Thoughts on Gospel Principles relating to priorities and responsibilities in the Home


Recommended Posts

Here are some things that I have been piecing together, specifically dealing with the proper proportions and priorities that should exist in the home.

I'd appreciate any feedback on the interpretation of each item, as well as the relationship between them, or additional overriding principles that are now represented.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- "No other success can compensate for failure in the home" (Pres. David O. McKay). I believe this also means that no success in one aspect of the home can compensate for failure in another aspect, and no obedience at one thing can make up for continued disobedience in another.

- Every calling has duties and responsibilities that are inseparably bound to that calling.

- "Father and mother are callings from which we will never be released, and there is no more important stewardship than the responsibility we have for God's spirit children who come into our families" (Elder M. Russell Ballard). I believe this means that mothers and fathers will never be released from the responsibilities that come from those callings.

- "By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners. Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation. Extended families should lend support when needed," (The Family: A Proclamation to the World). From my understanding, this is not saying that disability, death, or "other circumstances" will release either mothers or fathers from being as diligent as they possibly can be in fulfilling the duties stated above, but recognizes that there are many who's individual capabilities may be insufficient to provide for the essential needs of their family members and may need outside help to make sure their responsibilities are met, and just as Christ doesn't always take away our burdens but gives us the help we need to endure them.

- I believe fathers and mothers are still responsible to make sure their responsibilities are met, even if they are not able to do it with their own hands and require "adaptations"

- In the "adaptations" mentioned above, one spouse is not expected to give assistance to the other spouse to the point where they are not able to fulfill their own primary duties, correct?

- If one spouse is requesting adaptations because they feel they are incapable of fulfilling all their duties, should the spouse requesting assistance be free to do whatever they want with the time and resources they have available, or should any extra time or energy be devoted back to completing their duties, or helping to take up whatever work they can to lighten the load of those family members who are giving assistance, correct? (Similar to if someone can't work and is on Church Welfare - they are expected to serve where they can instead of just going fishing all day).

- "To nurture means to cultivate, care for, and make grow. Therefore, mothers who know create a climate for spiritual and temporal growth in their homes. Another word for nurturing is homemaking. Homemaking includes cooking, washing clothes and dishes, and keeping an orderly home. Home is where women have the most power and influence; therefore, Latter-day Saint women should be the best homemakers in the world. Working beside children in homemaking tasks creates opportunities to teach and model qualities children should emulate. Nurturing mothers are knowledgeable, but all the education women attain will avail them nothing if they do not have the skill to make a home that creates a climate for spiritual growth. Growth happens best in a “house of order,” and women should pattern their homes after the Lord’s house (see D&C 109). Nurturing requires organization, patience, love, and work." (Sis. Julie B. Beck). I have quite a few questions about this one:

  • This pretty much sets that a Mother's primary responsibility to "Nurture" includes doing the work that is typically considered "unfulfilling", "mundane" and "oppressive" by the standards of many women today, correct?
  • Combined with the lines from the Family Proclamation, doesn't this also mean that homemaking is a primary responsibility in the life of the mother, more so than her own "optional" talent development, or trying to grasp onto those things that it is not the correct "season" for?
  • These tasks are only secondary responsibilities to the husband, and that he should not give up fulfilling his primary responsibilities to compensate for any inability or choice of the wife to not fulfill them, correct?
  • The mother is expected to take personal responsibility for homemaking, not holding back or waiting around for the husband to "do his part" so she is not "taken advantage of" or "taken for granted", correct?
- "A wise woman renews herself. In proper season, she develops her talents and continues her education." (Elder Russell M. Nelson) "But, my dear granddaughters, you cannot do everything well at the same time. You cannot be a 100 percent wife, a 100 percent mother, a 100 percent church worker, a 100 percent career person, and a 100 percent public-service person at the same time. How can all of these roles be coordinated? Says Sarah Davidson: “The only answer I come up with is that you can have it sequentially. At one stage you may emphasize career, and at another marriage and nurturing young children, and at any point you will be aware of what is missing. If you are lucky, you will be able to fit everything in ... A woman does not necessarily have to track a career like a man does. She may fit more than one career into the various seasons of life. She need not try to sing all of the verses of her song at the same time ... The Book of Ecclesiastes says: “To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven.” ... The various roles of women have not decreased a woman’s responsibility. While these roles are challenging, the central roles of wife and mother remain in the soul and cry out to be satisfied. It is in the soul to want to love and be loved by a good man and to be able to respond to the God-given, deepest feelings of womanhood—those of being a mother and nurturer." (Pres. James E. Faust) Doesn't this denote that a woman's focusing on chosen talents must come after her duties as Mother are completed, and that in certain "seasons", they may not be developed at all?

- "When the Lord gives us a call through his servants, he takes into account all of our talents and abilities and needs. The call is to the whole person including the hidden talents that only become apparent when we are doing all we can." (Ensign, Oct 1979) Does this not say that we can fulfill the commandment to magnify and develop our talents simply by fulfilling and magnifying the callings that we have received, and that by magnifying those callings we are working on the talents that the Lord needs us to work on to be the disciple he needs us to be?

- "We may, for instance, have a specific set of skills which we mistakenly come to think we somehow own. If we continue to cling to those more than to God, we are flinching in the face of the consecrating first commandment. Since God lends us “breath … from one moment to another,” hyperventilating over these distractions is not recommended! (Mosiah 2:21)." (Elder Neal A. Maxwell) I believe this goes along with the theory that we don't always get to pick which talents we get to work on at any given time, or that our talents can't compensate for not fully consecrating ourselves and yielding to the Lord's time table or priorities.

- "The third category has to do with the nice-to-do things. Those are crafts and hobbies and recreational reading and movies and travel and lunches with friends. A lot of women call this “time out.” These things won’t save us. They add variety to our lives, but they won’t save us. When our priorities are on that list, and our time is devoted to those nice-to-do things, our priorities are out of order, and we lose power." (Sis Julie B. Beck) If we are spending an excessive amount of time in the "nice-to-do" list of things, and expect these things to compensate for our lack of diligence, is that a feeble attempt to "compensate for failure in the home"? Shouldn't fulfilling our primary duties as husband / wife come before these things? Shouldn't we deny ourselves of these things until our responsibilities are fulfilled?

- "Among those who do not sacrifice there are two extremes: one is the rich, gluttonous man who won’t and the other is the poor, destitute man who believes he can’t. But how can you ask someone who is starving to eat less? Is there a level of poverty so low that sacrifice should not be expected or a family so destitute that paying tithing should cease to be required? ... The story of the widow of Zarephath is an example of extreme poverty used to teach the doctrine that mercy cannot rob sacrifice any more than it can rob justice. In fact, the truer measure of sacrifice isn’t so much what one gives to sacrifice as what one sacrifices to give (see Mark 12:43). Faith isn’t tested so much when the cupboard is full as when it is bare. In these defining moments, the crisis doesn’t create one’s character—it reveals it. The crisis is the test. ... One reason the Lord illustrates doctrines with the most extreme circumstances is to eliminate excuses. If the Lord expects even the poorest widow to pay her mite, where does that leave all others who find that it is not convenient or easy to sacrifice?" (Elder Lynn G. Robbins) Does this also apply to those who are physically, mentally, or emotionally "destitute"?

- "Selfishness is often expressed in stubbornness of mind. Having a “mind hardened in pride” often afflicts the brightest who could also be the best. “One thing” the brightest often lack: meekness! Instead of having “a willing mind” which seeks to emulate the “mind of Christ,” a “mind hardened in pride” is impervious to counsel and often seeks ascendancy. Jesus, who was and is “more intelligent than they all,” is also more meek than they all." ... "Too often when we seek to excuse ourselves, it is, ironically, "the natural man" we are excusing. Yet scriptures inform us "the natural man" is to be "put off" (see Mosiah 3:19). "He" certainly should not be "kept on" because of a mistaken sense that the natural man constitutes our individuality." (Elder Neal A. Maxwell). Those who are strong-willed need to be extra cautious that they are not "hardened in pride", correct? They need to deliberately put off their natural man and increase in meekness and temperance, correct?

- "Built, therefore, into the seemingly ordinary experiences of life are opportunities for us to acquire such eternal attributes as love, mercy, meekness, patience, and submissiveness and to develop and sharpen such skills as how to communicate, motivate, delegate, and manage our time and talents and our thoughts in accordance with eternal priorities. These attributes and skills are portable; they are never obsolete and will be much needed in the next world." (Elder Neal A. Maxwell) From what I can gather, just "being nice" isn't enough - we need to work on obtaining not only each attribute, but each of the skills mentioned as well.

