Gaia

GAIA: Hi Again, Aphrodite -- AT the risk of starting up another battle -- and please everyone, that is most certainly NOT my intent -- I will tell you what i was taught as a student at BYU: You see, I converted as a freshman, and was disowned by my family, so really threw myself into the Gospel and the Church. I took every undergraduate religion class that was offered, and then i started in on the Graduate classes, which were primarily for the Seminary and INstitute teachers to renew their teaching certificates and to prepare for teaching Seminary and INstitute classes for the Church -- I was taught in those graduate classes that the immediate benefit of the Temple is that we get the power and authority to act as "Queens and Priestesses" right here and now -- the power and authority to develop first in our children, and then moving outward, toward developing in others -- -- The POWERS, gifts, blessings, opportunities, and qualities of LIFE -- ETERNAL LIFE -- which Heavenly Father (and MOther) have, together. As we demonstrate that we can be trusted with that challenge, and learn from it, we prepare for and develop the right to do it, as Gods and Goddesses in the next life, with (our own) Spirit Children, throughout eternity. But the immediate benefits are to receive the power and authority to act as Queens and Priestesses right now, so we are not only physical, biological parents, but we become spiritual parents to our children, (and others) as well.....being able to help develop in them the qualiies of Spritual rebirth, and Eternal Life, that we have (hopefully and presumably) developed within our selves, as we have lived the Gospel. We exercise those powers and authority to minister uno them, both temporally and spiritually -- and to as much as possible, create and minister in our own home, the KINGDOM of God, on their behalf. And as we are "true and faithful" in that, we eventually make our Calling and Election Sure" to Eternal Life, and ensure that we will continue doing that, forever. If you'd like references on any of that, just let me know, ok? I hope that helps -- Blessings -- ~Gaia

I wanted to continue the discussion on Heavenly Mother, thus this thread. The existence of Heavenly Mother is an accepted doctrine of the LDS Church -- (see for example: a) http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/basic/g...nly_mother.html B) http://www.greaterthings.com/MormonGoddess/ Some LDS men have a difficult time understanding the "pull" Heavenly Mother has for many LDS women (and some men). Perhaps the only way they can begin to understand would be to imagine what it would be like for them, to suddenly be prohibited from praying to, worshipping, communing with or talking about Heavenly Father.....How would that feel? In fact, it's been noted that it is very strange to say that Heavenly Mother exists as a Goddess, yet LDS are not permitted to pray, sing hymns to, talk or do much at all, with or about Her. In fact, It's been noted that there are reasons why it may be NECESSARY for people to re-claim the second half of their Divine Parentage -- See: Why Speak of God as Female: http://www.beliefnet.com/boards/message_li...4lastPost However, it's often noted that LDS don't know much about Her. The explanation frequently offered -- that God deliberately withholds informaton on Heavenly Mother in order to protect her -- is NOT doctrine -- It's NEVER taught anywhere as a principle of the Gospel or an explanation; it's merely a POSSIBLE explantion that has been offered by various people, including some general Authorities, as speculation , NOT doctrine. In fact, this explanation -- while perhaps a sweet, romantic, sentimental notion -- is (imo) contrary to several accepted doctrines and principles of the Gospel. 1. First, we are not talking about some frail, senstive, shrinking violet Maiden here, we're talking about a Divine, Exalted, Glorified, All-Powerful Goddess, whose glory is such that were someone exposed to it without being "Transfigured" to be able to bear it, they would be instantaneously burnt to a crisp. She needs "protection" from a few nasty words???? We all remember the very well known tendency for most merely mortal, human, flawed mothers to literally move heaven and earth, when called upon or needed by their children. Now if a merely mortal, flawed mother would go to such lengths to answer the needs of her children, -- How much sense does it make to suggest that an Exalted, Divine, Glorified, All-Powerful Goddess Mother is going to sit back and NOT answer the cries of her human children, who so need Her in so many ways and for so many reasons, right now at this point of our history -- Out of fear of offense over a few nasty words? 2. Secondly, Is it the kind of thing a Father would do -- would any truly loving, respectful father and husband deliberately withhold information and forbid a child from communing with their mother -- for *any* reason? Would any reasonable, loving father or husband DO that to his children, or to his Wife? If any merely mortal human husband displayed such behavior, we would (very rightly!) call it presumptuous, abusive and dictatorial. 3. Thirdly, Do you know of a single earthly, fallible, flawed, human mother who would stand for such a setup -- Who would actually permit herself to be shut out of her children's lives, on the "excuse" that they might disrespect her? -- especially if many of those children were yearning, even praying for contact with Her -- Does it then make sense that a GLORIFIED, EXALTED, perfected, all-powerful, Divine Heavenly Mother, who is EQUAL in power, might, glory, wisdom and strength with Heavenly FAther (see D&C 132) , would stand for such a setup??? 4. Fourthly, What kind of respect would God -- or any of us -- have for a Mother who would PERMIT herself to be a stranger to her own children, -- children who were yearning for and needing Her -- out of fear of a bit of insult??? B. -- Apart from romantic sentimentality, does this idea make sense or hold water in any other way??? -- In terms of the TRUE values of Eternity: - The value and need for good parenting; - The value of love, - The importance and value we place on courage and persistence in the face of opposition and challenge, - the importance and value of doing the Right no matter what the cost.... - the value and importance of the Family Unit and unity? - The value and importance of Guidance and INspiration from righteous examples; Put all that together and i think it's fairly obvious -- The notion that God is somehow withholding information on Heavenly Mother from us, is bogus. II. Furthermore, in fact, it is simply NOT TRUE that we have no information on Her -- - Joseph Smith had several visions of Her, some of which were simultaneously shared by others and reported on; - One reason why the Gnostic Gospels were considered heretical, was their inclusion of considerable material on the Goddess; - Both Jews and early Christians worshipped the Divine Female by a variety of names.....She was worshipped alongside Yahweh in Solomon's Temple, for over half of its existence. (See, for example, any of the following resources on the Divine Feminine: (NON-LDS) BOOKS: - "When God Was A Woman" by Merlin Stone - "The ONce and Future Goddess" by Elinor Gadon - "The Hebrew Goddess" by Raphael Patai - "The Goddess in the Gospels" by Margaret Starbird - "The Gnostic Gospels" by Elaine Pagels; - "Sophia: Goddess of Wisdom, Bride of God" CMatthews; - "In Her Name" by Elisabeth Schussler-Fiorenza. - "The Politics of Women's Spirituality" by Charlene Spretnak, ed - "Beyond God the Father" by Mary Daly, and several others. - "Religion and Sexism" by Rosemary Reuther, and others. - "Changing of the Gods" byNaomi Goldenberg LDS BOOKS: - "Women and Authority" edited by Maxine Hanks. - "Strangers in Paradox" by by Paul &Margaret Toscano - "God the Mother and Other Essays" by Janice Allred - "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View" by D. Michael Quinn ONLINE LDS RESOURCES: - Websites: http://www.greaterthings.com/MormonGoddess/ - " God the Mother in Mormonism" by Amber Satterwhite - "Shekinah the Presence of Diety" - discusses the Mormon Heavenly Mother - "The Common Origin of the Ancient Hebrew/Pagan Religion and the Demise of the Hebrew Goddess" by Fred C. Collier - http://www.greaterthings.com/MormonGoddess/ - http://www3.eu.spiritweb.org/Spirit/goddes...urn-herman.html - http://www.lds-mormon.com/ja1.shtml YAHOO GROUPS: - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/goddesschristians/ - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JesusandtheG.../?yguid=6029923 * * * I think it highly likely that at least some of that information would be useful in at least a beginning, elementary understanding of Her. III. The next question, of course, is WHY -- WHY would Church leaders withhold information on Heavenly Mother, and FORBID us to so much as MENTION Her, let alone actually discuss, let alone worship or pray to Her, and attribute that to Heavenly FAther? (See, for example, what happened to Lynne Whitesides when she merely gave an address MENTIONING Heavenly Mother -- http://www.lds-mormon.com/controve.shtml Many say it's because we're commanded to worship "The Father in the Name of the Son" -- true enough; but according to Scripture, a divine couple become "One"; is that "one" actually so seperate that one half of it wants and deserves worship, while the other half does not? Would God really punish us for wanting to commune with, receive inspiration or guidance from our Mother? Others say the problem could be that worship devoted to the Divine Feminine could turn perverse. This seems to be a legitimate possibility and problem, since there is historical evidence to support it. However, i think as with the potential for abuse of other principles (polygamy comes to mind) precautions could be set in place to avoid such eventualities. But by far, the major issue becomes fairly obvious with a bit of thought: A Female Divinity justifies, validates and affirms female Spiritual power and authority. And in a church where women's spiritual power and authority have been gradually but surely and systematically diminished, and then withdrawn over the years, until women have been discouraged from so much as exercising the Gifts of the Spirit (see the Letter from Apostle Joseph Fielding Smith to Belle Spafford, Marriane C Sharpe and Gertrude R Garff, 29 July 1946, in Clark, _Messages of the First Prsidency_ 4:314; also Derr, Cannon, Beecher, _Women of Covenant_ 220-221.) -- The idea of a Divine Feminine Who AFFIRMS such power and authority would present the leaders with huge, uncomfortable problems. LDS leaders cannot possibly acknowlege Heavenly Mother, because She opens up too many issues that a thoroughly Patriarchal, paternalistic church that has grown MORE sexist in recent years, cannot comfortably address. Here's how one woman [NOT Gaia!] addressed the issues that some LDS men invariably raise on this issue: "Who is anyone to tell you or me , who or how we should worship in the depths of our hearts and souls? Do you think it *pleases* our Heavenly Father or Mother when we, Her daughters, are told to "stay away from" Her??? How do you think your earthly father would feel if your brother told you to "stay away from" your earthly Mother, and blamed it on Him? Sisters, just because some man has ecclesiastical authority does NOT necessarily mean he is always right and to be listened to at all costs...." As for myself, I quote Joseph Smith: (Articles of Faith:11.) "I claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of my own conscience, and allow all the same privilege -- let them worship how, where, or what they may." Blessings -- ~Gaia

GAIA: Hello Sixpack-- I understand your concern here. We are discussing very sacred things. However, i would like to note wth all due respect, that your statement above that "Our HF felt so strongly about this that he never let us know this, knowing that his name would be taken in vain, and to protect her he didn't let others know" is NOT doctrine; it's NEVER taught anywhere as a principle of the Gospel or an explanation; it's merely a POSSIBLE explantion that has been offered by various people, including some general Authorities, as SPECULATION, NOT doctrine. In fact, we have NO (doctrinal) explanation as to why there is not more written or said about Heavenly Mother -- We do know that Joseph Smith and several of his trusted friends/ associates had at least one shared vision of Her; we do know that early Hebrews and Chrsitians worshipped the divine feminine, but other than that, our knowledge is quite limited and spotty. And your explanation above has several serious problems -- i think i can demonstrate that it is in fact, CONTRARY to accepted doctrine. I think further discussion of that is not wthin the purview of this thread, so i'll start a new one to adress that, and i do hope you'll check it out, ok? However, with regard to discussing these very sacred doctrines: There are a number of reasons why i feel it's legitimate here: 1. First, from what i've seen as i've tried to read over the posts and get a sense of who everyone here is, my impression was that most everyone here if not in agreement with the idea, would at the very least respect it. 2. Secondly, someone is asking questions -- very heartfelt, sincere, profound questions which they have already said, have NOT been sufficiently answered elsewhere, and that very silence has begun to be a problem for them. I think they deserve the answers that are available, as long as it's done so with discretion, care and respect. I think it's clear that the answers will be respected and appreciated. 3. I made sure to provide references from scripture and modern church leadership, to back up most of my major points, so there would be no question about their legitimacy. GAIA: Sorry, not sure whether you're saying that the Hymn, "O My Father" is not doctrine, or whether the teaching of there being a Heavenly Mother is nt doctrine -- and i think tht's an important clarification to make. I think it's pretty clear from everything from scripture (D&C 132) to modern teachings over the pulpit and official church publications, that the fact that we HAVE a Heavenly Mother is doctrine; the hymn was Eliza R Snow Smith's personal interpretation of that doctrine. GAIA: Ohmy, i hope i haven't given you the (mistaken!) impression that i would be offended or upset with such a respectfully-addressed question/ issue with something i've posted! -- I'm really a very nice, easy-going person, honestly! Blessings -- ~GAia

GAIA: Hi Rosie -- Thanks so much for those kind words!

GAIA: Hello there, Andy -- First, please let me say that i know very well, what it is to have to fight to pursue and practice your spirituality. I was *disowned* by my family for joining the Church . . . .During that time, my father had a major heart attack and nearly died, and nobody from my family even let me know. It can be very painful, frustrating, aggravating, and feel terribly disrespected. However, may i suggest that you look at it, for a moment, from your Parents' perspective: If you loved someone completely, and you suddenly realized that they had gotten involved in something about which you had heard questionable or even bad things, what would you do? What would you do to make sure they were not in danger? What extremities might you go to, to ensure their safety? You see, that's what they may feel from their side. So you see, it's not just a "black-and-white" issue . . . there are important perspectives to understand, on BOTH sides. Here are some basic suggestions for: HOW TO DEAL WITH PARENTS WHO WORRY ABOUT YOUR INTEREST IN LDS: (or any other religion): First, and MOST IMPORTANT: DON'T LIE (or Misrepresent the Truth) TO YOUR PARENTS -- If you are considering, or are now, Lying to your Parents about your interest or practice of Mormonism or any religion, please read the following, very carefully and prayerfully -- Please -- NEVER, EVER lie to your parents, or misrepresent the truth to them, regarding your spiritual practice. My point here is that to *whatever* degree you misrepresent the truth, you are *destroying* your INTEGRITY, and destroying your ability to speak with honor, to bear witness of Truth, because your words no longer holds ethical, moral or spiritual *power* and AUTHORITY. Consider too how your Parents would feel if / when they learn the truth -- as they will, sooner or later. What will happen to your relationship if you destroy their ability to trust you? Have you tried explaining to your Parents what the LDS Church and Gospel is, what you see in it, why it's so important to you? Have you tried *negotiating* with them, to come to some sort of mutually agreeable understanding, which respects BOTH them and you, and ALL of your wishes / desires? For example, you might offer to attend church with them, if they will allow you to see the LDS misisonaries, or whatever other arrangement you can work out with them. In this way, you would also be learning important lessons of personal discipline, negotiation, working with someone....all of which will serve you well, in life. But even if the worst is true, and your Parents simply cannot, will not be budged -- We're only talking about a very short time until you're out and on your own, able to make your own decisions . . . You may find that taking just a couple of years to respect your parents and and their wishes, until you're out and on your own, would be a fine way to honor Them for all the sacrifices THEY have made over the years, to the best of their ability at the time, for you and your welfare. Do you see how being straight with your Parents -- no matter what comes - - would make you a much BETTER SAint and human being, in the long run? MORE SUGGESTIONS - HOW TO DEAL WITH PARENTS: These are the result of years of challenges, and i can tell you from personal experience, that they DO work, with even the most difficult of situations. 1. Understand that their reaction is actually, at heart, concern and LOVE for you, and worry about your welfare. Remember that love is a tremendously motivating force that often gets confused and jumbled up in other (negative) emotions, like fear, worry, frustration, anger, jealousy, etc. Often, strong emotions like love, combined with FEAR or WORRY, come out in very negative ways. Don't be surprised, and don't misunderstand, either. When others respond with negative emotions like anger, etc., take a few moments to "center" yourself in the love of Christ, then "translate" their negative emotions, into the LOVE (and concern for your wellfare) that is at the *heart* of what they *really* mean, and respond to THAT, instead of the anger. If you keep that uppermost in your mind, you'll be able to respond with love, compassion and patience, rather than anger, hurt and offense; and you will keep the entire situation from escalating into misunderstanding and offense. 2. Keep some good, basic reading material on the Church (like the Ensign) around, so your family can pick it up and read it, at their convenience and interest -- which may be some time yet. Be patient. 3. Think about the questions they may ask, like "What is the Mormon Church", or "What is it that you like about that Church" -- and come up with some good answers, BEFORE they actually ask the questions, so when they do ask, you will already have thought it though and have some good answers ready. 4. Give them TIME to adjust, and to see that your practice of the Gospel actually makes you a better person -- and then make sure that it DOES. 5. Let your family take their time getting used to whatever changes you will make, don't spring it all on them at once. 6. Be patient, kind, loving and respectful -- even (especially!) when others are not. It is no great accomplishment to be kind and respectful to those who are that way to you; the challenge is to be so when others are *not*. 7. (Try to) See them as Heavenly FAther and Mother see them -- Try to see them as they might yet be. 8. Remember: there is a *reason* why you are together in this life; and you have an opportunity to make it a positive experience for both / all of you --or at the very least, for yourSELF -- with work, discipline, and effort. 10. Finally -- Deal with this challenge in a way that you can be proud of, in the years to come. And remember that it may take years before you reap the fruit of the seeds of patience, understanding, compassion and love that you plant now -- but their sweetness will be more than worth the effort. I hope that's soemwhat helpful -- Blessings and good luck to you -- ~Gaia

GAIA: I understand; posting so publically can be a bit intimidating --- So please feel free to email or pm me, any time. I would like to clarify one thing, for you and anyone else who might be reading/ interested, as well -- A lot of people make (what i think is) a small but very important mistake about the Temple: It isn't just about "added spirituality"; if that were all it was, i don't think LDS would have much to offer beyond that which other religions do, to be honest. Instead, it's about spiritual POWER and AUTHORITY. Those are two different but related things. Let me see if i can explain: If a person says a prayer, the Lord answers it based upon the circumstances, what's best in the long run for that person, and their faith, right? But if that person has added spiritual POWER and AUTHORITY, they are no longer just supplicants requesting a "favor" anymore, they become in a sense, part of what ANSWERS that prayer. One with true spiritual power and authority -- not just hoping or assuming s/he has it, but who KNOWS s/he has it and who uses it honorably, responsibly, and by the inspiration of the HOly Spirit -- is no longer just a supplicant, s/he can call down the powers of heaven with the knowledge that those powers / blessings are (to some degree) REQUIRED to respond to that call. That is a very different position to be in. Very few ever attain it, but the Gospel is designed to help those who can and wish, to do so. THAT in fact, is (again, imo) part of the ultimate design of the Gospel -- to make you no longer a beggar, no longer a supplicant, but rather, an "HEIR of God and joint-Heir with Christ", of "ALL that the FAther has". Now consider the position of an heir, relative to a servant -- even a trusted and beloved servant. VERY different, huh. We quote that all the time in Church, but think a bit on what it really means, what it implies, to be "Heir of all the Father has" (Romans 8:17, Hebrews 6:17, James 2:5) --- THAT is what the Temple rituals are designed to do -- to start you on the road to becoming no longer a beggar, no longer a supplicant before God, but a JOINT HEIR with Christ, with spiritual power and authority, to extend the blessings that are given to you, to others - starting with your biological children, and then moving out into the community/ world, as a Queen (one who disseminates temporal blessings to others) and a Priestess (one who disseminates spiritual blessings) -- (Doctrine and Covenants 76:50-70.) And again we bear record—for we saw and heard, and this is the testimony of the gospel of Christ concerning them who shall come forth in the resurrection of the just— 51 They are they who received the testimony of Jesus, and believed on his name and were baptized after the manner of his burial, being buried in the water in his name, and this according to the commandment which he has given— 52 That by keeping the commandments they might be washed and cleansed from all their sins, and receive the Holy Spirit by the laying on of the hands of him who is ordained and sealed unto this power; 53 And who overcome by faith, and are sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, which the Father sheds forth upon all those who are just and true. 54 They are they who are the church of the Firstborn. 55 They are they into whose hands the Father has given all things— 56 They are they who are priests and kings, who have received of his fulness, and of his glory; 57 And are priests of the Most High, after the order of Melchizedek, which was after the order of Enoch, which was after the order of the Only Begotten Son.... 58 Wherefore, as it is written, they are gods, even the sons of God— 59 Wherefore, all things are theirs, whether life or death, or things present, or things to come, all are theirs and they are Christ's, and Christ is God's.. "Becoming bone of bone and flesh of flesh, together, does not mean that I am trying to be more "womanly" and Charlotte more "manly"—nor that I am neglecting my own gifts and responsibilities, some of which are given, though only temporarily I think, because I am a man. I believe that the Melchizedek Priesthood and bearing the bodies of mortal children are simply assignments made for mortality. This does not mean the two are equivalent: certainly priesthood should not replace the nurturing duties of fatherhood nor does bearing children replace the spiritual gifts, including healing, nor the administrative gifts and duties given to women. But I believe priesthood and child-bearing are alike in providing, if we let them, similar opportunities to learn charity, to love and serve unconditionally. If we learn those lessons, we will pass beyond Melchizedek Priesthood and physical motherhood to a higher state of more perfect equality. That higher state, promised in the eternal marriage covenant, is called becoming kings and queens, priests and priestesses unto the most high God. Fatherhood and motherhood are equivalent right now in their intrinsic responsibilities. (President Lee said to both men and women that the most important work we will ever do is within the walls of our own home—and President McKay said to us both that no success could compensate for failure there.) The roles of man and woman are absolutely equivalent in their intrinsic joys and opportunities to learn the greatest joy—and the ground of our salvation—which is that pure love of Christ." (As Women of Faith: Talks Selected from the BYU Women's Conferences [salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1989], 117.) Monte S. Nyman and Charles D. Tate, Jr.: "Alma explained that "this high priesthood [was] after the order of [God's] Son, which order was from the foundation of the world; or in other words, being without beginning of days or end of years, being prepared from eternity to all eternity, according to his foreknowledge of all things" (Alma 13:7). Joseph Smith declared: "The Priesthood is an everlasting principle, and existed with God from eternity, and will to eternity, without beginning of days or end of years" (TPJS 157). In the words of President George Q. Cannon, the priesthood "had no beginning; [it will have] no end. It is [as] eternal as our Father and God, and it extends into the eternities to come, and it is as endless as eternity is endless, and as our God is endless: for it is the power and authority by which our Father and God sits upon His throne and wields the power He does throughout the innumerable worlds over which He exercises dominion" (JD 26:245). The Holy Priesthood after the order of the Son of God is from eternity to eternity, from everlasting to everlasting, meaning from one existence to the next. It was in operation in the first estate, it blesses lives and seals souls to eternal life in mortality, and it will continue into the world of spirits and beyond, on into the kingdoms of glory wherein dwell kings and queens, priests and priestesses." (Monte S. Nyman and Charles D. Tate, Jr., eds., Alma, the Testimony of the Word [Provo: BYU Religious Studies Center, 1992], 70.) Sister Chieko N. Okazaki, Counselor in the Relief Society Presidency: "Let us build upon our own faith and our own service. We can understand the mystery of Christian love that shines into the darkness around us and into the darkness of hearts and unites us with others. We can feel the steadfast and joyful love of the Savior in our hearts. Like Esther, we can respond with faith to the challenges we face, even if they seem too large and too complicated for us. We can find courage, even when trials beset us and our world seems dark. We can reach outside our small circles and take the risk of serving others. Like Mother Teresa, we can see the needs not only for food and shelter but for human kindness and divine love. Esther was a queen, but all of us have the potential of being kings and queens, priests and priestesses, gods and goddesses. Like Esther we are called to live with faith and with service. We, too, whatever our circumstances, must meet those circumstances as queens and kings who are called and challenged to be here in this hour." (Chieko N. Okazaki, Aloha! [salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1995], 126.) Then-Apostle Spencer W Kimball: "They who dwell in his presence are the church of the Firstborn; and they see as they are seen, and know as they are known, having received of his fulness and of his grace;And he makes them equal in power, and in might, and in dominion. (D&C 76:94-95.)" .... ...The Psalmist had sung: I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. (Ps. 82:6.) And Peter was well on his way toward this glorious goal to become one of those who inherits positions, titles, powers beyond human understanding. The latter-day Prophet Joseph Smith spoke of men like Peter: They are they who are priests and kings, who have received of his fulness, and of his glory;Wherefore, as it is written, they are gods, even the sons of God--These shall dwell in the presence of God and his Christ forever and ever. (D&C 76:56, 58, 62.)" (Elder Spencer W. Kimball, February 15, 1966, BYU Speeches of the Year, 1966 7.) I hope that helps -- Blessings -- ~Gaia

