Why Do We Care Who Thinks We Are "faithful?"

[Tacenda]

As long as you blame others and put the responsibility on others and don't do something because you fear others, you can never change yourself or your life.

Do you really want to live that life you are bemoaning all the time for the next 40-50 years? When it is time for you to die and you look at your life, are you going to think of all you didn't do out of fear or rejoice in what you did do?

I see that several of us have the same idea.

add-on: my daughter has lived a life crippled by anxiety since she turned 12, she is finally accepting responsiblity for it and has come to realize that she loves her life. And even though the anxiety is still huge, since she accepted she controled it and it didn't control her, the positive focus has pushed her out of her cocoon and she is even getting her learner's permit and driving...which was unthinkable just three months ago (she's 24)and she started a conversation with the cashier today when I spaced out, something that always made her squirm when myself or her dad do it.

The situation is different in a way since she is being supported and you see yourself as likely being attacked, however, her feelings underneath it all are much the same way due to her anxiety. The only way she is proving to herself it doesn't matter is to do it...and at this point she is getting to a place where she accepts support, but doesn't need it or fear the rejection. It is too important for her self respect to let her fear rule her anymore. And she refuses to look back at the last 12 years and resent all those lost opportunities...junior high, high school, college....all those friends and fun activities she never got to have because of her fear....to sit around and moan about how much her life sucks because life didn't turn out the way she thought it was going to and instead she got hit with such a shock wave just when she was most vulnerable that she only now being able to pick herself up again 12 years later. Instead she is telling herself the truth...she learned a lot of things in those 12 years many people never got the opportunity to do, she is a great person and she loves her family so what is there really to regret as long as she gets to leave the fear behind and take teh good things with her as she moves ahead?

And to give just a little bit of hope...as long as she was approaching it from being afraid of being afraid, gritting her teeth and doing something just made it worst, deepened and embedded the anxiety. However, now that she is approaching it from 'it is her choice how to react to her reactions', gritting her teeth and doing it is making so it is easier each time. She was even pushing today for me to let her drive through rush hour on unfamiliar roads and it was only my anxiety that couldn't handle it (I haven't have a chance to drive with her as all so I need to do it on easier roads so I know when I need to give advice and when to keep my mouth shut and not knowing is enough to trigger my anxiety, always not to below the surface when I am in the car).

I'm happy for your daughter, maybe you can use me as an example. Especially my inability to drive in rush hour on unfamiliar roads etc! I hope she keeps going forward and never looks back. She's 24 already, wow that was fast. I can't tell you how truly happy I am that she's getting out and throwing caution to the wind like that. I hope I can be as brave.

Sorry if I've derailed in any way, but I felt the comments kind of were directed at people that put on an act or are phonies, people that seem true believing but really aren't. But the OP is really about not flaunting their faith, but keeping it close to their hearts, God and close family members. Maybe not being those that stand up on podiums and declare their faith in a look at me, look at me, way.

[Calm]

I'm happy for your daughter, maybe you can use me as an example. Especially my inability to drive in rush hour on unfamiliar roads etc! I hope she keeps going forward and never looks back. She's 24 already, wow that was fast. I can't tell you how truly happy I am that she's getting out and throwing caution to the wind like that. I hope I can be as brave.

 

It isn't easy.  I know how hard it was for me first when I was in college where I had gotten to the point of every morning waking up with a pit of sickness about having to face the world and know it wasn't going to get better, change did not happen over night for sure and then when we moved up to Canada 13 years later, where the people were more reserved than I was and suddenly I was seen as outgoing...kind of funny that happening.  That and being one of the two mothers the teachers all relied on...it is important to feel like one belongs, we will do a lot to feel that way, good and bad...but it doesn't really give us anything back unless it is good and not pretending because then we know we really dont' belong.  It doesn't have to be big, little is good enough and always done with love and not fear.

[mfbukowski]

I always seem to make threads all about me.

What do you get out of doing that?

I won't give a long answer to your saying I don't accept responsibility.

I did not say that, I said that blaming others allows one to not accept responsibility.   That is one strategy people use.  If you feel that applies to you- that is for you to judge.

 

 

I will just say to put yourself in mine and others shoes and imagine for a moment what would happen in your ward, your social circles and possibly your job if you came out as a disbelieving LDS. Now tell me how that responsibility is on you when it is they who react in disappointment and mistrust etc. Each of these scenarios is mine. It could affect my family, my job & my ward.

