[dingobex]

I Agree Bishops are not the place to go for things like this but that is EXACTLY WHAT THE CHURCH TELLS YOU TO DO, the only reason i even brought my rape up with my bishop was because when reading the eternal marriage manual, when i got to the chapter on abuse i counted 15 x in one article the counsel to speak to my bishop, and since the article also stressed forgiveness from paragraph to paragraph, i decided to seek counsel from my bishop on what is actually meant by forgivess, because quite frankly the term is vauge and social understanding of it varies.

And thus this is a problem with church leadership, our lay clergy is not taught and not educated in church leadership and yet at every turn we are taught to go to them for their inspired advice, which brings me full circle to my discontent, If these men are suposidly inspired, then i want to know where the hell is it? cause i don’t see inspired men leading congregations, instead if see well meaning and well intentioned imperfect men doing with their best under there steam. It’s wrong, god has a time and a place for everything, the church imho needs to stop over using the ‘inspired’ ticket and overworking their bishops, if they expect their leaders to work miracles then they must do as god has repeatedly asked of all of us, EDUCATION, EDUCATION, EDUCATION

gahh this topic makes me mad- sorry

Roy wrote:

Dingo I am very sorry for what you experienced.

I was also enraged at the story that you linked to. The author’s male Mormon friend gave her a ride to an all night party, drugged her (to be funny?!?!?!), and then left her to find her own way back home. 👿 👿 👿 👿 That to me seems to smack of depraved indifference and might need be reported to the authorities as a crime all its own!

I also very much agree with Nibbler that part of why people seem dismissive of sexual assaults is because of a just world hypothesis that people use to protect themselves (mentally).

hawkgrrrl wrote:

This was a helpful viewpoint about the notion that forgiveness is often denial. https://bycommonconsent.com/2016/06/10/ … rspective/

Hawkgrrrl’s link to the post about denial masquerading as “forgiveness” was spot on and had much great insight to ponder. I believe that part of why Bishops might tend to sweep such things under the rug (in addition to all the other reasons before mentioned) and call it forgiveness is that to do otherwise is a daunting task. Cases of rape and abuse can tear families and congregations apart. They are complex, involving so many people. Police, lawyers, the stake leadership, the victim, the accused, family members of the victim and the accused – how big, unpredictable and uncontrollable of a mess might this be? The bishop can help to maintain the status quo or even keel of the ship by counseling forgiveness. All of this to me, reinforces that bishops are not the correct person to go to in cases like these. The bishop can be informed of the situation and the action that the family is taking as an FYI but he does not get to be a decision maker. The bishop may even be somewhat relieved that the decision is not left largely up to him. Bishops are well versed in the steps of repentance and when presented with situations outside their “wheelhouse” are likely to fall back on what they know. To a hammer every situation is a nail and to some bishops every situation is about the steps of repentance.

[dingobex]

hawkgrrrl wrote:

This was a helpful viewpoint about the notion that forgiveness is often denial. https://bycommonconsent.com/2016/06/10/justice-and-mercy-a-rape-survivors-perspective/

OMG!!! i completely love that post and couldn’t agree more, thanks for sharing

[dingobex]

Thanks Looking Glass and for what it’s worth i’ve come to agree with you, i think the worlds rape culture is likewise ramptant in the church, and is a result of the natural man trying to comfort himself and feel safe. It just saddens me when i also read victim blaming statements in church material the marriage handbook for example has several toxic paragraphs in the abuse section, albeit it does also have some inspired statements too, i just wish and think we should be able to hold our leaders of the church and even lay clergy upto a higher standard if we are to believe they are inspired of god. Heavenly father would never victim blame imho, any more than he would actually wish abuse on someone.

LookingHard wrote:

dingo – so sorry to hear both about your rape and then the added salt to that wound by a church leader. The only good little sliver in your brief story is how you were able to stand up for yourself a bit and then your bishop listened. I think as common as your initial experience with your bishop is, I don’t think most girls have the confidence to essentially correct a bishop. And for the small number that do, not all have a bishop that then reconsider’s their position. I fear the more common response from a bishop is to see this as not being humble and accepting responsibility for your action of sinning.

