Rescuing A Wayward Spouse

[Calm]

For most spouses with an inactive spouse, disbelief was very rare, especially before the Internet. I never heard of an inactive person disbelieving and attempting to impose that disbelief on the spouse.

I am afraid I have, including some spouses that refused to allow their believing spouses to participate in church (in the sense of requiring them to choose between the church and the marriage). I honestly don't really see much difference in such except for those who disbelieve pointing to others more to support their own positions.

What is significantly different from what I see is that the internet has given a place to create a community of the disaffected where doubters may sometime come and get their doubts reinforced and narratives are formed in ways they didn't used to be because there was little community around to influence them.

Seth Payne's FAIRmormon presentation is relevant here.

Edited August 3, 2013 by calmoriah

[Calm]

After her temple marriage several years ago, within the next month, my sister-in-law confided in me that it was the temple rituals themselves that started her quest out of the church. She felt the temple was a "creepy" experience and nothing like the way it was presented to her in her temple prep class.

It is unfortunate in my view that we are not more enthusiastic about teaching about symbolism and ritual in our faith. Often people are unaware of ritual even when it is right in front of them in baptisms, sacrament and healing ordinances...and then when they get to a very formal ritual that is obviously heavy in symbolism, it really throws them.

I grew up studying Jung and Campbell and when I got to the temple, it was like coming home.

[canard78]

For most spouses with an inactive spouse, disbelief was very rare, especially before the Internet.

I really don't know where you're getting your conclusions from. Before I request one for this, did you answer the other CFR?

I never heard of an inactive person disbelieving and attempting to impose that disbelief on the spouse.

Really? Maybe you've not met enough inactive people.

Today it is rather common. But I wouldn't call these people inactive. They may be antimormon, exmormon and hyper-critical of the lds church.

If either spouse is unwilling to respect the other persons beliefs then I think there is a problem in the marriage. But I think this can go both ways. A spouse can 'needle' in both directions and can make an ultimatum in both directions.

[canard78]

Many don't change, I agree. But if the spiritual basis of the marriage changes, what is a person to do?

A person is to love them. I expect my wife to show respect for my principles and values. It is reasonable for her to expect the same.

Both parties have to make a choice:

1) Do I want to be married to my spouse or a Mormon?

2) Do I want to be married to my spouse or a non-Mormon?

If either spouse considers the second to be more important than the first then there's little hope for the marriage. I consider it to be the wrong priority. Eternity is a long time and we've no real idea how it will turn out. I prefer the 'long game' approach to life.

Here's an admittedly weak analogy that I actually experienced: I used to have a checking account with a small, local bank. Before opening the account, I investigated all the banks in the area and even some online banks. I tried a couple of them, but found them not to my liking. When I opened the account, I was pleased with the fees, the service, and (most of all) the personal relationship offered by the bank. We went along swimmingly for over a year.

Then everything changed--the bank was bought by a much larger bank in the area in a consolidation wave. Letters went out and an advertising campaign ensued, assuring me and all customers that nothing would change--except the name--and we would enjoy the same benefits and level of service as before. I was skeptical, as I know how business paradigm shifts work. (You buy the business, and the bought business generally has to adapt to the paradigm and practices of the buyer.) The larger bank was even one I had tried before, and I had left them in favor of the small local.

Long story short: After several months I discovered it wasn't just the name that had changed. Charges and fees were changed to be in line with the buyer's fees. Service hours changed. And those with whom I'd had a relationship changed the relationship because they were operating under new and different internal rules.

In this situation, most everything upon which I had based the original decision to form a business relationship had changed. It was the values of the original institution that attracted me and the implementation of those values that satisfied me as a customer. The solution here was simple; I started searching for and eventually found a different bank more in line with my original expectations.

Again, the analogy is weak as a marriage is not a business. (Well, for most people it isn't.) But if you marry a person with a particular set of expectations--including an understood, common set of values that guide your life--what is one to do when the person throws out those values or says "I no longer believe in those values"?

I'm glad you said so.

If the above happened to me I'd also leave the bank and find another. I didn't promise to stay with the bank "as long as we both shall live." I didn't make a commitment to the bank in the temple. I don't have children with the bank. The bank doesn't make me happy, enrich my life, make me laugh, share wonderful happy memories with me. I don't love the bank. I do love my wife.

I think what you're trying to ask is: what do we do when some of the religious principles the marriage was founded on, change. It's a fair question. On our wedding day, do we expect our spouse to be the same person in 60 years? Perhaps we do. If so, it's an unreasonable expectation. Everyone changes during 60+ years.

Understand, please, that I'm not talking here about (C78's note: Group 1): values such as honesty, integrity, courage, or kindness. Those may not change. I am talking about values like (C78's note: Group 2)belief in prophets, continuing revelation, God, the atonement, priesthood authority, life after life, and eternal marriage. When a person changes their beliefs in the gospel, it is these beliefs, once foundational to the marriage, that are changed.

The first group are far more important to a positive marriage relationship.

You can have a good relationship based on Group 1 without Group 2. You can't have a good relationship with if only Group 2 exists if one or both parties lack Group 1.

I wouldn't want the eternities with someone who didn't have the values of Group 1. As for Group 2. I still believe them. I'll let God sort out the eternities.

As I've said in many other places: I believe in a God of a personalised curriculum. Sometimes that curriculum takes people out of the church or stops them attending at all. Why should I abandon my family commitments simply because I don't have God's perspective? I see through a glass darkly. He doesn't.

This is the intractable problem that a still-believing spouse faces. Some say "that's it; I'm outta here!" and leave the marriage. (And those people are roundly condemned--unjustly so, in my opinion--by others who don't understand.) Some say "I'll stay," but it often requires a "retooling" of the very foundations of the marriage, which is quite difficult. Such retooling often means that the gospel is no longer the center of the home life (it is probably relegated to the periphery), which can be continually wrenching for the believing spouse. Despite the Beatles' assertion to the contrary, you need more than love. You need a common, shared framework in which to organize your lives and teach your children.

To leave a marriage purely on the principle that the spouse is not active or not believing is, in my opinion, very short-sighted. It really depends and I doubt the spouse of the person who says "I'm out of here" has simply stopped attending/believing.

In any marriage, if either partner becomes persistently hurtful, spiteful, unkind, unhelpful, verbally or physically abusive etc and is unwilling to make any steps to change then I can understand the other spouse wanting to end that marriage.

But someone who stops attending or believing in the church should not be presumed to be on the road to those types of behaviour.

(Were this not the case, you wouldn't see so many RfM types asking about ways to pull their believing spouses into their new framework or subtle ways to teach their children that the Church isn't true.)

It may be worth considering that RfM is in no way representative of people who no longer attend the church. It represents a very specific sub-sample of those who leave the church.

[canard78]

It is unfortunate in my view that we are not more enthusiastic about teaching about symbolism and ritual in our faith. Often people are unaware of ritual even when it is right in front of them in baptisms, sacrament and healing ordinances...and then when they get to a very formal ritual that is obviously heavy in symbolism, it really throws them.

I grew up studying Jung and Campbell and when I got to the temple, it was like coming home.

I definitely think the temple prep classes could do far more to get people ready.

I've recently been researching some of the information that church leaders have discussed about the content of the temple in public. I don't understand the need for secrecy in preparation for the temple. Before someone takes the sacrament for the first time as a new member they have likely seen the ordinances many times. A baptism ceremony is not a surprise.

I'm certainly not saying we should let them sit through a 'pre-view' of the endowment. But there is far more information about what will happen and what it represents in LDS resources than we usually give them. This can all still be done within the bounds the Lord has set.

As the internet information on the endowment grows and it becomes more likely for people to stumble upon misrepresentations of what to expect I also wonder whether the church will be more open about what happens so they can present it on their terms first.

Who are the Jung and Campbell writers?