 

First of all, if I were in that position I would not care.  I would move on.

 

I do what God wants me to do, not what silly people around me who have no respect for my right to live my own life want me to do.  There are other fish in the sea- if one group does not accept you, there are a hundred others who will.

 

Most of my family denounced me when I became LDS.   So what?   I did the right thing.  Others of my relatives think that I destroyed the restful peace of my deceased relatives by "making them Mormon" by doing their temple work.  Can you imagine how it would feel if you believed someone did that to your deceased relatives?

 

I wish that was not the case, and that I could make them understand, but I can't.  We can't stop doing what is right because others are ignorant.  That is how the holocaust happened- people did not want to make waves to do what was right.

 

Such is life.   You either stand for something or let others make your decisions for you.  It's all up to each of us.

[Avatar4321]

Absolutely zero of that is in the baptismal covenant. Just like the temple, they never tell you until after you go into the temple and sit down and agree to stay and proceed, of the promises you are to make. At my baptism no one mentions temple covenants. Faith should feel right, none of this feels right. So I have to fake it, to be accepted or to not cause harm. Such is life, thanks JS.

And how is any of this Joseph's fault?

[HappyJackWagon]

 

Not to mention the Baptismal ceremony, the temple ceremony, and the connected sealing ceremonies were revealed by/through Joseph Smith.

Without Joseph Smith we might as well be sprinkling each other without any authority, get married till death do we part, and toss out the endowment completely.  We might as well go back to the protestant beliefs that were already on the earth before Joseph went into the grove.

 

No, accepting Joseph as prophet is vital.  And a temple recommend should not be given to anyone who doesn't.  They may be clean/pure (aka worthy) enough to merit one, but to allow them to partake in ordinances that they doubt the revelator who gave them seems a little sacrilegious.

 

What if one has already received their personal ordinances in full faith and fellowship, has a bit of a faith transition where the literal belief changes significantly, yet still finds value and wants to participate in the rituals of the temple? Maybe they want to participate with a loving spouse, or attend a child's sealing, enjoy the peace of the temple or even provide service to deceased family members. What if they believe there is value in this kind of temple participation yet don't believe ALL of JS's truth claims? Are they being sacriligious when they find the good and participate worthily, even in absense of belief?

[Teancum]

Agreed.

 

Speaking for myself... sometimes this board simply satisfies the odd need I have to engage in debate.  The topic doesn't matter as much as the idea of volleying arguments back and forth, sniffing out internal inconsistencies in a theory, speculating on the unknowable.  It's fun.  And sometimes you learn something new.

 

A great argument could be made for putting the brain power and time spent towards something a lot more fruitful.  But it's better than clicking around for porn.  Sometimes.

Heheh! Agreed back at you!

[Teancum]

I agree.  Sometimes I get tired of defending what I believe/don't believe.  Religion is personal.  My Bishop & SP are placed in a position to evaluate my worthiness for sacred blessings -and I am fine with that.  Nobody else, either within the Church or without gets to weigh in on my "faithfulness".

No you are wrong. Russell does, least he thinks he does.

[Teancum]

And that's just fine.But then you aren't preaching apostate doctrine on the one hand, and trying to leverage off your claimed status as an active Mormon in order to market your views as representative of some kind of growing Mormon consensus on the other.And doing it under cover of internet anonymity so that nobody can check up on your claims.So that the only way to test your claims is to compare your professed views with what is normative for faithful, believing Latter-day Saints.

See I told ya....

[Teancum]

I always seem to make threads all about me. I won't give a long answer to your saying I don't accept responsibility. I will just say to put yourself in mine and others shoes and imagine for a moment what would happen in your ward, your social circles and possibly your job if you came out as a disbelieving LDS. Now tell me how that responsibility is on you when it is they who react in disappointment and mistrust etc. Each of these scenarios is mine. It could affect my family, my job & my ward.

You are correct, But don't expect others here for the most part to have any sympathy for you. I do. But I am just one of those vile apostates.

