Leaderboard

If his use has been compulsive for that long, there's probably underlying triggers. Like (for one possible example) he's feeling down about himself, so indulging in this served as a pick-me-up. To break such a long-term thing, he needs to find a healthy way of dealing with that trigger instead of just white-knuckle-not-doing-that-bad-thing. For example, he's feeling down about himself, so he instead goes on a jog, gets his mind off of it, endorphins pumping, and taking good care of himself.

Great suggestions. You could also encourage him to set up boundaries to keep him safe. Some examples are 1. Not taking the phone into the bathroom 2. Not using it after a certain time at night. 3. There are apps that can track time and app usage on the phone. This can help him realize how he spends his time. 4. Create a list of 'fire drills' that he can do in moments of stress or triggers like: a. Reach out to someone he can trust and talk to. b. Physically move, whether jog, or do push ups, or walk into another room. c. Look at a picture that reminds him of his values. Like of Jesus, the temple or his family. d. Work on memorizing a scripture, a poem or something to get his mind working on something else. 5. