Heavenly Mother

[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

[sixpacktr]

Gaia,

I read thru your note, as well as some of the references, and I have yet to find a reference that I will accept as doctrinal. I saw nothing from LDS.org that stated this as doctrine, or any other source. I did read the short notes from belief.net, and while I believe that these were said by the various authorities at different times, (and again, remember that I did believe this) I see nothing that states that 'the church accepts as DOCTRINE the reality of a HM.' It is, to me, common sense, but it is not something that is openly taught and acted upon.

I then looked at some of your other sources, and saw that some are from ex-mos and excommunicated people that were ex'd for praying, or telling others, to pray to HM. This is expressly contrary to our doctrine.

I know the argument that women just want someone to talk to, that understands them, and that they feel that only HM would. I still think that is heresy (there, I finally said it), as we are commanded to pray to 'God the Father in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ'. And the one reference that says that the HG is actually HM is stretching it, I feel.

I am being as nice as I can in stating this, as I want to be sure I follow the admonition of Heather posted today to be respectful, and I hope that I came across that way, but this is a dangerous belief, I believe.

I hope that this is taken in the spirit given.

[Alaskagain]

I am a bit skeptical when people choose the names of pagan gods or goddesses for their screennames, and a bit suspicious of the intent behind their posts.

If we have a Heavenly Mother, it is not something I wish to discuss in a forum such as this.

~Blessings~

[pam]

Just a quick note on this. I can't remember where or when I heard this. But...I was told that one of the reasons Heavenly Father doesn't refer to Heavenly Mother much...is out of respect. So people won't take HER name in vain as they do HIS.

Take it for what it's worth.

[Dr T]

Alaska,

Would you say it is more sacred than God the Father, whom you obviously have no difficulty talking about on this site?

[Alaskagain]

Alaska,

Would you say it is more sacred than God the Father, whom you obviously have no difficulty talking about on this site?

Do I talk about God the Father very much on this site? I don't think so. Do I talk about temple work on this site? I don't think so. I am pretty sure most of my posts have had to do with more temporal or earthly subjects.

[Dr T]

You didn't answer my question. Is that concept more or less sacred than God the Father to you?

[Alaskagain]

Alaska,

Would you say it is more sacred than God the Father, whom you obviously have no difficulty talking about on this site?

You didn't answer my question. Is that concept more or less sacred than God the Father to you?

You implied that I have spoken of God the Father and his sanctity in other posts. I have not.

If something is sacred, is there such a thing as more or less?

[prisonchaplain]

Just to throw a wrench in the monkey works, some have argued that the reason men avoid religious meetings is that they already cater more to a feminine audience. It's a vicious circle--more women attend, so leaders, inadvertently prepare for their audience. When men do show up, they feel disconnected.

Promise Keepers, and other "men's movements" and men's ministries are an outgrowth of this situation. So, despite a seeming patriarchal bent to most Christian theologies, it is women who get the most ministered to. At least, so it seems.

[pushka]

Wow! Gaia, what an interesting and informative post. I particularly enjoyed, for want of a better word, the account of Janice M Allred and the controversy over her article regarding Heavanly Mother.

[john doe]

I think Six is right on this, any inferences to a Heavenly Mother in LDs doctrine are just that, inferences. There is, to my knowledge, no official doctrinal statment from the LDS church definitively proclaiming the existence of a Heavenly Mother. If you have information otherwise, I would be interested in seeing it. So far, your posts have claimed much on the subject yet not produced any official statement from the church confirming your position. You say it is doctrine, I say it may be a logical conclusion that many people have come to, but it has not been officially declared by the church. I invite you to prove us wrong.

You keep making references to a vision JS and others may have been party to in which the claim of a Heavenly Mother has been portrayed. Do you have links to those? I have never heard of this vision before.

[onyx]

Hi Folks,

Another stimulating and interesting thread to be sure.

I do need some help though...to clarify...

Quote 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"

Quote sixpacktr

"I read thru your note, as well as some of the references, and I have yet to find a reference that I will accept as doctrinal. I saw nothing from LDS.org that stated this as doctrine, or any other source."

My question is:

What defines doctrine?

What is it exactly that makes a teaching/concept/belief doctrine?

Is there a process or means by which something becomes or is made LDS doctrine?

The reason why I ask is because I read the whole OP (despite it's length) including links.

On the following link:

http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/basic/g...nly_mother.html

It would seem that Bruce R. McConkie affirms this particular teaching as doctrine:

"This doctrine that there is a Mother in Heaven was affirmed in plainness by the First Presidency of the Church (Joseph F. Smith, John R. Winder, and Anthon H. Lund) when, in speaking of pre-existence and the origin of man, they said that "man, as a spirit, was begotten and born of heavenly parents, and reared to maturity in the eternal mansions of the Father," that man is the "offspring of celestial parentage," and that "all men and women are in the similitude of the universal Father and Mother and are literally the sons and daughters of Deity." (Man: Origin and Destiny, pp. 348-355.)"

Have I misread or misinterpreted Elder McConkie's quote or its intent?

I welcome any help in resolving my confusion.

Thanks

Onyx

[Iggy]

I am a bit skeptical when people choose the names of pagan gods or goddesses for their screennames, and a bit suspicious of the intent behind their posts.

Could be that this is why she picked the name ~

Gaia, also known as the Guardian of the Universal Amalgamator, is a fictional comic book superheroine in the Marvel Comics universe, possibly a mutant or extraterrestrial. Created by Larry Hama, she first appeared in Generation X #37.

[sixpacktr]

The reason I stated that this is not doctrinal is that it isn't. Elder McConkie cited the statement of this 1st Presidency of Joseph F Smith, which, again, I feel speaks to common sense if you believe as we believe. It may not be common sense to Dr T or PC, because of their differences in religious beliefs from us, and that is okay.

Again, I believe this to be true, but there is danger in stating that this is doctrine, because I feel that the next logical step is that people will start to want to pray to our HM, which is 180 degrees opposite to what we have been commanded to do. Gaia used as citations one woman in particular, Janice Allred, who was ex'd for preaching we should pray to HM.

Some of the other citations also are dubious, to me, to say the least. I don't really give much credence to what other religions have said about the 'divine feminine'. I feel that this is just an offshoot of where some have gotten off course with the pure principles of the gospel, and changed it to fit with what they wanted instead of what had been revealed.

Onyx asks some good questions, and I don't have the answers to them. I don't really know how doctrine is determined, as there have been some thngs stated in the past that have since been stated to be opinion while not necessarily doctrine.

BY taught that we should all get the spirit so that we cannot be led astray by anyone, even our leaders. However, he didn't state that so that there would be anarchy and confusion in the church, but rather so that we would gain a testimony of what our leaders were telling us, particularly the 'prophets, seers and revelators' that make up the 1st Pres and Quorum of the 12 (which, BTW, is in 2 weeks!).

I seriously doubt that the 'doctrine' of HM will be taught there, but faith in our HF and the atonement of his Son Jesus Christ will be taught abundantly...

[onyx]

Quote Sixpactr:

"Onyx asks some good questions, and I don't have the answers to them. I don't really know how doctrine is determined, as there have been some thngs stated in the past that have since been stated to be opinion while not necessarily doctrine."

The reason I asked the question is because I would like to be sure for myself.

I have read some articles that assert that both Elder McConkie's book "Gospel Doctrine" and President Smith's writings "Man, Origin and Destiny" are not considered official or approved LDS articles.

Then I came across reference to these texts in some conference talks on lds.org.

I have heard different beliefs taught from time to time, but there is conjecture regarding doctrinal basis.

Wherever there is conjecture the likelihood for confusion increases.

So if anyone out there can provide the answers to my above questions...I'd be really grateful.

Onyx.

