Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
In my marriage my wife and I have reached a bit of a truce. She’s a TBM and I usually just act like one. She and my children know my struggles and that I have doubts about the eternal nature of life, etc. That being said, if there is a God – and I can sincerely say that I really really hope there is – that He would judge me as much (or more) on my actions than on my beliefs. To me faith seems to imply action while knowledge or belief don’t imply action. I think that’s the basis of our truce: my wife says “I know” and I say “I have faith in” or “I hope that”… Not knowing all the details of your marriage, it seems that if you are a good person and you both love each other and act that way, then you still have a basis for a good marriage. It may be rocky at first but hang in there.
One more thing that I want to point out separately. My family and I have changed what we do on the Sabbath day. We still don’t do things that make others work, but we go swimming (pool in the back yard), hiking, picnicing, and bike-riding on the afternoons we do have together. Going to the park and throwing the football is a common activity. I don’t hide it and others have commented on my family swimming but I tell them it builds more family unity than sitting in front of the TV. This all has the added benefit of me being less likely of having a ‘big’ calling the next time around.
Kumahito, I feel your pain. Sundays for me are literally more busy than a regular work day. Just this week my 6 year old taught himself to ride a bike because neither me nor my wife spent the time to teach him. I felt terrible when I found out. One thing that helps me is a set, unalterable time for date night with my wife. For me that’s Saturday night and with few exceptions I say “no” to things that require Saturday night time. People understand that when I say, sorry it’s date night. This is my favorite time of the eeek
My $0.02. I hope it helps.
Old-Timer wrote:Life and societal trends are cyclical. I see the Church continuing to evolve and not decline. I don’t envision becoming the next Catholic Church, but I’ve never seen numerical growth as an indication of anything other than numerical growth, so I’m completely fine with not seeing the explosion that was all the rage to predict a couple of decades ago.
Ray, I genuinely hope you’re right and I think it may depend on this topic of “being open to others” to a good degree.
DevilsAdvocate wrote:
That’s why my guess is that the Church will gradually decline over the next few decades and become almost completely irrelevant worldwide within 50-100 years compared to its relative high point in the mid to late 1990s. Sure the total membership numbers continue to go up but only a small minority of converts and children counted as new members each year will remain active very long and/or successfully pass all these traditions on to the majority of their children so mostly increasing the number of inactive members is not real sustained growth.DevilsAdvocate, I have much the same thought. My thinking is that we could end up a bit like Jews with several groups claiming to be Jews but living vastly different lifestyles. It makes me wonder about my children and grandchildren – I want to provide them a foundation for a happy life (and I think the church can help with that) but I don’t want them to end up in a religion that is viewed as extreme. There are many things I love about this church and a few things I just cannot bear and it would make me sad if it completely fizzled.
It also seems that religion in general is becoming less important in much of the world, so the LDS church is swimming a bit upstream anyways in addition to all the things that make us different than other Christian religions.
I’ve become more liberal during my faith crisis as most Americans would describe it, but I’d describe it as being more tolerant and understanding and less judgmental. Black and white (figuratively speaking) are no longer the only colors I see in my church and that has naturally extended to my broader view of life. That being said other aspects of my political beliefs haven’t changed one bit. Fiscal issues come to mind.
Don’t know if this situation applies to you or not – but once I had a bishop who constantly told me how to do my calling. It drove me *crazy* and one day I told him to leave me alone or release me. He backed off and now we are actually friends. I think you’re doing the right things – just stay out of his way and leave him alone. Most bishops don’t want the job and are doing their best to keep their own family, job, and mental sanity together. His reign will end, and if it makes you feel better, chances are many in your ward also feel the same way as you.
I’m going to have to read some of the links to other posts. They look really interesting. As a parent, I think it’s my responsibility to address sex education with my children – not the church and not the school either (but I do understand that most people don’t ever talk about it with their kids). I started when they were 9 and hope I gave them age appropropriate information, but I think that the process of making babies was clear after our talks. I have to think that children start talking about sex among themselves at a young age.
I cringe at the thought that the YW leaders in my ward would tell my daughters about sex ed. I cringe even more when I think about the YM leaders in my ward teaching sex ed. As a separate topic, it bothers me that male bishops often ask teenage girls about their sex life. Of course it’s to verify obedience to the LofC but I have to think there is some level of voyerism going on.
To answer the original question – I think some explanation that abstinence is the only way to 100% prevent pregnancy and STDs (although that’s not even completely true either, but it mostly is). I told my kids that abstinence is the best way but that they have to decide for themselves. If they decide to experiment they darn well better use a condom because I’m not paying for a baby and they may regret an STD their entire life.
SamBee wrote:Roadrunner wrote:There is probably another part of the atonement worth bringing up here and which very much has to do with this topic. Victims are not sinners nor transgressors, but many victims think they are.
Do victims sin? Well, I guess if they do, it is in hate and anger. These are understandable reactions, and I suspect God sees that there are extenuating circumstances. We’re supposed to forgive, and sometimes that’s difficult.