[Tacenda]

I am trying to remember what exactly it meant to be inactive or not active years ago. I don't think that it meant what it may mean by canard. To be inactive basically meant that the person was not attending church but not necessarily having issues with church history or believing antimormon literature. I think that inactive meant that one wasn't attending church or attending just one meeting etc. But one still believed.

I know that I am basically inactive because I don't feel like attending all the meetings nor do I want callings. However, this wayward spouse is different. They no longer believe in the church because of what they had read on the internet or in a book by an exmormon. This is different than being inactive unless we broaden the definition to meet the 21st century.

So what to do with a spouse who no longer believes? In this case the advise may be on target in strengthening the marriage and keeping it together. However, usually the spouse who no longer believes attempts to influence the believing the spouse and this creates a more serious problem. How not to become influenced by such a spouse's ideas? Would looking upon this kind of situation as spreading the spiritual flu be on target?

No way, in my situation I'd love my husband to stay strong in his belief. You think it's like the flu? And people like me are trying to get our spouse sick? That's just not true, in fact I'm sure Canard's wife didn't try to get him "sick" either, but like my husband, I believe Canard just became aware of the history that wasn't quite taught in SS, but he'll have to answer for himself.

I'm in Nauvoo right now. Earlier today, we went to Carthage jail and just outside the little Visitor's Center, are monuments with quotes from the prophet Joseph Smith. My husband started saying each one by memory, he knew most of what was engraved on both monuments and recited them out loud to me. He memorized them on his mission. It was a sweet moment. Later in the day we sat in a grove in Nauvoo and listened to a reenactment of the King Follet Sermon, with a portion of it being the revelation that the true nature of God was once a man. And the missionary that portrayed Joseph bearing his testimony that the atonement never made sense until he understood the doctrine of becoming Gods. And why would Jesus have to die for us unless we are to become like Him and the importance of that. And we have been involved in several things in Nauvoo just like this that have been faith promoting. If it was my intention to have my husband join me in doubting, why would I have him come to Nauvoo of all places?

Edited August 3, 2013 by Tacenda

[why me]

I really don't know where you're getting your conclusions from. Before I request one for this, did you answer the other CFR?

Really? Maybe you've not met enough inactive people.

I am inactive myself. And I have spoken with other wives or husbands with inactive spouses. However I suppose what I am saying is that the advise in the ensign is basically for a spouse with a husband like me and not for someone who is actively attempting to lead a spouse out of the church. But the wayward article is for those who are dealing with spouses who are out of the church and actively attempting to lead the other spouse out.

What is the other CFR?

[why me]

No way, in my situation I'd love my husband to stay strong in his belief. You think it's like the flu? And people like me are trying to get our spouse sick? That's just not true, in fact I'm sure Canard's wife didn't try to get him "sick" either, but like my husband, I believe Canard just became aware of the history that wasn't quite taught in SS, but he'll have to answer for himself.

That is very nice of you that you want your husband to stay strong in his faith. But I do have a question for you. Before you came to these boards did you attempt to share your doubts about the church and its relationship with Jesus and did you attempt to have him come to Jesus by sharing your new faith?

I have read many internet posts from critic boards where those who have left the church attempt to get their spouse out of the church. These people often ask for help in how to do it and posters respond with recommendations about what books and articles to give them. Could we say that these spouses are attempting to get their spouses 'sick' through such literature? Or can we be more polite and say that these spouses are just trying to educate their spouses out of the church? By giving their spouses such literature complete with their own interpretation of the events in the books, these spouses are attempting to spread their disbelief.

[why me]

I am afraid I have, including some spouses that refused to allow their believing spouses to participate in church (in the sense of requiring them to choose between the church and the marriage). I honestly don't really see much difference in such except for those who disbelieve pointing to others more to support their own positions.

What is significantly different from what I see is that the internet has given a place to create a community of the disaffected where doubters may sometime come and get their doubts reinforced and narratives are formed in ways they didn't used to be because there was little community around to influence them.

