EVE, ISIS, AND THE MOTHER OF GOD -- MORMON WOMEN AND THE PRIESTHOOD An Historical and Doctrinal Overview There is nothing more common in religious history, as attested in Frazer's classical study The Golden Bough , than the female goddess. Though recognized in early Hebrew religion, the female deity was proscribed among the Tribes of Israel following the Exodus, most probably as a purging reaction to the importance of female gods in the degenerate worship of the Egyptians. The concept never disappeared entirely, however, and the worship of Ishtar, or Astarte, the Isis of Egypt, and one of the entrenched female deities of the Near East, was habitually denounced by the prophets of the Old Testament.1 It was not however until the Protestant Reformation of the Sixteenth Century A.D. that the acceptance of the female in religion became almost totally suppressed in reaction to the excesses of Mariolatry in the Catholic Church, which practice, as much as anything, gave impulse to the Reformation. Today we seem to be experiencing a reaction to this reaction, as contemporary society experiences a blossoming of "liberated" theologians seeking to redress the balance, if negatively, by removing references to the male God in contemporary versions of both Old and New Testaments, as well as in prayer and hymn books -- at times even referring to deity as He/She in sermons and writings. As part of this movement, there is a demand on the part of women for ordination into the clergy, and a number or such ceremonies have taken place within the Episcopal Church as well as various smaller sects. In a recent split of the Catholic Church in the nation's capital, the schismatic leader has publicly announced that he will ordain women to his priesthood. At the same time we are observing the rebirth of witch cults whose members seem to believe the solution to the long Sectarian subordination of the female in contemporary religion justifies a return to some of the more degenerate and barbaric practices of the Dark Ages. From what source did these notions and forces arise? One of the common truths of human history is the power of cultural diffusion: i.e. the borrowing by adjoining peoples of concepts, technology, forms of war, social organization, and vocabulary, which are in turn passed on to even more remote neighbors. Linguists have traced the common grammatical and linguistic elements of the substantial group of Indo-European languages extending from Iran south into India, north into the steppes of Russia, and west to the shores of the Atlantic, to a small number of wandering tribes people originally located somewhere north of the Caspian Sea less than forty-five hundred years ago. There can be little serious doubt that the widespread acceptance of female divinities, together with the all-but-universal notions of Paradise and First Parents, derives from the role of Mother Eve in the earliest legends of humanity's common ancestors. Regrettably, it is not possible within the scope of this paper to review in detail the doctrine that Adam was that very Michael of the Preexistence who participated in the creation of the world as a member of the Trinity, being a God of Spirit before he was begotten with his sister Eve by the Great Elohim in the Garden to further the plan to make them the progenitors of a new generation of mankind 1 Fascinating confirmation of this has just been reported in a U.S. News and World Report article (April 17, 1995, p.68) which alludes to a recent archeological dig which turned up tablets with drawings and an inscription reading "May you be blessed by Yahweh and his Ashteroth". The U.S. News article reminds readers thats Ashteroth was a female deity of the time (an evident variant of Astarte). The article further asserts that the inscription raises the question whether ancient Israel considered that their deity Yahweh had a consort. A Professor Hoppe of Catholic Theological Union is reported as believing "this has opened for study an issue never before raised (except by Mormons. My note). And adds a vast new dimension to ancient Jewish life and religion (loc. cit. ). on this new world. Those interested in more foundation for the material discussed below may wish to refer to the paper Adam-God Revisited. The point of the present writing is to focus on the role of Eve, as sister and wife of Adam/Michael, similarly begotten by Elohim in the Garden and sealed to Adam under the New and Everlasting Covenant of Eternal Marriage by the power and authority of the Holy Priesthood after the Order of the Son of God. As such, Eve was herself one of the "noble and great ones" of the Preexistence especially selected, together with Adam/Michael, as worthy to become "the Mother of all living". Thus, not only by birth, but by marriage to Adam, through whom, as taught by Church leaders from Joseph Smith to Ezra Taft Benson, she shared (and, be it understood, to share is to possess , even if not to own or independently