On the matter of Baptism for the Dead - Harrowing of Hell

Up till yesterday, I haven't been able to see the value in the LDS practice of Baptism for the Dead, and in trying to learn how it figures so largely in the temple work, up to this point I have seen the one reference in the New Testament whereby Paul speaking to the Corinthians calls into comparison the practice of baptism for the dead, making the fact that such a ritual was a norm in that time and place apparent.   I thought it peculiar that an entire practice in these modern times could be based on a ritual of antiquity based on a quick reference verse in NT bible.  In my mind there was not strong enough reason for me to wish to involve myself in the practice, while respecting that the rite meant a great deal to the members who did observe it.

Another non-compelling reason for me to wish to include the 'temple experiences' as part of my own experience in Mormon faith practices.  Already on my list of not sure I even want to experience the temple is the compelling reason that the Church requires one to go through a temple recommend interview with the Bishop of the Ward.  Condition of being eligible to go into the temple is what is called being worthy.  Seriously objecting to that word and what it conveys, I was already greatly put off inasmuch as if a member is not considered 'worthy' then that may well mean the member is 'unworthy'.  I don't like the psychological messages that puts into people's minds.  As humans, it seems to me, we already have enough of a struggle in finding our worth without another condition being set upon us as in temple worthy or temple unworthy. I don't like how it feels to me.  An extension of the worthy concept as defined by the LDS Church includes a requirement to pay tithing.  That is another thought for another time, and to wrap it up, I don't like the idea of an enforced tithing as the means of contribution to the needs of the Church.

Enter Hugh W. Nibley with his thoughts on the matter, published in a transcript (online here) 'Baptism for the Dead in Ancient Times' at Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship (a BYU component) with an in depth look at the practice.  I'm so ready to resist and as I continue to read encounter concepts familiar to me that I am hooked into reading the rest of the article, getting only about half way through it and I stop to tell my husband of my find, asking him if he knows much about Hugh Nibley, and suggesting to him that if he hasn't read this particular article, he might be interested in reading it given some of the concepts we have explored together in other venues.

What would that be?

-- mention of a Coptic papyrus found in 1895, purported to be account of teaching of Christ to his apostles after the resurrection in salvation for the dead.

-- mention of names familiar to me as early Christian scholars; Justin (a Christian convert), Clement of Alexandria, Ignatius, Irenaeus, Tertullian, St Augustine; Origen, Plato

-- involving people of the bible; Peter (of the Disciples); Matthew, Luke, Mark (of the NT); James; John; Moses; Elias; Abraham, Issac, Jacob, John the Baptist;

-- mention of concepts familiar to me; Gates of Hell; Satan; Devil; Prince of this world; medieval Easter Drama with Satan and Death; underworld; God as a Cloud; Nicaea; Nicene Creed;  Hades; Dante's Inferno (depiction of his concept of Hell); ransom; Jesus destroying death (or Death); apocryphal books (Apocrypha); gnosis; apostolic times; Apostles Creed

There is no need to reinterpret what Nibley has already put to word and reader can read the article (already linked above).   What this new way of looking at that which I disavowed has alerted me to a deeper exploration.  I am mindful of the young missionary who pointed out verses in New Testament of the renting of the veil upon death of Jesus on the cross and His descending into hell before ascending (harrowing of hell).

Today then upon further examination, I encountered NT verses actually using the term 'spirit prison' - a term used in LDS teachings that I have not heard in any of my other spiritual affiliations.  See NT- 1 Peter 3:19-20 and then see 1 Peter 4:6 and Ephesians 4: 8-10 and OT - Isaiah 24:21-22. 

Given that there is a fullness of body of beliefs predating the formation of the religion of Joseph Smith, it is not a belief that I would wish to discard without giving attention to it's formation and application.  And in that regard as I take off my holding shelf a look at the concept of baptism for the dead, I come to appreciate why it might be revered as biblical, as a practice that did occur and as something I deem worthy of further exploration on my part.

In appreciated respect for the artists of the antiquities portrayals of the Harrowing of Hell, iconography of the same, and how art influences my mind, it seems there is a chunk of early Christian history absent of my understanding.  Ahhh, the humility of it all.  And perhaps that is the holiness that comes down to incarnate in humankind in bringing each of us a deeply needed sense of humility at what we do not know, cannot know, and yet know we do not know.

link - slideshow with many images of Harrowing of Hell

I'm Still Percolating

Still percolating. Updates though, while percolating.

 Baptism for the dead. I am coming to appreciate that this is indeed one of the rituals that LDS members do hold sacred, for reasons having to do with ensuring all have opportunity, living and dead. Also their belief that it among the commandments to make upon earth conditions as described in the scriptures. Although I'm not yet inclined to embrace all the scriptures they are using, preferring still bible as scriptural basis by which to begin to build foundations, and baptisms for the dead is but one verse in the New Testament referencing a practice done at that time in history, I am inclined to think about adopting the ritual in support of the fact that it is considered a sacred rite to LDS membership. Having now learned that the performance characteristics of this ritual are safe and do not include touching of the body beyond a laying on of hands on the head, that element is out of the way. Still a barrier and in the way - the issue of tithing equates to whether one can or cannot enter temple. Right now it is my thought that this church is putting up barriers that will impede my progression, something the leadership and membership desire for me, yet it seems I will need to pay my way to that progression.

 ....................... Sidebar, and in observing one bit of information, leads me to relating more of my (our) faith journey. Skip this part if you aren't interested in reading through 4-5 paragraphs, and I may well have related some part of our journey in previous blog postings.

