Notes on Divine Motherhood
Posted by jettboy on May 13th, 2007
One of the unique doctrines of the LDS Church is the existence of a Mother in Heaven. It is more than a trivial speculative idea, but part of the foundational teachings associated with Exaltation. Although particulars are not available, the doctrine is enshrined in one of the most beloved hymns “Oh My Father” by Eliza R. Snow. It states, “in the heavens, are parents single?” and replies, “no . . . truth eternal tells me I’ve a mother there.” President Wilford Woodruff proclaimed the hymn a revelation. To add to that, it is impossible to fully comprehend the doctrines of eternal families without accepting the implications.
Yet, some are troubled by the lack of particulars. Usually those who would like women to have a greater role in the LDS Church, and especially would like Priesthood positions granted to them voice these concerns. The refrain to such requests is “the subject is too sacred,” or more forcefully, “God doesn’t want His wife mocked and ridiculed by the World as He lovers Her too much.” There is truth in this, but it doesn’t really answer the question of near silence. The Scriptures don’t even hint this. Prophets, if they have said anything at all, have not made that proclamation (although they have numerous times in relation to Temple ordinances) a central concern. There are some answers, but not ones that will either close off the discussion or be comforting to the critics of minimalism.
On Earth as In Heaven
What we know about our Heavenly Mother is perhaps more than realized. This is because most Mormons, both “progressive” and “traditional” are looking for things overly transcendent. The “Easy to understand” is seen as less worthy of respect then something that can be forever argued and dissected. Perhaps worse for some is that the conclusion of Her nature casts a shadow on certain aspirations.
The key to understanding Heavenly Mother is both in the name and a simple verse of the Doctrine and Covenants. It occurs in the famous “Civil War Prophecy” of D&C 130:
1 When the Savior shall appear we shall see him as he is. We shall see that he is a man like ourselves.
2 And that same sociality which exists among us here will exist among us there, only it will be coupled with eternal glory, which glory we do not now enjoy.
Although it has more to do with the nature of God and our relation to Him than gender issues, the idea expressed of “that same sociality” has repercussions. There is not a lot of differences between what we observe here on Earth and human nature in the Eternities. It is true that we are perhaps more prone to sin, misunderstanding, lies, and mistakes in mortality. Yet, it is clear that mothers are a very important part of the social fabric of humanity. To understand motherhood is to understand Heavenly Mother, just as Fatherhood brings its own lessons. The recent Proclamation on the Family emphasizes the Earthly relationships of gender to Eternal truth:
We, the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children . . .
. . . By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners. Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation. Extended families should lend support when needed.
Therefore, we know that Heavenly Mother is just that; a woman who takes care of children. There is no pretence as to how that can be achieved other than through the known doctrine of Faith, Hope, and Charity or more succinctly Love. Learn how to cultivate those characteristics and the more the nature of Heavenly Mother will become clear. For those who believe that raising children is a disgrace or beneath a fully spiritual identity, Jesus had some choice words:
10 Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.
11 For the Son of man is come to Save that which was lost.
– Matt. 18: 10-11
Of course, not every woman has the opportunity to marry or raise children here on Earth. However, if Heaven is the ideal and families reflect Heaven, then Time only is of concern and not ultimate circumstances. There is much that we must, as religious people, hope for in the next life that cannot be attained in mortal probation. Marriage and children might be part of that anticipation for a better Eternal life. Creating a false Goddess figure only separates us from real Salvation through Jesus Christ.
Worship and Salvation
This possibility is not without precedent. Some scholars have seen within the Bible a fight for repressing a more female oriented worship. In other words, additional theology of a fertility Goddess that either goes with or usurps the male God that is accepted as the I AM that should have no other Gods before Him. Some would say the “go with” is not theologically unacceptable. However, Jesus warned:
17 But he, knowing their thoughts, said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and a house divided against a house falleth.
18 so be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand? because ye say that I cast out devils through Beelzebub.
–Luke 11: 17-18
It would be near impossible not to develop two theological worship systems that didn’t diverge. Like manna, a choice between one and the other would be inevitable when both insist upon our devotion. As is clearly taught in the Scriptures, Jesus Christ has already been established as the only Way to Salvation; and he does not give room for another deity beyond Father as the focus of our Prayers. It is true that he acts with God, but ultimately he gives the glory to God. There is an example of prayer to enhance this point:
9 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name.
10 Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
11 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
12 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.
