**Update** Some people have been having difficulty commenting. Please type your comment in a different application and then copy and paste to the form. If it doesn't show, you can email it to me directly at daisyzombie@gmail.com and I will post it for you. Thank you!**
I recently was asked a question about the stance of the LDS
church on public breastfeeding, and more specifically, whether or not a
breastfeeding cover was a requirement for “modesty”. Like many issues
that we come up against in today’s society, the Church doesn’t have an
official stance that they have come out with. In such situations, I find
it helpful to look into Church doctrine, scripture, and other materials
distributed by the church to find evidence of the Church’s disposition
towards a certain practice. To be clear, I am in no way claiming to be a
spokesperson for the Church or for other members of the Church. All
views contained here are strictly my own.
The first place I came across where breastfeeding was portrayed was in the Church’s artwork, and in fact, it was almost the sole area where there is any information at all. There are multiple instances of women breastfeeding in LDS artwork, and I have put many of them here, along with links.
The illustration below is of an LDS church meeting in 1871 and was printed in the Harper’s Bazaar magazine. The meeting took place in the Mormon Tabernacle. The full image can be seen by clicking on the link, and is displayed in the LDS History Museum. Notice that there are two women breastfeeding in the front row.
http://rixarixa.blogspot.com/2010/08/breastfeeding-history-moment-lds.html
At Temple Square, a place which has been used constantly to tell others about our religion and what we believe in, the Seagull Monument contains an image depicting a woman breastfeeding. Not only is she “uncovered”, but her breast is exposed.
Source: http://shelleybeatty.com/travel/salt-lake-city-temple-square-the-temple-flowers-and-incredible-beauty/
This next picture is displayed in the LDS Cardston, Alberta temple, and there is a woman who is breastfeeding as Christ is teaching and has her breast fully exposed. There are two other babies shown in the nursing position, although some high quality close-ups provided to me by a friend show that it is disputable whether they are actually nursing. All artwork in the temples has to be approved by General Authorities. Click the link for better picture quality.
http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=32332e4d12fdb010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&vgnextoid=f318118dd536c010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD
A final picture, currently at the University of Utah, contributed by the LDS Museum of History and Art there is a painting containing an image of a pioneer woman breastfeeding. She can be seen in front of a wagon wheel, her breast is also exposed.
http://content.lib.utah.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/Utah_Artists/id/710
I’d like to make some points about these images. Firstly, the breastfeeding is happening in the presence of men, and men who are unrelated to the women. That is one argument that I have heard, to the effect of “It’s ok if you want to breastfeed, but not with MEN around.” Apparently there have been many times in the church’s history where MEN were perfectly comfortable with a mother seeing to her child’s needs and were able to refrain from uncomfortable behavior around her.
Secondly, none of the women are using any type of cover other than what their clothing naturally shields. The General Authorities have specified modesty to us even down to the number of earrings that a woman should wear, but they have made no mention of breastfeeding in any of these discussions of modesty.
Thirdly, no one seems to be uncomfortable in these pictures or seems to think anything of the fact that there are women breastfeeding. This shows that the behavior of these women was a normal culturally accepted behavior.
Lastly, and I think most importantly, these images are displayed in areas that General Authorities visit on a regular, and sometimes daily, basis. However, none of them have had anything to say about the “inappropriate” or “immodest” depictions of the women. These are not images that are hidden in rarely visited corners of the Church, but are prominently displayed and approved by church authorities to be displayed in this way.
These pictures show that there was a time when openly feeding your child at the breast was an accepted and natural occurrence for modest and devout members of the church. However, there’s seems to have been a change in the culture of the church in some areas to the extent that it is no longer seen as a modest and seemly practice by some members. Why did this change occur? What is different now in comparison to the past? Still searching in doctrine, I found this quote from A Parent’s Guide, which is a manual distributed to members of the Church to guide and direct parents in the rearing of their children.
A quote from A Parent’s Guide:
“The scriptures often refer respectfully but plainly to the body and its parts. There is no embarrassment and often there is sacred symbolism. It is the world that makes the divinely created body an object of carnal lust. For example, it makes the female breasts primarily into sexual enticements, while the truth is that they were intended to nourish and comfort children. It promotes male sexual aggression in contrast to Christ’s example of tenderness, long-suffering, kindness, and steadfastness in the home.