 Interestingly, side note, there is an Occupy London (OWS) gathering at the St Paul Cathedral in London, Anglican (Episcopal) Church of England, which has been sourced as reason for two high ranking clergy stepping down from their positions in support of not banning the Occupiers from camping out at St Pauls. What has this to do with my blog subject? Just my observant following of the Occupy movement and my affiliation with the Episcopal church. I'm a bit of a dual citizenship Christian in that regard, actually more than dual citizenship but for now I'll reference just the two faith citizenships, Episcopal and LDS.

 I was baptized in Methodist church when I was a baby. In my young teen years I attended a neighborhood church when we lived in the South - probably a Baptist church and the minister called people to come down, and in the feeling of the moment, I went down which led the minister to herd me immediately into baptism - something I wasn't fully ready for, more was in touch with the feeling than knowledgeable about the practices or beliefs. Once again, as a young adult, via home lessons from the Jehovah's Witnesses, I began attending that church, was once again herded into baptism. By then I had our firstborn child and was looking for a spiritual home in which to raise her. That lasted two years, and I credit myself for a bit of perseverance in wanting good for my child, yet finding something not quite in line with what I was looking for, I left that church within two years. late into our adult years, after my divorce and marriage to my current husband, we were confirmed in the Episcopal church (church of my mother's formative years) where we found a church home where we felt welcome, wanted and needed. In time we came to see that the members were older and looking for younger energy to continue the offices of the church, which put us in the path of studies towards being licensed lay preachers, and further down the road unpaid Priests.

 The invasion into Iraq put us on a different footing, with a stronger discernment of ministry in activism to end the Iraq war, a call to Peace. With a military background and both of us having experienced some aspect of the earlier Vietnam war, we spoke as a military family and veteran calling for the troops to be brought home, the Iraq war brought to a close. This necessitated conflicting schedules with our functions at the church on Sundays and our public activism engagements. We advised the membership, spent years between 2004 and 2008 in intense activism efforts. Returning to our home church no longer quite felt like home to us. Years had passed with our country in turmoil, and we found it difficult to settle back into a quiet Sunday worship service routine as the expression of our spirituality, beliefs and recent activism energies.

 We had opportunity to visit a Lutheran worship service, as the Episcopals and Lutherans are in communion. It was not a lot different than Episcopal service and I loved the church building, a quaint building of Norwegian styled architecture. Lutherans have a quite extensive and somewhat impressive social services outreach. Thought it might be a bit too much though, husband still doing social work in his profession, and adding more social work outreach in his leisure hours after the years of intense activism might be a bit of overload. I chose instead to spend some time on the Boards of local non-profits, one that was being smeared badly and unfortunately given their history of good work in the community, and the other a church start-up food bank for local town. As it turns out on the Board of the food bank start up was the same individual who participated in badly smearing the other organization. I remained on both Boards until the inevitable demise of one organization had reached completion, in the hopes I might bring something to the table that would aid in turning it around. Not to be. In the diminished need of the existence of one board, I no longer felt comfortable being on the other board, taking my leave and still wanting for their endeavor to be a successful one.

 A few more years passed, we visited a church in our immediate community, good people, and perhaps a bit of the Evangelical coloring making it somewhat uncomfortable for us. By the time of the year 2010, we felt calmed enough to visit other of the local churches, still seeking a church home for our later years. We agreed we would visit the local denomination churches one by one, and some of the further distance churches based on what was attractive to us in their belief sets and practices, ie Quakers, Unity Church which we had enjoyed in our visit to congregation in Vancouver, WA. We started with a visit to my husband's church, local Mormon church in the area. I was impressed enough with the talks to believe I could make my personal spirituality work within context of this church, his church and I yearned for him to find some place of inner peace with his cultural heritage and identity vs the doctrines the church impressed upon him. I rather knew giving a thumbs up and announcing desire to proceed to baptism would generate the baptism preparedness activity which I by then knew every church denomination seems intent on insisting, thinking we could get it done and out of the way rather than the cat and mouse dance of being convinced to agree to baptism. I had years of life with my husband, exposure to his perception of Mormon beliefs and practices, and felt ready to make this dive for where it might take us. end sidebar............................

  Sunday talks at Sacrament Meeting. Conversion or Convert as a process and not an event. Speaker, a long time member of the church, and also holding an academic and skilled profession as an administrator of school system, spoke of being converted in some areas while still waiting for conversion in other areas. A relief to me to hear. The 'process' of conversion as a process as in over years, maybe decades, maybe a lifetime. Shares the out take from the parable of the wage earners with the late arrivals being paid the same amount as the all day workers. He used just a few sentences, it was a part of his talk, not the subject of his talk. Loved how he gave the parable a green light and ended that part of his talk as the end of his talk with those familiar phrase to 'get over it'. Gives me another sense of relief, that I have a place at this table even if I have arrived late to the party. Bishop talk, and he wrapped his talk up with the phrase to 'suck it up'. Another familiar phrase to me.

  Sunday School - Gospel Doctrine I just can't get into the teacher's teaching style. Asks the open ended questions and seems to me with an expectation of 'correct' responses, not shared thoughts of many. It feels to me like he is wanting people to read his mind as to what the correct response is, or at least based on my feeling/reaction when I do share a response which it feels like he pretty much writes off. I was resolved to provide no response at all, not to let my spontaneity overcome my resolve. I was successful. Bishop fulfilled his promise to sit with me, and again encourages me to share and respond. I'm thinking about this often. Knowing I bring different perspective since I've been exposed to different disciplines, I am coming to understand though, this is not about discussion, dialogue or sharing. It's pretty much rote, routine responses, even if the teacher has worked hard in preparing the lesson. Maybe it's his personal perspective that he brings to the lesson and since he and I would likely not see eye to eye on many of the New Testament readings, because he is in the role of 'teacher' it changes the dynamic as perhaps would not be in a private conversational exchange. Leaving this one as perplexing to me for now, likely will return to it from time to time in this blog. I am not doing well with the Sunday School class, nor the teachers called to teach it. Or at least that is my feeling about it, although I have not had any members call me out on it.

