What? No authority needed to pass the sacrament?

[Navidad]

58 minutes ago, Calm said:

If they shared their sacrament with the meaning it was meant to celebrate Christ as fellow Christians, it would have deep spiritual significance for me.  There are likely other doctrines I would find meaningful as well.

 I would not be assuming it meant the same for me as me partaking of the Sacrament in accordance with the doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Iow, It would not be a substitution for me, but a different sacrament), but there are many things in other faiths I find very inspiring and would desire to participate in if appropriate in their doctrine and participation would not contradict my own.  I would not want to participate if I felt the need to rewrite the experience in my head, I would want to participate as they defined the experience.  I would accept a blessing of healing through faith, for example.

I have very much enjoyed and been inspired in the few meetings I have attended in other faiths.  Mostly too shy just to crash them and my friends have rarely invited me...I think I may have finally reached the point I would feel comfortable in asking, but living in Utah Valley and having limited social contact outside my neighbourhood due to health, don't get opportunities.  Have attended a few Evangelical gatherings since the move here though, inspired by the devotion of others among other things.

Your reply helps a lot. As most of us do, I sometimes interpret things through my own filter. Quite frankly, I am quite interested in this topic because of a personal situation. Almost every year the Saints in our area put on a wonderful Christmas concert for the entire community. A thousand people or so show up to hear 200-250 singers and orchestra from our two stakes. The members of the choir are all, as far as I know Saints. This year, the director (and first counselor to the bishop) asked me to sing in the choir and then to sing a solo in German with the backing of the choir to honor the Mennonite attendees from the community. If I sing, I want to be a spiritual blessing. I have sung in dinner theatres and in secular oratorio groups, but this is different. To me this is ministry. I don't want to sing if all the Saints are going to either be offended, or sit there with arms folded because I can't possibly sing with any spiritual conviction since I don't have priesthood authority (outside of my own home). Why would the director and counselor in the bishopric  ask me then? Why would the stake president approve? I don't want to just minister to the Mennonites and Catholics who are there. I hope God would use the voice he gave me (which is wearing out as I approach old age) to minister to all in attendance, unless I hit a bunch of bad notes and mess up the German words. So this is personal for me. I am not a showboat; I have committed my life as a baptismal covenant to being a minister. I hope you can understand that without getting irritated at me. I am so scared to post here now.

[HappyJackWagon]

8 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Your reply helps a lot. As most of us do, I sometimes interpret things through my own filter. Quite frankly, I am quite interested in this topic because of a personal situation. Almost every year the Saints in our area put on a wonderful Christmas concert for the entire community. A thousand people or so show up to hear 200-250 singers and orchestra from our two stakes. The members of the choir are all, as far as I know Saints. This year, the director (and first counselor to the bishop) asked me to sing in the choir and then to sing a solo in German with the backing of the choir to honor the Mennonite attendees from the community. If I sing, I want to be a spiritual blessing. I have sung in dinner theatres and in secular oratorio groups, but this is different. To me this is ministry. I don't want to sing if all the Saints are going to either be offended, or sit there with arms folded because I can't possibly sing with any spiritual conviction since I don't have priesthood authority (outside of my own home). Why would the director and counselor in the bishopric  ask me then? Why would the stake president approve? I don't want to just minister to the Mennonites and Catholics who are there. I hope God would use the voice he gave me (which is wearing out as I approach old age) to minister to all in attendance, unless I hit a bunch of bad notes and mess up the German words. So this is personal for me. I am not a showboat; I have committed my life as a baptismal covenant to being a minister. I hope you can understand that without getting irritated at me. I am so scared to post here now.

I've been a part of these kinds of events as well and I think I'm very safe in saying that your participation would be universally accepted and appreciated by members (assuming you can sing of course  )  I think the membership generally really enjoys participation from members of other faiths, particularly in musical events like these. I think it is very similar to the way MOTAB invites non-member guests to perform with them. I've never heard of members being offended by non-member participation.

[Navidad]

23 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I'm not kfisher but I feel similar to how he does.

For me personally, I wouldn't see the purpose in partaking in the sacrament in a different church because I don't believe that it's been blessed by someone with the authority to do so. And if the bread and water aren't blessed, then there is no reason to partake of them.  They are no different spiritually than the bread I use for my sandwich or the water from my tap.

I wouldn't have a problem with anyone who felt similarly towards the sacrament in the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and didn't believe that it was blessed appropriately so had no significance either.

To the bolded part above, kfisher said that he didn't believe that other Christian religions have the authority from God to perform the ordinance of the sacrament, and that's all he said.  Why would you conclude that he was saying that he didn't believe that other Christians have spiritual accountability, practice or presence?  That conclusion makes no sense to me.

Sorry it makes no sense to you. I wasn't speaking for you,  it makes perfect sense to me. I hope you will accept that. Thinking, praying, remembering, and covenanting all have significance to me. Those things can and do happen in the pecan orchard, in the bathtub, in the LDS chapel, in an Anglican church, in the beautiful Sierra Madre mountains of our area, with my wife, with my bishop, while driving down the road, while in my office, while pitching horseshoes. They are all personal and individual Spiritual blessings given by the Holy Spirit. Can you not find a blessing in the bread you use for your sandwich or in the water from your tap? Each is a gift from God; just as was Jesus Christ, the one we remember when we remember his death, burial and resurrection. I have never thought of the sacrament as being anything more or less than a wonderful practice of the presence of God and a specific remembrance of His Son's atonement, an opportunity for renewal and re-commitment.  I don't need any bread or water to do that. Nor does it have to be wine or grape juice. Nor does it have to be blessed by a specific authority any more than it has already been blessed by the ultimate authority, our Savior. It has to be me sitting there with a clean heart doing it in "remembrance" of Him. If everything has to be "blessed appropriately" to have any spiritual significance, then I will never be a LDS-Christian. That concept is unfathomable to me. I mean no disrespect; but there are simply some concepts in the LDS Christians' minds and attitudes that are unfathomable to me. Not your fault. Some of you get so angry at me because my confusions and conclusions "make no sense to you." I am sorry for that. I do try hard.

