A Gift Given a Gift Taken

8/3/2019 A Gift Given a Gift Taken

1/10

W ashing, Anointing, and Blessing theSick Am ong M ormon W omenA MORMON HISTORIAN TRACES CHANGES IN THE PRACTICE

Editors NoteThis article is taken from a more extensive essay, "G ifts of the Spirit:Womens Share," to be pub.lis.hed soon i~1 a collection of essays edited byLavina Fielding Anderson and Maureen Ursenbach Beecher. J-he ]arg~rwork, in ad dition to the practice of washing and anointing, deals with otheraspect:; of womens involvement in the spiritual gifts of healing, speaking intongues, prophecy, etc., from 183 0 to the present. The au thor is indd~ted toVella N. Evans and C arol Cornwall Mad~:en f~r sharing some of theirextensive research and to Lavina Fielding A nderson tor her able assistan~-e i~putting the material together.

Linda King Newell

FOR members of the modern Church of Jesus Christof Latter, Tday Saints; the term "washing andanointing is synonymous with the initiatoryordinances of the temple endowment. Joseph Smith firstintroduced the practice to male members of the LDSchurch in the Kirtland Temple; he included womenwhen he gave the endowment and sealing ordinances tohis select "Quorum of the Anointed" in Nauvoo.~ By thetime the Mormons had established a refuge in the GreatBasin, washing and anointing had also been combined

with healing. Although it grew out of the templeordinances in Nauvoo, tlhe practice by women wascarried on outside the temple. Even after theestablishment of the Endowment House in Salt Lake in1855 and later the dedication of the St. George, Manti,

and Logan temples, the ordinance took place both withinthe confines of those sacred structures and in theprivacy of individual homes. This paper will focus on thelatter practice. These washings and anointings v,~-ereclearly done in connection with "administering to thesick." The wording took different forms as the occa:siondemanded. One of the most common uses of thewashing and anointing blessing came as womenadministered to each other pcior to childbirth.That women could and did participate in blessing andhealing the sick was already a clearly established andofficially sanctioned fact by the time the Saints hadestablished a refuge in the Great Basin. Women likSarah Leavitt and Edna Rogers left ~ecords of theiexperiences with healing others in Kirtland.x In Nauvothe Prophet Joseph Smith not only formed the RelieSociety as an essential part of the Church, but he alsointroduced the ceremony of the temple endowmentincluding washings and anoir~tings. With the coming ofthe Relief Society the women had .an organizatiothrough which they manifested the gifts of the spirit. Ofthis period, Susa Young Gates, a daughter of BrighamYoung, wrote: "The privileges and powers outlined bythe Prophet in those first meetings [of the ReliefSociety] have never been granted to women in fu~ll evenyet." Then Susa asked, "Did those women, do you and I,live so well as to be worthy of them all?3There is considerable evidence within the minutes o

Sunstone/16


2/10

the Nauvoo Relief Society meetings to suggest thatJoseph Smith seemed to envision the Relief Society as anindependent organization for women parallel to thepriesthood organization for men.4 Yet both seemed tocome under the aegis of the priesthood as a power fromGod, not as an administrative entity.The women themselves saw their organization asmore than a charitable society. Spiritual gifts such asspeaking in tongues and healing the sick were not onlydiscussed in their meetings but the sisters openlypracticed them. With Josephs approval, Emma and hercounselors laid hands on the sick and blessed them thatthey might be healed. The fifth time the Relief Societyconvened, Sarah Cleveland invited the sisters to speakfreely, and women stood one at a time in this testimonymeeting. Sister Durfee was among those who spoke.She "bore testimony to the great blessing she receivedwhen administered to after the last meeting by EmmaSmith and [her] Counselors Cleveland and Whitney,she said she never realized more benefit through anadministration." She added that she had been healed and"thought the sisters had more faith than the brethren."Following the meeting, Sarah Cleveland and ElizabethWhitney administered to another Relief Society sister,Mrs. Abigail Leonard, "for the restoration of health."5

In the intervening week, someone apparentlyreported to Joseph that the women were laying theirhands on the sick and blessing them. His reply to thequestion of the propriety of such acts was simple. Hetold the women in the next meeting "there could be noevil in it, if God gave his sanction by healing.., therecould be no more sin in any female laying hands on thesick than in wetting the face with water." He alsoindicated that there were sisters who were ordained toheal the sick and it was their privilege to do so. "If thesisters should have faith to heal," he said, "let all holdtheir tongues."~In 1857 Mary Ellen Kimball recorded her visit to a sickwoman in company with Presindia, her sister wife. Theywashed and anointed Susannah, cooked her dinner, andwatched her "eat pork and potatoes" with a gratifyingappetite. "I felt to rejoice with her for I shall never forgetthe time when I was healed by the power of God throughfaith in him which power has again been restored withthe priesthood" (a phrase which indicates a distinction inMary Ellens mind).

But after I returned home I thought of the instructions Ihad received from time to time that the priesthood wasnot bestowed upon woman. I accordingly asked Mr.[Heber C.] Kimball if women had a right to wash andanoint the sick for the recovery of their health or is itmockery in them to do so. He replied inasmuch as theyare obedient to their husbands, they have a right toadminister in that way in the name of the Lord JesusChrist but not by authority of the priesthood invested inthem for that authority is not given to woman.

Mary Ellen then noted an argument that would calmapprehensions for the next four decades: "He also saidthey might administer by the authority given to theirhusbands in as much as they were one with theirhusband."7At the same time, strong official encouragement forwomen to develop and use their spiritual powers isevident. Brigham Young, speaking in the Tabernacle on14 November 1869, scolded both men and women fornot improving, themselves. The example he cited was ofa sick child. Why do you not live so as to rebuke

disease?" he demanded. "It is your privilege to do sowithout sending for the Elders." He laid down somepractical advice; if the child is ill of a fever or of an upsetstomach, treat those symptoms by all means, beware oftoomuch medicine, and remember that prevention isbetter than cure. He ended by addressing himselfspecifically to mothers: "It is the privilege of a mother tohave faith and to administer to her child; this she can doherself, as well as sending for the Elders to have thebenefit of their faith."8 Having enough faith to heal wasclearly, for Brother Brigham, "practical religion" likehaving enough food on hand.The year before in Cache Valley, Elder Ezra T. Bensonhad called on all the women who had been ordained towash and anoint to exercise their powers to rebuke anunspecified disease which so destructively coursed itsway through the valley.9 This record neither identifiesthe ordained women nor who ordained them. It only saidthey were "ordained to wash and anoint." ZinaHuntington Youngs journal mentions several healings.On Joseph Smiths birthday in 1881, she washed andanointed one woman "for her health" and administeredto another "for her hearing." She remembered theProphets birthday and reminisced about the days inNauvoo when she was one of his plural wives: "I have