I have also seen the first paragraph take place in church. But I never considered these people unbelievers in the church, especially back in the seventies. If we remember the church would always talk about people who got offended and no longer come to church. Someone said this or that and caused offense. For the most part, the church was speaking to these people and how to get these people back to the fold. I never heard the church talk back then about wayward spouses who were leaving the faith because of what they learned from reading critical books. One reason for this was because the church was more open about the various accounts of the first vision, Brigham's Journal, the head in the hat, we will become gods, god had flesh and bone etc. All the listed above that people now claim the church hides. .

[why me]

Later in the day we sat in a grove in Nauvoo and listened to a reenactment of the King Follet Sermon, with a portion of it being the revelation that the true nature of God was once a man. And the missionary that portrayed Joseph bearing his testimony that the atonement never made sense until he understood the doctrine of becoming Gods.

I have read critic sites where posters claim that the church hides this part of its history: the kind follet sermons. As we can see, this is not true. The king follet sermon is very much a part of nauvoo. Also that the church hides its teaching about god was once a man...again that would be not true because it is being taught in nauvoo. Again the critics who claim the church hides it are not telling the truth or are misinformed.

[why me]

Or that there is something wrong with them as opposed to viewing it as simply an experience that they are going through that has some potentially painful aspects to it.

But on the other hand if the spouse is actively attempting to spread disbelief in the other spouse can we get away with the idea that they are attempting to spread their 'flu'?

[Calm]

Why not just state that they are trying to share their discontent with the Church rather than turn it into some kind of disease?

I love analogies and metaphors...but when they are not needed, don't use them if they are going to create defensive feelings.

[canard78]

But the wayward article is for those who are dealing with spouses who are out of the church and actively attempting to lead the other spouse out.

Really? Can you show me where the author of both articles have specifically defined the difference. It might be there but I missed it that Larry's correspondent is actively trying to get the spouse out.

If that is the case in any relationship I would encourage the believing spouse to kindly tell the other to not actively try to lead them out. But if if she/he wants to be given that respect she/he should return it and not make any attempt to get the non-attending/non-believing spouse back to church. Isn't that fair?

What is the other CFR?

I'm on my phone, I'll have to find it later.

[canard78]

But on the other hand if the spouse is actively attempting to spread disbelief in the other spouse can we get away with the idea that they are attempting to spread their 'flu'?

The analogy is Larry's - I don't like it. But I don't think even he was saying the wife was trying to spread it. He was effectively just saying 'imagine she is sick. If your wife was sick you wouldn't mind taking the kids to church on your own.' There's no suggestion he should put on a surgeon's mask and gown.

But as mentioned even the analogy of 'flu' has a negative undertone as the wife isn't sick.

[Calm]

Who are the Jung and Campbell writers?

Do you mean those who wrote about Jung and Campbell or the men themselves? If the second:

My favourite book of Jung that I used to read as an 8 year old on my mom's big bed with its brocaded cover that was always cool to the touch with the light coming in from the bathroom window...can still see that experience so vividly, lol...must be a good book

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_and_His_Symbols

And Campbell my favourite was Hero of a Thousand Faces...but she got some other ones which had just beautiful photography in it...like I've said before I am highly visual and either words need to present an opportunity for me to create a rich visual picture of my own or a book needs to supply it...usually with nonfiction ones...and these do. But I always read the text too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hero_with_a_Thousand_Faces

Then there was Swedenborg and that book had the old book smell that is so appealing, but not as many pictures so I don't remember it as well. He had the same name as my grandfather who had died a year or two before Mom introduced me to him and so that made me inclined toward him to begin with...plus the way Mom told it, he had such a hunger and passion for seeking and learning, how could I not love the man....all of them. (though later on coming across something things I saw as arrogant, that love was tempered with a little reserve and sadness as arrogance is one of my biggest turnoffs, don't you know! I think the book for Swedenborg was Heaven and Hell but it might have been New Jerusalem or Apocalypse Revealed.

Got the first two books on my shelf...or would if they weren't in boxes at the moment, am going to have to find a Swedenborg one if that got lost in Mom's moving around...at least four moves since I read it...or if she still has it as her favourite, in some ways it is mine as it gives more insight into Joseph's experience than the other two as it is about one who share it in many ways as opposed to those who studied it.

