Jump to content

If Mitt Romney Nominated, Then What For The Church And Members?


treehugger

Recommended Posts

I received a text, which contain a message purported to be from Elder Bednar. At first I thought "Good for my friend who attended the Conference and heard Elder Bednar speak, after years away from Church, my friend is participating again". I googled what the friend sent.

A letter from S&I Administrators Council to all All Personnel (US Only)* describes the statements as "distorted and inaccurate"; which, in my opinion, does not mean absolute fabrications and outright lies, that is, like the Apocrypha there is some truth to be found.

More googling, I did find that apparently Elder Bednar may have made statements at Dixie College:

8 ) He [Elder Bednar] prophesied that if Mitt Romney is elected the Presidential Candidate, the things of God will be made to look foolish in the media, specifically the temple He said, those that are not strong in the faith, may be shaken by the opposition that will arise in the near future. He said, the heat is being turned on and we need to be prepared.

and to Mission Presidents wife Sister Romney of the Mexico, Monterrey West Mission:

Source elderbryanwarner.blogspot.com

[Mission Presidents wife Sister Romney] expressed how when Elder Bednar came, they had a meeting with him afterwards. Elder Bednar expressed how the biggest concern of the Prophet and Quorum of the Twelve is that the members aren't converted. She mentioned a little about the political news with Mitt Romney, how Elder Bednar mentioned that in these future times, "All Hell is going to break loose". That Satan in these latter days is going to release "his wrath" and that if these members aren't converted, we will fall. It made me think of how many of us are REALLY converted into the Gospel of Jesus Christ?

Two persons, with no apparent reason to fabricate allege that Elder Bednar expressed concerns for the Church Membership should Mitt Romney get the Republican nomination for POTUS candidate.

I agree with the message attributed Elder Bednar, as I see it, he is urging the members of the Church to attain strong testimonies. I have often felt that there will come a time when all we can have to confirm the correctness of our positions (regardless of the forum) is a testimony of Gospel.

On a different note, provided the statements from Elder Bednar to Sister Romney and at Dixie College are generally accurate, should Romney step down to spare the Church and those who cannot weather the storm?

*I view this email/letter with a grain of salt, first, it is not signed by anyone; second, if the letter is authentic it is addressed specifically and solely to the US personnel and not the general membership of the Church; third, the email/letter only refers to the statements as “distorted an inaccurate”.

Link to comment

If it weren't this candidacy it would be another public event. I don't see Romney being the catalyst as much as the latest excuse for the forces of evil.

He should be at liberty to live his life and freely practice his faith up to and including the Presidency.

Link to comment

There are no doubt large portions of the church who lack in testimony, but I would highly doubt the FP and the 12 would have such little confidence in the general membership of the church.

Also, I believe that this far the light it has brought on the church has been largely positive.

Link to comment

If it weren't this candidacy it would be another public event. I don't see Romney being the catalyst as much as the latest excuse for the forces of evil.

He should be at liberty to live his life and freely practice his faith up to and including the Presidency.

I agree with you. There's nothing that'll be different about the presentation ofthe LDS Church and membership in them which hasn't already been presented. And I do not think that Mitt Romney's the centerpoint for the downfall of the Church. It'll move on as usual regardless of Romney. I have seen very good things though regarding how the LDS Church is presented since the nomination proces began (with two Mormons running) and since Romney's effectively cinlched the nomination. Particularly positive is the LDS Church's emphasis on being good to others. What surprised me is how deeply Mitt Romney's a true man of service to others. I never would have known this had the media not produced a list of his services in the past as an LDS bishop.

Link to comment

I agree that the Opposing camp will start to emphasize the Church more if Obama appears to be falling behind (already they are mostly tied at any given time... it fluctuates slightly). The other night on Hannity, they were talking about the opposition having to go back to 1965 to find something about Romney (the hair cutting incident), and Hannity said... Oh yeah, there was something brought up from the 1800's about some massacre...

So there will be some real attempts to discredit Romney through his faith, particularly since a good number of people from both sides are speaking in positive terms regarding Bain and other equity firms. If and when this happens, whether it be in regard to Romney... or just generally... members' faith will be tested I'm sure... what are the scriptures about there being a "sifting" in the last days.

