Spiritual but not Religious

[MiserereNobis]

On 1/6/2024 at 3:11 PM, Stargazer said:

But monastic worship seems to me to come extremely close, if not land squarely on, the condemnation that Jesus gave when he taught what we call the Lord's Prayer:

"But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking."

The focus here is on the word “vain”

[mfbukowski]

12 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

The focus here is on the word “vain”

And how often is our sacrament prayer a " vain repitition?

(Asking LDS...)

And the rosary can be a very effective mantra in meditation

 

[mfbukowski]

51 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

So, Samuel Johnson steps on a Lego instead of kicking a rock 😂 Berkeley is refuted! 😁

There you go! 

I wonder how many get THAT reference!  I tried to make it more contemporary!👍👍

Edited January 9, 2024 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, MiserereNobis said:

Your poor wife 😁😉

I know!

But seriously she corrects ME all the time, using my own paradigms

She never had ONE class in philosophy and I read her my Rorty quotes ONCE and she totally got it!

Instantly! 

She's the only one I have ever seen do that!

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, MiserereNobis said:

Just to clarify from the Catholic point of view: this is NOT how Catholicism views the contemplative orders at all. The unceasing prayers and sacrifices (does anyone here want to live their life?) are for the benefit of all. 

Why do you say contemplative monks aren’t holy? Have you spent any time at a monastery?

I have, and you are right.  They spend time every day doing whatever the monastery does to make money, as serving God and humanity through labor. The "jobs" are dedications to the Lord, and usually just manual labor for folks who could be doctors or lawyers "in the world"!

It elevates the very act of "work" into another level we should all be attempting.  It becomes meditation 

@Stargazer

Edited January 9, 2024 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

On 1/6/2024 at 12:02 PM, Stargazer said:

I do understand that they had the idea that they thought they were serving God. Serving God is a noble thing, of course, but...

...does God profit from hearing endless prayers? Does God profit from the deliberate infliction of "punishment" upon oneself? Or from hiding away from the world to feel holy?

I apologize for my harshness, but what they saw themselves doing was not what they were doing. Does God want us to engage in a life of mendicancy and asceticism, a life of prayer? Not that I can tell. I can feel quite holy in myself, being satisfied with reading the scriptures and praying daily, but what of it? What good am I doing? If a sister in my ward phones me up to come to give her sick husband a blessing, do I serve God by delaying helping her in order to not interrupt my program of "Come Follow Me" study? I hope not.

I know some see charity in such efforts; I hope they feel inspired thereby.

But "serving man by serving God?" What service does God want or need? King Benjamin taught it the other way around, serving God by serving man: "...when ye are in the service of your fellow beings ye are only in the service of your God." (Mosiah 2:17)

Dear Calm, I am not arguing with you. I know those people of the past (and even of the present) hide or hid themselves away from the world as a consequence of apostasy, and it is difficult to cast blame upon them, because whose fault was it that they misunderstood? The Greek philosophers of the past believed that God was Spirit, and all material was imperfect, so they taught the Christians their false ideology. And it continues to this day.

Hey bro, verily thou havest not a clue!

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

"...when ye are in the service of your fellow beings ye are only in the service of your God." (Mosiah 2:17)

Error.

The above quote was actually from, and this is a reply to @Stargazer

See above

Bukow reply :

Yep.

That's what they do!

https://tasshin.com/blog/monastic-career-paths/

Edited January 9, 2024 by mfbukowski

[MiserereNobis]

7 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

I have, and you are right.  They spend time every day doing whatever the monastery does to make money, as serving God and humanity through labor. The "jobs" are dedications to the Lord, and usually just manual labor for folks who could be doctors or lawyers "in the world"!

It elevates the very act of "work" into another level we should all be attempting.  It becomes meditation 

@Stargazer

Laboratory = labor et ora = work and prayer 

[Stargazer]

10 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Just to clarify from the Catholic point of view: this is NOT how Catholicism views the contemplative orders at all. The unceasing prayers and sacrifices (does anyone here want to live their life?) are for the benefit of all. 

Why do you say contemplative monks aren’t holy? Have you spent any time at a monastery?

In being firm about the matter, I was worried that I might cause some offense to you, and if so I am sorry. But as much as I admire the ardor of those who closet themselves away from the world to meditate and so on, I don't believe that their contemplation is as beneficial as may be believed. If you've read what I've written on the topic so far, a life of contemplation may have its benefits, but I don't believe it answers the ends of what Heavenly Father created us for. 

I have not spent any time at a monastery, no. But having spent time contemplating and working in, for example, the London Temple, I imagine that it is similar to what one could feel in a monastery. In order to produce videos for my YouTube channel I frequently find myself in small English villages recording the sights. Virtually ever little village has its own little Anglican church, and they are almost always open so that visitors can come inside and pray and meditate. These churches are invariably many hundreds of years old, and a few I've found are over a thousand years old. I love wandering around inside them, and sitting in the pews letting the spiritual ambiance soak into my being. During the holiday season of 2022 my wife and I took a coach tour through central Europe. On Christmas day during the evening we walked around the village we were staying in at the time, and dropped into the little Catholic church in the center of the village. No services were being held at the time, and the lights were low. The air of reverence was awesome, and as we sat there in that beautiful chapel just feeling at peace my wife started singing Pie Jesu. I hadn't expected that and it really caused the tears to flow. Wenn sie singt, schweigen sich die Vögel.