[Calm]

I definitely think the temple prep classes could do far more to get people ready.

We had a fireside with a Stake Patriarch who told us we have covenanted not to speak of very few things, basically the signs and tokens themselves, but much else can be and should be shared with those we are called to teach outside the temple in respectful and private venues to enrich both of our experiences. He suggested allowing your children watch you prepare your clothing for the temple and as you pack it, explain the purpose and meaning of each and share more of the experience itself. My son was not inclined to have much of a discussion about the temple, I will ask him if any questions arose that he felt he would have liked answered. My daughter has not gone yet, when she goes, I will have a long talk with her as her education is very spotty and very deep and she may really get it in some ways but be lost in others.

The only thing that caused me a problem was when the veil covers my head and I feel stifled and hot and even get faint...when I was pregnant and in a prayer circle I almost blacked out...what a wimp, I need to get a lighter weight or open weave veil to prevent that in the future. I will need to ask if I can get a lace veil rather than a solid one, I guess.

[canard78]

We had a fireside with a Stake Patriarch who told us we have covenanted not to speak of very few things, basically the signs and tokens themselves, but much else can be and should be shared with those we are called to teach outside the temple in respectful and private venues to enrich both of our experiences. He suggested allowing your children watch you prepare your clothing for the temple and as you pack it, explain the purpose and meaning of each and share more of the experience itself. My son was not inclined to have much of a discussion about the temple, I will ask him if any questions arose that he felt he would have liked answered. My daughter has not gone yet, when she goes, I will have a long talk with her as her education is very spotty and very deep and she may really get it in some ways but be lost in others.

The only thing that caused me a problem was when the veil covers my head and I feel stifled and hot and even get faint...when I was pregnant and in a prayer circle I almost blacked out...what a wimp, I need to get a lighter weight or open weave veil to prevent that in the future. I will need to ask if I can get a lace veil rather than a solid one, I guess.

I would love for there to a culture of discussing the endowment. There should be more than just a temple prep class. There should also be a temple debrief class or a temple review class.

Are there any suggestions 'in print' that this kind of conversation is ok in the right venues.

I think I said on another thread, I'm currently compiling a list of all the published quotes on the content of the temple (by GAs mainly but also Ensigns and BYU articles). I figure those are 'friendly' sources. Once compiled I'm going to do something with it. An article or fireside of something. We'll see. The objective is as an opportunity to illustrate the parts that GAs/Ensigns have discussed so others can feel more comfortable appropriately doing the same.

I wonder of much else is mentioned in the JOD.

(Thanks for the book references)

[Calm]

You should collect books on temple themes in the scriptures too...could be very helpful....almost got a great one at the auction tonight but got beat out...will have to just buy it without the author's sig one of the days.

Have you patrolled the internet looking for good sites, I bet volgadon has a few he could recommend and I know some FAIRmormon members have some personal sites or did.

Rongo was doing an excavation of the Journal of Discourses IIRC, and he may have material for you as well.

There is a quoteoholic on the elist who probably has some good stuff, remind me later as this is likely to disappear from my memory as soon as I hit post.

Yeah, we should make our own temple prep class manual. With some gentle humour too.

Nibley went into some pretty significant detail. I figure anything that you can find quoted outside the temple, in scriptures, in talks...not in the jokes of your neighbours thinking they are so clever with the in joke by using a phrase...my dad did this almost everytime we were going down stairs at my grandma's house which was quite a feat (the staircase was a work of art and a death trap)....which I didn't discover for many years until I went to the temple at which time I learned the smirk on his face...I still can't resolve my feelings on it, it is sacred but God also wants us to draw the temple out into the world with us, make it an integral part...and those kinds of things get talked about.

Meds are finally hitting so I don't feel like my body is going to snap in two if I relax (strange sensation when being relaxed means one feels more tense when one is holding oneself so tightly as to imitate a steel bar post)...so brain is turning off now, computer in a few more minutes.