I have read cover to cover the Church Handbook of Instructions (both the first and the second). I actually studied the first book while I was in a bishopric. I do not recall coming away from this with any hint of “make damn sure that someone says they were raped that they were actually raped and didn’t go along with it.” But I do think that across much of the world rape culture is fairly rampant. This is especially in the church culture. I think many men assume if a women didn’t almost fight to the death that the woman was in some way allowing (or even wanting) the sex and thus have broken a commandment.

I think we see with the BYU honor code office / Title IX office issue and all the stories coming out of it that this is an area that church culture (mixed in with some polices) still needs to (a) acknowledge (b) start working to correct.

Sorry you have had to go through this. It sure sounds like you didn’t deserve this and didn’t do anything wrong. In fact you did what was right – you stood up for yourself. Be proud of that. I am proud of you for doing it.

[dingobex]

nibbler wrote:

I certainly don’t think leaders are counseled in any way to blame the victim, I believe the real problem is that our local leaders (thrust into the position of being an armchair counselor) aren’t actively trained in how to avoid natural tendencies to blame the victim. I’m sure most people do it without even realizing that’s what they are doing.

Blaming the victim can help people preserve their belief in an ordered universe. If you have a strong belief in “if I do X then Y will happen” blaming the victim can restore balance to that imagined order. The internal narrative becomes, “this must have happened because they did X, I don’t do X, therefore I’m safe.” People are afraid of chaos, they want to assure themselves that they can avoid the terrible things that can happen to us. Framing tragedies as somehow being the victim’s fault is really a person’s way of comforting themselves. It’s natural… and unfortunately it can add to a victim’s pain.

I think of some level the church does teach victim blaming because the church itself victim blames. The more i keep reading church material the more i see victim blaming, which i see as a result of ‘natural man’ predisposition to victim blame, i just think the church should be more inspired than this, this is not what god would want. I do however agree with your statement

“Blaming the victim can help people preserve their belief in an ordered universe. If you have a strong belief in “if I do X then Y will happen” blaming the victim can restore balance to that imagined order. The internal narrative becomes, “this must have happened because they did X, I don’t do X, therefore I’m safe.” People are afraid of chaos, they want to assure themselves that they can avoid the terrible things that can happen to us. Framing tragedies as somehow being the victim’s fault is really a person’s way of comforting themselves. It’s natural… and unfortunately it can add to a victim’s pain”

[dingobex]

Morzen wrote:

@ LookingHard and @DarkJedi

I would like to respond to this for my own ‘education’ (for the lack of a better term, perhaps).

If all four of us were casually sitting around a table and dingobex recounted what he wrote here and I respond to him with the very same words, I fail to understand how that would be taken as offensive. I’m sure he would defend his stance in some way to which I may, or may not keep the ball in the air, but to be sure no one is going to be ‘oh so’ offended, but rather understanding and accepting of the fact that we just have differing opinions about a subject that has certainly generated a lot of controversy and suspicion about it’s validity. Hence, on this forum there is nothing ad hominem in what I said; there wasn’t any denigrating name calling; there was just a calmly ‘spoken’ opinion that I shared (or ‘volunteered’). If the roles were reversed I would have even gladly welcomed my comment as something to consider, and perhaps respond to.

Would it have been okay if I had prefaced my comment with, “IMHO and not wanting to be disrespectful with regard to your spiritual experiences, there is no way that I can…. IMHO, what ever spiritual experience you think you had…”?

I understand and agree there has to be ’rules’ as to how people are to behave on a forum such as this one, but IMHO this beyond the limits of required censorship and political correctness. Are we really so thin-skinned and delicate in that we can’t stand a little heat of disagreement, or differing opinions? Dingbex shared something publicly AND anonymously, which to me invites comment and feedback. If this was so sacred to him then he shouldn’t have shared it in a public forum where most obviously there are going to be people who don’t agree with him (although hopefully, in a reasonably, non-abrasive manner–like I think I did).

Hey, this is just my opinion on the matter, but this your forum and you set the rules, although I don’t understand your limits about those rules.

Im a woman and no i wasn’t offended

Sent from my SM-T550 using Tapatalk

[dingobex]

Morzen wrote:

@ dingobex

There is no way that I can accept that the “one and only true religion” of Jesus Christ has a lot to do with or being that your salvation is based upon the Masonic rituals of the Mormon church temple ceremony. I feel pretty confident is saying: “Impossible.”