JOSEPH INDICATED THAT THERE WERESISTERS WHO WERE ORDAINED TO HEALTHE SICK AND IT WAS THEIR PRIVILEGETO DO SO.

practiced much with My Sister Presendia Kimball whilein Nauvoo & ever since before Joseph Smiths death. Heblest Sisters to bless the sick." Three months later inMarch 1890: "I went to see Chariton [her son] &administered to him, felt so sad to see him suffer .... "The next year she notes with satisfaction hearing anaddress by Bishop Whitney in the Eighteenth Wardwherein he "blest the Sisters in having faith toadminister to there own families in humble faith notsaying by the Authority of the Holy priesthood but inthe name of Jesus Christ .... "~0Still, healing by women caused some confusion; thisquiet, routine practice on the local level occasion.allyraised questions which, when answered publicly byChurch leaders or the Relief Society, seemed to start aripple of uneasiness which, sooner or later, set offanother inquiry. Church leaders began to issue generalcautions about women blessing the sick. Angus Cannon,president of the Salt Lake Stake, included the followingin his answer to a question about women holding thepriesthood: "Women could only hold the priesthood inconnection with their husbands; man held thepriesthood independent of woman. The sisters have aright to anoint the sick, and pray the Father to heal them,and to exercise that faith that will prevail with God; butwomen must be careful how they use the authority ofthe priesthood in administering to the sick."~ ~ Two yearslater on 8 August 1880, John Taylors address on "TheOrder and Duties of the Priesthood" reaffirmed thatwomen "hold the Priesthood, only in connection withtheir husbands, they being one with their husbands."~2

September-October/17


3/10

A circular letter sent from Salt Lake on that October"to all the authorities of the Priesthood and Latter-daySaints" described the organization of the Relief Society,its composition, its purposes, the qualifications for itsofficers, and their duties. The letter includes a sectioncalled "The Sick and Afflicted":It is the privilege of all faithful women and laymembers of the Church, who believe in Christ, toadminister to all the sick or afflicted in their respectivefamilies, either by the laying on of hands, or by theanointing with oil in the name of the Lord: but theyshould administer in these sacred ordinances, not byvirtue and authority of the priesthood, but by virtue oftheir faith in Christ, and the promises made to believers:and thus they should do in all their ministrations.13

It seems clear that the First Presidency was answeringone question: anointing and blessing the sick is not anofficial function of the Relief Society since any faithfulmember may perform this action. However, byspecifying womens right to administer to the sick "intheir respective families," the Church leaders raised

"WHY DO YOU NOT LIVE SO AS TOREBUKE DISEASE?" BRIGHAM YOUNGDEMANDED. "IT IS YOUR PRIVILEGE TODO SO WITHOUT SENDING FOR THEELDERS."another question: what about .administering to thoseoutside the family circle? They gave no answer,although the practice of calling :for the elders or callingfor the sisters had certainly been established.

Another question also bear:s on the topic: "Is itnecessary for sisters to be set apart to officiate in thesacred ordinances of washing, anointing, and laying onof hands in administering to the sick?" Eliza R. Snowused the columns of the Womans Exponent in 1884 toanswer:

It certainly is not. Any and all sisters who honor theirholy endowments, not only have the right, but shouldfeel it a duty whenever cadled upon to administer to oursisters in these ordinances, which God has graciouslycommitted to His daughters as well as to His sons; andwe testify that when administered and received in faithand humility they are accompanied with all mightypower.Inasmuch as G od our Father has revealed these sacredordinances and committed them to His Saints, it is notonly our privilege but our imperative duty to apply themfor the relief of human suffering.Eliza Snow in 1884 then echoed the language of JosephSmith in his April 28, 1842 instructions to the ReliefSociety: "thousands can testify that God has sanctionedthe administration of these ordinances [of healing thesick] by our sisters with the manifestation of His healinginfluence."~4In answering the question of who should "officiate inthe sacred ordinances" Eliza Snows language isinstructive. By limiting its performance to those whohave been endowed, she definitely places the source oftheir authority under the shelter of those ordinances inthe temple. In other words, :;he saw washing and

anointing the sick as an ordinance that could and did takeplace outside the sacred confines of the temple. Women,through their endowment, had both the authority andobligation to perform them.Two differing points of view were now in print. ElizaSnow and the First Presidency agreed that the ReliefSociety had no monopoly on the ordinance oadministration by and for women. The First Presidency,however, implied that the ordinance should be limited tthe womans family without specifying any requiremenbut faithfulness. Eliza Snow,. on the other hand, saidnothing of limiting administrations to the famiilyindeed, the implication is clear that anyone in need of ablessing should receive it--but said that only wo~nenwho have been endowed may officiate.As the washings and anointing continued, womenattending Relief Society conference in the LoganTabernacle in 1886 heard a Sister Tenn Young urgethem: "I wish to speak of the :great privilege given to usto wash and to anoint the sick and suffering of our sex. Iwould counsel every one who expects to become aMother to have these ordinances administered by somegood faithful sister." She later gave instructions how ishould be done. Her counsel was endorsed by Mary AnnFreeze who "said she attended to this and the curse tobring forth in sorrow was almost taken away.~:5But doubts kept surfacing among women whosedesire for approval from their presiding brethreninevitably led to questions of propriety..Answers varied,however, depending on who provided them.In 1888 Emm eline B. Wells, editor of the Exponent . a n dsoon to be president of the Relief Society, sent WilfordWoodruff a list of questions on the topic: of washing .andanointings. Her questions, and his response follow:

