Women teaching patriarchy to women.

[Sleeping in EQ]

I've heard the following in the same paragraph in just about every church setting: "In the church, men and women are equal partners" and "the father is the patriarch of the family"

The two are irreconcilable. I've heard people try to reconcile these statements and the mental gymnastics required to do that are incredible. I'd imagine the issue is that for years and years the father was the head of the household, even in society. This got canonized and repeated over and over at conferences and in manuals. Then the Women's Rights movement hits and society changes to a more acceptable theme that men and women should be equal. The church, under pressure of appearing incredibly mysoginistic, starts to say the father and mother are equal partners. This leaves us with two competing doctrines/policies that are irreconcilable.

The nice thing about having two doctrines on this is that you can pick and choose which one you want to use. When talking to women, a GA can talk about the equality that exists in the home and how men should help the women with their roles. When talking to men, a GA can remind the men that, because they are the patriarch and PH holder, they are more responsible for the gospel instruction and well being of the home. It basically allows for the women to be uplifted and the men to be chided, win/win right?

The famous Mormon double-speak. The virtue of the expedient. The way we sift through the contradictory tangle of Mormon teaching and select what is best at the moment.

[Moliere]

The famous Mormon double-speak. The virtue of the expedient. The way we sift through the contradictory tangle of Mormon teaching and select what is best at the moment.

Last week I was at a training where the stake leaders were pushing family history. They brought out quote after quote from GAs telling us that family history is THE most important work in the church. I found that odd since I've been told that about pretty much every thing we do in the church (missionary work, home teaching, paying tithing, raising a family, etc.).

I side with Niku on the fact that there are so many quotes and positions in the church that you can pretty much support whatever you want, within reason and sometimes outside of reason.

FTR, I'm fine with family roles. My wife stays home and I work. She does most of the housework and I do the yardwork. It works for us and both of us are happy. She does know, however, that I see us as equals and that my position as PH holder does not make me the final word or tie breaking vote on family matters. We use reason, prayer and consensus to make decisions, not PH authority.

[TripletDaddy]

Bless UtahDan for pretending that he has a "female friend" that is troubled by the upcoming lesson material and that as part of her lesson prep, she called an inactive for guidance.

Bless IndyCoug for taking issue with UtahDan's premise and then trying to dispute it by stating and then clarifying that spirituality in the home is mostly the man's job.

Bless LAUte for pointing out the folly in this discussion. If it were a true "equality," who casts the tie breaker?

nobody has defined how they are using the term, "equal." Husbands and wives specialize in various fields of household expertise and, as such, are better suited to make certain decisions than others. In some cases, they both counsel with each other or look towards outside specialists to shape group decisions. In other cases, one of the two takes the lead depending on their area of specialty.

Good for those of you in this thread that are tripping over yourselves to show that you and your wife are "equal partners," when what you are trying to say is that you cook dinner from time to time and don't make your wife fetch you a drink when you are thirsty. Congratulations, Neanderthals. You should have learned how to cook and clean on your own a long time ago, anyway.

[Indy Coug]

Bless UtahDan for pretending that he has a "female friend" that is troubled by the upcoming lesson material and that as part of her lesson prep, she called an inactive for guidance.

Bless IndyCoug for taking issue with UtahDan's premise and then trying to dispute it by stating and then clarifying that spirituality in the home is mostly the man's job.

Bless LAUte for pointing out the folly in this discussion. If it were a true "equality," who casts the tie breaker?

nobody has defined how they are using the term, "equal." Husbands and wives specialize in various fields of household expertise and, as such, are better suited to make certain decisions than others. In some cases, they both counsel with each other or look towards outside specialists to shape group decisions. In other cases, one of the two takes the lead depending on their area of specialty.

Good for those of you in this thread that are tripping over yourselves to show that you and your wife are "equal partners," when what you are trying to say is that you cook dinner from time to time and don't make your wife fetch you a drink when you are thirsty. Congratulations, Neanderthals. You should have learned how to cook and clean on your own a long time ago, anyway.

Bless DDD for trying to milk this thread.

[TripletDaddy]

Bless DDD for trying to milk this thread.

I think the thread is silly. It is a UtahDan special.

