Showing posts with label patriarchy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label patriarchy. Show all posts

Thursday, July 16, 2015

Temple prep - "Dressed in White"

The following text is taken from the pamphlet "Preparing to Enter the Holy Temple" (2002) and annotated by me.


When we do ordinance work in the temple we wear white clothing. This clothing is symbolic of purity and worthiness and cleanliness. No news here. Baptism clothing is white for the same reason.
Upon entering the temple you exchange your street clothing for the white clothing of the temple. No one wears everyday clothes to the temple. If by "street clothing" you mean "Sunday best", then yes. Actually, no. Men get to keep their why button up shirt they wear in, so not all "street clothing" is traded in. This change of clothing takes place in the locker room, where each individual is provided with a locker and a dressing space and is completely private. Kids, this is good, practical information, but it has absolutely nothing to do with knowing your temple covenants before you go. In the temple the ideal of modesty is carefully maintained. How scandalous it would be for men or women see any sexy skin of another man or woman! :S As you put your clothing in the locker you leave your cares and concerns and distractions there with them. You step out of this private little dressing area dressed in white and you feel a oneness and a sense of equality, for all around you are similarly dressed. Communist uniforms LDS style.

If you are going to the temple for the first time, counsel with your bishop. When he issues you a recommend he will explain something of the nature of the clothing that will be required in the temple. What "counseling" is there to be done? Just tell us what the clothing is! What's that? The Church now does tell everyone in the whole world about our temple clothing? Yeah! Excellent job, Church! Way to disclose! Obtaining this clothing need not be a worry to you. You can either buy it through Church Distribution Services or, in some cases, rent it at the temple. In the latter case a very modest fee is required which covers only the cost of laundering the clothing. Rental clothing is not available at the smaller temples. Good practical information here, kids, but chances are your parents will buy your clothes for you.
As with the ceremonies and ordinances of the temple, outside of the temple we say very little about the clothing worn inside. NOT ANYMORE, DUDE! We can say that it, like the ceremonies, has great symbolic meaning. You can say whatever you want when you prohibit everyone from talking about what you've said.

It is a mark of reverence and respect when the Church member visits the temple dressed and groomed in such a way that he or she would not be uncomfortable in the presence of the Lord. Why should anyone be ashamed to show up as they are to the Maker who made them? Maybe it's time the Lord took a good hard look at his handiwork. Suppose for a moment that you are invited to be the guest in the home of a prominent and highly respected leader. Now imagine you're the kind of fool to grovel at authority... You are given to understand that you will mingle with distinguished guests who have received similar invitations. And you're going to want to do some schmoozing... The invitation is an indication that the host holds you in very high regard. You realize that many others would highly prize such an invitation, but for one reason or another they have not likewise been invited and therefore are not able to attend. So relax, the "leader" already likes your shit. Under those circumstances it is doubtful that you would arrive in old work clothes or dressed as you do for recreation. It is doubtful that a man would go unshaven, or a woman with her hair unkempt. So please show your ability to follow all social norms for dress and grooming! This is one case where the ways of the world are indeed the ways of the Lord. Remember the Lord looketh on your lapels for dander and mustard dribbles, and your shoes for fresh polish.

People of dignity and refinement, upon receiving an invitation to an important gathering, frequently make inquiry as to what dress would be in order. Would you not prepare carefully for such a special occasion? This is rhetorical. You would. You most definitely would. You might even purchase new clothing in the hope that your appearance would not detract from the dignified nature of the setting. You don't want to stick out. Remember the parable of the nail.

Care would also be shown for the pressing and cleaning of your clothes. Holy shit, you're still talking about dressing prim and proper. You would feel uncomfortable if you were not properly attired. Unless that sort of thing doesn't bother you.

 
The opportunity to visit the temple might be compared to such an invitation. I think every reader understood where you were going with this, but thanks for spelling it out.

There is one occasion only when members of the Church are invited into the temple proper in “street” clothing, and that is when they witness a temple marriage. Again, most people don't call their Sunday best "street" clothing. In that case only the shoes are removed, and these may be replaced with white footwear. Why? This sounds horribly superstitious. Years ago the Brethren authorized this to be so for the convenience of those family members and friends who would not be going through an endowment session immediately prior to the marriage. So there was a temple change? What else has changed?