First: Are sisters justified in administering theordinance of washing and anointing previous toconfinements to those who have received theirendowments and have married men outside of theChurch?Second: Can anyone who has not had t]hei~:endowm ents thus be administered to by the sisters if sheis a faithful Saint in good standing and has not yet hadthe opportunity of going I:o the temple for theordinances?To begin with I desire to say that the ordinance ofwashing and anointing is one that should only beadministered in Temples or other holy places which arededicated for the purpose of giving endowments to theSaints. That ordinance might not be administered to anyone whether she has received or has not received herendowments, in any other place or under any othercircumstances.But I imagine from your questions that you refer to apractice that has grown up among the sisters of washingand anointing sisters who are approaching theirconfinement. If so, this is not, strictly speaking,, anordinance, unless it be done under the direction of thepriesthood and in connection with the. ordinance oflaying on of bands for the restoration of the sick.There ~s no impropriety in sisters washing andanointing their sisters in this way, under thecircumstances you describe; but it should be understoodthat they do this, not as members of the priesthood, butas members of the Church, exercising faith for, andasking the blessings of the Lord upon, their sisters, jsutasking the blessings of the Lord upon their sisters, just asthey and every member of the Church, might do inbehalf of the members of thei.r families.:~

Sunstone/18


4/10

President Woodruffs careful distinctions between thetemple ordinance of washing and anointing, the churchmembers practice of washing and anointing, and thepriesthood ordinance of anointing in connection with ahealing blessing does not directly address the positionEliza R. Snow had taken earlier that only endowedwomen should administer to others. The issue becamemore confused. When precisely the same act wasperformed and very nearly the same words were usedamong women in the temple, among women outside thetemple, and among men administering to women, thedistinction--in the average mind--became shadowyindeed.In 1889 Zina D. H. Young, addressing a generalconference of the Relief Society gave the sisters adviceon a variety of topics. Between wheat storage and silkculture came this paragraph: "It is the privilege of thesisters, who are faithful in the discharge of their duties,and have received their endowments and blessings in thehouse of the Lord, to administer to their sisters, and tothe little ones, in time of sickness, in meekness and

Relief Society General Board I916, B ottom row left to right: Clarissa S. Williams,Emmeline B. Wells. Second row: Elizabeth C., McCune, Amy B rown Lyman,Priscilla Paul Jennings, Alice Merrill Home. Back row: ]eanette A. H yde, ElizabethA. W ilcox, Ida Smoot Dusenberrv, Edna May D avis.humility, ever being careful to ask in the name of Jesus,and to give God the glory."17 Although she does notspecify whether the "privilege" refers to washing andanointing or both, she reaffirms--without saying so--that it is not a priesthood ordinance. She also reit~_~atesElizas position that it was a privilege of the endowed.As the last decade of the nineteenth century closed,refinements were being added, both officially and in thewards and stakes. In 1893, the Young W omens Journalpublished a spritely article advising girls to get enoughfaith to be healed since it is "much easier .... much lesstroublesome and expensive withal" than obtainingmedical treatment. The writer then offered a programfor increasing faith:Do not wait until you are sick nigh unto death beforemaking a trial of your faith and the power of God. Thenext time you have a headache take some oil and ask God

to heal you. If you have a touch of sore throat, try the oiland a little prayer before you try a single thing besides.Go to bed and see if. you are not better in the morning. Ifyou are, then go on adding experience to experience untilyou have accumulated a store of faith that will all beneeded when your body is weak, and you are sick untodeath .... and if you still feel sick ask your mother or yourfather to administer to you. Try that; then if that fails,and they wish to call in Elders, let them do so, and thusexhaust the ordinances of the priesthood before you takethe other step [of calling a doctor].1 8The brisk matter-of-factness echoes Brigham Youngspractical heartiness--there is nothing mysterious ormystical here about faith and spiritual gifts. But perhapsmost revealing is the attitude of spiritual self-sufficiencyand the interchangeability of the mother and father asadministrators. If this article reflects practice among themembership at large, administrations were far frombeing confined to the men ordained with the priesthood.Another revealing example occurred in 1895 whenBrother Torkel Torkelson, widely in demand in hiscommunity to bless the sick, records that two sisters"came to my house to wash and anoint my wife beforeher confinement. Since it happened that I was at home,

THE TENDER ATTENTION TO BOTH THEWOMENS PSYCHOLOGICAL ANDPHYSICAL STA TE IS AN EXAMPLE OFLOVING SERVICE AND GENTLENESS.the sisters called upon me to bless her. After I hadblessed her and then sealed the holy ordinance which thesisters had performed .... I could see the power of Godcome upon [Sister Phelps]," and she prophesied intongues upon him, his household, and the unbornchild.~9 It is interesting that Torkelson blesses his wifebecause "it happened that I was at home" and that heterms the sisters service a "holy ordinance." Thedistinction drawn at the higher levels was not sorestricting at the lower.In the twentieth century, controversy continued overthe traditions and policies touching on womensadministrations to the sick in general and washing andanointing specifically. On 16 September 1901 a generalboard meeting discussed "whether the sisters shouldseal the annointing after washings and annointings.Pres. [Elmina S.] Taylor said that she thought it was allright. She had received just as great benefit from thesealing of the sisters as from the brethren, but thought itwise to ask the Priesthood to seal the annointing when itwas get-at-able." Her own testimony that she had beenas greatly benefited from the sisters as from thebrothers suggests that she did not believe that a manwith priesthood ordination might be more efficacious,only that she thought there was wisdom in including thepriesthood holders as much as possible. Thisinterpretation is borne out by her next statement: "Andif the brethren decided that women could not seal theannointing then we should do as they say," but she couldnot see any reason why women could not, "Aunt Zinadid."Over five years earlier, Ruth Fox recorded adiscussion with that same gently redoubtable ZinaYoung. "When asked if women held the priesthood in