to control) her husband's priesthood office. Eve was thus doubly Goddess, both by birth and as a consequence of the priesthood she shared with her God-mate. As Adam and Eve left the Garden to beget posterity, they reigned over their numerous children in a growing family kingdom, which we understand is the only legitimate form of government, for some 920 years. As the offspring of this royal couple spread abroad, both their parents' form of marriage and government became widely diffused. With the passage of time, however, change -- not infrequently degenerate change -- crept into these usages. Apostasy from Adam's religious teachings occurred; and the role of Eve as Goddess/Priestess/Queen was corrupted as, at times the government of Adam was corrupted into tyrannous rule by conquest, ignoring the heaven-proclaimed law of common consent. Indeed, corrupt government seems to have been more the rule than the exception in world history. Eve as Goddess was replaced by man-made stand-ins of stone or brass; and her role as priestess as often as not degenerated into ritual prostitution, as in Egypt, Greece, and Babylon. Rulers, egotistically distorting the First Parents' legitimate Godhood, themselves claimed divine descent, unrighteously demanding worship from their subjects (see Daniel, Chapter 3, reflect on the more recent cautionary tale of William Tell and the worship demanded of him by the Duke of Burgundy, and read carefully Revelation 19:10 where the Angel of the Lord forbids John to kneel before him, saying, "See thou do it not: I am thy fellow servant ... worship God...." Priesthood is not a private possession bringing personal honor to the holder. It is the authority of God to transact His affairs as directed by those holding the appropriate keys and receiving direct instruction from Him. Even the stolid and worldly Romans, despite their sound republican beginnings, in the later stages of Empire adopted consanguine marriage and succumbed to the fatal heresy of apotheosizing the Imperial Couple, initially only after death to be sure, and at first only the greatest of the Caesarian family, but latterly even during the lifetimes of unworthy Caesars (see Robert Graves Claudius the God ). I have written elsewhere regarding the importance of the sacred temple drama as a divine teaching tool designed, among other important purposes, to retard corruption of the saving doctrines of the Plan of Salvation (see Temples, Time, and Teaching ). The Mortal God heresy, like most heresies, is based on the grain of truth remaining from half remembered remnants of temple ritual following periods of deep apostasy, further distorted by folk memory with the passage of time. The related Divine Ruler heresy has proved so durable a notion (presumably because of its appeal to royal egos as well as its usefulness in governing the superstitious and deferential) that it has persevered into relatively recent history: examples being the Stuarts of England and Bourbons of France, who insisted on their Divine Rights as Kings until the 17th Century, and the Mikados of Japan until 1945! It must even be noted that a not dissimilar doctrinal distortion occurred following the Restoration when James J. Strang and Lyman Wight, each of whom, grossly misunderstanding the temple endowment, took it upon himself to create a personal kingdom independent of the Church, the first in upstate Michigan, the second in Texas ( see related paper Gnostics, Cathars, and Heretics of the Restoration).. It is a matter of historical record that, not only in the Ancient World, but from the Middle Ages well into modern times, both kings and nobles more often than not married relatives as a matter of preference. In-breeding was so common among European royalty in the last century that the offspring or grandchildren of Queen Victoria sat on, or shared, the thrones of half the nations of Europe as recently as seventy years ago. If Eve, then, was Goddess, is it any wonder that as the fact-become- tradition-tending-towards-legend, was passed on -- with the inevitable changes and corruption which affect any tradition with the passage of time -- the notion of loving, influential female gods took root in almost all cultures. We thus observe the rise of Gaia, goddess of the earth; Demeter, goddess of the harvest; Athena, goddess of wisdom; Diana, goddess of the hunt; Selene, goddess of the moon; and Isis, chief goddess of the Egyptians, (being elsewhere known as Astarte, Ashtoreth, Artemis, or Ishtar), the Great Mother of the Eastern Mediterranean and corrupter of the true religion given to Adam, Noah, and Abraham and (in part) restored by Moses -- all being evident derivatives of the Eve archetype. This historical overview is intended essentially to lay a foundation for the discussion that follows, attempting to clear away some Protestant shibboleths about Eve and Mary. It is to be noted that Catholic tradition has in some limited respects preserved somewhat