Camille Fronk, “Submit Yourselves . . . as unto the Lord,” in Go Ye into All the World: Messages of the New Testament Apostles, 31st Annual Sidney B. Sperry Symposium (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2002), 98–113.
Camille Fronk was an assistant professor of ancient scripture at Brigham Young University when this was published.
As a divinely appointed witness for Christ, the Apostle Paul spoke without “flattering words,” giving messages that were not always “pleasing [to] men, but [pleasing to] God” (1 Thessalonians 2:4–5). We should not be surprised then if we feel our toes stepped on from time to time when we read Paul’s epistles. Such a reaction generally means that he has just uncovered a gospel principle that we have not yet fully understood or faithfully followed. This discomfort is particularly felt in Paul’s instruction concerning women. He declared that “the head of the woman is the man” (1 Corinthians 11:3); “wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord” (Ephesians 5:22); and “let your women keep silence in the churches” (1 Corinthians 14:34; see 1 Timothy 2:8–15).
Many of us have reacted to these “hard sayings” by scrambling for the footnotes, hoping for a Joseph Smith Translation insight or another possible translation of the Greek that would exonerate Paul from a politically incorrect faux pas. When that fails, we usually respond in one of three ways. First, we may write off Paul’s teachings to women as strictly cultural for a first century Judeo-Roman world and therefore not applicable to us today. Second, we may use Paul’s words to justify patronizing or belittling women, concluding that women are not equipped to think for themselves, let alone teach doctrines of salvation. This reaction includes biblical humor using Paul’s words as fodder to poke fun at women. Finally, we may accuse Paul of chauvinism or even misogyny, concluding that he is blind to women’s contributions to the growth of the church and strength of society.
I propose a different response—one that adds nobility and stature to both men and women of Christ while garnering greater reverence for an Apostle who boldly professed God’s eternal laws. Upon closer consideration, Paul’s statements say as much about men’s stewardship in leadership as they do about women’s submission, both within the family and in the Church. At a time when strengthening the family and improving communication between the sexes are standard sermons by general Church leaders, Paul’s counsel is needed today as much as ever.
To begin, consider the cultural milieu for women in Paul’s day. Since Paul’s epistles were written to address specific concerns within the early Christian Church, identifying cultural characteristics of his audience help to elucidate timeless gospel principles equally applicable to our day. In Jewish society, women’s roles and functions were restrictive. Married women were limited in education and inheritance rights while generally being confined to home. During the time of the Savior’s ministry among the Jews, Jewish women were typically seen as being without status, voice, or any quality of life without a man’s providential care. 
By contrast, in Roman cities, educating women was considered very important. Poorer families were at least able to offer their daughters an elementary education; daughters in more affluent homes were taught by personal tutors. In Corinth and Rome, women could initiate divorce proceedings for any reason and were free to manage their own property. In cities like Ephesus in Asia Minor and Thessalonica in Macedonia, women could own private businesses, hold public office, and perform significant roles in various temple rituals.  Among Paul’s converts were many from this Roman culture such as “chief women” in Thessalonica (Acts 17:4) and “honorable” Greek women in Berea (Acts 17:12). Lydia—a businesswoman from Thyatira in Asia Minor who sold expensive purple dye—was Paul’s first convert in Philippi (see Acts 16:14).
The spread of Christianity throughout the Roman Empire in the first century A.D. reflects the potential for misunderstanding of priesthood authority on cultures where tradition either marginalized women or erased role distinction. Two thousand years later, many women (in and outside the home) perceive themselves as patronized and ignored or encouraged to transform themselves into clones of their male colleagues. Priesthood authority may then translate into further seclusion of women or attempts to curtail women’s unique voice. Certainly Paul’s teachings have as much potential to address men and women’s stewardship within our own Christian society as the audience that first encountered them. An understanding of those roles is discovered by knowing Christ and following His example.
Paul taught that “the head of Christ is God,” or that Christ is submissive to God (1 Corinthians 11:3). A search in any dictionary or thesaurus reveals quite an interesting list of synonyms for the characteristic “submissive,” such as obedient, pliable, meek, unpretentious, spineless, flexible, long-suffering, sheepish, modest, henpecked, shrinking, apologetic, gentle, humble, subservient, and forbearing. When the list is applied to the Savior, some of the synonyms simply don’t fit. Unquestionably, Jesus is humble, meek, gentle, and unpretentious in His perfect obedience to the Father. But henpecked, spineless, and apologetic? Certainly we do not conclude from Paul’s statement that Christ is merely a puppet in God’s hands or inferior in any way.