5/10

Mrs. Albect Manwaring

connection with their husbands, [she said] that weshould be thankful for the many blessings we enjoyedand say nothing about it. If you plant a grain of wheatand keep poking and looking at it to see if it was growingyou would spoil the root. The answer was verysatisfying to me.2But always someone was eager to poke and each timethe spiritual roots of the women were imperiled. Some,like Louisa Lulu Greene Richards, former editor of theWomens Exponent, responded indignantly. On 9 April 1901she wrote a somewhat terse letter to President LorenzoSnow concerning an article she read in the Deseret Newsthe previous day which stated: "priest, Teacher orDeacon may administer to the sick, and so may amember, male or female, but neither of them can seal theanointing and blessing, because the authority to do thatis vested in the Priesthood after the order ofMelchisedek." The question of sealing was thus added tothe long list of ambiguities. Lulu says, "If theinformation given in the answer is absolutely correct,then myself and thousands of other members of theChurch have been misinstructed and are laboring undera very serious mistake, which certainly should beauthoritatively corrected." She gives a hint of the kind ofauthority that would be necessary by stating firmly,"Sister Eliza R. Snow Smith, who received theinstructions from the Prophet Joseph Smith, herhusband, [the man to whom she is writing is Elizasbrother] taught the sisters in her day, that a veryimportant part of the sacred ordinance of administrationto the sick was the sealing of the anointing and blessings,and should never be omitted. And we follow the pattern

and daughters.she gave us continually. We do not seal in the authorityof the Priesthood, but in the name of our Lord andSaviour, Jesus Christ.21 Over the next few yearshowever, an emerging definition of priesthoodauthority, and an increased emphasis on its importance,would remove more and more spiritual responsibilitiefrom women and cluster them to the priesthood. Thevery statements authorizing the continuance ofwomens blessings only signaled their dependence onthat permission. One month later the generalpresidency of the Relief Society sent President LorenzoSnow a copy of President Woodruffs letter of 1888 toEmmeline B. Wells. This letter, which we discusseearlier, made the distinction between washings andblessings as an ordinance (and hence confined to thetemple under priesthood authority) and as a sisterlyact.22As president of the Church, Lorenzo Snreaffirmed the position explained there with thexception that blessings should be "confirmed" ratherthan "sealed.23Sometime during the first decade of the new centurythe Relief Society circulated a letter on Relief Societletterhead, called simply "Answers to Questions."Undated, it ended with the notation: "Approved by theFirst Presidency of the Church." This two-page letterwas the most complete document on the subject thusfar.Depending on the extent to which this letter wascirculated, it may have been a response to an unsigned1903 Young Womans Journal lesson that asserted: "Onthe higher or Melchisedek Priesthood has the right to layon hands for the healing of the sick, or to direct the

Sunstone/20


6/10

administration.., though to pray for the sick is the rightthat necessarily belongs to every member of theChurch.24 This may be the earliest published claim thatonly the Melchezidek Priesthood had authority to heal.But the Relief Societys approved letter directlycountered that position.This letter clarified some issues that had previouslybeen ambiguous or contradictory. Administrations bywomen to the sick did not necessarily fall as a ReliefSociety function, but it clearly indicated that the womendid not need priesthood permission or participation inthe performance of these duties. The quoting of Eliza R.Snows position gave any endowed woman authority toperform such services. Confining the blessings to onesown family was not necessary. The letter also cautionedthe women to avoid resemblances in language to thetemple forms, and although the blessings should besealed, the sisters did not need a priesthood holder to doit.2s

Nephi Pratt, the mission president in Portland,Oregon, wrote President Joseph F. Smith in 1908 toinquire if he should, in setting Relief Society sistersapart, give them the authority to wash and anoint sistersfor their confinement and also whether there were anyforms they should follow in carrying out these services.President Smith answered that the washings andanointings in question was a practice that

Some of our Relief Society Sisters appear to haveconfounded.., with one of the temple ordinances .... Wedesire you therefore to impress upon the sisters of yourRelief Society that this practice is in no sense whateveran ordinance, and must not be regarded as such, unless itbe attended to under the direction of proper authority inconnection with the ordinance of laying on of hands forthe healing of the sick.He emphasized, however, that even women who hadnot received their endowments could participate in thewashing and anointingas there is no impropriety whatever in their doing so,inasmuch as they do it in a proper way, that is, in thespirit of faith ,and prayer, and without assumption ofspecial authority, no more in fact than members of thechurch generally need to be barred from receiving ablessing at the hands of faithful women .... As to theparticular form of words to be used, there is none, notany more t.han there is for an elder to use inadministering to the sick.2oOn 17 December 1909 The First Presidency, stillheaded by Joseph F. Smith, again endorsed PresidentWoodruffs 1888 letter to Emmeline B. Wells, makingone correctio,n:namely in the clause pertaining to women administeringto children, President [Anthon H.] Lund had said thosesisters need not necessarily be only those who hadreceived their endowments, for it was not alwayspossible for women to have that privilege and women offaith might do so [give blessings].27Apparently for the first time, directly and decisively, apresident of the Church had enunciated a policy aboutwho could give and receive such blessings, separatingsuch actions clearly from the temple ceremony andmaking them rites accessible to any member of the

household of faith, male or female. But the matter wasnot yet laid to rest. The quiet practice of washing andanointing among women went on, but it was

accompanied by greater uneasiness, by more questions,and by greater uncertainty about the propriety of suchactions.The Oakley (Idaho) Second Ward Relief Societyminute book contains a rare undated item: the written-out blessing to be pronounced in a washing, anointing,and sealing before childbirth. Even though Joseph F oSmith had said that there was no special form for suchoccasions, it seems that the sisters were morecomfortable with one written out. To what extent theyfollowed the pattern, or deviated from it, is not known,but the very existence of the document bespeaks aninsistence that it be done, that it be done in a c ertain way,and that it be linked to the Relief Society. They didfollow earlier counsel to avoid the wording used in thetemple. To insure that the sacred nature of the templeordinances is not infringed upon, the author carefullychecked those portions of the blessing quoted hereagainst wording used in the temple. They are, indeed,different. And, of course, the blessing and sealing arealso different in concept from the temple washing andanointing.

"IT IS THE PRIVILEGE OF A MOTHER TOHAVE FAITH AND TO ADMINISTER TOHER CHILD; THIS SHE CANDO H ERSELF."The first two blessings follow each other very closelywith only minor changes in the wording here and there.The blessings were specific and comprehensive.We anoint your spinal column that you might be strongand healthy no disease fasten upon it no accident belaff[befall] you, your kidneys that they might be active andhealthy and preform their proper functions, yourbladder that it might be strong and protected fromaccident, your Hips that your system might relax andgive way for the birth of your child, your sides that yourliver, your lungs, and spleen that they might be strongand preform their proper functions .... your breasts thatyour milk may come freely and you need not be afflictedwith sore nipples as many are, your heart that it mightbe comforted.

