Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
When we had my son’s baptismal interview, they essentially invited me, my wife, and all our kids in from the get go. I was glad that I didn’t have to worry about trying to force my way in. Angel333, I totally understand your position. I wouldn’t have gone to church either. It’s important to me to obey the law, and if the government says to stay off the roads, I’ll stay off the roads. For the same reason, if same sex marriage is legalized, I will uphold and support that law as well regardless of the opinions of my local leaders. I don’t understand the mentality of people who will take a local bishop’s word over the law of the country I’m living in. On the other hand, I think a lot of people view driving and traffic laws as pretty bendable. Virtually everyone ignores speed limit laws, and getting a traffic ticket is seen as a minor offense at worst. I think that may be part of what makes a lot of people feel like the injunction to stay off the roads can be ignored. I’m sorry that some of the replies here didn’t feel supportive to you. When I made my first post on this forum, I was actually pretty mad about some of the replies for a while, for exactly the reason you mentioned. I didn’t feel like some people were really listening to me and sympathizing with my point of view. One of the people I was annoyed at was Curtis (hi, Curtis!) because his first response to my post felt pretty abrupt. I’ve since learned that’s part of his manner—he can be a bit blunt. But I’ve also learned that he’s an extremely caring and accepting individual, and I’ve learned to really value his input here. As DarkJedi and a few other have pointed out, we are all different, and everyone has different opinions and priorities—that’s actually one of the values of this forum. Because we’re all different and there’s no one right answer, what we often do on this forum is offer our own take on the original post, whether it’s in agreement or not. Overall, I’ve found that I really value hearing the different range of opinions, because it helps me understand that there’s not just one way of looking at a problem, and there are many possible choices for me out there. I’m really sorry if our replies weren’t supportive to you. I’m sure that wasn’t anyone’s intention, and I hope you stick around.
Oneofmany wrote:DarkJedi wrote:Any way to stop the same people answering the same questions every month?
Back when I was more TBM, I used to throw out what I thought were crazy answers or questions just to see if I could get others to comment. Unfortunately, I failed 95% of the time. I even tried answering all the question and reading all the scriptures in one SS class one sunday, just to see if I could… one person volunteered to read one scripture before I could… I guess my question is how do you get people to speak up. I have since stopped speaking up unless it is obvious to me that no one else will and I start to feel sorry for the teacher. To me it is obvious you have to create and and promote an environment where they feel comfortable speaking up, but, how do you do that?
DarkJedi wrote:I never said that, and probably because I know the answer. I’m just not sure that’s the question.
It was SamBee who said that, not DarkJedi. Be careful with your quotes.
This talk is almost two years old. I would really like to see what has happened in this stake over that time and find out how this councilor is doing. James E. Talmage wrote:Yet revelation is not given to save man from self effort; if he want knowledge let him ask of God, and prove himself worthy of the desired gift by his own faithful search. Such are the teachings of our Church. The leaders amongst us, those who are acknowledged as prophets and revelators to the people, are not heard in authoritative denunciation of the teachings of science. Yet under the freedom allowed by our liberal Church organization the lay speaker is prone to indulge in unguarded criticism, and the undiscriminating hearer is apt to regard such as the teachings of the Church. The scientist in his self-denying earnest labors is a true child of God; as he is strengthened spiritually will his work be the better. The scientific spirit is divine.
The Methods and Motives of Science, by Dr. James E. Talmage, Professor of Geology at the University of Utah. This address was delivered in the Logan Temple about 12 years before he became an apostle.
I’m a flaming introvert too. Have you heard of Susan Cain? Her book Quiet totally changed the way I look at myself. I highly recommend it to all introverts and anyone who knows an introvert (basically everyone). Momof3 wrote:Fortunately we were able to begin working through some things after I got back — he is willing to continue attending church with me and the kids, and probably baptized the kids. We had some disagreement over how he would follow some other Mormon practices, such as wearing garments, because I wanted to hide his unbelief from the kids until they were older.
My wife and I have been talking about this kind of thing for a while now. Right now I consider myself agnostic, while she is a true believer. She wanted me to baptize our son who just turned eight, but I didn’t feel comfortable with it. Then I found this site and realized that there is a way to navigate the muddy middle waters. So far this is what we’ve decided together: I will continue attending church and helping with the kids as much as I can. The kids will be doing all the normal churchy stuff that Mormon kids do, and yes they will be “indoctrinated” with many ideas in that process. We still read scriptures and have family prayer every day (I even take my turn, but I’m careful about what I say and how I say it in my prayers). The way I see it, I was really happy as a kid growing up in the church, and so was my wife. She is still very happy in the church herself, and I don’t see any use in trying to soil any of that. Our marriage is the most important thing, and our happiness as a family is paramount. I can go along with a lot of things I don’t believe or necessarily agree with in pursuit of that goal.On a personal level, I will be very careful about what I personally teach my kids. For now, they are young (ages 8, 6, 5, 2, and almost 1), and many of the literal teachings of the church are what make the most sense to them. As they get older, I will be able to start nudging them into more thoughtful and nuanced views—or at least to open the possibilities to them, if they want to pursue them. I can also teach strong values as a family that will support a less literal and more open faith for them—things like the Golden Rule and how it’s used in many other religions, the importance of free agency, the importance of thinking for one’s self, the idea that church leaders can make mistakes while still being good people, the idea of symbolism, and the high importance of supporting, loving, and accepting each other as family members no matter what. Teaching kids about some of the rocky areas of church history while younger is also on the agenda (from what I’ve seen that makes for stronger foundations and less chance of horrifying and faith-shattering feelings of betrayal later on). For now I will not be telling them anything about my personal doubts or my beliefs that might contradict the church. I don’t think they are old enough to understand the full importance of what that might mean. And I think that to give them a real chance at faith, it needs to be taught pretty strongly in the home while they are young. When they get older, maybe in their teenage years, and only as they seem ready and/or desirous to hear such things, I feel that I will be able to tell them that I don’t know everything, that I’m not sure we can know, but that faith is a valid choice and I will support them no matter what. That’s the idea, anyway. My ideas are still forming and changing all the time.
