Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
wuwei wrote:
I like the “adults of god” concept very much.
Me too. I’m going to ingrain this into my life.
wuwei wrote:God didn’t give us agency and reason just so we could ignore reason and turn our agency over to the church.
I think God gave the power to reason more strongly to some than to others. I sometimes get the impression that my ability to reason and think for myself is looked at as influence from the adversary.
wuwei wrote:Its always easier to just follow someone you think is inspired from god instead of seeking him yourself. But its not a substitute.
It is also my impression that this is standard and encouraged. I may be leaving if I can’t get past this.
Kipper wrote:GBSmith wrote:Kipper wrote:… Is it immoral to feel the sun and wind on your body and skin? Close your eye, put headphones in and lounge on the patio? Spend Saturday morning working in the garden in shorts and no shirt?
Nope
I don’t understand. There has to be parameters or rules to follow.
For me the rule is to wear the garment throughout my life and not defile it. That’s what I agreed to in the temple.
Quote:Just doing what feels right to you lends itself to hundreds or thousands of meanings and no standard.
On the list of shoulds in the Handbook is the little proviso about following the spirit. To me that’s not necessarily having a revelation as it is to use my brain and decide for myself. Letting people make up their own minds doesn’t always lead to chaos.
Quote:The handbook and the message from the FP read during the interview are clear, for me less than a month ago. The message is no sunbathing while sitting or working in the yard.
Ray’s comments above speak to this whole matter very well and I recommend them to you if you’ve not already seen them. I choose to wear and not wear my garments at varioius times and do it with a clear conscience. I answer yes to the recommend question without my fingers crossed. For further information you might want to check out
http://www.ldssdf.com/v.2/ OK, so I have a little better idea of what I should be following. The should and should not are not the same as will and must and are not part of the covenant. I need to hear the actual covenant again myself altho I think I have a pretty good idea what it says from previous posts. BTW, I “cuff” my bottoms if they are going to be exposed under my short pants even if the pants are knee length. I feel this better than having a silly looking hem hanging out and attracting attention.
GBSmith wrote:Kipper wrote:… Is it immoral to feel the sun and wind on your body and skin? Close your eye, put headphones in and lounge on the patio? Spend Saturday morning working in the garden in shorts and no shirt?
Nope
Probably a subject for another thread but in an organization that’s hierarchical with rules it’s just easier to ask for a list than to decide for your self.
I don’t understand. There has to be parameters or rules to follow. Just doing what feels right to you lends itself to hundreds or thousands of meanings and no standard. The handbook and the message from the FP read during the interview are clear, for me less than a month ago. The message is no sunbathing while sitting or working in the yard.
“Endowed members should wear the temple garment both day and night. They should not remove it, either entirely or partially, to work in the yard or for other activities that can reasonably be done with the garment worn properly beneath the clothing. Nor should they remove it to lounge around the home in swimwear or immodest clothing. When they must remove the garment, such as for swimming, they should put it back on as soon as possible.”
The choice is not what feels right but do I choose to obey. I don’t like being put in this position but church leaders are good at doing that. This is very unreasonable.
I never imagined there are so many that I can identify with. Johnh, Dax, Martha, HSAB and others, I have also felt the sense of relief knowing my true feelings are in the open if only on a message board. Although I may differ in that I do believe in the First Vision and restoration I also believe that so much of what we are told is man made and there are a majority who follow without questioning or validating in the name of obedience. This is really the only place to lay your thoughts out and sometimes find agreement and sometimes find (and accept) corrections. To be continued… The handbook and temple interview both said specifically to wear the garments when doing yard work. They also say to put them back on after swimming and not to lounge around the yard or house without them. This annoys me to no end. Is it immoral to feel the sun and wind on your body and skin? Close your eye, put headphones in and lounge on the patio? Spend Saturday morning working in the garden in shorts and no shirt? GBSmith wrote:This might give you some additional information.
http://www.ldssdf.org/v2/default.aspx?g=topics&f=6 I can’t get to the site from work for obvious reasons but that’s OK. There are a few things I just don’t get as a movement and this is one. Any other way I could get to the article?
cwald wrote:The “passion killer” comes from the commandment to wear them both night and day.
I feel there is something to that. It doesn’t strike me fully as a commandment. It’s like I’m being told what to do, think and feel and I’m being watched. And they do mean all the time, within reason, I was told specifically even when doing yard work. It just seams silly to me I guess because I believe it is literally symbolic and the point is to not let your commitment, promises and holy space wane wherever you are. Is there really something wrong about working up a sweat in my yard or garden and let the warm sun and wind touch my skin? A level headed friend told me that whenever G’s would cause conversation they could be left at home.
I need to read the information article on page 2.
Oh, and RayD, I really appreciate your comments.
I can’t say it’s not anyone’s business why we are not getting sealed. Maybe for my peers in the chapel but for the Bishop on up they want to at least know why a sealing is not in the near future. After all my Bishop is interested in our salvation and knows what steps we need to take. If we are not moving forward he at least would want to know why. My answer just happens to be pretty close to “we are working on it” and he has encouraged me to keep working on it and offered to help in the way of counsel in or out of the church. BTW, I did go thru with my son and I don’t want to say here what the entire experience was like for me but I will say it was special and I am glad I went thru. Also, I didn’t ask or want anyone to come share the experience other than my escort and my wife but there were plenty of friends who showed up on there own and I now see why. I can’t imagine being there longer than we were anyway. It took us from 6:30pm and we didn’t leave until after 10. I’m going to head on over to the “garment” thread because I have some real questions about the need for 24 hr even doing yard work directions.