Edited August 3, 2013 by calmoriah

[kassie]

Well I can't even imagine what it must be like for those of you going through this. I have read your posts and my heart aches for all of you....those who have left the Church because you no longer believe it is true and those of you who are still in the Church and have spouses who have left. Until someone walks in your shoes they can't possibly know how you feel nor can all the so-called "advice' in the world be of any help. When a spouse chooses to leave the Church and it is an inherent part of your belief system it can only throw you "for a loop." (vast understatement). If you lose your testimony and leave the Church it does the same to your spouse. I can't go there. My husband who is a Bishop at present (and ready to get out of the "calling' as soon as he can let me tell you!) and myself (past RS president-glad to get out of the job!) and I have had so many confidential husband and wife talks about all the people in our ward who are either a) considering divorce or b) getting a divorce or c) wishing they had the guts to get out of a bad marriage I can't even begin to tell you. NO ONE CAN KNOW WHAT IT IS LIKE UNTIL WE WALK IN ANOTHER PERSON'S SHOES. It is presumptuous at best to assume we can. Only Heavenly Father's grace can guide any of us through this turbulence and it can not be trivialized.

[EllenMaksoud]

Meridian's Larry Barkdull recently posted about a man whose wife is not active.

http://www.ldsmag.co.../13050/1/page-1

As an active member of a wonderful wife who stopped believing/attending about 3 years ago I have mixed feelings about this article.

I appreciate the encouragement to love the wife and to improve the relationship. But believing the wife is "spiritually sick" will drive a wedge into the relationship. I'm glad it's an attitude I let go of a long time ago.

Today I don't pray for her to return, but for her to be happy and I pray to love her and accept her. Larry gives the wrong advice.

Statistically, if a Husband attends, the wife and children will, I'll just ask the standard questions that are flags in my past denomination.

Has she had something happen that upset her at church? Did they overwork and burn her out? Is there tension between her and some other member? How is your life? Are you keeping the commandments? Are you loving and supportive of her needs in and out of the church? Do you spend so much time at the church, you have hurt her?

How is her self image? Has she been the victim of abuse in the past? Did her parents constantly criticise her? Does she have unresolved feelings with regard to the church's handling of certain social issues? Is she be harassed at work by non-Mormons?

Maybe it is time for you to put your Inspector Gagget hat on?

[Calm]

Only Heavenly Father's grace can guide any of us through this turbulence and it can not be trivialized.

Well stated...especially not trivializing it even if it feels like the same thing would be trivial to us.

I remember being told as a child don't make such a big drama about eating pork and beans due to my crying that I didn't want to eat them...right before I projectiled them across the kitchen. No one expected me to pretend that I liked them or at least found them edible after that or demanded that I eat them. (I realize this is a trivial example...but just using it as an illustration that we really can't know how the other experiences what doesn't matter to us, a bee sting can hurt slightly or kill as another example).

[canard78]

Statistically, if a Husband attends, the wife and children will, I'll just ask the standard questions that are flags in my past denomination.

Has she had something happen that upset her at church? Did they overwork and burn her out? Is there tension between her and some other member? How is your life? Are you keeping the commandments? Are you loving and supportive of her needs in and out of the church? Do you spend so much time at the church, you have hurt her?

How is her self image? Has she been the victim of abuse in the past? Did her parents constantly criticise her? Does she have unresolved feelings with regard to the church's handling of certain social issues? Is she be harassed at work by non-Mormons?

Maybe it is time for you to put your Inspector Gagget hat on?

Thanks for your suggestions Ellen. I understand where you're driving at and I appreciate the intention. But it suggests there something wrong with her or me and that if we work out what that thing is then I'll be able to "fix her." I'm not trying to fix her. She's not broken.

Can I ask you something? Your faith journey goes like this (I think): Evangelical > Islam > Mormonism. Did you leave the first two because there was something wrong with you? Or did you move on because where you were 'at' or where you wanted to work towards was incongruous with the religion you were a part of?

