[cwald]

MH – just spent an hour and read all the links. Great stuff. I like the Malay idea you posted on mormonmatters. Something about it just works for me – I probably need to dig into further.

Thanks for the info

[cwald]

George wrote:

…I told them of my mission, very labor intensive, with Navajo families half a century ago. We spent most of our time; burying the death, getting the sick to hospitals (two companions delivered babies), helping with crops, cattle & sheep. We attended rodeos, since if there was one within fifty miles, every hogan was empty & the athletic loving Navajos were in attendance at the same. The missionaries both lamented they would have loved to serve such a mission. Times change though, in business it’s called “Institutionalization.” I also told them we ran the scout troops, taught dancing & swimming to our branch kids. Our mission president was a Arizona rancher (obviously), and one of a kind as to rules. They were green with envy. By the way, I never knew a missionary who went home early.

I’m green with envy. I spent two years in the ghettos of Brooklyn – literally went 11 months in one area that covered 16 by 8 blocks. Perhaps we should start a thread and tell horror stories of the missionfield.

That temple in the “skyscraper” in New York City was a chapel/visitor center when I was there. The building and property is worth hundreds of millions of dollars – if not in the billions, sits right there on Columbus Circle. I think there was a great deal of politics and PR involved — and it probably worked. Pretty interesting to drive down Broadway street and see the angel Moroni among all the billboards and lights. The proximity to a temple never did, has not, and will not be a factor in how often I attend. I don’t know, perhaps Ray is correct that it is just that simple that they want the temples closer to members. Perhaps. My cynicism rarely allows me to view things like that.

Old-Timer wrote:

I ask that very seriously. Why can’t it be that simple?

I guess it could be, it very well could be, but people like us just won’t accept it until we have hashed it to death and made up our own minds. Thanks for the website where we can do so.

[cwald]

Thanks for the maps – I have browse your links, and am looking forward to reading it more thoroughly when I get some time. Very interesting theories. Now if we could just find some EVIDENCE. The lack of any substantial archeological evidence is aggravating to me.

[cwald]

Thanks for the info and the link — when I get a name of the archeologist or more details I will let you know.

[cwald]

Interesting history lesson, and I would agree that white shirt and suit has become what it was originally intended to replace. There was a lot of discussion recently about “white shirts” titled The Unwritten Order of Things which is located just a few topics below this one.

[cwald]

I’ve heard this argument about the boys getting more money and more attention for a long time. AND from my experience, right or wrong, yeah – they do. Interesting, I read in the MormonTimes paper that comes with the Church News just two months ago, a lady complaining about it. The response she quoted from the bishop was, “a boy can learn more sitting around one campfire, than a hundred meetings sitting in a hard-backed chair.” I would say this is generally correct – at least it is in my case. This lady then goes on to say that she got called to be a cub scout leader — and her whole position changed, and she now understands “why.”

Here in Oregon, In our Stake, the church runs the scouting program. We have a scout troop in our branch. 80% of it is made up of non-members, and the scoutmaster is a non-member who got the “calling” from the Branch President. We fund it – with some help from the local Community Church, and we recruit all the merit badge councilors. We do all the paperwork etc and the camps and merit badge fairs/work are all organized under the direction of the Stake YMP. I think that is the way it’s done throughout the states?

I know Pres. Monson was a huge supporter of the scouting program, Hinkley – not so much. I heard someone say that Monson gave a talk where he said in effect that “we are going to have a young men program. We can either do all the work ourselves, or we can team up with the Boy Scouts of America to do the lion share for us”…so I doubt thing will change anytime soon.

Don’t know if it’s right or not, but that is the way it works here.

[cwald]

Interesting comments and quotes

I have held a temple recommend off and on for – well forever – but I haven’t attended the temple in twelve years. It just doesn’t work for me. Part of the problem is I cannot answer those questions the way I was taught my whole life – and I have struggled to rid myself of that guilt. Yes, this site has certainly helped with that dilema, and i think I will be able to go back soon – but I still struggle attending. It almost seems disrespecful to me—I know and love some of those people who have bought into the whole system 100%, and they know I have not. Some of those people would consider my attending to be a mockery. 😳

I am in quite a conundrum. I have to keep a recommend – to keep my church callings – to keep the branch “functional” and have a place to partake of the sacrament (which I wholehearted believe in) – so my wife and three kids (10, 12, 14 year olds) will have the benefits/blessings of church association that I was fortunate to have growing up. I do get grilled often about it – why I don’t go if I hold a TR. I like what Brain said earlier. “Temple attendance is not mandatory” – even if holding a recommend sometimes is.

[cwald]

Rix wrote:

…the most important thing we can communicate to our children is that we love them unconditionally. No matter what…There will always be conflicting advice given by leaders, and they will make mistakes. But the most helpful thing we can do is to be there to hug them and let them cry on our shoulders when they need to.

“Amen brother” — wouldn’t it be nice if they would add that statement to the FTSOY pamphlet.

[cwald]

Euhemerus wrote:

I recognize I’m outside the norm, but I would love to see someone wearing a cross to church. Like nightwalden, I would be curious and want to know more!

I started wearing a cross last Fall, around Halloween time, and continue to do so – and I don’t take it off when I go to church either. I don’t “flaunt it”, but members have seen it on occasion. I started wearing it after the YW Pres. grilled my 13 year old daughter as to why she was wearing a cross necklace. (She received it as a “moving away” gift from her close catholic friend). My kid went home from church that day pretty upset. The whole incident stuck in my craw. Anyway, I’ve been asked by several members, “why?” I get very serious when they ask and say in a concerned voice, “protection from vampires of course.”