I have found deep reverence in many places. What I have noticed is this: while many of these places are beautiful in form, and seem designed to lead one to contemplation, the common element in all of them is what I bring to the table. 

What is holiness? I think it means various things to various people. 

[Stargazer]

10 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Hey bro, verily thou havest not a clue!

You're entitled to your opinion.

[Stargazer]

10 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Error.

The above quote was actually from, and this is a reply to @Stargazer

See above

Bukow reply :

Yep.

That's what they do!

https://tasshin.com/blog/monastic-career-paths/

Yes, there are many monastic orders who do beneficial work in their communities, and I do believe that they serve God by serving His children. In my village, just down the street from our house, is a facility formerly known as the Towers Convent School. We can see the namesake towers from our front porch. It was operated as a school for young girls by the Sisters of the Blessed Sacrament for over a hundred years, until it had to close due to declining enrollment just a couple of years ago. The nuns still live on the grounds and work in the community. 

I applaud their efforts! I'm glad that these orders do these labors of love! 

But to deliberately avoid marriage and children is not, in my humble opinion, sufficiently compensated for by whatever monastic labors these dedicated folks perform. God did not send us into the world to be sterile. And these folks could just as well serve God by participating directly in what I consider the most noble order of all, which is the order of parenthood, and the order of providing mortal bodies for Father's children.

But I have a bigger beef with the contemplative orders who spend their time and efforts in various degrees of silence, song, prayer, and contemplation. I know some consider them holy. And I hope they themselves feel rewarded for what they do. But to shut themselves away from the world the way they do? I respect their right to do it. I just don't believe that is what God truly wants from them.

YMMV.

[pogi]

17 hours ago, Stargazer said:

It was new to us. It was apparently an unrevealed doctrine prior to this time. Or if it had previously been revealed, it had been lost. That's what "restoration" means, in case you missed the turn.

The reason I mentioned it is because you made the comment that despite not having the D&C, monastics have no excuse or "argument" for practicing because it was an eternal covenant.   That just doesn't make sense.  They have plenty of argument for practicing if they don't accept the D&C. 

17 hours ago, Stargazer said:

Of course, and they're entitled to their reasons/interpretations. But they are not entitled to their own special facts that are contrary to actual facts.

"There are no facts, only interpretations."  

17 hours ago, Stargazer said:

Their believers may feel they have valid reasons to justify their practices and beliefs, and they are entitled to those feelings, but in the end their beliefs that are contrary to the gospel of Jesus Christ are false. There is no way around it. 

I am glad that you acknowledge that they are entitled to those interpretations and feelings, because it sounded like you were arguing that they had no excuse for believing or practicing such things. 

And yes, there is a way around it.  It is called relativism.   Things that are contrary to teachings in our church can still be true for other people, perhaps even inspired by God.   Line upon line, precept upon precept.  Their paths may begin in different places as they build upon different precepts, different things may be true for them in their current condition and perspective.  They may evolve from there as new precepts are added to old lines.   Man's version of truth in mortality is limited and relative to an individual's perspective.  What may be true for us, may not be true for someone else, and vise versa - and that is the way God made it - otherwise there would be a lot more Mormons. 

17 hours ago, Stargazer said:

One problem I have with this outlook is that people devoting themselves in such ways to thinking tend to overthink things. St. Augustine is justly regarded as one of Western philosophy's most influential thinkers. There is much to admire in his writings. But at the same time he came up with some damaging ideas in regards to sexuality, original sin, infant baptism, and so on. If he had been a husband and a father, with a need to support a family, this may have prevented him from some of his excesses of thought which have led many astray.

People can be inspired in some ways and not in others.   Everything doesn't have to be so black and white/all or nothing. 

17 hours ago, Stargazer said:

When the Lord appeared to Joseph Smith in the Sacred Grove he asked which church he should join, and reported upon the answer he received: 

I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”

If the monasteries had been producing truth, instead of the philosophies of men with abominable creeds, then the Lord would not have said this. 

Again, this is very black and white, all or nothing thinking.  There are other ways to interpret these words, and they certainly don't mean that monasteries were not "producing" any truth.  Otherwise, why would Joseph encourage us to seek truth from them?

17 hours ago, Stargazer said:

On the other hand, and I know I am repeating myself, if the Lord approved of monasticism for its supposed benefit of producing great thinkers, then he would have had His church organize such institutions. 

Why do you believe this?  Where is it recorded that unique truths and beneficial ideas cannot be produced elsewhere, or that unique modes of creating great thinkers cannot be found outside the church?  The current church lacks much knowledge precisely because they don't teach/practice the same modes.  It is an entirely different perspective, and thus an entirely different experience, and thus entirely unique truth.  

