A few days ago, I wrote a post proposing that all missions should make sisters eligible for mission leadership positions.  I put the post into queue to post later this month.  Today, the church announced new leadership positions for sister missionaries.  Yikes!  My post became obsolete before I could post it!  However, the church’s plan does differ from my suggestion that women be incorporated into the existing leadership structure.  Instead:

Each mission in the Church will organize a Mission Leadership Council that will include both elder (males) and sister (females) missionary leaders. The new mission leadership council will consist of the mission president and his wife, assistants to the president, zone leaders, and sister training leaders — a newly created role…Sister training leaders will continue to proselytise and will also spend time each week training and evaluating the needs of female missionaries. They will report directly to the mission president on the needs of sister missionaries. Additionally, the wives of mission presidents are now being asked to play an enhanced role in training and caring for sister missionaries, subject to their individual and family circumstances.

Here is the post I wrote before the announcement, plus new commentary in red about how the actual change differs from the change I would have proposed.

Read More

by Kelly Ann

(Pictures in this post are not to be used without permission.  I’m sharing them as I think they help illustrate what a mission with lots of Sisters can look like and a few of my other thoughts about the change in the missionary age limit as a returned missionary.)

My mission was unique. Without any sister specific destination like a visitor center, sister missionaries comprised somewhere around 25% of my mission in Southern Chile. There were probably about 40-50 Sisters to 180 to 200 missionaries for most of my mission. My mission president, and the one before him, specifically requested Sisters – with possibly as many as 60-70 at a time at the peak before I arrived (which in part decreased to President Hinckley’s infamous conference talk, but that would be a different story). My mission president said he requested Sisters because we were often more effective in the small towns and could get in doors the Elders could not. He told us we often baptized more Priesthood leaders and whole families.  Ok, technically we didn’t baptize, we taught people with the intent to be – but were encouraged to help our investigators make a connection with a member of the branch or ward who could perform the ordinance, which helped with retention after we left as well as took away the sting of having to ask an Elder to do it.

As consequence, I don’t wonder what a mission would look like with more Sisters – as discussed in response to this weekend’s announcement lowering the age limit on various blogs including here at the Exponent and ByCommonConsent.

I was in zones with more Sisters than Elders.

My mission had an “Hermana Asistente” who coordinated splits between Sisters and fielded Sister-specific questions in an area. The mission president’s wife put together a “conferencia de Hermanas” on a couple of occasions. We were allowed to contact her directly for health concerns (maybe too much information for some, but given the humidity of my mission – i.e. 200 inches of rain a year – vaginal yeast infections weren’t uncommon). But in fairness, the zone leaders and district leaders didn’t make a big deal out of Sister’s issues, not that we really had that many specific issues. I felt treated like an equal. The expectation to teach, to baptize, to reactivate, to encourage people to go to the temple, to give “bendiciones de hogar” (a prayer blessing the house as an introductory tool to the church, which we began with “having authority as a missionary”, rather than with “having the authority of the priesthood” as the Elders did) was the same.  Granted my mission wasn’t all rosy – it was very physically demanding in the foothills of the Andes and my major complaint looking back was that I never felt like I was doing enough when I was giving it my all (that would be a separate post) and the Elders sometimes drove me crazy regardless …

However, overall, I loved my mission. It changed my life. I went from being incredibly shy and soft-spoken to gaining confidence. I loved the people of Southern Chile. I loved the church. I loved feeling I could make a difference teaching investigators, training members, reaching out to inactives, and even just listening to people’s experiences. And to anyone who has asked, I have long recommended serving a mission to any woman that was interested even though I have been honest about some of the negative aspects as well. It thrills me that lowering the age requirement means that more women who may want to will consider going. And that more Sisters could serve in missions with ratios like mine – that the exception of my mission might become the rule.

If I had been able to serve a mission at 19, I would have. I knew at 16 that I wanted to serve a mission. It mad me mad that I had to wait. But also kind of glad that I could finish my degree and work a little first (I graduated early). I think my life experiences made me a better missionary.  However, it would have been a much easier transition to grad school if my upper division chemistry hadn’t been so rusty. I went because I felt called to.  I had a simple faith, passion for Christ, and – even if not fully acknowledging this fact – felt that if missionary was something that was so important that the men were expected to go, that I would too. I submitted my papers to enter the MTC, putting my availability date as my birthday and entered the first Wednesday after I turned 21.

