and at the same time make one house.” (176)
22. “Married partners according to the above-mentioned conjunctions,
become one man more and more.” (177)
It is my hope that careful reflection on the order of the above teachings will
be helpful in letting the Lord form how we think regarding the fundamental
difference between men and women, as I believe this is the key to making a
wise decision regarding women in the priesthood. My own reflections follow.
Male and female are the very form of the marriage of good and truth, and
the more the distinction is preserved the more perfect will be the state of our
marriages. It is therefore imperative that the difference between the sexes be
upheld in society at large, the church, and individual marriages in order to
sustain conjugial love itself.
Early in the line of reasoning we find the statement, “Nothing whatever
is alike in them; and yet in every least thing there is what is conjunctive.”
(Conjugial Love 33) The conjunction is according to the form of each, and each
differs as to affection, application, manners and form. (Ibid. 90-91) Whether
the distinction is expressed in terms of good and truth or love and wisdom,
the whole line of the reasoning leads to clearly distinguishable applications or
uses.
The statement that “the rational wisdom of the man cannot be with his
wife” is an integral part of the overall argument distinguishing the unique
wisdom of both. The argument continues by helping us see, “What is meant
by the rational wisdom of men.” Then is listed, “knowledge, intelligence, and
wisdom; and in particular rationality, genius, learning, sagacity.” They then
develop the definition to include knowledges associated with a number of
public professions and jobs, including the clergy, all of which exist today. (Ibid.
163)
But the line of thought does not stop there. Later we read that the one
partner cannot enter into the duties/offices of the other “and rightly perform
them.” (Ibid. 175) It is all one logical piece of cloth.
The cultural, economic, educational and other circumstances where we
find ourselves today may be far from what is described here. That is perhaps
not surprising, for conjugial love itself is rare and scarcely known. I believe
the Lord will understand if we find that we cannot fully comply with what is
prescribed here. He bends us. He does not break us. Nevertheless, the life of
our homes and our church depends upon our sincerest effort to follow the
Lord’s leading, even if it is high and we feel we cannot attain it.
Making distinctions necessary to conjugial love itself should not be
thought of as denying or discriminating against women, but rather as a way to
enhance the eternal happiness of both women and men.
179