Old-Timer wrote:Quote:I have been very unhappy with my marriage for too long. Being sealed would require I go thru the ceremony with glazed eyes.
That is an entirely different can of worms. It sounds trite to say this, but it also is a different issue than merely going through the temple, although it obviously is entwined in interesting and uniquely Mormon ways.
God bless you in working that out. It’s difficult, and an area where I can’t offer much advice, given how personal it is. All I can do is repeat, “God bless you.”
Not trite at all. The honesty I get here is is confirming. This validates my delima as being uniquely Mormon and narrows where I can go for council. Even though I have received some advice, I alone have to make some decisions. Going thru the temple is going to force me to move forward in one way or the other. Two people who are endowed and not sealed cannot go too long without answering to authority. Heh, it’s almost like living together. Honestly I should know better.
I read this thread and the one linked without concluding what is best for myself other than doing what I am told. I am certianly glad to not be the only one having issue with this. I’m in my 50’s and just received my first temple recommend and am dreading the day soon when I HAVE to start wearing garments all day, all night every day, every night, except within reason during certain sports events or something like that. I was told to expect that instruction as part of one of the covenants. Part of me says phooey, part of me says it will be a constant reminder, but day and night? Do I have to do this to express my commitment? I am way more active than most in my age group and it’s going to be hard to not wear a tank top while out fishing or taking my shirt off on a hike. I also ride mountain bikes, motocross and surf. I don’t plan to wear garments on the way to, during or after many of those activities so what do I say during my next interview? I also am not going to sleep in them every night. That just does not make sense to me especially when camping. My wife has always worn hers and it eats me up at night. It’s like protection from me unless I want to make an appointment for intimacy. Get up, take them off, jump back in… 😳 😳 😳 …get up put them on go to sleep. Totally ruins the spontaneous moments for me. Too much info, sorry.I have a little know secret which is I have been putting this off for years because I know the next pressure will be to be sealed and that would be really covering my true feelings. I have been very unhappy with my marriage for too long. Being sealed would require I go thru the ceremony with glazed eyes. I also harbor some indifference toward the Church because of the time commitment they require to be a member and what I have sacrificed to meet those standards. I mentioned it in a different post awhile back but in a way only to vent. I am now so disappointed that I let my dreams and goals get derailed and I can’t let it go. I will need to suppress these emotions while going thru the temple. Or maybe it will take care of itself. Thanks Ray. I was braced for a different response but I don’t know the community here real well. You are right, I am doing this for my family, primarily for my son. I suspect that if my thoughts were known within my own ward I would get a different reaction. I really see the whole activity as symbolic and while I have respect and reverence I do not get real wrapped up in all that. I went to Deseret and acquired all the ceremonial clothing but didn’t come home feeling all ambitious. There are a couple things I am going to be held to that really bother me but I don’t know where the proper place is to bring it up. SamBee wrote:
Most fall away without a song and dance. They’re pressed too hard, and drift away.
Do you mean as in expected to much of?
SamBee wrote:* People who love the gospel but not everything about the church. Some.
If I understand the above two statements correctly, they are related and these are my main issues. I would venture a guess that “expected too much of” would be at the top of disillusioned members keeping their distance. Or, could be just me.
church0333 wrote:Old-Timer wrote:rebecca, as Sam implied, the mention of Haun’s Mill is about the mentality that was pervasive at the time – and the willingness of the early saints to be defensive and even a bit paranoid. Frankly, that event alone isn’t the full picture, either. The early saints had been driven from place to place and seen friends and family members killed and die as a result of persecution, so it’s understandable that they were on edge.
It’s not close to an excuse for MMM, and I condemn MMM unequivocally, but it certainly was a contributing factor in understanding the instability of the situation.
I couldn’t agree more. It is easy to make a judgment after the fact We condemn the NAZIS for killing the Jews, but after the war the Jewish Brigade which was part of the British Army went on campaign of revenge and killed hundreds of Germans and they were considered heroes by many. Remember the way many celebrated in the middle east after 9/11, and they were doing it in the name of God. I went to Iraq and saw first hand America’s response and most of us Americans were okay with that at that time. There are so many stories like that in history, and only after history was made and people had time to think about it did the regrets and shame and sometimes the justification set in. There have always been cover ups, also, so I don’t find that too disturbing either, but I wish it wasn’t the case. After I got back from Iraq and saw the senseless taking of lives on both sides I began to understand how bad we can treat our fellow men. I can feel pride and shame at the same time. I also think that the Mormons involved in the MMM probably had to deal with their guilt during their time on earth and in heaven. Taking a live whether justified or not will haunt most people the rest of their lives.
Ray adds some great insight and church0333 some really good perspective that is hard to come up with on my own but when I see it I understand and identify with wholly. Thanks guys, this is why I lurk often.