They continued by requesting blessings from the Lordon the unborn childs health and expressed the hope thatit might not come before its "full time" andthe child shall present right for birth and that theafterbirth shall come at its proper time.., and you neednot flow to excess .... We anoint.., your thighs that theymight be healthy and strong that you might be exemptfrom cramps and from the bursting of veins .... That youmight stand upon the earth [and] go in and out of theTemples of God.~8

The document combines practical considerations, morecommon to womens talk over the back fence, with thereassuring solace and compassion of being anointed withthe balm of sisterhood.29 The women sealed theblessing:

Sister ___we unitedly lay our hands upon you to sealthis washing and anointing wherewith you have beenwashed and anointed for your safe delivery, for the



7/10

salvation of you and your child and we ask G od to let hisspecial blessings to rest upon you, that you might sleepsweet at night that your dreams might be pleasant andthat the good spirit might guard and protect you fromevery evil influence spirit and power that you may goyour full time and that ew~ry blessing that we have askedGod to confer upon yot2 and your offspring may belitterly fulfiled that all fear and dread may be taken fromyou and that you might trust in God. All these blessingswe unitedly seal upon you in the name of Jesus ChristAmen.30The tender attention to both the womans psychologicaland physical state is an example of loving service andgentleness. That this widespread practice continued insimilar form for several more decades is illustrated bythe .account written by a Canadian sister.

In the years from the early 1930s on, in the CalgaryWard R.S. under presidents--Bergeson, Maude Hayes,Lucile Ursenbach, the sisters often asked for a washingand blessing before going into the hospital for anoperation or childbirth. In this ordinance two sisterswashed the parts of the body, pronouncing appropriatewords of prayer and blessing, being advised to avoidsimilarity to expressions used in a temple ordinance, andat the conclusion put their hands on the head of therecipient and, in the name of the Lord pronounced afurther blessing.31

JOSEPH SMITH SEEMED TO ENVISION THERELIEF SOCIETY AS AN INDEPENDENTORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN PARALLEl,TO THE PRIESTHOOD ORGANIZATIONFOR MEN.In Cache Valley, a 1910 Relief Society meeting was

given over to testimonies of healing. President Lucy S.Cardon "read some instructions to the sisters on thewashing and anointing the sick and how it should bedone properly," adding a testimony of the importance ofhaving the Spirit of the Lo~d with us. One sister "asked aquestion of the subj." of washing and anointing, andSister Martha Meedham, with a brisk earthiness thatcomes off the page, answered that

she had done as much washing and anointing as anyonein this Stake. Related an experience of a blessing whichshe had given while she was ic~ Salt Lake. Said shewanted to spend the rest of her life in doing good toothers and blessing and confirming them. Related ofexperiences where all had blessed and anointed people.Said she had written Pres. J. F. Srnith on the sub. and hetold her to keep on and bless & comfort as she had donein the past. It was a gift that was only given to a few, butall sisters who desired and are requested can performthis.

Along with a number of other women the local ReliefSociety President, Margaret Ballard, "spoke of herexp[erience] in washing arid anointing and said they hadcarried out these instructions given." The next sentencespeaks volumes not only for the independence of theRelief Society, but perhaps also of mingled pride andtrepidation: "The sisters felt that the Bishop should beacqua[i]nted with the work we do.32 Sister Ballardcontinued, telling the sisters, "how she had been

impressed to bless and administer to her father who wassick and suffering and he had been healed. Had also beenimpressed to bless her husband and he was healed." Themeeting closed., appropriately, with singing, "CouYour Many Blessings."This rare glimpse into a Relief Society groupdiscussing anointings and blessings is revealing. Iaddition to the strong associations with faithfulness, thgift of the Holy Ghost, and the importance of personaworthiness, there were othe~c kinds of: teachings. Onewas the irreplaceable testimony of personal experience.It also shows a sharing of information the sisters hadabout current policy, former policy, and folklore, alonwith asking: How do these experiences relate to thepriesthood? That, after all, was the crucial question.In October 191.4 President Joseph F. Smith and hiscounselors sent a letter to bishops and stake presidents,establishing official policy on "Relief Society :SisteRegarding Anointing the Sick." For the first time, such document did not come from the Relief: Society itself.33Little of the information was new. It formalized policthat had taken shape over the years: Lorenzo Snowsstipulation that the blessing must be confirmed rathethan sealed, Wilfo~:d Woodruffs that it was not a RelieSociety function and neither was it an ordinance. Theonly new policy seems to be tk~at such work comes, under"the direction of" the bishop. At the April 13, 192general conference, Elder Charles W. Penrose reportedwomen asking "if they did not have the right toadminister to the s:ick" and he, quoting Jesuss promise this apostles of the signs that will follow the believersconceded that thence might be

Occasions when perhaps it would be wise for a woman tolay her hands u:pon a child, or upon one anothersometimes, and there have been appointments made forour sisters, some good wom en, to anoint and bless oLhersof their sex who expect to go through times of greatpersonal trial, travail and labor; so that is all right, so faras it goes. But when women go around and declare thatthey have been set apart to administer to the sick andtake the place that is given to the elders of: the C hurch byrevelation as declared through James o f old, and throughthe Prophet Joseph in modern times, that is anassumption of authority and contrary to scripture,which is that when people are sick they shall call for theelders of the Church and they shall pray over them an,dofficially lay hands on them .3";

Even though he cited the authority of Joseph Smith andeven though Joseph Smitlh certainly taught thepropriety and authority of elders to heal the sick, ElderPenrose also contradicted the extension of healingprivileges to women by Joseph Smith. In fact .JosephSmith had cited that same scripture in the 12 April 184Relief Society meeting but, ironically, had made a fadifferent commentary: "These signs.., should follow athat believe whether male or female.3sThroughout the 1920s Church leaders increasinglydrew bolder lines between spiritual gifts and priesthoodpowers. With the clarification of the priesthood rolecame restriction of the womens sphere. Church ]Leadermade it clear that women did not have rightl topriesthood power. Further definition of priesthoodincluded healing, anointing with oil, etc., as exclusivfunctions of elder:s.By 1928 President Heber J. Grant defended th


8/10

priesthood against "complaint... about the dominationof the people by those who preside over them." Hequoted the description of the ideal way in whichpriesthood authority is to function, found in Doctrineand Covenants 121, then asked, somewhat rhetorically,"Is it a terrible thing to exercise the priesthood of theliving God in the way that the Lord prescribes: Bykindness and gentleness "?37 The pattern had now beenestablished, clarified, and validated.

