A question for only the mormons.?

Question

Before I start, I'll have you know I consider myself a devout mormon. In the past general conferences, the general authorities have brought up the subject that men and women are equal in all things. I believe they are equal in the eyes of God. But in marriage, God definately put one in greater authority. Scriptures in the new testament hint at this: 1 Corinthians 11:8+9, 1 Corinthians 14:34+35, and Ephesians 5:22+23+24. This last scripture compares Husband and Wife to Christ and the church which clearly puts one above the other in authority if not pretty much everything. Why then, does it seem like the church officials almost seem to accuse all the bretheren of unrighteous dominion over their wives? When they say that the wives are equal to the husbands in family decision and even all things, I believe this is something Paul would not have us believe. I believe this leads to insubordinate women and femenism in the church. Anybody think so?

Since there are so many non-mormons answering, this question should apply to you since these scriptures are all in the bible.

Some of these responses just amaze me. I don't care if it's a new age or what, how can you ignore the teachings of Paul when it's convenient? People in the church these days aren't persecuted or hated at all! Just a few bad words said and that's it. It's because the church for the most part has become a friend of the world. Scriptures tell us that when you befriend the world, you become an enemy to God. This is true especially today as oppossed to when Paul or Brigham Young was around. It would be best if we were persecuted and pushed into the pacific ocean with violence than to openly accept and appease the world.

Answer 1

Your church also teaches that a women is already spiritual, but it also teaches that a women is a possession, so I don't see what the problemo is...The men have the priesthood and the prophet as well and that still is not enough for you all..
AND YOU ARE THINKING< OMGosh.
women posessions:
http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon468.htm
Women are also treated less then what the apostle Paul said:
http://www.exmormon.org/mormwomn.htm...

Answer 2

It is often said that modern-day Christianity should more appropriately be called Paulism.

Paul never actually met Christ, but was converted through a spiritual experience later. He introduced a lot of judaic principles into the doctrines that he taught. While men and women do have different roles, most Christians (at least the ones that analyze the Bible, instead of reading it word-for-word and accepting everything literally) realize that Paul's words aren't necessarily God's words.

The Church's standpoint is a classic case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing. It is trying to play a balancing act between accusations of abuse (or at least trying to appease critics) and traditional LDS definitions of authority roles.

Although I do not believe the Church to be "true", I do find many of its values to be square-on. I would recommend prayerfully studying the Proclamation to the World: The Family. Although it alludes to certain doctrines lacking in truth, I don't believe there is a religious declaration out there that more appropriately strikes the appropriate balance between male and female role distinctions, and equality in the eyes of God.

Feminism and insubordination are buzzwords that, unfortunately, have been loaded with negative connotation by events like the anti-ERA movement and Boyd K Packer's anti-gay/anti-feminist/anti-intellectual campaign of the early 1990s.

Although I don't believe in the doctrines of the Church, my wife absolutely does. She, too, is a devout Mormon. However, she is NOT by any means my subordinate. In many respects, you might even call her a "feminist." She values a career, her education, and her liberty to live her own life. She chooses, however, not to work and to stay at home with our daughter during the day. She doesn't do it because of my "authority" to instruct her to do so, but because she chooses to make her family a priority. If she chose to work, I would support her in that and make the necessary adjustments so that I could be home with our daughter when she isn't.

Marriage is give-and-take, and whether you're LDS or atheist, "unrighteous dominion" is much more dangerous of a sin than "role ambiguity" could ever be.

Answer 3

The Church has always been a supporter of the equality of women. It didn't start recently. The Utah territory gave female suffrage right after Wyoming. It was repealed when Gentiles took over the government. The Church struggled to keep women out of poverty and need. The Church established a separate ecclesiastical organization, the Relief Society, to give women their own role in spreading the Gospel. Today we study from the same lesson book as the Priesthood.

That President Hinckley has to use time to address the Priesthood on the matter of abuse is a sign that he must be getting more than a few cries for help from the sisters. If it does not apply to you, that is well. Take notes in case you are ever in a bishopric, because you will need to know.

Answer 4

I am an LDS convert, also very devout even though I raise brows and march very much to my own drum. I have a VERY balanced marriage. I believe that the reason the conferences bring up the issue of unrighteous dominion is because it can become a problem when you have a situation where husband and wife are not equally yoked and the husband makes choices simply to make them without seeking the council of God first. We are taught to harken unto our husbands as they harken unto the council of Heavenly Father - that is the connection. If the husband has not gone to Heavenly Father for process/prayer/meditation, etc. and then forces an answer on his wife that is not one that comes from proper prayer then it is a problem. I have watched this happen many times. My husband and I are very equally yoked and both have strong convictions about our place in life and in God's house. When we have a decision to make we seek first a discussion together, then prayer together and then if needed he will seek prayer alone - this is almost never an issue - 9 times in 10 we come to the same conclusion after the first prayer. We often go to the Temple for further confirmation if needed (or just to serve in the Lord's house!) We both believe that feminism in the Church is a good thing if handled properly. We all have our place - without him I could not be who I am and without me and the children, well frankly he would be bored and a lone man in this garden! Being here is about learning together how to get back to our Heavenly Father - so much can be put on our ego selves - a much bigger sin in my book that feminism will ever be! Just my thoughts.