Brides and grooms enter the temple to be married for time and all eternity. Ahem! ...The word you're looking for is "sealed". There brides wear white dresses that are long-sleeved, modest in design and fabric, and free of elaborate ornamentation. God hates immodest female arms and prideful embellishments! Grooms also dress in white. Brethren who come to witness temple marriages do not wear tuxedos. Unless they're all white tuxedos.

We have been puzzled and a little saddened at times, when attending the temple, to find that some have come to witness marriages or to attend a session in the temple dressed as though they were going to a picnic or an athletic event. Or in terrible black tuxedos like they're going to the Oscars.

The privilege to enter the temple deserves more from us than that. Why do you assholes always act to entitled! Argh! It is pleasing to the Lord when we bathe our bodies and put on clean clothing, however inexpensive the clothing may be. Yes, expensive clothing is of no consequence, but for the Lord's sake, please bath. He really wants to watch you bathe. We should dress in such a way that we might comfortably attend a sacrament meeting or a gathering that is proper and dignified. So you're saying Sunday best, right?

On occasions there has been one to witness a wedding who obviously has paid little attention to the counsel that the Brethren have given about dress and grooming, about taking care not to emulate the world in the extremes of style in clothing, in hair length and arrangement, etc. We wonder why it is that a person who is mature enough to be admitted to the temple would not at once be sensible enough to know that the Lord could not be pleased with those who show obvious preference to follow after the ways of the world. Bro, this entire section you have been hammering us about following American dress norms. How are those norms separate from the world? Are you suggesting that God's culture is mid-century American? This is ethnocentrism at it's finest.

How could a recommended member attend the temple in clothing that is immodest or worldly? Apparently they can't. How could one wear a style of hair that is not in keeping with refinement and dignity? How long has this stick been up your ass??

When you have the opportunity to go to the temple to participate in the temple ceremonies or to witness a sealing, remember where you are. It's very easy to forget because all these LDS places look just about exactly the same. You are a guest in the house of the Lord. He doesn't want to come home to see you lounging about in his favorite chair watching your damn shows on his celestial television! You should groom yourself and clothe yourself in such a way that you would feel comfortable should your Host appear. Exactly! Sit quietly with your arms folded and DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING! (By the way, God loves you and is happy to see you.)

Those who hold and share in the blessings of the priesthood should have their bodies covered as was revealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith when the endowment ceremony was given to him. Temple change alert!


Members who have received their temple ordinances thereafter wear the special garment or underclothing. Garments are provided by an agency of the Church—and are generally available to members throughout the world through a distribution program operated by the Church. And they're very reasonably priced.

The garment represents sacred covenants. It fosters modesty and becomes a shield and protection to the wearer. Can we talk a bit about what you mean by "shield and protection"? I understand the Church is shying away from all those stories of how garments stop bullets and fire and bear claws and other such earthly annoyances, so are we to understand that they just somehow keep Satan out of our pants? Should we not be getting aroused in our garments? Going vague doesn't exactly help your case.

"I make all my clothes in my garage because 
I want to be sexy modest for the Lord."

The wearing of such a garment does not prevent members from dressing in the fashionable clothing generally worn in the nations of the world. Yes, it does. Mormon women have an extremely hard time buying fashionable clothing. That's why Utah fashion is it's own unfortunate thing. Only clothing that is immodest or extreme in style would be incompatible with wearing the garment. Don't laugh! Porn shoulders are a huge problem, man! Any member of the Church, whether he or she has been to the temple or not, would in proper spirit want to avoid extreme or revealing fashions. You keep using the word "extreme", isn't it past time for a definition? To me, Photoshopping sleeves on angels just might fit the definition.

There may be occasions when endowed members of the Church face questions on the garment. Questions like "Why the fuck can't I every find ones that fit right?" and "Why the hell am I wearing an extra layer in 100 degree heat?"

On one occasion one of the brethren was invited to speak to the faculty and staff of the Navy Chaplains Training School in Newport, Rhode Island. The audience included a number of high-ranking naval chaplains from the Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish faiths. Yes! I love this very defensive story!

In the question-and-answer period one of the chaplains asked, “Can you tell us something about the special underwear that some Mormon servicemen wear?” The implication was, “Why do you do that? Isn’t it strange? Doesn’t that present a problem?”