- "The Lord drew boundary lines to define acceptable limits of tolerance. Danger rises when those divine limits are disobeyed. Just as parents teach little children not to run and play in the street, the Savior taught us that we need not tolerate evil. “Jesus went into the temple of God, … and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers” (Matthew 21:12; see also Mark 11:15). Though He loves the sinner, the Lord said that He “cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance” (D&C 1:31). Real love for the sinner may compel courageous confrontation — not acquiescence! Real love does not support self-destructing behavior." (Elder Russell M. Nelson) From what I can glean, I am to love my wife, not her self-destructive and family destructive habits, correct?

- "It is necessary to prepare and to plan so that we don’t fritter away our lives. Without a goal, there can be no real success. One of the best definitions of success I have ever heard goes something like this: Success is the progressive realization of a worthy ideal. Someone has said the trouble with not having a goal is that you can spend your life running up and down the field and never crossing the goal line. Years ago there was a romantic and fanciful ballad that contained the words, “Wishing will make it so / Just keep on wishing / And care will go.” 4 I want to state here and now that wishing will not replace thorough preparation to meet the trials of life. Preparation is hard work but absolutely essential for our progress. Our journey into the future will not be a smooth highway which stretches from here to eternity. Rather, there will be forks and turnings in the road, to say nothing of the unanticipated bumps. " (Pres. Thomas S. Monson) From what I can glean in this one, daily planning, and preparing for the future isn't just something that "Highly Successful" people do, it is something that we all must learn how to do, not matter how unnecessary it may seem.

- "The Lord gave man instructions in the Garden of Eden “to dress it, and to keep it” (Moses 3:15). The Lord requires this of us today as He did then. We are expected and required to care for and beautify whatever space we occupy on this earth. Whether we are homeowners or tenants, we should feel responsible for keeping property clean, neat, and attractive." (Relief Society Manual -"The Latter-Day Saint Woman") Doesn't this say that keeping a clean house and property is more than just something that is nice to do if we can, but is actually a commandment?

- "Now we ask you to clean up your homes. . . . We urge each of you to dress and keep in a beautiful state the property that is in your hands” / “Whatever your circumstance,let your premises reflect orderliness, beauty, and happiness” (Pres. Spencer W. Kimball) Do the "circumstances" spoken of here include things such as illness and injury, even if we are not able to meet the requirement ourselves?

- "In describing how we can “manage ourselves wisely” [Elder Neal A. Maxwell] quoted Anne Morrow Lindbergh, who said, “My life cannot implement in action the demands of all the people to whom my heart responds.” Elder Maxwell taught that “some choices are matters of preference, not principle,” adding that “wisdom and order [will] help us to separate preferences from principles” (p. 43). We are wise to conclude that we can’t do it all and that we are not required to. When we feel overwhelmed with all that presses upon us, we should pray for inspiration to guide us in identifying what is required by eternal principles. These things command priority. We do them first. Then, in the time that remains, we pray for wisdom to exercise our preferences among those things that are merely good but not essential. Finally, when inspired wisdom has guided our choices, we proceed, as President Hinckley has taught us, to just “do the very best [we] can.”" (Elder Dalin H. Oaks) Doesn't this set the principle that we do the things that "command priority", even if we had to persevere and delay our gratification of doing the things that we "prefer", even if it takes a long time and we don't get to do the things we like nearly as much as we wish to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno. Maybe the higher commandment is not to skewer one's wife on a public forum in a fit of self-righteous pique but cloaking it as divine advice. Am I correct?

I am a husband, and I have a wife, that I will not hide. Who I am, and who my wife is, on the other hand, shall remain unknown.

"True doctrine, understood, changes attitudes and behavior. The study of the doctrines of the gospel will improve behavior quicker than a study of behavior will improve behavior. Preoccupation with unworthy behavior can lead to unworthy behavior. That is why we stress so forcefully the study of the doctrines of the gospel." (Boyd K. Packer, Conference Report, October 1986)

I'm just trying to make sure I understand true doctrine, and not the version of the Doctrine that is colored by any cultural, ideological, or wordly influences. I'm not looking to burn anyone at the stake, just make sure I'm not leading my family in false or incomplete doctrine.

So ... line by line, let me know where my understanding falls short or is a preference of my own as opposed to eternal principle, (and if you do have something to say, please make sure it can be vetted with sources of General Authories or other General Auxiliary leaders)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a husband, and I have a wife, that I will not hide. Who I am, and who my wife is, on the other hand, shall remain unknown.

"True doctrine, understood, changes attitudes and behavior. The study of the doctrines of the gospel will improve behavior quicker than a study of behavior will improve behavior. Preoccupation with unworthy behavior can lead to unworthy behavior. That is why we stress so forcefully the study of the doctrines of the gospel." (Boyd K. Packer, Conference Report, October 1986)

I'm just trying to make sure I understand true doctrine, and not the version of the Doctrine that is colored by any cultural, ideological, or wordly influences. I'm not looking to burn anyone at the stake, just make sure I'm not leading my family in false or incomplete doctrine.

So ... line by line, let me know where my understanding falls short or is a preference of my own as opposed to eternal principle, (and if you do have something to say, please make sure it can be vetted with sources of General Authories or other General Auxiliary leaders)

Moon, you have made the cardinal error of posting while male. Had you been a woman posting equivalent questions (or, I daresay, confessing adultery), you would have been met with somewhat more understanding and compassion. Among certain on this list, men are welcome only insofar as they speak about women solely in reverential tones and gladly accept all blame for everything awful and foul-smelling in the world.

Having said that, I must agree that your post looks like you're angling for self-justification. If this is the case, you and your wife would both be better served by worrying less about the specifics of your role and your spouse's role and more about helping your spouse be happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me it wasn't the line by line but your post as a whole. You seem to be trying to find doctrine and support here for what you think are failings on the part of your wife and her family.

I am to love my wife, not her self-destructive and family destructive habits.

When we apply each of those quotes with charity for our spouse then the conclusions change. I don't want to know the details of your life. I just see a negative spin from your post as a whole.

You might want to check out the movie Fireproof. And I was being serious when I suggested that you're having a beam and mote issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few thoughts and responses:

"No other success can compensate for failure in the home" (Pres. David O. McKay). I believe this also means that no success in one aspect of the home can compensate for failure in another aspect, and no obedience at one thing can make up for continued disobedience in another.

Are we trying to read too much into this? Would you say that failure to keep a spotless house makes a failure of the home overall? I can see where someone who keeps a spotless house, but fails to teach and nurture their children has "failed" as a parent. On the other hand, someone who manages to teach and nurture their children to be healthy, productive adults, while failing to maintain a spotless home, has done ok, in my book. I guess in my mind there are some aspects of "home" that are more important than others, and failure in the less important aspects does not make a total failure of the home.

"Father and mother are callings from which we will never be released, and there is no more important stewardship than the responsibility we have for God's spirit children who come into our families" (Elder M. Russell Ballard). I believe this means that mothers and fathers will never be released from the responsibilities that come from those callings.

But how do we decide which are the eternal responsibilities from which we will never be released and which are temporal and subject to release? For example, as I approach the tender age of 40, I would not even begin to presume that my father is still responsible in any way to provide clothing, food, and shelter for me. Even if some challenge comes along that leaves me destitute, I would not expect him to assume that responsibility -- I would retain that responsibility to the extent that I am able. I would certainly be grateful for any assistance he could render under those circumstances. Even in terms of teaching, his role as teacher is different than it was when I was younger. He will always be my father, but at this point, I am pretty much responsible for myself, and I'm not sure I can see what responsibilities he still carries and will carry into the eternities.

- In the "adaptations" mentioned above, one spouse is not expected to give assistance to the other spouse to the point where they are not able to fulfill their own primary duties, correct?

Interesting question. This feels to me like too much of a division of responsibility. At some point as husband and wife, we are commanded to become one -- if it's not too cliche, a team. In my mind, this means I try to do everything I can to make the home a success, and spend less time worrying about which duties are "his" duties and which duties are "her" duties. I have tried to live my marriage trying to help my wife in any way I can to help her fulfill "her" duties, because "her" duties are also "my" duties. Some tasks/duties she fulfills because she is better at that task than I am, or because she thinks it's more important than I do, or because she is less averse to it, etc. I don't want her to feel alone in any of her responsibilities.

- If one spouse is requesting adaptations because they feel they are incapable of fulfilling all their duties, should the spouse requesting assistance be free to do whatever they want with the time and resources they have available, or should any extra time or energy be devoted back to completing their duties, or helping to take up whatever work they can to lighten the load of those family members who are giving assistance, correct? (Similar to if someone can't work and is on Church Welfare - they are expected to serve where they can instead of just going fishing all day).

As a disinterested third party observinig from the outside, I would say yes, this is true. As a husband, I find it difficult to judge when my wife is "taking advantage" of my generosities in helping with her responsibilities, and when her requests are genuine. I believe it is possible to sacrifice too much and become a "martyr" in a marriage, which is damaging/unhealthy. I think both spouses need to feel like they are contributing to the marriage/home, and that they are being supported in their contributions. As a husband, I find this is sometimes difficult for me to judge because I am too close to the situation or something like that. An opinion from a disinterested third party familiar with the situation might help.