THE QUIET PRACTICE OF WASHING ANDANOINTING AMONG WOMEN WENT ON,BUT IT WAS ACCOMPANIED BY GREATERUNCERTAINTY ABOUT THE PROPRIETYOF SUCH ACTIONS.The strength of that pattern can be seen through aletter from Martha A. Hickman of Logan who wrote tothe Relief Society General President, Louise YatesRobison, asking:

Is it orthodox and sanctioned by the Church today toperform "washing" and "anointings" for the sick(sisters) especially in preparation for confinement inchildbirth?Some have advocated that the proper procedure wouldbe to have a special administration by some memberbearing the Priesthood for those desiring a specialblessing at this time.Some years ago when our temples did away with thisordinance for the sick and expectant mothers, in many ofour wards in this stake, as well as adjoining stakes,committees of sisters, generally two or three in eachcommittee, were called and set apart for this work of"washing" and "anointing," in their respective wards,wherever this ordinance was desired.I happen to be the head of this committee in the FirstWa rd of Logan Stake. W e have officiated in this capacitysome ten years, have enjoyed our calling, and have beenappreciated. However, since above qu estions have arisenwe do not feel quite at ease. We would like to be inharmony, as well as being able to inform correctly thoseseeking information. Our Stake Relief Society President,nor our Stake President seem to ha ve nothing definite onthis matter.38

Sister Robison sent the letter back to the stake ReliefSociety president with an attached letter explaining:In reference to the question raised, may we say thatthis beautiful ordinance has always been with the ReliefSociety, and it is our earnest hope that we may continueto have that privilege, and up to the present time thePresidents of the Church have always allowed it to us.There are some places, however, where a definite standagainst it has been taken by the Priesthood Authorities,and where such is the case we cannot do anything butaccept their will in the matter. However, where thesisters are permitted to do this for expectant mothers wewish it done very quietly, and without any infringementupon the Temple service. It is in reality a mothersblessing, and we do not advocate the appointment of anycommittees to have this in charge, but any worthy goodsister is eligible to perform this service if she has faith,and is in good standing in the Church. It is somethingthat should be treated very carefully, and as we havesuggested, with no show or discussion made of it.We have written to Sister Hickman and told her to

consult you in this matter, as it is always our custom todiscuss matters of this kind with our Stake Presidents,and have them advise the sisters in their Wards.39There is an air of almost wistful timidity about SisterRobisons letter that bespeaks near-resignation towardthe change that was happening, not necessarily becausethe policy against blessings had changed per se, butbecause policy about the priesthood had changed theenvironment in which they occurred. Nonpriesthoodblessings were now suspect. One of the last documentson the subject is a little notebook containing a record of"Washing[s] and Anointing[s] done by sisters in 31stWard" in Salt Lake City. It begins in 1921: "Sister DallieWatson for confinement, Dec. 1, 1921--by EmmaGoddard and Mary E. Creer. 1033 Lake Street." Everyfew weeks there is another entry, usually for childbirth,but sometimes for illness. The last entry is 2July 1945 toa Jane Coulam Moore by three sisters, one of whom isthe same Sister Goddard who had officiated twenty-four years earlier at the first annointing.40

The next year brought the official death knell of thisparticular spiritual gift. On 29 July 1946 Elder JosephFielding Smith of the Quorum of the Twelve wrote toBelle S. Spafford, the Relief Society General President,and her counselors, Marianne C. Sharp and Gertrude R.Garff.While the authorities of the Church have ruled that it ispermissible, under certain conditions and with theapproval of the priesthood, for sisters to wash a nd anointother sisters, yet they feel that it is far better for us tofollow the plan the Lord has given us and send for theElders of the Church to come and administer to the sickand afflicted.4 1



9/10

It would certainly be difficult for a sister to say that shedid no t wish to follow "the plan the Lord has given us" byasking for administration from her sisters rather thanfrom the elders. One Relief Society worker in Canadarecalled: "This ordinance was a comfort and strength tomany. But it was discontinued and the sisters were askedto call :for administration by the Priesthood insteadwhen necessary and desirable."Elder Smiths pronouncement ended the practicewhere it had not already stopped. We have no furtherevidence of such blessings being given by women.

AN EMERGING DEFINITION OFPRIESTHOOD AUTHORITY, REMOVEDMORE AND MORE SPIRITUALRESPONSIBILITIES FROM WOMEN ANDCLUSTERED THEM TO THE PRIESTHOOD.A recent article in the New Era, "President KimballSpeaks out on Administration to the Sick," bears on thetopic at hand. Although it does not deal with the longforgotten practice of washing and anointing the sick, itdoes state what appears to be current Church policy inregards to blessing the sick.

The administration proper is an ordinance of twoparts, the anointing and the sealing. An elder pours asmall quantity of oil on the head of the one to be blessed,near the crown of the head if convenient, never on the otherparts of the body [italics mine], and in the name of the Lordand by au thority of the priesthood, he anoints the personfor the restoration of health. The sealing is performed bytwo or more elders, one of whom, as mouth, seals theanointing and gives an appropriate blessing, also in thename of Jesus Christ and by authority of the priesthood.Allowances can be made for unusual circumstances,for example, when only one Melchizedek holder ispresent. In this case, the article states, "a substituteprogram is followed." One elder, presumably actingalone, may "give a blessing, likewise in the name of theLord and by authority of the Melchizedek Priesthood ....Only by the priesthood are results manifested."Nowhere in the article does it mention an instancewhere a mother, wife, or other female could assist thepriesthood holder. It does, however state:Then there is the prayer that is unlike theadministration; it makes request to the Lord to heal andmay be offered by any soul who has a desire to do so andis not an ordinance in the same sense. The prayer is arequest for the Lord to act, whereas the blessing or theadministration is given by the brethren in the name ofChrist.4~