But I love the idea of owning an Inspector Gadget hat:

[kassie]

I would love for there to a culture of discussing the endowment. There should be more than just a temple prep class. There should also be a temple debrief class or a temple review class.

Are there any suggestions 'in print' that this kind of conversation is ok in the right venues.

I think I said on another thread, I'm currently compiling a list of all the published quotes on the content of the temple (by GAs mainly but also Ensigns and BYU articles). I figure those are 'friendly' sources. Once compiled I'm going to do something with it. An article or fireside of something. We'll see. The objective is as an opportunity to illustrate the parts that GAs/Ensigns have discussed so others can feel more comfortable appropriately doing the same.

I wonder of much else is mentioned in the JOD.

(Thanks for the book references)

I think you have some excellent points. From a very young age our children were exposed to temple garments. In the wash. Folded on the foot of our beds. Etc. etc,. etc. When they were very young they didn't pay any attention. As they grew they asked questions. I explained to them that someday when they went to the temple they would make covenants with Heavenly Father that would be so important they would want to remember them every day for the rest of their lives and that these garments would help them remember them when times got tough and when times were good. As teens, they asked more specific questions "Don't they rub on your clothes? Aren't they uncomfortable? Why don't other people in other religions wear them?" etc etc etc. I explained that many religions require sacred tokens. Catholics wear scapulars under their clothing. Jews wear tallits. etc. I then reinforced why we believe garments are part of a covenant and why we wear them. Did they understand? Probably not. Oh well...they didn't understand why we wouldn't let them date until they graduated from high school either. Such is life. But now....down the road. They understand. Two have been married in the temple. One has left the church. Many more still growing up. You do what you can. You trust Heavenly Father to lead them and guide them and help them be all that they can be. And you kneel at night and you pray. Best you can do.

[kassie]

Well stated...especially not trivializing it even if it feels like the same thing would be trivial to us.

I remember being told as a child don't make such a big drama about eating pork and beans due to my crying that I didn't want to eat them...right before I projectiled them across the kitchen. No one expected me to pretend that I liked them or at least found them edible after that or demanded that I eat them. (I realize this is a trivial example...but just using it as an illustration that we really can't know how the other experiences what doesn't matter to us, a bee sting can hurt slightly or kill as another example).

I am so laughing! I remember I hated fish as a child. I remember my parents telling me how "good it was for me." I didn't' care. It made me sick. No one seemed to understand. My parents thought I was being obstinate and kept putting fish in front of me. I would gag and choke and refuse to eat. Finally, my mother said "Ok, Kassie. You can fix yourself a peanut butter sandwich." I WON!!!! I still don't eat fish and I am in my 50's. But no one who likes fish could understand where I was coming from. You have to be there.......

[EllenMaksoud]

Thanks for your suggestions Ellen. I understand where you're driving at and I appreciate the intention. But it suggests there something wrong with her or me and that if we work out what that thing is then I'll be able to "fix her." I'm not trying to fix her. She's not broken.

Can I ask you something? Your faith journey goes like this (I think): Evangelical > Islam > Mormonism. Did you leave the first two because there was something wrong with you? Or did you move on because where you were 'at' or where you wanted to work towards was incongruous with the religion you were a part of?

But I love the idea of owning an Inspector Gadget hat:

I'm just trying to encourage you to do detective work. I am so analytical that it is painful at times. At the time my own marriage and relationship with the Ev church was crashing, I analyzed it so much that people did not think I even cared.

I just think that everything that happens has an etiology. Sometimes people experience trauma but are too ashamed and timid to cry for help. In the Mormon church, a lot of pressure to be positive is put on women, and in reality, sometimes people just need to be mad, and scream and yell for a while. Amazingly, a while back I did some of that myself and much to my astonishment, my sisters and brothers in the church let me blow up and then loved me any way. There is a reason, I know it and I am sure that you can find it.

Oh, and I never intended to insinuate that there is anything wrong with either of you.

I can't believe I had the cheek to even try to participate in this thread. My own past life is unbelievably broken. If people here knew me ...

Edited August 4, 2013 by EllenMaksoud