Edited November 8, 2018 by Navidad

[pogi]

32 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Help me out; and therefore that means what? What is the implication of priesthood authority or the lack thereof to your own personal experience, prayer, remembrance and commitment in the observation of the sacrament? Have you never experienced general or special revelation outside of priesthood authority? I know priesthood authority is important to LDS Christians, I am not questioning that. Do you however, expect to find no spiritual enrichment or enlightenment in the words, song, or actions of any non-LDS Christians? I know I will be criticized for asking such questions by some of you, because I have asked them before. I just find it so hard, so very hard to believe that a truly Godly LDS Christian believes there is no spiritual authority, accountability, practice, or presence in any other Christian group; and that is the only conclusion I can think of, from your answer.

If that is true why do the LDS Christians of our area keep asking me to sing, speak, share, testify in their midst when there are plenty of other LDS folks who could do the same? Am I just a novelty, a token interloper who they find fascinating? I know there are those of you who dislike it when I continue to be confused and not "understand." I just hope you can understand that such contradictions are indeed hard for me to understand. Your answer seems to indicate that there is a "magical" (there must be a better word) happening in the LDS sacrament like there is in the Catholic rite. The other day I walked into the men's room in our ward. The young man who was to say the sacrament prayer that morning had his phone up to his face and was saying it over and over and over again so he wouldn't mess it up (to use his words). I felt so bad for him. The pressure was intense. I gave him a hug and told him he would do fine. I am not sure I ever heard such a big sigh from a young man. He thanked me and walked out. Oh and he did fine! Please, it is not that I don't appreciate your answer. I simply can't comprehend it.

Navidad, it is not that a Latter-day Saint could not be enriched through participating in the sacrament of another faith by the experience of remembering and pondering on Christ's atonement, etc.  But I could get that same enrichment without taking any bread and water.  For us, the sacrament is more than just being enriched and remembering the Savior, it is a priesthood ordinance and renewal of baptismal covenants.  I cannot renew my personal covenants of baptism any other way.  As an ordinance of the church, it requires priesthood authority.  It is the authority to bind on earth and in heaven, without it, there is no binding covenant - that is NOT to say that it cannot be enriching in other ways.  

In regards to the rote prayer - do you not recite a rote prayer with baptism?  Is it not required that a person be baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holly Ghost?  Sometimes wording is important, no?  It is really no different with the sacrament.  In fact it makes sense as the sacrament is intrinsically related to baptism as a renewal of baptismal covenants.  It is the only prayers that are repeated word for word in our church. 

[kllindley]

26 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Help me out; and therefore that means what? What is the implication of priesthood authority or the lack thereof to your own personal experience, prayer, remembrance and commitment in the observation of the sacrament? Have you never experienced general or special revelation outside of priesthood authority? I know priesthood authority is important to LDS Christians, I am not questioning that. Do you however, expect to find no spiritual enrichment or enlightenment in the words, song, or actions of any non-LDS Christians? I know I will be criticized for asking such questions by some of you, because I have asked them before. I just find it so hard, so very hard to believe that a truly Godly LDS Christian believes there is no spiritual authority, accountability, practice, or presence in any other Christian group; and that is the only conclusion I can think of, from your answer.

If that is true why do the LDS Christians of our area keep asking me to sing, speak, share, testify in their midst when there are plenty of other LDS folks who could do the same? Am I just a novelty, a token interloper who they find fascinating? I know there are those of you who dislike it when I continue to be confused and not "understand." I just hope you can understand that such contradictions are indeed hard for me to understand. Your answer seems to indicate that there is a "magical" (there must be a better word) happening in the LDS sacrament like there is in the Catholic rite. The other day I walked into the men's room in our ward. The young man who was to say the sacrament prayer that morning had his phone up to his face and was saying it over and over and over again so he wouldn't mess it up (to use his words). I felt so bad for him. The pressure was intense. I gave him a hug and told him he would do fine. I am not sure I ever heard such a big sigh from a young man. He thanked me and walked out. Oh and he did fine! Please, it is not that I don't appreciate your answer. I simply can't comprehend it.

I may get a lot of heat for answering this way, but I hope it helps.  Please know that I am speaking only for myself and  other members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints may (certainly) disagree with me.  

I have read a lot of your posts.  I remember you talking a lot about your respect for other Christian faiths and the beauty you find in them.  If I may ask, how much personal spiritual edification and enlightenment do you find in non-Christian religious practices?  I deeply appreciate the mindfulness meditative aspects taught in Eastern religious traditions.  I find that they enhance my own spirituality.  However, I do not find any essential or salvic power in them.  So while I would be happy to join in various practices and take my own personal spiritual meaning from them, I would be using them differently than the rest of the Faith community.  I don't think that this is necessarily a bad thing.  However, I don't think this willingness to value the good in other religious traditions is without limit. Despite my deep love and respect for practitioners of Hinduism, I could not in good conscience join a prayer to Ganesh.  That would very closely border on violating the Commandment against worshiping other Gods.  I would not be baptized  in any other denomination.  For me some religious practices are so similar to my own, with enough of a distinction either in intent or in practice, that engaging in them would feel like a mockery of my own Covenants to God.   

It may seem harsh to compare other Christian denominations to non-Christian religions.  My intent is not to deny their faith in Jesus Christ.  At the same time, I firmly believe that there is something intrinsic to the Authority claimed by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that is not present in any other denomination.   For general spiritual enrichment through practices like singing, Scripture study, discussion, and even sermons in many cases, the presence of Priesthood Authority has no impact.  For those few things that do require Priesthood Authority in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, (primarily, but not necessarily limited to the Saving Ordinances) engaging in them outside of that Priesthood Authority feels too much to me like sacrilege. 

Does that make sense?  Is there more to the question that I didn't answer or other questions that my answer prompts? 

[kllindley]

42 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Your reply helps a lot. As most of us do, I sometimes interpret things through my own filter. Quite frankly, I am quite interested in this topic because of a personal situation. Almost every year the Saints in our area put on a wonderful Christmas concert for the entire community. A thousand people or so show up to hear 200-250 singers and orchestra from our two stakes. The members of the choir are all, as far as I know Saints. This year, the director (and first counselor to the bishop) asked me to sing in the choir and then to sing a solo in German with the backing of the choir to honor the Mennonite attendees from the community. If I sing, I want to be a spiritual blessing. I have sung in dinner theatres and in secular oratorio groups, but this is different. To me this is ministry. I don't want to sing if all the Saints are going to either be offended, or sit there with arms folded because I can't possibly sing with any spiritual conviction since I don't have priesthood authority (outside of my own home). Why would the director and counselor in the bishopric  ask me then? Why would the stake president approve? I don't want to just minister to the Mennonites and Catholics who are there. I hope God would use the voice he gave me (which is wearing out as I approach old age) to minister to all in attendance, unless I hit a bunch of bad notes and mess up the German words. So this is personal for me. I am not a showboat; I have committed my life as a baptismal covenant to being a minister. I hope you can understand that without getting irritated at me. I am so scared to post here now.