GAIA: Hello Annabelli -- Many people believe that in fact, REvelation was written for the Saints of the New TEstament period, who really did expect Jesus to return any moment, and who had major issues with the Romans.....Others of course think it was written to the generation of the "Last Days" -- and of course, they like to think they are that generation, since we all want to beleive that we're right in the middle of the key moments and issues of the world *g*.... In fact, I was a young BYU student when i converted and was very new in the Church, many years ago *smile* -- And there was then as i expect there is now, a tendency to participate in a kind of ongoing and very serious "game" to interpret the symbols of Revelation in terms of current events.... Everybody and their Aunt Tillie seemed to have a pet theory about the meanings and symbolism of each of the images of revelation -- and many of those interpretations conflicted with each other! My point here is to recommend caution and encourage discretion, wisdom, and care in determining whose interpretations to accept, and how much to make of them a "theory of Everything".... Good luck and Blessings - ~Gaia

GAIA: Hello Aphrodite -- It's great to meet a sister Goddess I was taught (at BYU) that the Endowment is exactly what the term says, an "endowment" of added spiritual power and authority from God, given in the (LDS) Temple, to both men and women. I think one of the problems that some people have with the temple is that generally, LDS worship does not have a lot of symbolism or ritual (compared with other religions, especially); and the Temple is a symbol-and-ritual RICH environment/ experience, so many are confused, bewildered, or even troubled by the experience at first. They just don't know how to "take" it. THE GOSPEL PLAN: Actually, the entire Gospel is a plan whereby the children of God receive -- and then extend to others (beginning with their own biological children) -- the powers, gifts, blessings, challenges, responsibilities and opportunities of *LIFE* -- in various forms and stages: first, physical life; then Spiritual Life, and finally, Eternal Life. All along the way, there are "Parents" who help "facilitate" or administer each stage of Life -- with its attendant powers, blessings, obligations, responsibilities, etc -- to their children. THAT, essentially, is (what i was taught as) the MEANING and Purpose of Priesthood. We begin as Intelligence; Heavenly Mother and Father "organize" that intelligence and give it Spirit Birth, which affords new aspects and qualities of life. Then we are born into mortality by our biological Mother and Father, and through them we receive new aspects and qualities of (mortal) life. Then through the Gospel, we are "Born Again" as sons or daughters of Jesus Christ (and our MOther in Spriitual Rebirth, the Church) -- through whom we receive yet more and new qualities and aspects of Life. When we're ready, we prepare to go to the Temple for an "ENDOWMENT" of yet more qualities, aspects, and powers of *Eternal Life* . The Bible and modern revelation say that in the Kingdom of God, men will rule (under Christ) as "Kings and Priests" and women will rule (again, under Christ) as "Queens and Priestesses" . A King or Queen is one who administers *temporal* blessings to others; a Priest or Priestess is one who administers *spiritual* blessings to others. So, i would say that the Endowment is a *ritual* in which this spiritual authority and power to become a King and Priest, or Queen and Priestess, are given *conditionally* -- that is, depending upon one's continued faithfulness -- to the Gospel plan in general, and to the Endowment covenants, specifically. RE: COVENANTS: Remember that in the Gospel, "covenants" are contractual promises which have two sides: the side of the individual -- what s/he is responsible for, and what s/he receives as a result; and the 'side" of God: what He is responsible for, and what He is to receive, as a result. Now about those covenants: they are generally found in the scriptures and Gospel teachings, but they are considered sacred, and you will not be told what they are *specifically*, until you are in the Temple, where they can be explained and where one is put under covenant to keep them sacred --- RE GARMENTS: The Temple Garments are a physical representation, symbol and reminder of those Temple covenants that are made, at the time one receives the Endowment. The garments have special "markings" which are symbolic of the covenants, and are themselves considered sacred. NOTE: it's NOT the garments which are sacred, rather it's the *markings* and what they SYMBOLIZE. Therefore, one should treat the garments with respect. Interestingly, there is evidence for ancient Garments: (Exodus 28:2-3.) 2 And thou shalt make holy garments for Aaron thy brother for glory and for beauty. 3 And thou shalt speak unto all that are wise hearted, whom I have filled with the spirit of wisdom, that they may make Aaron's garments to consecrate him, that he may minister unto me in the priest's office. (Exodus 29:29.) 29 ¶ And the holy garments of Aaron shall be his sons' after him, to be anointed therein, and to be consecrated in them. (Exodus 40:13.) 13 And thou shalt put upon Aaron the holy garments, and anoint him, and sanctify him; that he may minister unto me in the priest's office. When garments grow old and no longer useable, one should remove the markings (cutting them or burning them off is the usual method) and destroy them (again, burning is the usual method); and then the garments themselves revert to normal "clothing" and are no longer considered sacred. HOWEVER --Unfortunately, since many old garments have been found at Thrift Stores, and subsequently inappropriately used by those intending to embarrass and humiliate the Church, it's probably best to be careful about disposing of the entire garment. Some good Resources on the Temple: - Allen H. Barber. Celestial Symbols: Symbolism in Doctrine, Religious Traditions and Temple Architecture, Bountiful: Horizon, 1990, ISBN 0-88290-344-6 - Paul Thomas Smith & Matthew B. Brown. Symbols in Stone: Symbolism on the Early Temples of the Restoration, American Fork: Covenant, 1997, ISBN 1-57734-134-1 - Todd Compton, "The Handclasp and Embrace as Tokens of Recognition," in By Study and Also by Faith: Essays in Honor of Hugh W. Nibley on the Occasion of His Eightieth Birthday, 27 March 1990, John M. Lundquist and Stephen D. Ricks, eds., 2 vols. (Salt Lake City and Provo: Deseret Book Co., Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1990), 1: 620 - 631.). I HOpe that is helpful -- let me know, ok? Blessings -- ~Gaia