Perhaps women can gain some measure of comfortfrom Elder James E. Talmage, who wrote:When the frailties and imperfections of mortality are leftbehind, in the glorified state of the blessed hereafter,husband and wife will administer in their respectivestations, seeing and understanding alike, cooperating tothe full in the government of their family kingdom. Thenshall women be recompensed in rich measure for all theinjustice womanhood has endured in mortality ....Mortal eye cannot see nor mind comprehend the beauty,

glory, and majesty of a righteous woman made perfect inthe celestial kingdom of God.43But President Joseph Fielding Smith spoke more to thpoint when he said: "There is nothing in the.., gospwhich declares that men are superior to women ....Women do not hold the priesthood, but if they arfaithful and true, they will become priestesses anqueens in the kingdom of God, and that implies that thwill be given authority.44

Susa Young Gatess statement still rings clear, "Thprivileges and powers outlined by the Prophet [JosepSmith]... have never been granted to women in full eveyet." When the lives of Latter-day Saint women--theifaith, spirituality, devotion and sacrifice--are seeacross the history of the restored Church, we find arecord as venerable as that of men. We must respond toSusas question, "Did those women.., live so well as be worthy of them all?" in the affirmative.Notes1. For the most comprehensive studies to date of the history of thetemple ordinance see D. Michael Quinn, "Lattery-day Saint PrayeCircles," BYU Studies, 19 (Fall 1978) and Andrew F. Ehats article on tearly endowment in a forthcoming issue of BYU Studies.2. For examples of women participating in healing in Kirtland see LinKing New ell and Valeen Tippetts Avery, "Sweet C ounsel and Seas oTribulation: The Religious Life of the Women in Kirtland," BYU Studi20 (Winter 1980) and Linda King Newells essay "Gifts of the SpiriWomens Share," to be published in a collection of essays edited bLavina Fielding Anderson and Maureen Ursenbach Beecher, hereafcited as "Gifts of the Spirit" manuscript. For additional accounts seCarol Lynn Pearson, Daughters of L ight, Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1973. Susa Young Gates, "The Open Door for Women," Young W omenJournal, 16 (1905):117.4. See Newell, "Gifts of the Spirit" manuscript, pp. 8-11 for a mordetailed discussion of this issue.5. "A Record of the Organization, and Proceedings of The FemaRelief Society of Nauvoo," April 18, 1842. LDS Church Archivemicrofilm of original, Joseph Smith collection, hereafter cited as "RelSociety Minutes of Nauvoo."6. Relief Society Minutes of Nauvoo, April 28, 184 2.7. Mary Ellen Kimball, Journal, March 2,1856, Church Archives. Italimine.8. Journal of Discourses Delivered by President Brigham Young, his TwCounselors, The Twelve and others. Reported by G. D. Watt, J. V. Long anothers, Liverpool and London, 1856, Vol. 13 (Novem ber 14, 186 9), p15 5. Hereafter cited as Journal of Discourses.9. Cache Valley Stake Relief Society Minute Book A, 1869-1881, 1June 1868, LDS Church Archives.10. Zina Diantha Huntington Smith Young, Diary, Vol. 13, AugusDecember 1881, LDS Church Archives.11. Womans Exponent, 7 (1 Nov. 1878):86.12. Journal of Discourses, 21 (8 August 1880):367-68.13. Circular Letter, Salt Lake City, Utah, 6 October 1880. ChurcArchives.14. Womans Exponent, 13 (15 September 1884):61.15. Cache Valley Stake Relief Society Minute Book B, 11 Septemb1886, pp. 46-4 8, LDS Church Archives.16. Wilford Woodruff to Em. B. W ells, editor, Womans Exponent, 4-21888, Correspondence of the First Presidency, LD S Church A rchives17. Womans Exponent, 17 (15 A ugust 1889):172.18. Young Womans Journal, 4 (4 January 1893) :176-77 .19. T orkel Torkelson, D iary, 7 November 1895, LD S Church Archivestrans. Richard Jensen.20. Ruth May Fox, D iary, 8 March 1896.21. Louisa L. G. Richards to President Lorenzo Snow, April 9, 1901Church Archives.

Sunstone/24


10/10

22. Relief Society Minutes, 1901. Church Archives.23. Relief Society Minutes, special meeting of officers of the GeneralBoard, 2 May 1901., Vol. 1, p. 352, Church Archives.24. Young Womans Journal, 14 (8 August 1903):384.25. James R. C lark, ed., Messages of the F irst Presidency, 5 vols. (Salt LakeCity: Bookcraft, 1970), pp. 316-16. The first question concernedwashing and .anointing:

Is it necessary for one or m ore sisters to be set apart for that purpose?...or should it be done under the direction of the Presidency of the ReliefSociety, or could any good sister officiate?This seems to include three questions.

Firstly, our late President Sister Eliza R. S now Sm ith said many times,"Any goo d sister who had received her endowments and was in goodstanding in the Church, might officiate in washing and anointingprevious to confinement, if called upon, or requested to do so by the sisteror sisters desiring the blessing: (but should not offer her services.)Secondly, Not necessarily under the direction of the P residency of theRelief Society, although it is most likely whoever was called upon torender such services would be a member of the R elief Society in her ownWard. Some sisters are gifted in ministering and comforting with faith,and adaptability, who might not be chosen to preside or fill any officialposition in the Relief Society, then the sister herself who desires theblessing might have some choice as to whom she w ould prefer, and thereare many little things might be taken into consideration, all cases are notalike, all circumstances are not the same, wisdom and the guidance of theHoly Spirit are things necessary in all such matters.Thirdly, in reference to children in sickness, one could not always waitto consult the Presidency of the R elief Society; mothers, grandmothers,and often other relatives attend to a sick child, both in adm inistering andin the washing with pure water and annointing w ith the consecrated oil;but generally in neighborhoods, there are sisters who are speciallyadapted to minister to children, and who have in a large degree the gift ofhealing under the influence of the Holy Spirit, who are possessed ofgreater humility and have cultivated the gift, or whom the Lord hasgreatly blessed.Second question: "Should the washing be sealed?" It is usual to do thisin a few simple words, avoiding the terms used in the Temple, and insteadof using the word "Seal" we wou ld use the word "Confirm" in the spirit ofinvocation.Third question: "Have the sisters a right to seal the washing andannoint, using no authority, but doing it in the name of Jesus Christ, orshould men holding the Priesthood be called in?" The sisters have theprivilege of laying their hands on the head of the one officiated for andconfirming the anointing in the spirit of invocation, and in the n ame ofJesus Christ, not mentioning authority. The Lord has heard andanswered the prayers of the sisters in these ministrations many times.In suggestions made in reference to w ashing and anointing the sistersare always advised to kneel and offer prayer previous to officiating in anysacred duty.

