This verse came up in our “Come
Follow Me” discussion this morning, of course, since it was in the reading. I
have always had no problem with the concept of church leaders giving their own
opinions of things (which are influenced by the cultures they live in). Sometimes
the church leaders are also the authors of scripture, but I don’t think that
just because Paul’s letter was collected and included in the bundle of
documents that became the King James Version means that everything he says is
the opinion and doctrine of God. We talked together about the fact that there are
many Christian sects that do believe every word of the bible to be the word of
God, and that they see it as a precarious practice to delve into issues of
culture in the interpretation of what God wants us to do with the opinions of
the writers of, and speakers within, scripture. This can look to others as “picking
and choosing,” and that can lead to dangerous results.
Which is why we need living
prophets and personal revelation, of course.
So we got on the subject of
living prophets. I told my sixteen-year-old about how I have seen, in my
lifetime, an effort by General Authorities in General Conference to begin to steer
the church culture away from the model of the dominating patriarch within the
family. There was a period of years when I was a young wife when I would ask my
husband each time he came home from the priesthood session of General Conference,
“Were there any ‘wife talks’?” Because there almost always was at least one
talk to the men asking them to be less dominating (or abusive) and more
nurturing of their wives, encouraging them to see and treat their wives as equal.
I know that there are many who like to point out the ways our rhetoric could
still improve in this area, but I think it’s important to acknowledge the progress
we’ve made. I asked my son at the beginning of this conversation how he knows
that God doesn’t really expect wives to “submit” to their husbands any more
than husbands should submit to their wives (in a relationship of caring and
charity), and he talked about what he sees in the families at church (“by their
fruits”). I think it’s great that it hadn’t really occurred to him that God
would actually mean that men should dominate. Things ARE changing.
I was thinking about President
Hinckley, who is one of the people I attribute this cultural change to, and
what comes to mind is the feisty personality of his wife. I think there is
absolutely a connection between these things. I think President Hinckley was
the man he was, and able to do what he did, in part because his wife was who
SHE was. I think he listened to her, and this enabled him to seek and/or
receive the revelations he did about guiding the church to do better in this
area. I think also about the first time I heard Elder Uchtdorf (President
Uchtdorf at the time) speak to the women in Women’s Conference, and how I came
home and told my husband, “He must have an articulate, thoughtful wife” because
I could tell, from the way he spoke to women, that he understood the kinds of
things we struggle with.
As I ponder the connection I believe
exists between our male leaders who have helped our culture evolve in terms of the
treatment of and rhetoric around women, I think of how President Nelson has
made an obvious effort to include his own wife in his talks. He refers to her
often, using “we” much more regularly than I’ve heard before, and invites her
to speak along with him more often than we’ve seen a prophet do before. She
also is a strong woman, obviously, but I want to give him kudos for respecting,
including—even using—her. I believe that he is changing the culture, and
hope, excitedly, that he is setting a precedent and that prophets’ wives will
become more visible as a new tradition.
We live in exciting times. I know
that many wish that the progress would come faster, but it is coming. Let’s
take time to recognize and rejoice in it.
No comments:
Post a Comment