Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
nibbler wrote:
My frame of reference could be off-base but I find it interesting how the Book of Mormon includes some themes that run parallel to the concerns of the Anti-Masonic Party; a party formed shortly after the 1826 disappearance of William Morgan from a town about 50 miles from Palmyra. Then just 12 years after the publication of the Book of Mormon Joseph founds a Freemason lodge in Nauvoo.That’s quite a turnaround.
Well, the original Book of Mormon condemns polygamy and priestcraft, while apparently teaching about the Trinity and a more traditional understanding of Heaven & Hell (without degrees of glory.)
Actually, come to think of it, were the Three Degrees – Telestial, Terrestrial and Celestial influenced by Masonry as well?
DarkJedi wrote:
nibbler wrote:
If it’s about setting a record, they’re on their way.
I do think the “ooo and ahh” temple moment was announcing 20 temples, and maybe that was in lieu of having an exotic place (Russia, China, Mongolia) to announce. Gotta get the wow factor somehow.
And yet the one place that probably needs them, Africa doesn’t get any. For these purposes I don’t count South Africa as part of Africa, as it is the one place that the LDS has been active in for the past sixty years.
I know there are issues about war and instability – not to mention many poor Africans seem to lumbered with awful political leaders – but the church is growing there and African members can’t travel so easily.
I’d say the same about the Pacific islands, except perhaps they have a much smaller population. Latin America has a good sprinkling of temples and most of Asia has few members (although a Indian temple is a good call IMHO.)
Minyan Man wrote:
If Christ were on the earth today, would He make it this complicated?Are there any examples in scripture where He excommunicated anyone?
Good question. He was never very complimentary about someone betraying him, before Judas was named.
The short answer is that Jesus did not establish a church in the modern sense:
Quote:“If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses even to listen to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector” (Matthew 18:15-17).
Jesus did give a number of people a stern warning. The Pharisees, rich people and people who attempted to stone the woman caught in adultery.
I think it depends on what you are exed for. I mention two examples above. One is aggressive and banned, and the other is mild-mannered and active. The former needs medical treatment and the latter reconciliation. Obviously the worst case misdemeanors are murder and rape, and variations thereof, but most members don’t go down those avenues. If you are falsely accused of these then that is a horror story all of its own. There is a level of notoreity that comes with these that goes beyond excom. Most people outside the church will shun you too.
The worst things the church can do are go to the official legal system or unofficial – people cutting you off or being abusive. Then there are strange scenarios like Brother Hamula – I’ve no idea what he did but it leads to speculation, for precisely that reason.
nibbler wrote:Our church doesn’t typically actively shun people when they’re excommunicated, at least not to the degree that some other churches might. That said, I think we do passively shun people. Passive shunning from a community that defined your identity is a punishment. From that perspective I’d say that being banned from the building is worse, it’s a much more explicit form of saying, “we don’t want you.”
Depends what it’s for. If I get exed for a one night stand or becoming a Buddhist, it’s not on a level with certain other things. A big shouting match in public is another step up from that. And if I hold a knife to a leader’s throat or break a window etc. That’s another step up again and will probably land me in jail too. And so on up to the worst case scenarios of sexual assaults and murder.
I do support the first guy being banned from the buildings. I have met him and could deal with him. He had a quarrel with someone on our area leadership. He was maybe unfairly treated. I don’t know. I suspect it was badly handled. But he has an edge which makes me support that decision. I’ve experienced it myself though we didn’t fight. It sounds patronizing, but I hope he gets the help he needs. There are some non-church issues there. Maybe the church accelerated them.
Quote:
Not sure what to say about the excommunication of Natasha Helfer. I found that it made me angry, and it’s been a while since I’ve felt truly angry about something church related. The church is now weaker for it IMO.My last one was the declaration about children of gay parents. Thankfully reversed. It’s one thing to go after gay people, but it is another to go after the children of gay parents. That’s a double whammy. One can argue in the first case, those are people’s innate impulses, but their actions involve some level of agency. In the second case, children are being punished for another person’s actions. So it even managed to annoy people who were not that LGBT friendly. One of my high school exes is bi (leaning heavily towards women) but I didn’t know that early on – conceivably (no pun intended) she could have married me without me knowing this, we could have had children and then separated, before she went off with a woman – then my children would be barred from being bap’d etc in that scenario.
