The Last Mormon Freedom

[Jeff K.]

You were there for two years and still could not get used to the Russian spirit? One thing I really like about Russians is that they are quite spiritualistic, which leaves them open to the Gospel -- unlike Swedes for example who are pretty clueless on any issues that require abstract thought and individual innitiative.

Used to visit Leningrad (today Petrograd), if memory serves me they were very spiritual, and taken with mysticism. They seemed to reflect a view of religion not dissimilar to the times of Joseph Smith.

[emeliza]

Let me give you an example. We have a young lady in our ward. She had twins a couple years ago. The State almost ended up taking the kids because, she's a little slow if you know what I mean and so the Releif Society stepped in to help and teach her how to take care of the kids. Im not even sure if her husband is a member. When she participates in classes, or bares her testimony it always comes off as "a little weird", more primary level responses than anything else, and not always on subject. She's also an exquiset Piano player. Plays for the Primary.

Should the Bishop step in and ask her not to participate all together because of her "weirdness"?

We have people like that in my ward as well. I have never thought too much about it. We have people who are slow or have other mental issues. They usually ramble a bit with their testimonies and often share things that have nothing to do with the Church. Last Sunday one such gentlemen was giving his testimony and was doing well and then somehow got onto a tanget about being Cherokee. A minute later he was saying how much he loved our former Bishop's daughter and thought of her as a niece, a minute later he was back to his testimony. It might seem a bit weird, but really it was lovely. He gave his testimony in the best way he could. He also ran us over our time by about 8 minutes as he got up when we should have been ending, but I would never think to stop him from bearing his lopsided testimony.

I agree that there are times where Bishops need to retell us how to give a testimony and what is appropriate. Honestly, our Bishops have always done a good job about this. I think they just read a letter from the First Presidency or information that was given in GC. They never give examples. They never make it personal. Instead they just read from something as a reminder. They also make sure they don't do it on F&T day, but generally the week before. We still get the ocassional thankdamony and travelog, but overall it is good.

[Fiannan]

Used to visit Leningrad (today Petrograd), if memory serves me they were very spiritual, and taken with mysticism. They seemed to reflect a view of religion not dissimilar to the times of Joseph Smith.

Maybe that is why I like Russians so much -- being originally from Oregon I really love discussing essoteric ideas with intelligent people. And that is what I find ironic -- our missionary message is geared towards attracting people who are unconventional, freewpirited and who think outside the box. If we then feel we have to walk down some predescribed line in all things we will lose those potential converts as well as the people in our ranks who are somewhat more abstract in their thinking (and by that I mean those who are to the left and to the right in a socio-spiritual context). I would hate to think we all have to dress and look the same -- in fact Joseph Fielding Smith warned against wards trying to encourage male members to all wear white shirts. He felt it would evolve into priestcraft.

The Gospel has never been about group think. Now while there may be certain guidelines for F&T meetings they should be interepreted liberally. To go to the opposite extreme we risk a type of authoritarianism that will drown the Spirit.

[Zakuska]

If we wind up making too big an issue out of how to do a testimony we risk insulting the spirit -- if that person is indeed being inspired to give a certain message, and we jump on them, we are then commiting a serious sin since it would be the spirit we are questioning.

AMEN!

The Gospel has never been about group think. Now while there may be certain guidelines for F&T meetings they should be interepreted liberally. To go to the opposite extreme we risk a type of authoritarianism that will drown the Spirit.

AMEN!

The whole Irony of this thread is people are complaining about parents whispering testimonies in childrens ears yet these SAME people are 100% A-OK with Apostles of God holding Adults hands up to the pulpit and dictating what is and isn't appropriate to be said in a Testimony meeting.

[maklelan]

AMEN!

AMEN!

The whole Irony of this thread is people are complaining about parents whispering testimonies in childrens ears yet these SAME people are 100% A-OK with Apostles of God holding Adults hands up to the pulpit and dictating what is and isn't appropriate to be said in a Testimony meeting.

There is quite an enormous difference between whispering the words of a testimony into the ear of a child while standing at the pulpit and asking adults to limit their testimonies to testimonies and brief faith-promoting stories. The assertion continues to be made that the Twelve's counsel amounts to a requirement that all testimonies be identical, word for word, which is flagrantly and intentionally dishonest. I'd appreciate it if those wishing to assert a higher level of spiritual sensitivity and appreciation refrained from such gross dishonesty. It hardly furthers your position.

[Jeff K.]

Maybe that is why I like Russians so much -- being originally from Oregon I really love discussing essoteric ideas with intelligent people. And that is what I find ironic -- our missionary message is geared towards attracting people who are unconventional, freewpirited and who think outside the box. If we then feel we have to walk down some predescribed line in all things we will lose those potential converts as well as the people in our ranks who are somewhat more abstract in their thinking (and by that I mean those who are to the left and to the right in a socio-spiritual context). I would hate to think we all have to dress and look the same -- in fact Joseph Fielding Smith warned against wards trying to encourage male members to all wear white shirts. He felt it would evolve into priestcraft.

The Gospel has never been about group think. Now while there may be certain guidelines for F&T meetings they should be interepreted liberally. To go to the opposite extreme we risk a type of authoritarianism that will drown the Spirit.

I think the gospel is a dichotomy. It is about a direct relationship with Heavenly Father in which we are allowed allowed to receive direct spiritual influence. The free spirited if you will. Such actually runs our lives.

The other side is a group think (missionaries look pretty much alike no matter where you are or temple ceremonies that are similar to say the least), where the organization and organizational structure, and acting within the organization on church business follows a rather closely adhered to rules of conduct.

You need both for a world wide organization, otherwise the organization would evaporate into many separate units.

Outside of church ceremony and church sacrament meetings and Sunday School, that free spirited view exists and flourishes to allow us to learn on our own. Note that no one is saying testimonies when given outside of church must be confined to something more narrowly focused, however, we are discussing one meeting each month, in a ward where the conduct is generally outlined by a bishop, and has been outlined by apostles.

People who shout, or cry, or scream that they are being bound, forget two things. 1-They are not stopped from bearing a testimony anyway they wish, and at anytime, outside of the one meeting we are discussing. In fact if the only time you share your testimony in anyway is fast and testimony meeting, then there is something wrong with you, either in how you value the gospel or in how you value yourself. 2-The authority to conduct such meetings and provide guidelines for such meetings reside within the hands of the bishop, the stake president et al... all the way up to prophets and apostles.

I see such a view as myopic. It is one meeting we are discussing. Outside of church I am sure you can corner anyone you wish and regale them as to how your latest tribulation, vacation, trip to the Andes, et al... have strengthened your spiritual awareness. The bishop in this thread, the apostle (both of whom clearly have the authority) have told us how we should conduct ourselves in fast and testimony meeting.

[Redefined]

People who shout, or cry, or scream that they are being bound, forget two things. 1-They are not stopped from bearing a testimony anyway they wish, and at anytime, outside of the one meeting we are discussing. In fact if the only time you share your testimony in anyway is fast and testimony meeting, then there is something wrong with you, either in how you value the gospel or in how you value yourself. 2-The authority to conduct such meetings and provide guidelines for such meetings reside within the hands of the bishop, the stake president et al... all the way up to prophets and apostles.

I think the gray area comes because one purpose of a church is meant as a place people go to praise and worship God, but the church dictates how one is to worship. So it seemingly comes between an individual's personal relationship with God. Is the church for the benefit of the people, or are the people for the benefit of the church sort of thing.

[Jeff K.]

Yes, some may see that. But I believe it is a false dichotomy. Because we do both. The church provides us with the ordinances for eternal life, with the authority and ability to come close to God. The church is for us. The church also requires much from us, our time, what we can do, our funds, and how we support the church and in effect we are for the church.

As I said, we can place the argument of "free spiritedness" into many things that the church requires us to do in an equally regimented way, including missionary dress codes. But we accept that in many things the church does require us to act or conduct ourselves in a narrow range or in a specific way.

[frankenstein]

it would seem the difficultly with thread is where is the ling draw between "sticking to the script, you can only read this paragraph" and relating a personal event that lead to spiritual enlightenment. for instanceI experience something in public with a group of people that taught me I was not in control even though I had used force to make something go one way and miraculously it went the opposite way.

[maklelan]

it would seem the difficultly with thread is where is the ling draw between "sticking to the script, you can only read this paragraph" and relating a personal event that lead to spiritual enlightenment. for instanceI experience something in public with a group of people that taught me I was not in control even though I had used force to make something go one way and miraculously it went the opposite way.

I don't believe that's the case. There is no testimony script, and it's quite misleading to insist there is. The format is simply to share your testimony and, if you wish, short faith-promoting stories. This is the latter in the above. The difficulty is between those kinds of testimonies and the kind that are discouraged: thankamonies, I'm-sorry-monies, travelogues, the airing of grievances (it's not Festivus), lengthy stories, calling to repentance, etc.

[Scott Lloyd]

But Scott, who here is claiming that the two paradigms are mutually exclusive?

Not everything is a dichotomy.

It's no big deal I guess. It's just that some notions spring up spontaneously, spread and perpetuate until, in the minds of some, they take on quasi-official status and almost become like a shadow doctrine. This "ward family" thing strikes me as such a phenomenon.

[Zakuska]

There is quite an enormous difference between whispering the words of a testimony into the ear of a child while standing at the pulpit and asking adults to limit their testimonies to testimonies and brief faith-promoting stories. The assertion continues to be made that the Twelve's counsel amounts to a requirement that all testimonies be identical, word for word, which is flagrantly and intentionally dishonest. I'd appreciate it if those wishing to assert a higher level of spiritual sensitivity and appreciation refrained from such gross dishonesty. It hardly furthers your position.

Sorry if I fail to see the picturesque sunset over the Grand Canyon that you seem to see. Paul called the saints "babes in christ" his children who he begot through Christ and the Gospel. There is a definate child Parent relationship between the Apostles and the lay members.

PS. One poster on your side of the fence a few pages ago said "breif stories" no matter what they were about were not appropriate.

[Jeff K.]