[john doe]

I would guess that unless it is brought before the body of the church by the sitting prophet of the Lord and voted upon as doctrine, it would not be binding upon the church as doctrine. While the concept of a Heavenly Mother may have been and may even today be held as truth by leaders of the church, it does not mean it is doctrinal. There are many truths in the world which are not doctrinal, but that does not diminish their truthfulness.

The danger comes in teaching non-doctrinal truths as true doctrine. While generally harmless, fervently teaching non-doctrinal concepts and passing them off as doctrine can be a step on the road to apostasy. It is important to make people understand that while you feel the particular concept or teaching is true, the church does not teach it as doctrine or a tenet of our faith.

[Old Tex]

Have I misread or misinterpreted Elder McConkie's quote or its intent?

I welcome any help in resolving my confusion.

Thanks

Onyx

We all need to figure it out for ourselves Onyx, but I will pass on that when it comes to doctrine, I have always found safety in sticking with the standard works.

[sixpacktr]

<div class='quotemain'>

Have I misread or misinterpreted Elder McConkie's quote or its intent?

I welcome any help in resolving my confusion.

Thanks

Onyx

We all need to figure it out for ourselves Onyx, but I will pass on that when it comes to doctrine, I have always found safety in sticking with the standard works.

That was what I was thinking too, Tex (kind of sounds like a western, don't it! )

If I remember right, on our mission we were allowed to read the Scriptures (KJV of the Bible, the BOM, the D&C, the PoGP), Jesus the Christ, and Marvelous Work and a Wonder. That was all. I was rebellious and read the biography of Spencer W Kimball as well, as I was babysitting a sick elder and wanted something different to read. Anyway, I'm not sure if each mission has different rules, but that was all we had.

If I remember right, wasn't the 137 and 138th sections of the D&C added at a conference? Did I imagine that? That would be in line with what John Doe said...

[pam]

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

Have I misread or misinterpreted Elder McConkie's quote or its intent?

I welcome any help in resolving my confusion.

Thanks

Onyx

We all need to figure it out for ourselves Onyx, but I will pass on that when it comes to doctrine, I have always found safety in sticking with the standard works.

That was what I was thinking too, Tex (kind of sounds like a western, don't it! )

If I remember right, on our mission we were allowed to read the Scriptures (KJV of the Bible, the BOM, the D&C, the PoGP), Jesus the Christ, and Marvelous Work and a Wonder. That was all. I was rebellious and read the biography of Spencer W Kimball as well, as I was babysitting a sick elder and wanted something different to read. Anyway, I'm not sure if each mission has different rules, but that was all we had.

If I remember right, wasn't the 137 and 138th sections of the D&C added at a conference? Did I imagine that? That would be in line with what John Doe said...

Not the biography of Spencer W. Kimball? Oh the shame of it all. How can you still hold your head up?

[Gaia]

Gaia,

I read thru your note, as well as some of the references, and I have yet to find a reference that I will accept as doctrinal. I saw nothing from LDS.org that stated this as doctrine, or any other source. I did read the short notes from belief.net, and while I believe that these were said by the various authorities at different times, (and again, remember that I did believe this) I see nothing that states that 'the church accepts as DOCTRINE the reality of a HM.' It is, to me, common sense, but it is not something that is openly taught and acted upon.

I then looked at some of your other sources, and saw that some are from ex-mos and excommunicated people that were ex'd for praying, or telling others, to pray to HM. This is expressly contrary to our doctrine.

I know the argument that women just want someone to talk to, that understands them, and that they feel that only HM would. I still think that is heresy (there, I finally said it), as we are commanded to pray to 'God the Father in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ'. And the one reference that says that the HG is actually HM is stretching it, I feel.

I am being as nice as I can in stating this, as I want to be sure I follow the admonition of Heather posted today to be respectful, and I hope that I came across that way, but this is a dangerous belief, I believe.

I hope that this is taken in the spirit given.

GAIA:

Hi Sixpack. Thank you for a carefully worded, respectful reply.