more basic truth about Mary than other Christian denominations -- though the doctrine of the virgin birth and her role of Heavenly Queen became so corrupted in practice following the Great Apostasy that during the Reformation these partial truths were tossed out together with the false traditions of men which had crept into the church over the Centuries. Mary: Handmaiden of the Lord and "Mother of God" The New Testament in setting forth the genealogy of Christ, traces his lineage though both Joseph and Mary, showing the young Jesus to have been legitimate heir to the throne of Israel. Fear of his legitimate claim to rule was not only the determining element in Herod's slaughter of the innocents, but in Pilate's decision to allow the will of the mob to be fulfilled at the end of Passover Week (see Robert Graves' King Jesus ). What is relevant here, however, is that Mary was descended from a long line of elect forebears. She was a direct descendent of Noah (the Second Adam); Abraham (Father of the Faithful, than to whom no greater blessings have ever been promised); Jacob (He who prevailed with God), as well as Eve, Sarah, Leah, and other noble and great wives of these great priesthood-bearing men. If, then, as Latter-day Saints we accept that Joseph Smith is "mingling with Gods" we must be equally persuaded to believe that other noble and great religious leaders of the past are similarly now partakers of the divine nature, together with their virtuous spouses. And Mary, chosen in the Preexistence as one of the noble and great ones qualified to become the "Handmaiden of the Lord" and thereby mother of the Only Begotten in the Flesh, the very Great Jehovah of the Preexistence himself, must clearly be at least of the same spiritual rank as Eve, wife of Jehovah's brother and Co-Creator Michael. It should thus be not at all surprising that the Saints of the Primitive Church, being aware of the doctrines laid out above, and being even closer to these events in time, should have accorded exceptional honor to Mary. As mother of Jesus/Jehovah, it would not have been at all inappropriate to have considered her in sacred conversation the Mother of God, just as well-informed Latter-day Saints sometimes speak of sacred matters in private which we would not consider mentioning among unbelievers. Indeed, the first edition of the Book of Mormon referred to Eve as "The Mother of God" -- though this reference was subsequently edited out for reasons unanswered by LDS Church history. The tradition of the Assumption aside, it is certain that Mary, as with every elect woman who righteously completes her earthly probation, is undoubtedly associating with her ancestors Eve, Sarah (who also in the Adamic tradition was her husband's sister [see Genesis 20:12]), and Leah, all as Queens and Priestesses in Heaven. There can thus be seen to be a basis not only in Catholic tradition carried over from pre-apostate times, but in Mormon theology to accept Mary both as "Mother of God" and "[a] Queen of Heaven". Indeed, Mormon doctrine even comes close to the Catholic dogma of the immaculate conception: Heber C. Kimball taught that "Mary, the mother of Jesus was a pure woman, designed and ordained to bear the son of God because no woman in her sins was worthy" (JD 4:277). Of course most Latter-day Saints, unfamiliar with deeper doctrine, will probably continue to prefer to avoid these terms much abused by excesses during the preceding long period of apostasy, and rightly so, since as we've seen, only the Father is to be worshiped -- if always in the Name of the Son. A Note of Caution In considering these matters, it is important always to be on guard, understanding that these doctrines, tracing back to Mother Eve, while essential to exaltation when correctly understood, are not saving principles and are subject to powerful forces which tend to distortion and even degeneracy. Indeed, it seems that when the concept of female priesthood becomes involved with rule and presidency, disregarding the "keys of the priesthood" as controlled through revelation from on high, forces are released that often become impossible to control and destructive of society -- perhaps because of the explosive nature of sex in male-female relationships. (For one such negative example, reflect on how the Israelites, coming out of bondage, not yet having eschewed the worship of Egyptian goddesses, and having not yet developed the self-restraint imposed by desert life, gave way to orgiastic rites as soon as Moses left them to converse with God on Sinai. See also the note on Sonia Johnson below for a contemporary example). It is perhaps for this reason, among others, that the Lord has revealed these principles only when he has a righteous people prepared to accept them. The Restoration of All Things: Modern Women and the Priesthood It was as part of the "restoration of all things" during the introduction of the Dispensation of the Fullness of Times, as