I hope that helps. I’ve found that one of the best things about this site is the wide range of views. Just hearing all the diversity helps me focus in on what feels right to me and what doesn’t, and it opens me up to ideas and solutions I would never have thought of otherwise. You’re definitely not alone in your troubles, and I believe there will be a way forward for you. I hope we can help you find it.
Edit: About wearing garments, most kids have no idea what the significance of garments is unless it’s been specifically pointed out to them. I haven’t worn garments for years, while my wife has always worn hers. My kids have never noticed or cared what kind of underwear we wear. So it might not be as big of an issue as you fear.
The idea of the different kingdoms being a spiritual separation makes a lot of sense to me. Kind of like here on earth, we’re all here together and we can visit each other whenever we want. But only temple recommend holders get to be in the temple (God’s presence). In fact, for the most part only those who WANT to be there will go there anyway. I have often heard that hell is more of a state than a place—a state of guilt and pain where the thought of being in God’s presence makes one shrink way. So maybe the afterlife doesn’t have any physical walls at all—the only barriers will be those created by our own desires and knowledge. Not sure what I really think about all that, but it’s good to consider. Like Roadrunner and DarkJedi, I feel there’s so little that’s concrete about the afterlife and so much contradiction in what we supposedly do know that it’s almost pointless to speculate, and that makes it hard for me to be motivated by so-called eternal rewards when I can hardly understand them in the first place. I can see how a concrete, physical separation or togetherness in the afterlife makes it easier to motivate people and make the purpose of their lives seem clearer. But it doesn’t hold up very well under deep scrutiny. It does make me start to feel like all the ordinances don’t matter as long as you are living with love.
Curtis wrote:Don’t try to reconcile many of my views with a typical traditionalist view. It can’t be done.
Haha. I love that about you. I guess my goal is to try to figure out an explanation that I can understand and get behind AND my wife can understand and get behind AND that I can explain to her in a way that makes sense. Maybe I’m trying too hard though. My wife has actually surprised me several times with her views and her acceptance of my views.On Own Now wrote:I think it is a great idea to go to the temple to be sealed with your wife as a way of committing to each other.
However, I would recommend being very careful not to set aside “authenticity” toward her. If she believes that you are finally “coming around” or seeing the light or finding God, or whatever and that is not the case then you will be doing both yourself, and more importantly her, a disservice. You’ll be setting both of you up for a fall. Look, I’m no marriage counselor. But I firmly believe that both partners in a marriage have to accept each other for who they really are and for who they really are as a couple together. You have to be totally and completely in love with her even though she is a faithful member. On the flip side, she has to be just as much in love with you even though your faith is different from hers. In marriage, pretending to be something we are not, is condescending, unfair, and unfaithful. In my own case, years after my FC, my wife and I were talking about it, which until then had been a rarity. I was really surprised to learn that she had a wrong view of my situation. To hear her describe it to me made me sad, because I realized that I had inadvertently left her clinging to hopes that were never going to be realized. I’m so sorry that I did that, and I wish I could go back and undo it. My wife is my biggest ally. I mistreated her by stringing her along.
I think the best approach is to be a straight-shooter. I’d recommend sitting down together and having a conversation between the two of you to get the topic on the table. I would recommend being honest that there are some things you do believe, but some you don’t and some you are not sure about, but there is one thing you know above everything else, and that is your love for her and your desire to be with her as long as possible.
Thinking about my own wife and me, if we hadn’t been sealed in the Temple, but she wanted to, I’m fairly certain I’d approach it from the standpoint that sealing in the Temple would be wonderful for us, but that we would both have to understand that my faith isn’t changing, that I could go for US, but not for the Church. I would use phrasing like I want US to be sealed for US, and I would stay away from I want to do this for YOU. I’d let her know that I would like for us to go forward to be sealed with that understanding, and ask how she would feel about it. This can’t be a “talking to”… it has to be something that you come to together. Part of what I’d want to talk through, though, is that I would want it to be a private thing; just the two of us, because I wouldn’t want to set up inauthentic expectations with family and friends. As long as we are both OK, then great… let’s work toward it.
