[MayB]

Thanks for all your replies. Sorry it’s taken me a few days to get back on here.

Brown wrote:

I struggle with many of the same things you do, but that’s irrelevant in this case. If you can’t teach the curriculum as provided by the church, then I think you should step down from the calling of GD teacher because you aren’t fulfilling it. Sorry if this seems blunt.

No need to apologize. I appreciate your straightforward comment. I had only accepted this calling a few weeks before my faith transition/crisis/whatever hit me over the head and my first reaction was a desire to step down. I knew I wouldn’t be able to teach the way the manual wanted me to. The bishop wanted me to stay and I’ve been teaching for about 9 months now. As Ray mentioned, my bishop comes to my class regularly and has repeatedly expressed appreciation and support for my way of teaching. I’ve also had members of my class thank me for presenting things in a way that is truthful and gets them to really think a little harder or differently about certain things. It looks like I will be stepping down soon for other reasons that I won’t go into here. (I’ll probably vent/whine/explain over on the support board) This will probably be my last lesson.

I had sincerely considered getting a substitute for this one as a couple of you mentioned. However, after doing some more reading and thinking about it, I’m pretty sure I can teach it in a way that honors Joseph’s dedication to his beliefs and to the people that he led without turning into all-out idol worship.

Mike, thank you for the list of missionaries who died while serving and for that line of thought. Mackay, thanks for that Ensign article. I really enjoyed reading it and feel like it paints a pretty good picture of the events surrounding what happened at Carthage.

On Own Now wrote:

D&C 135 also has this statement that we gloss over: “henceforth their names will be classed among the martyrs of religion.” It doesn’t say they are the best martyrs ever. It doesn’t say they are the only true martyrs since Peter and Paul. It doesn’t say “martyrs of our church”… It says, “martyrs of religion.” That is a powerful statement because it recognizes a sort of kinship with others who have suffered tragedy because of their beliefs. We are on the same team, not opposing teams. It’s a rare unifying statement with others who believe in God. I would use this along with your “other martyrs” discussion.

Thank you. I really like this.

Old-Timer wrote:

I like the idea of using non-scriptural examples of people who died for their beliefs, and I probably would point out that most of them believed something that others found threatening and were killed as a result – and many of them believed things we personally don’t believe. I might ask them to think seriously about whether or not we can accept others who are different than we are. Perhaps at that point, I would start a discussion about how we should be careful of dismissing and persecuting others who see things differently than we do – that we ought to act more like Alexander Doniphan and less like Governor Boogs in our dealings with people with whom we disagree. I might take a quote or two from mackay11’s excellent quotes post (whatever it’s called) and/or Pres. Uchtodorf’s talks and discuss how much we need differing perspectives in the Church in order to learn from each other.

Ray, I love this idea! Sometimes I feel like a lot of my lessons boil down to looking at the way we think about and treat each other, not just in the church but in the world. That’s what Christ taught was to love one another and sometimes I feel like, especially with all the rules and checklists that our particular religion seems to employ, we get too caught up in judging one another and forget to simply love, accept, and treat each other well.

Thanks for all of your help guys! This place is such a wealth of knowledge, ideas and perspectives. 🙂

[MayB]

If this is true, I hope I’m still teaching Gospel Doctrine when they come out. I try so hard to come up with a new way to present such familiar information and it can be exhausting! I’ve found that inserting little tid-bits of church history that most people have never heard can really perk up the ears of the people in my class. But once we move on to the scripture lessons, it’s kind of hard to do much with them that hasn’t been done before.

I actually had a sister come up to me after a class and tell me that she likes hearing the same lessons year after year because that is how God teaches us, by repetition. Funny, I always thought it was line upon line, precept upon precept. Not line upon line and then that first line again and then again and again and again…..

[MayB]

One more thing….

girlygirl wrote:

I think I have progressed to the churches stance of not agreeing with porn just because its ‘addictive’ and ‘bad’ without any further explanation to actually exploring why it doesn’t sit well with me is because it truly is just an awful industry. Just the other day I watched a documentary on tv about tweenager girls trying to become models in Russia to feed their families and get them out of poverty and when that doesn’t work out the transition to the sex industry is just natural because their so used to posing for a camera.