We acknowledge both the Father and the Son as equally glorious members of the Godhead with two equally important yet distinct roles to bring about salvation for humankind. In His unique role, Christ leads us back to God because He is submissive to God. Consequently, we have unsurpassed reverence for the Savior, feeling to thank Him continually for His strength of character, supreme wisdom, devotion to covenant, and selfless love for the Father and each of us.
When one uses Christ as the personification of submission, a deeper definition unfolds. True submission requires restraint when one-upmanship is possible; the complete absence of pride when recognition is meted out; strength to stay the Spirit-directed course when letting go may be expected and even rewarded. When Satan tempted Him to display glory, Jesus restrained Himself from showcasing the breadth of His powers (see Matthew 4:1–11). When converted individuals desired baptism, Jesus “himself baptized not so many as his disciples . . . preferring one another” (JST John 4:3–4). On the cross He manifested unparalleled strength and magnificently accomplished the mission His Father sent him to do (see Matthew 27:42–50). Meekness begets meekness; one who is submissive inspires others to have the courage to change, to admit weakness, to “submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him” (Mosiah 3:19). Whether faced by goodness or evil, the Savior exercised restraint, humility, and commitment to the Father’s cause; through His example of submission, His disciples—then and now—have the courage to do likewise.
Recognizing submission in Jesus Christ provides an appropriate definition when the term is applied to His disciples. The Apostle Paul instructed women to be submissive, but he preceded his counsel with a reminder of his own need for submission. Paul told Saints living in Corinth that he could only expect them to heed his words as he followed Christ: “Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ” (1 Corinthians 11:1). He then admonished: “I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God” (1 Corinthians 11:3). The general context of 1 Corinthians addresses interactions of Saints in a church setting rather than within the family. Paul’s counsel about men being the head of women in this epistle therefore invites us to consider these dynamics within a Church leadership context.
To the Ephesians, however, Paul taught that the same leadership and submission roles exist within the family. He wrote: “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church. . . . Therefore as the Church is subject unto Christ so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing” (Ephesians 5:22–24). Paul perceived a responsibility for women to be meek and unpretentious in both a familial and ecclesiastical setting.
Women who exercise submission with a husband at home and a priesthood leader at Church begin to illuminate the power of a woman’s perspective and voice. First Corinthians was written in response to a woman’s sensitivity to contentions in the Corinthian branch. Very little is recorded about Chloe and her household in Corinth except that Paul acknowledged their report (1 Corinthians 1:10–11). This lengthy and doctrinally rich sermon identifying the destructive ramifications of disunity is evidence of Paul’s respect for a woman’s perceptions in spiritual matters.
Remembering that the vast majority of synonyms for the word submissive indicate a highly desirable trait, why do we think it means sheepish, spineless, and apologetic when it is used to describe women? Submission is neither giving in to a man’s unrighteousness nor giving up on encouraging a man in his potential. In the scriptural context, being submissive does not require women to become doormats for men to walk on. On the contrary, submission requires remarkable strength of character, devotion to covenant, unusual wisdom, and selfless love—reminiscent of the exemplary submissive One.
Furthermore, a broader study of the Bible reveals that Paul did not originate the responsibility for a woman to be submissive. The Lord ordained that role of submission from the beginning. In the Garden of Eden, God gave woman the assignment of “help meet,” because man needed a complement, being unable to accomplish his mission alone (Moses 3:18; Genesis 2:18). The Hebrew word ezer, translated help, infers strength to succor, support, or rescue. Meet, or kenegdo, means “equal to or appropriate for.” Eve and her daughters were created by God to be a help to Adam and his sons, who are their equals. God created man and woman to complement each other. He was fully aware that they would need each other to accomplish their missions and reach their full potential.