[cwald]

hawkgrrrl wrote:

Quote:

if anyone wanted my opinion, I’d recommend that we focus on the practical value of church membership,

Exactly —- this is why I was so torn about staying or leaving the church. I believe I could have found the spiritual aspects on my own – but I wanted my kids to have the practical advantages that church membership has given me. SL is certainly moving this direction, especially just in the last few years, and I’m grateful for it.

[cwald]

hawkgrrrl wrote:

Quote:

it was determined that since the “ox was in the mire” that I could go ahead and bless the sacrament that week.

Hah! Of course, you know the phrase “ox in the mire” is a Mormon euphemism that actually doesn’t occur in the scriptures. The real expression is “ox or ass in a pit,” which is why always say “Well, our ass was in a pit, so we had to . . . ” Here’s the actual quote:

Quote:

Luke 14: 5 And answered them, saying, Which of you shall have an ass or an ox fallen into a pit, and will not straightway pull him out on the sabbath day?

Great! That is hilarious. I’ll be sure to correct “the brethern” the next time they “misuse” the phrase – hopefully during priesthood meeting 😆 😆 .

[cwald]

abacus wrote:

Likewise, this talk has always bothered me. I actually think it might be the most significant factor contributing to what I view as an oppressive culture in the church, and it overnight it seemed to morph cultural traditions into quasi-official church policy. Elder Packer certainly knew the effect the talk would have when he gave it, and this concept of complete compliance seems perhaps to be the governing mission in his life. I don’t believe it’s been healthy for the church…

It would certainly make it easier for me if the church would take a more liberal stance toward things like this and focus instead on some of the basic doctrines, like the ones taught by Jesus. Quite honestly the “white shirt issue” exposes an attitude of intolerance within the church – particularly among church leaders – that has been a major catalyst for my personal faith crisis. Not THE issue, but definitely one of them, and I can’t imagine I’m alone in feeling this way.

No you are not. Two months or so ago, I was wearing a Khaki at church. The first councilor came up to me and told me he was going to ask me to bless the sacrament, but I couldn’t do it because I didn’t have a white shirt on. I told him that was fine, but if you change your mind, let me know. As things turned out, I was the only Elder that showed up that week, and the only other two folks with the MP were the 1st and 2nd councilors. It took some convincing from the second councilor, they were in the office for 10 minutes debating, but in the end it was determined that since the “ox was in the mire” that I could go ahead and bless the sacrament that week.

[cwald]

swimordie wrote:

I watched this talk when Bruce posted it, too. It’s stunningly refreshing!!

I keep two documents in my church briefcase, which I read regularly before going to church and/or church meeting. One is this talk by Poelman. Great talk. And the other one is, no surprise, How to Stay in the LDS Church After a Major Challenge to Your Faith

I say this truthfully and honestly — when I finally reached the point where I felt I had no choice but to leave the church, and that I was the only normal LDS person left on the planet, I stumbled across these two documents — these two documents kept me from making that disastrous mistake of leaving the church.

You want to talk about answers to prayers and receiving personal revelation. There you have it. Now wouldn’t that be funny, tell my ecclesiastical authorities that god answered my prayers by sending me here, not to their office! 😯 Nah, probably won’t do that. What good could come from it.

[cwald]

Interesting. I really haven’t heard that particular medical opinion, but it certainly makes sense and is logical. I voted for it just because it makes sense from humanitarian standpoint.

Quote:

One could also conclude that there might have been MORE faith; ie, they might have believed that a mracle was possible.

Yeah, okay, I guess that makes sense in a fanatical kind of way. When I discuss this issue using logic, I may be tearing and chipping away at the orthodox mormon’s faith?

[cwald]

Whoa! What have I got myself into here? 😯

Nah, it’s all good. Nice to be able to discuss these issues without offending and threatening others faith and beliefs – burning bridges. Very refreshing.

Quote:

…what we have “faith” in is what we either have seen work before, or believe the person/group is credible enough that we will believe them.

Yeah, I just don’t believe you have to have truth in order to have faith. It is all about how you define the word “faith”.

Quote:

Now I’m going to say something here that many might cringe at. I was involved in a research project here in Utah about 10 years ago to determine appropriate end of life care. (There was a reason it was commisioned through the medical licensing board…that I won’t bore you all with). To the amazement of many, there was a significant problem with the LDS families letting their dying spouses/parents “go.” IOW, they (we) have a tough time pulling the plug even when there is no quality of life remaining. Some might call this a lack of faith…ironic for many who consider them “faithful.”

This has never made sense to me why this is such a huge issue within the church with the widely accepted belief system we have on “eternity” and the “eternal family”. In Oregon, the voters approved a “Death with Dignity” law a couple years back, and I thought it was a pretty easy vote to cast…even though I heard differently over the podium. Perhaps you are correct…”some might call this a lack of faith”.

Quote:

I have analyzed the meaning of this, and have my own opinion as to why it is. In a nutshell, I think “we” often say we have faith, but we really don’t. It is something that starts in our youth…to say “we know the church is true,” etc…when we don’t even know what it means. But we are rewarded for the statement — parents bathe us with praise and love, so we learn what to say — even as we get older — to get the attention and acceptance we want. When it comes down to it, we never have to challenge our own words…and live life as others have trained us to live.

Mormons are not alone…in fact there are examples like this in all religious philosophies I’ve studied. We are a tribe. We have our own system of survival — including emotional — that we have learned to live within. Uniformly, we are accepted by most (in our tribe) when we say the right things, so we conclude those “right things” are correct for everybody. Sometimes we also interpret that acceptance as a spiritual experience…

That is VERY, VERY well said. I love the philosophy faith chatter, but to me, and in my current situation within the church, this quote hits the nail on head. thank you.

[Author]

Posts