Sorry if I’m all over the place and this doesn’t make sense. I just feel I live in a world where everyone pretty much watches porn thinking it doesn’t harm anyone but doesn’t have empathy for the individual. Even if it is their choice, they run the risk of disease. Theres just so many implications.

I agree. Porn is an awful industry and ruins so many lives. I’d say the consumers of porn see it as an object and don’t see the personal aspect of it as far as the individuals who make it. Does that make sense? The thinking is usually along the lines of “I’m looking at it and it’s not hurting anyone at all.” They don’t think of themselves as supporting an awful industry that destroys lives and exploits young girls and women.

I saw a similar documentary a while back and it made me so sad for these girls and women, many of whom just didn’t think they were capable of doing anything else with their lives. Anyway, I understand that it’s hard to reserve judgment on a topic that you are particularly passionate about. Maybe you could talk to your friends about it. Just mention…”Hey, I saw your magazine in the bedroom the other night and it reminded me of this documentary that I watched recently…..” and then go on to express your feelings about it while being sure not to make them feel like you’re condemning them or anything. Just kind of a sharing of information kind of thing. Don’t know if that helps, but it might be a way for you to bring a little awareness to those in your life, but still maintain the friendship.

[MayB]

I know what you mean about that automatic judgment that just seems to pop up. Obviously you know these are good people that you really like. One thing that has been a big part of my own transition is realizing that my standards are not everyone’s standards and that’s okay.

With that said, I don’t like porn. I think it is an awful industry and has the potential to cause incredible damage to peoples’ lives and families. It’s caused a lot of hurt in my own marriage and still pops up once in a while to rear it’s ugly head. When that happens, I have to remind myself that I know my husband. I know he’s not some disgusting pervert going around objectifying every woman he sees. I know he’s a good man, a great husband, my best friend, and an amazing father. Just because, once in a while, he is drawn to images of naked and suggestive women doesn’t change any of that. I think the church’s emphasis on pornography has actually increased the problems that it causes. Sure, state your position that it is bad and has no redeeming value and encourage members to stay away from it. But the constant rhetoric just makes men who do succumb to the temptation feel like crap and the women in their lives feel worthless. I also have a theory that the constant emphasis on it just makes it more intriguing for young men too and encourages secrecy that further damages relationships.

In the case you mentioned though, I agree with Mackay that them leaving it out in the open is an indication that for them, pornography isn’t an issue. There are a lot of couples who enjoy pornography together or where the wife doesn’t mind her husband looking at it. I’ve decided that how pornography affects a marriage is entirely dependent on the couple. These people that you know sound like they’re using it in a healthy way. Try to just remember that they’re still great people. They’re still the same as they were the day before you slept in their house. I know it’s easier said than done, but I hope it helps. 🙂

[MayB]

First off, thank you for reading my novel of a post. I tend to go on and on sometimes.

Secondly, thank you all for your input, support and encouragement.

SilentDawning wrote:

Let me ask — what do you find more interesting — sitting through TBM lessons that often perpetuate cultural/non-doctrinal issues that you find disturbing, or those lessons where you step out on the plank, take risks (like you did with the pants-to-church scenario), and find the audience loved it? Where you find yourself a positive change agent, speaking for the silent minority or majority that believe many of the same things, but are afraid to say them?

You’re right SD. I can barely stand to sit through most of the TBM lessons. In RS last Sunday, the lesson was on sustaining the priesthood. I could tell that our instructor, also the RS president, was trying to get women to think of the priesthood as something they can utilize and be blessed by regardless of whether they have a PH holder in the home, but the women just kept turning it into an idolize-the-men-who-hold-it fest. They kept saying things about how we sustain the priesthood by making sure our husbands go home teaching, not complaining when they’re gone all the time with PH duties, being obedient to what our local and general authorities ask us to do. At the very last minute, I raised my hand and said that it’s important to realize that the priesthood and the men who hold it are two completely separate things and that we shouldn’t just give blind support to any man who is a PH holder in the name of doing our duty. I even said that I know many men who, while holding the priesthood and sometimes through the office or calling of the PH they held, have done some truly terrible things. The women stared at me, but the RS pres. came up to me afterward and thanked me for saying what she had been trying to get across the whole time.