God’s tutelage for Eve did not end at Creation. He empowered her with desires to fulfill her stewardship before she and Adam left the Garden. Not only did man and woman need each other to depart from the Garden and commence mortality, God knew they would need each other to sojourn successfully in a fallen world. So after both Adam and Eve had partaken of the tree of knowledge, God strengthened Eve in her assignment to be a help meet to Adam by giving her a “desire” toward her husband. God gave her an inclination to support, encourage, and remain with her husband as Adam honored his role to “rule” or preside or be “head” of the woman (Moses 4:22; 1 Corinthians 11:3). “We believe that the Church simply will not accomplish what it must without [women’s] faith and faithfulness,” said Elder M. Russell Ballard, “[without their] innate tendency to put the well-being of others ahead of [their] own, and [their] spiritual strength and tenacity.”  Again, an inclination to support contributes a spirit of cooperation within the family and the Church. These gifts from God encourage both the partnership God ordained between man and woman as well as their ability to develop their complementary stewardships.
A young returned sister missionary attending BYU taught me that lesson. She described her feelings of discomfort with the assignment to do street contacting and tracting door-to-door at the commencement of her mission. By contrast, she noticed the boldness, courage, and even enthusiasm the elders in her mission displayed when they actively proselytized. She reasoned, why couldn’t the sisters be assigned to nurture visitors who attended Church meetings (which she loved to do and the elders seemed to ignore) and let the men go find people to teach (a task they seemed to enjoy so much more)? Then she began to notice elders who had been out for nearly two years. Without losing their courage to boldly bear witness of the restored gospel, whenever or wherever they saw opportunity, they also were sensitive, nurturing, and encouraging to those who had already committed to baptism. About the same time, she recognized what was happening to her as she matured in mission experience. She was losing her fear of tracting. She was becoming more confident in speaking up and bearing witness, while at the same time becoming more effective in encouraging new members by showing greater sensitivity to their needs. Because elders and sisters worked together in a holy cause, they strengthened each other to develop their complementary responsibilities and the work of the Lord progressed.
Most of the confusion, frustration, or anger surrounding the principle of women’s submissiveness is grounded in personal experience with men who assume that being “head” of a woman is a license for fathers, husbands, Church leaders, and men in general to abuse, neglect, patronize, dominate, belittle, and disrespect women. When such blatant mistreatment comes at the hands of men ordained to the priesthood, a woman may be cautious or even repulsed by instructions from the Apostle Paul to submit to a man. President Gordon B. Hinckley cautioned:
“Some men who are evidently unable to gain respect by the goodness of their lives use as justification for their actions the statement that Eve was told that Adam should rule over her. How much sadness, how much tragedy, how much heartbreak has been caused through centuries of time by weak men who have used that as a scriptural warrant for atrocious behavior! They do not recognize that the same account indicates that Eve was given as a help meet to Adam. The facts are that they stood side by side in the garden. They were expelled from the garden together, and they worked together side by side in gaining their bread by the sweat of their brows.” 
In an attempt to protect herself from such offense, a woman may become more aggressive, directive, or even vow to prove that men are not needed in society at all. In short, varying connotations of “head” have confused the lesson Paul was communicating about submission.
The Greek word kephale, translated as “head,” has been the source of countless word studies and commentaries, producing a variety of suggested meanings such as:
1. “source” or origin, referring to Adam as the source of Eve;
2. “preeminence,” as the head has preeminence over the body; 
3. “authority over” or “leader”; 
4. “foremost” as in a military context—not a chief or captain who rules from a safe distance, but “one who went before the troops . . . the first one into battle.” 
Examining the scriptural context provides the clarifying key to understand the meaning of “head.” Before Paul instructed man to be head of woman, he wrote, “the head of every man is Christ.” If we appreciate how Christ led, we will understand the meaning for man’s leadership role in connection with women.
Jesus was the perfect leader as “head” of all God’s children. Like the review of synonyms for submission, a review of meanings for head, preside, and lead produces the potential for negative and positive connotations. Consider this list of synonyms: control, supervise, direct, manage, guide, trail-blaze, take precedence, command, regulate, pioneer, boss, dictate, innovate, warlord, show the way, conduct. Which words describe Christ’s role as our perfect leader while at the same time reflecting His submission to the Father? Which words do not?