[JLHPROF]

 

 

What if one has already received their personal ordinances in full faith and fellowship, has a bit of a faith transition where the literal belief changes significantly, yet still finds value and wants to participate in the rituals of the temple? Maybe they want to participate with a loving spouse, or attend a child's sealing, enjoy the peace of the temple or even provide service to deceased family members. What if they believe there is value in this kind of temple participation yet don't believe ALL of JS's truth claims? Are they being sacriligious when they find the good and participate worthily, even in absense of belief?

 

Yes, they are being sacrilegious.  I apologize if that's mean, but I firmly believe that.

The temple is not a place to chill and feel the spirit.  That's a benefit, but not a reason to go.

 

If they don't see the ordinance as valid, or accept the source of the authority by which the ordinances came to us, they should not be participating in said ordinance.  Unity with the family is not a sufficient reason for partaking in a sacred ordinance if you don't believe.  It's the very definition of sacrilegious.

 

Your statements sound very reasonable and loving, and I DO understand that.  But the temple ordinances and the authority to perform them came to the earth through Joseph Smith (and for the most part were implemented AFTER he began living polygamy).  If you consider that polygamy makes him a fallen prophet then you should not be participating in the temple ordinances, and I certainly don't know how you can have a testimony of priesthood authority passed down through Brigham, John, Wilford etc who participated in the same things that are used to call Joseph fallen.

[Uncle Dale]

Hmmm.... I suppose this may be the case if I wanted something from you.  But I just want to sit in the pews, do my home teaching, and go to the temple.  So why would you care then?  I'm guessing you wouldn't.  And I think there is a distinction between someone promoting this, that, or the other, and someone who just goes about their own business.

 

Q

 

.

I probably agree with you, more than some here --

 

But I recently looked over my old (very old) Teacher's

Office RLDS manual, and noticed that the job duties

included (back then, at least) protecting the Church

from apostates, hypocrites and unbelievers.

 

Essentially this meant prying into the private lives of

members and baptismal candidates, making sure

that they were "faithful." Somewhere during the

mid-20th century, it appears that the Reorganized

Church reduced the responsibilities of Teachers

in this regard, and they no longer were expected

to schedule Church Court trials, initiate investigations

for excommunications, etc.

 

As I recall, the LDS Church long ago changed the

duties of a Teacher in the Priesthood, to match the

concerns and abilities of little boys -- so, perhaps

some other ward/branch leaders have assumed the

old faithfullness-checking work of Teachers.

 

Among the RLDS/CoC the office is reserved for adults,

as it was back in the Nauvoo era (when even the

Joseph Smith, Jr. family was subject to periodic visits

and interrogations by visiting Teachers).

 

I suppose that anybody requesting baptism in the LDS Church

would be aware that his/her faithfulness would be subject to

monitoring by priesthood leaders -- even if the infractions were so

minor as showing the kids an R-rated movie DVD or drinking a Pepsi.

 

UD

ps -- As I said, I do not agree with this old Latter Day Saint monitoring practice.

Edited May 5, 2015 by Uncle Dale

[HappyJackWagon]

 

Yes, they are being sacrilegious.  I apologize if that's mean, but I firmly believe that.

The temple is not a place to chill and feel the spirit.  That's a benefit, but not a reason to go.

 

If they don't see the ordinance as valid, or accept the source of the authority by which the ordinances came to us, they should not be participating in said ordinance.  Unity with the family is not a sufficient reason for partaking in a sacred ordinance if you don't believe.  It's the very definition of sacrilegious.

 

Your statements sound very reasonable and loving, and I DO understand that.  But the temple ordinances and the authority to perform them came to the earth through Joseph Smith (and for the most part were implemented AFTER he began living polygamy).  If you consider that polygamy makes him a fallen prophet then you should not be participating in the temple ordinances, and I certainly don't know how you can have a testimony of priesthood authority passed down through Brigham, John, Wilford etc who participated in the same things that are used to call Joseph fallen.

Then I'm extremely happy you're not in a position of authority over me. That approach would alienate Many people who are struggling to hang on to the closeness they feel to God through the church.

For example, for the parents who want to attend their child's wedding/sealing and qualify for a TR, telling them they are being sacriligious and shouldn't participate in such a special event because their belief isn't orthodox enough is callous. Frankly it's this type of pharisaical approach to religiosity that pushes people away, and as long as the church, or individuals in the church, do things to push people away from Christ, then they are failing in their baptismal covenants.

[ALarson]

Yes, they are being sacrilegious.  I apologize if that's mean, but I firmly believe that.