17 hours ago, Stargazer said:

This is a straw man. I did not imply that there was nothing valuable outside our religion. 

You have said many different times and in different ways that if God approves of something then it would come through his church or prophets, otherwise what did you mean by "then he would have had His church organize such institutution" 

You also said - "If so, why hasn't God inspired his modern prophets to institute that mode of spiritual life, if it were so uniquely valuable?"

It sounds to me like you are clearly implying that if something is "uniquely valuable" then it would come through modern prophets.  What else would you mean by that?

17 hours ago, Stargazer said:

Again with the straw man. I said that plenty of deep thoughts and precious insights have been produced by men (and women) leading lives outside the monasteries, by which I meant to say that the monasteries are not needed in order to produce brilliant, valuable, and insightful thoughts. Because plenty of such thoughts have been produced outside them.

I don't buy it.   Experience precedes knowledge.  Experience is knowledge.  Unique experience produces unique knowledge.  That is why we all see things differently based on our individual perspectives.  The blind men and the elephant.  Relativism.  It is just the way things are.  Our unique experiences provide unique perspectives that others can't know in the same way. 

17 hours ago, Stargazer said:

I am surprised by your apparent claim that validity or truth of a matter is signaled by how many people follow it.

That's not what I am saying.  I am suggesting that very few people on earth even know about Mormonism, should we assume that God does not influence them in their lives at all?  That God is not directing them?  That God is not ok with the path that they are on currently?  Not to say that he doesn't have something more instore for them, but presently, he seems to be ok with things.   

17 hours ago, Stargazer said:

Finally, I am confident that even many of those confined in monasteries were inspired and directed by God within their sphere of knowledge.

This is what I have been trying to say this whole time, but you kept refuting me.  So now it seems we are just not understanding each other. 

17 hours ago, Stargazer said:

I've been trying to say that while many valuable works have been produced by men and women in monasteries, this does not confer validity upon the institution of monasticism.

You just literally stated that God may have directed some people to monasteries, how is that not a conference of validity?  Seriously?  It helps to think in terms of relativity and not think in terms of absolutes (which can't be known with certainty in mortality) and black and white thinking. 

17 hours ago, Stargazer said:

My objection to monasticism is that it is contrary to the purposes of God to hide oneself away from the world as a form of worship.

Yet, you admit that God inspires some to the monastic life?   If so, that doesn't seem contrary to the purposes of God to me. 

 

Edited January 9, 2024 by pogi

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Stargazer said:

But to shut themselves away from the world the way they do? I respect their right to do it. I just don't believe that is what God truly wants from them.

Contradictory.

[mfbukowski]

12 minutes ago, pogi said:

The reason I mentioned it is because you made the comment that despite not having the D&C, monastics have no excuse or "argument" for practicing because it was an eternal covenant.   That just doesn't make sense.  They have plenty of argument for practicing if they don't accept the D&C. 

"There are no facts, only interpretations."  

I am glad that you acknowledge that they are entitled to those interpretations and feelings, because it sounded like you were arguing that they had no excuse for believing or practicing such things. 

And yes, there is a way around it.  It is called relativism.   Things that are contrary to teachings in our church can still be true for other people, perhaps even inspired by God.   Line upon line, precept upon precept.  Their paths may begin in different places as they build upon different precepts, different things may be true for them in their current condition and perspective.  They may evolve from there as new precepts are added to old lines.   Man's version of truth in mortality is limited and relative to an individual's perspective.  What may be true for us, may not be true for someone else, and vise versa - and that is the way God made it - otherwise there would be a lot more Mormons. 

People can be inspired in some ways and not in others.   Everything doesn't have to be so black and white/all or nothing. 

Again, this is very black and white, all or nothing thinking.  There are other ways to interpret these words, and they certainly don't mean that monasteries were not "producing" any truth.  Otherwise, why would Joseph encourage us to seek truth from them?

Why do you believe this?  Where is it recorded that unique truths and beneficial ideas cannot be produced elsewhere, or that the current church lacks such knowledge precisely because they don't teach/practice it? 

You have said many different times and in different ways that if God approves of something then it would come through his church or prophets, otherwise what did you mean by "then he would have had His church organize such institutution" 

You also said - "If so, why hasn't God inspired his modern prophets to institute that mode of spiritual life, if it were so uniquely valuable?"

It sounds to me like you are clearly implying that if something is "uniquely valuable" then it would come through modern prophets.  What else would you mean by that?

I don't buy it.   Experience precedes knowledge.  Experience is knowledge.  Unique experience produces unique knowledge.  That is why we all see things differently based on our individual perspectives.  The blind men and the elephant.  Relativism.  It is just the way things are.  Our unique experiences provide unique perspectives that others can't know in the same way. 

That's not what I am saying.  I am suggesting that very few people on earth even know about Mormonism, should we assume that God does not influence them in their lives at all?  That God is not directing them?  That God is not ok with the path that they are on currently?  Not to say that he doesn't have something more instore for them, but presently, he seems to be ok with things.   