GG

Link to comment

I don't want to turn this wholly into politics, but I read this morning about how the attacks on Romney for his role at Bain Capital were not getting much traction. Obama continues to slip (albeit slowly) in polls, and I wondered "what else will they come up with against Romney between now and November?". The more I thought about it, the less I liked the answer. If Obama is comfortably ahead in the fall, things may not get too bad. But if Obama trails and nothing else has stuck to the walls, we may very well see direct and sustained attacks on the church, not by Obama directly, but by his surrogates.

Since that seems to be the scenario that is shaping up, get ready for a wild ride. I suspect that we will hear things about our religion that will make most of us scratch our heads.

That's been my conclusion for a few months.

As for Romney stepping down to spare the Saints who aren't converted, to be blunt, if they arent prepared to handle whats coming, something else is going to challenge their faith and the result is going to be the same. I dont relish what's coming, but I dont think Romney should change tactics for that reason. The last days are coming. Things are going to get stirred up soon anyway. Did anyone honestly think this period of ease and safety would last indefinitely? The Lord was giving us time to prepare ourselves and so that everyone can learn his duty. It's time for the Priesthood to step up as prophecied.

If not us, who? If not now, when?

Link to comment

The pressures of the last days are inevitable. The wild fruit has to be cut out and cast into the fire at some point, it might as well start now. Perhaps there will come a day when mormons will protest against the 1st presidency much as Catholics are protesting now against the Pope. Just imagine a time when a group of members, including bishops and stake presidents hold up placards and subsequently get excommunicated. We have not seen opposition. We have seen amateurs fighting with the sword of ignorance. It won't always be so easy.

Link to comment

deleted

You have been warned in the past about making purely political posts in these threads. We allow some leeway due to a Mormon candidate but we are not turning MDD into a political debate.

Everyone else I hid purely and primarily political comments. Stick to the topic and stay away from partisan comments as much as possible. -Ares

Link to comment

On a different note, provided the statements from Elder Bednar to Sister Romney and at Dixie College are generally accurate, should Romney step down to spare the Church and those who cannot weather the storm?

"Some say, 'I do not like to do this [build temples], for we never began to build a temple without the bells of hell beginning to ring.' I want to hear them ring again. All the tribes of hell will be on the move, if we uncover the walls of this temple. But what do you think it will amount to? You have all the time seen what it has amounted to." -Brigham Young

Same principle. Or, more succinctly, the words of the theatrical Theoden of Rohan after hearing the size of the army coming to attack: "Let them come."

Link to comment

I think we are seeing once again the bigotry of some people. Persecution is not new to the church but I don't see how a Romney presidency would bring more criticism than already arises over the building of temples. I do agree however that the members of the Church need to attain strong testimonies, but this is something that has been emphasized in the last several conferences. We are headed toward perilous times and those not founded on the rock will wash away in the storm. I am already seeing a great exodus of those who think they know more than the prophets and should heed the warning found in D&C 112:

25 And upon my house shall it begin, and from my house shall it go forth, saith the Lord;

26 First among those among you, saith the Lord, who have professed to know my name and have not known me, and have blasp...hemed against me in the midst of my house, saith the Lord.

27 Therefore, see to it that ye trouble not yourselves concerning the affairs of my church in this place, saith the Lord.

28 But purify your hearts before me; and then go ye into all the world, and preach my gospel unto every creature who has not received it;"

Link to comment

The scriptures say that in the last days even the very elect will be deceived. We also know that in the last days, Satan will rage in the hearts of men. We should not be surprised if the election gets really ugly, we should expect it. But that's no reason to give up--we're Saints! We should expect persecution--it's part of the last days as well and fear of persecution of the church or it's people should not sway Romney from running.

Link to comment

Or, more succinctly, the words of the theatrical Theoden of Rohan after hearing the size of the army coming to attack: "Let them come."

After repelling a massive attack at Wake Island, the Marines sent a message to HQ: "Send us more Japs."

Link to comment

The scriptures say that in the last days even the very elect will be deceived. We also know that in the last days, Satan will rage in the hearts of men. We should not be surprised if the election gets really ugly, we should expect it. But that's no reason to give up--we're Saints! We should expect persecution--it's part of the last days as well and fear of persecution of the church or it's people should not sway Romney from running.