Shame about the human body, its parts and purposes, is justified only when a person uses it for carnal purposes. Teach your children that they will find joy in their bodies when they use them virtuously after the manner taught by Christ.”
https://www.lds.org/manual/a-parents-guide/chapter-5-teaching-adolescents-from-twelve-to-eighteen-years?lang=eng
The perversion of the female breast being seen as a sexual object is not a new phenomenon. What has changed recently is our perspective of the breast when being properly used in the “nurturing and comforting of children.” Instead of appreciating and understanding this blessing from our Heavenly Father, our culture seems to be trending toward pushing embarrassment and shame onto mothers. So, in essence if our culture is moving in this direction then Satan is succeeding in changing the view that we should have of our OWN bodies to something contrary to the divine purpose appointed by God. This is in addition to also changing the definition of masculinity, from something steady and kind, to something predatory and aggressive.
From this change, two trains of thought among LDS women have sprung up. One mindset is that, because men have been taught that they are predatory and sexually driven, women feel that they need to protect themselves from men, and also protect men from their own carnal thoughts, by relying on conservatism in dress and behavior, thereby reducing opportunities for Satan’s temptations.
The other mindset is to resist Satan’s influence in our culture as a whole; to encourage resistance to temptation by seeing the female body from a heavenly and accurate perspective. They believe that by setting the example of treating their bodies as they were divinely designed to be treated is the most effective way of resisting Satan’s misdefinition of modesty and hope they will raise a generation that no longer holds the false ideas of the previous one.
It seems that the choice to cover or not to cover is an intensely personal one. According to my research, either choice is an appropriate one, and the most important thing is that we are respectful of each other’s choices. The authorities of the Church have been approached numerous times with a request to come out with a statement about breastfeeding and they have not. The only other direction that I could find besides that in A Parent’s Guide is a comment from LDS church spokesman Scott Trotter :
"Countless thousands of mothers have been accommodated in church for generations, simply by everyone observing common sense, discretion and respect."
There is a place in the Church for women who want to sit on the front row in Sacrament meeting and breastfeed their active toddler and a place for the mother who prefers the discreteness of a cover or a mother’s lounge. It is not an issue of modesty or sexuality, but one of comfort for both the mother and the child.
An additional thought: I don't wish for any of this to imply anything negative about those mothers for whom breastfeeding their children is not a viable option. How wonderful it is that God has provided us with the knowledge to create an alternative for all of the children who do not have access to breast milk for any reason!
The first place I came across where breastfeeding was portrayed was in the Church’s artwork, and in fact, it was almost the sole area where there is any information at all. There are multiple instances of women breastfeeding in LDS artwork, and I have put many of them here, along with links.
The illustration below is of an LDS church meeting in 1871 and was printed in the Harper’s Bazaar magazine. The meeting took place in the Mormon Tabernacle. The full image can be seen by clicking on the link, and is displayed in the LDS History Museum. Notice that there are two women breastfeeding in the front row.
http://rixarixa.blogspot.com/
At Temple Square, a place which has been used constantly to tell others about our religion and what we believe in, the Seagull Monument contains an image depicting a woman breastfeeding. Not only is she “uncovered”, but her breast is exposed.
Source: http://shelleybeatty.com/
This next picture is displayed in the LDS Cardston, Alberta temple, and there is a woman who is breastfeeding as Christ is teaching and has her breast fully exposed. There are two other babies shown in the nursing position, although some high quality close-ups provided to me by a friend show that it is disputable whether they are actually nursing. All artwork in the temples has to be approved by General Authorities. Click the link for better picture quality.
http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/
A final picture, currently at the University of Utah, contributed by the LDS Museum of History and Art there is a painting containing an image of a pioneer woman breastfeeding. She can be seen in front of a wagon wheel, her breast is also exposed.
http://content.lib.utah.edu/
I’d like to make some points about these images. Firstly, the breastfeeding is happening in the presence of men, and men who are unrelated to the women. That is one argument that I have heard, to the effect of “It’s ok if you want to breastfeed, but not with MEN around.” Apparently there have been many times in the church’s history where MEN were perfectly comfortable with a mother seeing to her child’s needs and were able to refrain from uncomfortable behavior around her.