some prayers are reserved for holy places. about it being done outside the temple. Can you show me proof that they had permission/ council from the prophet/apostles? GAIA: Hello All - Here is some more information on LDS Prayer Circles -- There was some discussion in a previous thread ("Did Women Ever Have the Priesthood") on the "Anointed Quorum" or "Holy Order" which Joseph Smith organized during the Nauvoo period, and in fact, one of the activities of this Quorum was to offer up prayers in the "True Order of Prayer" for the benefit and guidance of the entire Church and Kingdom of God. The following is from a "BYU Studies" article on "LDS Prayer Circles" -- Development of LDS Prayer Circle (1829-1846): Although conventional forms of public and private prayer were practiced within the LDS Church from its earliest years, there were significant variations in the conduct of prayer. Physical objects were sometimes used in connection with prayer. Between 1827 and 1829 the Prophet Joseph Smith sought revelation through the Urim and Thummim as well as through a Seer Stone. fn Oliver Cowdery was by revelation given the gift of working with a "rod of nature . . . and therefore whatsoever you shall ask me to tell you by that means, that will I grant unto you, that you shall know. fn Moreover, during the Nauvoo period Apostle Heber C. Kimball "inquired by the rod" in prayer. Prayer in a circle was inaugurated in the LDS School of the Prophets at Kirtland, Ohio, in 1833, according to a reminiscence of Zebedee Coltrin fifty years later:They opened with prayer, Joseph then gave instructions to prepare their minds. He told them to kneel and pray with uplifted hands. . . About the time that the school was first organized some wished to see an angel, and a number joined in the circle, and prayed. When the vision came, two of the brethren shrank and called for the vision to close or they would perish. fn In the LDS Church, prayer was conducted in a circle as early as 1833, but this was after the conventional manner of Protestant revival "prayer rings." When Mormons prayed in a circle before 1842, they did not offer those prayers as a part of intricate rites as was done anciently and after 1842.Even the revelation of 19 January 1841, which spoke of William Law's receiving "the keys by which he may ask and receive blessings" (D&C 124:97), did not refer to the true order of prayer. Joseph Smith's remarks to a theological lyceum at Nauvoo, Illinois, in 1841 indicate that the 1841 revelation had reference to the manner in which Deity is named:The Great God has a Name By[w[h]ich he will be Called Which is Ahman--also in asking have Referance to a personage like Adam for God made Adam Just in his own Image Now this [is] a key for you to know how to ask & obtain. fn Not until 1842 did Joseph Smith give instructions and priesthood ordinances that constituted what was known first as "the holy order" and became known later as the "endowment."On 4 May 1842 Hyrum Smith, William Law, Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, Willard Richards, Newel K. Whitney, George Miller, William Marks, and James Adams met "in Joseph's private office, where Joseph taught the ancient order of things for the first time in these last days, and received [their] washings, anointings and endowments." fn It is very likely that the true order of prayer was included, for Heber C. Kimball wrote Apostle Parley P. Pratt on 17 June 1842: "We have received some pressious things through the Prophet on the preasthood that would caus your Soul to rejoice I can not give them to you on paper fore they are not to be riten." fnAlthough the order of prayer may have been instituted as early as 1842, the organization of a prayer circle was not complete until 1843. The initial meeting for this purpose occurred on 26 May 1843, involving eight of the men who had received the 1842 priesthood endowment, plus additional men. A summary of this May 1843 meeting is the first entry in a document at the LDS Archives titled, "Meetings of the anointed Quorum Journalizing, 1843-4." fn The full establishment of a prayer circle that included women occurred on 28 September 1843, which is described as follows in the published History of the Church:At half-past eleven, a. m., a council convened over the store, consisting of myself, my brother Hyrum, Uncle John Smith, Newel K. Whitney, George Miller, Willard Richards, John Taylor, Amasa Lyman, John M. Bernhisel, and Lucien Woodworth; and at seven in the evening we met in the front upper room of the Mansion, with William Law and William Marks. By the common consent and unanimous voice of the council, I was chosen president of the special council.The president led in prayer that his days might be prolonged until his mission on the earth is accomplished, have dominion over his enemies, all their households be blessed, and all the Church and the world. fn The reference to Joseph Smith's being chosen president of a special council has caused one historian and Joseph Smith's most recent biographer to conclude that this was an early organization of the theocratic Council of Fifty, fn a misinterpretation which results from a textual alteration in the published history. Instead of the words: "I was chosen president of the special council," the original record reads: "Baurak Ale was by common consent & unanimous voice chosen president of the Quorum & anointed & ordained to the highest order of the priesthood (&[Companion--d[itt]o" fn Baurak Ale was a designation for Joseph Smith, Jr., and his companion on this occasion was his wife Emma. fn The "Quorum" mentioned was often designated the "Quorum of the Anointed," "The Holy Order of the Holy Priesthood," or "The Holy Order" in the diaries of its Nauvoo participants and in the official records available about its meetings. A reference to "quorum" in a diary or other record is too vague in itself to assume application to a prayer circle. Nevertheless, the sources are sufficiently abundant that by cross-checking different sources for the same date it is possible to identify the Nauvoo prayer circle when it was described by its various names.... Beginning 28 September 1843, the wives of previously endowed men were given the ordinances of anointing and endowment in order to join the prayer circle, and other men and women were admitted to the Anointed Quorum each week. By the time Joseph Smith and Hyrum Smith were murdered in June 1844, more than sixty-five persons were members of the Quorum of the Anointed. fn Following the example of Joseph and Emma Smith, many of the members of this group received the second anointing during the lifetime of Joseph Smith, to which President Wilford Woodruff publicly testified. fn Others, like Sidney Rigdon and Orson Pratt, participated alone, and therefore did not receive the second anointing in connection with a spouse. Male membership in the first prayer circle included only the most prominent leaders of the Church and Kingdom of God; in most cases they were General Authorities, or prominent in the bishopric of the Church or leadership of the Nauvoo Stake, whereas the other men in the Anointed Quorum who were still faithful to Joseph Smith in the spring of 1844 also became members of the Council of Fifty. fn These men and women of the Holy Order were a select group, a religious elite within the Church, ... Having thus conferred the keys and form of the true order of prayer, Joseph Smith apparently also authorized members of the Anointed Quorum to practice the order of prayer apart the rest of the prayer circle. While Heber C. Kimball was campaigning for Joseph Smith's presidential candidacy in Washington, D.C., he recorded in his journal on 6 June 1844: "Last nite I clothed my self and offerd up the Sines of the Holy Preasthood--and called one the nam of the Lord he hurd me fore my heart was mad comfortable," and a month later he and Apostle Lyman Wight obtained confirmation of the actuality of the martyrdom in answer to the order of prayer. fn (Latter-Day Saint Prayer Circles Fn by D. Michael Quinn Fn, BYU Studies, vol. 19 (1978-1979), Number 1 - Fall 1978 81.)

GAIA PREVIOUSLY: First: If my "view" (that it was once taught that LDS women had Priesthood ) is heretical, you need to take that up with the people from whom i learned it and whose teachings i quoted -- including Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, (Church) Patriarch John Smith, and others. SNOW: That's hardly a legitimate defense. Brigham Young and Joseph Smith are not the final arbiters of orthdoxy. The point is that you, Gaia, hold a position that is not supported by scripture and is in fact contrary to the official position of the Church and the current teachings of the prophet and General Authorities. That makes you, in the case of your view of women and the priesthood, heritical. That position may not have been understood as heretical 150 years ago, but it is today. As an aside, neither Joseph Smith nor Brigham Young would likely qualify for a Temple Recommend today. GAIA NOW: An interesting point. SNOW: If you taught or preached your views in Sacrament meeting, your Bishop would likely correct you. If you persisted in teaching such heresy, the Stake President might well discipline you. GAIA NOW: And that is exactly the point, Snow -- i did NOT "preach" this in ANY official capacity or Church venue; I presented it here in a thoroughly NON-official "Gospel Discussion Board" in the context of a discussion on LDS HISTORY. Your dogmatic, authoritarian defense was therefore rather exaggerated and melodramatic. That you constantly fear and accuse others of manipulation is an interesting comment on your focus (Matthew 12:24). GAIA PREVIOUSLY: SNOW: Beyond me correctly identifying your heretical opinion I doubt you can find an instance of me treating you anyone one way or another. You may not like what I point out, it may make you uncomfortable to have your views identified but I am hardly being unkind of unmeriful about it. Truth is neutral. It just is. GAIA: But you didn't just "identify [my] heretical opinion", Snow. Go back and re-read -- You did considerably more than just say, "Gaia, imo that view is heretical." GAIA PREVIOUSLY: GAIA: 1) With all due respect, i'm afraid i have to question your honesty both with me and (if you really mean what you said there) with yourself, about how you have participated in this discussion. If you had merely called me to repentance, i would not have disputed with you; but you denigrated, lectured and misrepresented me and my position, impugned my motives and my spirituality. In short, you attacked. Perhaps that's your style here, i haven't been here long enough to know; but i would respectfully and sincerely ask you to examine that style and critique it as you would someone else's . 2) My point (above) was that while behaving thusly, you were hardly someone to lecture me on what the Priesthood is and is not. 3) I understand that you think my thoughts are heretical. I thank you for what i assume is your concern over my eternal welfare (and that of others who may read my thoughts and be "led astray"). I assure you that i have not and would not represent what i've written here as official, current LDS doctrine, to anyone. With that, i think this discussion is over. I wish you well, and the continued guidance of the Lord and His Spirit. ~Gaia