 

31 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I've been a part of these kinds of events as well and I think I'm very safe in saying that your participation would be universally accepted and appreciated by members (assuming you can sing of course  )  I think the membership generally really enjoys participation from members of other faiths, particularly in musical events like these. I think it is very similar to the way MOTAB invites non-member guests to perform with them. I've never heard of members being offended by non-member participation.

I completely agree.  Bringing Spiritual edification through music absolutely does not require any degree of Priesthood Authority.  I think even you would agree that it is important that the intent of the performance and at least to a degree the words and style do matter.  I can think of some "Screamo Rock" songs that would not be spiritually uplifting even if sung with the words of a hymn.   Also, if the words contradict truths of the Gospel, the spiritual edification could be lessened.  But I am not aware of any teaching in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that even suggests music needs Priesthood Authority to be spiritually uplifting.  

[Navidad]

46 minutes ago, pogi said:

Navidad, it is not that a Latter-day Saint could not be enriched through participating in the sacrament of another faith by the experience of remembering and pondering on Christ's atonement, etc.  But I could get that same enrichment without taking any bread and water.  For us, the sacrament is more than just being enriched and remembering the Savior, it is a priesthood ordinance and renewal of baptismal covenants.  I cannot renew my personal covenants of baptism any other way.  As an ordinance of the church, it requires priesthood authority.  It is the authority to bind on earth and in heaven, without it, there is no binding covenant - that is NOT to say that it cannot be enriching in other ways.  

In regards to the rote prayer - do you not recite a rote prayer with baptism?  Is it not required that a person be baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holly Ghost?  Sometimes wording is important, no?  It is really no different with the sacrament.  In fact it makes sense as the sacrament is intrinsically related to baptism as a renewal of baptismal covenants.  It is the only prayers that are repeated word for word in our church. 

Hi Pogi: You are always helpful. I understand what you are saying to a degree. Here is my question: Why can you not renew your baptism covenants outside of an ordinance? Maybe that is what I don't understand. Perhaps I have a different definition of revewal. I take advantage of the intent of the sacrament to renew my covenants at that time; I don't need the ordinance (which it is for most, if not all Christian groups) to do that. It is a specific time set aside to do that. It is not the only time I can do that. If it is the only way for you to renew your covenants then I don't understand that. Doesn't the enrichment we are talking about come from the renewal of our covenants, which can happen anywhere? Or I guess you are saying it cannot. Maybe that is what I am missing.

To answer your other point, I have "presided" over many a sacrament or communion ordinance, but have never offered a rote prayer in doing so. I have read the same scripture each time (from I Cor. 11). Perhaps that is rote part you are talking about. Anyway, I need to just let this go. Part of my problem is best reflected in a confession.

My confession is that I am in "hopeful denial" that the members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are as stridently confident that they are the only ones. I tried to think of something else to write behind that, but it seemed a period is the best thing, because that represents the reality. I have so much interaction with so many. I don't want to be a token, a mascot, a proof of diversity, a symbol of an inter-faith movement that really believes there can never be parity within beliefs, and therefore believes there can never be any real community between us. There are so many fine LDS Christians, and obviously so many fine Christians from other traditions as well. I hate to let that dream go, but it seems that I am buffeted wherever I take it.

If the majority of Christians really believe you aren't; and you really believe you are the only, then I guess there is nowhere to go except silly token solos in a choir! Growing up as a boy we often had an invitation hymn we sang called "Just as I am." It was a beautiful hymn that we sang over and over and over again. I learned the song as a boy and believed that under the blood of the atonement God accepts each one of us who repent and commit "just as I am."

I don't think LDS-Christians need to change - they are fine just as they are. They don't have to depend on other Christian's approval to be approved by God. I don't think non-LDS Christians need to change - they are fine just as they are. They don't have to depend on LDS-Christians' ordinances or authority to be approved by God. So there you have it. I must be one of three people on earth who think that way! I haven't met the other two.

 

Edited November 8, 2018 by Navidad

[Navidad]

1 hour ago, kllindley said:

I may get a lot of heat for answering this way, but I hope it helps.  Please know that I am speaking only for myself and  other members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints may (certainly) disagree with me.  

I have read a lot of your posts.  I remember you talking a lot about your respect for other Christian faiths and the beauty you find in them.  If I may ask, how much personal spiritual edification and enlightenment do you find in non-Christian religious practices?  I deeply appreciate the mindfulness meditative aspects taught in Eastern religious traditions.  I find that they enhance my own spirituality.  However, I do not find any essential or salvic power in them.  So while I would be happy to join in various practices and take my own personal spiritual meaning from them, I would be using them differently than the rest of the Faith community.  I don't think that this is necessarily a bad thing.  However, I don't think this willingness to value the good in other religious traditions is without limit. Despite my deep love and respect for practitioners of Hinduism, I could not in good conscience join a prayer to Ganesh.  That would very closely border on violating the Commandment against worshiping other Gods.  I would not be baptized  in any other denomination.  For me some religious practices are so similar to my own, with enough of a distinction either in intent or in practice, that engaging in them would feel like a mockery of my own Covenants to God.   

It may seem harsh to compare other Christian denominations to non-Christian religions.  My intent is not to deny their faith in Jesus Christ.  At the same time, I firmly believe that there is something intrinsic to the Authority claimed by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that is not present in any other denomination.   For general spiritual enrichment through practices like singing, Scripture study, discussion, and even sermons in many cases, the presence of Priesthood Authority has no impact.  For those few things that do require Priesthood Authority in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, (primarily, but not necessarily limited to the Saving Ordinances) engaging in them outside of that Priesthood Authority feels too much to me like sacrilege. 

Does that make sense?  Is there more to the question that I didn't answer or other questions that my answer prompts? 

I hope you don't get any heat for your answer. You certainly won't get any from me. My only real involvement in non-Christian rituals were when I did my mission in Africa. I observed a few Islamic and a few animistic traditions. I did not find any essential or salvific power in them. I enjoyed observing because I felt that enriched my life experience, but that is it.