26. Joseph F. Smith to Nephi Pratt, December 18-21, 1908,Correspondence of the First Presidency, Reel 39, LDS ChurchArchives.28. Relief Society Minutes, 17 D ecember 1909, p. 13 6, Vol. 3:184.27 . Relief Society Minutes, 17 D ecember 1909, p. 13 6, Vol. 3:184.28. Oakley [Idaho] 2nd Ward Relief Society Minutes, Church Archives.29 . Maureen Ursenbach Beecher, Comments, n.d., p. 1-2.30 . Oakley [Idaho] 2nd Ward Relief Society Minutes, Church Archives.31. Lucile H. Ursenbach statement, August 14, 19 80. In possession ofMaureen Ursenbach Beecher.32. Other testimonies born that day included: "Sister Moench felt thatwe had had so much good said today. Said while she was very youngshe went out to wash and anoint the sick. Said Sister Richards hadgiven them a foundation to go by and had said to get the spirit of theLord then they would do right. Related an experience in blessing a childwho had been given up by the doc and it got well. Know that if we getthe faith and the spirit of God with us we can bless as well as theBrethern ...."Pres. Hattie Hyde spoke of her experiences in Wyo. where thebrethern had helped the sisters to bless and anoint the sick."Sister R. Moench said that Pres. Young had said that the sistersneed not be set apart for this calling but if they can call in any goodbrethern to seal the anointing so much the better."Pres. Lucy S. Cardan said they use to in the Temple have thebrethren seal the anointing but now they do no t. Knows that one sistercan bless another. We have that privilege but when we can get thebrethern we should have them seal the blessing." [Cache Valley StakeRelief Society Minute Book B, 1881-191 4, Vol. 2, 5 March 19 10, pp.438-44 0, CR 1280, 14.]

33 . Messages of the First P residency, 4:314-15.To the Presidents of Stakes and B ishops of wards:-Questions are frequently asked in regard to washing and anointing oursisters preparatory to their con finement. In a circular issued by theleading sisters of the Relief Society a number of q uestions on this matterhave been answered and correct instructions given, but notwithstandingthis having been done, we judge from the contents of letters received byus that there exists some uncertainty as to the prop er persons to engagein this administration; we have therefore considered it necessary toanswer some of these questions, and give such ex planations as will placethis matter in the right light. We quote some o f these questions and giveour answers:1. Is it necessary for one or more sisters to be set apart to wash andanoint the sick?2. Should it be done under the direction of the Relief Society?Answer: Any good sister, full of faith in God and in the efficacy ofprayer may officiate. It is therefore not necessary for anyo ne to be setapart for this purpose, or that it should be done exclusively under thedirection of the R elief Society.3. Must the sister officiating be a member of the Relief Society?Answer: It is conceded that most of our sisters, qualified to performthis service and gifted with the spirit of healing and the pow er to inspirefaith in the sick, belong to the Relief Society, but if the sick should desireto have some good sister who is not a member of the Relief Societyadminister to her, that sister had the right to so administer.4. Have the sisters the right to administer to the sick children?Answer: yes: they have the same right to administer to sick children asto adults, and may anoint and lay hands upon them in faith.5. Should the administering and anointing be sealed?Answer: It is proper for sisters to lay on hands, using a few simplewords, avoiding the terms employed in the tem ple, and instead of usingthe word "seal use the w ord "confirm."

6. Have the sisters a right to seal the washing and anointing, using noauthority, but doing it in the name of Jesus Christ, or should men holdingthe priesthood be called in?Answer: The sisters have the privilege of laying their hands on thehead of the person for whom they are officiating, and confirming andanointing in the spirit of invocation. The Lord has heard and answ eredthe prayers of sisters in these administrations many times. It should,however, always be remembered that the command of the Lord is to callin the elders to administer to the sick, and when they can be called in, theyshould be asked to anoint the sick or seal the anointing.7. A re sisters who have not received their endowments competent towash and anoint sisters previous to confinement?Answer: It mu st always be borne in mind that this administering to thesick by the sisters is in no sense a temple ordinance, and no one is allowedto use the words learned in the temple in washing and anointing the sick.Sisters who have had their endowments have received instructions andblessings which tend to give them stronger faith and especially qualifythem to officiate in this sacred work; but there are good faithful sisters,who through circumstances have not received their endowments, andyet are full of faith and have had much success in ministering to the sick,who should not be forbidden to act, if desired to do so by our sisters.In conclusion we have to say that in all sacred functions performed byour sisters there should be perfect harmony between them and theBishop, who has the direction of all matters pertaining to the Church inhis ward Your brethren,Joseph F. Smith,Anthon H. Lund.Charles W. Penrose.First Presidency.34. Conference Report, 3 April 1921, pp. 190-91.35. Relief Society Minutes of Nauvoo, (sixth meeting) 12 April 1842.36. For a more detailed discussion see Newell, "Gifts of the Spirit"manuscript, p. 36.37. Conference Report, (5 October 1928), pp. 8-9.38. Martha A. Hickman to Pres. Louise Y. Robison. 28 November 1935.Church Archives.39. L ouise Y. Robison, 5 D ecember 1935 . Copy in possession of author.40. Xerox of holograph, courtesy Charlott Boden Erickson, LDSChurch Archives.41. Quoted in Messages of the First Presidency, 4 : 314 .42. "President Kimball Speaks out on Administration to the Sick,"NewEra, 1981, pp. 46, 50.43 . James E. Talmage, "The Eternity of Sex," Young W omens Journal, 2 5(October 1914 ):602-03.44. Doctrines of Salvation, 3:178 as quoted in Choose You This Day,Melchizedek Priesthood Personal Study Guide, 1980-81. Church ofJesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Salt Lake City, Utah, 1979, p. 200.LINDA KING NEWELL is co-author of a forthcoming biography ofEmma Smith (Doubleday).

A Gift Given a Gift Taken

Documents

Transcript of A Gift Given a Gift Taken