On Saturday, President Dieter F. Uchtdorf addressed the women of the Church. Apparently, how he did so was unprecedented: he referred to them as disciples. Here’s the headline at the Huffington Post: “Mormon Feminists Surprised By New Wording Referring To Women As ‘Blessed Disciples Of Jesus.'” Here’s a quote from the article:
Mormon feminists may have been surprised by some subtle changes in vocabulary and approach Saturday (Sept. 27) at the church’s general women’s meeting.
Dieter F. Uchtdorf addressed the audience — sitting in the giant Conference Center in downtown Salt Lake City or watching via satellite in chapels of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints across the globe — not just as “sisters” but also as “blessed disciples of Jesus Christ.”
In a speech about living out one’s faith joyfully, Uchtdorf, second counselor in the church’s governing First Presidency, referred twice to women as “daughters of heavenly parents,” alluding to the Mormon belief in male and female deities.
Apparently, it is unprecedented to mention “Heavenly Parents,” and unprecedented to refer to women as disciples of Christ. Except for the fact that the term “Heavenly Parents” is used in the Proclamation on the Family, and leaders of the Church have been including women as “disciples” for ages (the linked post lists just a few examples of what I’m sure is many).
But that’s how you craft a narrative: anytime the leaders of the Church talk about the divine role of women, act as if its something that’s never been done before. That’s how you spin the tale so that people — both within and outside of the Church — come to believe that, until now, the Church has been demeaning towards women. But now, due to the vocal efforts of Mormon feminists, things are changing, and women can be disciples too!
I’m with Kathryn Skaggs on this one: sometimes it feels like some people belong to a different Church. Not that I want them to. I want them to be a part of the Church I’ve been a member of all along: The Church I grew up in always treated women as fellow disciples of Christ, and there was never a doubt in my mind of that. I see that the leaders of the Church tried for decades to communicate to women how much God values them, how important and central they are to the Creator’s plan for His children. And now Mormon feminists are taking the credit, by pretending it’s only now happening (presumably due to their vocal efforts).
I don’t think the Church is perfect. There may be practices and traditions that need to change. But I’m going to make a bold claim: If a sister in the Church just now realizes that she’s valued as a disciple of Christ, it’s not because the Church hasn’t taught it, frequently and often. What President Uchtdorf said this past weekend is nothing new. It’s not a change of rhetoric. Rather, perhaps our ears are opening enough to hear for the first time what they’ve been saying all along?
I think it’s dishonest to claim that this is some unprecedented shift in rhetoric on the part of the Church, and I think this twisting of the facts is designed to ultimately make the Church look bad and feminist agitators look like the protagonists of the story. It’s also designed set up a false crisis later on: If the Church has always been true, why is it only now treating women as disciples of Christ?
New Post: Crafting a Narrative: On Saturday, President Dieter F. Uchtdorf addressed the women of … http://t.co/A0PGAnXKbz #LDS #Mormon
TheMillennialStar: Crafting a Narrative http://t.co/CjGVPXgo2S #lds #mormon
Bravo LDSP!
Essentially, this is the equivalent of asking someone “When did you stop beating your wife?” I haven’t read Pres. Uchtodrf’s talk yet, as the transcript was not yet available this morning. I did have a similar reaction to the comments I was hearing. Nothing about it seems revolutionary, and it made me wonder if some of the people marveling at this just having been paying attention before now. It makes better sense that these women and their allies are engaged in the manner described above.
If only these folks would pay as strict heed to the vocabulary of the Holy Spirit instead of parsing every syllable of an apostolic address.
Crafting a Narrative: http://t.co/qIUcw83JIc #WomensMeeting #WithWomen #LDSconf
And there is the point Michael. They are NOT paying attention to the spirit, but to their own twisted agenda and trying to make everything fit into it. The other complaint I’ve seen about the Women’s Meeting was that they did not adequately address the “pain” of women in the church. Well, they did by talking about the Atonement and Jesus Christ and temples and covenants. But if you’re not looking to be taught, I guess you won’t be.
Can I just give my two cents on this? These liberal narratives are a two edged sword. Why aren’t we taking advantage of that fact?
Sure there is nothing unprecedented about calling women ‘disciples’. And sure we’ve referred to Heavenly Parents for just about forever. And sure there is probably no change here whatsoever.
But I once had a non-member tell me how proud of the LDS church he was for how much we’ve changed on some issue or other. Heck, why not just accept the liberal compliment for what it is in his mind?
“Yup! That’s us! The LDS Church! We sensed the pain of some women in the Church and we promptly showed that we could address their needs directly within our own belief system and without giving up on our core beliefs and doctrines. And we did it because we care. And you know it’s true because you heard it on the news and even all the liberal blogs admitted it was true!”
Why not just own the narrative they are giving us? It’s a good thing. Based on what liberals say about the church as a whole constantly changing, isn’t it just obvious that we care, that we’re constantly hearing and moving to improve? Isn’t it just obvious that we’ve already largely addressed this issue – and apparently through something as simple as re-emphasizing doctrines we already have: like women as disciples of Christ and our belief in Heavenly Parents?
To my non-member friend, the liberal media buzz is primarily proof that we’re good people doing what is right. Period. He just doesn’t care about anything else doctrinally… cause he’s not a Mormon! Duh! To him this isn’t some sign that we’re selling out. He has no concept of what that would mean to a Mormon anyhow. So he can only process it as a sign that we’re good people doing what’s right. And he believes it because the liberal media told him so!
I think that’s the response we should have.