the Prophet began to be instructed regarding sex as an eternal attribute of man, that he began to elaborate in a series of public sermons and private discussions the balanced and correct doctrine of Patriarchy and Matriarchy. Shortly after the arrival of the Saints in Nauvoo, as things settled down a bit and he was given time to ponder and inquire, and begin to put the Church in order according to the divine plan, the Relief Society was organized "according to the order of the priesthood" with its own officers paralleling priesthood quorum leadership, i.e. with a President, two Councilors, and a Recording Secretary. A century and a half later, the Relief Society is the largest Auxiliary in the Church, bigger even than the combined Melchizedek quorums. In the words of the Prophet Joseph on March 30, 1842 when the Relief Society was organized: "The keys of the kingdom are . . . to be given to them [the women of the Church] that they may be able to detect everything false, as well as to the Elders. . . I now turn the key to you in the name of God." A year later, Presiding Patriarch Hyrum Smith, blessed Leonora Cannon Taylor, with the words, "You shall be blest with your portion of the Priesthood which belongeth to you, that you may be set apart for your Anointing and your endowment." Nor was such understanding restricted to Joseph and Hyrum Smith and the Nauvoo period of Church history. On June 28, 1874 no other than Brigham Young preached, "Now brethren, the man that honors his Priesthood, the woman that honors her Priesthood, will receive an everlasting inheritance in the kingdom of God". And this unequivocal statement, openly recognizing that worthy LDS women shared the priesthood, was confirmed by Presiding Bishop Edward Hunter in a sermon of December 1, 1877. Said Bishop Hunter concerning LDS women, "They have the Priesthood: a portion of the Priesthood rests upon the sisters." And five months later on May 28, 1878 Patriarch Joseph Young, Senior President of the First Council of Seventy blessed Brigham Young's daughter Zina Young Card in the following words: "These blessings are yours, the blessings and the power according to the holy Melchizedek Priesthood you received in your Endowments. . . ." An equally unequivocal assertion of women's equality of priesthood blessings was contained in an 1888 statement by Apostle Franklin D. Richards: "I ask any and everybody present who have received their endowments, whether he be a brother Apostle, Bishop, High Priest, Elder, or whatever office he may hold in the Church, what blessings did you receive, what ordinance, what power, intelligence, sanctification or grace did you receive that your wife did not partake of with you? . . . I hold that a faithful wife has certain gifts and blessings and promises with her husband, which she cannot be deprived of except by transgression of the holy order of God." (Woman's Exponent 6 [1 Sept. 1888]:54). In 1896 however, the First Presidency under President Woodruff, and the Quorum of the Twelve, decided that women should no longer have their own prayer circles or participate with their husbands in prayer circle meetings outside the temple. This same year Apostle Franklyn D. Richards nevertheless confirmed to the Relief Society Conference that the sisters still had the right "to rebuke disease in the name of the Lord . . . [and in doing so to employ the words] by virtue of the Holy Anointing which I have received." As late as 1901 the Presidency of the Relief Society was still being sustained in office by the Priesthood in Solemn Assembly with other General Authorities. But by 1904 Emmeline B. Wells as writing in the Woman's Exponent of which she was Editor, "Aunts Presendia [H. Kimball] & Zina [D. H. Young] used to interpret dreams for us, but now there is no one to do it". But the notion that women share priesthood was still vigorously alive as late as 1945 when the Deseret News (April 21 issue) announced that due to a ward's lack of deacon-age boys, the bishop had officially called young girls age twelve to fourteen to perform such functions of deacons as collecting fast offerings and passing the sacrament. By 1947 however, a Quorum of the Twelve letter informed the general Relief Society Presidency that women should henceforth seek blessings of health from male priesthood holders and not from other women -- ending more than a century of women's anointing and sealing blessings of health upon other women (and sometimes upon men). By 1967 there was a Priesthood Bulletin prohibiting women from praying in sacrament meeting! Clearly the Brethren, who hold all the keys of the Priesthood, have every right to alter policy decisions about who is to exercise (or not exercise) the keys of priesthood. The distinction between authority and the freedom to exercise authority is critical. While being ordained to the High Priesthood qualifies an individual to preside as Bishop or Stake President, it does not automatically