What ever spiritual experience you think you had in the temple has nothing whatsoever to do with “the one and only true church/religion” of God Almighty and the living Christ, if in fact there is a “God Almighty” and “living Christ”.

But what about the fact freemasonry started in solomons temple? At least that’s what I was told.

Sent from my SM-T550 using Tapatalk

[dingobex]

Roy wrote:

That sounds like a very powerful experience. I personally find it hard to take at face value. That says everything about me and my experience and may have limited relevance to your journey.

dingobex wrote:

one of the things heavenly father spoke to me about was a contract i aparently made with him prior to coming to this earth, in that contract i agreed to marry a specific person and for a specific reason, father warned me if i did not do this, if i did not do as i was told, not only would have have the holy ghost drag me kicking and screaming into the temple but he would punish me, he wouldn’t simply remove the holy ghost from me, he would punish me,

My most powerful spiritual experience was one of acceptance and love. I can only know what I felt – but it seems inconsistent with what you describe here. I am not sure that what you describe fits in with modern Mormon theology. There have been some teachings to pre-mortal marriage commitments (most notably in the not official/not doctrinal play Saturday’s Warrior) but recently the emphasis has been on personal decisions, revelation, choice, and accountability. The temple ceremony itself says “and this you do of your own free will and choice.”

What you are describing hearkens back to the early days of polygamy when JS was being threatened by an angel with a drawn sword and at least one woman [Mary Elizabeth Rollins (Lightner Smith Young)] was being told that she had been “given” to JS in a pre-mortal contract.

Quote:

“Joseph said I was his before I came here and he said all the Devils in hell should never get me from him.” In her autobiography Mary wrote that Smith told her, “I was created for him before the foundation of the Earth was laid. “

Therefore there is some precedent to what you describe but it is for many (myself included) a very troubling precedent…. mired in polygamy and second class status for women. Perhaps it would help if you told us the “specific reason” why you are to be married to this specific person.

As for the CES Letter…

Mormonism unabashedly answers the questions of “Where did I come from? Why am I here? and Where am I going?” These are questions of meaning and purpose – questions of the soul and human spirit – that science and “fact” are not well equipped to give satisfying answers for. The answers Mormonism gives are impressively expansive and compelling for many. These “ring true” (spiritually true) in the hearts of the adherents.

A specific reason was not not given, just that this was not standard practice but it was required of me to be fully prepared for the responsibility when i came home. My temporal experiences would be of little consequence except to train me for when i return home.

Sent from my SM-T550 using Tapatalk

[dingobex]

Ann wrote:

dingobex – You’ve talked about some other explanations for the spiritual experiences you’ve had. I don’t believe a loving Heavenly Father would intimidate and threaten you. Maybe you could talk with a counselor about your guilt and anxiety.

And I would bet there’s a way to fix things with your membership.

It wasn’t so much deliberate intimidation or a threat, more so as a chastisement and stern warning, in the exact same manner any father would, and it was intimidating because his power was palpable, not because he was threatening me but because i call feel his authority, in the same manner as a child would feel their fathers authority and be intimidated knowing that there will be consequences.

Sent from my SM-T550 using Tapatalk

[dingobex]

Roadrunner wrote:

I believe there is a 30 day waiting period that the bishop is supposed to wait and use to reach out to the member to make sure he/she really wants to resign. You may not have to grovel as much as you think. They won’t want you to leave either.

I hope so but i waived my 30 day period, i used a prewritten letter i found on a fb group i joined at the same time. Sigh

[dingobex]

The mistake i have made and it is a BIG mistake is over reacting and sending in my resignation papers. I feel awful now and sooo sooo guilty!!!! i only sent them in a week ago, but they have processed already, and while i have messaged my bishop and stake president to grovel and apologize i think it might be too late. This is the second time i have done this, the last time was 2 years ago, granted i had not been to church since 6 months after i was baptised but this time i have been regularly attending church for 16 months and was just recently endowed and was the primary 1st counselor. I feel awful for the stupidity of my decision, the hurt i have caused others and genuine fear for what heavenly father might do.