# This pretty much sets that a Mother's primary responsibility to "Nurture" includes doing the work that is typically considered "unfulfilling", "mundane" and "oppressive" by the standards of many women today, correct?

# Combined with the lines from the Family Proclamation, doesn't this also mean that homemaking is a primary responsibility in the life of the mother, more so than her own "optional" talent development, or trying to grasp onto those things that it is not the correct "season" for?

There's no question that, "to every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven." I don't think I'm quite as enthusiastic about traditional gender roles as some. I would be very careful with the attitude that "homemaking is primary." If it really is her "primary responsibility," then maybe I need to butt out and let her fulfill her responsibility in the way she and the Lord decide best fits rather than trying to micromanage her responsibilities. Or maybe I need to be more concerned with how I can help her fulfill her primary responsibility than worrying about whether she's doing it right or not.

Doesn't this denote that a woman's focusing on chosen talents must come after her duties as Mother are completed, and that in certain "seasons", they may not be developed at all?

Does this not say that we can fulfill the commandment to magnify and develop our talents simply by fulfilling and magnifying the callings that we have received, and that by magnifying those callings we are working on the talents that the Lord needs us to work on to be the disciple he needs us to be?

I believe this goes along with the theory that we don't always get to pick which talents we get to work on at any given time, or that our talents can't compensate for not fully consecrating ourselves and yielding to the Lord's time table or priorities.

How do you judge which talents we should wait for a calling to develop, and how do you judge when developing a talent will you better able to serve in future callings. For example, I play the piano in primary and accompany the choir. There's no way I would be successful in either of these callings (if they would have ever been extended) if I had not developed those musical talents years ago. A person who learns how to delegate may be a better RS president (or bishop) out of the gate rather than have to learn how to delegate "on the job." IMO, if my wife claims that she feels she should be doing something, and I feel differently, then we need to either figure out a compromise position, or I should try to figure out how I can support her, rather than trying to claim that my "revelation" is superior to hers based solely on gender roles, even when those gender roles seem supported by revelation. I don't believe that these "revealed gender roles" are intended to be used to force a "square peg" wife into a "round hole" wife role.

I believe this goes along with the theory that we don't always get to pick which talents we get to work on at any given time, or that our talents can't compensate for not fully consecrating ourselves and yielding to the Lord's time table or priorities.

If we are spending an excessive amount of time in the "nice-to-do" list of things, and expect these things to compensate for our lack of diligence, is that a feeble attempt to "compensate for failure in the home"? Shouldn't fulfilling our primary duties as husband / wife come before these things? Shouldn't we deny ourselves of these things until our responsibilities are fulfilled?

There's no question in my mind that anyone can get their priorities out of order. Exactly how to judge when our priorities is out of order is more challenging. Within the context of a bunch of scriptures/GA quotes, it is easy to say that home and family should be our #2 priority (#1 being God). Without really knowing your wife, it is hard for me to say that she has put something else ahead of home and family. It's also hard for me to know if you are putting gender roles/homemaking in front of home and family. Edited by MrShorty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moon, you have made the cardinal error of posting while male. Had you been a woman posting equivalent questions (or, I daresay, confessing adultery), you would have been met with somewhat more understanding and compassion. Among certain on this list, men are welcome only insofar as they speak about women solely in reverential tones and gladly accept all blame for everything awful and foul-smelling in the world.

Vort, I agree that sometimes it seems that women are treated more kindly when posting about issues. But... not always. If a woman had posted this same type of Opening Post I would have replied the same way I did.

Having said that, I must agree that your post looks like you're angling for self-justification. If this is the case, you and your wife would both be better served by worrying less about the specifics of your role and your spouse's role and more about helping your spouse be happy.

I agree 100%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moon, you have made the cardinal error of posting while male. Had you been a woman posting equivalent questions (or, I daresay, confessing adultery), you would have been met with somewhat more understanding and compassion. Among certain on this list, men are welcome only insofar as they speak about women solely in reverential tones and gladly accept all blame for everything awful and foul-smelling in the world.

:lol: Do we really do that? (/me looks over my own posts) Hmm.... Maybe I am less compassionate toward the guys who post on here. Guess I need to work on that.

To the OP-

Let me see if I'm following this right. It sounds like you have a spouse who has some sort of illness/disability and is using that as an excuse to not keep up with work in the home. It also sounds like she is spending her time pursuing other interests instead of devoting all her time and energy to her home. You are pulling quotes that support your position in order to point the finger at her and tell her that she needs to shape up and do more around the house, yes?

If she is excessively shirking her duties, I can understand your distress. Let me share a little experience of my own... I was married to a man who had been put out of work due to a lower back injury. We had no health insurance and could not afford to get him the care or medication he needed. His work would not compensate him for the injury due to some loopholes in his contract. He was constantly in pain, and it was hard for him to do things as simple as walking. I attempted to show him the greatest compassion possible and take up more responsibility.

At the same time, I was attempting to find ways that he could still contribute so that he would not feel useless. However, he would repeatedly turn down these opportunities to help and waste his time doing other things. His days devolved into getting out of bed to use the bathroom, going to sit on the couch, putting five movies into the dvd player (a rotating one that allows you to switch between the five without having to get up), log on to an online game, and watch the movies and play the game. He would break to eat the meals I cooked for him, use the bathroom, and maybe play a card game with me. He would not even get up to take care of his trash and would just let it pile on the floor.

I was pregnant at the time, and I was not handling the pregnancy well. I was constantly picking up after him, cooking meals, doing dishes (we had no dishwasher), taking the trash out to the dumpster, and trying to find work for both of us. I felt very put out that he would not do the paperwork for government assistance, would not fill out applications for work online, would not do ANYTHING constructive or helpful. And then, he was constantly getting on my case about what a mess the apartment was, how little time I spent "with" him (cuddling, engaging in conversation, playing games with him, etc), and complaining about my cooking.

Of course, there were many other problems with that marriage and I ended up leaving due to physical abuse. However, I want to focus on this since it seems somewhat in line with your problem. I am fairly sure your wife's discrepancies are not anywhere near as severe as my ex-husband's were. Despite my inability to pick up all his slack and that he was clearly "wasting" his time, I never once took it upon myself to tell HIM what HE should be doing. If he was ever going to get out of his slump, that was on him. I gave him suggestions, let him know when I needed help with something I knew he was capable of helping with, and attempted to make everything as easy and smooth as possible for him.

I certainly did not like him getting on my case for the areas I was having trouble keeping up with, and I didn't want to be a hypocritical nag. It was not my responsibility to keep track of what he did to contribute or tell him what to do. It was my responsibility to pull as much weight as I could and be worried about MYSELF. If there was anything I could do to help him, I would do it. Whether it was my "designated" responsibility or not, if it needed to be done and I could do it, I would do it.

Male or female, husband or wife, that is the attitude we should all have in a marriage. No matter what the other person is doing or not doing, we need to be focused on pulling our own weight and doing what we can. If the other is lacking or not meeting up to the same standard as ourselves, it is not our place to judge or point fingers. It is our place to help lift that person up if possible, and otherwise worry about our own actions and contributions. Whether the other person has a legitimate complaint or not, whether they are truly doing the best they can with their limited abilities or are making excuses to be lazy and slack, that is not our place to judge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few thoughts and responses:

Are we trying to read too much into this? Would you say that failure to keep a spotless house makes a failure of the home overall? I can see where someone who keeps a spotless house, but fails to teach and nurture their children has "failed" as a parent. On the other hand, someone who manages to teach and nurture their children to be healthy, productive adults, while failing to maintain a spotless home, has done ok, in my book. I guess in my mind there are some aspects of "home" that are more important than others, and failure in the less important aspects does not make a total failure of the home.

Relief Society Manual: "Caring for our Homes":

The scriptures tell us that the Spirit of the Lord cannot dwell in a place of confusion or uncleanliness. If we make our homes cheerful, clean, and inviting, our loved ones will want to be there. As we live in harmony with gospel principles, the Spirit of the Lord brings us peace and tranquillity.

In what way would having a home environment where the Spirit of the Lord cannot dwell _not_ constitute failure?

The common setiment of "We don't have to have a clean home as long as our kids turn out ok" seems a bit to me like saying "We need the Spirit in the home to help protect and teach our children, but since it seems that we are going OK on our own, we don't really need it to dwell in our home after all, and only an occasional visit will be enough to tide us over". (Didn't that happen over and over in the scriptures - people think they are doing OK on their own and don't need to be obedient to keep the Lord with them -- so he departs, or in the case of the 10 Virgins - everything looks good for the 5 virgins ... until their oil runs out).

I think we need to liken this one to the Pharisees & Sadducees. Pharisees would make everything "Martha Stewart" clean and go "beyond the mark". Sadducees would say "I don't really care how clean it is, as long as I get the results that I want out of it", and be considered "lukewarm". In the middle is the universal doctrine, which states that:

The Lord gave man instructions in the Garden of Eden “to dress it, and to keep it” (Moses 3:15). The Lord requires this of us today as He did then. We are expected and required to care for and beautify whatever space we occupy on this earth.