Again, i certainly do undersand and respect your concen, and that of others; so please don't think i don't appreciate that this is a delicate topic requiring discretion, wisdom, and discipline.

Regarding the topic of Heavenly MOther specifically:

1. I did not list many references because i did link to two sites --

a.) http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/basic/g...nly_mother.html

b.) http://www.greaterthings.com/MormonGoddess/

- Which not only list but quote (official LDS) resources -- includng General Authorities -- extensively.

If you have any concerns regarding the legitimacy of the *doctrine* of Heavenly Mother, i hope you will access those resources and read the many quotes and references there, from LDS General Authorities.

2. The other, non-LDS and non-official resources were provided not to offer "offiical doctrine", but rather, as general historical resources, for anyone who is interested in pursing the topic of the Divine Feminine further; whether one accesses those resources is entirely up to them.

However, i must say that it's really inaccurate to dismiss them generally as "excommunicated Mo's" -- only four out of a list of TWENTY resources could be described in that manner --

But the greater problem with that view is that it is entirely ad hominem. Again, I did not use them to establish LDS doctrine; i used them as INFORMATIONAL RESOURCES, which they are -- and exceptional ones. D MIchael Quinn for example is an award-winning Historian (with awards from the MOrmon HIstory Association and the American Historical Association), and holds the position of Scholar-In-Residence at UCLA.

Maxine Hanks has been researching women and the Church since 1975, and compiled and edited the book "Women and Authority: Re-emerging Mormon Feminism".

The problem with ad hominems is that they discount, denigrate or reject material NOT on the basis of whether that material is accurate, truthful or worthwhile, but on the basis of what one has against the author, personally. We could find a lot of thngs wrong with anybody -- after all, humans are notoriously flawed; thus it's easy -- but patently unfair -- to dismiss or reject just about everything on the basis of ad hominems.

But one principle often heard from the church is that we should NOT JUDGE the Gospel or the Church by the flaws, weaknesses or mistakes of the human beings who represent it. I think that argument applies here.

3. Your point about them having been " ex'd for praying, or telling others, to pray to HM" is first of all, inaccurate and questionable --

First, they did NOT "tell others to pray to Heavenly Mother"; since you've evidently accepted the rumor you've heard, i would respectfully encourage you to actually read their stories and find out exactly what they DID do.

Secondly, even if they had, where in any scripture are we told that "praying to Heavenly Mother" -- or telling people to do so -- is a sin worthy of excommunication?

My point here is that with all due respect, i would ask you to do some resarch and prayerfully ask the Lord whether you are making some unfair and inaccurate assumptions, based upon unfair, inaccurate rumor and hearsay, and rejecting something on erroneous bases.

Please note: I am NOT saying that you should "change your position" and pray to heavenly Mother; i'm saying that if you beleive that these people were ex'd for praying to her, you beleive something that is erroneously based upon rumor and hearsay, and if you repeat it, you are spreading erroneous rumor and hearsay.

Now about the rest of my list of Resources: it should also be noted that there are on my list, a number of good, honorable (NON-LDS) experts in various fields. To dismiss them all is unfair and unreasonble.

For just one example, Raphael Patai -- author of "The HEbrew Goddess" -- studied at rabbinical seminaries in and at the University of Budapest and the University of Breslau, from which he received a doctorate in Semitic languages and Oriental history... He founded the Palestine Institute of Folklore and Ethnology in 1944, serving as its director of research for four years....

In 1947 Patai went to New York with a fellowship from the Viking Fund for Anthropological Research; he also studied the Jews of Mexico. ... He held visiting professorships at a number of the country's most prestigious colleges, including Columbia University, the University of Pennsylvania, New York University, Princeton University, and Ohio State University. He held full professorships of anthropology at Dropsie College from 1948 to 1957 and at Fairleigh Dickinson University. In 1952 he was asked by the United Nations to direct a research project on Syria, Lebanon and Jordan for the Human Relations Area Files.

