Mothers Who Know

Here is a link to the talk given by Sister Julie Beck, the General Relief Society President, at the most recent General Conference of the church this past October. What was your reaction when you read this talk or heard it given at Conference? Did you react like some of these women did? For some more reaction, check out this blog post and the comments that follow. And finally, for the actual online rebuttal visit this site, here.

In speaking with a couple of friends about this, they had some pretty good reactions. One noted that it does not depart at all from previous council given by other authorities of the church. Another mentioned that those people who signed the petition are probably asking to be the subject of a church disciplinary council. In looking over the manifesto put forth by "women who know", it reads as if they feel like their points of contention and the talk given by Sister Beck are mutually exclusive. They are not. Not by any means.

What I find most disconcerting about this petition that is being circulated by these people is that it feels like what they are most upset about are the things that weren't said: that Sister Beck didn't talk about fathers and their role at all, or the extenuating circumstances that might pull a mother away from childrearing or homemaking. That's like getting upset after reading or seeing Harry Potter that it wasn't more focused on Dumbledore and his story. That is not the subject of her talk! I'm sorry.

The talk was directed toward mothers and the primary role of women. And just like a talk about raising the bar is going to directed exclusively toward prospective missionaries, her talk about motherhood is going to be directed exclusively at women. And it is a 15-20 minute talk, not a fully explicating treatise on being a parent in the church.

I don't think that Sister Beck would really dispute the bold points from the online petition. Maybe the explanations that follow, but those issues brought up in petition are not so far off base. They are, however, misguided in thinking that the drafted document serves as a direct retort to the talk that she gave. What really seems to be at issue is whether or not these people trust in the council given by a recognized authority within the church. Are their tents pitched toward the temple and yearning for the guidance of their leaders? Are they quick to observe, as Elder Bednar has noted, meaning that they are both quick to hear and heed the councils that they are given? Or are they among the crowd of people who reject Alma and his teachings because he no longer has any legal authority over them? I believe that part of the rumblings that have occurred with these people is due to the fact that she is not the Prophet or among the 12, and because she's a woman and her teachings don't hold the same level of clout in their minds.

I close with a quote that comes courtesy of President Harold B. Lee:

You may not like what comes from the authority of the church. It may contradict your political view. It may contradict your social view. It may interfere with some of your social life. But if you will listen to these things as if from the mouth of the Lord himself, with patience and faith, the promise is that the gates of hell shall not prevail against you; yea and the Lord God will depserse the powers of darkness from before you, and cause the heavens to shake for your good and his names glory. (D&C 21:61)”