27 rules of Celestial Marriage

[Ben McClintock]

http://www.mormonchronicle.com/27-rules ... -marriage/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Have you seen these before? What do you think?

[tmac]

What do you think?

They're good, but 27 is waaay too many. Always remember KISS -- Keep It Simple, Stupid. Just the thought of having to abide by 27 separate rules of celestial marriage is fairly overwhelming . . . and I'm not sure you've hit all of them, but it's still overwhelming.

[iamse7en]

I first read these on my mission (when I was devouring The Seer), and I remember they affected me deeply. Although one may think some of the principles don't apply because you don't live plurality, they very much do. When I read these, I promised myself I would study these with my wife so that we could try and adopt these celestial principles. We did, and although we fall short, it's a great standard for us to revisit and strive for. I love Orson's writing style. Great article for people to read.

[moonwhim]

I was going to send these to a girlfriend, but then I started reading them......too many references to "wives."

[Original_Intent]

I've been married for almost twenty years, and am still working on "put the toilet seat down."

OK, not really. Not that I have mastered it, I'm just not working on it any more. B-)

[Jason]

I've been married for almost twenty years, and am still working on "put the toilet seat down."

OK, not really. Not that I have mastered it, I'm just not working on it any more. B-)

LOL....oh thank you...that was a great belly buster laugh!

[Jason]

http://www.mormonchronicle.com/27-rules ... -marriage/

Have you seen these before? What do you think?

Well I think its an awesome compilation of 15 reasons why one would never ask to be a polygamist!

[Rand]

I was going to send these to a girlfriend, but then I started reading them......too many references to "wives."

Which Girlfriend? )

[JohnnyL]

I quit reading after failing the first one, but figured it was time to get married anyway...

[Rand]

I found these fascinating and intimidating. What an immense job these men, and women, who were called to practice polygamy were given. It would require a remarkable man, or woman, to do such a thing and to do it righteously. I will continue to study them and grow from applying what he teaches. It could be a corporate leadership manual as well. Great stuff.

[Ben McClintock]

Polygamy???? These are great rules for all of us. Just take out the letters of a few of the words and make them apply in the singular and they are just as applicable today as they were then

[Hope]

Keep in mind that we are all influenced by the times in which we live and Orson Pratt lived in a time where women were considered "weaker vessels" (I cringed when I read that in the "rules") and quite frankly, inferior. Although the Church treated women with much more respect than the general society of the time, unfortunately that condescending attitude comes through loud and clear in these "rules". (I admit, I only got to about "rule" 14 and couldn't take it anymore.) The relationship of a husband described in the article comes across as so paternal, keeping with the prevailing attitudes of the 1800s. Yes, there are some nuggets to glean in the article but why such an interest in adopting the rules from distant generations who were influenced by their times when we have prophets and apostles who speak to our generation?

The Family Proclamation:
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.

Marriage and Family Relations Manual, Lesson 10:
Explain that the word preside means to lead and guide and to take responsibility for the family’s welfare.
Emphasize that as a man fulfills his responsibility to preside in the home, he works in partnership with his wife. President Howard W. Hunter, the 14th President of the Church, counseled: “A man who holds the priesthood accepts his wife as a partner in the leadership of the home and family with full knowledge of and full participation in all decisions relating thereto. … By divine appointment, the responsibility to preside in the home rests upon the priest-hood holder (see Moses 4:22). The Lord intended that the wife be a helpmeet for man (meet means equal)—that is, a companion equal and necessary in full partnership. Presiding in righteousness necessitates a shared responsibility between husband and wife; together you act with knowledge and participation in all family matters. For a man to operate independently of or without regard to the feelings and counsel of his wife in governing the family is to exercise unrighteous dominion” (in Conference Report, Oct. 1994, 68

Further reading on the relationship between husband and wife from the prophets and apostles of our generation:
http://lds.org/search?lang=eng&query=hu ... conference" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

When my husband gets home tonight, I'm going to let him know how much I appreciate that he follows the modern prophets and am grateful he acts, not as a father, but as my husband, partner, and Priesthood leader.

[firend]

Rule number 4 is devastatingly wrong. I know lots of polygamists, they are all miserable and not "one" at all. Unless you see how they live it following rule #4 then you may not understand.

So as monogamists we are supposed to have no secrets with our spouse. We are "one" right? Oh, but then bring in #2 and now you are no longer "one" with wife # 1 or #2.