This is what I have been trying to say this whole time, but you kept refuting me.  So now it seems we are just not understanding each other. 

You just literally stated that God may have directed some people to monasteries, how is that not a conference of validity?  Seriously?  It helps to think in terms of relativity and not think in terms of absolutes (which can't be known with certainty in mortality) and black and white thinking. 

Yet, you admit that God inspires some to the monastic life?   If so, that doesn't seem contrary to the purposes of God to me. 

 

Blessed Bovine, and Holy Cow!

There are not enough emojis in the universe for this one!

👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Stargazer said:

You're entitled to your opinion.

U 2

..Next..

Edited January 9, 2024 by mfbukowski

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Stargazer said:

But having spent time contemplating and working in, for example, the London Temple, I imagine that it is similar to what one could feel in a monastery.

If so, then why do you see monastic life as not beneficial when the work they do while contemplating can be quite valuable even in mundane ways?

[Calm]

4 hours ago, Stargazer said:

God did not send us into the world to be sterile.

You believe in a one size fits all plan of salvation?  Are those who are single or childless by choice not being obedient to God in your view?  
 

What about those who are sterile?  If God does not want them to be, are they in limbo land as far as progression or being able to be obedient to the plan?  If those who are sterile not by choice can find ways to be spiritually obedient, why not those who by choice for no selfish reasons chose not to produce children…,perhaps they are carriers of a genetic disorder in the family that is highly common in manifesting and destructive most of the time it dies.  Or perhaps they have other issues, mental or physical which leads them to believe it is best not to have children…can God inspire them not to have children?

What if they believe they have been inspired to do so?  Do you believe they are lying to themselves about this?  What about someone like my sister who has no children, but cares for children and helps them have better lives by teaching?

Why couldn’t there be individuals that need more work in their spiritual development in order to progress and God could be inspiring them to seek out a monastic life to develop this part of their nature?  Or that God sent to earth to receive a body, but did not want them to become biological parents, but still help others in their own way and monastic life offered them a way to do this plus gave them a spiritual family for spiritual and physical and emotional needs.

Monasteries offered training and education for many at a time when outside such facilities many would have been attempting subsistence living.  Monasteries were also often where the poor went to get medical help.  Convents were where girls and women often went to for protection and were known for trying to help prostitutes leave that life, either through joining the convent or helping them get married.

 

 

Edited January 9, 2024 by Calm

[mfbukowski]

3 hours ago, Stargazer said:

I just don't believe that is what God truly wants from them.

Seriously? For THEM?

Can't you see that this is the basis of all religious wars in history?

How about Judaism vs Islam?

It's none of your business.

The very fact that you can know what God wants for others then is a logical contradiction.  You know better what works for them than they do.

What does that make you then?

Edited January 9, 2024 by mfbukowski

[BlueDreams]

On 1/8/2024 at 9:40 AM, Stargazer said:

I've read a lot about them. Obviously I haven't lived the kind of life that they represent. In that sense I do not understand them -- much in the same way that I cannot understand the life of slaves in the US South before the Civil War, and only know about them from reading. But I can still judge the matter from the understanding that I do have. 

There have been many forms of slavery throughout human history. Some of them have been less oppressive than others, but all have been bad. I can make that judgement, even though I've not been a slave, just as I can make a judgement about monasticism, having not lived that life. Sure some monastic practices were better than others, but monasticism in itself I judge to be bad.

This is comparing apples and oranges. well maybe poppy seeds and cyanide. As in poppy seeds (monasticism) can come from a plant with negative outcomes when used wrongly...but they also make tasty muffins. Cyanide (slavery) is overtly bad. It harms just about everyone and anyone with systems of exploitation an entitlement over people. Ironically it's slavery that's mentioned in the bible overtly and how to properly go about it if you're the slave or master. So it seems a little funny to compare the overt wrongness with a practice that was never fully condemned in the bible and given proper parameters (slavery) with a practice that's never overtly mentioned in the bible but has some good outcomes that even you are recognizing as you condemn it as a false practice. 

On 1/8/2024 at 9:40 AM, Stargazer said:

Yes, they served valuable functions in the circumstances in which they existed. It is good that they kept religious scholarship and other education alive in the dark ages. Freely admitted! 

But regardless, I still feel that monasticism is not a good thing. 

I'm well aware that men and women in past (and certainly present) monastic organizations have benefitted us, and probably continue to do so. And I am quite willing to grant that many and even most of those participating in these orders (and not just the Christian ones) are doing so out of a true commitment to God (or the Higher Being of their choice). And that is something that can be admired to a certain extent.

And despite any objection I express, I have great respect for the love and commitment these folks have demonstrated and continue to demonstrate.

But my beef with the Christian ones, at least, is that regardless of conviction and benefits to humanity, monasticism is a false tradition, and a perversion of Christ's teachings. And every single thing that the monasteries did that was positive, could have been done by men and women who were not shut up in monasteries. 

