Women in the Book of Mormon
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of Book of Mormon Studies Volume 11 Number 1 Article 12 7-31-2002 Women in the Book of Mormon Camille Williams Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/jbms BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Williams, Camille (2002) "Women in the Book of Mormon," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies: Vol. 11 : No. 1 , Article 12. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/jbms/vol11/iss1/12 This Feature Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Book of Mormon Studies by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Title Women in the Book of Mormon: Inclusion, Exclusion, and Interpretation Author(s) Camille S. Williams Reference Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 11/1 (2002): 66–79, 111–14. ISSN 1065-9366 (print), 2168-3158 (online) Abstract Feminist readers, particularly, have argued that biblical writing is sexist because the majority of the text was written by men who seem to place little significance on the role of women. This observation has become a seri- ous concern among some because it calls into question the nature of God: does this supposedly perfect being love men and women equally? This study delves into the text of the Book of Mormon and its female charac- ters to suggest that women were not considered lower than men in Book of Mormon times; likewise, women are not considered lower than men in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints today. IN THEWomen BOOK OF MORMON INCLUSION, EXCLUSION, & INTERPRETATION Camille S. Williams ll interpretations of scripture the scriptural testimony concerning the nature of are, inA some sense, a dialogue with the text, or, as humanity and the nature of God.7 Old Testament scholar Phyllis Bird notes, “an exercise “Modern feminist critique of the Bible as male- in cross-cultural understanding.” This exercise may be centered and male-dominated has elicited widely dif- aided by knowing the writers’ and compilers’ world- fering historiographical and hermeneutical responses, views and by avoiding interpretations that “distort the ranging from denial of the fact or intent of female sub- ancient writer’s understanding or intention, whether ordination to rejection of the authority of the Scrip- to a ‘negative’ or ‘positive’ effect.”1 Our understanding tures as fundamentally and irredeemably sexist.”8 The of scriptural texts, as with other “dialogues,” is affected relative absence of women and women’s voices in by our expectations, experiences, and purposes for scriptural texts, including the Book of Mormon, has reading those texts. raised questions for some LDS readers about issues In reference to the Bible, Sharon Ringe cautions: of equality and the meaning and authority that these Although the careful reader attempts to distin- texts can or should have for us today. guish between the voice of the ancient author Questions about women’s status in scripture are and his or her own concerns as a modern inter- not trivial and cannot be answered by recommend- preter, this distinction is never absolute. The ing that we focus instead on the “big questions,” place in history, culture, and society occupied by such as the nature of God, the problem of evil, or the reader inevitably influences what she or he the meaning of life.9 For a significant number of can perceive in any text and what questions seem readers, questions about the treatment of women important to ask about the text and its context.2 anciently and currently are the “big questions.”10 The answers or lack thereof will be predictive of the value During the past 30 years, the most important ques- some readers place on the scripture text and, to some tions for some readers have been what Katharine extent, on the religious institutions that consider Bartlett calls “the woman question,” actually a set of those texts canonical. Because these questions mat- questions about the status and treatment of women ter to so many, we ought to seriously consider them. in law and in cultural practices.3 As a result of inter- That is the purpose of this paper. Asking questions disciplinary interest in women’s issues, the amount about women’s roles, ancient and modern, as we of research about women in biblical times and texts read the scriptures can bring new insights, even has grown exponentially. During this same period of when the texts are incomplete and women’s stories time, the amount of published research on the text abbreviated. In addition, an examination of the and cultures of the Book of Mormon has increased Book of Mormon in light of its stated purpose and significantly, although few feminist explorations of provenance suggests that the presence or absence of Latter-day Saint texts have been published. women in the text is not determinative of its author- A common assumption among some contempo- ity as a witness of Jesus Christ nor, therefore, of its rary readers is that most women’s stories have been relevance to women as well as to men. excluded from scripture, that women have been “silenced” by male scribes, editors, and commenta- The Context of the Contemporary “Woman tors.4 So far as we know, virtually all of the texts we Question” have “about the lives of women in the ancient world While significant interest in women’s issues now ...have been written by men.”5 Ruth and Esther are permeates our society as a whole, spanning the politi- the only book-length narratives in the Bible focusing cal and social spectrum, it is an overtly feminist11 on females. “No other female characters in the Hebrew approach to the Bible that has had perhaps the most canon dominate the narrative scene for more than impact in the academy and in publishing about one chapter, not even the extraordinary character of women in scripture.12 Women have not always been , by Robert T. Barrett T. , by Robert Deborah.”6 The stories that have been included are “self-conscious about reading [the Bible] as women,” frequently interpreted “as a primary source and legiti- but many now consider it important to do so.13 mator of patriarchal religion.” Feminist biblical schol- Some scholars have argued that the Bible “might ars have extended this view to every branch of their be patriarchal and androcentric without necessarily theology but consider it to have “particular bearing being misogynistic.”14 But for religiously committed on the question of biblical authority,” or the truth of Abish, the Lamanite Woman feminists, there is a persistent tension between their JOURNAL OF BOOK OF MORMON STUDIES 67 belief that the Bible is the word of God, and there- they do so from a perspective that might be called fore must support the equality of male and female, the “hermeneutic of suspicion,”22 wherein there is an and their view that the Bible is a primary source and adversarial or distrustful approach to a text coupled sanction of women’s oppression and cannot, there- with an examination less of the text’s content per se fore, be divine revelation—or worse, that it reveals a than of the author’s presumed self-interest.23 A few God unworthy of reverence.15 Some women have jet- writers are engaged in reconstructing LDS theology tisoned much of the religious traditions in which in ways they believe are more amenable to feminist they were reared and are seeking religious forms they principles of equality.24 Most of current Book of feel honor women and the experiences of women.16 Mormon commentary targeting an LDS audience Latter-day Saint feminist commentaries are, by reflects what might be called the hermeneutic of comparison, few and generally less caustic.17 LDS charity or consent,25 in which Book of Mormon sto- doctrines and the statements of prophets affirming ries, for the most part, are universalized to include the worth of women as individuals and in their vari- females in one way or another26 in an interpretation ous roles in the family, church, and community have intended to conform to church teachings.27 Unfortu- also consistently stressed the value of women18 and nately, this truce may not last. Marie Cornwall has pre- have turned aside some harsh interpretations of dicted that “the next generation of [LDS] readers will women in scripture, most notably that of Eve and find the scriptures’ lack of attention to women, par- the treatment of Lot’s daughters.19 ticularly in the Book of Mormon, to be disquieting.”28 However, LDS women have challenges that some Of course, Book of Mormon scholarship has chal- of their sisters of other faiths do not have. In addition lenges that differ from those in biblical studies: we have to the problems presented by biblical texts, latter-day a relatively short history of research on the Book of scripture contains far fewer stories of individual Mormon, there are few scholars focused on Book of women than those in either the Old or the New Mormon research, no ancient texts of the Book of Testament. Carol Lynn Pearson argues that the dearth Mormon are available to us for textual criticism,29 and of women mentioned in the Book of Mormon is a the Book of Mormon text abridges the spiritual histo- “strong anti-female statement made by Nephite so- ries of peoples across a span of more than a thousand ciety,” in whose record we see a few “spiritually de- years, with the linguistic, sociological, and archaeologi- pendent [women]” and a plethora of faceless, name- cal evidence of those peoples considered sparse at less women listed as part of their husband’s posses- best.30 Further, those with a particular interest in the sions.20 Francine Bennion has attributed to Nephite history of women appear to have even less to work culture what might be seen as a fairly common set with, given the small number of individual women of assumed characteristics about ancient societies: named in the Book of Mormon.