Good read overall. Orson was a really smart guy.

[Amore Vero]

I agree with Hope. These days we have so much more light & knowledge about the true marriage relationship & the requirement to not share our hearts with anyone other than our 1 wife or husband.

Women in the 1800's, & throughout most of history, were not respected & considered equal in marriage & were told to submit to & obey their husbands, while husbands were not expected to do the same.

Today we understand that women are completely equal in marriage & the home & both spouses must submit to & obey each other. Neither one is over the other. Both are Co-Presidents, Co-Presiders & Co-Heads, with equal voice & veto power.

In fact, a husband must prove his righteousness, complete faithfulness, true love & devotion & submission & obedience to his wife, before he can ever expect the same from her & before God would ever ask her to do the same.

[Original_Intent]

I agree with Hope. These days we have so much more light & knowledge about the true marriage relationship & the requirement to not share our hearts with anyone other than our 1 wife or husband.

Women in the 1800's, & throughout most of history, were not respected & considered equal in marriage & were told to submit to & obey their husbands, while husbands were not expected to do the same.

Today we understand that women are completely equal in marriage & the home & both spouses must submit to & obey each other. Neither one is over the other. Both are Co-Presidents, Co-Presiders & Co-Heads, with equal voice & veto power.

In fact, a husband must prove his righteousness, complete faithfulness, true love & devotion & submission & obedience to his wife, before he can ever expect the same from her & before God would ever ask her to do the same.

Sorry, but the garden of Eden and the temple tell a different story. Yes they are equal, side by side and yet the husband presides. Your co-president concept is your own creation.

Even submits to Adam as Adam submits to the Father - not after Adam submits to Eve. I know you think you are the final authority on what "True Love" is, and you are certainly free to adhere to your own wisdom over revealed wisdom all you like.

[Amore Vero]

Sorry, but the garden of Eden and the temple tell a different story. Yes they are equal, side by side and yet the husband presides. Your co-president concept is your own creation.

Even submits to Adam as Adam submits to the Father - not after Adam submits to Eve. I know you think you are the final authority on what "True Love" is, and you are certainly free to adhere to your own wisdom over revealed wisdom all you like.

When we isolate one sentence from the scriptures or temple we can easily be deceived to believe in false & worldly philosophies. But when we study all that has been said on the subject by Prophets & we possess true love, then we get a grander view & understanding of marriage & this concept.

Part of Adam 'following the Father' is his commandment for men to submit to their wife's wishes & needs & desires & welfare, before his own wishes, feelings, needs or desires, & give his life, one day at at time, in serving her as she needs & requests, so she can fulfill her calling in Motherhood.

In fact, that's how a women knows if her husband is righteous & trustworthy of her submission in return.

And 'Co-Presiders & Co-Presidents' was not my words but Elder Perry's in Gen. Conf. Apr. 2004 (audio portion).

[Original_Intent]

Of course calls of presidency are also calls to serve - no argument there. But this idea that a man must submit to his wife's desires in all things BEFORE she submits to him is your personal wish of how you would like things to be, not doctrine. And any woman that would expect that level of submission from her husband isn't looking for a man, she is looking to raise cats and read romance novels for the rest of her life.

[Amore Vero]

Of course calls of presidency are also calls to serve - no argument there. But this idea that a man must submit to his wife's desires in all things BEFORE she submits to him is your personal wish of how you would like things to be, not doctrine. And any woman that would expect that level of submission from her husband isn't looking for a man, she is looking to raise cats and read romance novels for the rest of her life.

"Do unto your wife as you would have her do unto you".

If men would expect such submission they must be willing to give it themselves.

Unfortunately it is the disposition of nearly all men throughout history to use unrighteous dominion by expecting such submission from women but not require themselves to do the same.

[sbsion]

one rule..................DC137:9 be sure the desires of your heart are righteous and you practice it :-$

[iamse7en]

Keep in mind that we are all influenced by the times in which we live and Orson Pratt lived in a time where women were considered "weaker vessels" (I cringed when I read that in the "rules") and quite frankly, inferior.

I agree with Hope. These days we have so much more light & knowledge about the true marriage relationship & the requirement to not share our hearts with anyone other than our 1 wife or husband.