GAIA: Hello A-Train. Thanks for sharing that difficult story. First, i'd like to say that i'm so sorry your mom has had such sorrow and grief in her life. I don't think i or anybody else can judge your Mom; You of course are in a somewhat different position since as her child, her actions affected you -- thus, (i believe) that what happened is between her and the Lord, and to some degree, you. I imagine she did the best she could at the time. I believe and hope that the Lord will take even those things we cannot know about the intentions, the heart and mind and spirit, into accout, when he does judge each of us. Let me give a brief example of what i'm thinking: I've never smoked; as a young co-ed at BYU, i converted to the Church so i never "learned" that nasty habit, although my parents were "3+-packs-aday" smokers for many years. I hate the smell and detest second-hand smoke. But when some LDS complain about having to sit next to smokers at Church, i always wonder what it would be like if our sins all had their own unique, quite discernable scent(s) -- what offensive odors might each of us be giving off, constantly? {rueful grin} I will add this: In my experience, the most Christ-like people i know -- and those who have the most lasting and positive impact upon the (mortal and eternal) lives of others -- are people who resist the (very human!) need to blame, punish, castigate, etc; and who instead, merely try to love, as an example of Christ's compassion for them and their weaknesses, and of His invitation to all, to come and partake of His mercy, Grace, and love. Meanwhile, i do hope your mom eventually finds healing, happiness, and fulfillment. Blessings to you both -- ~Gaia

GAIA: First: If my "view" (that it was once taught that LDS women had Priesthood ) is heretical, you need to take that up with the people from whom i learned it and whose teachings i quoted -- including Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, (Church) Patriarch John Smith, and others. Secondly, you misunderstood me -- again: My point was that you "chastize" me on the basis of questionable doctrine, but do so in a way that is contrary to even more basic, fundamental and essential principles taught by the Ten Commandments and Christ Himself. Jesus said relatively little about doctrine, but nearly his entire ministry focused on how people should behave, critique their OWN behavior (NOT that of others), and treat each other with respect, kindness, compassion and mercy . I think i have legitimate reason (D&C 121) to think that a righteous Priesthood holder who honestly believed me to be a heretic would respectfully call me to repentance with compassion and kindness -- not publically criticize, ridicule, denigrate and condemn me. ~Gaia

GAIA: Hello Sixpack -- I certainly hope you're not referring to me, there. I don't think (and never intended to suggest) that women having Priesthood is (currently) a "tenet" of the LDS Church. Such a position is obviously, demonstrably absurd. I have stated that there is historical evidence that suggests it was taught at one time that faithful LDS women had and exercised Priesthood -- but those are two very different things, as i hope would be clear to anyone who actually tried to understand my messages, rather than just condemn them out of hand. And secondly, i have gone out of my way to say that i think there are many fine Priesthood holders in the Church who have blessed my own life, and who i am sure bless others. As far as the current LDS leaders are concerned: I think/ feel that they are generally good, honorable men who try their very best to do what they feel is right. Like all humans, they are occasionally subject to human flaws, weaknesses, and errors; yet at the same time, occasionally demonstrate amazing strengths, insight, wisdom, and compassion. I hope that makes my position(s) clear -- ~Gaia

