Tacenda Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 http://journalofdiscourses.com/5/46 Preparation of Heart for Divine Blessings—Responsibility—Family Government - Erastus Snow Well, go on: let the good work continue. This is my prayer all the time. Are all the families of Israel and every woman striving herself to play well her part and reverence her husband as her lord; for he is her lord. Will she ever have another? No, never; and if she ever expects to have another, she has not learned "Mormonism" aright. She may tear herself loose from him and attach another, but she may have a worse one: she ought to have a worse one. If she cannot learn to honor him, the next one she gets, if she is permitted to have another, ought to be a worse one. How shall women honor their husbands? Just as we honor brother Brigham in his place, and the authorities of the Wards in their places; because upon him is laid the responsibility of that family, and he cannot get rid of it. He is in duty bound to purge them of their follies, and they are in duty bound to listen to his reproofs and honor him and pray for him, that he may be led aright. Do the women, when they pray, remember their husbands? Do you pray for brother Brigham? Yes, you should always pray for him. But when you pray for him, do you pray also for your own husband, that he may have the inspiration of the Almighty to lead and govern his family as the lord? Do you uphold your husband before God as your lord? "What! My husband to be my lord?" I ask, Can you get into the celestial kingdom without him? Have any of you been there? You will remember that you never got into the celestial kingdom without the aid of your husband. If you did, it was because your husband was away, and someone had to act proxy for him. No woman will get into the celestial kingdom, except her husband receives her, if she is worthy to have a husband; and if not, somebody will receive her as a servant.
JLHPROF Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 You want the honest answer or the PC answer? You want the Church answer in Brigham's day or the Church answer today? I think you already know the answer to your question. If you've been endowed you definitely should. Scripture is clear on it too.
bluebell Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 I don't have a problem with this as long as the exact same things were believed about (and taught to) the husband. I would not be surprised if it wasn't. Women get the shaft in almost every era in history, regardless of the society they live in. 3
Tacenda Posted December 31, 2015 Author Posted December 31, 2015 (edited) 11 minutes ago, bluebell said: I don't have a problem with this as long as the exact same things were believed about (and taught to) the husband. I would not be surprised if it wasn't. Women get the shaft in almost every era in history, regardless of the society they live in. True and that is why I thought of this. I listened to a Ted Talk from Jimmy Carter and his statement that women have the most mistreatment. And he attributes that to things read in the bible and how it's misinterpreted. I probably should have started with the Ted Talk. It's that 'lord over' mentality that cause the harm to these women. I don't believe I've seen it in my life as LDS, but I see it in the Mormon fundamentalists. https://www.ted.com/talks/jimmy_carter_why_i_believe_the_mistreatment_of_women_is_the_number_one_human_rights_abuse?language=en Edited December 31, 2015 by Tacenda
HappyJackWagon Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 I hate to break it to you Tacenda but... "King of kings and Lord of lords" can be rephrased as "King of men who will also be kings" and "Lord of men who will also be lords". Sometimes it feels like the women have a middle man in their relationship with God.
JLHPROF Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 1 minute ago, Tacenda said: True and that is why I thought of this. I listened to a Ted Talk from Jimmy Carter and his statement that women have the most mistreatment. And he attributes that to things read in the bible and how it's misinterpreted. I probably should have started with the Ted Talk. It's that 'lord over' mentality that cause the harm to these women. I don't believe I've seen it in my life as LDS, but I see it in the Mormon fundamentalists. https://www.ted.com/talks/jimmy_carter_why_i_believe_the_mistreatment_of_women_is_the_number_one_human_rights_abuse?language=en The D&C is very clear. You are right that the "Lord over" mentality has caused much harm. And the way many have followed that mentality is textbook unrighteous dominion resulting in priesthood loss. 1
Ahab Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 It says right there in the Bible, in that place where it says it in the Bible, that husbands are to devote themselves totally to their wives in the same way that our Lord devotes himself totally to his Church. And that wives should honor and equally devote themselves to their own husbands as their husbands devote themselves to them and their Lord. A man being a Lord shouldn't be considered a bad thing when a man is a Lord in the same way that our Lord, Jesus, is a Lord. And a woman should be a Lady about it when her husband treats her like Jesus would treat her. 2
JAHS Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 From the JOD (vol 2) Orson Hyde refers to Jesus as the "Lord" or husband of Mary: "When Mary of old came to the sepulchre on the first day of the week, instead of finding Jesus she saw two angels in white, "And they say unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? She said unto them, Because they have taken away my Lord," or husband, "and I know not where they have laid him. And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away. Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master." Is there not here manifested the affections of a wife. These words speak the kindred ties and sympathies that are common to that relation of husband and wife." 3
Buckeye Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 (edited) Tacenda, JLHPROF is correct in referring you to the temple ceremony. Remember that our current ceremonies are largely based on Brigham's canonization, which places men as intermediaries between God and their wife(s). Men covenant to obey God and are promised to become Kings and Priests to Him. Women covenant to obey their husbands and are promised to become Queens and Priestesses to him - the husband. Now, could the endowment ceremony be revised? Sure. There's been loads of changes made over time (see Devery Anderson's work on this). But the church's formal ceremonies today still place husbands as the gatekeepers of their wives entrance in the celestial kingdom. That said, for most LDS couples I know, this part of the temple liturgy does not bear out in any real practical ways. Men tend to only preside in conjunction with their wives; they don't try to give commands or direction as if they were lords over their wife. Typically changes to our doctrine and teachings follow behind changes in members' behavior. That may well play out here. Edited December 31, 2015 by Buckeye 1
thesometimesaint Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 It is all voluntary. The woman doesn't have to answer, and the man doesn't have to ask.