I'm not entirely comfortable going down this road, but do you also cringe when the President and Prophet of the primitive Church calls woman the "weaker vessel?" (1 Pet. 3:7) Orson is merely quoting the scriptures. You can be partners in leading your family to righteousness, but still have one leader, and that leader should be the "stronger" one. In that same scripture, Peter says give honor unto her, and that husband and wife "are heirs together of the grace of life." Brigham, John Taylor, LeGrand Richards, Delbert Stapley have also quoted the "weaker vessel" principle in General Conference.

Both ancient and modern prophets have taught this principle. I presume the pre-1990 endowment ceremony did/would have also made you cringe? Words were changed to soften the relationship between husband and wife. Why? Sometimes a change in policy is a revelation from God, sometimes its because of the voice of the people. Was it the will of God that the Israelites reject the higher law and receive the lesser law? (Not saying it's akin to that, but there's a lesson in this example.) Turns out the Church did a massive survey just prior to 1990 to get feedback on the temple ceremony, and as you can imagine, the feminist movement crept in and made many people "cringe," so the wording was softened from obey to hearken to counsel. The Church throughout history (from Adam til now) has always balanced between God's will and our will. He is everlasting and does not change. He adjusts to our changes. But I would not feel comfortable to say that we have more light and knowledge than both Peter and Brigham. Okay, no more from me on this topic.

[Hope]

Please, let's keep insults out of the discussion. Cats and romance novels, really?

Just to clarify my earlier comments, it's true - men preside in the home as stated in both quotes I posted. It's by divine decree and OI is correct that decree has been in force since Adam and Eve. Both quotes also define what ruling/presiding means and clarification of what was required of Eve (and wives) has been made by our modern prophets in the temple. Amore Vero is also correct that husbands are to serve and love their wives and a husband is to lead in righteousness, however I'm not aware of husbands being instructed to submit to and obey their wives, but to submit to and obey Christ. If I understand you correctly, Amero, what you're saying is both spouses are admonished to become Christlike and love one another as He does and I agree with that. Perhaps if we substitute the word 'honor' for 'submit and obey' - a husband and wife would honor one another's righteous desires thus overcoming any selfishness or unrighteous dominion by either spouse, it makes more sense to me. So, Amero and OI, I hope I'm understanding you both correctly.

(Side note - printed talks are corrected versions of talks that have been given and I noticed the term in the printed version of Elder Perry's talk is 'coequals', so the other terms he used in his speech were corrected in print. Still, I think co-equal illustrates the point.)

Bruce Hafen clarifies what I'm trying to say in this article from the Aug 2007 Ensign: http://lds.org/ensign/2007/08/crossing- ... s?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If you don't have time to read the whole thing, please check out this quote. I love his illustration of "ruler".

The concept of interdependent, equal partners is well-grounded in the doctrine of the restored gospel. Eve was Adam’s “help meet” (Genesis 2:18). The original Hebrew for meet means that Eve was adequate for, or equal to, Adam. She wasn’t his servant or his subordinate. And the Hebrew for help in “help meet” is ezer, a term meaning that Eve drew on heavenly powers when she supplied their marriage with the spiritual instincts uniquely available to women as a gender gift.

As President Boyd K. Packer, Acting President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, has said, men and women are by nature different, and while they share many basic human traits, the “virtues and attributes upon which perfection and exaltation depend come [more] naturally to a woman.”

Genesis 3:16 states that Adam is to “rule over” Eve, but this doesn’t make Adam a dictator. A ruler can be a measuring tool that sets standards. Then Adam would live so that others may measure the rightness of their conduct by watching his. Being a ruler is not so much a privilege of power as an obligation to practice what a man preaches.[ Also, over in “rule over” uses the Hebrew bet, which means ruling with, not ruling over. If a man does exercise “dominion … in any degree of unrighteousness” (D&C 121:37; emphasis added), God terminates that man’s authority.

Perhaps because false teachings had twisted original scriptural meanings, President Spencer W. Kimball (1895–1985) preferred “preside” rather than “rule.” He said: “No woman has ever been asked by the Church authorities to follow her husband into an evil pit. She is to follow him [only] as he follows and obeys the Savior of the world, but in deciding [whether he is obeying Christ], she should always be sure she is fair.” In this way, President Kimball saw marriage “as a full partnership,” stating, “We do not want our LDS women to be silent partners or limited partners” but rather “a contributing and full partner.”

Spouses need not perform the same functions to be equal. The woman’s innate spiritual instincts are like a moral magnet, pointing toward spiritual north—except when that magnet’s particles are scrambled out of order. The man’s presiding gift is the priesthood—except when he is not living the principles of righteousness. If the husband and the wife are wise, their counseling will be reciprocal: he will listen to the promptings of her inner spiritual compass just as she will listen to his righteous counsel.