I'm a simple person. If there's fruits of the spirit showing in the practice, it must need be a good tree. There's good fruit that have come from many monastic practices...there must need be goodness in that tree. 

I'll give two side stories tied to this. When you mentioned you reminded me of my brother when he told me the full reasons why he converted to a more conservative christian sect. He told me he assumed that if I didn't change my beliefs in the church I was going to hell, because my faith was anchored in a fraudulent practice. Note, he felt icky saying it...but it was the only option he'd really been given in his newfound religious home. I asked him if he saw the fruits of the spirit in me after explaining what they are. He said yes. I then asked him how could I be exhibiting all the fruits of the spirit if I was going to hell. He said "huh" ...he was stumped. (He would later shift his assumptions a little to accommodate this problem without confronting the root of the problem that fueled said belief in the first place...but baby steps.) 

One more that I recently had. I went to Peru on vacation last year. There I went to two Catholic churches. One that has historical significance in cusco as it was built over an incan temple (fairly common story in the Americas and not the first time I'd seen such). The entire time I was there, I had a thick oppressive feeling that weighed on my chest to the point that I thought I would end up crying. It was completely dissonant to the circumstance, and I finally mentioned it to my husband who noted that the place was also the place incans were massacred. I left with a very sour, not fully formed thought of "how could anyone here be Catholic??" A while later, while walking to main walk in Lima I walked by a Catholic church that had begun service. I felt prompted to walk in, so I did.  There while sitting for a few minute I felt the spirit so strongly it reminded me of some of the strongest spiritual experiences I've had in my life. I took the message that, yes, horrible evil has been done in the name of this church, but that doesn't take away that there is good and comfort to be found here too. I don't think God wanted me to condemn a whole practice....no faith or institution would stand based on the litmus test of whether they've made grave errors in the past or held onto false or even evil traditions. I was reminded of Jacob 5 and how God in these last days is trimming off the bad as the good grows. 

The last is most recent. I have been deeply pondering the kingdoms of glory, wanting better understanding. This morning as I pondered d+c 131 again, the thought came to me again but more strongly: there's more than one way to be celestial. 

 

On 1/8/2024 at 9:40 AM, Stargazer said:

As evidence that monasticism is not a true principle of the Gospel, ask yourself whether Christ included monasticism as a principle of the restored Church of Jesus Christ. The answer to the question is "No." And as a consequence I can say without fear of contradiction that monasticism is an apostate practice in the Church of Jesus Christ, regardless of whatever benefits its practice might have provided.

Christ didn't include Yoga either, but I've found it a deep and meaningful practice that has helped me process my emotions and heal. I hear truths in the practice. Once recently I had a sacred experience with it, that helped me to release pent up emotion and enter better communion with God. I don't believe in some core concepts of Buddhism, Hinduism, or other beliefs that hold large space for meditative practices. I don't believe in core aspect of the creeds. But I also don't think that means they're all wrong or all right. For that matter I don't think we are all wrong or all right, I don't believe the restoration is finished, that there aren't good and beautiful practices in other faiths we could gleen from, or that having the restored gospel and priesthood means we have a monopoly of all good in the world. 

 

I can see the beauty that could happen in a monastic life/practice. I think there's something lovely about giving sacred purpose to lives that don't or shouldn't look like mine. I'm sure if I dug, there would be practices I find wrong, that I don't feel any form of spiritual confirmation to. But the experiences I have had in life make me loathe to wholesale condemn as apostate what you have. It just sounds dissonant to me to say, there's beautiful people, lives, and works that have come from said practice....and also it's a false practice that doesn't exemplify the ways of God. 

 

With luv, 

BD 

Edited January 10, 2024 by BlueDreams

[Tacenda]

2 hours ago, BlueDreams said:

This is comparing apples and oranges. well maybe poppy seeds and cyanide. As in poppy seeds (monasticism) can come from a plant with negative outcomes when used wrongly...but they also make tasty muffins. Cyanide (slavery) is overtly bad. It harms just about everyone and anyone with systems of exploitation an entitlement over people. Ironically it's slavery that's mentioned in the bible overtly and how to properly go about it if you're the slave or master. So it seems a little funny to compare the overt wrongness with a practice that was never fully condemned in the bible and given proper parameters (slavery) with a practice that's never overtly mentioned in the bible but has some good outcomes that even you are recognizing as you condemn it as a false practice. 

I'm a simple person. If there's fruits of the spirit showing in the practice, it must need be a good tree. There's good fruit that have come from many monastic practices...there must need be goodness in that tree. 

I'll give two side stories tied to this. When you mentioned you reminded me of my brother when he told me the full reasons why he converted to a more conservative christian sect. He told me he assumed that if I didn't change my beliefs in the church I was going to hell, because my faith was anchored in a fraudulent practice. Note, he felt icky saying it...but it was the only option he'd really been given in his newfound religious home. I asked him if he saw the fruits of the spirit in me after explaining what they are. He said yes. I then asked him how could I be exhibiting all the fruits of the spirit if I was going to hell. He said "huh" ...he was stumped. (He would later shift his assumptions a little to accommodate this problem without confronting the root of the problem that fueled said belief in the first place...but baby steps.) 

