As you point out in your letter, the Universal House of Justice
has stated that, by inference from a number of responsibilities placed upon
him, the father can be regarded as the "head" of the family. However,
this term does not have the same meaning as that used generally. Rather, a new
meaning should be sought in the light of the principle of the equality between
men and women, and of statements of the Universal House of Justice that neither
husband nor wife should ever unjustly dominate the other. The House of Justice
has stated previously, in response to a question from a believer, that use of
the term "head" "does not confer superiority upon the husband,
nor does it give him special rights to undermine the rights of the other
members of the family". It has also stated that if agreement cannot be
reached following loving consultation, "there are times ... when a wife
should defer to her husband, and times when a husband should defer to his wife,
but neither should ever unjustly dominate the other"; this is in marked
contrast to the conventional usage of the term "head" with which is
associated, frequently, the unfettered right of making decisions when agreement
cannot be reached between husband and wife.
- The Universal House of Justice (From a letter dated 11 January
1988 written on behalf of the House of Justice to an individual believer quoted
in a Memorandum by the Research Department of the Universal House of Justice
dated 27 June 1996)