For example, we should take the Kate Kelly movement to task for wanting to make changes to our core beliefs (i.e. bottom up revelation instead of top down revelation) and then point to the Huffington Post article and say, “And we have proof Kate Kelly is unnecessarily radical, because the Church is already doing a fantastic job addressing women’s needs by referring to them as blessed disciples of Christ and talking openly about our belief in Heavenly Parents! Even Mormon and non-Mormon feminists are saying this is a proof that the LDS Church is addressing women’s needs. So why do we need to gut the church doctrinally like the Kate Kelly movement wishes to? Everyone *including our critics* already agrees we’re making great progress directly addressing women’s needs!”
And don’t forget the first rule of journalism: there is nothing so ridiculous that if it isn’t said enough times people will start to believe it.
The liberals ‘say’ we’re improving constantly. People are starting to believe it. And this is bad for us how? Utilize the above trick a few times and they’ll probably have to stop the whole narrative-jack trick because it makes the LDS church look a bit too good for what they really want.
Bruce,
I think the question is whether they are complimenting the church or themselves and their own efforts?
LOL.
Of course they *mean* to compliment themselves for their own efforts. I’m suggesting we just change that around and reuse it in a way they didn’t intend. — because they can’t compliment themselves for their own efforts without accidently complimenting the Church in the eyes of a non-member like my friend. As I said, their narrative-jacking is always a two edged sword. I’m just suggesting we use the edge they didn’t intend.
Bruce, I think assuming that the media would apply the sword fairly is giving them far too much credit. More likely, they would use the change to undercut the notion that the LDS leadership speak on behalf of an unchanging God.
It’s all about eroding the credibility of the apostles and the prophets, and priming the Church to accept other more secular (or at least, more libertine) shepherds in their place.
Both this article and the Kathryn Skaggs blog refer to only the Huffington Post bit. Is there any other “proof” that some lds members reacted so astonished to these doctrines?
Bruce,
I’m still not on board.
“The liberals ‘say’ we’re improving constantly. People are starting to believe it. And this is bad for us how?”
It’s bad because the whole point they are trying to make is that their own existence is justified in order to patch up the holes in the church. Even if your strategy for turning their own words against them doesn’t hurt the church, it helps their own cause much more than in does the church… and it is this – the idea that the progressive politics can legitimately steady the church – that hurts the church.
Put another way, even if their sword does have two sides, they will always make sure that the sharper side points away from them.
It is worth pointing out that there is a huge potential — in fact a high probability — that the progressive politics mentioned will damage the testimonies of the members involved as well when they don’t get what they want. We see this happen again and again. Liberal members get all excited when one apostle says something they can claim as a “progressive victory,” and then when Elder Oaks comes along to remind members that, no, the Church is not about to become Unitarian church, the liberals spend all their time disparaging the Church and acting all depressed when an obvious apostate gets ex’ed.
There is really only one road toward maintaining a firm testimony, and that is to bring your secular ideas in line with the prophets. So we can nod at the liberals and say, “no, we are not as bad as you think we are and we never have been as bad as you think we are,” but we cannot at the end of the day expect the secular world to embrace us because they will not.
Nice post. I agree. This is feminists marketing at its finest. Sigh. Hopefully we can wake up a few Millennials and show them how their being targeted. Thanks for linking over.
Kathryn
Bruce, that would be like telling a husband unfairly accused of beating his wife, that he’s making progress not beating his wife this week due to his friends intervention, even though the poor guy never hit his wife to begin with.
Central to this issue is the fact that Elder Uchtorf said it. He has already been adopted by liberals as their resident progressive within the leadership. They are trying to further a narrative of disunity, where they highlight more conservative and some liberal members among the apostles. While it is undoubtedly true that some are more conservative than others, the apostles probably don’t appreciate being used as pawns against each other in a proxy online war. They do everything they can to avoid being seen as disunited.
I think the beautiful thing about Elder Uchtdorf’s addresses is the wonderful parallax view he brings to our shared belief. It isn’t that he says anything that isn’t consistent with prior teachings, but he has a way of saying these things that is profoundly joyful and egalitarian.
Even when he talked about hated vegetables, it was a parable of those bits of the gospel that aren’t fun, but that we fundamentally should accept as being God’s will for us because they are for our good.
So even though it’s a bit silly for folks to imply that it is only now that women are termed disciples, or that there is only now a focus on Heavenly parents, it is also true that Elder Uchtdorf’s comments were not just a repeat of past talks.
In particular, Elder Uchtdorf stressed that everyone is a child of God – that no act can undo that basic heritage. He then went on to talk about the additional blessings we, as God’s children, can receive if we will only open ourselves to those blessings through obedience. The gospel Elder Uchtdorf spoke of was a gospel of universal abundance, a gospel of love and joy, a gospel that actively invites all to participate more deeply, whether that might mean a return to activity or a renewed depth of commitment.
Which reminds me – as music director in my ward, I should start selecting the hymns that would go particularly well with each address. My ward has for several years now used the past conference addresses as the texts for both Sacrament meetings and the “Teachings of Our Times” lessons in the priesthood/Relief Society hour. So I might as well get a head start on the inevitable opportunity to select appropriate music for these powerful addresses.
Pingback: General Conference and Looking for “New Wording” | Religious Reason
“it is also true that Elder Uchtdorf’s comments were not just a repeat of past talks.
In particular, Elder Uchtdorf stressed that everyone is a child of God – that no act can undo that basic heritage. He then went on to talk about the additional blessings we, as God’s children, can receive if we will only open ourselves to those blessings through obedience. The gospel Elder Uchtdorf spoke of was a gospel of universal abundance, a gospel of love and joy, a gospel that actively invites all to participate more deeply, whether that might mean a return to activity or a renewed depth of commitment.”
I am not convinced that these themes are alien to the Gospel that has been preached since 1830. In fact, absolutely nothing Pres. Uchtdorf said is new, except perhaps it was spoken in a delightful German accent.