[foodoctor33]

Yeah. I don’t want to remove my name because I’m looking for an excuse. I just want the Church to put free agency above policy. PERIOD. It’s become a corporation. When the Stake president gets a call from an “analyst” it tells me how removed my concerns are from getting to policy makers (the Brethren). It becomes just a piece of paper and a rubber stamp denial from underlings in the COB.

I just feel the Church should stand for personal decisions on e makes in their life at how they approach their faith. I thought my sealing was between my ex, myself and the Lord. Granted. Authority of a sealer is necessary, but beyond that, no one else should have a say in that triangular relationship to force a sealing to remain in force. ESPECIALLY WHEN INFIDELITY IS CONCERNED.

I know I have beaten a dead horse. When do we as members stand up and say, “HEAR US. INDIVIDUALIZE OUR CONCERNS.” ???? The Brethren have become too far removed from the people. Lay clergy locally have no authority to do anything and letters from me and them end up at an analysts desk who push it back with no real recourse or appeal delineation.

Can I ask for audience from an Seventy Area Authority?

Corporate policy should be different than Church policy. This is a faith, a gospel. Not a Corporation that can trample the agency of it’s members without us being heard. I have no desire to remove myself from the Church in principle but if I do, it would be to play the bureaucratic game to get what I know is fair, right, just and personal.

I appreciate your desire to have me stay. You come from a great place and your help gives me hope in the lay members of the church. You are proof to me that I see the Corporation is veering from the Gospel. I want so bad to cling to the gospel but in this instance I am forced to try to rip the corporation from the gospel.

Hugh Nibley said it best

Quote:

“The worst sinners, according to Jesus, are not the harlots and publicans, but the religious leaders with their insistence on proper dress and grooming, their careful observance of all the rules, their precious concern for status symbols, their strict legality, their pious patriotism… the haircut becomes the test of virtue in a world where Satan deceives and rules by appearances.”

[foodoctor33]

BTW: Thanks Silent Dawn for you kind insights.. I just wish I could feel peace at a church that doesn’t honor my free agency. I wish I was told when I married my ex in the temple that regardless of her actions, I would have to stay sealed to her. In the interest of full disclosure. I made a sealing decision without full knowledge of the commitment with no fault of my own.

I just had a thought.

To get around the bureaucracy:

If I have my name removed from the records of the church, that will cancel my baptism, my endowment and sealings to both spouses correct?

If I do that and then get rebaptized, do I have to get my endowment again , or is that automatically re-instated after baptism?

Why go this route???? I was thinking it may be an end around the “analyst” people at the COB policy red tape. It will only work if, after my rebaptism and if my sealings aren’t automatically restored. Then I can get resealed to my current wife. Thinking out of the box.

ANy thoughts on how reinstatement works after having name removed from the records of the church?

[foodoctor33]

When I say she gets to determine my spiritual future….I MEAN NOW. The church defers to her CURRENT concerns about what happens to the children as far as sealing. The church is refusing to grant me a cancellation NOW basing that on an afterlife policy that isn’t understood well. I do not believe polygamy is of God. PERIOD. SO, my letter stated the concern I have about not granting me a cancellation based on a policy that the Church tries to distance themselves from as often as they can publicly.

I understand what you are saying about the idea of me being forced to practice polygamy in the HEREAFTER. I agree. I am not talking about the HEREAFTER. I am talking about the HERE AND NOW. Her concern about child sealings (when she doesn’t go to church, fought against me in court to have more time with the kids, fought against one of our kids getting baptized) is a tool she uses to get at me on a spiritual level. It isn’t based on a true concern for her children and their sealing. After all, sealing to a parent isn’t a saving ordinance, it is a linking ordinance to Abrahamic blessings; sealing to a spouse is the only thing that matters as far as the highest degree of CK. So, for the church to have the policy to not grant cancellations, in effect, they are telling me that I have to be ok with the IDEA, the CONCEPT, the ‘DOCTRINE’ of plural marriage in the HERE AND NOW.