  Joint Priesthood and Relief Society Meeting (men and women meeting together) Four Talks - every one of them about Tithing (capital T intentional). Lay it off to it's that time of year, with tithing settlements sessions with Bishop coming up or can't help but feel like because I did bring the issue up with the Bishop in Bishop interview last week, it brings the topic back to the forefront. One of our newest members (moved here from another Ward) pointed out the distinction of 10% of income or 10% of increase and don't other contributions as strength, time, talents, gifts count as increase. That was not dismissed as not having merit, but given that all the other talks were firm on the 10% of income, I didn't get the impression that the point of increase was considered to be the correct application. Discussions with husband and he assures me that talk is not aimed at me (us) specifically and there are others in the Ward membership who are not paying tithing regularly or fully or at all.

  Community of Christ church meeting We had bumped into website for Community of Christ Church earlier in the week, and read through the website for several hours. It appears that while they are the product of Joseph Smith teachings that did not make the trek to Utah under Brigham Young leadership, remaining instead in East Coast states, the formation of the religions have quite different beliefs. Listening to Mormon Stories podcast; John Hamer, The LDS Succession Crisis of 1844 and the Beginning of RLDS (Community of Christ) we got a feel for the formation and beliefs of the Community of Christ church. Interestingly, when we lived on Samish Island in Skagit County, there was one road in and an RLDS sign was posted showing direction to what we presume was an RLDS campsite. As it turns out, that is correct, it is one of the Community of Christ campsites. I recall at the time, not knowing the difference between Fundamentalist LDS with polygamy, I had mistakenly thought RLDS to be that, and was always put off by seeing that sign, thinking it pointed direction to a polygamous compound. I was wrong about my perceptions, confused about the acronymns. RLDS means Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, a name they changed to Community of Christ in 2001 more in keeping with original name of the Joseph Smith church - Church of Christ. Community of Christ church follows the Revised Common Lectionary with the liturgical years A,B, C. Familiar theme via our confirmation and activity with the Episcopal Church. Core message of the Community of Christ church is Peace. From the website, it certainly appeared that the hybrid blend of Mormon/Protestant beliefs might be a better fit for us, we contacted a congregation closest to us and were invited to come.

 We drove the hour drive and met with the people of that particular congregation, very small, newly forming and sharing church building with Methodist church in that particular neighborhood, diaconal Minister (meaning unpaid minister). The people were pleasant, warm, welcoming and inviting enough, sharing their meal with us, followed by their service. We tried to bring to the sharing some of our positive LDS experiences, yet I didn't get the sense there was familiarity to them of LDS community. It was, not as I might have thought, LDS Light, but seemed more of a start up congregation of what could easily have been any Protestant faith, or for that matter, a community non-profit reach out group. Were this what we were looking for, we can find it much closer to home, and we have found it in many of our church and community affiliations. Since they are a quite small group, their focus is on their immediate community needs, ie, holiday baskets, adopt a family, clothing and food drives, helping with holiday community dinner. Bless them and wishing them well in their endeavors, it is not quite what we were thinking it would be and if anything rather validated that I am more pleased than I realize with the LDS church and Ward we attend.

Baptisms for the dead - an early Christian practice?

It remains on my mind that the Bishop said to me with a degree of emphasis on it being in the bible (he knows I have a strong leaning towards biblical text which I consider to be the gospel, having not yet fully embraced the BoM, D & C, PoGP as 'gospel') so much so, that I wanted to do my own follow up and see what I think the bible verse, chapter and context is trying to say.  Verse; 1 Corinthians 15:29  ²⁹Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead? 


Given that I am not taken to use of one verse as a methodology to create an entire concept or doctrine based on that verse, I was curious about the entire chapter and what was being said, to whom, by whom, along with some sense of the era or period of time in which it was being said as well as some of the customs/practices of that time.  It is a given that I cannot possible know what were customs/practices of an era of antiquity and must rely on scholarly studies, which of themselves are seldom in agreement.  More sorting, more puzzle pieces and I've long since abandoned an idea that with enough puzzle pieces I would be able to piece together an entire picture, rather a composite of fragments of customs/cultures and belief sets that have been shared, borrowed, confiscated, supplanting and/or augmenting the existing cultural belief sets.

It is my belief that it is impossible to gather enough information or ideas or concepts to glue together an overarching belief set thus having at last driven down to the 'truth' as a singular foundational underlaying of the many years of layers upon layers.  I think my mental approach wants to be a bit like an archaeological dig, getting down beneath the surface to find out what was buried over the eons.  And even then knowing whatever is found will still be subject to interpretation based on the finder's perspectives given his/her period in history. 


excerpt at ORB    (more closely matches my understanding of the Christian narrative, and I appreciated  as well as recommend reading the entire article)

Early Christian doctrines developed and were shaped over time; they were neither fixed nor stable. Once a doctrine was established it often necessitated a subsequent doctrine to define more precisely what was meant and to clarify the subtle nuances. Lived experience and understanding was the basis for the emergence of forming and re-forming doctrine. In other words, the need to develop doctrine about Jesus Christ emerged from the need to sort out what was truly Christian experience and life. In the words of the early church historian, Joseph Kelly:

The story of the Church begins at Pentecost with a frightened group of disciples wondering what will happen to them; it progresses through an almost frenetic attempt to win over the outside world before the Second Coming; it focuses on an epic struggle with the most powerful empire of the ancient world; it reaches its high point with the conversion of that empire to the new faith; it closes with the gradual decline of a great civilization and the emergence of a new world. It has a large canvas and broad brush strokes. While we must pay meticulous attention to the particulars, we must never forget the generalŠ(Kelly, "Why Study Early Church History?" 5)

I read the entire chapter of Corinthians for context, and continued to be nagged by the sense that this one particular verse pointed to something I had not yet explored for myself.  Further that it is not of substantive value to be mentioned in the Protestant narratives to which I had been exposed, nor the Episcopal narrative, meaning to me that it has been discounted as not relevant to the Protestant or Episcopal narratives.  If I bypass Protestant and Episcopal narratives, what do the religious studies have to say about this verse, being that it does point to some kind of custom being practiced in that time.  What practice, why, and from where does that practice stem? 

Chasing it down, I gain some knowledge of what is believed among some scholars to be the custom pointed to in the verse (along with a lot of sifting through the usual and typical finger pointing to the Mormon belief as heretical, false, misguided, etc.).  That is not what I'm after, I'm after some concrete sense of what custom, what practice, for what reason, why is Paul pointing it out at all unless it was being practiced and he knew of it.  And if so, is he finding a commonality he can point to in preaching the Christ resurrection or is he admonishing against something suggesting a replacement of belief sets, what he is preaching instead of the practice of what they are doing?   

It would be presumptuous for me to write that I found answers to what I was looking for as if that is the explanation.  Rather I would state that I did find thoughts about what I was looking for that cause me to pause a bit and let that information percolate a while.  Nonetheless, it becomes evident to me that somewhere in the Mormon history, the meanings attached to this verse, whether from Gnostic or otherwise belief sets, this verse brought the Mormon practice of baptisms for the dead alive as a ritual practice imbued with sacred meanings for those who teach it as well as those who believe it as well as those who practice it.  Iconography has sprung up with it to further imbue sacred meaning to the practice.  It is therefore real enough as it is practiced in the LDS church among the membership.

 I'm not having a problem with approaching it from that perspective.  I'm still stuck though on the a,b,c  element that ties tithing to temple, therefore ties tithing to the Mormon sacred ritual practice of performing baptisms for the dead, as it is performed only in the temple, not in the chapels and access to the temple requires a temple recommend which requires approval from a bishop which means responding with an honest degree of integrity to the questions posited by the bishop in which the question of 'do you pay a full tithing' requires an answer of yes or no.  The matter of defining what is a full tithing, as in one tenth of your personal increase has considerable wiggle room, and were we agreeable to paying some part of a tithing, could easily respond to the question with a yes with a personal degree of honest integrity.  The church has not been unclear in restating repetitiously it's requirements of members to pay tithing at a rate of ten percent or 1/10th of their income/increase.

It seems that I do not yet have a testimony of tithing, which is in fact prohibiting and impeding gaining a testimony of the temple, a testimony of baptism for the dead, a testimony of sealing, and as yet unknown to me other testimonies that involve temple, ie, personal endowments, ordinances and in truth because it is absent in my experience, I really don't yet know what else will be kept from me for the lack of temple experience.

It's an odd thing, because I have a belief in sharing, compassion, generosity of spirit, empathy for humankind, community, communion, and belonging.  While I recognize there is usually some sort of price to be paid for admittance to the tribe, be it initiation rituals, practices, customs as shared among the tribe, I have not yet encountered a must pay cash contribution situation.  Appreciating that it does take funding for most organizations, religious or otherwise, to function well, I'm not opposed to contributing for the sake of well being of the organizations ability to function.  I am not sold on a specific contribution amount being set as the price of admittance though - that concept troubles me.  

Tithing/Temple, a barrier - either/or - not much gray here

Well we knew this time was going to come, and we thought it would be when Arthur and I had our one year interview with the Bishop, me the newcomer, him the returnee.  And something came up sooner -- for me.  It had been suggested that it would be time for me to accompany the young people and new converts in the various Wards in our Stake in their trip to the Temple to perform baptisms for the dead.  And it was set up for me to go with them this month, Oct 29.   I've heard and read about this ritual, performing baptisms for the dead, and the reasons for it, and I have to say it has a sound of peculiar to many who are non-mormons, myself included.  So close to Halloween, and the very name of the ritual, and images do float across my mind, even though I know that is not the aim or intent of the practice.  It is though, one of the unique features of this church, as there are not many other Christian based churches that have this kind of a ritual.  I do know when we lived in Japan, in a Japanese village, not on the military base, that I learned of an annual practice required of the families which involved going into the tombs that dotted the hillsides to perform the ritual of washing the bones of their dead ancestors buried in those tombs.

Later in my life experiences, learning of other faith belief sets that honored ancestors as part of their spirituality.  Putting these together, I don't see the Mormon practice of performing baptisms for the dead as bizarre as it might seem at first glance.  Further that the members feel it is with a great degree of a sense of sacredness that this practice is performed and observed.  In that regard when I was invited to participate, I did feel it was intended as an invitation to participate in an honored and sacred ritual practice.  I would liken it to be invited to participate in a Sweat Lodge ceremony or something along those lines that is a intended as a welcoming gesture to enable a person new to the culture to become more fully part of that culture.