Whether we are homeowners or tenants, we should feel responsible for keeping property clean, neat, and attractive.

Sure, we could probably keep the house less than organized, and have our kids turn out "ok", but what about their kids, or their kids? Have you heard the talk that Michael Ballam gave at BYU where he talks about the understanding he gathered from playing his "role" in a certain video production that we should all be familiar with? (http://byub.org/talks/Talk.aspx?id=3885) He gained an understanding of just how hard our homes are being bambarded from all sides from those forces, and that we must constantly "put on the whole armor of God" not only on ourselves, but we must also fortify our homes with the Spirit.

And I don't think that people give working in the home enough credit for taking care of the social, physical, and emotional needs of the children - they see it as an either / or. Kathleen Bahr has some great insights into how keeping a clean and ordered home doesn't take away from taking care of the needs of the children, but actually is the vehicle by which it can be done most effectively. (Family Work)

(And didn't Elder Nelson say something about this in his last General Conference address about those who went with the “cafeteria approach” to obedience, where they pick and choose which parts they will follow?)

But how do we decide which are the eternal responsibilities from which we will never be released and which are temporal and subject to release? For example, as I approach the tender age of 40, I would not even begin to presume that my father is still responsible in any way to provide clothing, food, and shelter for me. Even if some challenge comes along that leaves me destitute, I would not expect him to assume that responsibility -- I would retain that responsibility to the extent that I am able. I would certainly be grateful for any assistance he could render under those circumstances. Even in terms of teaching, his role as teacher is different than it was when I was younger. He will always be my father, but at this point, I am pretty much responsible for myself, and I'm not sure I can see what responsibilities he still carries and will carry into the eternities.

Suppose you went "apostate" at the age of 40. Doesn't your father still have the sacred responsibility to try to bring you back into the fold? Doesn't he still need to keep an eye on you to make sure you aren't creeping into false doctrine? Does he no longer need to pray for you or his grandkids? If something was to happen to you and you were no longer able to care for yourself or your family, does he no longer have a responsibility to assist where he can, even if it means having to physically care for you if no one else can?

I don't think there are any temporal responsibilities to which we will be subject to release. As soon as we are out of the womb, we are commanded to be as self-reliant as we can be. When we become parents we are commanded to teach the children to become more self reliant and to make up the difference between our children's capabilities and their temporal needs. When a baby is born, it is as self-sufficient as it can be, but that isn't sufficient to sustain life. We teach the child to care for itself as best as it is capable of, and when they are able to sustain life on their own we no longer provide "individual adaptations", (unless their capacity changes in the future and they are no longer self-sufficient). We still have the responsibility to provide "adaptations" as needed, even if they are not needed at the current point in time.

Interesting question. This feels to me like too much of a division of responsibility. At some point as husband and wife, we are commanded to become one -- if it's not too cliche, a team. In my mind, this means I try to do everything I can to make the home a success, and spend less time worrying about which duties are "his" duties and which duties are "her" duties. I have tried to live my marriage trying to help my wife in any way I can to help her fulfill "her" duties, because "her" duties are also "my" duties. Some tasks/duties she fulfills because she is better at that task than I am, or because she thinks it's more important than I do, or because she is less averse to it, etc. I don't want her to feel alone in any of her responsibilities.

Husband and wife are commanded to become one - in _purpose_. Contrary to "Radical Feminist" beliefs, there _is_ a divinely appointed division of labor. The mere fact that men don't give birth and that women don't hold the priesthood illustrates this. Look at the Family Proclamation - different roles for each mother and father. Proverbs 31:15-18, 17 - highlights the roles of the wife in the home to support her husband's callings. That doesn't mean that they are the only ones expected to do the work, but they are the ones' who have been given the charge to see that the duties are fulfilled. Some roles can be exchanged by necessity, and there are some husbands who can nurture their children better than their wifes, and there are some wifes who have more earning potential than their husbands, but we have been given these roles "by divine design". We can either manipulate or rearrange them to meet our preferences or fulfill our own "vain ambitions", or we can trust and humble ourselves to do what the Lord has given us to do, even if it means we don't maximize our economic / emotional / cultural / social potential.

There's no question that, "to every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven." I don't think I'm quite as enthusiastic about traditional gender roles as some. I would be very careful with the attitude that "homemaking is primary." If it really is her "primary responsibility," then maybe I need to butt out and let her fulfill her responsibility in the way she and the Lord decide best fits rather than trying to micromanage her responsibilities. Or maybe I need to be more concerned with how I can help her fulfill her primary responsibility than worrying about whether she's doing it right or not.

Does having something be a primary responsibility denote total automomy in all decisions about it or how it is carried out? Is there no accountability to the spouse or family? Does a wife not have a say in the finances, or in a husband's employment choices? Just because part of the the wife's primary roles is to prepare the meals, does that mean she gets to paint the kitchen any color she wants or rearrange the cupboards without having a say from the husband?

Helping the other to covery their primary responsbilities sometimes has to take the "teach a man to fish" approach if there isn't enough time on the part of one spouse left after fulfilling their primary duties, or enough _exercised_ faith or recognition of the blessings these responsibilities bring on the part of the other spouse.

How do you judge which talents we should wait for a calling to develop, and how do you judge when developing a talent will you better able to serve in future callings. For example, I play the piano in primary and accompany the choir. There's no way I would be successful in either of these callings (if they would have ever been extended) if I had not developed those musical talents years ago. A person who learns how to delegate may be a better RS president (or bishop) out of the gate rather than have to learn how to delegate "on the job." IMO, if my wife claims that she feels she should be doing something, and I feel differently, then we need to either figure out a compromise position, or I should try to figure out how I can support her, rather than trying to claim that my "revelation" is superior to hers based solely on gender roles, even when those gender roles seem supported by revelation. I don't believe that these "revealed gender roles" are intended to be used to force a "square peg" wife into a "round hole" wife role.

Agreed - there must be a great deal of communication in the relationship and household. There are a number of cummuncation techniques that work very well in taking care of the mechanics of making sure one understands the other. As far as disagreements go, "of necessity, there must be in the Church and in the home a presiding officer ... By divine appointment, the responsibility to preside in the home rests upon the priesthood holder" (Pres. Howard W. Hunter). We should council together and discuss the options, and in matters of preference we can even "take turns" deciding, but when disagreements arise in matters of principles and doctrines, then it falls to the presiding priesthood member, (the husband), to make the decision.

As far as "square peg" / "round hole" personalities, aren't these roles and responsibilities given to us to change our very nature? Elder Bruce C. Hafen said in a 2008 BYU address:

But, as one friend said, if you don’t get out of your comfort zone, you won’t learn. And if you don’t learn, you won’t grow. And without growth, you won’t find joy. That’s a high price to pay for indulging in self-satisfied comfort—no growth and no joy.

There's no question in my mind that anyone can get their priorities out of order. Exactly how to judge when our priorities is out of order is more challenging. Within the context of a bunch of scriptures/GA quotes, it is easy to say that home and family should be our #2 priority (#1 being God). Without really knowing your wife, it is hard for me to say that she has put something else ahead of home and family. It's also hard for me to know if you are putting gender roles/homemaking in front of home and family.

Yes, and no. We have been given quite a bit of counsel on where to prioritize the major categories, (See Elder Oak's "Good, Better, Best" talk and the last blurb from my first post on "Priorities vs Preferences", and Sis. Beck's talk on prioritizing at the 2010 Woman's Conference). Hypothetically, if someone is preoccupied with Facebook, engaging in excessive "recreational reading", socializing with friends, playing video games, or any number of "nice to do things" instead of consecrating their time to the spiritual and temporal needs of the family, it's pretty simple to make an "Intermediate Judgement" (Elder Oaks - "Judge Not and Judging" - 1999) that those priorities are off.

As far as "putting gender roles/homemaking in front of home and family", that can go two ways - either we can understand the importance of those roles and the environment of the home has on the family, or we can ignore the relationship and do things according to our standards, not the Lord's.

I think C.S. Lewis puts it best:

"He (the devil) always sends errors into the world in pairs--pairs of opposites...He relies on your extra dislike of one to draw you gradually into the opposite one. But do not let us be fooled. We have to keep our eyes on the goal and go straight through between both errors. We have no other concern than that with either of them."

I think there is a lot of sexist attitudes about homemaking floating around the world today - from both genders. We need to make sure we "keep our eyes on the goal and go straight between both errors". Edited by Shoot_The_Moon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shoot_the_Moon

Maybe the question you need to be asking is why your wife is using Facebook, socializing and other forms of entertainment to escape? Seems to me there are some deeper issues going on with your wife that really need to be addressed besides her not doing her part, she is choosing not to do her part...the question is why. If my husband approached me telling me what I was doing wrong, I would shut down, stop listening and become very angry and eventually pull completely away finding other friends.