SilentDawning wrote:

I have had the same experience. I taught a lesson on not judging others. I taught it in jeans, tennis shoes and a loud, flowered shirt. At the end, unveiled that I did it intentionally to allow everyone to introspect on their thoughts as they saw me up there — a seasoned priesthood holder — openly violating the dress code. What did you think? Apostasy? Rebellion? Judgmental thoughts? I focused the lesson how we should be a light, not a judge, and that I had permission to be dressed that way from our HPGL. Powerful lesson with so many brethren, including a high councilor, sitting there with shocked and some of them, sheepish looks on their faces.

I love this! These are the kinds of lessons we need.

I do love being an agent for change or even just causing people to do a little bit of introspection. I usually feel very satisfied after my lessons are done. I guess I’m just a little worried about the stress of school being too much. I think I’ll keep teaching and just take it one lesson at a time. My next lesson is on the deaths Joseph and Hyrum at Carthage. I’m sure I’ll be picking all of your brains in the week or two before I teach. 🙂

[MayB]

I have yet to hear a testimony like that, but I’m listening for them. Not because I want to find someone who is ‘disaffected’, but because I often feel like testimonies are so manufactured and similar. I actually toyed around with the idea of getting up this last Sunday, but I didn’t. I don’t have a testimony of anything really, at least not in the sens that others expect me to. Maybe by next month I’ll be feeling brave enough to get up and simply say that I’m grateful for Jesus Christ and for the things that the He taught while he was on the Earth and that trying to be more like Him makes me a better person.

[MayB]

hawkgrrrl wrote:

I think you can explain to MIL that you appreciate their generosity in setting aside money for a mission, but you find with your kids that using guilt or pressure to get them to do what you want usually backfires, and you’d rather let them make their own minds up through the great examples they see. That seems like a reasonable request. You’re the parent.

This is a great way to put it hawkgrrrl. Thank you. I think I’ll use it and see if it helps. Even though DH and I are the parents, they usually seem to think they know best because they are DH’s parents and have “successfully” raised 5 kids.

opentofreedom wrote:

The thing I find THE MOST ASTONISHING about all of this is that they are totally missing the ENTIRE point of what the “GOSPEL” is trying to teach… by a LANDSLIDE. How is living the church in the way they are living it really helping to have an eternal family if 2 of their children wont even have anything to do with them? Sometimes the “logic” in this church makes me want to run away screaming!!

I can only see this because I am pretty sure at one point I was heading down that path that I could have no empathy for people who didn’t live and see the church as I did. I am SO grateful that I am having this faith transition.

Yes, they are missing the whole point and what really bothers me is that they don’t see how it has been their actions/words that have alienated their 2 kids from them and they don’t see what they are missing out on.

[MayB]

On Own Now wrote:

I’m not going to talk about the temple, because I think that’s treating the symptom. You and your husband need to get on the same page about your faith crisis/transition. Your husband is probably a problem solver by nature. You tell your husband you don’t like to attend the temple, he looks for ways to fix it. I suggest that you get away for discussing specific points of doctrine and focus on your belief about God, spirituality, and discipleship. Tell him what you do believe, not what you don’t. Reassure him that you are the same person you’ve always been, but that your faith is changing. Tell him you support his faith. Tell him you’d like to go to the temple with him, because you love him, but that you don’t need to be converted to the temple-as-salvation model in order to do so. If he’d welcome you with that understanding, then you’d welcome the chance to go with him. If you just can’t be comfortable with the temple, then take that off the table, and substitute “church” for “temple”.

This. I totally agree with this. Taking questions to the temple pres. isn’t going to help anything. I don’t feel like going to the temple right now either, but my husband knows that if he wanted me to go with him, I would. At the moment, both of us are kind of taking a break from temple attendance. I think On Own Now hit it on the head. This is about your relationship with your husband. Focusing on what you DO believe and reassuring him of your love and support for him could go a long way in a mutual understanding.

[MayB]

Old-Timer wrote:

Quote:

The first time I met her, she went on and on about how lucky I was to be marrying into their righteous family and how it was so sad that my parents had divorced because I must have never been able to experience a family that reads scriptures every day, prays together, goes to the temple, and how my family won’t be an eternal family.