13 For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever. Amen.
– 3 Ne. 13: 9-13
The nature of Heavenly Mother is clearly defined, as is her role. Scriptures do not mention Her because she is not part of the plan of salvation beyond what we already know of motherhood. The deity we worship continues to be Father, Son, and Holy Ghost as One, and They have been consistent on who and what we must do to be saved. If honesty is important, those who want to “graduate” the female half of Heavenly Parents must acknowledge there isn’t much known about Father in Heaven either. We know as much as we do about Him because Jesus is His representative. Ultimately it is through Jesus Christ that we get near the Father, and it is through the Father that the Mother can be percieved.
…and it is through the Father that the Mother can be percieved.
Interesting thought. Reminds me of the saying “behind every good man is a great wife.”
Comment # 1 left by Connor on May 13th, 2007
You make some good points, but I have to strongly disagree with the above. I believe nearly every woman in the church has to come to terms with questions about our role and with the almost complete lack of evidence for or teaching about a Heavenly Mother. Most of us may do it more or less privately and/or silently, but having a greater role or concerns about the priesthood have nothing at all to do with it.
Comment # 2 left by C Jones on May 13th, 2007
A few thoughts…
1.Eliza R. Snow’s poem/song was originally titled “Invocation, or the Eternal Father and Mother.” It was written as a prayer to both God the Father and God the Mother. In fact, the song itself includes a prayer to both heavenly parents, a prayer which we utter every time we sing this song:
When I leave this frail existence,
When I lay this mortal by,
Father, Mother, may I meet you
In your royal courts on high?
Then, at length, when I’ve completed
All you sent me forth to do,
With your mutual approbation
Let me come and dwell with you.
2. The scriptures give examples of prayers made to Jesus the Son. While one may claim that those prayers are specific to the role of Jesus the Redeemer (for example, Alma Jr.’s prayer “Jesus, thou Son of God, have mercy on me…”), why cannot one pray to her Mother in a manner specific to Her role as Mother?
3. Joseph Smith taught that we cannot truly understand our nature unless we understand the nature of God. If this is the case, how does the silent, subordinate, submissive, suppressed, and shut-away attributes of the Divine Female in Mormonism help a daughter of God understand herself?
4. You make the claim that the nature of Heavenly Mother is clearly defined, yet I see no clear definition that supports Her silence and the lack of communication with Her. If a mother’s primary role is to nurture her children, then it seems very odd for us to ask that our Heavenly Mother perform that role without any contact or communication. One of the distinct nurturing roles that my mother has for me (even at my age) is her availability to comfort and talk to me when I am in need.
There are many other criticisms of this support of a silent Mother that I give in a paper that I wrote that you can read here.
Comment # 3 left by the narrator on May 14th, 2007
Narrator, you have decided ahead of time that She is silent, subordinate and suppressed. Your choice of words communicates your bias and will not enable you to consider that perhaps she is not suppressed but perfectly united and yet veiled for reasons unknown. But being angry about it won’t give you the ability to discern more about Her, and I think jettboy’s point is that there is more to discern than we sometimes think. I agree.
A great article I just read that touches on this in a wonderful way can be found here.
Comment # 4 left by Michelle on May 15th, 2007
The problem I have is that, unlike the example of Jesus, we have no examples or injunctions in the Scriptures to do anything with Mother in Heaven. You can pray to the Mother in Heaven in private if you wish, but in the end I think you are praying toward a false God. The Old Testament is filled with examples of those who try to worship a female side to God and are cursed for doing so by the prophets. We know to who and how we should worship, and to go beyond that I think brings us to dangerous spritual territory.
My biggest problem isn’t that we should want to know about the Mother in Heaven, but that the only one who can do that for us is God the Father. And He, not the leadership of the Church, has been absolutely silent on the matter.
Michelle is right that my point is that there is more to learn about Mother in Heaven than is in the scriptures if we take families as eternal social units seriously. My own take on Joseph Smith’s statement about knowing God is to know ourselves, is that it goes both ways. This is because after he says that he doesn’t explain the differences, but the similarities between God and humans.
I love the quote, “but perfectly united and yet veiled for reasons unknown.” Not sure, Michelle, if you had a particular meaning behind that or not. It brings a particular image to my mind that I don’t understand, but feel has an important reason that I have not figured out yet.
Comment # 5 left by Jettboy on May 15th, 2007
Hi, Michelle-
I followed the link in your comment to Patricia Holland’s talk, and while her talk was beautiful, it didn’t address the nature of our MiH - only that Sis. Holland does not feel the need to know more about her. I’m genuinely curious about our MiH, however. When you say our MiH is “united” with our Father in Heaven, what do you mean by this?
Comment # 6 left by ECS on May 15th, 2007
“The Old Testament is filled with examples of those who try to worship a female side to God and are cursed for doing so by the prophets.”
Jettboy, that’s not quite accurate. They are cursed for worshipping actual, physical female idols, as well as for engaging in some pretty, uh, colorful rituals celebrating the goddesses of fertility. (use your imagination). That’s not remotely like some contemporary women’s attempts to understand what the feminine half of Elohim might be like.
You’ve got Gordon B. Hinckley (General Conference 1989 or so) on your side as far as praying to Heavenly Mother or trying to learn more about her. No need to resort to strained scriptural analogies to bolster your argument.
Comment # 7 left by Kristine on May 15th, 2007
Michelle-
Narrator, you have decided ahead of time that She is silent, subordinate and suppressed. Your choice of words communicates your bias…
I chose the word ’silent’ because she has been silenced. While she may be trying to speak to us, if we do not know what she sounds like, her words are as good static on the radio.
I chose ’subordinate’ because in our relationship to our Heavenly Parents, she is in a very subordinate position… so much so that we are instructed to not even communicate with her.
I chose ’suppressed’ because that is what she is in Mormonism today.
perhaps she is not suppressed but perfectly united and yet veiled for reasons unknown
I don’t even know what that means. I know what it means to be united, but I’m not sure what the context is for you. Is it similar to me being united with the flagpole outside my window? If so, how? If not, why not?
Comment # 8 left by the narrator on May 15th, 2007
Jettboy -
The goddess Asherah (as Yahweh’s consort) was an accepted deity of worship for the ancient Israelites. It wasn’t until the tree that symbolized her in the temple became an object of worship itself (just as Aaron’s rod became an object of worship), that the Israelites were condemned.
In the late 19th century, Mormons were much more active in discussion, worship, and praise of our MiH. It wasn’t unil the early 20th century that the Patriarchs began to prohibit it.
Comment # 9 left by the narrator on May 15th, 2007
“That’s not remotely like some contemporary women’s attempts to understand what the feminine half of Elohim might be like.” I am NOT arguing that we shouldn’t understand and discuss the MinH. Not sure where that comes from as I stated this is my own exploration on the subject.
The only real contention I can see toward what I wrote is my belief that praying or worshiping MinH is worship of a false god. With that, as someone has said, I have Pres. Hinckley about praying to her. Not that I don’t think I have far more than that!
Comment # 10 left by Jettboy on May 15th, 2007
ECS,
Sorry…I have to say I disagree with you. I think she is teaching us how patterns, types and symbols in the scriptures and temple (and I would say in life and prophetic teachings) can teach us something about our Mother in Heaven and/or about woman’s potential and place in the eternal scheme of things. She’s inviting us to look for patterns and symbols that can help us discern more about what womanhood means in the plan of salvation. I think there is a lot we can learn as we do.
Jettboy, you might be interested in the following links, here and here. Not saying I necessarily buy into everything that is said, but I think it’s all interesting to mull over.
Comment # 11 left by Michelle on May 15th, 2007
Michelle- hmm. I didn’t mean for there to be a disagreement. As I said, I enjoyed the talk, but it didn’t tell us anything about our MiH. Maybe you could be more specific about what Sis. Holland meant by “woman’s potential and place in the eternal scheme of things” and how this relates to MiH. (I’m still confused as to what you mean by MiH and FiH being “united”).
Comment # 12 left by ECS on May 15th, 2007
Michelle: perhaps she is not suppressed but perfectly united and yet veiled for reasons unknown
Hehe. Does that mean you are starting to warm up to the ideas I presented in my One Flesh post after all?
Comment # 13 left by Geoff J on May 15th, 2007
Nice try, Geoff. I’m not gonna go that far.
Comment # 14 left by Michelle on May 16th, 2007
So, ECS, I mean united in purpose. When my son asked about Mother in heaven the other day, I told him that I, too, wish we knew more, but that I think we can learn a bit from our lives now. I said something like this, “When Daddy does your interviews, do you think that means that I don’t care? Do you think he doesn’t talk to me and share and ask me what I think?” Just because Dad might be the one talking to my children in that way, or is the one giving them blessings, doesn’t mean I am any less involved in their lives, or that Dad is acting without my involvement or support or approval. I don’t imagine heavenly Mother out there hiding because she has been told to. I suspect we will be surprised at how lovingly involved She has been, and how perfectly united in purpose and love our Parents are. I don’t know what eternal parenthood looks like in specifics, but no one does. We can’t really surmise much specifically about what Father’s existence is like, either.
Incidentally, ECS, I think Sister Holland was trying to invite us to see what we can learn from divine womanhood and motherhood from the scriptures and temple, and I think there might be more there about our Mother than might be apparent at first blush.
Comment # 15 left by Michelle on May 16th, 2007