The LDS church has tied Tithing to Temple in a way that affords no or seemingly no wiggle room.  My reaction to it has been strongly in opposition.  My husband's reaction, while somewhat different from mine for different reasons is also strongly in opposition.  While I'm favorable to the concept of generosity, supporting the organization/church/affiliation doing outreach in an effort to help humankind, I'm not comfortable with the monetary amount being identified as an exact amount.  I'm very much not comfortable with tithing being a requirement to enter a temple.  I've had too many years within other faith beliefs, and organizations which also need to be funded and those contributions being both voluntary with the amount being voluntary.  Although, having said all that, I was so very taken and impressed when we visiting the Bishop's tithing house many years ago in Chesterfield, Idaho (a restored and preserved historic town of the Mormon pioneer era).  The building was were food products and such were stored,  intended for use by the community.   It was such a beautiful concept, a concept which lifted my heart and a practice that certainly seemed somewhat lost to this time gone by period in history.  Actually is is not a bygone concept, in historic times, members who could not pay in cash could pay their tithing in kind ie, milk, butter, eggs, produce, meat, grain, hay, etc.  In it's more modernized form, it feels much more industrial and organizational although the generosity underlying the concept remains the same.  Thus is the value of tithing among the membership.

Part of the requirement to enter an LDS temple is an interview with the Ward Bishop in which he has a list of questions to ask and the responses will cause him to make a determination as to whether the person will be given what is called a 'temple recommend'.  In this case, he advised me it would be a one day only temple recommend for the purpose of permitting me to be in that part of the temple in which the baptisms for the dead are performed.  Our Bishop is a loving, compassionate, caring man, and it is obvious in how he handles various sensitive situations.  We moved along through the questions well enough, until he asked me the question about tithing, do I pay a full tithing.  No, I answered.  No, he said with a bit of surprise, but somehow I rather think he would know either outright or subliminally which members are or are not paying a tithing.  He explained that perhaps it was not yet time for me, and that he could not give a temple recommend at this time, that it would be confidential information, and some members might be curious enough to ask him why I was not going to the temple this trip, and that he would indicate that it was just not time yet.  I explained to him that I do respect his sense of confidentiality, and that I have respect for the concept, and that in this instance it was not required.   That I thought it to be a topic of discussion and conversation among the membership as I was not yet satisfied that I had heard enough reasons to justify the practice which I felt was very damaging to some of the membership who were already struggling with the very basic fundamentals of life - shelter, clothing, food.

I wanted this to be a discussion/conversation with the Bishop, not a justification or explanation of why I wasn't in compliance on my part. He asked if I understood the premise of tithing and  I pointed out that I had given a lesson on tithing recently, so my head understands the concept, and my life experiences tell me otherwise.   He spent a great deal of time with me after, and I very much liked that he was not moving in a heavy handed direction, rather was very much attempting to find different approaches that might resonate with me, including some personal experiences of his own.  It felt it was a productive shared discussion and exploration of this particular topic, and I'm fairly sure it will come up again soon.  

I shared some of that conversation with my husband afterwards on our way home, he was quiet and said to me that he was very proud of the way in which I handled myself in this interview, as well as the approach I chose to use.  We spent a great deal of the evening later discussing tithing/temple again; we have discussed it often and many times before.  To me it feels like an absolute - a non-wavering obstacle in the path for me ahead.   It equates one to the other, we don't pay tithing, there will be no temple, and Temple is a Big part of the Mormon/LDS experience.  I'm also intuiting that the path the Bishop, Stake President, and membership would like to see me take leads directly to the temple, capital T.

Can one be a practicing Mormon, a participating member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and not participate in the tithing/temple joining experience, I wonder?  

The experience in my Ward, in communion among the membership has felt to me to date spiritual enough in it's own right without the temple experiences.   As I explained to the Bishop in the ensuing discussion, many other of the religions have beautiful Cathedrals and do not prohibit people from entering that sacred space; this being the only church I know about that has these beautiful sacred building in which people are not permitted to enter without having paid for the privilege via first having a temple recommend, of which tithing is a requirement.   I will leave it at that for now.  It is a thing to continue to ponder and time, Holy Ghost, spirit of the soul will guide me in this one.

As promised, details on our baptism

I have had ten days to think about it since our baptism weekend, and now feel ready to write my post about the experience.   In between was Mother's Day weekend, in which my two granddaughters chose to spend the day with me and we had  wonderful 'girl time'.   Given that the baptism weekend has taken on sacred qualities for me and my husband, I will give only the outline, and probably won't begin to try to capture the depth of emotion.

My husband and his two brothers have been somewhat estranged over the years of our marriage.  In my assessment, partially for their own familial  'brother' kinds of family relationships, inherent in all families.  The baptism served well to bring them together to forge new relationships going forward.  Both brothers, by choice, wanted to travel from Utah to our home in Washington (state) to witness our baptisms.  Taking it a step further they offered to perform the baptisms.  One brother (former ward bishop) baptized husband, and the other brother (in a bishopric) baptized me.  I have had my own falling out with the younger brother over a strong difference of opinion which has lasted over the years, making his performing of my baptism all the more significant.  This is the same brother who is musically talented, has played the piano all his life, and he performed the music for us that day.  His especially soulful rendition of the song we chose for my husband 'Consider the Lilies' was so personal between them, for all of us, and the impact was felt by all in attendance.