Patai's work was wide-ranging but focused primarily on the cultural development of the ancient Hebrews and Israelites, on Jewish history and culture, and on the anthropology of the Middle East generally. He was the author of hundreds of scholarly articles and several dozen books... (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raphael_Patai

5. I certainly respect your position of not wanting to pray to Heavenly Mother -- although i must respectfully admit that the notion that it is "dangerous" seems to me to be inconsistent with LDS doctrine, and with everything i've ever been taught about the nature of Divine Beings.....

But i certainly respect your right to beleive whatever you wish.

Please note that NOWHERE throughout any of this discussion, have i told ANYONE that they should "pray to Heavenly Mother"; Nor would i. I hope i would defend your right to worship as your conscience dictates, and hope you would do the same for me or anyone else.

I hope that (respectfully!) clarifies my position relative to your statements; Please know that i really appreciate your efforts to make and keep this a respectful and cordial exchange.

Blessings to you --

~Gaia

[sixpacktr]

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

Have I misread or misinterpreted Elder McConkie's quote or its intent?

I welcome any help in resolving my confusion.

Thanks

Onyx

We all need to figure it out for ourselves Onyx, but I will pass on that when it comes to doctrine, I have always found safety in sticking with the standard works.

That was what I was thinking too, Tex (kind of sounds like a western, don't it! )

If I remember right, on our mission we were allowed to read the Scriptures (KJV of the Bible, the BOM, the D&C, the PoGP), Jesus the Christ, and Marvelous Work and a Wonder. That was all. I was rebellious and read the biography of Spencer W Kimball as well, as I was babysitting a sick elder and wanted something different to read. Anyway, I'm not sure if each mission has different rules, but that was all we had.

If I remember right, wasn't the 137 and 138th sections of the D&C added at a conference? Did I imagine that? That would be in line with what John Doe said...

Not the biography of Spencer W. Kimball? Oh the shame of it all. How can you still hold your head up?

Yeah, I was really 'bad to the bone'!

Gaia,

I will try and read some more of the sources you had, and comment later.

It is after midnight here, and I have all day meetings tomorrow, so I'm going to have to leave off here...

[Old Tex]

That was what I was thinking too, Tex (kind of sounds like a western, don't it! )

Yep! Sounds like a line straight out of an old Tex Ritter movie.

If I remember right, on our mission we were allowed to read the Scriptures (KJV of the Bible, the BOM, the D&C, the PoGP), Jesus the Christ, and Marvelous Work and a Wonder. That was all. I was rebellious and read the biography of Spencer W Kimball as well, as I was babysitting a sick elder and wanted something different to read. Anyway, I'm not sure if each mission has different rules, but that was all we had.

If I remember right, wasn't the 137 and 138th sections of the D&C added at a conference? Did I imagine that? That would be in line with what John Doe said...

Below is the heading from Section 138. I try to pick a quiet time and read that section every once in a while. There is a lot of information there. (Bold is mine)

A vision, given to President Joseph F. Smith in Salt Lake City, Utah, on October 3, 1918. In his opening address at the eighty-ninth Semiannual General Conference of the Church, on October 4, 1918, President Smith declared that he had received several divine communications during the previous months. One of these, concerning the Savior’s visit to the spirits of the dead while his body was in the tomb, he had received the previous day. It was written immediately following the close of the conference; on October 31, 1918, it was submitted to the counselors in the First Presidency, the Council of the Twelve, and the Patriarch, and it was unanimously accepted by them.

[Gaia]

I am a bit skeptical when people choose the names of pagan gods or goddesses for their screennames, and a bit suspicious of the intent behind their posts.

GAIA:

Hello Alaskagain --

Hmm, using that name for your ID, are you possibly trying to entice us to come to Alaska, or something?

I guess i'm surprised that anyone would be "suspicious" when they can't have any idea why such a name might have been chosen, ....

