LDS Women Used To Give Healing Blessings
Many members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints do not know that LDS women were once allowed to give healing blessings. It is a beautiful piece of our religious legacy that is not often spoken about in our Church despite having been encouraged by Joseph Smith himself.
While women were never ordained to the office of the Melchizedek Priesthood, they often performed healings with the laying on of hands through the power of faith in Christ — it was considered a sacred duty of Relief Society women, especially in blessing other women during the time of pregnancy and childbirth. In fact, that particular type of blessing was of such importance that it carried a special name: “the washing and anointing previous to confinements”.
Both men and women were also set apart to administer formal healing blessings in the temple. In short, women laying on hands to administer blessings was not a strange or foreign practice for our Latter-day Saint foremothers. The practice began in the earliest days of the Church and continued well into the 20th century — there are still many LDS women alive and well today that have heard their own mothers or grandmothers recounting such experiences!
Read below for linked and cited sources about this beautiful practice.
Source: Joseph Smith said it is not a sin for women to lay hands & heal
Regarding female blessings, Joseph Smith said:
“Respecting the female laying on hands, there could be no devil in it if God gave his sanction by healing — that there could be no more sin in any female laying hands on the sick than in wetting the face with water — that it is no sin for any body to do it that has faith, or if the sick has faith to be heal’d by the administration” (Joseph Smith in the April 28, 1842 Relief Society Meeting Minutes, emphasis added).
Later in this same document, it was written:
“Prest. Smith continued the subject by adverting to the commission given to the ancient apostles ‘Go ye into all the world’ &c. — no matter who believeth; these signs, such as healing the sick, casting out devils &c. should follow all that believe whether male or female. He ask’d the Society if they could not see by this sweeping stroke, that wherein they are ordain’d, it is the privilege of those set apart to administer in that authority which is confer’d on them — and if the sisters should have faith to heal the sick, let all hold their tongues.
…Prest. S. then offered instruction respecting the propriety of females administering to the sick by the laying on of hands — said it was according to revelation.”
Source: The Church website recounts details about the practice
An excerpt from the Church’s official Gospel Topics Essay entitled “Healing” says:
“For women, blessing the sick was a natural extension of their work as the primary nurses and caregivers in times of illness. In particular, Latter-day Saint women often anointed and blessed other women in cases of pregnancy and childbirth.
Brigham Young and other Church leaders continued to encourage women to seek the spiritual gift of healing and approved women’s participation in healing blessings.
…With respect to women’s participation in healing blessings, a 1914 letter from the First Presidency affirmed that ‘any good sister, full of faith in God and in the efficacy of prayer’ may bless the sick” (Gospel Topics Essay, “Healing”, emphasis added).
There is also mention on the Church website of Louisa Barnes Pratt, an early missionary of the Church who served in Tahiti and blessed the women there:
“While living among the women of Tubuai in the South Pacific, Louisa instructed them in English and domestic skills. She also taught them the gospel and blessed them when they were sick” (“Louisa Barnes Pratt”, a Church History Topics essay).
Source: Firsthand records of women blessing & being blessed
There are firsthand records of women recounting their experiences of giving and receiving blessings, such as written by “Mother Sessions” in her diary:
“Sisters Young and Whitney laid their hands upon my head and predicted many things that I should be blesed [sic] with, that I should live to stand in a temple yet to be built…I should be blessed by many and there I should bless many and many should be brought unto me…and after I had blesed them their mothers would rise up and bless me.
…We had a feast in the afternoon at sister Millers…there we blessed and got blessed & I blesed sister Christeen by laying my hands on her head and the Lord spoke through me to her great and marvelous things” (Sunstone Magazine, “We Blessed and Got Blessed” by Patty Bartlett Sessions, emphasis added).
Source: Church leaders said it was necessary and imperative, even scolding them for not doing it
In November of 1869, Brigham Young spoke in the Tabernacle and scolded both men and women for not developing their spiritual powers. He said:
“Why do you not live so as to rebuke disease? It is your privilege to do so without sending for the Elders. … It is the privilege of a mother to have faith and to administer to her child; this she can do herself, as well as sending for the Elders to have the benefit of their faith” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13 page 155, emphasis added).