Having family as guests in our home over that weekend was a treasure.    Although our house is not well configured to be much accommodating to overnight guests, it was still a quite successful weekend.  They were accommodating to the restricted geographical circumstances of our home and I applaud them for their willingness to make the best of the situation.  We had traveled north to pick up my mother from Tacoma a day earlier, and she occupied the one guest room in the house, and family made do with air mattress and couch in the living room.  Friday night we were getting tucked in when the electricity went out (happens sometimes here, fortunately not so often).  That added to the 'camping out' feeling that already existed with the camping out sleeping arrangements, except made a tad more challenging getting it set up in candlelight.

Saturday, April 30, 2011, day of our baptism, and we knew to expect some of his cousins who wanted also to be there to witness the baptism.  My son and his lady were coming, and my husband's daughter was also coming.  In a suprise announcement, our niece, a mother of four little ones, was able with help of her family 'move mountains' to make the trip from Utah. I was planning to prepare a meal for all our guests after the baptism, and the head count started at one number and kept growing.   It was exciting and challenging all at the same time.   We had eighteen of our family at the baptism and to our home afterwards for dinner.  Travelers from Utah, Portland, Oregon, Woodland, WA, and most all were heading out that night, either back the same night to their homes or to a stopover location.   Earlier in the day, my sister-in-law suggested a walk and she took photos of interest points in our quaint little community.  Appreciating the walk with her as it was rather calming for me.

Sunday, May 1, 2011, day of our confirmation.  We went to the Sacrament meeting at our Ward, knowing the confirmations had been planned.   With family having performed the baptisms the day before, the Bishop wanted the confirmations to join us to the Ward family, and while respecting it was our choosing as to who would be 'the voice' in stating the confirmations, we had agreed to having a long time elderly member of the Ward speak the words.   I really did want the young missionary who has been with us from the start to have a more active role in my confirmation, and I also understood the symbolism of having a Ward member say the words.  The confirmations were done, including the young missionary, husband's two brothers, the Bishop, and the elderly member of the Ward.  It felt inclusive, covering all the bases, personal, family, missionary and Ward.

It happened to be what is called Fast and Testimony Meeting Sunday, whereby members who feel compelled can have time at the podium to share their faith experience.   Knowing how emotional it already was for us, and not likely either of us would be able to get more than a few words out should we choose to share our feelings, it still seemed an opportune time to me for my husband to speak given that his brothers were in attendance and we would not likely see them again in that capacity.   Dear husband did decide to try, and words were lost to him, he delivered a sense of his feelings by performing one of his beloved piano hymns, one that he had played upon the return of his mission all those decades earlier in the brother's lives together.
It was a quite moving way to give expression when words won't come.  

His brother followed up giving a powerful sharing of his feelings, in which he included what he knows of me in what he shared, catching me by surprise, the singular stand out thing for me he said was acknowledging my personal spirituality.   I will hold onto the content of what he said that Sunday for many years to come.   A few other people came up to share their experiences, and by then his other brother was seated, waiting his turn to share his thoughts, but the clock was ticking and had ticked away the time by the time his turn came, and I don't know this to be factual, but I believe he abbreviated his talk, probably changed the topic as well. But it is good; enough sustaining emotion had passed that weekend and may blessings abound.

Baptized and Confirmed weekend of April 30/May 1 in 2011

We both were baptized and confirmed into the LDS church this past weekend.  I wanted to get a placeholder post in place and will return to write more detail in short time.  It was such an intense, moving, emotional experience throughout the weekend and words are just not available to me to adequately describe the depth and sacredness of the experience.  The bare bones is the the experience in and of itself is worthy of a post, and the reconciliation elements with my husband's brothers and cousins and extended family is another emotional aspect of the experience, along with my own personal feelings of being embraced into the family and the church.

Stake Conference - The Man who didn't speak for Women

My first Stake Conference experience.  We watched the General Conference two weekends ago, and this weekend was about Stake Conference.   A meeting for Investigators and Returning Members was arranged for us newbie souls (me) and returning souls (my husband).  Mostly an hour long welcome, encouragement kind of thing with an added bonus that us newbies and returnees had a section up front when it came time for the Conference Meeting.   This little bonus (blessing?) worked better for husband who wasn't relishing sitting in the fold out chairs set up in the multi-area knowing there would be attendance beyond the capacity of the pews.

Speakers included a young boy telling his story of making a decision to go on a mission and his mother's displeasure with his decision.  He told it with the sincerity of his age and experience, it was a good story.  His mother eventually came around, but it was apparent that it was a stressful situation for the boy during the time his mother was not supporting of his decision.

Speaker, return missionary reporting on his mission, stories of disinterested people, disheartened missionaries, and the occasional success story.  Importance of how the load is lightened when members work with the missionaries to 'friend' a new investigator or returnee.

Speaker, husband and wife team, Mission Presidents.  What one would expect to hear from Mission Presidents talking of their activities with the young missionaries.

An hour or more has passed, and we have only stood up once to sing a hymn.  Another hour to go, and I'm starting to miss the movement of what is affectionately known as pew aerobics in our Episcopal services.  Stand up to sing, get down on knee rails for Prayers of the People, stand up for Gospel presentation, sit down again, stand up and move around for The Peace, the Eucharist and walk forward to take communion at the altar, kneel, then stand and walk back to your pew and kneel  sit, stand, sing. Of course, no one is required to do all of these, some bodies won't bend well enough to kneel, sitting is permitted : ).  Back to Stake Conference, second hour and more continual sitting; speakers were the Stake President and his two Counselors.