Yes, I suppose that victims sin in retaliation or in hate and anger. My simplistic post was meant to say that I don’t really think victims can be blamed for the “first” sin. I believe that this whole thread shows what a difficult topic this is. Like was said elsewhere, if I were to talk about it in church I would stick with the idea that victims aren’t to blame. end of story. Parsing out the language is undoubtably helpful for some and is interesting to frame the atonement in, but not really necessary for me.
The things I’m about to post are probably a bit incoherent in nature, and I’m having difficulty tying them in logically to the thread. Hopefully they will help someone or maybe just typing them will help me.
My wife was a victim of sexual assault as a pre-teen and she shows no long term scars whatsoever that I can see. In her mind, it’s over, she’s healed, and she has a remarkably healthy attitude about it. She’s a TBM, RM and I wish I was more like her in many ways. She ‘fooled around’ in high school which neither she nor I attribute to her being a victim, but rather being a healthy, attractive teenager with hormones. She repented and has found peace with her teenage years.
This is something I’ve never shared with anyone, even my wife: I was a victim of abuse (relatively mild) in my pre-teen years and the abuser was a teenager just a few years older than me. I won’t go into details about it but I genuinely feel like I’m to blame for the abuse. I haven’t told anyone about it because I’m afraid that it would label me as a weirdo or freak or something, including my wife. As a teenager with raging hormones I wanted so badly to ‘fool around’ and actually now I feel a lot of regret for not doing so when I could. I felt an (in hindsight) irrational fear of burning in hell for all eternity for even the smallest infraction against the law of chastity.
How this fits into the atonement, I’m not entirely sure. I know that now that I’m an adult, I’m jealous of my wife’s teenage experiences which means that I don’t understand repentance / atonement fully. Also, blaming the victim (myself in this case) is easy to do and perhaps a natural part of human nature (important note – I’m *not* saying the OP condones it). I remember hearing a report on National Public Radio about “ambiguous” sexual relationships and perhaps at the time it was the way to describe experiences between two young people, neither of which entirely understands the situation. I find the abstract idea of an atonement very comforting in general but it’s been difficult applying to myself in the non-abstract. I suspect that many victims feel that way. For me, divine empathy is the most important thing here and I’m a little discouraged it hasn’t received more attention.
And finally (for now), I know that I would never have the courage to bring up a topic like this in a forum for fear of being scrutinized to the nth degree. If I ever had to give a lesson or talk on this in church I’d want to have a licensed counselor write the talk for me and then I’d read it word for word. There is so much abuse and so many different circumstances. That alone makes me want to believe in the atonement and apply it to myself more fully.
Ray, My post wasn’t really directed at you and I’m thankful you created this topic. It’s a difficult subject and I’m glad you posted it. My post was really only trying to say that divine empathy is a powerful part of the atonement that I wanted to emphasize.
That being said, I didn’t understand the section below which I think can be misunderstood.
Quote:those who understand the Law of Chastity (even to the fullest extent possible) and participate in its violation without their own full consent also have “transgressed the law”
There is probably another part of the atonement worth bringing up here and which very much has to do with this topic. Victims are not sinners nor transgressors, but many victims think they are. This is not only something that happens in the lds church but in many conservative or traditional (not sure of the correct term) cultures. A victim is faced not only with forgiveing the perpetrator but also must understand he/she is not at fault. I think the atonement applies to the victim in the sense that Jesus understands their pain and feelings and can help them heal themselves of that incorrectly placed guilt. Alma 7 says Jesus takes upon himself our pains and sicknesses, not only sins. It’s the “understanding it’s not my fault” pain that the atonement can help victims the most with, I believe. At least in many cases.
My girls are excited about the change. They and I have thought the age difference was unfair and promoted girls to marry right out of high school. I think the average marriage age of lds girls will increase slightly and the marriage age of lds boys will remain about the same. Most boys will probably still go around 18.5 to 19 I’m guessing. This will probably affect church members in other ways two. My local mission already announced an increase from 180 to 250 missionaries next year and that each ward will have its own missionaries. That means housing, meals, transportation, etc for ward members.
Our bishop also said missionaries are cutting into the church’s tithing more and more. Look for an increase in the $400 mission contribution and or an increased emphasis on a full tithe.
All things considered, I believe this change is a good thing. If nothing else, women are treated slightly more equally.
Thanks for the original post and replies. I didn’t know anything about the Fijians or Philipinos and their priesthood history. I think in the future we will be as ashamed about our position on gays as we are now about blacks.
Kind of funny true story. My bishop got the letter from SLC with the rephrased how to respect the garment letter and he read it aloud in bishopric meeting. When he got to the part about wearing garments while doing yard work, he loudly said something like “that’s not cool” and he never placed the new letter in the temple recommend book. So we’re still using the old letter that doesn’t tell people to wear garmets while moving the lawn in my ward.