FYI, here's (at least part of) the story:

a) There is a Scientific principle advanced by research scientist Dr. James Lovelock called the "Gaia Hypothesis", which suggess that the Earth acts as a living organism --

"The Gaia hypothesis is an ecological hypothesis that proposes that living and nonliving parts of the earth are viewed as a complex interacting system that can be thought of as a single organism. Named after the Greek earth goddess, this hypothesis postulates that all living things have a regulatory effect on the Earth's environment that promotes life overall." -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis

I have a chronic illness and have lived my entire adult life in pain; the idea of the Earth as a living organism whose systems seem to regulate our environment and "promote life overall" reminded me of the notion of deliberate and conscious, overall health and wellbeing that i seek to incorporate into my daily life.

B) Secondly, I had a small "cottage industry" making herbal concoctions from my garden, silk paintings, and other goodies, all natural and all Gifts of Earth.

c) The idea of rebirth and renewal of Springtime, and the rebirth of the Spriit, all converged in my mind, to symbolize for me the ideas of life and renewal and opportunity which are symbolized for me, by The MOther and the Atonement of Christ.

d) The name "Gaia" is one that most people recognize as one of the names for the Divine Feminie / Earth Mother.

Alltogether, then, the name "Gaia" seemed appropriate for both my herbal business (Gaia's Gifts") and then, when i was looking for a name to use online, a friend suggested, "Why not use Gaia" -- which made a lot of sense and felt right.

In a perhaps more serious vein, i am reminded that early Christianity incorrporated considerable Pagan influences ....

And about names -- Jesus was of course never called "Jesus" during his lifetime; that's just an Anglicized version we've settled upon and become used to; History and Jewish tradition suggest that he was probably named and called somethign like "Yeshua".

If we have a Heavenly Mother, it is not something I wish to discuss in a forum such as this.

GAIA:

That of course is your prerogative and decision;

-- but i hope you'll also understand and respect that others may feel differently, and make different decisions.

Blessings --

~Gaia

[Gaia]

The Proclamation on the Family also certainly implies the existence of Heavenly Mother:

The Family: A Proclamation to the World

The First Presidency and Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

We, the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator's plan for the eternal destiny of His children.

All human beings—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.

In the premortal realm, spirit sons and daughters knew and worshiped God as their Eternal Father and accepted His plan by which His children could obtain a physical body and gain earthly experience to progress toward perfection and ultimately realize his or her divine destiny as an heir of eternal life. The divine plan of happiness enables family relationships to be perpetuated beyond the grave. Sacred ordinances and covenants available in holy temples make it possible for individuals to return to the presence of God and for families to be united eternally.

The first commandment that God gave to Adam and Eve pertained to their potential for parenthood as husband and wife. We declare that God's commandment for His children to multiply and replenish the earth remains in force. We further declare that God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife.

We declare the means by which mortal life is created to be divinely appointed. We affirm the sanctity of life and of its importance in God's eternal plan.

Husband and wife have a solemn responsibility to love and care for each other and for their children. "Children are an heritage of the Lord" (Psalms 127:3). Parents have a sacred duty to rear their children in love and righteousness, to provide for their physical and spiritual needs, to teach them to love and serve one another, to observe the commandments of God and to be law-abiding citizens wherever they live. Husbands and wives—mothers and fathers—will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.

The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity. Happiness in family life is most likely to be achieved when founded upon the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ. Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of faith, prayer, repentance, forgiveness, respect, love, compassion, work, and wholesome recreational activities. By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners. Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation. Extended families should lend support when needed.

We warn that individuals who violate covenants of chastity, who abuse spouse or offspring, or who fail to fulfill family responsibilities will one day stand accountable before God. Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.

We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.

This proclamation was read by President Gordon B. Hinckley as part of his message at the General Relief Society Meeting held September 23, 1995, in Salt Lake City, Utah.

~End.

Someone asked for references to Joseph Smith's Vision of Heavenly Mother --

Here is that informaiton:

Joseph Smith's Vision of Heavenly Father and Mother:

The Mother was revealed in an 19 April 1834 vision in which Joseph Smith and others beheld the Father, the Mother, and the Son.