PS. One poster on your side of the fence a few pages ago said "breif stories" no matter what they were about were not appropriate.

Would that be the apostle's talk?

[wenglund]

Some times we can get all worked up about things that are out of our control, perhaps even none of our business, and may not be all that important in the eternal scheme of things, and argue at great length about it counter-productively in a way that may over-react to and misconstrue what others are suggesting.

Could that be happening on this thread?

If so, then I think we may take solace in realizing that regardless of the neglagible impact this discussion may have on testimony-bearing practices throughout the Church, we are going to be okay, and so will be the Church and the gospel of Christ it represents.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Zakuska]

Would that be the apostle's talk?

I wonder if the Apostle would have Lectured Nephi or Alma for the way they bore their testimonies?

There are Lots of Travelmonies born in the scriptures.

[Jeff K.]

In Sacrament meeting? Do you know how Nephi and Alma conducted sacrament meeting? CFR if you do.

[Zakuska]

In Sacrament meeting? Do you know how Nephi and Alma conducted sacrament meeting? CFR if you do.

Did they even have Sacramant meeting? or did they follow the Jewish feasts of the Law of Moses like they claim to have done?

The Testimonies they bare in the scriptures wouldn't Meet Elder Ballards "Ideal Testimony Meeting" by any stretch of the word.

[Jeff K.]

You don't mean the closely regulated Jewish feasts where everything follows a set pattern? Indeed a good example.

The Testimonies they bare in the scriptures wouldn't Meet Elder Ballards "Ideal Testimony Meeting" by any stretch of the word.

The testimonies they bare were outside of certain festivals and meetings, like passover. Before you jump to conclusions in an attempt to undermine an apostle, you might want to think of this word "context". What you implied was false because it left out key information. Be more accurate in the future.

[Deborah]

It seems to me the issue isn't the stories that accompany testimonies but rather the stories in place of testimonies. I do think that there are people who get up who are not led by the spirit but rather have a need to make themselves seen and heard. There is no spiritual uplift in their comments, only a way to make themselves seem more important. We probably should have compassion and patience for such people as no amount of explaining the proper purpose of testimony will reach them and they will continue to do what they do and continue to be unconscious of the time they are taking from others (they are usually the ones who ramble on repeating themselves). There are others however who will take stock of what they are doing and make sure they are truly bearing testimony and keeping the time short out of consideration of others.

Zakusa you seem to be upset by this distinction and I don't think anyone, least of all the GA's have suggested we all recite the same things. They are simply trying to remind people to keep the Spirit in mind and to be considerate of others in the time they use. The purpose of testimony meeting is that all may be uplifted. It is a two way street but sometimes when certain people get up I think we shut off and say to ourselves "here she goes-again." On the other hand we've all been in those meetings where the spirit has been so powerful that we come out weeping and rejoicing in the testimonies borne.

[Scott Lloyd]

The Testimonies they bare in the scriptures wouldn't Meet Elder Ballards "Ideal Testimony Meeting" by any stretch of the word.

I don't see much conflict, actually. And Jeff K makes a good point about setting and context.

Incidentally, the correct verb in this instance is bear, not bare. It means "to give, offer or supply," as in "to bear witness."

[Zakuska]

You don't mean the closely regulated Jewish feasts where everything follows a set pattern? Indeed a good example.

They didn't become all that closely regulated until Josiah pulled his blood bathed power grab and killed all those who wouldn't tow the line.

The testimonies they bare were outside of certain festivals and meetings, like passover. Before you jump to conclusions in an attempt to undermine an apostle, you might want to think of this word "context". What you implied was false because it left out key information. Be more accurate in the future.

A testimony is a testimony wether born in a Sacrament meeting or in a Lousianna swamp.

[Jeff K.]

LOL, having kept my testimony in a bushel sometimes, I thought "expose".

[Jeff K.]

Quote

The testimonies they bare were outside of certain festivals and meetings, like passover. Before you jump to conclusions in an attempt to undermine an apostle, you might want to think of this word "context". What you implied was false because it left out key information. Be more accurate in the future.

A testimony is a testimony wether born in a Sacrament meeting or in a Lousianna swamp.

Let me get this straight.... you are stating that if one were to suddenly stand up in the middle of a temple ceremony to give a travelogue and bear a testimony, that it is equally acceptable to doing it somewhere else. such as a group in a corner, and a testimony is a testimony wether born in Sacrament meeting or a Louisiana Swamp? Or are there guidelines of conduct that come into play?

I don't think your accurate in your estimation.

[Jeff K.]

Jeff K., on 05 January 2010 - 11:49 AM, said:

You don't mean the closely regulated Jewish feasts where everything follows a set pattern? Indeed a good example.

They didn't become all that closely regulated until Josiah pulled his blood bathed power grab and killed all those who wouldn't tow the line.

I disagree, I think they were closely regulated much earlier. Do you have examples of pre and post Josiah Passovers that provide a CFR?

[David T]

Do you have examples of pre and post Josiah Passovers that provide a CFR?

Kind of hard to do, because according to this train of thought, the OT Genesis-II Kings records we have are all influenced and edited under the Josianic Reform.