Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
On Own Now wrote:
Does it really require the AP and the Office of Teacher, to stand by the chapel door and hand announcements to people as they walk in, and then close the door for the sacrament, and open it again after the sacrament? Of course not. But it would be scandalous for a Miamaid to do this.
While Bishop, we had a small chapel until a new building was finished. It was difficult to get out of the chapel after Sacrament, so for a while I had ushers dismiss by row. I’d mix it up, and had the YW do it from time to time, just to keep everybody on their toes.
On a flight from Shannon to New York Irish Father Maguire finds himself seated next to a Mormon Bishop who introduces himself as Bishop Smith, who was returning
home to New York after a lovely vacation in Ireland.
Shortly after Irish father Maguire pulls out a flask, and pours some whiskey into his coffee. He then turns to Bishop and asks,
“Bishop. Is it true that you people never drink Alcohol?”
“Never,” replies the Bishop.
“Surely, at some time in your life you must have tasted alcohol. Come on, now, huh?”
“Well, Irish father, I guess since we’re both in the same racket I can tell you.
Yes, I did stray once and drank some whiskey.”
“Ah, I thought so,” says Irish father Maguire, a broad smile of satisfaction on his rotund face.
“Now, Irish father,” said the Bishop, “it’s my turn. You guys are supposed to be celibate, right?”
“Oh, dear God, yes. Absolutely.”
“Ah, come on, man. I leveled with you. Was there ever a time you strayed?”
Sheepishly, Irish father Maguire says, “Well, truth to tell, there was a time, yes. Once. Long time ago.”
“I see,” says the Bishop. Then after a moment he says “Beats the hell out of whiskey, don’t you think?
mackay11 wrote:On the subject of “sexual relations” in the temple, didn’t it used to say “sexual intercourse”?
Yes it did, and I believe it was changed specifically because if Bill Clinton and the whole oral sex thing (it’s not “intercourse”!)
I have no reference for this, but I read this on the internet years ago. Back when they severed sacrament during General Conference, the prophet at the time (don’t remember the name) announced that the deacons passing the sacrament was just an assignment from the prophet, and could be changed at any time. To make the point, he asked the YW in the congregation to pass the sacrament for that session of Conference.
I’ve never read anything on this, and never seen it reported anywhere else. Has anybody here herd of this?
SIlentDawning, I think most of your Priesthood leaders are going to be much like my Stake President. I had just finished reading Rough Stone Rolling, and during my monthly PPI with the SP that all bishops go through, I asked him if he had read the book. He said he has started to read it, but when Bushman got to some negative aspects of Joseph Smiths life, he stopped reading it. He said he did not what to know those things about JS. I think most of your leaders will be like that. There will be nothing you can say that will change them. They are either already an open, heterodox bishop like I was, or they are an orthodox person, with their head in the sand like my SP was. (BTW, my SP was a wonderful man, who I considered a friend). The things people said to me in interviews did change me, but again, I was already headed that way. During the predecessor to Prop 8 here in California, called Prop 22 (early 2000’s), there was the typical rhetoric from the pulpit in Sacrament meetings, sometime it was a HC speaker, delivering a message from the SP on Gay Marriage This happened just before I was called as bishop, so I got to see the fallout of this. I learned that two couples in my ward went inactive because of the churches stance on Gay Marriage. Nobody else knew why they stopped coming. (one had a gay son). So, while bishop, I told my SP that I would not allow the stake to take over sacrament meeting for any future gay marriage bashing, as I had seen first hand the outcome of such actions. He said he didn’t foresee that happening again, and hopefully if wouldn’t happen while I was bishop. I was released 2 years before Prop 8 reared its head.
I once early on in my tenure as bishop had a widowed lady in her 80’s ask to see me. As we sat in my office, she told me she had something to confess. I wondered what could this sweet old lady had done that she needed to speak with me? She told me that 60 years ago, weeks before their marriage, she had let her soon to be husband touch her inappropriately. She had never confessed this, and it had bothered her for all these years. I of course told her she was forgiven years ago with her faithful service as a mother and many callings in the church. But what I learned from this is to make sure the youth in my ward did not go through life fretting over something as insignificant as this.
