“Why don’t women have the priesthood?”

The most common answer we hear is probably “Men have the priesthood, and women have the sacred responsibility of motherhood.”

As Mormon feminists our response to this answer is generally: Men also have the sacred responsibility of fatherhood, and fatherhood is the role and responsibility that is analogous to motherhood.

Priesthood (which is granted to pretty much every Mormon male) really does not have an analogous role for women.

Some will respond that women have the Relief Society which is like an order of the priesthood (or at least that’s what Joseph Smith himself said). Others believe that women do have the priesthood (if not the keys to use it) through our husbands or through the temple.

Or perhaps they simply believe that God made it this way, so it must be good (at least until God says differently).

I will admit that I find these responses flawed and unsatisfactory. (which isn’t to say I know the right answer, only that I know haven’t heard one yet that isn’t full of holes)

But let us just say, for a moment, that Priesthood/Motherhood is truly the answer, and God really did set it up that way for a reason. Let us just say that women and men have separate spheres, but that they are truly equal spheres. This does not mean that God loves or privileges men over women, because while different we are perfectly equal and loved and respected. Many people do genuinely feel that this is true.

In which case how do we view the following story?

This is a true story that happened to me several years ago.

There was a family in my neighborhood with a large passel of children all very close in age, and to me the mother seemed overwhelmed and maybe even depressed (postpartum depression is the worst! Just ask me!) So I wasn’t terribly surprised that her children were out in the street unsupervised quite often. Our street is quiet, and the danger was minimal, but the kids really were very young, and they would be out seemingly all day never an adult to be seen. The talk of the neighborhood turned to these kids quite often and the longer this went on, the more talk I heard of “what should we do?”, “should we call CPS”? None of us (including myself) felt like we could approach her directly, she didn’t seem like the type that would take that well.

And while I appreciate that we have systems in place to protect children, I felt like CPS was an extreme first step, especially when the kids weren’t in that much danger (quiet close-knit neighborhood nowhere near busy streets, canals or prisons). We were the only two Mormon families on the block so I suggested that I could call my church and see if there was anything we could do first. So I did. I called the Relief Society President of our ward and explained the situation, and the concerns of the neighborhood, and my reluctance to approach the mother directly. And I asked if there was anything we (the women of the Relief Society) could do.

Now step back from this situation for a moment. If you believe that women and men have separate but equal spheres, then I can not imagine any situation that would more fully totally completely and utterly fit into the sphere of womanhood. Here we have a mother in need, children in need of nurturing, and other mothers (both Mormon and Non) willing to help if only they knew what to do. Am I correct? This is our sphere! Where the power of Motherhood is separate but equal to Priesthood and where we nurture the children and make the world a better place! Right?

The Relief Society President’s response to me was not, “Yes! We can handle this! And here is what you can do to help! Mothers Unite!”

Her response was this, “Oh I will have to call the bishop, I’ve been told that I’m not to give counsel, so I can’t contact her, but I’ll call the bishop and maybe they can send in the home teachers. I’m not supposed to give counsel.”

I distinctly remember that line, “The bishop has told me I’m not to give counsel” and I remember her repeating it at least three times. I liked the bishop that told her that, respected him, and I don’t know the context of why he told her that, if it’s official policy? (handbook anyone?) Saddest thing of all? She is one of the best people I have ever known and would be brilliant at counseling. She didn’t sound upset by that fact, she was only giving me the reason for her passing this problem along down the line, to the men, where they are allowed to counsel, apparently, and take care of this problem, that women can’t take care of for ourselves. Even though, we are, apparently, separate. But Equal.

And it makes me wonder, what can Equality possibly mean in that context? What can it possibly mean? Because that doesn’t look anything like any kind of equality that I’ve ever heard of.