Quote:While not a lifelong ban, the withdrawal of a person’s membership by church leaders amounts to the harshest punishment available for a member of the faith.
I’m going to quibble about this. Excom is bad. But there is a level above this. You can be banned from all church buildings… We have someone in our area who is banned from them. I don’t think his case was properly or fairly handled, but he is severely mentally ill (plus diagnosed) and potentially dangerous. (I’ve met him and can vouch for this. I ran into him by accident and talking to him was like walking in eggshells. I don’t like to judge, but he is difficult, and he’s also physically big.)
At the other extreme, we have a sister who comes to our ward who is lovely and takes part in activities. I didn’t know until last year but she is excom’d. She told me her story, and if I had my way, I’d bring her back in. She appears to have been the victim of rumors. I don’t know both sides of the story but her behavior in the time I’ve known her has been exemplary.
Edit to add: I’ve split this off into its own topic see here –
The big P can end up becoming a major addiction for some people. A friend of mine who was in the book trade once went to buy the library of someone who had died – thousands of volumes of such material, so for some people it is a problem. Its widespread presence online is changing our societal dynamic. It definitely promotes promiscuity over steady relationships and long term marriage – which we can see around us. My former therapist has told me it affects adolescents heavily now – she has teenage girls who are clients, and they complain they are being pushed into more and more experimentation and extreme behaviors which are depicted in these films, which they try out, regret and don’t enjoy. Their boyfriends even complain they don’t look like the stars of these films and their bodies are different (I’m not going into detail, but let’s just say we are all different shapes and sizes, and appearances, and have irregularities… Which are not reflected in the industry). This leads to a lot of confusion, body dysmorphia, self-hatred, STIs etc.
The industry also doesn’t reflect the social aspects of courting, affection and long term commitment.
DarkJedi wrote:
I guess I’m missing something…. Where are you seeing he’s dead?
The Wikipedia link is not fully updated but his death is recorded on it. Heard elsewhere (short version)
A good friend of mine is an inactive mason and he has had a lot of candid conversations with me about it, so I know what goes on in the three degrees. We both think these represent a kind of preparation for death (as does LDS endowment). Many Masons used to believe their ceremonies went back to Solomon’s temple.
As for occult accusations with Masonry, they aren’t without some merit. Occult means something done in secret and most Masonic ceremonies are held behind closed doors. There are also quasi-religious/mystical elements and the use of symbols with meanings not apparent to non-Masons, which strengthen that charge. In some cases, those symbols have meanings that you do not learn until you are “promoted”. I do not think Masons are Luciferians – I don’t know about the 33° etc – at least at the lower levels. The secretiveness in Mormonism and Masonry has allowed opponents to spin all kinds of stories.
One Masonic cliché I can’t stand is, “We’re a society of secrets, not a secret society.” To me that is as much of a fudge as “sacred not secret”. If you’re not open about what you do with outsiders, then it is a secret. Freemasonry is not a secret society in the sense it exists openly with signposted buildings etc. But even that is not entirely true since there have been underground lodges, and ones which do not advertise their existence like Propaganda Due (P2) in Italy.
Limhah wrote:
One of the things that first drew me to LDS was the F&T meetings. I had previously checked out the Quakers who as you may know make spontaneous talk or testimony a primary part of their service, “waiting on the Lord.” Members sit quietly until someone is moved to get up and say a few words about anything that crosses their mind. I’ve usually found these spontaneous meetings more interesting and beneficial than planned sermons.
I’ve tried to attend Quaker meetings but for some reason it almost never happens. I even stay in a Quaker B&B when I visit a particular city and every time I’ve tried to go they’ve canceled!