GAIA: HI A-Train; thanks for your thoughts -- all of them; sorry i had to cut some for space. I would suggest that your quote was only a part of Joseph Smith's thinking, teachings (and actions) on the subject of women and PH; and that there was much more to it. I have a few questions i 'd like to ask, and references i'd like to quote, if i may: 1) What do you know/ what have you studied about the Anointed Quorum/ Holy Order that Joseph established in the Nauvoo period? Have you read any of the references i provided here: http://www.ldstalk.com/forums/index.php? showtopic=9832&st=45 , in Message # 56, which state that women WERE accepted into and functioned in the Priesthood, in that Anointed Quorum/ Holy Order? For example: Joseph and Emma Smith became the first couple to receive the Second Anointing (by which they made their Calling and Election Sure and thus received the Second Comforter) or "fullness of the priesthood." By this ceremony they were each "anointed & ordained to the highest & holiest order of the priesthood." PLEASE NOTE: "EACH anointed and ordained", NOT just the husband. ("Meetings of the Anointed Quorum- Journalizings," 28 Sept 1843, also slightly different entry in Joseph Smith diary, 28 Sept 1843, in Faulring, "An American Prophet's Record" p 412. In The HIstory of the Church (HC), the ordinance by which Hyrum and Mary Fielding Smith received their Second Anointing is recorded as "My brother Hyrum and his wife were blessed, ORDAINED AND ANOINTED." PLEASE NOTE: "and his wife were blessed, ORDAINED AND ANOINTED." (Wilford Woodruff, "Historian's Private Journal," 26 Feb 1867, LDS archives; LDS MIllennial Star 22 (7 April 1860): 214; HC 6:46.) When Brigham Young's own wife received the endowment on 1 Nov 1843, he wrote, "Mary A Young ADMITTED TO THE HIEST ORDER OF THE PRIESTHOOD" [sic] [emphasis added] PLEASE NOTE: It does NOT say that her husband was admitted, it says that SHE "was admitted". She did not receive the Second Anointing with him until three weeks later. (Brigham Young Diary 29 Oct, 1 Nov 1843, copies in Donald R Moorman papers, ARchives, Weber State University; "Meetings of anointed Quorum - Journalizings," 29 Oct 1843; Faulring, "An American Prophet's Record," 444; Ehat, "Joseph Smith's Introduction of the Temple Ordinances," 103.) PLease NOTE: The popular but erroneous idea that women receive priesthood only through their husbands (in temple marriage or the Second Anointing -- both of which a husband and wife must receive together) -- was NOT the view expressed by the Anointed Quorum's original members, who learned about the endowment directly from Joseph Smith: Brigham Young's 1843 diary associated the endowment of women with their receiving priesthood. For example: ON 29 Oct 1843, he noted that Thirza Cahoon, Lois Cutler, and Phebe Woodworth were "taken into the ORDER OF THE PRIESTHOOD." That was the day those three women individually received their endowments. They did NOT join with their husbands to receive the Second Anointing until 12 and 15 Nov 1843, respectively. On 3 Feb 1844, William Clayton's diary noted that Jane Bicknell Young was also endowed and received "into the Quorum of the Priesthood." (William Clayton diary, 3 Feb 1844, 7 Dec. 1845; in Smith, "An Intimate Chronicle," 125, 193; "Meetings of the anointed quorum" JOseph Smith diary, 3 Feb 1844, in Faulring, "an American Prophet's Record," 444; Ehat, "Hoseph Smith's INtroduction of Temple Ordinances," 103; Buerger, "The Fulness of the Priesthood," 23.) Joseph Smith's uncle John Smith, a special member of the First Presidency since 1837, member of the Anointed Quorum since 28 Sep 1843, having received four months of special instruction from the Prophet about the Holy Order of the Priesthood during the frequent meetings of the Anointed Quorum -- (Deseret News 1991-1992, "Church Almanac" 46; HC 6:173; Faulring, "An American Prophet's Record" 416; "Meetings of the anointed Quorum," 28 Sept 1843; Ehat, "Joseph Smith's Introduction of Temple Ordinances," 102); -- Subsequently pronounced a patriarchal blessing on Maria Turnbow which specificed that it was THROUGH THE ENDOWMENT CEREMONY THAT WOMEN RECEIVE THE PRIESTHOOD: "Thou shalt have an Endowment in the Lord's house [and] be clothed with the Power of the Holy Priesthood..... (John Smith patriarchal blesing to Maria Louisa Turnbow, 7 Nov 1845, in William S Harwell, "The Matriarchal Priesthood and Emma's Right to Succession as Prsiding HIgh Priestess and Queen" 7.) In fact after his ordination as patriarch to the church in 1849, John Smith also described an *ancient* dimension of this female birthright to priesthood: In his blessing to Caroline Cottam in Mar 1853, he referred to the "Priesthood which Abraham sealed upon his daughters." He also blessed Elizabeth Bean in May 1853: "I seal upon you all the blessings of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and all the PRIESTHOOD THAT WAS SEALED UPON THE DAUGHTERS OF JOSEPH in the land of Egypt..." He made a similar statement in a blessing to another LDS woman in Nov 1853. (John Smith patriarchal blessing to Caroline Cottam, 26 Mar 1853, LDS archives; JOhn Smith blessing to Elizabeth Bean, 1 May 1853, Goerge Washington Bean journal, Book 1, 79-80, Archives, Lee Library, BYU, and his blessing to Sophia Pollard, 9 Nov 1853; all are quoted in Irene May Bates, "Transformation of Charisma in the Mormon church , Ph.D. diss., UCLA 1991, 281-82.) Now, as you say, these men did not speak words lightly, without thinking. As others have said, these statements are NOT from current General Authorities, however, as did say, they certainly do indicate * * * 2. Did you read the Prophet's address on the Three Orders of Priesthood, here: Three Grand Orders Of Priesthood, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith (TPJS) 322 There are three grand orders of priesthood referred to here. 1st. The King of Shiloam (Salem) had power and authority over that of Abraham, holding the key and the power of endless life. .... What was the power of Melchizedek? 'Twas not the Priesthood of Aaron which administers in outward ordinances, and the offering of sacrifices. Those holding the fulness of the Melchizedek Priesthood are kings and priests of the Most High God, holding the keys of power and blessings. In fact, that Priesthood is a perfect law of theocracy, and stands as God to give laws to the people, administering endless lives to the sons and daughters of Adam. It's important to note that LDS officials have said that this includes women as "Queens and Priestesses" -- For example: That higher state, promised in the eternal marriage covenant, is called becoming kings and queens, priests and priestesses unto the most high God. (As Women of Faith: Talks Selected from the BYU Women's Conferences [salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1989], 117.) The Holy Priesthood after the order of the Son of God is from eternity to eternity, from everlasting to everlasting, meaning from one existence to the next. It was in operation in the first estate, it blesses lives and seals souls to eternal life in mortality, and it will continue into the world of spirits and beyond, on into the kingdoms of glory wherein dwell kings and queens, priests and priestesses. (Monte S. Nyman and Charles D. Tate, Jr., eds., Alma, the Testimony of the Word [Provo: BYU Religious Studies Center, 1992], 70.) Esther was a queen, but all of us have the potential of being kings and queens, priests and priestesses, gods and goddesses. Like Esther we are called to live with faith and with service. We, too, whatever our circumstances, must meet those circumstances as queens and kings who are called and challenged to be here in this hour. (Chieko N. Okazaki, Aloha! [salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1995], 126.) The main purpose for our mortal existence is that we might obtain tabernacles of flesh and bones for our spirits that we might advance after the resurrection to the fulness of the blessings which the Lord has promised to those who are faithful. They have been promised that they shall become sons and daughters of God, joint heirs with Jesus Christ, and if they have been true to the commandments and covenants the Lord has given us, to be kings and priests and queens and priestesses, possessing the fulness of the blessings of the celestial kingdom. (Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, 5 vols. [salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1957-1966], 4: 61.) Inasmuch as we continue faithful, we shall be those that will be crowned in the presence of God and the lamb. You, my sisters, if you are faithful, will become Queens of Queens, and Priestesses unto the Most High God. These are your callings. We have only to discharge our duties. fn (Eliza R. Snow and the Woman Question by Jill C. Mulvay Fn, BYU Studies, vol. 16 (1975-1976), Number 2 - Winter 1976 264.) Judging from such indications as the floor plan of the Nauvoo Temple fn and public statements made about its ordinances, one can conclude that this temple offered a model for understanding eternal human existence that taught and embraced, among other things, the following elements: the premortal existence of all humankind; the plan of salvation that was established before the creation of the world; a creation accomplished by organizing previously existing matter; Adam and Eve and the Fall; the importance of entering into covenants with God to build the kingdom of God on earth; an absolute prohibition of sexual relations outside of marriage; the need to seal husbands and wives to each other that they might receive the promises given to Abraham of eternal posterity, numerous as the sands of the sea; and a promise that all righteous men and women may become kings and priests, queens and priestesses, to rule eternally and become like God. (Doctrine and the Temple in Nauvoo by Larry C. Porter and Milton V. Backman, Jr. Fn, BYU Studies, vol. 32 (1992), Num. 1 and 2 - Winter and Spring 1992 45.) We are priestesses and queens, who have received of his fulness, and of his glory; (Chieko N. Okazaki, Disciples [salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1998], 23.) But, the central purpose of the holy endowment as it relates to the temple program is to build a patriarchal family, and to give those who have been anointed to become kings and priests, and queens and priestesses, the higher ordinances of the priesthood through which they can become patriarchs and matriarchs, or fathers and mothers, spiritually. (Hyrum L. Andrus, The Divine Patriarchal Order [1972], 13.) * * * 4. Given the fact that there are three Orders of Priesthood (Aaronic, Melchizedek, and Patriarchal) and the last (ie Patriarchal) is not about outward ordinances, quorums, or offices, but that it IS the Order which contrinues on into Eternity, and is the one upon which the Celestial Kingdom is organized and based, and through which the Faithful become Kings or Queens, Priests or Priestesses -- (See D&C 76, especially 56-70): 56 They are they who are priests and kings, who have received of his fulness, and of his glory; 57 And are priests of the Most High, after the order of Melchizedek, which was after the order of Enoch, which was after the order of the Only Begotten Son; 58 Wherefore, as it is written, they are gods, even the sons of God— Compare with D&C 132, especially 132:20: 20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them. Given all this, my 5th Question is, How do you understand the prophets (and the scriptures) teachings that a woman is to become a "Queen and Priestess" in the Kingdom of God? GAIA: I think you're right on -- -- Although i would want to respectfully ask: (and i guess this is # 6 and final question *smile* -- What about HER "Priesthood authority"? What about the fact that SHE is referred to as a Priestess in both scripture and modern revelation and teachings? What about the teachings of Joseph Smith and other early leaders who said that women were Priestesses in their own right? What about the women whom JOseph Smith and his uncle (Church Patriarch) John Smith, called as Priestesses and who functioned in the Anointed Quorum/ Holy Order as Priestesses? Thanks and Blessings to you -- And apologies for the LLLLLLOOOOOONG post -- I hope (and certainly appreciate if you did) persevered and read it all -- ~Gaia

GAIA: Hello Traveler -- These are excellent questions. I'm reminded of the scripture, "OUt of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh." (Matthew 12:24); I think that's true of the mind "thinking", too :) Blessings - ~Gaia GAIA: Hello Anabelli -- Sorry you had such a negative experience. I guess i'd like to ask you, what do you consider to be "religious spiritual awareness", and how would that manifest? Blessings -- ~Gaia