One of the missionaries who helped me find the answers i needed after i tried to resign 18 months ago, called me from his new area, he is 3 weeks away from going home, and as soon as someone told him what i’d done he called me, he reminded me of some of the spiritual witnesses i have had, all of which i am not confident to call spiritual witnesses because i’m aware like a lot of spiritual witnesses, environment and delusion can play a role, however i remember one witness i got and it’s that witness that scares me. That same elder gave me a blessing, it was a generic blessing, as i’b been reciving a prompting to get a blessing but didn’t know why, so the elder gave me a quick and sweet blessing, but part way through the blessing i felt like i had just been hit in the gut with a giant usb stick, exhausted and feeling partial to being overwhelmed i went to bed and prepared to deal with it the following day, the next day while praying, i was floored literally!!! i ended up on the kitchen floor huddled in the corner, and spent two weeks recovering from exhaustion. During the 45 minsutes that i was spoken to, chastised and warned, one of the things heavenly father spoke to me about was a contract i aparently made with him prior to coming to this earth, in that contract i agreed to marry a specific person and for a specific reason, father warned me if i did not do this, if i did not do as i was told, not only would have have the holy ghost drag me kicking and screaming into the temple but he would punish me, he wouldn’t simply remove the holy ghost from me, he would punish me, i was given a brief glimps of standing before him and mother, with my future spouce and then another glimps of life after this and the responsibility i would have to my father and thus the need to ensure i am prepared in this world.

I had forgotten about this experience until the Elder reminded me of a vision i saw in the temple, a vision of which i am still not sure i didn’t hulucinate from excitement, but in reminding me of that he inadvertently reminded me of the blessing and warning i had recieved, something i can not ignore. Prehaps i imagined the blessing, prehaps i am just crazy but i’m too dang scared to find out, the power in that message was both terrifying, comforting and palpible, so what ever heavenly father meant, i am NOT gutsy enough to mess with it.

So now i find myself, sick to my stomach, feeling incredibly stupid, and guilty, desperately hoping my foolishness can be undone but if not, i will have to make ammends and BEG BEG BEG fathers forgiveness

Sent from my SM-T550 using Tapatalk

[dingobex]

SilentDawning wrote:

I like the quote above which says tithing is 10% of your “interest” which is a pretty ambiguous statement. If you check Gospel principles I think they used some selective editing or quoting to make it sound like more than it has to be — which is the amount your conscience tells you it is.

What should you do going forward? Now that you’ve told your Bishop, you are bound by his directives, I think. You could followup with your Stake president for clarification, but he might support the Bishop with some qualifying statements, or placing the Bishop’s authority above his own opinion. If you don’t get a satisfactory answer from the SP you’ll have some decisions to make — whether to do what your Bishop asks (he will expect you to obey him if the SP supports his authority in the Ward), or whether to sit this one out until your Bishop changes over and not pay.

I have learned that the less you tell the priesthood leaders the better off you are. One Bishop told me he “doesn’t know incomes” which to me, was admission that he’s at the mercy of the consciences of his membership.

My personal opinion is that self-reliance comes ahead of tithing. If you have to pay the church tithing and then go on Church welfare to make ends meet, your priorities are upside down. (Not that you are planning a welfare request, I am not implying that).

Good luck — remember — happiness is the object and design of our existence, so ask yourself, what would make me happiest?

Thank you! I feel the same way and I love that quote! It’s now written on my whiteboard in the kitchen to remind me every day.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

[dingobex]

Dax wrote:

Hi it is wonderful that you are getting such amazing insight and help with your endownment questions. I just wanted to make it clear that for women, garment wearing is very much a outward marker/sign of being a “good little lds woman”. You can choose to wear them as you deem correct as others have stated, but truly it will be like a Muslim woman choosing not to wear a head scarf in public. It is very shocking to those in the lds culture to see a woman not covered completely ie wearing something sleeveless or an inch above the knee. We as a culture have turned shoulders,knees and lower legs into sexual objects even on young children and babies. So just be prepared mentally for the gossip and potential shunning if you wear clothing that shows you are not wearing garments. That being said, I choose to wear mine as I see fit along with clothing that makes it pretty clear that when its 100 degrees outside that I am comfortable. Yes I get looks and a few comments but I will tell you what, I enjoy my garments and their symbolism because I determine how and when I wear them. I also always try to wear them to church on Sunday’s and for a few moments most days. I have no issue answering yes to the temple recommend question as I have prayed and feel this is correct for me. Don’t let garments be a block for the endownment just realize the difference between what the culture expects and what you determine with Heavenly Father. Good luck!