/FULL BODY SHUDDER

Yep. That about sums it up Ray. There are plenty more examples like that too. And my FIL can be just as bad. Early in our marriage we were having issues with a former girlfriend of DH’s trying very hard to split us up claiming she had a revelation that he was her eternal companion and father of her children. In the middle of this, FIL decides to lecture me on how I need to be accepting and loving of her because she will likely be my sister-wife in the eternities and very possibly in this life because polygamy is an eternal principle and could be brought back at any time. He told me that I needed to be okay with sharing my husband. :wtf: Yeah, that didn’t go over with me very well.

It’s these kinds of things that I don’t want my children to experience with my in-laws.

[MayB]

Thanks for all your responses. My husband has been great about all of this and working through it together has been really beneficial to our relationship. I do find that if I talk about anything church related too often, he shuts down a bit. And he still seems to see me teaching GD as being sort of hypocritical. I’ve talked to him a little about how I don’t teach anything that I don’t believe in and I work hard to steer the lesson towards basic principles rather than just teaching the church version of its history. I think he’s slowly coming around on that one. He’s usually busy with our 9 month old during my class, so he doesn’t hear my lessons.

Ann wrote:

I noticed that my angry, panicked, constricted feelings re. garments alternate with positive feelings. Their whiteness and familiarity and symbolism pull me towards them. Sometimes I can’t wear them; sometimes I can’t not wear them. What is off the table for me is wearing them 24/7/365.

Thanks for your thoughts on garments, Ann. I’m not to the point where I ever feel drawn to them, but perhaps that will come back in time.

As for the in-laws, yes mackay11, you hit the nail on the head. 😆 But they do it in the most passive-aggressive way with a big smile on their face and “truth” on their side. It drives me nuts! My FIL has always held high-profile church callings. He’s been bishop, has been a patriarch for the last 20-ish years, and is also a temple sealer. My husband grew up being known as the patriarch’s son and his parents have always used the guilt/shame tactics when it comes to behavior and anything church related. They’ve even used it on me a time or two. They have already alienated their 2 oldest children and their families by being judgmental and overbearing. We’ve been trying hard to maintain a good relationship with them, mostly for the kids’ sake. But if they continue to apply the same behavior to their relationship with our children, they might just lose us too.

Kumahito wrote:

Unfortunately, in the Church the success or failure of parents and grand parents are often measured in numbers of temple marriages, missions served, children baptized, etc. How many times have you heard older members of the Church introduce themselves as “a mother of four wonderful children, all married in the temple.” It’s an outward indication of their faithfulness, they think. Perhaps your mother-in-law feels, for some reason, that if your son doesn’t serve a mission it will be a negative reflection on her. So, rather than encouraging someone to serve a mission because of the positives the missionary will take from their mission, people with this mindset encourage others to serve in order to receive some of the reflected light from that service. Kind of selfish, perhaps.

I think this is a lot of the problem. My MIL in particular seems to do this a lot. She takes a lot of pride in her family being extra righteous. The first time I met her, she went on and on about how lucky I was to be marrying into their righteous family and how it was so sad that my parents had divorced because I must have never been able to experience a family that reads scriptures every day, prays together, goes to the temple, and how my family won’t be an eternal family. It was repulsive. She would flip out if she knew that her two oldest children(both RMs and married in the temple) haven’t been attending church for years. As I said before, my in-laws have already driven them away and have very little contact with them.

Kumahito wrote:

Just out of curiousity – did your father-in-law and mother-in-law serve missions?

FIL served a mission but MIL did not.

Roy wrote:

I also have manipulative In-Laws. It helps to live 500 miles away. Relations with more than half of the posterity is strained because of this issue. I have come to some realizations that I repeat to myself and DW as coping mechanisms.

1) Their behaviour is more about them than it is about you. I was noticing that sometimes MIL will send books for my 5 year old that are baby-ish. They send 12 days of Christmas packages that contain little dollar store knick-knacks that cost more to ship than to purchase (and that we didn’t want in the first place). One time they were getting each family a Wii for Christmas – we were really hurting for money and DW wanted to visit her family for Christmas – we asked if we could use the Wii money to help finance the trip home. We were told that they really wanted us to have the Wii :wtf: , so we ended up putting the trip home on our credit card. With our kids being toddlers a Wii was not needed (we didn’t even take it out of the box for the first few years) but a trip home was important. Many of the other families had older kids so this gift made sense for them and the in-laws wanted everyone to get the same gift.