I keep watching LDS priesthood authority holders (in life and on this forum) to hopefully see something unique, some manifestation of the Holy Spirit, some spirituality, some Godliness that I have not felt or seen in other Christians of many denominations. I am genuine in that search. So far I have not been able to discern, even through the Holy Spirit, a difference that this "authority" makes from any other Godly individual I know. Quickly, I want to say; I see, feel, and observe nothing less than, either. The issue is rather, the "more than." If there is something"intrinsic and unique to the Authority claimed by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that is not present in any other denomination" then that uniqueness should manifest itself somehow, shouldn't it? Perhaps in a unique Godliness, a unique patience, a unique commitment to Christ-likeness, something - perhaps a unique manifestation of the Holy Spirit. How do you as LDS-Christians think your unique authority can and should manifest itself to those around you?

I said too much already. I have eliminated the rest.

Edited November 8, 2018 by Navidad

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Navidad said:

Thinking, praying, remembering, and covenanting all have significance to me. Those things can and do happen in the pecan orchard, in the bathtub, in the LDS chapel, in an Anglican church, in the beautiful Sierra Madre mountains of our area, with my wife, with my bishop, while driving down the road, while in my office, while pitching horseshoes. They are all personal and individual Spiritual blessings given by the Holy Spirit.

I completely agree.

Quote

Can you not find a blessing in the bread you use for your sandwich or in the water from your tap?

I definitely can, but it wouldn't have anything to do with the sacrament, where the bread and the water are blessed by priesthood authority to symbolize a very specific thing: the body and blood of Christ and my baptismal covenants.

Quote

Each is a gift from God; just as was Jesus Christ, the one we remember when we remember his death, burial and resurrection.

But for members of the church of Jesus Christ of latter-day saints, the sacrament isn't just about remembering.  It's much more. 

Quote

I have never thought of the sacrament as being anything more or less than a wonderful practice of the presence of God and a specific remembrance of His Son's atonement, an opportunity for renewal and re-commitment.

That's fine.  For members of my church, it's an ordinance, requiring authority from God to perform. 

Quote

I don't need any bread or water to do that.  Nor does it have to be wine or grape juice.

That's fine, but in the latter-day saint perspective, that's not the sacrament.  

Quote

Nor does it have to be blessed by a specific authority any more than it has already been blessed by the ultimate authority, our Savior.

Again, that's fine, but that's not what we believe.  We don't believe you can renew covenants with God without having/using His authority to do so.

Quote

It has to be me sitting there with a clean heart doing it in "remembrance" of Him.

Ok.  But again, remembering the Savior is not all the sacrament is to latter-day saints.

Quote

If everything has to be "blessed appropriately" to have any spiritual significance, then I will never be a LDS-Christian.

Everything doesn't have to be blessed appropriately to have spiritual significance.  Performing ordinances is what has to be done with the appropriate authority.  No one has said anything about 'everything' needing priesthood authority.  That's the assumption that you are making that I don't understand. 

Quote

That concept is unfathomable to me.

It's unfathomable to me as well.

Quote

Some of you get so angry at me because my confusions and conclusions "make no sense to you." I am sorry for that. I do try hard.

I think that some of us get frustrated because you often attribute attitudes and feelings to us that we don't ascribe to, such as the idea that everything has to be blessed appropriately to have spiritual significance.  We don't believe that.

[pogi]

1 hour ago, Navidad said:

Hi Pogi: You are always helpful. I understand what you are saying to a degree. Here is my question: Why can you not renew your baptism covenants outside of an ordinance? Maybe that is what I don't understand. Perhaps I have a different definition of revewal. I take advantage of the intent of the sacrament to renew my covenants at that time; I don't need the ordinance (which it is for most, if not all Christian groups) to do that. It is a specific time set aside to do that. It is not the only time I can do that. If it is the only way for you to renew your covenants then I don't understand that. Doesn't the enrichment we are talking about come from the renewal of our covenants, which can happen anywhere? Or I guess you are saying it cannot. Maybe that is what I am missing.

For us, ordinances are the Lord's way of making covenants.  Perhaps our misunderstanding comes in how we each define covenant.  Here is how it is defined in our Bible dictionary, you might find this helpful:

Quote

 

Sometimes denotes an agreement between persons (1 Sam. 23:18) or nations (1 Sam. 11:1); more often between God and man; but in this latter case it is important to notice that the two parties to the agreement do not stand in the relation of independent and equal contractors. God in His good pleasure fixes the terms, which man accepts. The same word is sometimes rendered “testament.”

The gospel is so arranged that principles and ordinances are received by covenant, placing the recipient under strong obligation and responsibility to honor the commitment. Thus the severe consequences to Ananias and Sapphira, who deliberately broke their covenant and lied unto God (Acts 5:1–11).

 

Ordinances cannot be received without covenant, and God (not man) fixes the terms of those covenants.  Finally, it is the sealing power of the priesthood that makes these covenants binding on both earth and in heaven.  In other words, the Lord is bound to fulfill his end of the bargain when we fulfill our end.  It is critical to note that it is not man who makes covenants.  We do not create or write the contract, God does.  We either choose to enter that contract upon his terms or we are not guaranteed the binding promise of the covenant.  He sets the bounds, the rules, and the means of covenant making, it is us who accepts or rejects those means.  The ordinances are a manifestation of our commitment to his Holy order.  It is all done on His terms, not ours.  "Not my will but thine be done..."  We view the sacred ordinances of the priesthood as His terms and His will and the only binding guarantee of receiving His end of the bargain. 

Sure, people can make promises to God without the priesthood, and the Lord can generally bless them for keeping those promises.  That is different from priesthood ordinances and covenant making though.  That is man making promises with God, whereas covenant making is God making contractual promises with man.  He does that as he always has done, through the priesthood. 

Seals are often used today to affirm authenticity.  It used to be that rings would be used as an official stamp for melted wax on envelopes.  This idea of authoritative sealing priesthood power is not new.  It is ancient.  At least in our interpretation of scripture:

http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Sealing

As members of the restored church, we declare that the ordinances of the priesthood as performed in Christ's church are God's will and means for authorized covenant making.  These are His terms.  There is one way.  It is pure and without contradiction of different sects.  It is given to man to know for himself if this is true or not (Moroni 10:3-5; Alma 32), and to accept His terms or not.  All will be given ample opportunity in this life or the next for a perfectly just and merciful judgment.     

That is what we believe with out whole souls. 

 

Edited November 8, 2018 by pogi

[Calm]

I think one can emotionally and spiritually renew covenants without participating in the assigned ordinance, but one cannot ritually renew them according to doctrine in terms of an authorized ordinance.  Just as baptism has an authorized ritual attached to it, so has our ritualized renewal of covenants through the partaking of the authorized Sacrament.