Upon entering, I was surprised to learn of people who had been granted exceptions – missionaries who had their birthday in the MTC or children of mission presidents. But honestly, they were only a couple cases and I never thought much about it. So I was taken back again in this weekend’s announcement that so many 18 year olds had already been able to serve given country specific policies. President Monson, Elder Nelson, and Elder Holland all cited the exceptions as reason for making an universal policy.

It moved me to hear how many people had asked for exceptions – whether in countries like Britian which do not allow for an interruption in education or for those with military obligations. After all, I served in a country that has varied between having compulsory and voluntary service. The majority of the local Chilean Elders I knew were older due to obligatory military service at 18 at the time. In fact, in thinking about it now, I believe one of them requested a special consideration on the opposite side of the age spectrum leaving at 26. And while military service is now technically voluntary, after googling a little, I learned that last year Chile instituted a draft of 50000 young people. I imagine a cohort of them applying to go early on missions in order to balance that responsibility – whether to postpone it or to try to get out of it. The kicker being my understanding (which I acknowledge is limited) is that both women and men can be drafted, so that women have also probably been asking for the change. Going at 19 will help them – although I wish everyone had the option to go at 18. But it really makes me happy that people asking for change effected a great change and the cascade of changes that will likely follow.  Even if it shouldn’t have been revolutionary.  As TopHat mentioned in her comments on the earlier exponent post, I like seeing how the international church is changing the whole church.

However, in thinking about my mission, the thing I loved about serving was getting to know the diversity of Sisters present.  There were a few like me who went right at 21 – but most had made a conscious decision in their early 20s to go.  I served with life time members as well as new converts.  But what set my mission apart, was that we had a number of older Sisters.  It is often a forgotten fact that there is no age cutoff for women.  Men can only serve until they are 26, whereas our mission had women in their 50s, 60’s, and 70’s.  They brought with them wisdom of life.

In fact, I think another thing that set my mission apart was that so many of the Elders were older due to previous military service.  It actually disappoints me that the change could mean many are likely to go on missions when they are younger.  I hope people will still realize that there are options within the age limits.  I’d like to see the emphasis to go when you are ready and when you want to as mentioned in the press conference.  There should be no embarrassment for a man or a woman to leave at 25.  I’d also like to see more older sister missionaries.  They were some of the best missionaries I knew.

I want less homogeneity in the missionary program.  Perhaps it is because I want missionaries who recognize some of the problems with the church.  I want sisters who have had their feminist awakenings.  Because as much fun as it has been to reminisce about my mission, and realize I was lucky, I couldn’t go back on a mission in that I have become disillusioned with the church and specifically Joseph Smith.  I sometimes feel a little bit guilty about having preached a simplified portrayl of the church – even though it was my knowledge and belief then.  I hope that in the churches call for more missionaries, a reason stated for the age change, that diversity will still exist amongst missionaries even if their average age decreases.

But it is kind of ironic that while I want there to be missionaries with more knowledge and experience, I hesitate even returning to some of my areas in Chile on an impending vacation.   I don’t want to disillusion the people I knew by learning that their missionary is happily now borderline inactive.  But then part of me thinks it would be good for them to see a liberal feminist returned missionary to portray something not so homogenous – especially if it is otherwise not out there.  But then the next part of me thinks I’m simply not up for it.  That there are others better suited for the task. And I hope that there are.

Anyhow, these are just a few of my thoughts on my perception of the change.  While there has been lots of conversation already here, and throughout the bloggernacle, and media, I would love to hear more thoughts.  I’d also welcome any questions or comments on my perspective. 

[And yes, I realize you may notice in the photos that our attire was also somewhat unique - it was much too cold to only wear nylons.  If sister missionaries were allowed to wear pant suits, now that would be revolutionary .  Part of the reason I am sharing the pictures is to expand the missionary image in several different ways.]

Read More

Church Members as Ambassadors

President George Albert Smith noted that as the Church becomes more well known, “its members are esteemed for their virtues,” and critics “are quickly divested of their unjustified prejudices, by coming in direct contact with the Latter-day Saints in their daily lives. … They then judge us by our fruits, from personal observation, and such information, as they impart it, can have but one effect, and that most favorable to us.”¹

Smith observed that actually knowing members of our church dispels prejudice about the church. People who know us drop their misconceptions and instead judge us by our fruits—what we actually do.  This seems logical to me but I question Smith’s assertion that knowing a Mormon “can have but one effect.”  Depending on which Mormon you know, and how that particular Mormon behaves, you might draw different conclusions about the church. Sometimes, we Mormons, like anyone else, can be guilty of producing sour fruit.