Your post stands alone in both its clumsy logic as well as not so subtle sexism. What made your post so funny was that, as UtahDan pointed out, you concede the point and then a few sentences later you go back and emphasize the very statement that conceded the point.

On an unrelated note, as General Conference approaches, what small tasks are you allowing your wife to do for the family to promote a spiritual weekend? You will be busy, of course, as the primary purveyor of spirituality in the home, but surely there is some little thing here or there that your woman might be able to contribute?

[myboynoah]

FTR, I'm fine with family roles. My wife stays home and I work. She does most of the housework and I do the yardwork. It works for us and both of us are happy. She does know, however, that I see us as equals and that my position as PH holder does not make me the final word or tie breaking vote on family matters. We use reason, prayer and consensus to make decisions, not PH authority.

36 That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness.

37 That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.

38 Behold, ere he is aware, he is left unto himself, to kick against the pricks, to persecute the saints, and to fight against God.

39 We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.

40 Hence many are called, but few are chosen.

41 No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;

42 By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile—

[Indy Coug]

On an unrelated note, as General Conference approaches, what small tasks are you allowing your wife to do for the family to promote a spiritual weekend? You will be busy, of course, as the primary purveyor of spirituality in the home, but surely there is some little thing here or there that your woman might be able to contribute?

Such a heartfelt, honest question. How can I possibly not answer this one?

[Moliere]

36 That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness.

37 That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.

38 Behold, ere he is aware, he is left unto himself, to kick against the pricks, to persecute the saints, and to fight against God.

39 We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.

40 Hence many are called, but few are chosen.

41 No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;

42 By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile—

Yep, that's why I exercise dominion, not unrighteous dominion

[TripletDaddy]

Such a heartfelt, honest question. How can I possibly not answer this one?

it isn't your primary responsibility?

[creekster]

The famous Mormon double-speak. The virtue of the expedient. The way we sift through the contradictory tangle of Mormon teaching and select what is best at the moment.

UNlike just about every other area of our lives, right?

[Sleeping in EQ]

UNlike just about every other area of our lives, right?

Actually, yes, although I don't know about the "our" because I don't know you or your life.

[Indy Coug]

UNlike just about every other area of our lives, right?

But what if it only appears to be double-speak?

[creekster]

Actually, yes, although I don't know about the "our" because I don't know you or your life.

In my experience you must lead a simple and blessed existence if you don't regularly have to choose between seemingly contradictory and inconsistent teachings. That seems to be the nature of life, IME. Moreover, I rather doubt that among religions Mormonism is unusual in the way you are suggesting. The problem here, IMO, is not so much that the church presents irreconcilable positions but that some adherents impose rigid and unrealistic meanings to some of the teachings which they then conclude are irreconcilable. As I said before, I don't believe ANY relationship under ANY value system is ever truly and fully equal. There are always differences and allocated burdens.

[Indy Coug]

In my experience you must lead a simple and blessed existence if you don't regularly have to choose between seemingly contradictory and inconsistent teachings. That seems to be the nature of life, IME. Moreover, I rather doubt that among religions Mormonism is unusual in the way you are suggesting. The problem here, IMO, is not so much that the church presents irreconcilable positions but that some adherents impose rigid and unrealistic meanings to some of the teachings which they then conclude are irreconcilable. As I said before, I don't believe ANY relationship under ANY value system is ever truly and fully equal. There are always differences and allocated burdens.

1. Multiply and replenish the earth

2. Don't partake of the fruit

[Sleeping in EQ]

In my experience you must lead a simple and blessed existence if you don't regularly have to choose between seemingly contradictory and inconsistent teachings. That seems to be the nature of life, IME. Moreover, I rather doubt that among religions Mormonism is unusual in the way you are suggesting. The problem here, IMO, is not so much that the church presents irreconcilable positions but that some adherents impose rigid and unrealistic meanings to some of the teachings which they then conclude are irreconcilable. As I said before, I don't believe ANY relationship under ANY value system is ever truly and fully equal. There are always differences and allocated burdens.

You've misunderstood me. Please keep imposing your observations on "the nature of life," though. I can't wait! I'm hanging on your every word!