Add to that that we haven't seen any real persecution yet and I doubt Romney will cause any and I don't think we have much to worry about. When they start burning houses again I'll get excited. Until then it's mostly just words.

Link to comment

Things can happen quite quickly. Review the situation just 2 years before the Berlin wall came down. A couple of years before the Bosnian conflict atrosities happened,neighbors of different faiths were attending each others weddings etc.

Link to comment

We need to be prepared for the possibility that, just a few weeks prior to the election, a prominent individual will leave the church because of its social policies regarding blacks and its "homophobia".

"I have had increasing difficulty reconciling my membership in this church with my personal commitment to fairness and equality to all people. I can no longer remain indifferent to those policies."

Link to comment

The scriptures say that in the last days even the very elect will be deceived.

Actually the scripture adds the caveat "if it were possible":

Matthew 24: 24 "For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." The Joseph Smith translation keeps that caveat. Which is why I think the very elect will be able to see through the deceptions.

Link to comment

We need to be prepared for the possibility that, just a few weeks prior to the election, a prominent individual will leave the church because of its social policies regarding blacks and its "homophobia".

"I have had increasing difficulty reconciling my membership in this church with my personal commitment to fairness and equality to all people. I can no longer remain indifferent to those policies."

Hello cdowis...

I note the sentence above in quotation marks... may I ask who the quote is from? Is that a real quote?

GG

Link to comment

Hello cdowis...

I note the sentence above in quotation marks... may I ask who the quote is from? Is that a real quote?

GG

I believe it's a hypothetical statement from another prominent member in the US political sphere. At least that's how I see it.

Link to comment

I think Harry Reid supports SS marriage, does he not? Also abortion rights, even though he is, personally, pro-life. And, he is a member in good standing?

Link to comment

Sen. Reid said he'd vote for a SSM initiative in his own state. That seems like pretty limited support to me. And the Church really doesn't tell us how to vote, nor comment on how we personally interpret and apply the scriptures to legislation.

Link to comment

I think Harry Reid supports SS marriage, does he not? Also abortion rights, even though he is, personally, pro-life. And, he is a member in good standing?

There's not much I agree with politically with Brother Reid. And it brought forth a chuckle a few years back when he said that he did not see how one could be a Republican and faithful LDS at the same time. :sorry:

But back in Searchlight, Nev, many moons ago, he was Bishop Reid. And I have heard apocryphal stories of him and Brother Hatch sharing a hymnbook in one of the Washington wards. So I think that like most of us, to the best of his imperfect ability, Harry Reid is trying to live the gospel, at least as he understands it.

Link to comment

There's not much I agree with politically with Brother Reid. And it brought forth a chuckle a few years back when he said that he did not see how one could be a Republican and faithful LDS at the same time. :sorry:

But back in Searchlight, Nev, many moons ago, he was Bishop Reid. And I have heard apocryphal stories of him and Brother Hatch sharing a hymnbook in one of the Washington wards. So I think that like most of us, to the best of his imperfect ability, Harry Reid is trying to live the gospel, at least as he understands it.

Forget hymnbook sharing, if Romney is elected, would they be able to attend the temple together in the same session? Would you be able to throw Glenn Beck into the mix, as well? Perhaps the DC temple could host an Uncle Sam night, including all eligible senators and congressmen/women.

Link to comment

"Saints and Soldiers" tells the story of two men on opposite sides in the war were nevertheless brothers when it comes to faith.

I saw a BYU devotional with Harry Reid, and no matter how much you may disagree with him, he sincerely believes he is following Christ by his liberal philosophy.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Similar Content

    • By Maestrophil
      So I have shared before that of all my 6 kids, we have 4 that want nothing to do with the church, one that has been sealed in the temple, but seem to struggle with activity, WOW, garments, etc. and one couple that talks as if they have a testimony, but have never chosen to attend the temple, or church since being married.  
      This weekend, I had the good fortune to spend time with all my kids and have some good conversations.  My DIL, who is the wife in the last couple I mentioned was talking about how she has a 'strong testimony the gospel is true' but doesn't like the 'culture'.  I mentioned we all struggle with various aspects of the culture, and then felt to ask her if they ever saw themselves choosing to be sealed int he temple.  She said she didn't think so - when I asked why, she said it was because she "doesn't feel bad about having chosen to live with André (my son) before they were married."  She said she feels that was the right choice for them, and that because of this, she doesn't think she would be able to get a recommend.  
      I know that they are faithful to each other, so chastity is not a current issue, but it got me to thinking - how would a bishop respond if such a young woman came in asking for a recommend, admitted that she lived with her husband before they married, but have now been married for a few years.  Would the issue of regret come up if she didn't bring it up?  What if it did and she said she didn't regret the choice?  I'm glad I am not a bishop. 😉  Of course, I know the mantle and the spirit are with bishops so they are fit for the task.
      So, is there any advice I could or should offer my son and DIL?  Should I not follow up on the conversation at all?  It's hard with adult kids to know where to draw the line between being a parent and giving them a wide enough birth to be free-agents and adults.  
       