salgare Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 1 hour ago, JLHPROF said: You want the honest answer or the PC answer? You want the Church answer in Brigham's day or the Church answer today? I think you already know the answer to your question. If you've been endowed you definitely should. Scripture is clear on it too. If you took out your endowment, say the same day as your sealing ... as JLHPROF indicates you have the Temple answer (which likely is not the PC answer) 1
JLHPROF Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said: I hate to break it to you Tacenda but... "King of kings and Lord of lords" can be rephrased as "King of men who will also be kings" and "Lord of men who will also be lords". Sometimes it feels like the women have a middle man in their relationship with God. Everyone has many middle men between them and God, despite what some Christian religions claim. But everyone also has direct access to God through prayer and supplication without any interference. 2
JLHPROF Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 (edited) 58 minutes ago, Buckeye said: Tacenda, JLHPROF is correct in referring you to the temple ceremony. Remember that our current ceremonies are largely based on Brigham's canonization, which places men as intermediaries between God and their wife(s). Men covenant to obey God and are promised to become Kings and Priests to Him. Women covenant to obey their husbands and are promised to become Queens and Priestesses to him - the husband. Now, could the endowment ceremony be revised? Sure. There's been loads of changes made over time (see Devery Anderson's work on this). But the church's formal ceremonies today still place husbands as the gatekeepers of their wives entrance in the celestial kingdom. That said, for most LDS couples I know, this part of the temple liturgy does not bear out in any real practical ways. Men tend to only preside in conjunction with their wives; they don't try to give commands or direction as if they were lords over their wife. Typically changes to our doctrine and teachings follow behind changes in members' behavior. That may well play out here. Yeah, changing the ordinances...Isaiah and Joseph Smith both had things to say about that, and the results. Edited December 31, 2015 by JLHPROF
Avatar4321 Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 did you want someone else to be your lord?
The Nehor Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 “The husband is the head of the wife just in so far as he is to her what Christ is to the Church - read on - and give his life for her (Eph. V, 25). This headship, then, is most fully embodied not in the husband we should all wish to be but in him whose marriage is most like a crucifixion; whose wife receives most and gives least, is most unworthy of him, is - in her own mere nature - least lovable. For the Church has not beauty but what the Bride-groom gives her; he does not find, but makes her, lovely. The chrism of this terrible coronation is to be seen not in the joys of any man's marriage but in its sorrows, in the sickness and sufferings of a good wife or the faults of a bad one, in his unwearying (never paraded) care or his inexhaustible forgiveness: forgiveness, not acquiescence. As Christ sees in the flawed, proud, fanatical or lukewarm Church on earth that Bride who will one day be without spot or wrinkle, and labours to produce the latter, so the husband whose headship is Christ-like (and he is allowed no other sort) never despairs. He is a King Cophetua who after twenty years still hopes that the beggar-girl will one day learn to speak the truth and wash behind her ears.” ― C.S. Lewis, The Four Loves Of course we hit the old realization of Joseph that as soon as people have or think they have power they rush off to unrighteous dominion. A very wise friend of mine and I talked about this kind of lordship and I thought her comments were very correct. As best a I can recall: "I accept this kind of lordship exists and even want it but any man who would attempt to use it without the Holy Ghost is a fraud. Any guy who would appeal to it to win an argument or to shut his wife down or overrule her has lost it. 3
Tacenda Posted December 31, 2015 Author Posted December 31, 2015 2 hours ago, salgare said: If you took out your endowment, say the same day as your sealing ... as JLHPROF indicates you have the Temple answer (which likely is not the PC answer) A week before, in '84.