To the chaplain who made the inquiry he responded with a question: “Which church do you represent?” In response he named one of the Protestant churches.

He said, “In civilian life and also when conducting the meetings in the military service you wear clerical clothing, do you not?” The chaplain said that he did. Yeah, dumb fucker, you sure do!

He continued: “I would suppose that that has some importance to you, that in a sense it sets you apart from the rest of your congregation. It is your uniform, as it were, of the ministry. Also, I suppose it may have a much more important place. It reminds you of who you are and what your obligations and covenants are. It is a continual reminder that you are a member of the clergy, that you regard yourself as a servant of the Lord, and that you are responsible to live in such a way as to be worthy of your ordination.”

He then told them: “You should be able to understand at least one of our reasons why Latter-day Saints have a deep spiritual commitment concerning the garment. He sure a fuck should be able to understand but he's a near-sighted, self-centered Mormon hater! A major difference between your churches and ours is that we do not have a professional clergy, as you do. Because Mormons are way above showing off their devotion like that, you superficial sack of shit! The congregations are all presided over by local leaders. They are men called from all walks of life. Yet they are ordained to the priesthood. They hold offices in the priesthood. They are set apart to presiding positions as presidents, counselors, and leaders in various categories. The women, too, share in that responsibility and in those obligations. Just at home though when their husband unload on them and ask for advice. We really don't allow any women to preside over men directly. The man who heads our congregation on Sunday as the bishop may go to work on Monday as a postal clerk, as an office worker, a farmer, a doctor; or he may be an air force pilot or a naval officer. The only thing he may not be is a woman. By our standard he is as much an ordained minister as you are by your standard. He is recognized as such by most governments. We draw something of the same benefits from this special clothing as you would draw from your clerical vestments. The difference is that we wear ours under our clothing instead of outside, for we are employed in various occupations in addition to our service in the Church. These sacred things we do not wish to parade before the world.” Because we're not self-righteous show offs!

He then explained that there are some deeper spiritual meanings as well, connecting the practice of wearing this garment with covenants that are made in the temple. Oh, do tell us what "deeper spiritual meanings" he explained! No one in the temple really bothers telling us anything more than that they represent the lamb skin garments God made for Adam and Eve and that they have some kind of protective power. We wouldn’t find it necessary to discuss these—not that they are secret, he repeated, but because they are sacred. Not secret, we just won't tell you about it because you're all swine.

The garment, covering the body, is a visual and tactile reminder of these covenants. Which covenants? For many Church members the garment has formed a barrier of protection when the wearer has been faced with temptation. Ah ha! They do keep Satan out of some Mormons' pants! (Just not mine.) Among other things it symbolizes our deep respect for the laws of God—among them the moral standard. Or more accurately they symbolize our tendency to shame God's creation and guilt those in our group who do not abide by this culturally specific dress standard.

Wednesday, March 11, 2015

Sex changes - handsome and chaste


General authorities have a lot to say about the innate qualities of women and their divinely appointed role here on earth. What happens if we flip the sexes in what they have to say about the topic? Do we have a nonsensical statement because the logic is gender dependent, or do we end up with a statement that still agrees with LDS thought because gender is irrelevant?


"The true spirit of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints gives to man the highest place of honor in human life. To maintain and to merit this high dignity he must possess those virtues which have always, and which will ever demand the respect and love of mankind... [because] 'a handsome and chaste man is the perfect workmanship of God.'" First Presidency of Heber J. Grant, Improvment Era, May 1935, 276.


 The original quote was already plenty condescending to women, but readdressing it to men makes it feel strangely empowering for sexy men who won't give it up. The message makes just as much doctrinal sense maled so I'm going to have to call bullshit on brother Heber. Men do indeed get the highest place of honor in the LDS Church; Mormons are all about being virtuous, lovely, of good report and praiseworthy; and who's to argue that God really gets off on handsome, chaste men?


Wednesday, January 14, 2015

My beloved sisters


Here's a wonderful video synopsis of what our beloved brethren have been saying to our beloved sisters these past several decades. May your hearts be filled with their patronizing, patriarchal love as they thank you for staying in your place.


(This is totally the kind of thing I mentioned earlier on in this project.)

Monday, January 12, 2015

Why ordain women?

