if you want to do something, don't ask permission. Just do it and you'll know soon enough.

Guest 3 [00:54:12] People don't like to take on the responsibility of giving approval. It seems that the women, and I quote from Linda's paper, the quiet practice of washing and anointing among women went on, but it was accompanied by greater uneasiness, by more questions and by greater uncertainty about the propriety of such actions. But one has to ask why the uneasiness and where it came from? And of course it was a two way street. There is some lack of confidence in the women, but we ask where it came from too.

Questions of Ordination and Spiritual Gifts

Guest 3 [00:54:49] If women in the early days of the church were ordained to bless the saints, how were they ordained? What words were used? And if they were not ordained to bless the sick, and Eliza R. Snow said this was not necessary, presumably they acted when moved upon by the Holy Ghost, and in that case they did not require permission.

Guest 3 [00:55:11] As late as 1935 there was evidence of this searching for approval of an existing practice and the death knell, as Linda calls it. It came in 1946, when, significantly enough, feminism was at a very low ebb, from being a natural response to a duty to a privilege, to a concession by default if the priesthood were not there or by permission of the priesthood held by husbands. It seems that oft times single women were excluded from it.

Guest 3 [00:55:53] And Linda's overview traces the history of this change, and she resists the temptation to psychoanalyze or to speculate, as I am doing, as to the underlying reasons for the demise of this particular spiritual gift as far as women are concerned.

Guest 3 [00:56:10] But the question is, continue to tantalize. How did this gift, as against all other spiritual gifts, become afforded formal ordinance only? Are we becoming more entrenched in formalism, as has been the fate of most churches, as they have become more deeply established and, quote, respectable?

Guest 3 [00:56:35] Linda sees hope in the utterances of Broken Brother Faust and President Joseph Building Smith, at least for the hereafter? I hope she is right, because my final response to her paper was a personal one, a heart deep awareness as I thought, of those women in such hard circumstances turning to their sisters for blessings when the odds against coming safely through childbirth were so High.

Guest 3 [00:57:01] I was deeply moved. In the middle of the night after reading Linda's paper, I found myself in tears as I empathized and imagined what those washings and anointings might have meant to such women in those circumstances. A unity of spirits, of course, is not dependent upon gender.

Guest 3 [00:57:25] There have been several very sensitive men in my life, as well as women with whom the deepest spiritual communion has been possible, and I could turn to any one of those men or women in most circumstances. But there are inevitably areas of understanding born of common experience and shared concerns which might make a touching of spirits and a union of faith, especially like you.

Guest 3 [00:57:56] And to cut off half of life's participants solely on the basis of sex tends to impoverish our options proportionately. A paradox emerges from Linda's paper. We have been told repeatedly that we as women are, and I quote, spiritually, morally, religiously and in faith, stronger than men.

Guest 3 [00:58:22] I don't subscribe to that narrow view which stereotypes men as well as women. But it does seem strange when those same women are denied the exercise of a spiritual gift so compatible with such qualities. Or are we not talking about a spiritual gift?

Guest 3 [00:58:43] Are we simply talking about a priesthood ordinance which may take no heed of the bearer of the gift? I'm not sure. Linda has opened up a torrent of questions, and for that I thank her. They add much to the adventures of the inner life.

Guest 3 [00:59:02] If I have one discontent about her paper, it represents a purely personal desire for icing on the cake. I'd like to hear some of her answers to the question she has raised. Come to think of it, I'd like to know how a lot of other people, men and women, would respond to those questions. And I would love to discuss this paper in Relief Society. There isn't much hope of that, of course, but we can all dream.

Guest 2 [00:59:48] Linda King Newell has presented a detailed summary and analysis of one element in Latter Day Saint women's history. In all hers is an excellent paper, original in its research, meticulous in its scholarship, revealing in its data, pleasing in its style, gentle in its questions and calm in its tone.

Guest 2 [01:00:07] All this I admire. But my criticisms of the paper lie in what poet Robert Frost called the road not taken. Perhaps to avoid the appearance of strident feminism in the patriarchal subculture, or to avoid possible criticism by male academics that as a woman she was engaging in self serving, special pleading, Ms. Newell has sidestepped some crucial questions in her presentation.

Guest 2 [01:00:33] I believe that four intertwined questions define the road not taken. What is the gift? Who gave it? Who has taken it and what are the implications? Throughout the paper, the gift referred to in the title seemed to be identified with the exercise of personal faith through various healing ceremonies.

Guest 2 [01:00:53] Ms. Newell documented very well the attitudes of Mormonism's founding prophet toward women exercising this gift, but she did not place her analysis within the context of Mormon doctrine and theology concerning this gift, its origin. Exercise and Non Exercise before the Mormon Church was organized, Joseph Smith published the Book of Mormon. In its final chapter is a passage that bears directly upon the subject of the and again I exhort you, my brethren, that ye deny not the gifts of God, for they are many, and they come from the same God, and there are different ways these gifts are administered but it is the same God who worketh all in all and they are given by the manifestations of the Spirit of God unto men to profit them, and unto another exceeding great faith and to another the gifts of healing by the same spirit.

Guest 2 [01:01:48] And I would exhort you, my beloved brethren, that ye remember that he is the same yesterday to day and forever, and that all these gifts of which I have spoken, which are spiritual, never will be done away, even as long as the world shall stand only according to the unbelief of the children of men and woe unto them who shall do these things away and die for they die in their sins, and they cannot be saved in the kingdom of God. And I speak it according to the words of Christ, and I lie not like the timid woman who wrote the LDS Relief Society general president in 1938 to ask, is it orthodox and sanctioned by the Church to exercise the gift of healing?

Guest 2 [01:02:33] LDS women generally have lost that gift because they have demanded the approval of a church hierarchy to exercise something the hierarchy did not and could not give them or take away from them. In Mormon theology, faith and healing are gifts of God, not of the Church, and certainly not of a changeable administrative policy.

Guest 2 [01:02:54] Parenthetically, one should also recognize why the practice developed of LDS women alone administering to women prior to childbirth or gynecological surgery. In the 19th century, it was standard practice for men administering to the sick to directly anoint with oil the afflicted parts of the body.

Guest 2 [01:03:15] In Victorian Mormonism, it was unthinkable that men would touch the distended uterus or sexual organs of a woman. Thus, LDS women did not usurp a prerogative but were required to administer to pregnant women because of a male priesthood practice. Only when the procedure of priesthood administrations was changed to omit touching the affected anatomy and touching only the head, was it possible to exclude LDs women from maternity and gynecological administrations.

Guest 2 [01:03:50] Anciently, the apostles also tried to circumscribe the exercise of spiritual gifts by condemning the person who healed the sick but who was not a follower of Jesus Christ answered their objection with the words, he that is not against us is with us.

Guest 2 [01:04:06] According to the rigors of Mormon theology, LDS women have no need to resent the church hierarchy for denying the exercise of gifts, which the Book of Mormon said never will be done away even as long as the world shall stand only according to the unbelief of the children of men.

Guest 2 [01:04:24] If Mormon women have lost the gift of healing, they have abandoned it through fearfulness, ignorance, or faithlessness. It has not been taken away in this connection. Another oversight of men his Newell's paper is her lack of emphasis upon LDS women exercising healing gifts and ceremonies in company with men. For example, Stake President Edward J. Wood of Canada recorded in his 1902 diary a visit by Church President Joseph F. Smith and wife Alice Wood's little daughter was ill, and he recorded the Sunday afternoon they all came to our house, and Sister Alice Alice Kimball Smith anointed Ivy, and President Smith sealed the ordinance.

Guest 2 [01:05:09] Thus it was possible, and if we quench not the Spirit, it is still possible for a Latter Day Saint man and wife jointly to administer the ordinances of healing not only to children and other members of their immediate family, but also to persons not related to the couple. Despite her marriage to the Church, President, Alice Kimball Smith had no more power or authority than any other woman in Mormonism. And if memory serves, there are also recorded instances where women performed an anointing ceremony of healing which was then sealed by men who were not their husbands. All this leads to the other have LDS women received something in addition to the gifts of the Spirit by which they have been able to perform sacred ordinances?

Response, Discussion, and Closing Reflections

Guest 2 [01:05:52] If so, what is this other gift and how has it been given? Ms. Newell approaches this question in her references to the temple ceremonies and the frequent official statements since the turn of the century denying that women hold the priesthood. Her paper shows that these issues were discussed, but she did not probe them sufficiently.

Guest 2 [01:06:13] To understand these questions, it is necessary to explore the meaning of the temple endowment for women when it was first given in the 1843-45 period, as instructed by Joseph Smith, the Prophet. Those who first received what we call the temple endowment understood that to receive the endowment was to receive the priesthood. This priesthood was conferred by the act of receiving the endowment, not through an act of ordination.

Guest 2 [01:06:41] For example, when several men entered the Nauvoo Temple on 30 November 1845, Heber C. Kimball recorded in his journal that only those that had received the priesthood were admitted, even though the excluded men included previously ordained and worthy elders, 70s and high priests of the church.

Guest 2 [01:07:01] And on 7 December 1845, Kimball recorded the names of 19 women among the members of the Holy Order of the Holy Priesthood, having received it in the lifetime of Joseph and Hyrum the Prophet. Women at Nauvoo who received the temple endowment just like any Latter Day Saint woman today, received the signs and tokens of the holy priesthood and exercised them just as did the men.

Guest 2 [01:07:28] Moreover, without having to be ordained to any priesthood office in the church, as required without exception for men, Latter Day Saint women received and do continue to receive the endowment and administer its various ceremonies to other women. In this context one can better understand such patriarchal blessings as this one conferred at Nauvoo by John Smith on Louisa C.

Guest 2 [01:07:54] Thou art of the blood of Abraham through the loins of Manasseh, and a lawful heir to the priesthood, and shall possess it in common with thy companion and inasmuch as thou art faithful in the covenant, thou shalt have power to heal the sick in their own houses.

Guest 2 [01:08:10] But a woman who had no husband in this life, or did not have one who was a worthy priesthood holder of his ordained church offices could also receive the endowment. This woman could also receive the endowment and its priesthood gifts at Nauvoo, as stated in Patriarch John Smith's later Blessing to imhitable duty that calls the priesthood in its fulness shall be conferred upon thee in due time. Thou shalt have power over thy relatives and thy friends, and thy husband and thy children to lead them whithersoever thou wilt, inasmuch as ye seek faithfully and truly to preserve them in the bonds of the new and everlasting covenant.

Guest 2 [01:08:52] The reason that Eliza R. Snow and others wanted to limit the exercise of healing ordinances to which women who had received the temple endowment was because she and they believed that women who had received the temple endowment had received the priesthood and that women who had received the second anointing with their husbands had received the fulness of the priesthood.

Guest 2 [01:09:14] The priesthood of endowed and anointed Latter Day Saint women was not a priesthood of church offices and hierarchy. Those relate to temporal power and status. The endowed and anointed Latter Day Saint woman is a queen and a priestess and a prophetess without the trappings of administrative offices of ordained Latter Day Saint men hers is a priesthood of spiritual power, just as the unendowed Latter Day Saint woman has the right of the gifts of the Spirit, as does the unordained men in Man. In Mormonism, woman, Women. Women then and now who understand this will not be tempted to challenge the ecclesiastical temporal positions, offices and jurisdictions of Latter Day Saint men.

Guest 2 [01:10:01] Moses Sister Miriam was a prophetess and a priestess in her own right and exercised her gifts and powers with God's approval until she presumed to challenge the temporal authority of her brother's priestly and prophetic office which he had received by calling and ordination.

Guest 2 [01:10:19] Latter Day Saint men who understand this relationship will not feel threatened by Latter Day Saint women who exercise the gifts of God to them in faith, power and humility. These are the implications of Ms. Newell's paper that should have been explicit. Thank you.

Guest [01:10:51] In view of the fact that it's 10 minutes to 10 and some of you need to do some make some engagements for a few minutes before our 10 o' clock session in order for them to start on time, I think we should not have a question and answer or comment period. We're appreciative of these fine presentations today and very hopeful that they will all be published. Thank you.

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.