Jesus taught His disciples, “Whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant: even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many” (Matthew 20:27–28). Christ served those over whom He presided. He took initiative to act and give direction when challenges arose. He found solutions to problems and involved others in the process. He healed the infirm and was not afraid to praise the faith of those He healed (Luke 8:48). Because of His selfless leadership, men and women desired to “[minister] unto him of their substance” (Luke 8:3). Jesus led by living what he taught. He admonished His disciples to pray always, but it was after hearing Him pray that His disciples wanted to pray when they petitioned, “Lord, teach us to pray” (Luke 11:1). He even asked His disciples to pray for Him. Jesus listened without being condescending, spoke candidly and openly without concern over rejection, trusted His disciples to participate in His demanding work, and worked along side them without fearing He would disappoint them. Of his leadership style, President Spencer W. Kimball said, “Jesus was concerned with basics in human nature and in bringing about lasting changes, not simply cosmetic changes.” 
Christ was fearless in preaching and doing truth while at the same time humble and accepting. He was more concerned with the welfare of souls than the opinions of men. We love and reverence the Savior because He gives clear direction, valiantly blazes a trail we can follow, and never ceases to point us in the direction of the Father.
Christ’s example of leadership illustrates how men were divinely assigned to be leaders. Paul’s declaration that man is the head of woman does not suggest controlling, commanding, demanding, or managing. When God created man and woman, He gave them both dominion over all His other creations (see Moses 2:26–27; Genesis 1:26–27). In other words, the responsibility of dominion was not solely given to man, but to both man and woman together. Being “head” does not then infer that man has dominion over woman, even when the Lord told Eve that her husband was to “rule” over her (see Moses 4:22). President Hinckley’s interpretation of that statement was, “The husband shall have a governing responsibility to provide for, to protect, to strengthen and shield the wife.”  When the man is “head” in the Lord’s way, the woman is free to tend to her stewardship.
God emphasized differing roles and responsibilities for His sons and daughters. The challenge is not recognizing that God assigned differing responsibilities to His sons and daughter but in inspiring men and women to work harmoniously and complementarily in their assigned roles. To add complexity to this task, priesthood leadership functions differently in the home than in the Church. President Boyd K. Packer described the difference:
“In the Church our service is by call. In the home our service is by choice. . . . In the Church there is a distinct line of authority. We serve where called by those who preside over us. In the home it is a partnership with husband and wife equally yoked together. . . . While the husband, the father, has responsibility to provide worthy and inspired leadership, his wife is neither behind him nor ahead of him but at his side.” 
Priesthood leadership follows a vertical pattern in the Church, with every person’s Church calling following a line of authority through those men called to preside over them, eventually reaching up to the President of the Church.
This clarification may provide insight for Paul’s instruction, “Let your women keep silence in the churches” (1 Corinthians 14:34). Some biblical scholars discount the passage altogether by explaining it as “the work of an interpolator” since it appears to contradict Paul’s earlier acknowledgment that women prayed and prophesied in the churches (see 1 Corinthians 11:5).  Others suggest that Paul was forbidding women to teach doctrine, not from speaking in general. 
The chapter context gives the background for a very different interpretation for women’s silence. The text describes church meetings in Corinth where people spoke in tongues without an interpreter and where there was general confusion and disruption (JST 1 Corinthians 14:26–34; 1 Timothy 2:11–12). Moreover, the Greek word hesuchia, translated silence, suggests “a state of rest and contentment” or “a desistance from bustle or language,”  as in the manner in which Paul exhorted Thessalonian men to cease being busybodies and idle by working “with quietness” (2 Thessalonians 3:11–12). For these reasons, one scholar concluded that by using the same Greek word in his epistles, Paul intended that the Thessalonian men be “at peace with [their] work” and that the Corinthian women give “peaceful support of their leaders.” 
This view is further strengthened by the JST insight in the subsequent phase about the women: “For it is not permitted unto them to rule . . . in the church” (1 Corinthians 14:34–35). Women are at liberty to speak, bear witness, teach, and offer perspectives but not to provide priesthood leadership in the Church. No matter how much practical leadership training some of these Corinthian women may have received in their businesses and careers—very possibly more than some of the men called as presiding authorities—they were never commissioned by God to be overseers for the Corinthian branch. At Church, the head of the woman is a man in a hierarchical priesthood leadership position.
In the home, the pattern of priesthood leadership is horizontal, as President Packer described. Much of family disharmony over “headship” occurs when the Church application is practiced in the home. In an address during a priesthood session of general conference, President Howard W. Hunter taught:
“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. Of necessity there must be in the Church and the home a presiding officer (see D&C 107:21). By divine appointment, the responsibility to preside in the home rests upon the priesthood holder (see Moses 4:22). . . . 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.” 