The specific ritual has additional layers of meaning for Saints that may be lacking for others, though I suspect many who use authorized forms in their faith see it in a similar fashion.

[Navidad]

13 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I completely agree.

I definitely can, but it wouldn't have anything to do with the sacrament, where the bread and the water are blessed by priesthood authority to symbolize a very specific thing: the body and blood of Christ and my baptismal covenants.

But for members of the church of Jesus Christ of latter-day saints, the sacrament isn't just about remembering.  It's much more. 

That's fine.  For members of my church, it's an ordinance, requiring authority from God to perform. 

That's fine, but in the latter-day saint perspective, that's not the sacrament.  

Again, that's fine, but that's not what we believe.  We don't believe you can renew covenants with God without having/using His authority to do so.

Ok.  But again, remembering the Savior is not all the sacrament is to latter-day saints.

Everything doesn't have to be blessed appropriately to have spiritual significance.  Performing ordinances is what has to be done with the appropriate authority.  No one has said anything about 'everything' needing priesthood authority.  That's the assumption that you are making that I don't understand. 

It's unfathomable to me as well.

I think that some of us get frustrated because you often attribute attitudes and feelings to us that we don't ascribe to, such as the idea that everything has to be blessed appropriately to have spiritual significance.  We don't believe that.

I just erased my longer reply. I am sorry I didn't ask my questions better. If you would re-read my post I said "If" That is a huge "if." I didn't say "since." You are ascribing to me things I didn't say. I never said that you believe everything has to be blessed. I said if - that carries with it the essence of uncertainty. You made a series of statements. I still don't know any more about the essence and nature of what a priesthood blessing has to do with remembering, reconsecrating, and renewal that I did before. I also don't know how a priesthood blessing creates a symbol of something that I, without a priesthood already know is a symbol. Do you simply reject the fact that I made baptismal covenants when I was baptized? They may not have been 100% the same as yours, but I would think for the most part they are, and that I can sincerely pray each and every Sunday morning during the sacrament to God the Father to strengthen me to maintain those covenants for another week. There is so much more to ask, but I won't. It just upsets folks here when the non-Mormon asks too many questions over and over again. I have been here well over a year. There are many things that I don't ask about anymore. Anyone ever notice that? I understand them; no need to keep on asking. I rarely debate the answers, unless they aren't answers, just a series of declarative statements that I guess are supposed to settle it all for me.

[Navidad]

36 minutes ago, pogi said:

For us, ordinances are the Lord's way of making covenants.  Perhaps our misunderstanding comes in how we each define covenant.  Here is how it is defined in our Bible dictionary, you might find this helpful:

Ordinances cannot be received without covenant, and God (not man) fixes the terms of those covenants.  Finally, it is the sealing power of the priesthood that makes these covenants binding on both earth and in heaven.  In other words, the Lord is bound to fulfill his end of the bargain when we fulfill our end.  It is critical to note that it is not man who makes covenants.  We do not create or write the contract, God does.  We either choose to enter that contract upon his terms or we are not guaranteed the binding promise of the covenant.  He sets the bounds, the rules, and the means of covenant making, it is us who accepts or rejects those means.  The ordinances are a manifestation of our commitment to his Holy order.  It is all done on His terms, not ours.  "Not my will but thine be done..."  We view the sacred ordinances of the priesthood as His terms and His will and the only binding guarantee of receiving His end of the bargain. 

Sure, people can make promises to God without the priesthood, and the Lord can generally bless them for keeping those promises.  That is different from priesthood ordinances and covenant making though.  That is man making promises with God, whereas covenant making is God making contractual promises with man.  He does that as he always has done, through the priesthood. 

Seals are often used today to affirm authenticity.  It used to be that rings would be used as an official stamp for melted wax on envelopes.  This idea of authoritative sealing priesthood power is not new.  It is ancient.  At least in our interpretation of scripture:

http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Sealing

As members of the restored church, we declare that the ordinances of the priesthood as performed in Christ's church are God's will and means for authorized covenant making.  These are His terms.  There is one way.  It is pure and without contradiction of different sects.  It is given to man to know for himself if this is true or not (Moroni 10:3-5; Alma 32), and to accept His terms or not.  All will be given ample opportunity in this life or the next for a perfectly just and merciful judgment.     

That is what we believe with out whole souls. 

 

What a great answer. Thanks for the time and thoughtfulness it took. I appreciate it very much.

I do understand your concept of covenants. I agree with everything you said; it is rather Presbyterian in its construct. You would get an A at Westminster Seminary (I am just kidding here). Maybe the Saints got the concept from the Covenant Presbyterians. Woodrow Wilson and William Jennings Bryan were both Covenant Presbyterians. Just being silly. I am a bit stressed out here right now. Anyway I understand what you are saying and agree wholeheartedly. I can't and more importantly won't debate anything you have said. Obviously there is one big thing on which we don't agree, the nature of the priesthood in the first sentence of your second paragraph and the first sentence of the third where I actually agree with the intent of your statement, but believe that all Christians hold the priesthood. Certainly Christians make promises to God as a matter of convenience. I acknowledge that and so agree that people can make promises to God without the priesthood, but I know that is not what you are saying. i agree wholeheartedly with the end of that paragraph. Perhaps we don't disagree about covenants at all, but about the priesthood. I agree completely that "As members of the restored church, we declare that the ordinances of the priesthood as performed in Christ's church are God's Will and means for authorized covenant making. These are his terms. There is one way." The only thing we disagree on there is the extent of the word "restored" since Mennonites were about restoring, not reforming the church 300 years before the Saints.  and again of course the extent of the term "priesthood."

The only big difference in our beliefs as far as I read is the concept of the priesthood, certainly not the concept of covenant. That is the big kahuna difference. That is why I believe that I, sitting in the pew on a Sunday morning as a priest after the order of Melchizedek so designated by Christ our high priest, can make, honor and renew a covenant the same way any Saint, priesthood holder or not, can.

I am not asking you to agree with me; that isn't going to happen. I do think you might insist I agree with you as a precursor to full-fellowship. We both believe with our whole souls, and I would add spirit. I am a tripartist - body, soul and spirit! Soul is mind, will and emotion. Body and spirit are obvious. I really don't know what LDS-Christians believe about that? Oh no, another question? I think I hear my wife calling me to supper. Thanks again for your helpful and respectful answer.