Read More

I have always been a feminist on weekdays but not always on Sundays. My innate desire to promote equality in politics, business and family life has usually been encouraged.  In contrast, I learned to suppress any concerns about inequity at church because I was usually so quickly hushed. Over time, enough small and insignificant events accumulated that I realized that I was not just a feminist, I was a Mormon feminist; I longed for equality at church just as much as I wanted it in other spheres of life. Here are some of those moments that made me the Mormon feminist I am today.

Age 7: A recently returned missionary spoke to my Primary, wearing a beautiful dress in the style of the country where she had served. It was a revelation for me.  Girls can go on missions?  Why hadn’t anyone told me this before?  I decided I would serve a mission, too.

Age 12: About half of my Sunday School class members (all of the boys) spent each Sunday School hour shooting spit wads, knocking over chairs, tormenting the teacher and making fun of the better behaved class members (all of the girls). Strangely, God had recently selected these bullies to hold His priesthood and administer His sacrament, passing over all of the class members who seemed capable of reverence. As I ducked from the spit wads, I frequently wondered why God would make such an irrational selection.

Age 16:  I vented about the church youth calendar to my family as we ate Sunday dinner.  “This week, the Young Men are going boating and next week they will go camping.  Again.  The Young Women will be cleaning an old lady’s house.” My sister chimed in:  “And she has six cats.”

Age 20: My date nonchalantly explained that he hoped to find a wife who wasn’t as smart or spiritual as he was because that would make it easier for him to fulfill his priesthood duty to be leader in the home.  Hmm.  Did that mean that he considered me intellectually and spiritually weak enough to be worthy of going out with him?

Age 21: The Elders in my mission district returned from Priesthood Meeting and told us sister missionaries (accurately, I later verified) that President Hinckley, the very person who had signed my mission call and sent me to this part of the world, had been gossiping about sister missionaries behind their backs at the only meeting of General Conference that sisters were not invited to.

Age 26: My newlywed bliss was interrupted by a series of disturbing dreams that I was forced to share my new husband with some other woman in a polygamist marriage.

Age 30: My sister was removed from her position as seminary teacher for the offense of becoming pregnant within wedlock. When I expressed my shock that the Church Education System actively discriminates against mothers, another woman defended the policy, pointing out that we wouldn’t want youth exposed to working mothers.

Age 32: The day before the annual ward primary program, the bishop decided to exercise his right to make final decisions and cut several children out of the program.  They had been rehearsing their parts for three weeks, ever since the bishop approved the original script.

Age 35: I lobbied my bishopric and stake presidency to move the church Mother’s Lounge from a tiny, stinky closet to a more reasonable location where more than one woman could feed her baby at a time.  After two years, I prevailed.  I wondered if it would take two years to accomplish such a small feat if any of my leaders had ever lactated.

Read More

 

For about a year and a half, I regularly went mountain biking while wearing a skirt.  Why would I wear such an inappropriate costume for biking?  I was a Mormon missionary.

Modesty was a problem for me during my missionary days. Skirts flap around Marilyn Monroe-style on a bike.

Skirt damage was another issue. I shopped for skirts carefully: not so straight that I couldn’t pedal, but not so wide that the fabric would get caught in the gears—at least, not usually. Eventually, there would come the day when I would hit a pothole and my skirt would fly into the gears anyway, which would shred it to pieces or hopelessly stain it with oil.

To avoid exposing myself or destroying my clothes, sometimes I applied the adult diaper method to my skirts, wrapping them around my legs and pinning them. I’ll bet that was the dignified look Church Headquarters was going for when they set up the dress code. Anyhow, it wasn’t a full-proof solution.

I never wanted to give up my missionary bike. Bikes are good for missionary work; they get you from place to place faster than walking but keep you outdoors where you can meet people. As a bonus, biking creates a refreshing breeze that feels so good when the weather is hot.

However, bikes and skirts are clearly a bad combination, so what is a woman to do? Fortunately, just recently (in the late 1800′s), our foremothers discovered a brilliant new technology to address this problem: ladies’ pants.

Read More