As for a clean house..

'Martha, Martha, you are worried and distracted by many things; there is need of only one thing. Mary has chosen the better part, which will not be taken away from her' - Jesus Christ

As for parents taking responsiblity for their grown children...'teach them correct principals and let them govern themselves' - Joseph Smith Jr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the question you need to be asking is why your wife is using Facebook, socializing and other forms of entertainment to escape?

So, RescueMom, just curious:

If a woman posted to the forum complaining that her husband surfed the web all day after work, playing on Facebook and reading ESPN.com instead of helping out with kids and housework, would you respond by asking her why her husband is trying to escape from her? Would you suggest she give the poor guy a break and try loving him for once, instead of constantly hounding him? Or would you sympathize with her plight, being married as she is to a good-for-nothing parasite?

Uh-huh. That's what I thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a husband, and I have a wife, that I will not hide. Who I am, and who my wife is, on the other hand, shall remain unknown.

nancy didn't ask you to disclose who you are. Why you thought that comment was necessary is baffling.

I'm just trying to make sure I understand true doctrine, and not the version of the Doctrine that is colored by any cultural, ideological, or wordly influences. I'm not looking to burn anyone at the stake, just make sure I'm not leading my family in false or incomplete doctrine.

It's obvious your intent is to prove to your wife that she's defying God because she's doing something, or not doing something, you think she should be. For all I know you are correct, and she is, indeed, guilty of failing all of you.

But I do guarantee you that your method of gathering a gazillion quotes to throw at her to prove you're right, and she's wrong, is going to backfire.

You can find this in the Book of Elphaba, Chapter 1, Verse 1: NEVER approach your wife in a self-righteous manner, even if, technically, you're right.

Elphaba, General Authority on how women think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Relief Society Manual: "Caring for our Homes":

The scriptures tell us that the Spirit of the Lord cannot dwell in a place of confusion or uncleanliness. If we make our homes cheerful, clean, and inviting, our loved ones will want to be there. As we live in harmony with gospel principles, the Spirit of the Lord brings us peace and tranquillity.

In what way would having a home environment where the Spirit of the Lord cannot dwell _not_ constitute failure?

Okay, I'll join the fray...

Let's start with this.

Okay, scenario:

I didn't read the OP carefully, so I can't remember if your wife was working or if she's a stay-at-home mom or whatever. So, let's set this up as: You work an 8-5 job, your wife stays home to care for the house and children.

You come home at 5:30 and the house is a mess. In your mind this is a failure - Spirit cannot dwell or whatever...

So - what's your reaction?

1.) Do you blame the complete abject failure on your wife for shirking her responsibilities of a clean house?

2.) Do you ask your wife if she is getting overwhelmed with her responsibilities and ask what both of you can do to improve the situation?

3.) Do you roll your sleeves and start cleaining?

Okay, I'll wait for your answer before I keep going...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Book of Elphaba, Chapter 1, Verse 1: NEVER approach your wife in a self-righteous manner, even if, technically, you're right.

Elphaba, General Authority on how women think.

Or, as more manly put in LM's Big Book for Big Boys: If you're a jerk, she won't care if you're right.

There is no amount of right you can be, that makes self-righteousness ok. Conversely, it doesn't matter who you are or what you're like - it's always ok to be righteous. In other words, learn the difference between righteousness and self-righteousness, and act accordingly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, RescueMom, just curious:

If a woman posted to the forum complaining that her husband surfed the web all day after work, playing on Facebook and reading ESPN.com instead of helping out with kids and housework, would you respond by asking her why her husband is trying to escape from her? Would you suggest she give the poor guy a break and try loving him for once, instead of constantly hounding him? Or would you sympathize with her plight, being married as she is to a good-for-nothing parasite?

Uh-huh. That's what I thought.

Yes I would. Because the issue is a symptom of a bigger problem. I did not say give the woman a break but to approach it differently. There are better ways to approach things, and using church doctrine in an unrighteous holier than thou manner will not help the situatation, and if kept up will lead to some very resentful feelings, not just of the husband/wife/ but of the church too. And in the end could lead to much worse things.

and I would suggest if either a husband or wife were at this point that marriage counciling would be in order, with a qualified marriage therapist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whenever my husband was critical about how clean the house was, I just told him, "It's as clean as you want it to be".

Here's my two cents and this is coming from my own experience. When my husband worked full time and I was a stay-at-home mom, I figured the cooking, cleaning, laundry, diapers etc., were my responsibilities. This is work that I dislike. I love the snuggling and nurturing part of having children. I don't like housekeeping. But, I did it, because it had to be done. My home wasn't spotless, but I tried to keep the living room picked up in case company came over unexpectedly, and of course dishes and laundry done. I don't think a home needs to be spotless in order to be a house of order.

I also worked many years full time outside of the home. I still had small children at home. In that circumstance I expected my husband to help with the household chores. He managed to do a batch of laundry occasionally and change a few diapers during the week. In our thirty years of marriage he has probably washed the dishes and vacuumed less than ten times each. I am not joking. Not to put him in a totally bad light, he did pick up the slack with the cooking. He will cook meat. And for him, as long as there is meat, he's happy. So, if I felt we needed a more balanced meal, I would fix a salad and veggies to go along with whatever meat he cooked.

Now days, there doesn't seem to be such a division in labor as there used to be. I think the younger men are more willing to help around the house, especially if their wives work out side of the home. My feeling is if women are helping with the bread-winning responsibility, then men should be helping with the house keeping responsibility--just wish my husband would have been taught that. And, I'm sorry to say, I allowed him to behave that way. Both of us came from a generation where there were specific gender roles and duties--very hard to break away from that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow...you want a line by line response???? okay, I'll give it a shot, but you posted quite a bit. Here goes.

Here are some things that I have been piecing together, specifically dealing with the proper proportions and priorities that should exist in the home.

I'd appreciate any feedback on the interpretation of each item, as well as the relationship between them, or additional overriding principles that are now represented.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- "No other success can compensate for failure in the home" (Pres. David O. McKay). I believe this also means that no success in one aspect of the home can compensate for failure in another aspect, and no obedience at one thing can make up for continued disobedience in another.

- Every calling has duties and responsibilities that are inseparably bound to that calling.

- "Father and mother are callings from which we will never be released, and there is no more important stewardship than the responsibility we have for God's spirit children who come into our families" (Elder M. Russell Ballard). I believe this means that mothers and fathers will never be released from the responsibilities that come from those callings.

- "By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners. Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation. Extended families should lend support when needed," (The Family: A Proclamation to the World). From my understanding, this is not saying that disability, death, or "other circumstances" will release either mothers or fathers from being as diligent as they possibly can be in fulfilling the duties stated above, but recognizes that there are many who's individual capabilities may be insufficient to provide for the essential needs of their family members and may need outside help to make sure their responsibilities are met, and just as Christ doesn't always take away our burdens but gives us the help we need to endure them.

- I believe fathers and mothers are still responsible to make sure their responsibilities are met, even if they are not able to do it with their own hands and require "adaptations"

- In the "adaptations" mentioned above, one spouse is not expected to give assistance to the other spouse to the point where they are not able to fulfill their own primary duties, correct?

- If one spouse is requesting adaptations because they feel they are incapable of fulfilling all their duties, should the spouse requesting assistance be free to do whatever they want with the time and resources they have available, or should any extra time or energy be devoted back to completing their duties, or helping to take up whatever work they can to lighten the load of those family members who are giving assistance, correct? (Similar to if someone can't work and is on Church Welfare - they are expected to serve where they can instead of just going fishing all day).