[Bernard Gui]

4 hours ago, Navidad said:

Thanks to you all. Certainly different churches have different expectations regarding the sacrament. I was assuming in my question when I said they handed it to you, that it was ok with them for you to take it as a non-member of their church, which is quite often the case. I probably was asking to find out if it would have any spiritual significance to you to take it in a non-LDS setting? I go to many a mass in our local Catholic church, but I never take communion there. I doubt the priest would refuse me, but I simply have never done it.

Every Sunday however, my wife and I in attendance at the LDS chapel partake. I find no difference to me from taking it in my home church in Pennsylvania. The methodology is almost identical and the Spiritual nature of it is individual. As I partake, I remember Christ's suffering, death, resurrection and atonement. That is a personal individual thing. Remembering my baptismal covenants is also a personal thing. Praying is also personal. Therefore there is nothing preventing me from complete enjoyment (in a spiritual sense) of the sacrament in an LDS chapel. I am surrounded by fellow Christians. The only thing different for me is the rote prayer. Being non-creedal, anything rote in a service is different for me. I am not criticizing it; it is simply different.

I wouldn't take it if I believed I was not in a good spiritual place, regardless of the setting. I guess I was wondering, and didn't say it well; for a LDS-Christian are there any limitations to the spiritual enjoyment of worshiping, or taking the sacrament in a non-LDS setting since I think of both as an intensely personal experience? I thought of it especially in the context of this discussion which is all about who, how, the details of taking the sacrament. In our Mennonite environment, the elements are passed around the church by elders of the church who, depending on the church might be male, female, or a mixture of the two.  Over my life I have spoken at or attended many different spiritual traditions, mostly within the Christian tradition. I have found personal spiritual blessings in many if not most of them. I have been told that my testimony, songs, and prayers have "blessed" and "ministered to" LDS Christians in several different contexts. Next Thursday I have been invited to speak in a Fireside in a different ward. I hope the folks will find spiritual enjoyment in it. I asked the question this morning because I have never really thought about or heard from LDS Christians about their ability to find spiritual renewal or refreshment in a non-LDS Christian settings. I think Jane on this forum has come the closest to sharing her spiritual enjoyment in the traditions of other Christian groups. Of course I am not speaking for her.

How would the priest know if you are a Catholic?

What is the Mennonite baptismal covenant?

Are the elders ordained minister?

What is the subject of your fireside?

I have enjoyed (felt welcomed, peaceful, uplifted) attending other religious services and I have performed in numerous weddings of various religions. To be honest, I have not felt the Spirit as I have in some LDS services, and, to be honest, I don’t always receive that blessing in our services. The saddest part of the weddings is when the officiant says, “until death you do part.” I want to tell them no, it doesn’t have to end then.

 

[Navidad]

1 hour ago, Bernard Gui said:

How would the priest know if you are a Catholic?

What is the Mennonite baptismal covenant?

Are the elders ordained minister?

What is the subject of your fireside?

I have enjoyed (felt welcomed, peaceful, uplifted) attending other religious services and I have performed in numerous weddings of various religions. To be honest, I have not felt the Spirit as I have in some LDS services, and, to be honest, I don’t always receive that blessing in our services. The saddest part of the weddings is when the officiant says, “until death you do part.” I want to tell them no, it doesn’t have to end then.

 

Hi Bernard: I live in a very small town about 500 yards from the Catholic Church and the priest has visited our home as have I visited him. We donate to the church and I always tease him about accepting Mennonite tile, gravel, money, etc. Whenever he has a priest friend visit he makes sure that he introduces him to me as the only Mennonite minister he has ever met. He has copies of several of my books, so yes he knows all about me. Oh, and in a town of 1000 so does everyone else! He has cancer and my wife and I have done our best to minister to him.

Well, I was baptized in a Baptist church and grew up in a Mennonite community in Pennsylvania. I "migrated" from Baptist to Mennonite. I have also served in non-denominational community churches. Now that that is clarified, I was baptized around 7 and a half years of age and made five covenants 1. To be willing to always give a testimony that God saved me through the atonement of his son; 2. To always have a servant attitude; willing to faithfully perform His will in my life, including the full-time ministry if so called; 3. To promise to study and grow in His knowledge and grace; 4. To keep his temple (my body) pure and always act in a way that would please Him (our idea was that avoiding worldliness and other sin was most important); 5. To be a helper to anyone who was in need.

Neither Mennonite or Baptist elders are ordained ministers. In terms of passing the sacrament these elders are often the deacons or the elders of the church. They serve, support, and counsel the ordained minister{s) who "presides." Most Baptist churches have paid ordained ministers: many, if not most Mennonite churches have ministers and elders who are chosen from and by the congregation. They are often bi-vocational; therefore not paid for their ministry work. They are chosen and function according to the gifts of the Holy Spirit they have manifested. My gifts for example were identified as the gift of exhortation, ministry, and helps. Mennonites have bishops that usually oversee a group of churches in one locale. The vast majority of Baptists have no ruling hierarchy above the local pastor. That is one reason it is hard to nail down Baptists; they are very independent. Even the huge Southern Baptist Convention has no hierarchy over the local pastor. There are "association" ministers who advise, counsel, and coordinate, but they have no authority over a local pastor.

My fireside talk is a discourse on "Little Known Episodes and Pioneers in the Early Mormon Mexican Colonies" It is a Thanksgiving - styled event where the folks will celebrate and give thanks for their heritage here in the colonies. It is not the first Fireside I have given here.

I hope that answers all of your questions.

Edited November 9, 2018 by Navidad

[kllindley]

3 hours ago, Navidad said:

I hope you don't get any heat for your answer. You certainly won't get any from me. My only real involvement in non-Christian rituals were when I did my mission in Africa. I observed a few Islamic and a few animistic traditions. I did not find any essential or salvific power in them. I enjoyed observing because I felt that enriched my life experience, but that is it.

I keep watching LDS priesthood authority holders (in life and on this forum) to hopefully see something unique, some manifestation of the Holy Spirit, some spirituality, some Godliness that I have not felt or seen in other Christians of many denominations. I am genuine in that search. So far I have not been able to discern, even through the Holy Spirit, a difference that this "authority" makes from any other Godly individual I know. Quickly, I want to say; I see, feel, and observe nothing less than, either. The issue is rather, the "more than." If there is something"intrinsic and unique to the Authority claimed by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that is not present in any other denomination" then that uniqueness should manifest itself somehow, shouldn't it? Perhaps in a unique Godliness, a unique patience, a unique commitment to Christ-likeness, something - perhaps a unique manifestation of the Holy Spirit. How do you as LDS-Christians think your unique authority can and should manifest itself to those around you?