Additionally, women were able to administer blessings alongside their husbands:
“…If she is requested to lay hands on the sick with him, or with any other officer holding the Melchizedek Priesthood, she may do so with perfect propriety. It is no uncommon thing for a man and wife unitedly to administer to their children…” (President Joseph F. Smith, The Improvement Era, Vol. 10 page 308, emphasis added).
Orson Pratt spoke of how necessary this gift was:
“How many scores and scores of cases have there been in this Church, every year since it was organized, where the parents, both brethren and sisters, have had power over disease, through the Spirit of God being poured out upon them, and their children have been healed through the laying on of their hands? … Has God ever said that these gifts should be unnecessary in the Church?” (Orson Pratt Journal of Discourses Vol 16 page 291, November 2, 1873, emphasis added.)
And finally, President Eliza R. Snow wrote in the official Relief Society magazine of the time (“The Woman’s Exponent”) that women did not need to be set apart to administer:
“Any and all sisters who honor their holy endowments, not only have the right, but should feel it a duty whenever called upon to administer to our sisters in these ordinances, which God has graciously committed to His daughters as well as to His sons; and we testify that when administered and received in faith and humility they are accompanied with all mighty power.
Inasmuch as God our Father has revealed these sacred ordinances and committed them to His Saints, it is not only our privilege but our imperative duty to apply them for the relief of human suffering.” (Women’s Exponent 13:61, 15 September 1884, emphasis added.)
Why did we stop?
As we can see, the practice of women’s healing blessings was quite ubiquitous and actively encouraged by multiple prophets and church leaders. So why did we stop?
Leading up to the turn of the century, increasingly more discussion and confusion arose surrounding the idea of women administering blessings. There were disagreements on whether it was an ordinance or not, whether it should be limited to the woman’s own family or not, whether the woman must be endowed first or not, and finally, whether it should happen at all.
The practice continued for many decades regardless, though as time went on it became quieter and more uneasy as disagreements kept rising. The organization of the Church in this time also continued to become more patriarchal, the function of the Relief Society becoming less in deference to the priesthood. At this time, Church leaders began to emphasize the scriptural instruction to “call for the elders” as written in James 5:14 (though there is debate on whether the New Testament term “elders” strictly referred only to men — read more here if you are interested).
The official end of the practice came on July 29, 1946 when Elder Joseph Fielding Smith of the Quorum of the Twelve wrote the following to the then-Relief Society General President, Belle S. Spafford:
“While the authorities of the Church have ruled that it is permissible, under certain conditions and with the approval of the priesthood, for sisters to wash and anoint other sisters, yet they feel that it is far better for us to follow the plan the Lord has given us and send for the Elders of the Church to come and administer to the sick and afflicted” (Messages of the First Presidency, 4:314).
This new instruction was circulated amongst Relief Society women into the 1950s, and any vestiges of the practice that still remained died out completely. Today, the current Church handbook states that “only Melchizedek Priesthood holders may administer to the sick or afflicted.”
A transcript of the pregnancy blessing — and why only women could give such a blessing
What we lost in the death of this beautiful practice is no small thing. To understand why, look no further than the transcript of the blessings themselves.
The following is a written-out blessing to be said in the washing, anointing, and sealing before childbirth found in the Oakley (Idaho) Second Ward Relief Society Minute Book. The below screenshots were taken from the Sunstone article “A Gift Given: A Gift Taken” by Linda Newell in which she gives context to and quotes the blessings:
What struck me in reading this the first time was just how unapologetically feminine these blessings are. These are so clearly blessings by women, for women. The blessings address things that a man may never even think to bless a woman with— let alone things a man would be comfortable with saying. Many of these things would not be comfortable for a woman to hear coming from a man, either.
What man would think to bless a woman’s postpartum bladder to protect it from accident? What man would feel comfortable blessing a woman with protection against sore nipples, or to be spared from uterine cramps and excess flow? Even if a man did bless a woman with these things, would it carry the same legitimacy, the same tenderness, the same empathy, or the same comfort, as it would coming from a woman’s mouth who has experienced these things herself? No, it would not.
These blessings fill a niche that today’s Melchezidek-priesthood-only blessings do not. This is not a slight to the good men of our Church as I know firsthand the great Christlike love many priesthood-holding men have when performing healing blessings; no, it’s just simply a fact that men and women have different experiences and will empathize about different things. Women are going to have much different things to say to another woman in a blessing than a man would. It is a shame that we no longer have that woman-to-woman spiritual outlet.