One more that I recently had. I went to Peru on vacation last year. There I went to two Catholic churches. One that has historical significance in cusco as it was built over an incan temple (fairly common story in the Americas and not the first time I'd seen such). The entire time I was there, I had a thick oppressive feeling that weighed on my chest to the point that I thought I would end up crying. It was completely dissonant to the circumstance, and I finally mentioned it to my husband who noted that the place was also the place incans were massacred. I left with a very sour, not fully formed thought of "how could anyone here be Catholic??" A while later, while walking to main walk in Lima I walked by a Catholic church that had begun service. I felt prompted to walk in, so I did.  There while sitting for a few minute I felt the spirit so strongly it reminded me of some of the strongest spiritual experiences I've had in my life. I took the message that, yes, horrible evil has been done in the name of this church, but that doesn't take away that there is good and comfort to be found here too. I don't think God wanted me to condemn a whole practice....no faith or institution would stand based on the litmus test of whether they've made grave errors in the past or held onto false or even evil traditions. I was reminded of Jacob 5 and how God in these last days is trimming off the bad as the food grows. 

The last is most recent. I have been deeply pondering the kingdoms of glory, wanting better understanding. This morning as I pondered d+c 131 again, the thought came to me again but more strongly: there's more than one way to be celestial. 

 

Christ didn't include Yoga either, but I've found it a deep and meaningful practice that has helped me process my emotions and heal. I hear truths in the practice. Once recently I had a sacred experience with it, that helped me to release pent up emotion and enter better communion with God. I don't believe in some core concepts of Buddhism, Hinduism, or other beliefs that hold large space for meditative practices. I don't believe in core aspect of the creeds. But I also don't think that means they're all wrong or all right. For that matter I don't think we are all wrong or all right, I don't believe the restoration is finished, that there aren't good and beautiful practices in other faiths we could gleen from, or that having the restored gospel and priesthood means we have a monopoly of all good in the world. 

 

I can see the beauty that could happen in a monastic life/practice. I think there's something lovely about giving sacred purpose to lives that don't or shouldn't look like mine. I'm sure if I dug, there would be practices I find wrong, that I don't feel any form of spiritual confirmation to. But the experiences I have had in life make me loathe to wholesale condemn as apostate what you have. It just sounds dissonant to me to say, there's beautiful people, lives, and works that have come from said practice....and also it's a false practice that doesn't exemplify the ways of God. 

 

With luv, 

BD 

Thanks for sharing BD, very insightful. Made me conclude that God/Jesus can't be put in a box, they are much bigger than that. 

[Stargazer]

On 1/9/2024 at 6:28 PM, pogi said:

The reason I mentioned it is because you made the comment that despite not having the D&C, monastics have no excuse or "argument" for practicing because it was an eternal covenant.   That just doesn't make sense.  They have plenty of argument for practicing if they don't accept the D&C. 

I perceive I'm going to be arguing about this for weeks if I try to answer all this.

Let me just say that "Yes, yes, I will concede that they don't accept the D&C." But so what?

Getting back to basics, just to make this simple, my contention is not based on the D&C. D&C supports my contention (because I'm talking to you, who presumably does accept the D&C), but nevermind about that. God's first commandment, which I will quote to you here, can be found in Genesis 1:27,28. In pertinent part it says:

"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth..."

Some will argue that God gave that commandment to Adam & Eve, and so only Adam & Eve are bound by it, while the rest of us can ignore it. And they are entitled to their opinions, even if they are wrong.

On the other hand, and just for the sake of being clear, it is my opinion that the commandment God gave in Genesis 1:27,28 was given to every one of A&E's descendants, because that's how He ensures that as many of His spirit children acquire bodies as possible, in order to fulfill His own purpose, which is to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of Man. Regardless of whether any given person believes that that is God's purpose, it is written. 

Monasticism requires that people deliberately refuse to procreate, which is directly counter to God's commandment to the progenitors of the human race, and is why I say it is not right for men and women to participate in it. Because it goes counter to God's command. That is my opinion, which appears to be abundantly supported by canonized scripture. Because we've been given agency, we're free to disobey and are not forced to do it, even though we are commanded.

Could there be exceptions, on a case by case basis? Perhaps there could be. 

On 1/9/2024 at 6:28 PM, pogi said:

"There are no facts, only interpretations."  

There are always interpretations, but they are not alone because facts exist in abundance. 

The rest of your very interesting and responsive post seems to be trying to answer things that I didn't say, but that you read into what I wrote. I will answer in this manner:

While I believe strongly that monasticism is an apostate practice (again because I believe strongly that God commanded men and women to marry and if possible have children), I would never try to claim that some of the people participating in it have not at least sometimes produced beneficial results for the community of man. I would never try to claim that people believing in and practicing religious faiths other than my own have not produced truths or beneficial results. 

