Leaderboard

Back when I was doing wills, I would just very pointedly ask people--even elderly people--"what do you plan on doing when you're no longer able to live alone?" Amazingly, people tended to open up pretty comfortably and generally had already put quite a bit of thought into the matter. It led me to conclude that in many cases, the trouble isn't the subject matter or the fact that people don't like to confront their own mortality. The problem is that people don't want to bring the matter up with their children. I've discussed things with all of Just_A_Girl's grandparents that I'm reasonably certain none of them have ever discussed with my parents-in-law. It's easier for them because even though I'm still their inferior (married to their granddaughter), they didn't see me grow up, didn't change my diaper, and never had a relationship of absolute responsibility for and control over me that is about to be completely reversed.

Well, first of all we should discuss if droit du seigneu ever existed. But if we entertain the idea, a simple answer would be a "no". However, those who have issues with Joseph Smith or even Brigham Young marrying women who were already married would say it is a variant of droit du seigneu. However there are several issues with that reasoning: 1. There isn't irrefutable evidence that these marriages involved sexual intimacy (specially in Smith's case although I personally believe there was). 2. Some of these marriages were merely sealings and these wives continued living with their husbands until they died.

The idea that the President of the Church ever had first claim upon the virginity of any woman in the Church he happened to desire (or even the notion that such an idea was ever current in the Church), is utterly unsupported. I believe there are some statements out there from Brigham Young to the effect that a woman had a right to leave her unrighteous husband and marry a man who either she deemed to be more righteous, or who was higher in priesthood authority. (As territorial governor he was very generous in giving certificates of divorce to women; whereas he typically told male applicants to tough it out.) I have no idea with what frequency this may have actually happened in practice; but I suspect you might be thinking, at least in part, of the modern FLDS practice of the "prophet" coming up to a man accused of unrighteousness and saying "all your wives and kids now belong to me". That practice is a perversion of Young's teaching--as I recall, it was the wife who was supposed to initiate that sort of thing. It was an escape mechanism for the woman, not a wife-poaching procedure for the man. Young did have a wife who was a bit of a firecracker (Augusta Cobb, I think her name was) who declared that she no longer wanted to be sealed to Young and insisted on being sealed to Joseph Smith. Young eventually acquiesced, but drew the line when she later demanded to be sealed to Jesus Christ Himself.

A lot of aging parents believe they can manage on their own forever (even though clearly it isn't the case) so it is a very delicate topic and needs to be approached very carefully. The key element is proper communication and constant conversations about the issue rather than "one" serious dialogue. You need to use some strategy as well. Most aging parents do not want to be a burden to their children which is understandable so when communication with your parents take place, make sure to express how *you* feel about them under the present circumstances, and that *you* are very concerned about their health, welfare, etc. In this way, you are approaching the topic as it is *your* issue, *your* feelings rather than theirs, it will help them to be more open minded knowing their child/children are having serious concerns about them. Sometimes, no matter what... the aging parent will still insist they can do it on their own and well, you will have to back off for a while until they are ready. However, just because you are backing off doesn't mean you are not going to touch the subject ever again. You should continue talking about it often. Most importantly with aging parents, is to keep their dignity intact. They are not babies, they are adults who just happen to be aging, it will happen to all of us so I would suggest if your parents are willing to move to a nursing home, ensure *they* are the ones that make that choice with your full support. Visit a few places, etc and then let them make that decision.

Phoebe as a trusted servant, fellow laborer, and courier/emissary for Paul? Sure. Phoebe as a bishop-in-training? Not so sure . . . If we accept Joseph Smith as a prophet, and accept that in the primitive church women could serve as deacons--not generic servants/fellow laborers, but deacons--then why didn't Smith (who had done a run-through translation of/commentary on the New Testament jointly with Sidney Rigdon, who presumably was aware of the Greek usages) ordain any women to the office of deacon (or any other priesthood office)?

Well...let me further shed some light on the matter Suzie, we know for sure droit du seigneur existed -- evidence -- I watched it on Braveheart (premission times, I have repented, withhold judgement :) )

Oh, dear. I can imagine how difficult this is. So in case it helps - I went home and attended to my mom the last 3 months of her life. I wouldn't/couldn't have done it if I hadn't forgiven her first. That process took years. Anyway, I consider those three months a huge blessing in my life so even if forgiveness comes later/after the fact for you, you may see your efforts differently down the road. Hold on to that and bless you!

The OP maybe could have been worded a little less ambiguously; but I can see how Suzie could have interpreted it as referring to claims that Joseph Smith was sealed to women who were married to other men. That's not exactly droit de signeur; but I can see how someone might think there are parallels.

Professionally speaking, I talked with many people struggling with same sex attraction. Of course, they all had different backgrounds and stories to share but in my personal experience, I had three different kind of groups. One, the group where the same sex attraction remained unchanged regardless of therapy/counseling (because it is not a psychologist's job to change sexual orientation), the second group were those who chose to suppress those feelings and careful, it doesn't mean they don't struggle with same sex-attraction anymore, it only means they learned how to cope with it. And third, those who thought they were homosexual, specially young teenagers to discover they weren't in the first place.