- "To nurture means to cultivate, care for, and make grow. Therefore, mothers who know create a climate for spiritual and temporal growth in their homes. Another word for nurturing is homemaking. Homemaking includes cooking, washing clothes and dishes, and keeping an orderly home. Home is where women have the most power and influence; therefore, Latter-day Saint women should be the best homemakers in the world. Working beside children in homemaking tasks creates opportunities to teach and model qualities children should emulate. Nurturing mothers are knowledgeable, but all the education women attain will avail them nothing if they do not have the skill to make a home that creates a climate for spiritual growth. Growth happens best in a “house of order,” and women should pattern their homes after the Lord’s house (see D&C 109). Nurturing requires organization, patience, love, and work." (Sis. Julie B. Beck). I have quite a few questions about this one:

  • This pretty much sets that a Mother's primary responsibility to "Nurture" includes doing the work that is typically considered "unfulfilling", "mundane" and "oppressive" by the standards of many women today, correct?
  • Combined with the lines from the Family Proclamation, doesn't this also mean that homemaking is a primary responsibility in the life of the mother, more so than her own "optional" talent development, or trying to grasp onto those things that it is not the correct "season" for?
  • These tasks are only secondary responsibilities to the husband, and that he should not give up fulfilling his primary responsibilities to compensate for any inability or choice of the wife to not fulfill them, correct?
  • The mother is expected to take personal responsibility for homemaking, not holding back or waiting around for the husband to "do his part" so she is not "taken advantage of" or "taken for granted", correct?
- "A wise woman renews herself. In proper season, she develops her talents and continues her education." (Elder Russell M. Nelson) "But, my dear granddaughters, you cannot do everything well at the same time. You cannot be a 100 percent wife, a 100 percent mother, a 100 percent church worker, a 100 percent career person, and a 100 percent public-service person at the same time. How can all of these roles be coordinated? Says Sarah Davidson: “The only answer I come up with is that you can have it sequentially. At one stage you may emphasize career, and at another marriage and nurturing young children, and at any point you will be aware of what is missing. If you are lucky, you will be able to fit everything in ... A woman does not necessarily have to track a career like a man does. She may fit more than one career into the various seasons of life. She need not try to sing all of the verses of her song at the same time ... The Book of Ecclesiastes says: “To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven.” ... The various roles of women have not decreased a woman’s responsibility. While these roles are challenging, the central roles of wife and mother remain in the soul and cry out to be satisfied. It is in the soul to want to love and be loved by a good man and to be able to respond to the God-given, deepest feelings of womanhood—those of being a mother and nurturer." (Pres. James E. Faust) Doesn't this denote that a woman's focusing on chosen talents must come after her duties as Mother are completed, and that in certain "seasons", they may not be developed at all?

- "When the Lord gives us a call through his servants, he takes into account all of our talents and abilities and needs. The call is to the whole person including the hidden talents that only become apparent when we are doing all we can." (Ensign, Oct 1979) Does this not say that we can fulfill the commandment to magnify and develop our talents simply by fulfilling and magnifying the callings that we have received, and that by magnifying those callings we are working on the talents that the Lord needs us to work on to be the disciple he needs us to be?

- "We may, for instance, have a specific set of skills which we mistakenly come to think we somehow own. If we continue to cling to those more than to God, we are flinching in the face of the consecrating first commandment. Since God lends us “breath … from one moment to another,” hyperventilating over these distractions is not recommended! (Mosiah 2:21)." (Elder Neal A. Maxwell) I believe this goes along with the theory that we don't always get to pick which talents we get to work on at any given time, or that our talents can't compensate for not fully consecrating ourselves and yielding to the Lord's time table or priorities.

- "The third category has to do with the nice-to-do things. Those are crafts and hobbies and recreational reading and movies and travel and lunches with friends. A lot of women call this “time out.” These things won’t save us. They add variety to our lives, but they won’t save us. When our priorities are on that list, and our time is devoted to those nice-to-do things, our priorities are out of order, and we lose power." (Sis Julie B. Beck) If we are spending an excessive amount of time in the "nice-to-do" list of things, and expect these things to compensate for our lack of diligence, is that a feeble attempt to "compensate for failure in the home"? Shouldn't fulfilling our primary duties as husband / wife come before these things? Shouldn't we deny ourselves of these things until our responsibilities are fulfilled?

- "Among those who do not sacrifice there are two extremes: one is the rich, gluttonous man who won’t and the other is the poor, destitute man who believes he can’t. But how can you ask someone who is starving to eat less? Is there a level of poverty so low that sacrifice should not be expected or a family so destitute that paying tithing should cease to be required? ... The story of the widow of Zarephath is an example of extreme poverty used to teach the doctrine that mercy cannot rob sacrifice any more than it can rob justice. In fact, the truer measure of sacrifice isn’t so much what one gives to sacrifice as what one sacrifices to give (see Mark 12:43). Faith isn’t tested so much when the cupboard is full as when it is bare. In these defining moments, the crisis doesn’t create one’s character—it reveals it. The crisis is the test. ... One reason the Lord illustrates doctrines with the most extreme circumstances is to eliminate excuses. If the Lord expects even the poorest widow to pay her mite, where does that leave all others who find that it is not convenient or easy to sacrifice?" (Elder Lynn G. Robbins) Does this also apply to those who are physically, mentally, or emotionally "destitute"?

- "Selfishness is often expressed in stubbornness of mind. Having a “mind hardened in pride” often afflicts the brightest who could also be the best. “One thing” the brightest often lack: meekness! Instead of having “a willing mind” which seeks to emulate the “mind of Christ,” a “mind hardened in pride” is impervious to counsel and often seeks ascendancy. Jesus, who was and is “more intelligent than they all,” is also more meek than they all." ... "Too often when we seek to excuse ourselves, it is, ironically, "the natural man" we are excusing. Yet scriptures inform us "the natural man" is to be "put off" (see Mosiah 3:19). "He" certainly should not be "kept on" because of a mistaken sense that the natural man constitutes our individuality." (Elder Neal A. Maxwell). Those who are strong-willed need to be extra cautious that they are not "hardened in pride", correct? They need to deliberately put off their natural man and increase in meekness and temperance, correct?

- "Built, therefore, into the seemingly ordinary experiences of life are opportunities for us to acquire such eternal attributes as love, mercy, meekness, patience, and submissiveness and to develop and sharpen such skills as how to communicate, motivate, delegate, and manage our time and talents and our thoughts in accordance with eternal priorities. These attributes and skills are portable; they are never obsolete and will be much needed in the next world." (Elder Neal A. Maxwell) From what I can gather, just "being nice" isn't enough - we need to work on obtaining not only each attribute, but each of the skills mentioned as well.

- "The Lord drew boundary lines to define acceptable limits of tolerance. Danger rises when those divine limits are disobeyed. Just as parents teach little children not to run and play in the street, the Savior taught us that we need not tolerate evil. “Jesus went into the temple of God, … and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers” (Matthew 21:12; see also Mark 11:15). Though He loves the sinner, the Lord said that He “cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance” (D&C 1:31). Real love for the sinner may compel courageous confrontation — not acquiescence! Real love does not support self-destructing behavior." (Elder Russell M. Nelson) From what I can glean, I am to love my wife, not her self-destructive and family destructive habits, correct?

- "It is necessary to prepare and to plan so that we don’t fritter away our lives. Without a goal, there can be no real success. One of the best definitions of success I have ever heard goes something like this: Success is the progressive realization of a worthy ideal. Someone has said the trouble with not having a goal is that you can spend your life running up and down the field and never crossing the goal line. Years ago there was a romantic and fanciful ballad that contained the words, “Wishing will make it so / Just keep on wishing / And care will go.” 4 I want to state here and now that wishing will not replace thorough preparation to meet the trials of life. Preparation is hard work but absolutely essential for our progress. Our journey into the future will not be a smooth highway which stretches from here to eternity. Rather, there will be forks and turnings in the road, to say nothing of the unanticipated bumps. " (Pres. Thomas S. Monson) From what I can glean in this one, daily planning, and preparing for the future isn't just something that "Highly Successful" people do, it is something that we all must learn how to do, not matter how unnecessary it may seem.

- "The Lord gave man instructions in the Garden of Eden “to dress it, and to keep it” (Moses 3:15). The Lord requires this of us today as He did then. We are expected and required to care for and beautify whatever space we occupy on this earth. Whether we are homeowners or tenants, we should feel responsible for keeping property clean, neat, and attractive." (Relief Society Manual -"The Latter-Day Saint Woman") Doesn't this say that keeping a clean house and property is more than just something that is nice to do if we can, but is actually a commandment?

- "Now we ask you to clean up your homes. . . . We urge each of you to dress and keep in a beautiful state the property that is in your hands” / “Whatever your circumstance,let your premises reflect orderliness, beauty, and happiness” (Pres. Spencer W. Kimball) Do the "circumstances" spoken of here include things such as illness and injury, even if we are not able to meet the requirement ourselves?

- "In describing how we can “manage ourselves wisely” [Elder Neal A. Maxwell] quoted Anne Morrow Lindbergh, who said, “My life cannot implement in action the demands of all the people to whom my heart responds.” Elder Maxwell taught that “some choices are matters of preference, not principle,” adding that “wisdom and order [will] help us to separate preferences from principles” (p. 43). We are wise to conclude that we can’t do it all and that we are not required to. When we feel overwhelmed with all that presses upon us, we should pray for inspiration to guide us in identifying what is required by eternal principles. These things command priority. We do them first. Then, in the time that remains, we pray for wisdom to exercise our preferences among those things that are merely good but not essential. Finally, when inspired wisdom has guided our choices, we proceed, as President Hinckley has taught us, to just “do the very best [we] can.”" (Elder Dalin H. Oaks) Doesn't this set the principle that we do the things that "command priority", even if we had to persevere and delay our gratification of doing the things that we "prefer", even if it takes a long time and we don't get to do the things we like nearly as much as we wish to?

Okay, horrible job of a line by line examination. All the same, I feel you are in error in the very approach you are taking. A marriage is a partnership. Both husband and wife are equally accountable before the Lord not only for how their children are raised, but for the health of their own personal relationship. Your approach sounds to me like the results of a union contract negotiation, not a covenant between man, woman, and God.