I said too much already. I have eliminated the rest.

I don't necessarily believe that the unique authority should manifest itself to those around me. When we discuss the priesthood, we teach that the authority of the most newly ordained Elder is the same as the prophet. Thus, this authority is not dependent on the Charity, spirituality, or any other trait of the priesthood holder.

As a full-time missionary, I used an imperfect analogy to teach about our view of authority.  With the correct materials, I could create a passable replica of a 10 € bill. My creation may be completely identical to a genuine bill. There is even a good chance that the creation looks and feels more authentic than the hammered bill in my pocket. Did I create a valid 10 € bill? People always agreed that no I did not. I would have created a counterfeit. I would ask why? Was the quality of my work lacking?  People could generally explain that I didn't have the government's authorization to make a bill. That authorization is what makes the bill valid, not the quality of the product. 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2005/04/our-most-distinguishing-feature?lang=eng

https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/authority-in-the-church

 

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, Navidad said:

Hi Bernard: I live in a very small town about 500 yards from the Catholic Church and the priest has visited our home as have I visited him. We donate to the church and I always tease him about accepting Mennonite tile, gravel, money, etc. Whenever he has a priest friend visit he makes sure that he introduces him to me as the only Mennonite minister he has ever met. He has copies of several of my books, so yes he knows all about me. Oh, and in a town of 1000 so does everyone else! He has cancer and my wife and I have done our best to minister to him.

Well, I was baptized in a Baptist church and grew up in a Mennonite community in Pennsylvania. I "migrated" from Baptist to Mennonite. I have also served in non-denominational community churches. Now that that is clarified, I was baptized around 7 and a half years of age and made five covenants 1. To be willing to always give a testimony that God saved me through the atonement of his son; 2. To always have a servant attitude; willing to faithfully perform His will in my life, including the full-time ministry if so called; 3. To promise to study and grow in His knowledge and grace; 4. To keep his temple (my body) pure and always act in a way that would please Him (our idea was that avoiding worldliness and other sin was most important); 5. To be a helper to anyone who was in need.

Neither Mennonite or Baptist elders are ordained ministers. In terms of passing the sacrament these elders are often the deacons or the elders of the church. They serve, support, and counsel the ordained minister{s) who "presides." Most Baptist churches have paid ordained ministers: many, if not most Mennonite churches have ministers and elders who are chosen from and by the congregation. They are often bi-vocational; therefore not paid for their ministry work. They are chosen and function according to the gifts of the Holy Spirit they have manifested. My gifts for example were identified as the gift of exhortation, ministry, and helps. Mennonites have bishops that usually oversee a group of churches in one locale. The vast majority of Baptists have no ruling hierarchy above the local pastor. That is one reason it is hard to nail down Baptists; they are very independent. Even the huge Southern Baptist Convention has no hierarchy over the local pastor. There are "association" ministers who advise, counsel, and coordinate, but they have no authority over a local pastor.

My fireside talk is a discourse on "Little Known Episodes and Pioneers in the Early Mormon Mexican Colonies" It is a Thanksgiving - styled event where the folks will celebrate and give thanks for their heritage here in the colonies. It is not the first Fireside I have given here.

I hope that answers all of your questions.

Thanks for the kind and informative comments. I was assuming you went into a random Catholic Church. I attend a Polish Catholic Church on Christmas Eve in honor of my grandparents, but no one there recognizes me as Catholic or non-Catholic. I do not take communion, though.

When the baptismal covenant is made, are the words you shared spoken, or how do you make the covenant? I was asking specifically about ordination for elders in the Mennonite church....apparently not. Are the bishops ordained? If so, is there a central authority that authorizes the ordination? Are there educational requirements?

I understand the Baptists....have spoken with many and have a number of Baptist friends. 

Edited November 9, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

4 hours ago, Navidad said:

Perhaps in a unique Godliness, a unique patience, a unique commitment to Christ-likeness, something - perhaps a unique manifestation of the Holy Spirit.

Reminds me of this:

Quote

2 For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty  that we should desire him.

3 He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

So many saw Him, heard Him, witnessed His miracles, but did not recognize Him. 

Edited November 9, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[Navidad]

16 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Thanks for the kind and informative comments. I was assuming you went into a random Catholic Church. I attend a Polish Catholic Church on Christmas Eve in honor of my grandparents, but no one there recognizes me as Catholic or non-Catholic. I do not take communion, though.

When the baptismal covenant is made, are the words you shared spoken, or how do you make the covenant? I was asking specifically about ordination for elders in the Mennonite church....apparently not. Are the bishops ordained? If so, is there a central authority that authorizes the ordination? Are there educational requirements?

I understand the Baptists....have spoken with many and have a number of Baptist friends. 

When I was baptized I was interviewed by the pastor and the elders of the church. The pastor was ordained. The elders were not. During the interview I was asked to work with the pastor (who in my case was my father!) to write down the covenants I would promise to commit to for the rest of my life. They (the elders) then reviewed and approved the covenants. Of course my dad made me memorize them, which now I am glad he did. Just before being baptized and while in the water my dad (pastor) asked me a series of questions in front of the congregation, including about my covenants. After I answered all of them and while shaking from the cold water he then immersed me.

For the Mennonites the congregation is the most important organization. Over the years the "conference" has been created to form a larger group (area in LDS terms) to provide continuity and unity beyond the congregation. At the congregational level, the primary leadership positions include elders, deacons, and ministers. All three may be ordained. The laying on of hands is very important. The elders role is to provide for the spiritual well-being of the local church and are chosen from within the congregation. The deacons take the lead in service and ministry of a non or quasi-spiritual nature. They are always chosen from the congregation and may become elders. The identification of specific gifts of the Holy Spirit are very important. A minister or pastor is often chosen from the elders and may indeed be the "preacher" of the group. All three leadership groups are individually ordained to their role. In recent times with the existence of bigger congregations the minister (pastor) is formally trained at the bible college or seminary (graduate school) level and serves full-time with salary. Sometimes there are multiple full-time staff and ministers who are licensed for a particular ministry, such as music, ministry to elderly folks, etc. I have been both licensed and ordained in my life. When I was ordained in 1973 the entire religion faculty of the Baylor University Graduate School of Religion was there to examine me. I was scared to death. The local church ordained me, but the gurus at the graduate school examined me and gave their approval. Conferences support the local church in both the Baptist and Mennonite traditions but have no hierarchical authority over the individual church. Bishops exist, usually still pastoring one local church but providing spiritual oversight and leadership over several. He oversees both ordinations and licensing. I hope that helps. A couple of the large Baptist groups now ordain women. Some Mennonite churches ordain women; most do not.