 1. BECAUSE WOMEN ARE NOT SUBSERVIENT TO MEN.

2. Because LDS scripture, doctrine, and history all give room to ordaining women.

3. Because soon the Church will regret not doing it.


Tuesday, April 22, 2014

Believing blood


One of the stranger beliefs of Mormonism postulates that the more Hebrew blood you have the more receptive to the truth of the Gospel and authority of the LDS Church you will be. Apparently belief is genetic and the Hebrews hold the majority of shares when it comes to believing... that they're the awesomest, most chosenest people of God.


Even awesomer than believing in the truth because you've got a lot of Hebrew is that if you're of the tribe of Ephraim you won't rebel!

"And the rebellious shall be cut off out of the land of Zion, and shall be sent away, and shall not inherit the land. For, verily I say that the rebellious are not of the blood of Ephraim, wherefore they shall be plucked out." (D&C 64:35-36, emphasis added)

So Ephraim just might be the least rebellious of all the believers of Israel. Very cool stuff (even if it's total nonsense).


It really gives you a sense of what the world lost when the blood of Joseph Smith, a pure Ephraimite, a pure non-rebellious believing blood type, was spilled at Carthage. What a fucking waste of the "best blood of the nineteenth century" (D&C 135:6)!

Joseph Smith III, half Ephraimite, half Moggle.

What's worse is that obviously Emma contaminated that blood because otherwise Joseph Smith III would have surely reunited with the saints in Utah. If only we could once again breed the purest of believers...

Monday, April 21, 2014

Mormons the Israelites

Here's an early doubt for you. According to the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith was a direct descendant of Joseph, the youngest son of Jacob who was sold into Egypt, and Brigham Young confirmed that our latter-day Joseph was "pure Ephraimite." This might lead one to believe that the British Isles were populated by the tribe of Ephraim, right? The Brits must be Hebrew at heart.


But they're not. Neither was the Smith family. The Book of Mormon prophesy was bullshit. DNA evidence proves that.

"Gryffindor! No, WAIT... Ephraim!!"

And yet Mormons continue to claim lineage to the tribe of Ephraim. Isn't that a bit arrogant? How do Mormons expect anyone to take them seriously when they start spouting off about being Ephraimite? Just don't get your hopes up for an Israeli duel citizenship.

Monday, March 10, 2014

My tribe, my future


Patriarchal blessings are a big deal in the LDS Church. Receiving that blessing equates to an unmistakeable encounter with real live direct personal prophecy. There is no maybe about it, this is God addressing you and you alone through his prophetic mouthpiece, the patriarch. The future God has in store for you is spelled in delicious detail if you're lucky, but most likely it will read something like a cross between a baby blessing, horoscope, and fortune cookie.

A few things are for certain though. You're from the tribe of Ephraim either directly or through adoption. Congratulations. You should keep your blessing as a private, sacred matter because, if you go around sharing it, you'll probably realize that it's just like everyone else's blessing and that might cause you to doubt. You should read your blessing all the time and probably memorize it because the more time you invest in it the less likely you'll be to throw it out as complete trash. Finally, you'll likely notice as your life progresses that, despite all of your best efforts and deepest convictions, your patriarchal blessing and your real life aren't matching up, and you might be believe it's your fault. Just keep in mind that there are very few certainties anyone can tell you about life; one is that you will die and another is that until you do you'll have to address a several physical needs and experience a wide range of emotions, some pleasant, others less so.


My patriarchal blessing was perfect. It said everything right. Tribe of Ephraim. Check. Diligent mission service. Check. Marriage to a choice daughter of our Heavenly Father. Check. Righteously fulfill my paternal role. Check. Life of potentially high callings and committed service in the Church. Check. Future recipient of unbounded love and respect by countless people. Check. That's either a BINGO! or a jackpot, I think.

Or it could just be the same Mormon spew I've heard every Sunday and every day in between about how my life should be if I want to be "truly happy" and make God so very proud of me.

Friday, February 7, 2014

Girl power

Silent as stone and can't get her hands in anything. Perfect.

I believed for a long time that men and women in the Church were equal. I believed that because I was told that's how it was. Bit by bit, however, I began to realize that the facts do not support this idea. Mormon women get little besides lip service from the Church hierarchy; they're decision making power is essentially nil. Mormon women are put on a pedestal and kept under under glass. The stats speak for themselves.