JLHPROF Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Tacenda said: A week before, in '84. So your endowment was even taken out well before the differences between man and woman were softened. If you think back on THAT endowment you should have an even clearer view of the topic of your thread. Post 1990 many things that upset members were softened or removed. And if Buckeye is right they may have further things removed to make people more comfortable. Edited December 31, 2015 by JLHPROF
Tacenda Posted December 31, 2015 Author Posted December 31, 2015 1 hour ago, Avatar4321 said: did you want someone else to be your lord? I guess I never let these things bother me too much, until now. So I don't want anyone but the Saviour/God to be over me. I think the scriptures are man made for their liking. Maybe we have some mixed in from the Saviour/God. But I will have to pray or study to understand better. 1
JLHPROF Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 Just now, Tacenda said: I guess I never let these things bother me too much, until now. So I don't want anyone but the Saviour/God to be over me. Virtually nobody gets that privilege, male or female. Everyone has someone over them and someone below them. Position on the chain shouldn't matter.
HappyJackWagon Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 2 hours ago, JLHPROF said: Everyone has many middle men between them and God, despite what some Christian religions claim. But everyone also has direct access to God through prayer and supplication without any interference. I realize that is what is taught but I find it very unsatisfying.
JLHPROF Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 3 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: I realize that is what is taught but I find it very unsatisfying. I fail to see why. Even if you consider husband and wife 100% equal in all things period and perfectly united, they will still as one couple have people between them and God. We all have priesthood heads. God has a priesthood head. Christ has a priesthood head. Everyone has priesthood heads. Worrying about whether one person is a little closer to another person on the ladder seems silly if we are all moving in the same direction upwards. 4
juliann Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 5 hours ago, Tacenda said: http://journalofdiscourses.com/5/46 Preparation of Heart for Divine Blessings—Responsibility—Family Government - Erastus Snow Well, go on: let the good work continue. This is my prayer all the time. Are all the families of Israel and every woman striving herself to play well her part and reverence her husband as her lord; for he is her lord. Will she ever have another? No, never; and if she ever expects to have another, she has not learned "Mormonism" aright. She may tear herself loose from him and attach another, but she may have a worse one: she ought to have a worse one. If she cannot learn to honor him, the next one she gets, if she is permitted to have another, ought to be a worse one. How shall women honor their husbands? Just as we honor brother Brigham in his place, and the authorities of the Wards in their places; because upon him is laid the responsibility of that family, and he cannot get rid of it. He is in duty bound to purge them of their follies, and they are in duty bound to listen to his reproofs and honor him and pray for him, that he may be led aright. Do the women, when they pray, remember their husbands? Do you pray for brother Brigham? Yes, you should always pray for him. But when you pray for him, do you pray also for your own husband, that he may have the inspiration of the Almighty to lead and govern his family as the lord? Do you uphold your husband before God as your lord? "What! My husband to be my lord?" I ask, Can you get into the celestial kingdom without him? Have any of you been there? You will remember that you never got into the celestial kingdom without the aid of your husband. If you did, it was because your husband was away, and someone had to act proxy for him. No woman will get into the celestial kingdom, except her husband receives her, if she is worthy to have a husband; and if not, somebody will receive her as a servant. First, what is the question. Second, answer it with modern prophets.
readstoomuch Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 I am pretty sure I can find quotes saying that I won`t get into the celestial kingdom without my wife-something I absolutely know and agree. It also seems to me that we united together as a team. That team/couple carries out the purposes of the priesthood together as equals. I don`t know why the man takes the lead or why Jesus prayed to His Father instead of His Heavenly Mother. Some things are just so and I try to live them the best I can.
Glenn101 Posted January 1, 2016 Posted January 1, 2016 (edited) 3 hours ago, readstoomuch said: I am pretty sure I can find quotes saying that I won`t get into the celestial kingdom without my wife-something I absolutely know and agree. It also seems to me that we united together as a team. That team/couple carries out the purposes of the priesthood together as equals. I don`t know why the man takes the lead or why Jesus prayed to His Father instead of His Heavenly Mother. Some things are just so and I try to live them the best I can. We also have to realize that the converse is true. No man will be able to get into the Celestial Kingdom without his wife. Maybe as ministering angels, only, man or woman. Edited January 1, 2016 by Glenn101
VideoGameJunkie Posted January 1, 2016 Posted January 1, 2016 Does Jesus bow down to Heavenly Mother?
Recommended Posts