This is my faith issue. I am being FORCED TO STAY SEALED IN THIS LIFE, ON PAPER NOW, IN THE TEMPLE, ON FAMILYSEARCH.ORG to a woman that has been nothing but a pain in my heart and soul and pocketbook for many years. When does MY personal FREE WILL enter into the equation? Why does her desire to stay sealed to the kids get deference with the Brethren when she committed adultery? Why does the church excommunicate Kate Kelly for speaking out for her personal concern but allow my ex-wife to stay on the records when she has committed adultery, took our children and left, and calls the shots with the church when it comes to this sealing knowing she doesn’t care about their spiritual future (as she fights me for time with them hurting their physical and emotional future)?

I really do appreciate your replies but it seems we are talking about two separate things. Your response deals with the HEREAFTER and the policy around the ‘doctrine’ as it pertains to the hereafter. I AM pleading with the BRETHREN to consider how those HEREAFTER policies affect the spiritual progression of people in the HERE AND NOW. Choose my free agency now and avoid spiritual stumbling blocks from the members.

[foodoctor33]

Ray, yes. My SP stated that if my ex repented the Lord would remember her sins no more and our sealing would still be valid. That’s why he recommended I get a cancellation.

The whole polygamy thing is wrong morally and spiritually. I agree.

[foodoctor33]

Wow. Hawkgrrrl. Amazing insight. Amen. Amen. And Ray et al….thank you to for your insights. If we can all agree that none of us really know what the afterlife truly holds, the only thing we can know for certainty is this life. And if we have spiritual rituals like polygamy that we can all agree are personally problematic and we can prove caused significant legal, spiritual, relational problems for the Church and was part of the reason JS was killed……why do we hold on to the offshoots of this? I guess I just can’t wrap my heart and brain around the Brethren being so dogmatic and rigid in a belief (polygamy) that is so divisive and not err on the side of the only thing we do know and that is what effects polygamy has on those living NOW. Again, I can’t say it loud enough, PEOPLE OVER POLICY!!!!!

I just grew up with this vision and teaching from my parents and local church that the leaders are infallible when it comes to spiritual things. Maybe that is and was naïve of me but that is wha the church peddles. “follow the prophet…follow the prophet…he know the way.” we sang all the time. My faith gap grows wider with this personal issue when I see leaders cling to dogma and policy over individuals. I’m the Kate Kelly of spiritual polygamy in a sense. I need a policy answer to a personal issue I know I am right about. I struggle to want to deal with an organization that has anything to do whatsoever with spiritual plural marriage and refuses to honor free will especially when I am not asking for acceptance of a “lifestyle” to have them turn their head to any “sin”. If my ex-wife repents…I am at her mercy and am sealed to her. PERIOD. I will die if I here again… “The Lord will sort it out in the end.” If this kills my faith NOW….who cares about the end for me…right? Ugggggg. Not only now to I have to recreate my faith to include picking and choosing when the Brethren are speaking and acting as prophets and when they are following policy and just going with their gut. Would be a huge paradigm shift.

I am humbled by all of your time and help with this. I am grateful for this space to verbally throw up and ask for insight….it’s a space I need because I can’t find it elsewhere to any deep degree.

[foodoctor33]

That is exactly the issue. If they don’t know what is going to happen in the next life… why not honor my agency in this life? The only thing we know is this life. Free will should trump policy especially if it’s not doctrinal. I read you last post 3 times and still don’t see how my free will is being honored? What am I missing?

[foodoctor33]

To Ray and SD and others…..this is a great conversation BUT one thing keeps getting lost in the discussion. It is the single thing angering me and trying my faith……FREE AGENCY. If the Lord is going to sort it out in the end (and there will be billions of people to sort out “in the end”) …… WHY HAS MY FREE AGENCY BEEN SUBVERTED!!!!!!!!!!!!! I truly don’t care if not every Mormon back in the day practiced it….JS and BY taught that this is the way Heaven will be. My biggest issue is that if a church puts policy over people and subverts free agency and will….how can I trust that the organization has MY BEST INTEREST at heart and cares about me personally / individually or are we all just worker bees making honey for the hive???

UPDATE: I just wrote my letter of appeal to the First Presidency. My SP told me he would send this along with a letter from him for appeal. My wife asked me what if they deny your appeal? If so, I may still come to take the sacrament but won’t go to 2nd and 3rd hours of church. Why go to school if the school doesn’t honor free will? If they allow my sealing cancelation, that is one less frustration I have with the Church.