And in an equal-partner marriage both also bring a spiritual maturity to their partnership, without regard to gender. Both have a conscience and the Holy Ghost to guide them. Both see family life as their most important work. Each also strives to become a fully rounded disciple of Jesus Christ—a complete spiritual being.

[tsc]

I personally think the women should follow these suggestions from the '50s - =)) =)) =))

•Have dinner ready. Plan ahead, even the night before, to have a delicious meal ready on time for his return. This is a way of letting him know that you have been thinking about him and are concerned about his needs. Most men are hungry when they come home and the prospect of a good meal (especially his favourite dish) is part of the warm welcome needed.
•Prepare yourself. Take 15 minutes to rest so you’ll be refreshed when he arrives. Touch up your make-up, put a ribbon in your hair and be fresh-looking. He has just been with a lot of work-weary people.
•Be a little gay and a little more interesting for him. His boring day may need a lift and one of your duties is to provide it.
•Clear away the clutter. Make one last trip through the main part of the house just before your husband arrives. Run a dustcloth over the tables.
•Over the cooler months of the year you should prepare and light a fire for him to unwind by. Your husband will feel he has reached a haven of rest and order, and it will give you a lift too. After all, catering for his comfort will provide you with immense personal satisfaction.
•Minimize all noise. At the time of his arrival, eliminate all noise of the washer, dryer or vacuum. Encourage the children to be quiet.
•Be happy to see him.
•Greet him with a warm smile and show sincerity in your desire to please him.
•Listen to him. You may have a dozen important things to tell him, but the moment of his arrival is not the time. Let him talk first - remember, his topics of conversation are more important than yours.
•Make the evening his. Never complain if he comes home late or goes out to dinner or other places of entertainment without you. Instead, try to understand his world of strain and pressure and his very real need to be at home and relax.
•Your goal: To try and make sure your home is a place of peace, order, and tranquility where your husband can renew himself in body and spirit.
•Don’t greet him with complaints and problems.
•Make him comfortable. Have him lean back in a comfortable chair or have him lie down in the bedroom. Have a cool or warm drink ready for him.
•Arrange his pillow and offer to take off his shoes. Speak in a low, soothing and pleasant voice.
•Don’t ask him questions about his actions or question his judgment or integrity. Remember, he is the master of the house and as such will always exercise his will with fairness and truthfulness. You have no right to question him.
•A good wife always knows her place.

And I would add to this list, be prepared to wake him up when this fantasy has ended and the baby has a poopy diaper. )

[Hope]

Keep in mind that we are all influenced by the times in which we live and Orson Pratt lived in a time where women were considered "weaker vessels" (I cringed when I read that in the "rules") and quite frankly, inferior.

I agree with Hope. These days we have so much more light & knowledge about the true marriage relationship & the requirement to not share our hearts with anyone other than our 1 wife or husband.

I'm not entirely comfortable going down this road, but do you also cringe when the President and Prophet of the primitive Church calls woman the "weaker vessel?" (1 Pet. 3:7) Orson is merely quoting the scriptures. You can be partners in leading your family to righteousness, but still have one leader, and that leader should be the "stronger" one. In that same scripture, Peter says give honor unto her, and that husband and wife "are heirs together of the grace of life." Brigham, John Taylor, LeGrand Richards, Delbert Stapley have also quoted the "weaker vessel" principle in General Conference.

Both ancient and modern prophets have taught this principle. I presume the pre-1990 endowment ceremony did/would have also made you cringe? Words were changed to soften the relationship between husband and wife. Why? Sometimes a change in policy is a revelation from God, sometimes its because of the voice of the people. Was it the will of God that the Israelites reject the higher law and receive the lesser law? (Not saying it's akin to that, but there's a lesson in this example.) Turns out the Church did a massive survey just prior to 1990 to get feedback on the temple ceremony, and as you can imagine, the feminist movement crept in and made many people "cringe," so the wording was softened from obey to hearken to counsel. The Church throughout history (from Adam til now) has always balanced between God's will and our will. He is everlasting and does not change. He adjusts to our changes. But I would not feel comfortable to say that we have more light and knowledge than both Peter and Brigham. Okay, no more from me on this topic.