Secondly, none of the women are using any type of cover other than what their clothing naturally shields. The General Authorities have specified modesty to us even down to the number of earrings that a woman should wear, but they have made no mention of breastfeeding in any of these discussions of modesty.
Thirdly, no one seems to be uncomfortable in these pictures or seems to think anything of the fact that there are women breastfeeding. This shows that the behavior of these women was a normal culturally accepted behavior.
Lastly, and I think most importantly, these images are displayed in areas that General Authorities visit on a regular, and sometimes daily, basis. However, none of them have had anything to say about the “inappropriate” or “immodest” depictions of the women. These are not images that are hidden in rarely visited corners of the Church, but are prominently displayed and approved by church authorities to be displayed in this way.
These pictures show that there was a time when openly feeding your child at the breast was an accepted and natural occurrence for modest and devout members of the church. However, there’s seems to have been a change in the culture of the church in some areas to the extent that it is no longer seen as a modest and seemly practice by some members. Why did this change occur? What is different now in comparison to the past? Still searching in doctrine, I found this quote from A Parent’s Guide, which is a manual distributed to members of the Church to guide and direct parents in the rearing of their children.
A quote from A Parent’s Guide:
“The scriptures often refer respectfully but plainly to the body and its parts. There is no embarrassment and often there is sacred symbolism. It is the world that makes the divinely created body an object of carnal lust. For example, it makes the female breasts primarily into sexual enticements, while the truth is that they were intended to nourish and comfort children. It promotes male sexual aggression in contrast to Christ’s example of tenderness, long-suffering, kindness, and steadfastness in the home.
Shame about the human body, its parts and purposes, is justified only when a person uses it for carnal purposes. Teach your children that they will find joy in their bodies when they use them virtuously after the manner taught by Christ.”
https://www.lds.org/manual/a-
The perversion of the female breast being seen as a sexual object is not a new phenomenon. What has changed recently is our perspective of the breast when being properly used in the “nurturing and comforting of children.” Instead of appreciating and understanding this blessing from our Heavenly Father, our culture seems to be trending toward pushing embarrassment and shame onto mothers. So, in essence if our culture is moving in this direction then Satan is succeeding in changing the view that we should have of our OWN bodies to something contrary to the divine purpose appointed by God. This is in addition to also changing the definition of masculinity, from something steady and kind, to something predatory and aggressive.
From this change, two trains of thought among LDS women have sprung up. One mindset is that, because men have been taught that they are predatory and sexually driven, women feel that they need to protect themselves from men, and also protect men from their own carnal thoughts, by relying on conservatism in dress and behavior, thereby reducing opportunities for Satan’s temptations.
The other mindset is to resist Satan’s influence in our culture as a whole; to encourage resistance to temptation by seeing the female body from a heavenly and accurate perspective. They believe that by setting the example of treating their bodies as they were divinely designed to be treated is the most effective way of resisting Satan’s misdefinition of modesty and hope they will raise a generation that no longer holds the false ideas of the previous one.
It seems that the choice to cover or not to cover is an intensely personal one. According to my research, either choice is an appropriate one, and the most important thing is that we are respectful of each other’s choices. The authorities of the Church have been approached numerous times with a request to come out with a statement about breastfeeding and they have not. The only other direction that I could find besides that in A Parent’s Guide is a comment from LDS church spokesman Scott Trotter :
"Countless thousands of mothers have been accommodated in church for generations, simply by everyone observing common sense, discretion and respect."
There is a place in the Church for women who want to sit on the front row in Sacrament meeting and breastfeed their active toddler and a place for the mother who prefers the discreteness of a cover or a mother’s lounge. It is not an issue of modesty or sexuality, but one of comfort for both the mother and the child.
An additional thought: I don't wish for any of this to imply anything negative about those mothers for whom breastfeeding their children is not a viable option. How wonderful it is that God has provided us with the knowledge to create an alternative for all of the children who do not have access to breast milk for any reason!