[Rain]

 

On 11/8/2018 at 12:18 AM, mfbukowski said:

Yes that's it- it seems I can never get this right- supposedly Patriarchy makes women feel subservient to men and as so is not correct so I was just thinking that this would be a case where men do the blessing and women do the passing and never the blessing.  It's not "equal".

Deacons are subservient to priests knowing that someday they will get to bless the sacrament while women would not have that

And serving food is a traditional "women's job" so I thought certain women would find that a sexist role - only getting to pass

I should just never post on feminist issues- I totally do not understand them.  My wife knows that she shares the priesthood - that it is shared in our complimentary roles and so I do not get the resentment some women feel.  She has known discrimination at work and sexual harassment and I  get that as the abomination that is- but in priesthood matters we are perfectly comfortable with our individual roles and see so no reason for a change.  She is a theological genius and has never studied philosophy but I can say one sentence on a topic from a philosopher and she can deduce from that the philosopher's position on other topics.  She is one of the most amazing people I have ever met and between us we have discussions that just soar into realms I never thought possible to even discuss.  She is totally comfortable in her skin so there is no need for "feminism" between us

She understands the blessings given in the initiatories and how that shapes our relationship.

 I am sure this post is still not politically correct on this stuff and I should just avoid posting on these issues I suppose.  Even why I try to get it right- I get it "wrong".

We just don't have these issues, thank God

I'm surprised you would equate passing the sacrament to serving food. Are you thinking of a deep meaning to serving food? It never would occur to me that the two would be on the same level so I figure it must be much deeper than I have thought.

Edited November 9, 2018 by Rain

[Bernard Gui]

45 minutes ago, Rain said:

 

I'm surprised you would equate passing the sacrament to serving food. Are thinking of a deep meaning to serving food? It nevery would occur to me that the two would be on the same lebelieve so I figure it must be much deeper than I have thought 

So many important events in the Lord’s ministry included sharing food.

[Bernard Gui]

4 hours ago, Navidad said:

When I was baptized I was interviewed by the pastor and the elders of the church. The pastor was ordained. The elders were not. During the interview I was asked to work with the pastor (who in my case was my father!) to write down the covenants I would promise to commit to for the rest of my life. They (the elders) then reviewed and approved the covenants. Of course my dad made me memorize them, which now I am glad he did. Just before being baptized and while in the water my dad (pastor) asked me a series of questions in front of the congregation, including about my covenants. After I answered all of them and while shaking from the cold water he then immersed me.

For the Mennonites the congregation is the most important organization. Over the years the "conference" has been created to form a larger group (area in LDS terms) to provide continuity and unity beyond the congregation. At the congregational level, the primary leadership positions include elders, deacons, and ministers. All three may be ordained. The laying on of hands is very important. The elders role is to provide for the spiritual well-being of the local church and are chosen from within the congregation. The deacons take the lead in service and ministry of a non or quasi-spiritual nature. They are always chosen from the congregation and may become elders. The identification of specific gifts of the Holy Spirit are very important. A minister or pastor is often chosen from the elders and may indeed be the "preacher" of the group. All three leadership groups are individually ordained to their role. In recent times with the existence of bigger congregations the minister (pastor) is formally trained at the bible college or seminary (graduate school) level and serves full-time with salary. Sometimes there are multiple full-time staff and ministers who are licensed for a particular ministry, such as music, ministry to elderly folks, etc. I have been both licensed and ordained in my life. When I was ordained in 1973 the entire religion faculty of the Baylor University Graduate School of Religion was there to examine me. I was scared to death. The local church ordained me, but the gurus at the graduate school examined me and gave their approval. Conferences support the local church in both the Baptist and Mennonite traditions but have no hierarchical authority over the individual church. Bishops exist, usually still pastoring one local church but providing spiritual oversight and leadership over several. He oversees both ordinations and licensing. I hope that helps. A couple of the large Baptist groups now ordain women. Some Mennonite churches ordain women; most do not.

Thank you for the thoughtful answers. I respect the preparation and processes you followed to prepare for baptism and ordination. They appear to be similar to other Evangelical Protestant denominations, right?

You can probably guess my next question? 

Edited November 9, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[Scott Lloyd]

4 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

So many important events in the Lord’s ministry included sharing food.

Understandable when one thinks of the imagery of “the bread of life.” 

[Navidad]

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Understandable when one thinks of the imagery of “the bread of life.” 

It seems like many important events in  the Mormons' ministry include sharing food too! I like that part!😄

[bluebell]

16 hours ago, Navidad said:

I just erased my longer reply. I am sorry I didn't ask my questions better. If you would re-read my post I said "If" That is a huge "if." I didn't say "since." You are ascribing to me things I didn't say. I never said that you believe everything has to be blessed. I said if - that carries with it the essence of uncertainty.

I'm sorry for the confusion.  I replied as if you were making statements of fact because after saying 'if' you proceeded with the rest of the post as if the 'if' were already established as true.

Quote

You made a series of statements. I still don't know any more about the essence and nature of what a priesthood blessing has to do with remembering, reconsecrating, and renewal that I did before. I also don't know how a priesthood blessing creates a symbol of something that I, without a priesthood already know is a symbol.

I might have missed it, but I didn't see that you asked any of those questions, so I didn't try to answer them.

When Christ instituted the sacrament at His last supper, he blessed the bread and water.  In your view, what did Him blessing it have to do with remembering, reconsecrating, and renewal?  How did Christ's blessing on the sacrament during the last supper impact the bread and water?  Or did not have any impact at all in your view?

Quote

Do you simply reject the fact that I made baptismal covenants when I was baptized?

No.

Quote

It just upsets folks here when the non-Mormon asks too many questions over and over again. I have been here well over a year.

This isn't my experience.  I do notice that posters will get frustrated when someone asks the same questions over and over again without engaging in the answers they have already been given.  

Quote

There are many things that I don't ask about anymore. Anyone ever notice that?

I honestly haven't, but maybe other posters have.  I really have no idea.