       
    • By latterdaytemplar
      I was recently interviewed by Saints Unscripted to address doubts that some Latter-day Saints may have regarding Freemasonry and the influence that it has historically had on the Church, as well as a description of what Masonry is. I thought that I would share it here.
      Not in the Interview
      One reason for joining Freemasonry that was not mentioned in the interview is that I had heard rumors concerning Joseph Smith stealing Masonic ceremonies and passing them off as revelation; with doubts growing, I decided to become a Mason for myself to see if those rumors were true. My doubts on this matter were resolved and my faith strengthened due to the information presented in this interview. In essence, I have come to the conclusion that Joseph Smith adopted the Masonic teaching model (concepts of theatrical presentation, of physical gestures for tokens, of illustrative symbols, etc.) and adapted it to teach the Church's already-existing, unique doctrine and to make covenants with God.
       
       
    • By Maestrophil
      Hi all.
       
      My wife and I have been reading in Ezekiel and have come to the part about the temple that is to be build in Jerusalem at the second coming.  Ezekiel gives great detail about the dimensions and layout of the temple, which is very unlike what current temples are, and much like the temples of old.  He also describes what will be done in tis temple - and much of it is animal sacrifice and offerings etc.
      My question is - how does this square with the idea that the temple is to be built by Jews who have accepted Jesus (and presumably joined the church) at his second coming?  Why would animal sacrifice be practiced there at all?  I have looked a bit online, and can't seem to find anything talking about this. 
      Thanks!
      MP
       
    • By HappyJackWagon
      I've been hearing rumors since the last conference that there will be some significant changes to the ways we experience and worship in the temple. Most significantly I'm hearing that there is an effort afoot to shorten the endowment to help reduce the logjam of names. As we know, a person (or group) can go to the temple and be baptized for 150 people within the same time it takes a person to do 1 endowment. I've long wondered about this discrepancy and how it could easily cause an imbalance in temple work. I've seen temples limit the number of baptisms one person could do. For a while on youth trips each youth was limited to just 5 names even though we had time to do more. So it would make sense to me to somehow shorten the endowment. Changes have been made before so I don't see any reason why it couldn't be done.
      With that general background, I'm also hearing that Pres. Nelson wants temple worship to be his legacy. For that to be the case I would suspect some significant changes would be needed, else why would it be "his" legacy. He is definitely a mover and a shaker, making things happen quickly so I think it fits his personality to move with changes he may have been considering for many years. In general I enjoy his ambition and determination to make things happen.
      I'm also hearing about mandatory meetings in early January for all temple workers where supposedly they will be informed of these changes so they can be prepared. Perhaps January meetings for all temple workers is a totally normal thing (I don't know as I've only ever served as a veil worker).
      So, it makes sense to me that changes could come, as early as the next few weeks. So I've got a couple of questions.
      1- Would you welcome changes to the length of time it takes to perform temple ordinances? (I call these efficiency changes)
      2- Is the family history/temple approval system adequate for temple work to move forward in a faster way? IOW- will there be enough names (without duplication) to keep up a faster pace?
      3- Are there other changes (besides efficiency) that you might expect to see?
      *Please keep the discussion respectful, both to each other and also to the temple rituals. There are a couple of specific items/topics regarding temple worship that shouldn't be discussed.
    • By nuclearfuels
      With all the new Temples being announced and my excitement builds at attending the dedications of said Temples, can the experts on this forum and the Journal of Discourse experts comment as to a future Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Temple on Mount Horeb (Moses and the Burning Bush site)? Perhaps during the Millennium?
×
×
  • Create New...