I am told though that they suffer from similar problems to F&T. The same people get up, little time for others etc. And that some of them are bores. I’m sure some of it is inspiring, but I’m also sure that some use it to peddle some fashionable cause or other. Some people like the sound of their own voices.
DarkJedi wrote:
SamBee wrote:
DarkJedi wrote:That would be fun, even in regular SM!
I’m sure they’d heckle the wrong people!
Maybe we need a blanket ban on the phrases “I know” and “is true”, and a thesaurus on the podium alongside the scriptures.
hahaha, good point. Expanding our vocabulary would be great. Truth is I don’t think most members notice that GAs in their conference addresses rarely use those phrases themselves any more.
It just becomes boring! One can express the same sentiments in different words anyway.
We get so hung up on the Lord’s Prayer but some of us produce the same testimony practically word on word.
DarkJedi wrote:
Limhah wrote:
I always felt the congregation should be able to heckle the person on the stand when warranted, like in the British Parliament. I could never get anyone else on board with my suggestion unfortunately.
That would be fun, even in regular SM!
I’m sure they’d heckle the wrong people!
Maybe we need a blanket ban on the phrases “I know” and “is true”, and a thesaurus on the podium alongside the scriptures.
hawkgrrrl wrote:
SamBee: There was one guy (and his wife) in a ward I was in decades ago who totally used F&T meeting to lobby for being called as the next bishop. Our current bishop was close to the end of his tenure. He did this the way Mrs. Elton talks about forming a musical club in Emma. He would say, “I know there’s a lot of talk that I should be the next bishop, and I wish people would quit saying that. Of course, I would serve in any way I was asked, but it’s not a calling I seek after, but clearly I would love any opportunity to help and to serve, even if it had to be something like that. But the nursery would be fine for me, just as noble.” It was just gross.
Pass the sick bag, Alice!!! I’m not an Austen fan, so I don’t get the reference, but I can imagine. People had better be careful what they wish for. I think being a bishop is probably one of the toughest and thankless callings in the church. One might get some glory from it, but also a lot less time to yourself, and the blame for anything that goes wrong in the ward.
I sincerely hope he wasn’t called. Like you say, gross”.
The workload is not bad. However, I would be prepared for constant demands about raising participation. This can be done, just to a limited degree. Ebowalker wrote:
SamBee wrote:
My father especially troubles me. I think he was a good man, although difficult sometimes. But I don’t agree with how he raised me. He beat me with a stick a few times, and I don’t cherish that memory. But he also helped me when I was scared of the dark or in trouble at school. He was a lot more successful than I ever have been and I fall continually under that shadow.
ACA is about dealing with dysfunction in a family no matter the level. Check out The Laundry List and see if you have any of the traits, such as fear of authority, confusing pity and love etc…many people in the programme feel a loyalty to their parents but ACA focuses on you, not your family of origin. For 50 years I denied that I was ever abused, but when I carefully examined it,I was shocked. In our society we are told to just suck it up and move on but adult children have to deal with their past in order to “grow up” otherwise they stay that 6yo. Even in this past conference we were told to “forget the past”. I wish humans were that simple but we just aren’t. Neglect, for example, is abuse. so is beating a child to punish them though it is widely accepted. The original action is unimportant, it’s the emotional scars that we develop to survive that really hurt us.
Remember that your parents or their parents may have been adult children, it’s called generational grief and it’s passed down to their children. So, even though you may not have had drunks or abusers for parents, they may have come from that. It’s worth examining.
I’ve come to see my parents as complex people. I understand some of their motives now. Some of their behavior was cultural as much as personal.
I think my main problem with them was not what they did to me specifically but that they handed me over repeatedly to people who assaulted me. I don’t think they meant to, but they did. They were taken in by people who said one thing and did another. Their biggest mistake was sending me to a boarding school when I was very young. Even when those places are well run they create permanent psychological issues by breaking the bond between a child and home.