My main issue is how you are addressing, and focusing on, the duties of the wife in the relationship, and not examining at all the duties of the husband. If you want to treat the issue on a level playing field, study the oath and covenant of the priesthood, followed by all the other statements in the scriptures regarding how husbands and wives ought to behave. Then we can go back to past general conferences and begin examining what the GA's have said about the duties of the priesthood holder as a husband and father. I dare say you'll find yourself reading far more than what you've quoted here.

You say you simply want to avoid misleading your family, and that is honorable, but in your attempt, you aren't examining yourself at all. Rather you are examining (with near pharasaiacal attention to detail) every last single comment any church leader has ever made regarding the duties of, responsabilites of, and matters relating to the wife. This has the potential of becoming a serious case of unrighteous dominion if you don't catch it yourself.

I believe your wife and your family matter deeply to you. That is evident, and far too rare these days. If you haven't already, I would suggest you re-examine your feelings and motivations through prayer with Heavenly Father before carrying this study any further.

The other issue I have is where you all but state that the husband has no obligation to assume the wife's responsabilities, and I assure you that is not at all the case. There are many households where the husband stays home and the wife works a job. No two families are the same, nor are their needs, skills, abilities, talents, or desires.

It is true that men and women are naturally given to specific roles and responsabilities, but even then, exceptions are not only allowed, they were expected by God. This is why he left so much open room in these standards. Room that it seems you seek to eliminate.

In your own examination, what about single fathers? Single mothers? Who's gonna take up the other side? I just feel you are trying to establish your interpretation as the only scripturally based one, and I'm sorry, but your conclusions just don't match the entire picture.

Edited by RipplecutBuddha
Link to comment
Share on other sites

wow...you want a line by line response???? Okay, i'll give it a shot, but you posted quite a bit. Here goes. <<<snip all of op >>>

okay, horrible job of a line by line examination. All the same, i feel you are in error in the very approach you are taking. A marriage is a partnership. Both husband and wife are equally accountable before the lord not only for how their children are raised, but for the health of their own personal relationship. Your approach sounds to me like the results of a union contract negotiation, not a covenant between man, woman, and god.

my main issue is how you are addressing, and focusing on, the duties of the wife in the relationship, and not examining at all the duties of the husband. If you want to treat the issue on a level playing field, study the oath and covenant of the priesthood, followed by all the other statements in the scriptures regarding how husbands and wives ought to behave. Then we can go back to past general conferences and begin examining what the ga's have said about the duties of the priesthood holder as a husband and father. I dare say you'll find yourself reading far more than what you've quoted here.

you say you simply want to avoid misleading your family, and that is honorable, but in your attempt, you aren't examining yourself at all. Rather you are examining (with near pharasaiacal attention to detail) every last single comment any church leader has ever made regarding the duties of, responsabilites of, and matters relating to the wife. this has the potential of becoming a serious case of unrighteous dominion if you don't catch it yourself.

i believe your wife and your family matter deeply to you. That is evident, and far too rare these days. If you haven't already, i would suggest you re-examine your feelings and motivations through prayer with heavenly father before carrying this study any further.

the other issue i have is where you all but state that the husband has no obligation to assume the wife's responsabilities, and i assure you that is not at all the case. There are many households where the husband stays home and the wife works a job. No two families are the same, nor are their needs, skills, abilities, talents, or desires.

it is true that men and women are naturally given to specific roles and responsabilities, but even then, exceptions are not only allowed, they were expected by god. This is why he left so much open room in these standards. Room that it seems you seek to eliminate.

in your own examination, what about single fathers? Single mothers? Who's gonna take up the other side? I just feel you are trying to establish your interpretation as the only scripturally based one, and i'm sorry, but your conclusions just don't match the entire picture.

Thank you, thank you, thank you

and AMEN!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are some things that I have been piecing together, specifically dealing with the proper proportions and priorities that should exist in the home.

I'd appreciate any feedback on the interpretation of each item, as well as the relationship between them, or additional overriding principles that are now represented.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- "No other success can compensate for failure in the home" (Pres. David O. McKay). I believe this also means that no success in one aspect of the home can compensate for failure in another aspect, and no obedience at one thing can make up for continued disobedience in another.

- Every calling has duties and responsibilities that are inseparably bound to that calling.

- "Father and mother are callings from which we will never be released, and there is no more important stewardship than the responsibility we have for God's spirit children who come into our families" (Elder M. Russell Ballard). I believe this means that mothers and fathers will never be released from the responsibilities that come from those callings.

- "By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners. Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation. Extended families should lend support when needed," (The Family: A Proclamation to the World). From my understanding, this is not saying that disability, death, or "other circumstances" will release either mothers or fathers from being as diligent as they possibly can be in fulfilling the duties stated above, but recognizes that there are many who's individual capabilities may be insufficient to provide for the essential needs of their family members and may need outside help to make sure their responsibilities are met, and just as Christ doesn't always take away our burdens but gives us the help we need to endure them.

- I believe fathers and mothers are still responsible to make sure their responsibilities are met, even if they are not able to do it with their own hands and require "adaptations"

- In the "adaptations" mentioned above, one spouse is not expected to give assistance to the other spouse to the point where they are not able to fulfill their own primary duties, correct?

- If one spouse is requesting adaptations because they feel they are incapable of fulfilling all their duties, should the spouse requesting assistance be free to do whatever they want with the time and resources they have available, or should any extra time or energy be devoted back to completing their duties, or helping to take up whatever work they can to lighten the load of those family members who are giving assistance, correct? (Similar to if someone can't work and is on Church Welfare - they are expected to serve where they can instead of just going fishing all day).

- "To nurture means to cultivate, care for, and make grow. Therefore, mothers who know create a climate for spiritual and temporal growth in their homes. Another word for nurturing is homemaking. Homemaking includes cooking, washing clothes and dishes, and keeping an orderly home. Home is where women have the most power and influence; therefore, Latter-day Saint women should be the best homemakers in the world. Working beside children in homemaking tasks creates opportunities to teach and model qualities children should emulate. Nurturing mothers are knowledgeable, but all the education women attain will avail them nothing if they do not have the skill to make a home that creates a climate for spiritual growth. Growth happens best in a “house of order,” and women should pattern their homes after the Lord’s house (see D&C 109). Nurturing requires organization, patience, love, and work." (Sis. Julie B. Beck). I have quite a few questions about this one:

  • This pretty much sets that a Mother's primary responsibility to "Nurture" includes doing the work that is typically considered "unfulfilling", "mundane" and "oppressive" by the standards of many women today, correct?
  • Combined with the lines from the Family Proclamation, doesn't this also mean that homemaking is a primary responsibility in the life of the mother, more so than her own "optional" talent development, or trying to grasp onto those things that it is not the correct "season" for?
  • These tasks are only secondary responsibilities to the husband, and that he should not give up fulfilling his primary responsibilities to compensate for any inability or choice of the wife to not fulfill them, correct?
  • The mother is expected to take personal responsibility for homemaking, not holding back or waiting around for the husband to "do his part" so she is not "taken advantage of" or "taken for granted", correct?
- "A wise woman renews herself. In proper season, she develops her talents and continues her education." (Elder Russell M. Nelson) "But, my dear granddaughters, you cannot do everything well at the same time. You cannot be a 100 percent wife, a 100 percent mother, a 100 percent church worker, a 100 percent career person, and a 100 percent public-service person at the same time. How can all of these roles be coordinated? Says Sarah Davidson: “The only answer I come up with is that you can have it sequentially. At one stage you may emphasize career, and at another marriage and nurturing young children, and at any point you will be aware of what is missing. If you are lucky, you will be able to fit everything in ... A woman does not necessarily have to track a career like a man does. She may fit more than one career into the various seasons of life. She need not try to sing all of the verses of her song at the same time ... The Book of Ecclesiastes says: “To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven.” ... The various roles of women have not decreased a woman’s responsibility. While these roles are challenging, the central roles of wife and mother remain in the soul and cry out to be satisfied. It is in the soul to want to love and be loved by a good man and to be able to respond to the God-given, deepest feelings of womanhood—those of being a mother and nurturer." (Pres. James E. Faust) Doesn't this denote that a woman's focusing on chosen talents must come after her duties as Mother are completed, and that in certain "seasons", they may not be developed at all?

- "When the Lord gives us a call through his servants, he takes into account all of our talents and abilities and needs. The call is to the whole person including the hidden talents that only become apparent when we are doing all we can." (Ensign, Oct 1979) Does this not say that we can fulfill the commandment to magnify and develop our talents simply by fulfilling and magnifying the callings that we have received, and that by magnifying those callings we are working on the talents that the Lord needs us to work on to be the disciple he needs us to be?