And given that I am certain that God knows that what some of these organizations are doing are beneficial in some way, I don't see why He wouldn't lead some people to participate in them due to their needs, or the needs of others, because they are there. Monasteries exist. Churches other than His Church exist. It would be better for a person to join and participate in a church that is Christian but not His authorized Church on earth, if the alternative were for that person to dwindle in unbelief. And so on.

I am not trying to argue anything other than that I believe monasticism (especially Christian monasticism) is a practice that is counter to God's will, because it forbids marriage and children to its participants, which God's very first commandment commanded.  That is my main point.

But even though someone does not accept the D&C as the word of God, that does not make what God said in the D&C inapplicable. Ignorance abounds; that's the way of it. But this is what God told the Prophet Joseph Smith:

D&C 49:15-17 (emphasis added) - 

15 And again, verily I say unto you, that whoso forbiddeth to marry is not ordained of God, for marriage is ordained of God unto man.
16 Wherefore, it is lawful that he should have one wife, and they twain shall be one flesh, and all this that the earth might answer the end of its creation;
17 And that it might be filled with the measure of man, according to his creation before the world was made.

And again, if a person does not accept Joseph Smith as a prophet of God, then they will not necessarily accept those three verses from the D&C. Everyone is free to accept or reject as seemeth them good; but their rejection is immaterial, because the commandments of God are not negotiable in the end.

[Stargazer]

On 1/9/2024 at 6:38 PM, mfbukowski said:

Contradictory.

How so?

[mfbukowski]

42 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

How so?

You respect their right to believe in THEIR BELIEF of what God wants them to do, while asserting that YOUR belief of what God wants for THEM is correct.

You deny them their assertion of what is right by simply asserting yours

You have no better reason for your belief that they are wrong, than they have for believing they are right.

Either we have the right to believe our opinions are right for us, or we don't.

Yes, they are different, that's all

 

 

Edited January 12, 2024 by mfbukowski

[Stargazer]

On 1/10/2024 at 4:33 PM, BlueDreams said:

This is comparing apples and oranges. well maybe poppy seeds and cyanide. As in poppy seeds (monasticism) can come from a plant with negative outcomes when used wrongly...but they also make tasty muffins. Cyanide (slavery) is overtly bad. It harms just about everyone and anyone with systems of exploitation an entitlement over people. Ironically it's slavery that's mentioned in the bible overtly and how to properly go about it if you're the slave or master. So it seems a little funny to compare the overt wrongness with a practice that was never fully condemned in the bible and given proper parameters (slavery) with a practice that's never overtly mentioned in the bible but has some good outcomes that even you are recognizing as you condemn it as a false practice. 

You're right that it's comparing apples with oranges. I was hard-pressed to come up with something that expressed what I was thinking. That was the first thing that popped into my mind, and it was obviously quite inadequate.

On the other hand, it seems that God didn't think that slavery was outright evil, since as you say, He never fully condemned it. Not even in modern revelation. I'm sure you're familiar with D&C 134:12 <- although it must be said that this section was not a revelation per se, but presented by the leaders of the church for sustaining by the membership as a "We believe..." kind of thing. And I take it to have been permitted by the Lord for His people, who at the time had to deal with the real world as it was.

On 1/10/2024 at 4:33 PM, BlueDreams said:

I'm a simple person. If there's fruits of the spirit showing in the practice, it must need be a good tree. There's good fruit that have come from many monastic practices...there must need be goodness in that tree. 

You have to be careful of simplicity, for in some cases it can lead you down paths that are not beneficial. I am tempted to ask what good fruit you believe has come from any monastic practices that couldn't have come outside of those practices, but in asking that I would be going astray from my main point. My main point in respect of monasticism (which applies equally well to non-monastic celibacy) is that monastic practice in its essential is counter to God's command to marry and have children. 

As I was trying to tell pogi, there might well be good things that come out of the monastic life, but that does not cancel out God's commands, specifically God's first commandment to Adam and Eve.

On 1/10/2024 at 4:33 PM, BlueDreams said:

I'll give two side stories tied to this. When you mentioned you reminded me of my brother when he told me the full reasons why he converted to a more conservative christian sect. He told me he assumed that if I didn't change my beliefs in the church I was going to hell, because my faith was anchored in a fraudulent practice. Note, he felt icky saying it...but it was the only option he'd really been given in his newfound religious home. I asked him if he saw the fruits of the spirit in me after explaining what they are. He said yes. I then asked him how could I be exhibiting all the fruits of the spirit if I was going to hell. He said "huh" ...he was stumped. (He would later shift his assumptions a little to accommodate this problem without confronting the root of the problem that fueled said belief in the first place...but baby steps.) 