These actions can be hurtful because it tells me that no matter how great the gesture, it is not really personalized to you and what you might need. To say anything about it can make you sound ungrateful. I believe that these actions fulfil need to accomplish a duty or role or responsibility in the mind of the in-law. They do these things to feel good about their role or to “fulfil their responsibility.” Sort of like a faithful home teacher that visits every month and delivers the message but never seems to really connect.

2) They will never change. I have much evidence to suggest that trying to make them change would be a fruitless endeavour.

3) I sometimes equate this to love languages. I gravitate to expressing love through my love languages even though I know that my wife receives love more in other ways. I know this, but I still gravitate to what comes naturally to me. I try to be charitable to others doing what comes naturally to them.

In their own way this is how they show love. In DW’s family there is not much display of affection. Gestures such as giving of gifts is one of the only ways this is done. I believe that they think they are showing love – even if they are tone deaf as to what actual needs are.

In addition to reminding myself of these things we set boundaries. These boundaries to not necessarily need to be announced. Reducing visit frequency or avoiding certain topics can also be a boundary. Most of these boundaries are accomplished by the distance between us and the relatively young age of our kids, but we have made known that we have certain parenting styles and techniques. I try to be a “filter” for my kids to help with the outside messages that they receive. I believe that you were doing exactly that by talking to your son about it later in the car. If you think it would help to ask your MIL to direct all her “life lessons” through you then go for it. Otherwise, a debriefing afterward might accomplish a similar objective.

We used to live about 400 miles away and we’d only see them once or twice a year. Things were so much easier then. Now we’re only about an hour and a half away and see them every couple of months or so. Still not too bad, but they’ve recently expressed a desire to have the kids over for sleepovers. DH and I just aren’t comfortable leaving the kids with them because of those small things, like the mission comment, that get turned into little lectures given to our kids make them feel bad.

I have already realized #1 and #2. Others have tried talking to them about their behavior and it hasn’t done anything except cause them to do more of it. For me, it’s more about just trying to manage a relationship with them while they behave this way. As our children are getting older, this is becoming increasingly difficult.

I love the love languages! My in-laws do the giving gifts thing too. Their gifts are things like picking up outfits for the kids at garage sales, dropping off random items they think we could use, and then of course birthdays and Christmas. I’m okay with this. Whether it’s something we can use or not, we always accept whatever they offer with gratitude. I know it’s their way of showing they care.

I like the boundaries you mentioned. That’s exactly what we’ve been trying to do. I think we’ll continue filtering their behavior and messages to our children and hope that works. If not, we may have to do something like what Ray suggested.

Old-Timer wrote:

Maybe if you looked them in the eyes and said something like:

“We love you, and we want to be involved with you. We want our children to know and love their grandparents. How would you feel if I pulled aside one of your children and started contradicting what you have taught them? How would you feel if I tried to undermine what you believe and teach your children? We would never do that to you, and all we ask is that you don’t do it to us.”

It’s strong, but it is designed to make them think about what they are doing, rather than what you are doing. If they can’t accept that, maybe a break is necessary.

I can easily see it coming to this, but I know that even if we did make a statement such as this, nothing would change and we would have to take a break.

[MayB]

I was having these exact feelings yesterday in RS. Our lesson was supposed to be all about RS and true charity, but somehow it turned into priesthood worship complete with several sisters mentioning their favorite GA’s and how wonderful it is to have such righteous priesthood holding men leading the church and the RS. 🙄 I really wanted to walk out, but I had to play the closing song so I stuck it out.

[MayB]

cwald wrote:

You see this is the problem. This is too important to make a decision when one is not ready…It affects too many aspects and too many people in our lives to make a decision when one is not ready to make it. These crisis of faith transitions should not be forced on anyone. Believe me I know.

Exactly! I feel like he’s seeing this as either I’m all in or I’m all out. I don’t feel like I’m either one right now. It feels like he thinks that he knows where the end of this path will take me and wants me to just skip the journey and be at that destination.

[MayB]

hawkgrrrl wrote:

Maybe I’m off base, but I sense some cold hostility under his words to you. As you said, he hates a hypocrite. In MBTI terms, there are people who prefer closure, decisiveness, and planning ahead. There are other people who prefer to explore all options, gather information first, delay decision making until they feel comfortable. The first type of people can be hasty and make errors. The second type of people can get stuck in analysis paralysis. Honestly, both types drive each other completely nuts. My guess is he’s the former type and you’re the latter.