Thanks Dax, I am worried about the social stigma and bullying mostly because I don’t know the doctrine well enough and panick that im doing something wrong. But I am learning now I just have to decide if im ready.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

[dingobex]

Grudunza wrote:

The rhetoric on tithing from leaders used to be “for those who have means,” or in other words, you are only tithed if you have money left over after your family’s needs are met. That comports with everything fair and loving and “yoke is light” that I feel from the God of my understanding. Paying on surplus also is in tune with many of the other teachings our church puts forth; family first, multiply and replenish the Earth, get food storage, stay out of debt, give charitably, etc. Paying on gross creates an imbalance between families of different sizes, is not an equal burden between different income levels, is not standard across different nationalities and tax rates, and has the potential to create debt in some cases. I’ve shared some examples of that here before (one example below), but the bottom line to me is that gross payment is not in harmony with church teachings, with scriptures, and with a fair and loving God. By all means, someone can pay using the gross method if they want to and *if they can really afford to,* but they shouldn’t expect any greater blessings for that, or teach that as the standard.

---

A person has a fixed income of $2,000 per month, and legitimate living expenses of $1,900 per month.

If they pay tithing on gross ($200), they are now $100 in debt somewhere, or possibly shorting a landlord or bill collector, or forced to borrow from family (which can strain relationships), or will need to accept a handout from the church in some way. Regardless, they have *nothing* left over; no extra money for savings, for food storage, for giving to charity, for having fun wholesome recreation, etc. It’s easy for this pattern to become burdensome, not just for the person themselves, but for those who have to continually support this person. And where is the real hope for this person to ever be able to climb out of that?

Or… they can pay tithing on their surplus ($10). Now, they are living responsibly within their means, are not incurring any debt or strain or disfavor from anyone, and have $90 left over to put some money into savings, to invest with, to give something to charity, to go on a date, to buy some food storage, etc. The church does not need to support this person, and can use those resources for people whose income is lower than their expenses, or who have no income, or who have a medical emergency, or to put into a community service project.

Which method seems more in tune with the bigger picture of the kind of life and fiscal responsibility and accountability we would prefer to encourage among our members? I realize this is one particular example, but just by the fact that this scenario does exist for some, it invalidates the idea that paying on gross could be the standard.

That is exactly my thoughts too and for the very same reason as you’ve just mentioned in your senario. That was also why I was comfortable before the lord paying tithing on my surplus but now because my bishop demanded gross after ‘checking my reccords’ I am in debt and unable to support the missionaries. I used to give them food, and have them for dinner several times a week but now I can barely support myself.

What I don’t understand is why tithing is a prerequisite for a temple reccommend anyway? It is not a sin to not pay tithing, god does not need our money but we do need salvation so why are we forced to into debt for the temple?

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

[dingobex]

Heber13 wrote:

10% of your increase. First define what you feel right about what is your increase, then choose to pay 10% of it or choose not to. If not, just skip the tithing settlement or declare partial. If he starts to probe or want to help you live it differently, you just tell him you aren’t ready right now. Your bishop knows there are many people in the ward that can’t live it right now and aren’t.

It gets a bit stressful thinking about talking about it. Whichever you decide to do, tell yourself you are a good person regardless of this one thing. You’re on a journey and there will be some things right now that you accept you can’t do. you can’t do all things. D&C 50:40-41. God loves you as you are.

I think I just found my new favorite scripture. Thank you so much! This is getting printed and placed on my wall as encouragement when I feel discouraged. Thank you again!!!

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

[dingobex]

Old-Timer wrote:

The Church’s official position is that determining what constitutes a full tithing is up to each individual member. So, figure out what makes sense to you and pay that amount.

Answer, “Yes.” If anyone questions you about how you calculate it, tell them you contribute 10% of your increase, exactly as the Chruch says you should. If they press further, tell them that you are following the Prophet when it comes to paying tithing. If they ask how much you make and how much you pay, tell them it’s none of their business – in a polite tone and with a smile.

If you choose to pay something, consider paying online directly to the Church, if you don’t mind making payments online.

I pay online at the moment I would just feel more comfortable making a prayful and spiritual decision to tithe out of my want each fortnight and not obligation. Going forward I think that is exactly what I will do and when questioned by my bishop I will just stand my ground and say yes.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

[Author]

Posts