The question is, why would Heavenly Father, a perfect being who loves all his children equally, be okay with this? Isn't the Church's treatment of women a worthy reason to doubt the rectitude of the organization and it's leaders? It's certainly enough to make myself and others step away.

Wednesday, November 20, 2013

Converts

 Missionaries teaching the ideal family.

Throughout my mission I found myself reflecting on the kinds of people who were typically more open and receptive to the Church. I, like most missionaries, contacted and taught a fairly wide range of people personally, consulted other missionaries (both in and out of my mission) about their experiences, and heard of past conversions from a wide range of sources such as Church publications, older members, and people with relatives who were Mormon. I thought a lot about these people and their stories. I wanted to understand how the Spirit works in peoples' lives.

It was clear that the vast majority of people joining the Church were either poor, uneducated, immigrants, refugees, mentally unstable, lonely middle-aged women, unconfident young men, or people seeking a stronger political connection to the United States. Most were probably a combination of two or more (but hopefully not too many were middle-aged women/young men). Why? Why did the Gospel of Jesus Christ appeal almost exclusively to these disenfranchised types of people? Why wasn't the power of the Spirit and the beauty of the message able to reach people who were in more stable situations or who maybe even held some respectable level of influence in their community? 

I kept reminding myself that the Book of Mormon says rather explicitly that the rich, who are puffed up in the pride of their hearts, pretty much just plain suck, and that the poor are more open to God because they're humble. (To be honest, the main reasons we missionaries wanted to convert rich people was usually so they could help the Church out tithing-wise and take us on awesome trips when we came back after the mission to visit.)

Lehi having a hard time converting wealthy men.

Could Heavenly Father help us find and convert some healthy, financially stable, maybe even prominent individuals (if they're humble!) who would help build the Kingdom and send the Work forward? We sure hoped so.

Wrong neighborhood, elders! Go find people with $$$!

The folks at the top really hoped so, too. My mission president insisted, under direction of the area authorities, that we missionaries spend more time seeking out native, adult males who could help build up the body of Priesthood holders in the country. We called it "Priesthood contacting" and it took precedence over speaking to anyone who was female, foreign, unemployed, or single. Our goal was now quality, not quantity. So basically the only people in our teaching pool that we could hang on to were the uneducated men. Our days out proselytizing involved us annoying the hell out of grown men on their way to work, at lunch, on their way home, and while they were out trying to enjoy some family time.

No, no more single mothers! We have too many already!

The thing is IT FELT WRONG. All of it felt wrong. It felt wrong that we were bringing such unstable people into the Church when deep down we knew how many problems they had. The last thing those people needed was the Church with all its nonsensical rules and dogma to complicate their lives further. It also felt wrong that we were required to suddenly limit our contact with many people because they weren't family men with the right ethnicity. I had always thought that all were alike unto God. Maybe they are. Maybe it's just that not all are alike unto the Mormon Church.

Friday, November 8, 2013

The temple - sexism


In addition to the gendered seating and the veils imposed on the female attendees, the Mormon endowment ceremony held yet another shockingly sexist element. At a certain point in the ceremony the men are told that they will become kings and priests to God, but the women are told that they were to become "queens and priestesses to [their] husbands". Why not to God like the men? It seemed a little weird to me and I felt uncomfortable about it. It was clearly creating a hierarchy in which men stand above women.


I shouldn't have been surprised. The emphasis on Church hierarchy was never hidden from me and should be obvious to anyone who happens to run across the portraits of the General Authorities will notice Thomas Monson at the top of the pile, followed by his two wing men, the big 12, and the First Quorum of Seventy. And the sexism is obvious as well. None of the General Authorities is a woman.


I didn't like what I was seeing and doing, but I really didn't want to think I was part of a sexist church. How could Christ's church be sexists? God certainly wasn't sexist (I thought)! Besides, I had been told before attending the temple that the temple was one place where everyone was equal. There were no bishops, no quorum leaders, no stake presidents, no area authorities, no apostles - just brothers and sisters worshiping their Father. It sounded great. 


I never got over my discomfort of the temple sexism and unsurprisingly I learned years later that it used to be much worse when women had to covenant to obey the Law of the Husband. That "law" was removed in 1990 because the Church surveyed its temple-going members and found out that people didn't care for it. Imagine that! Why didn't those surveyed members just doubt their doubts and go along with the overt female subordination?