Actually, I think you may be right on. He’s always been a bit impatient with my desire to analyze every possible option and outcome while I tend to get irritated when he just makes decisions, sometimes big ones, without researching things and thinking it all the way through. Right now, I might just be stuck in that “analysis paralysis” you mentioned. Sometimes I feel like I’m driving myself crazy trying to figure out what I should do because I’m thinking of every possible scenario or consequence that may come from every decision I make regarding my beliefs or my level of church activity and involvement. I’m scared to make any actual decision or take action because I worry about what might happen as a result, especially regarding my relationship with my husband, children, and other family and friends.

[MayB]

Old-Timer wrote:

Have you told him that no matter what your ultimate decision is with regard to the Church, that you always will choose him?

Maybe he has felt free to be . . . less committed . . . because he has believed you will make up for it – that your faith will make up for a lack on his part. Maybe, deep down, he wants to believe in eternal marriage and the big picture of Mormonism – and having you struggle has shaken that – made him worry that you and he might end up “til death do you part”. Maybe your ability to make “the right decision” about the “big things” has freed him not to have to worry about them.

Thanks for this perspective Ray. Yes, I have told him several times that he comes first and that our relationship is more important to me than anything else. When I first spoke to him about my doubts and issues, his first worry was for our marriage and the eternal aspect of that. I’ve reassured him that I still believe in God and I don’t believe that a loving God would keep us apart after this life. We’ve actually grown closer over these past few months.

I had never really thought of his view as even possibly being the way you describe, but it makes sense. I’ve always been the one to lead out in family prayer, scripture study, FHE, temple attendance, etc. He’s never been one to instigate anything related to church or spirituality. In this instance, I don’t want him to rely solely on me to make “the right decision” because I feel like religious belief and spirituality is such an individual journey. I want him to decide for himself and I worry that if I decide to step back or even just to be more open in my “buffet” choices that he will too without really making the effort to dig deep and discover his own beliefs.

SilentDawning wrote:

You might want to discuss what his goals and vision are for your family as your children grow older. Also, kindly, but gently, with a view to understanding, ask him about his own feelings, since you indicated they are not clear — for example, why he doesn’t stay for the full three hour block, etcetera. Let him also share how he feels.

There may be common ground there. You may find you both have reasons for staying without fully engaging with the entire experience.

I agree with Ray, though, that if you really mean it, affirm your relationship and family comes ahead of any divisiveness that may be inspired by church teachings.

I was relieved that the other day, my wife said her relationship to me comes ahead of the church. That wasn’t always true when we were younger, but it is true now

This is a wonderful idea SD. Thank you. This is something that we really haven’t done. We’ve always been so focused on the present, making ends meet, dealing with the demands of a stressful job, school, and young children that we’ve never really sat down and talked about what our vision for our family is. He has mentioned, in passing, that he feels like the church has a good structure and support system for children and youth. And I do agree with the basic principles and standards that are taught at church. I also really enjoyed most of the activities and the social atmosphere that it gave me growing up. The one thing I would change is that I totally bought into the black and white issues and by doing so missed out on friendships with wonderful people and made choices that hurt others unnecessarily. I also took everything so literally that some of those teachings became damaging to me. I’ve mentioned to my husband before that even though those things bother me, I feel like we are in a better position than our parents were to be able to help our children wade through them and understand their own ability to study things out, pray, and choose for themselves.

I’ll be looking for a good time for us to talk. Maybe we’ll have to make a date of it. Get a sitter, pick up some dinner or something, drive to our favorite spot and sit and talk. These kind of discussions used to really scare me, but now I love them because they give us the opportunity to really understand each other better and to grow closer and more united. Thanks again for all of the great advice and words of support! I probably would have bungled this up big time without you guys. 🙂

[MayB]

Thank you for your responses. Just knowing others are thinking of me helps lift my heart.

On Own Now wrote:

if their is one commonality that most of us share it is what I call “The Great Disappointment”; learning that the Church is not what we once thought and that our lives are not as purposeful as we previously believed.

Such an apt description. For me, letting go of the “purposes” I’ve been taught for my life has felt liberating. I always struggled with taking the path that the church kept telling me was my “calling” in life, not pertaining to issues of morality or the commandments, but in the role I was taught I was destined to play and that should be my goal and my true joy. So, I guess this disappointment has paved the way for me to work toward being a more authentic version of myself.