One more that I recently had. I went to Peru on vacation last year. There I went to two Catholic churches. One that has historical significance in cusco as it was built over an incan temple (fairly common story in the Americas and not the first time I'd seen such). The entire time I was there, I had a thick oppressive feeling that weighed on my chest to the point that I thought I would end up crying. It was completely dissonant to the circumstance, and I finally mentioned it to my husband who noted that the place was also the place incans were massacred. I left with a very sour, not fully formed thought of "how could anyone here be Catholic??" A while later, while walking to main walk in Lima I walked by a Catholic church that had begun service. I felt prompted to walk in, so I did.  There while sitting for a few minute I felt the spirit so strongly it reminded me of some of the strongest spiritual experiences I've had in my life. I took the message that, yes, horrible evil has been done in the name of this church, but that doesn't take away that there is good and comfort to be found here too. I don't think God wanted me to condemn a whole practice....no faith or institution would stand based on the litmus test of whether they've made grave errors in the past or held onto false or even evil traditions. I was reminded of Jacob 5 and how God in these last days is trimming off the bad as the good grows. 

If you've read some of what I have written previously around this subject, you will have read that I have had beautiful spiritual experiences in both Catholic and Anglican churches. I especially reference the experience my wife and I had in a little Catholic church in an Austrian village on Christmas day. 

But I know very well that much of what I got out of those church buildings was directly influenced by what I brought into them, which was a reverent attitude and love for God. I am well aware that people who do not have such attitudes or love may not have anything like the experiences I have had.

On 1/10/2024 at 4:33 PM, BlueDreams said:

The last is most recent. I have been deeply pondering the kingdoms of glory, wanting better understanding. This morning as I pondered d+c 131 again, the thought came to me again but more strongly: there's more than one way to be celestial. 

Indeed. There will be some who come to the Celestial Kingdom in the two lower degrees and they will be as immeasurably happy as those in the highest. I think we all attain to the Kingdom where we are most comfortable, and for everyone of us the joy will be as full as it can be, nothing wanting.

On 1/10/2024 at 4:33 PM, BlueDreams said:

Christ didn't include Yoga either, but I've found it a deep and meaningful practice that has helped me process my emotions and heal. I hear truths in the practice. Once recently I had a sacred experience with it, that helped me to release pent up emotion and enter better communion with God. I don't believe in some core concepts of Buddhism, Hinduism, or other beliefs that hold large space for meditative practices. I don't believe in core aspect of the creeds. But I also don't think that means they're all wrong or all right. For that matter I don't think we are all wrong or all right, I don't believe the restoration is finished, that there aren't good and beautiful practices in other faiths we could gleen from, or that having the restored gospel and priesthood means we have a monopoly of all good in the world. 

@pogi has mentioned his positive experiences with the teachings of the Benedictine monk, Laurence Freeman. I bought the Kindle version of Freeman's book, "Christian Meditation: Your Daily Practice," and have been reading it. It's pretty short, but as an ADHD kid I tend to bounce around a lot before I finish things. Freeman definitely has his head screwed on straight, and while my meditation doesn't greatly take the shape of what he tries to teach, I find what he says to be quite beneficial. I don't do mantras, though. They cause me to get in the way of my own brain -- probably because I have a touch of OCD.

On 1/10/2024 at 4:33 PM, BlueDreams said:

I can see the beauty that could happen in a monastic life/practice. I think there's something lovely about giving sacred purpose to lives that don't or shouldn't look like mine. I'm sure if I dug, there would be practices I find wrong, that I don't feel any form of spiritual confirmation to. But the experiences I have had in life make me loathe to wholesale condemn as apostate what you have. It just sounds dissonant to me to say, there's beautiful people, lives, and works that have come from said practice....and also it's a false practice that doesn't exemplify the ways of God. 

For all that I criticize it, quite justifiedly I believe, I feel that you are right that they may be beauty that could happen in it. 

I'm probably expressing myself wrong, and I may be being too harsh, but I'm not condemning the practice, merely saying that it violates God's commandment. And the word apostate does not necessarily mean evil. It comes from a Greek word for "revolt" or "defection." And it applies to monasticism due to its practice of forbidding to marry, which revolts or defects from God's command in the respect of marriage and child-bearing. 

And this reminds me of something Elder Oaks said in General Conference back in 2007:

"We should begin by recognizing the reality that just because something is good is not a sufficient reason for doing it." - Good, Better, Best.

 

[Stargazer]

32 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

You respect their right to believe in THEIR BELIEF of what God wants them to do, while asserting that YOUR belief of what God wants for THEM is correct.

You deny them their assertion of what is right by simply asserting yours

You have no better reason for your belief that they are wrong, than they have for believing they are right.

Either we have the right to believe our opinions are right for us, or we don't.

Yes, they are different, that's all

Yes, they are different. But there are absolutes, are there not? Just because someone believes a lie, does not make their lie the truth. And I don't deny them their assertion of what is right. They can assert everything they want. Who am I to forbid them?

But there are sometimes two things that cannot both be right at the same time. I've seen flat-earthers who are absolutely convinced the earth is flat. They're allowed the believe it, and allowed to assert it. But they are wrong. And while it's a difference of opinion, it's not just a difference of opinion.

Unless we truly live in The Matrix, in which case it doesn't matter.