- "We may, for instance, have a specific set of skills which we mistakenly come to think we somehow own. If we continue to cling to those more than to God, we are flinching in the face of the consecrating first commandment. Since God lends us “breath … from one moment to another,” hyperventilating over these distractions is not recommended! (Mosiah 2:21)." (Elder Neal A. Maxwell) I believe this goes along with the theory that we don't always get to pick which talents we get to work on at any given time, or that our talents can't compensate for not fully consecrating ourselves and yielding to the Lord's time table or priorities.

- "The third category has to do with the nice-to-do things. Those are crafts and hobbies and recreational reading and movies and travel and lunches with friends. A lot of women call this “time out.” These things won’t save us. They add variety to our lives, but they won’t save us. When our priorities are on that list, and our time is devoted to those nice-to-do things, our priorities are out of order, and we lose power." (Sis Julie B. Beck) If we are spending an excessive amount of time in the "nice-to-do" list of things, and expect these things to compensate for our lack of diligence, is that a feeble attempt to "compensate for failure in the home"? Shouldn't fulfilling our primary duties as husband / wife come before these things? Shouldn't we deny ourselves of these things until our responsibilities are fulfilled?

- "Among those who do not sacrifice there are two extremes: one is the rich, gluttonous man who won’t and the other is the poor, destitute man who believes he can’t. But how can you ask someone who is starving to eat less? Is there a level of poverty so low that sacrifice should not be expected or a family so destitute that paying tithing should cease to be required? ... The story of the widow of Zarephath is an example of extreme poverty used to teach the doctrine that mercy cannot rob sacrifice any more than it can rob justice. In fact, the truer measure of sacrifice isn’t so much what one gives to sacrifice as what one sacrifices to give (see Mark 12:43). Faith isn’t tested so much when the cupboard is full as when it is bare. In these defining moments, the crisis doesn’t create one’s character—it reveals it. The crisis is the test. ... One reason the Lord illustrates doctrines with the most extreme circumstances is to eliminate excuses. If the Lord expects even the poorest widow to pay her mite, where does that leave all others who find that it is not convenient or easy to sacrifice?" (Elder Lynn G. Robbins) Does this also apply to those who are physically, mentally, or emotionally "destitute"?

- "Selfishness is often expressed in stubbornness of mind. Having a “mind hardened in pride” often afflicts the brightest who could also be the best. “One thing” the brightest often lack: meekness! Instead of having “a willing mind” which seeks to emulate the “mind of Christ,” a “mind hardened in pride” is impervious to counsel and often seeks ascendancy. Jesus, who was and is “more intelligent than they all,” is also more meek than they all." ... "Too often when we seek to excuse ourselves, it is, ironically, "the natural man" we are excusing. Yet scriptures inform us "the natural man" is to be "put off" (see Mosiah 3:19). "He" certainly should not be "kept on" because of a mistaken sense that the natural man constitutes our individuality." (Elder Neal A. Maxwell). Those who are strong-willed need to be extra cautious that they are not "hardened in pride", correct? They need to deliberately put off their natural man and increase in meekness and temperance, correct?

- "Built, therefore, into the seemingly ordinary experiences of life are opportunities for us to acquire such eternal attributes as love, mercy, meekness, patience, and submissiveness and to develop and sharpen such skills as how to communicate, motivate, delegate, and manage our time and talents and our thoughts in accordance with eternal priorities. These attributes and skills are portable; they are never obsolete and will be much needed in the next world." (Elder Neal A. Maxwell) From what I can gather, just "being nice" isn't enough - we need to work on obtaining not only each attribute, but each of the skills mentioned as well.

- "The Lord drew boundary lines to define acceptable limits of tolerance. Danger rises when those divine limits are disobeyed. Just as parents teach little children not to run and play in the street, the Savior taught us that we need not tolerate evil. “Jesus went into the temple of God, … and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers” (Matthew 21:12; see also Mark 11:15). Though He loves the sinner, the Lord said that He “cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance” (D&C 1:31). Real love for the sinner may compel courageous confrontation — not acquiescence! Real love does not support self-destructing behavior." (Elder Russell M. Nelson) From what I can glean, I am to love my wife, not her self-destructive and family destructive habits, correct?

- "It is necessary to prepare and to plan so that we don’t fritter away our lives. Without a goal, there can be no real success. One of the best definitions of success I have ever heard goes something like this: Success is the progressive realization of a worthy ideal. Someone has said the trouble with not having a goal is that you can spend your life running up and down the field and never crossing the goal line. Years ago there was a romantic and fanciful ballad that contained the words, “Wishing will make it so / Just keep on wishing / And care will go.” 4 I want to state here and now that wishing will not replace thorough preparation to meet the trials of life. Preparation is hard work but absolutely essential for our progress. Our journey into the future will not be a smooth highway which stretches from here to eternity. Rather, there will be forks and turnings in the road, to say nothing of the unanticipated bumps. " (Pres. Thomas S. Monson) From what I can glean in this one, daily planning, and preparing for the future isn't just something that "Highly Successful" people do, it is something that we all must learn how to do, not matter how unnecessary it may seem.

- "The Lord gave man instructions in the Garden of Eden “to dress it, and to keep it” (Moses 3:15). The Lord requires this of us today as He did then. We are expected and required to care for and beautify whatever space we occupy on this earth. Whether we are homeowners or tenants, we should feel responsible for keeping property clean, neat, and attractive." (Relief Society Manual -"The Latter-Day Saint Woman") Doesn't this say that keeping a clean house and property is more than just something that is nice to do if we can, but is actually a commandment?

- "Now we ask you to clean up your homes. . . . We urge each of you to dress and keep in a beautiful state the property that is in your hands” / “Whatever your circumstance,let your premises reflect orderliness, beauty, and happiness” (Pres. Spencer W. Kimball) Do the "circumstances" spoken of here include things such as illness and injury, even if we are not able to meet the requirement ourselves?

- "In describing how we can “manage ourselves wisely” [Elder Neal A. Maxwell] quoted Anne Morrow Lindbergh, who said, “My life cannot implement in action the demands of all the people to whom my heart responds.” Elder Maxwell taught that “some choices are matters of preference, not principle,” adding that “wisdom and order [will] help us to separate preferences from principles” (p. 43). We are wise to conclude that we can’t do it all and that we are not required to. When we feel overwhelmed with all that presses upon us, we should pray for inspiration to guide us in identifying what is required by eternal principles. These things command priority. We do them first. Then, in the time that remains, we pray for wisdom to exercise our preferences among those things that are merely good but not essential. Finally, when inspired wisdom has guided our choices, we proceed, as President Hinckley has taught us, to just “do the very best [we] can.”" (Elder Dalin H. Oaks) Doesn't this set the principle that we do the things that "command priority", even if we had to persevere and delay our gratification of doing the things that we "prefer", even if it takes a long time and we don't get to do the things we like nearly as much as we wish to?

Ok this just went wooosh over my head>my wife is the Queen and I am the King when one is not happy then where both not "Happy" if she is upset then I am upset, if the house isn't tidy then I need too tidy it , there is no excuse for everyone in my Kingdom Work there is no gender excuse(thats mum's job) here mate we all have put the effort in wether its cleaning the house to relationship building

cheers:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I've been thinking about this thread I remembered a poem I've posted before. I had such a problem with my MIL over housework and what she expected from me (as if she was the one I married) that I embroidered this and hung it on my wall.

Cleaning and scrubbing can wait for tomorrow

For babies grow up, we've learned to our sorrow

So settle down cobwebs and dust go to sleep

I'm rocking my babies and babies don't keep

--author unknown

One addition. I agree that a tidy house does help remove distractions in my head when I'm trying to pray and feel the spirit. But I KNOW we've had some of the most spiritual experiences as a family when the house was at its worse. The Spirit doesn't refuse to enter our home if the dishes aren't done and the beds aren't made.

I also know that if hubby and I are at odds over something then its most definitely hard to feel the Spirit. Contention over housework and whose duty it is to do dishes will drive the Spirit away. Contention over a husband's responsibilities will drive the Spirit away too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One addition. I agree that a tidy house does help remove distractions in my head when I'm trying to pray and feel the spirit. But I KNOW we've had some of the most spiritual experiences as a family when the house was at its worse. The Spirit doesn't refuse to enter our home if the dishes aren't done and the beds aren't made.

I also know that if hubby and I are at odds over something then its most definitely hard to feel the Spirit. Contention over housework and whose duty it is to do dishes will drive the Spirit away. Contention over a husband's responsibilities will drive the Spirit away too.

I agree with this completely applepansy! Also... we've had some of our most spiritual moments when we're all cleaning the house together! We just had one not too long ago - when all 4 of us were cleaning out the car. It's quite amazing how we can easily talk about difficult gospel principles when we all have our hands occupied with dirty rags and such.

The crazy thing about it is - we finish cleaning the car then not even an hour later hopped in the same car and went to beach... getting sand all over the car again.

That's just the thing, though. We don't let dirt prevent us from living harmonious lives, ya know?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share