The temple is not a place to chill and feel the spirit.  That's a benefit, but not a reason to go.

 

If they don't see the ordinance as valid, or accept the source of the authority by which the ordinances came to us, they should not be participating in said ordinance.  Unity with the family is not a sufficient reason for partaking in a sacred ordinance if you don't believe.  It's the very definition of sacrilegious.

 

Your statements sound very reasonable and loving, and I DO understand that.  But the temple ordinances and the authority to perform them came to the earth through Joseph Smith (and for the most part were implemented AFTER he began living polygamy).  If you consider that polygamy makes him a fallen prophet then you should not be participating in the temple ordinances, and I certainly don't know how you can have a testimony of priesthood authority passed down through Brigham, John, Wilford etc who participated in the same things that are used to call Joseph fallen.

JLHPROF, I know you're talking (or referring) to me and others on this board who believe as I believe.  I completely respect your right to feel this way and I know you firmly believe what you wrote above.

 

However, until the church leaders change the temple recommend questions to be much, much more specific, I am completely temple worthy in every way and I am very upfront and honest with my Bishop and Stake leaders in my interviews.  None of them have ever had any doubts about issuing me a recommend.  

 

What the temple means to you is admirable, but you should know that it means many different things to many other active, temple worthy, members of the church.  I think you'd really run into problems if you tried to enforce your standards of worthiness on members of the church.  But that you do for yourself is as it should be since that's what you believe "temple worthy" means.

 

I know that just in my ward, there would be a great many who would not be able to attend the temple if you were conducting the interview and that would probably cause many of those to leave the church.  That's exactly what our leaders don't want to happen and this is why they've worded the TR questions as they have.  I believe they are inspired to do so and we shouldn't question it.

Edited May 6, 2015 by ALarson

[mfbukowski]

Hmmm.... I suppose this may be the case if I wanted something from you.  But I just want to sit in the pews, do my home teaching, and go to the temple.  So why would you care then?  I'm guessing you wouldn't.  And I think there is a distinction between someone promoting this, that, or the other, and someone who just goes about their own business.

 

Q

You know that UD is not a member of the SLC based LDS church, right? Love UD but his answers will different but than most LDS

[mfbukowski]

Then I'm extremely happy you're not in a position of authority over me. That approach would alienate Many people who are struggling to hang on to the closeness they feel to God through the church.For example, for the parents who want to attend their child's wedding/sealing and qualify for a TR, telling them they are being sacriligious and shouldn't participate in such a special event because their belief isn't orthodox enough is callous. Frankly it's this type of pharisaical approach to religiosity that pushes people away, and as long as the church, or individuals in the church, do things to push people away from Christ, then they are failing in their baptismal covenants.

I understand your point,and sympathize. But what about the funny clothes? Would they be ready for that?

[JLHPROF]

JLHPROF, I know you're talking (or referring) to me and others on this board who believe as I believe.  I completely respect your right to feel this way and I know you firmly believe what you wrote above.

 

However, until the church leaders change the temple recommend questions to be much, much more specific, I am completely temple worthy in every way and I am very upfront and honest with my Bishop and Stake leaders in my interviews.  None of them have ever had any doubts about issuing me a recommend.  

 

What the temple means to you is admirable, but you should know that it means many different things to many other active, temple worthy, members of the church.  I think you'd really run into problems if you tried to enforce your standards of worthiness on members of the church.  But that you do for yourself is as it should be since that's what you believe "temple worthy" means.

 

I know that just in my ward, there would be a great many who would not be able to attend the temple if you were conducting the interview and that would probably cause many of those to leave the church.  That's exactly what our leaders don't want to happen and this is why they've worded the TR questions as they have.  I believe they are inspired to do so and we shouldn't question it.

 

You are confusing the definitions of "worthy".  I have no right or desire to question anyone's "worthiness".

I am certain you are temple worthy (as are many who doubt).  Worthiness is not about testimony.

 

However, I consider partaking in an ordinance you don't believe in to be sacrilegious.  Unless you can explain to me how it would not be.  I would never partake in a Catholic confession, a protestant Baptism, or any other religions ordinances because I have more respect for them than to make a mockery of something they hold sacred.  And someone receiving an endowment for themselves or others when they don't believe in the authority behind it, the truthfulness of the source,  or the efficacy of it is disrespectful.