A missionary couple, Priscilla and Aquila, exemplify the partnership President Hunter described. Between them, Paul and Luke acknowledged Aquila and Priscilla six times for their contribution to the work. Together Priscilla and Aquila provided their home as the Christian meeting house (1 Corinthians 16:19); “expound[ed]” the gospel to Apollos, an “eloquent man” who was already “mighty in the scriptures,” bringing him into the gospel fold (Acts 18:24, 26); and as Paul identified them: “my helpers in Christ Jesus: who have for my life laid down their own necks” (Romans 16:3–4). In his final farewell, Paul identified “Prisca and Aquila” among the stalwarts in the gospel while the greater church was sinking into apostasy (2 Timothy 4:19). Aquila’s inclusion of Priscilla in missionary labors strengthened him in successes and challenges.
Pastor John Piper wrote a remarkable description of “mature masculinity,” his term for divinely inspired “headship” based on the Apostle Paul’s teachings:
“Mature masculinity expresses itself not in the demand to be served, but in the strength to serve and to sacrifice for the good of the woman. . . .
“Mature masculinity does not have to initiate every action, but feels the responsibility to provide a general pattern of initiative. . . . For example, the leadership pattern would be less than Biblical if the wife in general was having to take the initiative in prayer at mealtime, and get the family out of bed for worship on Sunday morning, and gather the family for devotions, and discuss what moral standards will be required of the children, and confer about financial priorities . . . etc. . . .
“Mature masculinity recognizes that the call to leadership is a call to repentance and humility and risk-taking. . . . In a good marriage decision-making is focused on the husband, but is not unilateral. He seeks input from his wife and often adopts her ideas. . . . His awareness of his sin and imperfection will guard him from thinking that following Christ gives him the ability of Christ to know what’s best in every detail. Nevertheless, in a well-ordered Biblical marriage . . .
“ . . . The husband will accept the burden of making the final choice.” 
When a man initiates goodness and respects the knowledge and insight that women provide, he is honoring his stewardship to preside or be “head” of woman. This requires humility that comes from submission, for as Paul cautioned, “the head of every man is Christ.” When men lead as God directed, they do not see themselves as their family’s savior but do all they can to lead each family member to know God and Jesus Christ, the true Savior.
Two illustrations provide examples of how God’s pattern works when men and women honor their respective responsibilities.
First, President Boyd K. Packer related a parable to show how men and women need each other to obtain the greatest blessings of God. A man inherited two keys—one to a vault and the other to a safe within the vault. He was told that the treasure inside the safe would produce blessings that are continually replenished for all eternity if he worthily used the contents to benefit others.
“The man went alone to the vault. His first key opened the door. He tried to unlock the treasure with the other key, but he could not, for there were two locks on the safe. His key alone would not open it. No matter how he tried, he could not open it. He was puzzled. He had been given the keys. He knew the treasure was rightfully his. He had obeyed instructions, but he could not open the safe.
“In due time there came a woman into the vault. She too held a key. It was noticeably different from the key he held. Her key fit the other lock. It humbled him to learn that he could not obtain his rightful inheritance without her.
“They made a covenant that together they would open the treasure and, as instructed, he would watch over the vault and protect it; she would watch over the treasure. She was not concerned that, as guardian of the vault, he held two keys, for his full purpose was to see that she was safe as she watched over that which was most precious to them both. Together they opened the safe and partook of their inheritance. They rejoiced, for, as promised, it replenished itself. . . .
“Because some tempted them to misuse their treasure, they were careful to teach their children about keys and covenants.
“There came, in due time, among their posterity some few who were deceived or jealous or selfish because one was given two keys and another only one. ‘Why,’ the selfish ones reasoned, ‘cannot the treasure be mine alone to use as I desire?’. . .
“Those who received the treasure with gratitude and obeyed the laws concerning it knew joy without bounds through time and all eternity.” 
God’s blessings are not diminished with different assignments. On the contrary, combining our complementary responsibilities as men and women magnifies the gifts and opportunities God gives to us. Neither man nor woman can obtain the fullness of God’s promises without the other.