Actually yes, Iam, there have been many things in the Bible that have made me 'cringe' because I grew up in a home where there was unrighteous dominion and physical and emotional abuse and finding worth has been a difficult journey. Yes, I was always taught that I'm a daughter of God but was also taught that a son is of more value than a daughter, which thankfully I've learned is not so. However along this journey there have been many things in the Bible that on the surface appear to make women seem of less worth. I've learned to take my questions (women should wear long hair, not speak in Church, why are there concubines and slaves, Judah and Tamar,etc.) and study them out and if still troubled take them to my Priesthood leaders and to the Lord. One of the answers I've received was what I said in my earlier post, that the society of the time can influence what is said. Also, that in some instances there are changes/mistranslations made to the ancient scriptures or just false traditions arising from them (that Mary Magdalene was a harlot for one).

Yes, going to the temple before the change reinforced my view that women were somehow lessor because I was young and didn't understand. The teachings of the modern prophets and the changes in the temple have helped me understand better. One of the ways revelation is received is to go to the Lord with a question so it makes perfect sense to me that there may have been a survey to see what questions should be taken before the Lord. I believe the changes made were by revelation - in clarification, not rejection of the higher law. Think about the timing - the internet was just about to take off bringing more evil into the home. I believe that our prophets lead through inspiration and revelation! I just sustained them as prophets, seers and revelators last weekend!

You can be partners in leading your family to righteousness, but still have one leader, and that leader should be the "stronger" one.

What do you mean by the 'stronger" one? Yes, my wonderful husband has always been able to open jars that I couldn't but there have been times when he wasn't the spiritually strong one and I've had to step up. But it doesn't seem that's what you mean by "stronger" one. And even if we are 'weaker vessels' - what is the good in pointing that out? How would you feel being called a "weaker vessel"? Why not build one another up? Marriage isn't a competition but at its best is a coming together of husband and wife working towards the same eternal goals and yes, with the husband presiding in righteousness.

Hopefully this (and the quotes and articles I posted) clarifies where I'm coming from. I'm not a feminist, just a previously wounded daughter who has tried to find her proper place and role in the Lord's kingdom. Perhaps cringe wasn't the exact word I should have used but I hope you'll understand the pain that women who have been under unrighteous dominion and abused (and there are so many of us) feel. Anyway, Iam, like you, I don't want any contention and will be signing off of this discussion. :ymhug:

[Ben McClintock]

For those of you that want to say that the Prophets words are dictated by the culture and not by God, I'd suggest taking a look again at the job of a Prophet

http://speeches.byu.edu/reader/reader.php?id=8853" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Any man claiming to be a prophet of God would declare his message without any fear and without making any weak concessions to public opinion.

If he were speaking for God he could not make concessions, although what he taught would be new and contrary to the accepted teachings of the day. A prophet bears witness to what he has seen and heard and seldom tries to make a case by argument. His message and not himself is important.

He would have not only an important message for his time but often a message for all future time, such as Daniel, Jeremiah, and others had.

He would have courage and faith enough to endure persecution and to give his life, if need be, for the cause he espoused, such as Peter, James, Paul, and others did.

Such a man would denounce wickedness fearlessly. He would generally be rejected or persecuted by the people of his time, but later generations and descendants of his persecutors would build monuments in his honor.

His teachings would be in strict conformity with scripture, and his words and his writings would become scripture. “For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” (2 Peter 1:21).

A strong word of caution to those that want to say that they didn't preach the will of God or didn't know the truth so they would be accepted by the people.

[Jason]

I agree with Hope. These days we have so much more light & knowledge about the true marriage relationship & the requirement to not share our hearts with anyone other than our 1 wife or husband.

Women in the 1800's, & throughout most of history, were not respected & considered equal in marriage & were told to submit to & obey their husbands, while husbands were not expected to do the same.

Today we understand that women are completely equal in marriage & the home & both spouses must submit to & obey each other. Neither one is over the other. Both are Co-Presidents, Co-Presiders & Co-Heads, with equal voice & veto power.

In fact, a husband must prove his righteousness, complete faithfulness, true love & devotion & submission & obedience to his wife, before he can ever expect the same from her & before God would ever ask her to do the same.

False doctrine. The man presides....end of story. The woman is to obey the counsel from her husband as her husband obeys the counsel from God. A man doesn't have to prove squat to his wife....what he does have to do is become completely obedient to the Father's will. Solomon was obedient to his wives...where did that get him???