I will keep you all posted.

[foodoctor33]

Amen, Old-Timer. I want to belong to The Church of Old-Timer of Latter-Day Fallen Saints.

I truly think ….. “Obedience with exactness” “Be ye therefore perfect..” and it’s all true or it’s a fraud” statements and themes that are very pervasive throughout our culture and lesson manuals are at the root of most of our posts in general. We have become a bunch of Pharasees and Saducees fighting about how many steps to take on Sunday to assuage our guilt when Christ came not only to FULFILL the law but to knock down the rules and laws of the Jewish faith and CULTURE. Love, tolerance, meekness, kindness, brotherly love, forgiveness, charity….etc. is what Christ brought to eliminate the Law of Moses, Judaic rituals and laws and focus on silly rules that pushes many from a relationship with God… I truly feel like TBM blog sites are exactly what Pharasees blog sites would be like if they had them back then. Worried about garment length, what color shirt to pass the sacrament with, who is worthy enough to take the sacrament, percentage of home teaching….I could go on forever.

I agree. We need The Diet Church of JC of LDS. Christ-centered….not so policy and regulation based…performance based. Probably unrealistic as a body but it is how I am going to approach my faith within the current structure and if that keeps me from callings…so be it.

[foodoctor33]

I’m with ya

[foodoctor33]

Ray,

I appreciate your response. Very cerebral and well stated. While the GA’s may be hesitant about unsealing someone…what is the fear? Cancelling will result in 2 scenarios (if this is the way of heaven)

Scenario #1: You allow me to have my Sealing cancelled…because afterall…it isn’t the Church’s sealing…It’s MY sealing. Result: A happy guy who feels like his free agency is honored and one less faith stumbling block removed. End result: I have to get resealed to her in Heaven along with BILLIONS of other people…what’s one more???

Scenario #2: You don’t allow me to have MY sealing cancelled….you annul free agency…you potentially lose a faithful LDS guy who spent 41 years in the service of his faith. And the Lord disregards it anyway according to your POV Ray. What a waste!!!!!!!!

In the end, I agree with Nibbler…

Quote:

I agree with you though, a person’s wishes should come before any policy.

And Orson, it’s not the policy

Quote:

that gives the appearance of next-life polygamy.

That is Church DOCTRINE according to the first 6-7 prophets of our Chruch and the entire substance of D&C 132.

I believe the Church needs to abandon the whole Heaven polygamy idea as a whole. Polygamy, besides creating numbers of people in the Church, has been a very large NET negative for our church both within and outside of the Church. If we are always told that “God will sort it out in the end” and “we aren’t sure how it is all done”….STOP the stumbling block and let’s deal with it in Heaven.

My two cents.

[foodoctor33]

I wasn’t able to read all the above posts but I will say one simple thing:

If Joseph Smith and Hyrum took off their garments before going to Carthage Jail because “it is hot in the summer” according to John Taylor, that is all I need to know to determine when I feel it’s ok to wear or remove them.

[foodoctor33]

I get frustrated by the way the WoW is handled in the Church. If someone has a beer or a glass of wine or a cup of joe….not worthy to go to the temple. However, my very overweight father can go to the SUMMER ward picnic, eat 3 hamburgers the Bishopric grilled and feel absolutely no problem with walking into the temple with the Bishopric for ward temple night.

This is why the WoW was meant to NOT be a commandment. Because it is treated so objectively. If a very overwieght person, or a summer ward steak BBQ isn’t breaking the WoW in their minds or the Bishop’s mind when doing temple recommend interviews, why does coffee, tea, tobacco, wine or strong drink get such scrutiny?

The WoW is a great code of health. When I am asked if I live the WoW, I say yes because the WoW states, “…not by way of commandment..”. So I generally live the WoW but still get looks when I am sucking down a venti iced carmel macchiato. If the church picks and chooses what parts of the WoW it can break, why can’t I?

Any thoughts? Am I justifying or just confused about the double standard? Probably a little of both.

[Author]

Posts