bestow the right to do so unless and until openly endowed with the keys of office by higher authority and sustained by the congregation over which one is to preside. Nor, in the contrary case, does not having been given such keys diminish one's priesthood authority. Thus, having had some of the keys of their priesthood withdrawn does not diminish a worthy LDS woman's possession of basic priesthood authority. Nor, let it be said, her ability to exercise such keys as the Presidency continue to allow -- e.g. participation in the temple ceremony, serving as Visiting Teachers, and presiding over the Relief Society, the Young Women's Organization, and the Primary -- the three largest organizations in the Church; or presiding in the home in the absence of her husband, even in the presence of the highest non-family male authority -- or Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthood. For the time being, they seem only to lack the keys to participate in the more outward elements, for example sitting on the stand as a presiding officer (though, as noted, the do preside over the three largest Auxiliaries of the Church). . To recur to the Prophet Joseph's instructions at the time the Relief Society was first organized, it was made known that every task carried out in the Universe must be done by authorization under the governing direction and by divine command of the Father to an appropriate servant, all actions being performed however in the name of the Son under the doctrine of investiture. No individual, no matter how exalted, is to assume or take credit for any work done by the authority of the priesthood, which is not, after all, performed by the authority or in the interest of the possessor, but by "the power and authority of the Holy Priesthood after the Order of the Son of God". As previously cited, even the Angel who appeared to John, forbade him to kneel for fear of violating the divine injunction under which "amen to the priesthood" of anyone who ignores this strict rule of priesthood subordination. It was at the same time also made known that women are to be just as actively engaged in the work of the Kingdom as men, if in somewhat different priesthood callings (which, as we have seen, have varied over time, not only as shown in Old and New Testament times, but in the hundred and sixty-five years since the Restoration). Sex, the Prophet Joseph taught, is an eternal principal and there is a necessity for mortals, as Gods in embryo in both male and female form, to prepare and prove themselves worthy for the work of the Eternities, Gods and Angelic Servants of both sexes, being Beings who have successfully passed through their mortal probation during previous stages of Creation -- a doctrine distorted through earlier ages by the substitution of Isis, Astarte, and various other female deities to the virtual eclipsing of the Father as Divine Ruler of the Universe and the Son as His heir. The foregoing sometimes negative considerations may be among the reasons why this marvelously beautiful doctrine has in some Dispensations been deliberately left unrevealed, just as the Lord has not always and in all circumstances commanded His People to practice the Order of Enoch or plural marriage, much being dependent on the condition of the world and the faithfulness of His People at a given time. Even following the mission of the Great Jehovah himself, who as Jesus of Nazareth, Savior and Messiah, the Master Teacher, who introduced the Dispensation of the Meridian of Time in person, these doctrines were given an apostate spin -- on that occasion turning into the extreme adoration of the Virgin. Indeed, God may have encountered some difficulty during certain epochs of deep apostasy in finding leaders with sufficient courage and tenacity to introduce this knowledge, or to keep the people from immediately corrupting it into one or another of its degenerate forms. A given generation may have proved so hard of heart and stiff of neck that even valiant, foreordained leaders who might have otherwise have been eligible to grow up in Zion as "lambs in the stall", but who had volunteered for service behind the lines, were found in the event to have been so affected by their times that they could not succeed. At least we are informed that it is possible for the foreordained to refuse or fail to live up to a calling. It cannot be for no reason that a procedure for resolving such a problem is included in the Doctrine and Covenants (Section 107:82). In any event, it is evident that a balanced understanding of these sacred and essential, but powerfully explosive doctrines, was absent from the earth, until the Restoration fifteen hundred years later when the time came for the Dispensation of the Fullness of Times. This Dispensation, preparatory to the Second Coming of the Messiah, heralds the "Time of the restitution of all things which God has spoken by the mouths of all his holy prophets since the world began" (Act