“Call for the elders” does not mean “never call for the sisters”
Undoubtedly, there are many wonderful things that come from “calling for the elders” and asking for blessings. Many of my greatest spiritual experiences have come while receiving a priesthood blessing. It is also a very growing experience for priesthood-holding men to be called upon to administer blessings.
However, just because the scriptures state that we should “call for the elders” does not mean we should never call for the sisters. One does not exclude the other!
Calling for the sisters does not mean men would be called on less— it would simply mean more blessings would happen in total. Currently, there are blessings that most women are not seeking out at all (ex: pregnancy blessings, blessings to ease menstrual cramps, etc.) that they would begin asking for in addition to the usual priesthood blessings if women became an option. Fathers, husbands, and bishops have their own style of blessings that men and women alike would still value and need. Women calling on women for female-specific blessings would not detract from that.
There are also some blessings that simply must come from a woman. For example, some women may want to ask for a woman’s blessing to emotionally heal from sexual assault as it may feel unsafe to receive it from a man. Other women may seek spiritual help navigating an abusive situation and may feel uncomfortable asking a man for it. It is hard to “call for the elders” less when they aren’t being called on at all for situations like these.
We can (and should) bring women’s blessings back if we want to follow scripture
We have the ability to bring women's blessings back with no disruption to our doctrines. In fact, I would argue that it is more doctrinally disruptive to continue keeping women out of blessings — especially when so many scriptures and prophets have clearly pointed out how and why this was an important practice.
Joseph Smith taught the sisters that they administer with the power and authority of Jesus Christ, referring to Mark 16:17–18 which reads:
“And these signs shall follow them that believe . . . they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover” (Mark 16:17–18, emphasis added).
This echoes what is written in D&C 84:64–70, which reads:
“I say unto you again, that every soul who believeth on your words, and is baptized by water for the remission of sins, shall receive the Holy Ghost. And these signs shall follow them that believe — In my name they shall do many wonderful works; In my name they shall cast out devils; In my name they shall heal the sick; In my name they shall open the eyes of the blind, and unstop the ears of the deaf; And the tongue of the dumb shall speak” (D&C 84:64–70, emphasis added).
Are women not among “them that believe”?
Are women not part of “every soul”?
If 1 Corinthians 12 is to be believed as well, spiritual gifts are available to all followers of Christ. I believe many women in our Church possess the spiritual gift of healing, as is their right as followers of Christ. While many of our women are able to exercise this gift despite not being able to give blessings, just imagine how much more effective they would be if they could! Think of the tenderness and compassion that would grow among the sisterhood; think of the countless miracles; think of all the sisters that could more easily stay in the Church if they felt the power of their own female divinity. Think also of how beautiful it would be for young girls and boys to grow up receiving blessings from their mothers — especially in single mother or widowed homes!
And finally, think of how beautiful it would be for a mother and a father to lay hands on their child together and pronounce a blessing of healing as one. It would be a beautiful bonding experience for the family. Would it not echo the divine heavenly structure between us and our Heavenly Parents? If our Heavenly Parents are one in purpose and power, should we not replicate that structure here on earth as we do with everything else?
We can’t afford not to bring this back
We can’t afford not to let women exercise their spiritual powers in the formal ritual of giving blessings. Women are an underutilized spiritual powerhouse in this regard; there are so many faithful, spiritual women ready to pronounce healing blessings on their fellow sisters or children and aren’t being allowed to. There are also many women leaving the Church because they cannot clearly see their own divinity here. This would be such a simple yet powerful balm to the female soul.
Further, the thought that a woman could face church disciplinary action for performing a blessing feels intimately wrong to me. Should it not be the right of any believer, any faithful follower of Christ, to be able to lay hands and pronounce a blessing on another? It was never a priesthood ordinance; it was simply a formal expression of faith in Christ. Why must that be limited to priesthood?
My sincere hope and prayer is that our Church leaders take this to the Lord and ask if this can be an opportunity for women once again. Women need this tender spiritual connection with their sisters. Women need to feel their divine power in this formal expression of faith.
Women need to be numbered among “them that believe”.