So I guess the bottom line is that unless your bishop is already an open thinker, I don’t think there is much you can say to change his mind.
Old-Timer wrote:I understand it was in a manual, but the actual talk that sparked the manual statement is as I quoted it – and, as GB mentioned, Pres. George Albert Smith repudiated it emphatically. That’s what I meant when I said that apologists and critics twist original statements. In this case, those who wrote the manual and members who continue to preach it are the ones at fault.
I should have made that clearer.
Ray, do you have the original talk? I’d love to read it and keep a copy in my files.
Going back to the OP, we could separate the whole “porn is bad because it exploits women” argument if we changed one part of it. What if the OP had found in the stack of books on the night stand explicit photos of the homeowners. It would be safe to assume there was no exploitation going on. So now how does one judge or not judge the homeowners? It is widely believed that Matthew, Mark and Luke (synoptic gospels) all came from the same source. All were written well after Jesus’ death. Each wrote a slightly different account from this source, so it would make sense that one could read them together to fill in the holes. Brigham Young, “Eternal Punishment,” Journal of Discourses, reported by G.D. Watt 12 January 1862, Vol. 9 (London: Latter-Day Saints Book Depot, 1862), 150. Quote:I will say a few words in regard to your belief in being led, guided, and directed by one man. Brother Jackman has said that our enemies hate the fact of our being led by one man. Thousands of times my soul has been lifted to God the Father, in the name of Jesus, to make that verily true in every sense of the word, that we may be led by the man Jesus Christ, through Joseph Smith the Prophet. You may inquire how we are to know that we are so led. I refer you to the exhortation you have heard so frequently from me. Do not be deceived, any of you; if you are deceived, it is because you deceive yourselves. You may know whether you are led right or wrong, as well as you know the way home; for every principle God has revealed carries its own convictions of its truth to the human mind, and there is no calling of God to man on earth but what brings with it the evidences of its authenticity….
What a pity it would be if we were led by one man to utter destruction! Are you afraid of this? I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by Him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken that influence they could give to their leaders, did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way. Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not. This has been my exhortation continually.
Old-Timer wrote:Sheldon, there has been more than one talk in the last few years warning about excessive time spent on online games – and I can’t remember the last time I heard an apostle mention masturbation directly in a talk.
Thus, the top leaders are saying the same thing.
OK, I get your point, Top leaders are saying it, but it has NOT reached the people that can make a difference, Bishops and SPs. They ask about masturbation, not video games. Until BKP writes about it and gives talks about it, it’s not getting traction. BKP needs to come up with an equivalent “little factory” speech on video games.
Old-Timer wrote:Quote:Where are the prophets?
Saying the exact same thing, ironically. Now, as you like to say, if the members would follow them in that regard . . .
Really? The same thing? Are the youth being asked about their video game habits during TR interviews? Are the youth being asked about how often thyn play video games during their mission interviews? How many young men have had to delay their mission due to excessive video gaming?
Now, replace the words “video game” with masturbation in the above, and answer the questions again.
Gerald wrote:The fact that the story is fictional or embellished doesn’t necessarily take away from someone’s message or call into question the teller’s sincerity.
Could the above apply to the Book of Mormon?
Heber13 wrote:How does your family do with your ideas? Is your ward family very aware of your views?
My family knows that I have a heterodox view of the church and its teachings, but they mostly just rack it up to me being weird. I still attend the same ward I was bishop in, so I’m still called bishop by most, and offered some respect when I speak in class. I was well liked by the ward (or so I think), and was very laid back hands off bishop. The RS and Primary pretty much ran themselves. The RS Pres would ask me what I thought of such and such an activity, and I would just say “do what you think is best”. After a while she got the hint, and stopped asking.
My talks have always been different, more Uchtdorf than Monson. I once while bishop gave Elder Poelman’s un-edited GC talk in sacrament meeting (you can read the side by side talks
hereI also make people think and squirm in their seats when I teach a lesson in Sunday School or HPG. Only once years ago did I have a class member run to the bishop when I said that the church has no position on evolution, and you can believe what you want. The bishop called me in, and I showed him the FP statement that said the church has no position. He said Ok, and to keep up the good work..