This vision was given while Joseph Smith was travelling from Kirtland to New Portage, Ohio, with Zebedee Coltrin and either Sidney Rigdon or Oliver Cowdery (or possibly both).

Though not reported in the _History of the Church_ (2:50), where mention was made of the New Portage trip, Zebedee Coltrin gave several accounts of this vision later in his life, one of which was recorded under the date 3 October 1883 in the Salt Lake School of the Prophets minutes, Located in archives, Historical Department, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Salt Lake City.

"Once after returning from a mission, he [Coltrin] met Bro. Joseph in Kirtland, who asked him if he did not wish to go with him to a conference at New Portage. The party consisted of Prests.

Joseph Smith, Sidney Rigdon, Oliver Cowdry [sic] and myself [Coltrin]. Next morning at New Portage, he [Coltrin] noticed that Joseph seemed to have a far off look in his eyes, or was looking at a distance, and presently he, Joseph, stepped between Brothers Cowdry [sic], and Coltrin and taking them by the arm, said, "lets take a walk." They went to a place where there was beautiful grass, and grapevines and swampbeech interlaced. President Joseph Smith than [sic] said, "Let us pray." They all three prayed in turn-- Joseph, Oliver, and Zebedee.

Brother Joseph than [sic] said, "now brethren [sic] we will see some visions." Joseph lay down on the ground on his back and stretched out his arms and the two brethren lay on them. The heavens gradually opened, and they saw a golden throne, on a circular foundation, something like a light house, and on the throne were two aged personages, having white hair, and clothed in white garments. They were the two most beautiful and perfect specimens of mankind he ever saw. Joseph said, They are our first parents, Adam and Eve. Adam was a large broadshouldered man, and Eve as a woman, was large in proportion."

Another version of this vision was recorded by Abraham H. Cannon in his journal under the date 25 August 1890, Located in Archives and Manuscripts, Special Collections, Harold B. Lee Library, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah.

"Pres. Petersen told of an incident which he had often heard Zebedee Coltrin relate. One day the Prophet Joseph Smith asked him [Zebedee Coltrin] and Sidney Rigdon to accompany him into the woods to pray. When they had reached a secluded spot Joseph laid down on his back and stretched out his arms. He told the brethren to lie one on each arm and then shut their eyes.

After they had prayed he told them to open their eyes. They did so and they saw a brilliant light surrounding a pedestal which seemed to rest on the ground. They closed their eyes and again prayed. They then saw, on opening them, the Father seated upon a throne; they prayed again and on looking saw the Mother also; after praying and looking the fourth time they saw the Savior added to the group. He had auburn brown, rather long, wavy hair and appeared quite young."

This may be the first recorded vision of the Heavenly Mother in Mormonism. In the first account she is identified as Eve. In the second account she is identified as "the Mother" and is given status with the "Father" and the "Son."

~Gaia

[Dove]

Gaia,

Thanks so much for opening this thread on Mother-in-Heaven.

It is soo nice to hear about other women struggling with not knowing more about Her, as I have.

I don't pray to Her out of respect to what I have been told is the counsel of church leadership, with great sorrow, but I often hear Her name when I pray, and feel that She is real, alive, and very loving and concerned about me, as She would be for all Her Children. Thank you for all your references for reading about this subject.

I don't understand why it is so taboo to talk about Her and to want to understand Her better. I really related to your previous quotes about being cut off from her. I have struggled a lot with the feeling that being close to Her through the Spirit, as I want to be to HF, was witheld from me. Again, it brought sorrow to me. Of course, I am the one who had the congregation sing "Oh, My Father" on Mother's Day. By the way, I have also been taught that the hymns contain nothing but church doctrine, otherwise they wouldn't be in a church publicized book for worshipping in our sacrament meetings.

Anyway, thankyou for bringing up what I feel to be a worthwhile and important topic.~Dove