s 3:21). These magnificent doctrines, essential to mans' exaltation and the saving of the World at Christ's Coming, were given glorious poetic form by Eliza R. Snow, enabling Latter-day Saints to know through "the key of knowledge" that in addition to our Father in Heaven, "we've a Mother there". With the restoration of this knowledge, the sisters of the Church become charged with developing and perfecting the attributes of the Heavenly Mother, just as male members are to strive until they are partakers of the Divine Nature of the Heavenly Father, becoming together "heirs and joint heirs with Christ" who is, severally, our Elder Brother, and Father by adoption and, as such, the legitimate Divine Ruler of this generation of Creation. Based on these great truths, Joseph taught that women share the priesthood of their husbands (and if, as already noted, sharers then possessors , even if they do not own or independently control priesthood -- as properly understood none does). As part of their authorized duties they are to visit the homes of their sisters as Visiting Teachers to "instruct and look after the welfare of the Saints" just as their husbands are called to do as Home Teachers -- something a later President of the Church Joseph F. Smith might have called "a distinction without a difference". As additional priesthood tasks, Relief Society sisters under the direction of the First Presidency, in an earlier period engaged in "washings for the sick" and the anointing and blessing of sick children in the absence of their husbands who were often away from home for extended periods on foreign missions. The former practice has dwindled, together with the practice of rebaptism as symbol of re-dedication upon gathering to Zion, presumably as a result of the spread of organized stakes to all corners of the world. But the laying on of hands by priesthood-sharing mothers which was widespread in earlier generations of Latter-day Saints endures among not a few into the present era. While current Church leadership insists that such blessings by female members are to be viewed as nothing more than "prayers of the faithful", this may be just another example of "a distinction without a difference", as any child feeling the healing influence of his mother's hands exercising the priesthood she shares (and thus jointly possesses) with her husband in his or her behalf, can attest. At the same time the Lord has, as noted, given women the actual keys to preside over the three largest organizations in the Church -- the Relief Society, the Primary, and the Young Women's Program. He's authorized them, again as noted, to do Visiting Teaching, where probably more, and more effective contact takes place than by all the Home Teaching accomplished by the brethren; and for those with the fortitude to step up to their priesthood privileges, to bless their homes and their children in the absence of their Helpmate. Not understanding these truths, a regrettable few LDS women, the most notable of whom was Sonia Johnson, have lent themselves to agitation for "priesthood". Perhaps it should be more widely known that Sister Sonia was carefully instructed in these matters both by her Bishop and the Stake President who reviewed her excommunication. Sonia didn't want the priesthood, which she already shared with her husband, she wanted the keys possessed by the presiding authorities which control the functioning of the priesthood and which at present restrict women to the callings determined by the Lord as appropriate, as outlined above. She did not, and seems not yet, to comprehend that even male holders of the priesthood cannot put themselves forward for office, but must await the will of the Lord as revealed by revelation and the call or assignment by those who have been given possession of these keys, themselves exercising them only under the direction of God. Sonia didn't want to visit the sick and comfort the afflicted, nor to preside in Relief Society, nor bless her children, nor officiate as priestess in the Holy Temple of the Most High. She wanted to sit on the stand publicly to be seen of men, failing to understand that "when one undertakes to gratify one's pride, one's vain ambition, or to exercise control . . . in any degree of unrighteousness . . . Amen to the priesthood or authority of that [person]. D & C 121:37. It was Sonia Johnson's "hidden agenda" that was her downfall. Unlike their Catholic and Protestant counterparts, there is no need for LDS women, to agitate for the priesthood. As has been carefully argued, THEY'VE ALREADY GOT IT! and have had it SINCE THE RESTORATION. They've been organized in their own ward-based proto-quorums just like their Elder and High Priest counterparts for nearly a hundred and fifty years, though this seems to be one the best kept secrets of all time. The sisters even preceded their male counterparts in identifying the merit and efficiency of not compartmentalizing their meetings