GAIA: Hi Dr. T -- I think it's interesing to note that scripture says the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy (Revelation 19:10.) Any ideas on what that means, or what it means to you? Blessings - ~Gaia

GAIA: With all due respect, Snow, your bias and obvious hostility (evidently) make it impossible for you to state the FACTS correctly, let alone "perfectly", let alone correctly divine and interpret and then state, my thoughts and feelings. And i would certainly hope that your understanding and obedience to a principle (avoiding misrepresentation of other people) would not depend upon whether someone ELSE (ie Ogre or anybody else) does it. Y'see, those who actually try to live by the teachings of Jesus, do so regardless of whether anybody else does, or not. :) ~Gaia No disrespect, but I stated your position correctly. I note that you are complainiing a lot more than you are pointing out any error of fact from my post. That's because my post is factually accurate. GAIA: No disrespect? Please don't insult my intelligence. And pardon while i LOL but No, that's because your prejudice and hostility make it clear that it's impossible and futile to reason with you -- One does not attempt to reason with someone who's proven they are incapable of it. And as i've tried to explain to you several times now, i don't believe in arguing doctrine. I present information and allow people to do with it as they wish -- (even if that means rejecting it), and (hopefully and eventually) as the Spirit directs. GAIA: LOL again -- Only you are allowed self-righteous nonsense, huh? I'm sorry you feel that integrity is "self-righteous nonsense"; i strongly disagree. I think we each and all have a responsibility to examine our OWN behavior, before/ instead of making pronouncements on what others "should" and shouldn't believe. With all due respect, i would like to encourage you to prayerfully study the Oath and Covenant of the Priesthood (D&C 121) a few more (hundred) times..... ~Gaia

GAIA: Hello Rajah - -Thanks so much for an excellent summation; that was exactly (part of) what i was trying to say. Blessings to you - ~Gaia

GAIA: With all due respect, Snow, your bias and obvious hostility (evidently) make it impossible for you to state the FACTS correctly, let alone "perfectly", let alone correctly divine and interpret and then state, my thoughts and feelings. And i would certainly hope that your understanding and obedience to a principle (avoiding misrepresentation of other people) would not depend upon whether someone ELSE (ie Ogre or anybody else) does it. Y'see, those who actually try to live by the teachings of Jesus, do so regardless of whether anybody else does, or not. :) ~Gaia

GAIA: Hello Rosie -- Thanks for sharing your thoughts/ feelings. It is certainly true that many LDS women feel as you have indicated. It's interesting to note -- and you should remember -- that when women tell the truth about their experiences in patriarchal systems, they (or their feelings, thoughts or experiences) are frequently accused of being stupid, crazy, irrational, bad, unworthy, or sinful. Illegitimi non carborundum !!! ~Gaia

GAIA: With all due respect, Snow -- YOu're entirely welcome to make statements about what YOU beleive; But please do not presume to interpret or represent me or my thoughts or beliefs. Anyone who actually wants to know what GAIA thinks or believes, instead of what Snow IMAGINES she believes, is welcome to ask me. ~Gaia

GAIA: Hello Isaac -- The thing is, it's a well-known principle that humor is often a disguise for an uncomfortable or difficult truth. In fact, the idea that women are superior and that their receiving and using Priesthood would make men virtually irrelevant, has been re-stated many times -- For example, In a well-publicized statement, misogyny hit a new low when an LDS General Authority (Hartman Rector, Jr) predicted that if the female portion of humankind were to receive the Priesthood, then: "...The male would be so far below the female in power and influence that there would be little or no purpose for his existence [--] in fact, he would probably be eaten by the female as is the case with the black widow Spider." (Hartman Rector Jr, President of the First Quorum of the Seventy, to Mrs. Teddie Wood, 29 August, 1978, photocopy in "Utah Women's Issues, 1970s-80s", Western Americana, J Willard Marriott Library, University of Utah; quoted in Sonia Johnson, "From Housewife to Heretic", and in Robert Gottlieb and Peter Wiley, "America's Saints: The Rise of Mormon Power" 212.) I think there is a reason why this "women are superior" notion (which btw, i think is completely bogus) is so frequently repeated, especially in the Church. We might discover some very interesting things about Mormon gender politics, attitudes and values, by prayerfully meditating on it a bit, and observing how things are in the Church ..... Blessings -- ~Gaia

GAIA: Since the validity of the Journal of Discourses has been (yet again) impugned, i thought the following might be appropriate: Volume I of the _Journal of Discourses_ was printed in 1854. The following quote is from the letter from the First Presidency at the beginning of that volume: LETTER FROM THE FIRST PRESIDENCY. Great Salt Lake City, Utah Territory, June 1, 1853. Elder Samuel W. Richards, and the Saints abroad. Dear Brethren--It is well known to many of you, that Elder George D. Watt, by our counsel, spent much time in the midst of poverty and hardships to acquire the art of reporting in Phonography, which he has faithfully and fully accomplished; and he has been reporting the public Sermons, Discourses, Lectures, &c., delivered by the Presidency, the Twelve, and others in this city, for nearly two years, almost without fee or reward. Elder Watt now proposes to publish a Journal of these Reports, in England, for the benefit of the Saints at large, and to obtain means to enable him to sustain his highly useful position of Reporter. You will perceive at once that this will be a work of mutual benefit, and we cheerfully and warmly request your co-operation in the purchase and sale of the above-named Journal, and wish all the profits arising therefrom to be under the control of Elder Watt. BRIGHAM YOUNG, HEBER C. KIMBALL, WILLARD RICHARDS, First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. * * * It is also important to remember that many of these discourses were given during General Conferences and/or Priesthood Conferences, and that many were published in other official LDS periodicals before they were published in the _Journal of Discourses_ . Wilford Woodruff also stated that Brigham Young had a chance to review the Journal of Discourses, and that he (Wilford Woodruff) had also reviewed his sermons, and that the reporting in the JD was accurate. (then) President Brigham Young said: I know just as well what to teach this people and just what to say to them and what to do in order to bring them into the celestial kingdom, as I know the road to my office. It is just as plain and easy. The Lord is in our midst. He teaches the people continually. I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture. Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good Scripture as they deserve. (Journal of Discourses, 26 vols. [London: Latter-day Saints' Book Depot, 1854-1886], 13: 95.) ~Gaia

GAIA: Hi CrimsonKairos - What you don't seem to understand (other than my references to quotes and doctrines which answer several of your points regarding why women "can't possibly have" priesthood -- lol -- ) is that it's not YOUR window that i'm particularly concerned with. It's ok, CK -- i understand that you don't accept the idea. I wouldn't dream of trying to "convince" you of something against which you feel so strongly. I've learned that "arguing" doctrine is an exercise in ego and futility. I provided the information for those who care to do some prayerful research and thinking on the subject, and as the scriptures invite, "Seek Wisdom" -- (See Proverbs 1:20-23, 8:23-26) Blessings -- ~Gaia GAIA: Hello Pushka! -- Don't worry about "butting in", at least as far as i'm concerned, you're welcome to ask any questions or clarifications. For my position on women and Priesthood, please see Post # 56 Here: http://www.ldstalk.com/forums/index.php?sh...=9832&st=45 In addition to the other material i've posted in this thread. Blessings -- ~Gaia

I'm stepping into this discussion late but I have to take huge issue with your quote above because I have also been taught within the church differently. GAIA: Hello Rosie -- Quite true, and your quotes were certainly relevant to the discussion. In fact here's another from the D&C (clearly according to anybody's "book", accepted LDS scripture) : (Doctrine and Covenants 68:4 4 And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost shall be scripture, shall be the will of the Lord, shall be the mind of the Lord, shall be the word of the Lord, shall be the voice of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation.