All opinions are always 100% honest and my own. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. I also participate in: CJ Affiliate; eBay Partner Network; Rakuten Affiliate Network; ShareASale; Walmart Affiliate Program; independent affiliate networks.
I'm just going to put this right here:
LDS Church changes temple ceremony; faithful feminists will see revisions and additions as a ‘leap forward‘
While I only label myself a feminist with a lot of caveats (and typical feminists don't accept me in the fold), fairness (real fairness, not some kind of reverse dominance or reparations) has been part of my psyche since I was four years old.
Since I was endowed in 1985, the temple experience has improved incrementally. But there was still enough inequity, subordination, and intermediary stuff that it has always been difficult and somewhat painful. I have tried to overlook those things that bothered me by simply noting historical sexism, recognizing that human perceptions and biases exist among humans whether they are leaders or not, and recognizing that systemic sexism in a large institution would likely change very slowly (like most all changes). But I have still always left with the inferiority of women being affirmed.
I have not seen the new ceremony—I intend to go this week, literally as soon as possible—but what I've heard has my heart utterly rejoicing. I was not sure I would see these changes—which I have long felt were needed and are correct—in my lifetime.
It takes a certain…hmmmm…chutzpah for a leader to make massive changes in an established organization rather than just continue with the status quo. Those changes will be disruptive and are likely to create pushback (thus the need for chutzpah). I haven't liked all of President Nelson's changes thus far. But, boy, this one thing will cover a world of hurt for me.
Go ahead and abolish ‘Mormon' from the lexicon, with all the costs and SEO involved (and, no, I'm still not changing my site name)! If you are able to see needs of this sort through it all, I can deal with just about anything.
Alison Moore Smith is a 60-year-old entrepreneur, who graduated from BYU in 1987. She has been (very happily) married to Samuel M. Smith for 39 years. They are parents of six incredible children and grandparents to two astounding grandsons.
What a miracle. I wasn’t only enough to remember the 1978 revelation, but many members explain it as one of the experiences where you’ll always remember where you were. That’s how I feel right now.
Dave, I remember the revocation of the temple/priesthood ban very well, like you said. And today all the things on my list have gone out the window while I dance. 🙂
Alison Moore Smith recently posted…Two Tiny Gender Changes You Might Not Have Noticed at the March-April 2018 General Conference
I’m crying! I can’t even believe it, it doesn’t feel real — I need to go ASAP and see this for myself! I just read the SLTrib article and audibly gasped, then came here. I’m a long-time follower but I rarely comment but oh my goodness — I had to go somewhere and celebrate ♥ï¸
Lydia, thank you so much for commenting. I hardly post here anymore, but just needed to mark the moment, if nothing else. I welcome you in the celebration. My husband and I are planning to go today. And I hear the lines are LOOOOONNNNGGGG! 😂
Alison Moore Smith recently posted…My Definition of God and a Possible Response to Homosexuality in Church Policy
What Temple changes are you referring to? I’m an ordinance worker in the Los Angeles temple, and have not heard of any changes…
Did you go on January 2nd, Rochelle? That’s when the changed occurred and it seems they are pretty universal, at very least in the US. I’ve heard from people from Seattle to Orlando who’ve attended the new sessions.
Alison Moore Smith recently posted…My Definition of God and a Possible Response to Homosexuality in Church Policy
I am really excited about these changes and also really sad that I probably cannot even get to a state with a temple until March! Nonetheless, this is significant change that I think might he’ll with the questions I have had about the temple ordinances.
I understand the rejoicing of women who still attend the temple.
I understand that change happens incrementally.
But I’m still sad/disappointed that it’s still not equal. The new analogy is –
men(priests):God::women(priestesses):______
The female half of the analogy is left unstated! What does that mean? Does each woman get to fill in the blank for herself? I’m sorry if this is too vague — I’m not sure how comfortable you are with direct quotes. But leaving it unstated is almost as bad as keeping “husband.” It could even be worse if you’re a cynic and a pessimist like me!
Katie, I have some thoughts on your post, but want to wait until after I go to the temple this afternoon. Thanks for commenting. 🙂
Alison Moore Smith recently posted…My Definition of God and a Possible Response to Homosexuality in Church Policy
To be a tiny bit more clear, the part I am referring to is in the initiatory. I hear that the endowment is presented more equally. And I’m just reporting secondhand information.
President Nelson didn’t make changes. The Lord made changes.
Because that’s how God works. Leaders, members, humans are puppets who just freeze until moved by God at each moment.