by the priesthood office they are assimilated to by reason of their husbands, choosing rather to order meetings by age group and interest, a wisdom the male priesthood is belatedly adopting. While the Lord, under his formula for separating the keys for exercising presidency from the power authoritatively to act when properly given a priesthood task to accomplish, has chosen, at least in present circumstances , to focus the primary priesthood function of women as that of being "mothers in Zion" -- a calling He apparently considers considerably more essential and time-consuming than putting in an eight hour day at the office, presiding over a Ward Sacrament meeting for an hour, or attending a Ward Council once a week. Lest this still leave some sisters unsatisfied and asking "what else is new?", the clinching role of women in the priesthood ordinances of the Temple must not be overlooked. Why the role of woman as Temple Priestess is not better known to Church members has always been puzzling. Perhaps it is because as a people we've been cautioned about speaking outside the House of the Lord about the details of the sacred drama and holy ordinances carried out within its walls. In this, perhaps we've overreacted, not only protecting the detail of the sacred covenants, as intended, but lending unintended and unnecessary mystery to the purpose and meaning of temples. The New Testament (John 2:36) is not hesitant to identify one Anna as a temple servant and prophetess (undoubtedly a King James mistranslation for priestess ). No less than Apostle, Melvin J. Ballard, wrote an entire book explaining in some detail the nature of the temple and its ordinances and containing color photographs of just about every ceremonial room therein. Women take part in baptisms by proxy in furtherance of the great genealogical labors which are performed in the temple. They also perform as priestesses the sacred preparatory washings and annointings and clothings in the garment of the Holy Priesthood which was given to Adam and Eve when they left the Garden. Thereafter they take upon themselves, with no distinction from male priesthood holders, the Oath and Covenant of the Holy Priesthood after the Order of the Son of God, as revealed in the Doctrine and Covenants 84:33-41 , preparatory to being endowed with the sacred signs and tokens which will enable them to return to their Heavenly Father and Mother at the end of their mortal probation if they fulfil faithfully the obligations of faith and service they have committed themselves to. What more priestly than all this? Finally, it is not inappropriate in discussing women and the priesthood to conclude with the reminder that women, as priestesses and full sharers of priesthood authority with their husbands, have not only been accorded the keys to temple work, but are encouraged to exercise their priesthood regularly in the most holy and sacred rites of the High Priesthood. If an LDS woman believes herself deprived of priesthood it can only be because she chooses not to recognize it or to righteously exercise it. If sister Sonia wasn't satisfied with this it wasn't because of lack of knowledge. Both her bishop and stake president made sure she understood in detail what she was forsaking in her insistence that the kind of priesthood she wanted was one without the necessity of "keys" -- or where she held all the keys herself without regard to the constraints of divine initiative which must govern all exercise of priesthood authority. Why Doesn't the Church Speak Out More Loudly About this Doctrine? Some have wondered why the Church doesn't give this doctrine more currency in Conference addresses, doctrinal manuals, and missionary teaching materials. One has to go back to the Journal of Discourses the Documentary History of the Church and other early sermons to piece these doctrinal comments into a coherent whole. Better knowledge of the role of women and the priesthood would not only quiet the concerns of many intelligent and inquiring LDS women and girls, both covenant born and convert, it would also make known to the world that the Church of the Fullness of Times leads the way in women's participation in it's highest and most sacred rites as well as in its commitment to strong families, higher education, extended life expectancy as a result of the Word of Wisdom, and sane social life. By hiding our light under a bushel we've allowed ourselves to be placed in a corner over our opposition to the meretricious Equal Rights Amendment proposal, whose only contribution to the social order would apparently be to remove women' option not to be drafted for combat in the next Vietnam or Korea -- since they've already achieved the vote, equal pay for equal work (even if the non-economic "comparable pay" issue is still around for discussion), anti-harassment legislation, access to the Service Academies, and the possibility of volunteering for combat (viz . Panama and the Gulf Action).