OON, I really appreciate your thoughts. I have had a similar experience with my wife. We had “the big talk” about 8 months ago, when I finally admitted to her that I did not see myself ever returning fully to the church. That was really hard for her to hear, but it had to be said. As our son’s baptism approached, we were forced to talk more often about things that I had been avoiding. I found out that she had thought that maybe I was just being lazy, that maybe my lack of faith was because I hadn’t tried hard enough when the challenges came. I also found out that as hard as it is for her to hear some of my views, she absolutely hates the idea of not talking about it—of not knowing what I’m thinking and feeling. Since we’ve been talking about it more often, we have a much better understanding of each other now.As I’ve spent more time thinking and searching, and since I found this forum, I’ve suddenly realized that there may be more possibilities than I imagined 8 months ago. I have expressed to her that I am starting to feel open to the idea of going to the temple, but I am not promising anything and I’m not sure it will ever happen. I wouldn’t want to do it if I can’t feel I’m being honest to her, to my bishop, and to myself. My wife has said that she recognizes that going to the temple could potentially be a big sacrifice for me, and she totally respects that and actually thinks it would be honorable even if I’m only doing it for my family.
I suspect that she might still feel like there’s a chance for me to gain a traditional testimony if I do it, because I’ll be testing the word, so to speak. I don’t really see it happening, but who really knows? I’ve never had what I could say was a real spiritual experience without qualifications, and even if I did have one I’m not sure it would survive my skepticism. And I’ve told her that too. So part of this is looking for ways to maybe blunt the impact if I eventually can’t get myself to a place where I feel comfortable going to the temple after all.
You definitely have a higher level of both caring and courage than I. Your story has given me reason to try to be better, and that quote from Brigham Young is going in my permanent file (do you know the source?). Thanks so much for sharing. I appreciate all the advice to go to the temple. I am trying to get my engine chugging that direction. I want badly to do this for my wife—but if it’s at the expense of my own authenticity, I’m not sure if it’s a great tradeoff. I’m working on the authenticity part. Curtis wrote:I am on a device where it is impossible for me to cut and paste, so go to my blog and read the current post. I wrote
And posted it before reading your post here, and it is about this topic. (Click on my name to go there.)
I actually read your blog post before posting this. I believe I understand your take on sealing, and it makes sense to me. But I had trouble how your explanation really connects with the typical TBM perspective.mercyngrace wrote:The ordinance is symbolic, like everything else in the temple, and designed to teach principles which will lead to the state of being “sealed” (i.e. reconciled, at-one, unified). The sealing ordinance is the culmination of the endowment. In other words, the principles which make any sealing effective are priesthood – not the authority but the power, as described in the latter part of D&C 121.
Some people take the ordinance as literally binding. I don’t see that as theologically sound simply because there are sealed marriages in which the principles of priesthood are not practiced. I don’t see the cancellation of a sealing as anything more than a comforting symbolic act for the same reason. We gravitate toward those with whom we have cultivated certain relationships. According the Mormonism, virtue cleaves to virtue, etc. and the same sociality exists between us here as exists on the other side.
My experience is that charity and virtue bind us. The ordinance is what we hang our hopes on while we struggle through life learning to be charitable and virtuous.
Thank you for this! It spoke to me and helped me understand something I should have known but hadn’t ever quite made explicit in my own mind, which is that sealing is just a physical representation of something that is truly in your heart—just like baptism and conversion to Christ itself. I don’t believe that a couple that has been sealed in the temple but then lacks mutual respect, or actively harms one another, is truly sealed in the hereafter. It follows that a couple that does have mutual respect and love are cleaving unto one another and forming a bond (a sealing) that ought to continue in the hereafter. The ordinance itself can always be performed by proxy.I think the more troubling idea is that my lack of belief might keep me out despite anything else we do.
I’ve never spent much time on Reddit, but I know they call themselves Redditors. I lean towards him just being a pompous jerk. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I’m not sure I would ever have come to any of these ideas on my own, but I love them. Thanks so much for sharing your ideas. Unknown wrote:Only recently have I begun to look at it as a poetic expression, with the celestial room being the sanctuary of our mind/soul and guarding the veil of our mind from self defeating thoughts and attitudes with the same vigilance that Angels of God would guard heaven, only allowing in that which has committed to consecration.
…
I have come to see the endowment, and all the ordinances, not as requirements for a future exaltation, but as a powerful metaphor for growth, and even enlightenment. It is interesting to imagine each personality in the presentation as being just another phase of me, within myself.
I really like this view of the temple. I’m not sure I will ever grow past my deep skepticism for … well, everything. But I can understand the power of metaphor and how it might help make me a happier, more self-fulfilled person. Thanks for sharing these ideas.Curtis wrote:The symbolic meaning of the tokens and the garment marks are quite powerful for those who understand them. Not so much or at all for those who don’t. I wish the meanings were taught openly in temple prep classes. It can be done without crossing any lines.
Maybe you should teach us a temple prep class!