Speaker one; and the reason for how I titled this blog.   The man was engaging, and while he was obviously given a theme to talk on as well as guided material to use, he was vivacious with the story telling, so much so that it sounded like a story of his own making.   I took a liking to him, and would enjoy hearing more presentations from him.  Then he got to the part about 'transitions' and advised the focus was to be on young women transitioning.   Immediately, I find myself going on guard, wondering why if this talk is aimed at young women, why a man is giving the talk.  He talked of the transition of young men to the priesthood, to new responsibilities, to new challenges.  I thought how it might be both exciting and a bit intimidating to young boys to cross that threshold, and how so many cultures have some kind of rite of passage for boys to young manhood.

Now for the women.  I waited to hear what he would have to say about the transition for young women.  It was merely that young women would transition from Young Women's to Relief Society and to let the women of Relief Society mentor them.  The end.  He didn't say much more about this particularly relevant and important transition in a young woman's life.   What I wanted very much to call to attention is that if this is the message delivered to young women, then it is a message of almost hopelessness.  While young men will have a transition rite of passage to rise up to new responsibilities, new opportunities, new challenges, what can young women look forward to in this scenario?   Maybe their women mentors of Relief Society will encourage them to go to college or to do a mission.    But those same women know very well that the young women in this culture will be expected to marry and give birth, repeatedly.  A noble gender role, to be sure, yet I wonder what are these young women to do with the education or the experience gained from the mission -- how is it to be used in raising a family, being part of this church when they hold no authority and that authority is with the men and via the men only to the woman?  I wonder, will there be enough stimulation for the women in child bearing, child raising once their minds have been opened with stimulation and disciplines gained in education, missions, employment when income needs of the family demand it, careers perhaps?

In hearing the presentation, I felt the let down on behalf of my young women sisters.  Perhaps they will be satisfied with the direction laid out for them, but I think not.  I think this church and culture does an admirable job of elevating the biological role of women in marriage, birthing, child rearing, but that is not the whole of what it is to be woman.   And in an organizational setting as this church has laid out with male leadership roles, males making decisions on behalf of the local ward (congregation), the stake (diocese), the larger church, which has been one of my overriding concerns, this presentation brought that point home for me yet again.

I've already heard it said that women have respected roles, ie, teachers, Relief Society, but in my attendance at Relief Society so far the lessons I have heard repeatedly are about women supporting the priesthood (males).   While so far all the men I have met at this church do acknowledge that their wives and the women strongly influence the workings of their homes and the church (wink, wink), I would liken it more to  that informal structural order known to women for eons.  The one in which women learn how to influence their men within the context of whatever social structure they find themselves in at any given time in history.  

This priesthood business is 'dated', more like 'outdated' and harkens back to an earlier time in history when women were more the property of their husbands and men, and had did not have an active voice in how they were governed, what the rules of society governing them and their daughters should/would be and if it was in their best interest.  No big deal??   I think it is a big deal for more reasons than I will number in this blog post.   I'm aware of cultures active today that still stones their women in a most horrific way, with only the men of the village throwing the stones, including the woman's father, brothers,grandfathers, and community leaders.  (see movie, The Stoning of Soraya M, and you'll feel it viscerally, it won't be an abstract concept).  I'm aware of cultures that have a rite of passage for young women which insistes on mutilation of their clitoris and parts of their vagina by the very women of their tribe whom they trust.  It is some aberrant notion of an  idea that it will help the young women be faithful to one man.  Yes, well, given that the pain of intercourse will hardly be one of mutual pleasure, and childbirth may be quite difficult, I'm sure the trauma of the mutilation experience and any trauma they will continue to experience will have long term impact on the young women.

There are more reasons than not to partner in some form of equally with women while still respecting the nature of the gender differences and gender roles.  There is little value in leaving women in their 19th century roles while we live in the 21st century.  I don't advocate for disassembling the structure of the priesthood, no, I advocate for growth in the church, by extending the opportunity of priesthood to the young women.  If as this church keeps trying to tell me how much they value their women, it might well be past time for them to step up to the plate and demonstrate their faith in the faith of women.   I advocate for more choice for women, and if they prefer not to take on additional responsibilities of a priesthood role along with the other roles they are likely to have in life as a woman, let it be a matter of choice, not a matter of barriers to opportunities.

Women in the 21st century have opportunities not available to them just a few decades ago.  They can and do hold positions in politics, are active in sports - what used to be male only sports, have roles in active military, are able to have careers while having families, and none of this is 'required' of them as much as they have choice about it.  I don't see the value in the LDS church position of continuing to subject women to roles that women may well have outgrown.   It can be argued that it is doctrinal, scriptural, that there is some kind of wisdom in holding to that belief set.  I would say differently.  I would say that it is time for the prophets, seers and revelators to listen more closely to the messages they may be choosing to ignore.

As for the destination being charted out for me after baptism.  I am advised we would be enhanced by more of the holy spirit if we readied for temple marriage, temple work, and aimed for the celestial kingdom.  Well, I'm not sure that a celestial kingdom that has me perpetually giving birth to babies is the idea I had of a heavenly after life.   Perhaps the celestial kingdom once we get there will have found additional roles for women beyond that of their biological gender.  Women were built to have children, yes, and men weren't, true, but all of us are more than our biological gender, and in spiritual faith it is quite possible there is no gender.   Wouldn't the men be greatly disappointed to find when they got there that the roles had been reversed, and they were doing the work of baby making while the women were doing the work of priesthood?

Aside from that bit of outburst from my internal self, the Stake Conference, was well, okay.  Although I'm not sure how it is largely different from a Ward meeting, it is good to gather periodically and get acquainted with the others who make up a Stake.   I think most religions do something like this, even as they use different names for what they call their congregants and the buildings.

p.s., and I know I'm not saying anything new here, these kinds of discussions about the role or lack thereof for women in Correlated LDS are all over the Mormon blogosphere.  I'm adding my 2 cents, coming from a non Mormon background, not governed in my role by Mormon or LDS dictates, and having been a part of that second wave of feminism, I am of the opinion that women cannot do it all, at least not all of it simultaneously, but women can and should be given the opportunities of choices along the progression of their life phases as women.