On Own Now wrote:

I stopped worrying about what other people thought of me. Spirituality, god-centered living, Christian attitudes, charity, love, faith… these are all far more personal than I once thought. In the Church, we often tend to think of these things as tied to our observance of the various commitments of mormonism. In reality, those are just outword rituals.

I’ve spent my whole life worrying about what other people think of me. I suppose I’m having a hard time letting that go. Also, I know that not wearing the garment, once discovered, would trigger unwelcome discussions (read lectures of concern) from certain family members and I really don’t want to deal with that. I suppose though, if I’m going to be more authentic I would have to deal with those things eventually anyway. There is no easy answer. Either go on pretending or deal with the consequences of truly living according to my own belief and conscience.

On Own Now wrote:

Black & white thinking is a poor foundation for the aforementioned charity, love and faith. It hinders. It restricts. It judges. That’s true for people still fully in the Church and for people in faith transition, alike. If you can find good things in the Church that help you reach your personal spirituality and you can learn to ignore the other things, then great. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing. I personally believe there is no God. I still find a sort-of burning in my bosom regarding the teachings of the New Testament. The LDS Church offers me my most consistent brushes with the ‘spiritual’ realm.

Thank you so much for sharing this. I’d like to try to incorporate my own spiritual growth within the community of the church, but am finding it increasingly difficult.

On Own Now wrote:

It’s not ‘hypocrisy’ if you are true to yourself.

I have been very careful in teaching my class that I don’t profess to belief I do not have. Sometimes it’s easy, other times not. This will be a good issue to discuss with my husband. Right now, I’m not wearing the garment for myself, but for others. I’ll have to do some serious introspection as to what choices I will make and why.

Earl Parsons wrote:

I’m curious about why he wants you to hurry up and make a decision. From your initial description of him it sounds like he would be more sympathetic to your questions. Could it be that he wants to take a break from church and wants you to make the decision for him?

You know, Earl, he just might. He’s not one to take time to weigh options carefully and contemplate every possible consequence to an action. He prefers to just make a decision and stick to it. He can sometimes be a bit impatient with my more methodical way of doing things. I don’t like to take an action until I’m 100% sure it’s the one that I want. He has also looked to me to make some of the bigger decisions in our marriage. I’d rather we each discuss our positions and go from there. When he does something that he knows I want or I feel good about without expressing that he feels the same way, I worry that he’s just trying to make me happy and might later blame me if the results of that action we took aren’t what he wants them to be. Maybe he’s okay with taking a step back and taking a break from church, but if that’s the case I really wish he would just say so. It would make things so much easier. 🙂

Ann wrote:

Like some others have said, it seems like he might be asking you to make a decision for both of you. I don’t know anything about your marriage. Does he tend to defer to you in religious matters? But, if you’re going to nit-pick along his lines, why is your wearing garments more “hypocritical” than him skipping the majority of Sunday meetings? You know how to bring it up without being contentious. I know you’re dealing with the whole ball of wax, not just garments, but being called a hypocrite by your husband is not a good way to start. Good luck to both of you as you figure out a way to talk

Thanks Ann. As I mentioned above, he sometimes does defer to me in several different areas of our marriage. I hadn’t thought of his skipping meetings to be along the hypocritical line. I simply understand that he doesn’t feel he benefits from being there and isn’t comfortable attending. I’m hoping we can talk without it getting contentious. Per our conversation yesterday, he just seems to be waiting to see what I’ll do without giving me any inkling of what that would mean for him and the kids or what he wants as far as activity with the church.

opentofreedom wrote:

I agree with what others said that just from the sound of it , it sounds like your hubby might want a break too? And I can see how that would be SO scary. I worry about the same thing. I don’t want to be the cause of anyone’s faith crisis!! or anyone leaving the church unless they decided on their own.

Thanks OTF. It really is so scary. It might sound silly, but after 30 years of being told exactly what to believe and how to live my life, the idea of rejecting any of those things or of openly stepping back from them scares me to death. I’m scared of the reactions of others, mostly because I know I might have to state my reasons and opinions and that those reasons and opinions will not be accepted in a loving or understanding way.

[Author]

Posts