 

As for what the temple means, the only thing that matters is what it means to God.  God will not be mocked.  If you and I see the temple differently that is both ok, and understandable.  But how does God see the ordinances and those who partake without belief?

 

I would never deny someone a recommend based on their doubts as long as they were worthy.  However, if I knew they considered the temple ordinances invalid for any reason I don't know that I could approve of that person getting a recommend.

Fortunately, that is not my calling (nor likely to be).

I mean, would you allow someone who didn't believe in Christ to be baptized?  You might as well baptize a bag of sand.

[ALarson]

You are confusing the definitions of "worthy".  I have no right or desire to question anyone's "worthiness".

I am certain you are temple worthy (as are many who doubt).  Worthiness is not about testimony.

 

However, I consider partaking in an ordinance you don't believe in to be sacrilegious.  Unless you can explain to me how it would not be.  I would never partake in a Catholic confession, a protestant Baptism, or any other religions ordinances because I have more respect for them than to make a mockery of something they hold sacred.  And someone receiving an endowment for themselves or others when they don't believe in the authority behind it, the truthfulness of the source,  or the efficacy of it is disrespectful.

 

As for what the temple means, the only thing that matters is what it means to God.  God will not be mocked.  If you and I see the temple differently that is both ok, and understandable.  But how does God see the ordinances and those who partake without belief?

 

I would never deny someone a recommend based on their doubts as long as they were worthy.  However, if I knew they considered the temple ordinances invalid for any reason I don't know that I could approve of that person getting a recommend.

Fortunately, that is not my calling (nor likely to be).

I mean, would you allow someone who didn't believe in Christ to be baptized?  You might as well baptize a bag of sand.

I take my temple covenants very seriously and I have not broken any of those covenants.  So there is no mockery or sacrilege taking place when I attend the temple.  I understand that in your mind there is, but in my mind and heart (and in those of my Bishop and Stake President), that's simply not true.  

[JLHPROF]

I take my temple covenants very seriously and I have not broken any of those covenants.  So there is no mockery or sacrilege taking place when I attend the temple.  I understand that in your mind there is, but in my mind and heart (and in those of my Bishop and Stake President), that's simply not true.  

 

I try not to judge other peoples hearts or faith.  If your Bishop is fine who else should get to have an opinion.

I am simply concerned with keeping things that are sacred to me from being used/misused by those who don't consider them sacred.

[ALarson]

I try not to judge other peoples hearts or faith.  If your Bishop is fine who else should get to have an opinion.

I am simply concerned with keeping things that are sacred to me from being used/misused by those who don't consider them sacred.

I totally get that and I respect your feelings.  I don't know about others, but I would not use or misuse anything I've gained from my temple experiences or the covenants I've taken there.  I know that you & I differ on many of the things we believe, but we're in agreement on this.

[HappyJackWagon]

 

I understand your point,and sympathize. But what about the funny clothes? Would they be ready for that?

 

We're talking about people who have already received their own temple ordinances so the "funny clothing" wouldn't be a surprise to them. I wasn't arguing the case of letting ALL family into the temple. The easier solution would be allow couples to marry outside the temple and then be sealed shortly after. Easy solution that works in many other countries.

[ALarson]

   The easier solution would be allow couples to marry outside the temple and then be sealed shortly after. Easy solution that works in many other countries.

I agree with this.  I thought at one time there were "rumblings" this was going to happen?  If this takes place in other countries, it makes sense to have the same policies here too (or at least that that the leaders are not opposed to doing this).  I do think it will change here in the U.S. at some point in time.

[SmileyMcGee]

I think you should send me your tithing instead of giving it to your bishop. I mean who really cares, right?

I would happily send you my tithing instead of the church...your posts are more informative than the garbage I hear in the second and third hour of my block.

[mfbukowski]

I would happily send you my tithing instead of the church...your posts are more informative than the garbage I hear in the second and third hour of my block.

Well, for the record I appreciate the compliment but find that you would say that a little scary.

The way people read things around here, which is usually without understanding context, I have to say for the record that of course all this was said in jest, and I want it clear that I most certainly am horrified at what we call "priestcraft".

I am so weird about it that I don't even declare all my donations on my taxes, since in my weird brain, to do so constitutes some renumeration for my church activities.

But certainly I am glad that you enjoy my posts!