What he said...

Posting for the purpose of pointing reader to a recent post on my husband's blog, titled Moving toward baptism and re-baptism.  I enjoy reading the manner in which he puts words together, as he explores anew things of old, dusts off his books of yesteryear to share with me while all the while he is incorporating different approaches as imprints to lay upon the old.

Cleared for Baptism - April 30, 2011

Had another missionary lesson/discussion last week, March 9th.  And this time the young missionary brought with him the mission leader, another young, energetic missionary.  We started off the discussion in good hearted and light humor, and as it turned out it was a planned 'interview' with questions put to me that I was to answer...yes, those questions that have concerned me like do you believe Joseph Smith was a prophet; do you believe the Book of Mormon; will you live the Word of Wisdom, and on down the list.  Then I was given a samll card with the last questions which are of an intrusive and sensitive nature, and instructions to merely answer yes or no.  Uh, more about this in another post, and I could answer no easily enough, yet it was very worrisome to me that if I had reason to answer yes, what would be the next steps, and if I had answered yes, that would mean these young men would now know something about very personal decisions which are not the business of the church in any capacity.

But that is not the purpose of this post.  So, I am good to go now in proceeding with baptism, and the young missionaries are most pleased.   Next, we are waiting for Arthur's follow up interview with the Bishop.  The women's monthly potluck dinner is scheduled for the next evening, and the Bishop is agreeable to doing the interview with Arthur during that time.   I had a pleasant time at the potluck meal - the feminine influence was there with beautiful roses on the tables, tablecloths, and a set up for a lovely shared meal.

Arthur and the Bishop showed up after the meal was fininshed (some thoughtful women had taken plates into the Bishop's office for he and Arthur), and Arthur is cleared to proceed with baptsim.  Now it is a matter of setting the date.  The Bishop was slightly disappointed that we needed to put it out into April, but understands why as we are coordinating a date with Arthur's brothers from Utah to be here for the baptsim.  He informs Arthur that one of the young missionaries may be reassigned within the next two weeks and was hopeful to be here for the baptisms.

Next day is the horrific tsunami that did so much damage to Japan.  We are on tsunami alert here in Western WA on the coastline which is where we live.  Spent an anxious day.  The young missionary phones during that day to inquire about Arthur's interview with Bishop, to which I tell him that he has been cleared to proceed with baptism, and the potential date.  He is disappointed that the date is out so far, catches himself and rearranges his expression to one of congratulatory rather than disappointment.  I tell him that I will see if we can move the date up prior to the other Elder's mission reassignment date, and he is pleased.

Quick exchanges with Arthur's brothers and they cannot be freed up to get here earlier than April, if anything the date is pushed even futher out in April to the last weekend.  I phone the young missionary to advise we weren't able to get the date early enough, but would it be okay to phone the Misson President to ask permission that both missionaries be freed up that day to attend.  He is pleased with the suggestion, and provides me the contact information, although he is not optimistic that special allowance will be given.

Church on Sunday, which is quiet and uneventful.   It was the weekend of the Daylight Savings time change, to switch the clocks an hour forward (Fall Back/Spring Forward).  Many were not at church Sunday, likely due to the time changes and their clocks were not yet on Daylight Savings time.

Impressions in the walk towards baptism into the LDS church

The title of this post initiates the beginning of blogging my impressions as a newcomer to the LDS belief set/church/faith.  I wonder if I might retitle this blog as Impressions, and will leave the blog titled as it is for now.   It seems I have made a decision to walk inside the LDS faith rather than observe it from outside.  In our marriage years together we have not made a visit to the LDS church in our area.  We decided to pay a visit two Sunday's ago.  We set the ground rules for ourselves, that we would attend the general meeting and leave before the other two meetings that follow.  The purpose of visiting the church was to introduce ourselves to Mormons within our community.  I found myself quite taken with the speakers at the meeting, a husband and wife team in the function of missioner presidents.  Meaning to the best of my present understanding that they assist and help the young missionaries in performing their functions.

She spoke with depth and feeling to the Book of Ruth (biblical), he told an engaging story, and it did not feel to me like 'preaching' in the traditional sense of the word.  As I looked around at the people in attendance, I had moments of appreciation that they were people, neighbors living in the region where we live, trying to make their way in the world to the best of their varied abilities.  i said to my husband, that I would like to stay and see how the rest of the meetings develop. 

It happened to be the 5th Sunday at this Ward (they call their church buildings Wards), and the agenda for the services/meetings differ on the fifth Sunday.  The men and women stay together in what is called Sunday School, and then the meeting following that which is a combined Priesthood Meeting and Relief Society Meeting.  The men and women remain together, the children go to their various classes.  

At the end of the meetings, I said to my husband that I was ready to take the next step towards moving inside, and that step is baptism, so I was ready for baptism.  He was startled and quick to recover, knowing our walk is one together, not separate and his appreciation for the male role of attendance to his wife,  indicated he would be baptized, he first, and then he would be in position to baptize me.  Thus began for us a new aspect to our journey together.  As I continue to write in this blog, I hope to write some of my initial impressions of the experience as a newcomer to this church. It has been a week since that announcement, and  it has been a week full of high wind emotions, The Storm, which in it's own right is neither good nor bad, but is in fact a storm, the culmination of climatic events in the weather that come together to create conditions that generate a  weather storm.