I'm talking primarily about the Utah period. Joseph Smith is his own can of worms. We should probably note D&C 132:41-44. This extract sets forth a general law that a woman who is sealed to a husband and is then "with" another man has committed adultery and shall be destroyed--UNLESS the first husband is himself an adulterer, in which case the prophet may seal the wife to a new husband and her union with that new husband will not thereafter be deemed adulterous. That doesn't really set out a formal rule for who would generally initiate that type of proceeding; but in context it seems geared towards protecting the wife's prerogatives rather than the Church President's. The evidence during Smith's lifetime is scanty; but there's lots from the Territorial period; and we just don't see the sort of re-assignment or expropriation of spouses by Brigham Young that we see with--say--Warren Jeffs and the FLDS.

Suzie, I know the wiki suggests that droit du seigneu may not have happened, but there is a town in Italy where it was recorded as having happened. I cannot recall the name of it, I could look it up, but I'm sure it's probably Google-able. I wouldn't be surprised if there were other places that have some sort of record of this.

"Because the Kelly affair is more than a local matter, we believe that it would be welcomed by many if the senior leadership of the church were to intervene." -from the linked article in the original post. ----------------------------------- The Kate Kelly affair or excommunication is a local matter. It is personal between her and her local leaders. Excommunication is dealt with on an individual level, not as a group. Her excommunication only directly affects her and no one else. Senior church leadership intervenes if the local leadership is wrong. Since there has been no intervention and the senior church leadership has released a letter that agrees with the local leaders actions, one can correctly assume that the local leaders are acting in harmony with current church policy. The church is not a system like our legal system. Commandments (policies) are not up for debate and never will be. To me the actions of Ordain Women seem very similar to the actions Martin Harris. They don't like what they are hearing so they are going to ask over and over instead of humbly accepting God's will. They feel they are right. They have been told they are not. They are not accepting council. There are some that say they have prayed and feel that they have received answers that are contrary to current church policies. In certain conditions, Satan can mimic the feelings of the Holy Ghost. That is one reason why we have commandments. If our answer is contrary to current church policy and we are not in a position to authoritatively change the policy, then we can know beyond any doubt that the answer we are getting is from the adversary. It is that simple.

Are heinous sins forgivable? Yes. But is everyone forgiven of them? No. I agree with Anddenex. It depends on various factors, such as; what is your knowledge and understanding of the gospel, have you made covenants with the Lord, and are you genuinely seeking forgiveness through humble repentance? If you've committed rape or murder, and show no remorse, or care not for resolve with the Lord - you won't be forgiven. It's not an automatic thing. At least, not from what I was taught.

Apparently, the former Lamanites who became the Anti-Nephi-Lehi's were also forgiven of their sins which included murder. “Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool." Isaiah 1: 18. This I believe. It gives great comfort and hope to the sinner. For those who have truly found sorrow in their sins and have repented, this is the hope and the promise. For those who have been sinned against and are having a hard time with forgiveness, this perhaps seems harsh and too lenient. If we have suffered at the hands of others, it is required of us to forgive. And, we need to allow the sinner to repent. Don't constantly bring up the past mistakes of someone who has put it behind them and is attempting to lead a righteous life.

Thanks, great post! I think one of the things that helps when faced with trying to forgive someone who has committed a serious and especially hurtful sin is to remember that the person is one who was faithful in the pre-mortal world. They passed the first estate test like the rest of us and will merit a Kingdom of glory that is greater than any of us can comprehend. We should treat that person as one who merits a Kingdom of glory that is higher than anything on Earth. We also cannot understand all the reasons behind such events, all the circumstances and state of mind and what is in a person's heart when they do such things as the body sometimes acts on its own without the spirit being in control. Think about the things that are done when a person is drunk for example, would they really act that way with full faculties? I also think about examples such as the mass murder that occured at the University of Texas in Aug 1966 where 16 people were killed and 32 wounded. On the surface one might say, how could a person like that receive any forgiveness at all but it turns out he had a brain tumor that some suggest was pressing on his amygdala which controls things like anger and fight/flight response and he was on medications for those symptoms. We cannot say how much those things caused him to do what he did vs his spirit driving those actions but God will sort that out. In other cases there may be similar situations that we never learn about or can understand, but again God will take all those things into consideration and forgive whom He will based in all the information.

Heya Rose :)... gona be exploding stuff on july 4th with femily

It is NOT clear. If it was clear, it would be clear and there would be no questions or debate as to it's meaning. That is simply not the case. There are many, many debates as to it's meaning. The LDS church, having access to modern day revelations, and the actual restoration of truth as intended by God, knows it's meaning though. She was not ordained to a priesthood office, whatever Greek word was used to describe her.

the word "diakonos" renders -- a waiter, servant; then of any one who performs any service, an administrator. The word deacon is derived from it, but the original Greek word does not mean an office in the priesthood.

Bing004 I am sorry to hear about this trouble you and your husband are having. I have a firm testimony that the Saviour wants you to be happy and is there to support you. I'd like to shift the focus of the discussion a little and hope you find it helpful. The way I see it there are a few things here for you to deal with. Men like to feel attractive, wanted, and needed just like women do. It is likely that your husband being upset is coming from a place of not feeling as valued as he did before, he is no longer perceiving himself as being needed to complete you. I also want to make it clear that this is not unique to same sex attraction. If I were to let my wife know that I am more attracted to other women than her it would be a devastating blow as would the inverse be on me. Sadly this kind of thing can develop a lot of the time as couples age and physical appearance diminishes and waistlines grow. Of note is the fact that there is more to a lasting relationship than physical attraction. What other qualities does your husband embody that you fell in love with in the first place? Focus on things like that and let him know. Make sure he feels loved and needed and respected. Also be sure to let him know you need the same in return. Do not allow your temptations to define you and your relationship.