Elder Russell M. Nelson provided a second example of men’s and women’s complementary responsibilities with a recounting of his family’s river-rafting vacation. The first time the family approached dangerous rapids and a waterfall, Elder Nelson explained that his fatherly instinct was to “hold them close to me. But as we reached the precipice, the bended raft became a giant sling and shot me into the air. I landed into the roiling rapids of the river. . . . I finally found the side of the raft and rose to the surface. The family pulled my nearly drowned body out of the water.” Lucky for him he had a “help meet,” one who is his equal with strength to help and rescue!
With all humility and honesty, Elder Nelson then described the most important responsibility a father has in leading his family. When they faced “the most dangerous drop of the journey,” Elder Nelson initiated a family council meeting where a plan for survival was outlined. As the one who presides, he directed his family not to hold on to him this time, but to hang on to the only thing that would keep them afloat—the ropes secured to the raft. Lucky for the family they had a father who was submissive to the Lord and knew how to lead them to Him.
Elder Nelson’s lesson is clear: “As we go through life, even through very rough waters, a father’s instinctive impulse to cling tightly to his wife or to his children may not be the best way to accomplish his objective. Instead, if he will lovingly cling to the Savior and the iron rod of the gospel, his family will want to cling to him and to the Savior.”  When a man uses his position as “head” to lead those within his priesthood stewardship to Christ and a woman actively sustains that focus, families are strengthened and individuals fortified in their connection to God.
In Paul’s day, disunity and contention plagued the early Christian Church in a variety of ways, including confusion and competition over men’s and women’s differing God-given responsibilities. In our day, Elder M. Russell Ballard observed: “The adversary is having a heyday distorting attitudes about gender and roles and about families and individual worth. He is the author of mass confusion about the value, the role, the contribution, and the unique nature of women.” 
The Apostle Paul boldly restated God’s order to invite unity in Christ by emphasizing the necessity of submission in every relationship: “The head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God” (1 Corinthians 11:3). No amount of manipulation of these dynamics will make the world a better place. No misinterpretation of presiding and submitting will finally make right either unrighteous dominion or relinquishing a voice. Only by submitting to God’s order are we empowered to lift each other to become what God promised we could be. For what man would not gladly sacrifice, actively serve, and more meekly guide a woman who sincerely trusts, unpretentiously follows, and wholeheartedly supports his Christlike attempts to lead? And what woman would not willingly and joyfully cooperate with a husband, father, or priesthood leader who boldly protects, unflinchingly holds to truth, and gently leads them to Christ and subsequently to an understanding of their potential in the Church, the home, and the world? The Apostle Paul said it best: “Neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord” (1 Corinthians 11:11).
 David Noel Freedman, ed., The Anchor Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 6:958–60, S.V. “Women (NT).”
 M. Russell Ballard, “Here I Am, Send Me,” in Brigham Young University 2000–2001 Speeches (Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University, 2001), 199.
 Gordon B. Hinckley, in Conference Report, October 1991, 72.
 Wayne Grudem, “The Meaning of Kephale (‘Head’): A Response to Recent Studies,” in Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: A Response to Evangelical Feminism, ed. John Piper and Wayne Gudem (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books, 1991), 426.
 John Temple Bristow, What Paul Really Said about Women (New York: HarperCollins, 1988), 36–37.
 Spencer W. Kimball, “Jesus: The Perfect Leader,” Ensign, August 1979, 6.
 Gordon B. Hinckley, “Daughters of God,” Ensign, November 1991, 99.
 Boyd K. Packer, in Conference Report, April 1998, 96.
 Margaret Y. MacDonald, “Reading Real Women through the Undisputed Letters of Paul,” in Women & Christian Origins, ed. Boss Shephard Kraemer and Mary Rose D’Angelo (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 216.
 Werner Neuer, Man and Woman in Christian Perspective (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books, 1991), 117.
 James Strong, The Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (McLean, Virginia: MacDonald, N.D.), S.V. “Hesuchia.”
 Richard Lloyd Anderson, Understanding Paul (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1983), 352.
 Howard W Hunter, in Conference Report, October 1994, 68.
 John Piper, “A Vision of Biblical Complementarity: Manhood and Womanhood Defined According to the Bible,” in Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: A Response to Evangelical Feminism, ed. John Piper and Wayne Gudem (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books, 1991), 38–59.
 Boyd K. Packer, in Conference Report, October 1993, 31.
 Russell M. Nelson, “Women Of Righteousness,” Ensign, November 2001, 69.
 Ballard, “Here I Am,” 199.