Answer 5

I agree with Jacob D. The reason the Bretheren bring this up so often in General Conference is because they see things that we don't. The see trends that are occuring in the church and they know how easy it would be for men to act in a dominating way toward their bride. Since it has been discussed numerous times, it seems to me that it must be a very important problem that they are seeing. Any time we see something repeated in the scriptures it's an opportunity to really sit up and pay attention. Since General Conference Ensign issues are considered our most recent scripture, it stands to reason that if an issue is talked about repeatedly in General Conference then it must be extremely important.

I think this may be an opportunity for you (Nathan S) to reevaluate where you stand with God. And having said that, I think maybe I need to too.

Answer 6

It's not about a hierarchy, it's about delegation. Go back and re-read the Proclaimation on the Family. It is the husband's primary focus to provide and protect the family. It is the wife's primary focus to raise and nurture. A marriage in proper balance doesn't need everyone reporting back. Hence, the reason for the accounting to come from the husband. Any man who dictates unto his wife is exercising unrighteous dominion. If you really wonder how it works, look to the example the prophets have set. Joseph was no dictator in his home. He was charitable and loving and concerned about Emma's emotional and temporal welfare. Look to President Benson and the marriage he had with his wife -- to see the two of them together, you would think that she wore the pants of the family - she was such a little fireball with a tremendous sense of humor [and President Hinckley was often the subject of her humor]. Or look at President McKay and the way he treated his sweetheart. Or any of the brethern... The reason we have prophets today is to clarify matters such as this.
Your wife is a daughter of God -- think about the stereotype of meeting the father here on earth -- now think about that on the eternal scheme of things. Daughters of God are very precious -- their tender hearts make them more likely to seek out lovely things - chivalry, courtesy, manners, love. I don't see a loving Father in Heaven taking kindly to anyone making his daughter cry through being demanding or course. Service should the be watchword and cry of every marriage. Lead by example, not by reproving.
I think Paul is often misquoted and misunderstood -- and used by small men who don't understand how precious their wives are. Go back to your example of Christ and the Church -- the Savior suffered untold agony and was crucified - for love not only of the church, but all mankind. There was no demand, no dictate. Only love. The first shall be last and the last shall be first. Devote your might, mind and strength to your wife -- and if you're lucky- she'll do the same to you.

EDIT: btw- a husband and wife will NEVER receive contrary revelation regarding family matters -- and each is entitled to have that witness for themselves.

Answer 7

Well if we are going by what Paul teaches, then we really should not be married, according to him Marriage is only for the weak. Not that I am discounting Paul- But if you are using him as an example you can't pick and choose his teachings.

Really like others have said, refer to the Proclamation about this. If you go to the temple- I would encourage you to really pay attention, put your "men should be in Authority" attitude aside and try to understand this principle. You will find that the teaching on this matter are very clear, women are to be companions and partners to their husbands, and that we are to heed their counsel as long as they are righteous and following the Lord. If you believe that the General Authorities are called of God and that the 12 apostles and the First Presidency are ordained as Prophets, Seers and Revelators and are the mouthpiece of God, then you should not have a problem with following their teachings on this matter. Following their teachings is essentially following God's teachings. If you sustain them, then you agree to follow their counsel on this and other matters.

When it comes to things like this, I always go with what Modern Day prophets are saying on the matter. If we could sit Paul down and ask him to explain- I am sure we could get a better understanding,but since we can't do that then we really have to look to what the Lord is telling us through the men he has called to lead us.

Answer 8

Men and women are equal in the Mormon Church and in the eyes of the Lord. However, you can be "equal" and yet have different roles. men and women have different roles. Women give birth to children. That is a role singular to the women. One of the singular roles for men, is to carry out responsibilities of the priesthood.

There are also "shared" roles that either the man or the woman can do, like nurture, care for, train and educate your children.

In my view, this is not inconsistent with Paul. You can be equal in status, but have one be the "leader."

And in my view, God has given men the priesthood to "teach or require" men to learn service, compassion, and Christlike concern for others. Perhaps the reason men have the priesthood is that they need to be required to do these things in order to learn them and make them a part of their natures. Women on the other hand seem to be naturally compassionate, caring, nurturing, etc. Perhaps they do not need to be "taught" those things and therefore do not need to hold the priesthood in that sense.

Answer 9

Men are given the priesthood and are therefore in authority to make the decisions, but the scriptures also make it clear that men and women are to cleave unto each other and that they both need each other.

I think that there is a fine balancing line to be made. If a man receives revelation on what is best for his family, then he should act accordingly. However, I think he should consult with his family to see what they think. That is why men should listen to their wives. After all, we are told to study things out before asking God.

Also, we are warned against unrighteous dominion (D&C 121). Men acting in their interest and not in the interest of their family are exercising this and will lose the power to act in God's name.

Answer 10

I hate to "denounce" a fellow Mormon, but the opinion Nathan S has expressed is not in harmony with the teachings of the Mormon Church. As Nathan S himself states, "general authorities have brought up the subject that men and women are equal in all things." General authorities are the global leaders of the Mormon Church.

In fact, this is not an example of a church oppressing women. This is an example of a church trying to prevent the oppression of women. Unfortunately, Nathan S doesn't seem to have gotten the Mormon message on this issue.

No offense, Nathan S, but I have to call it how I see it. :)

http://www.allaboutmormons.com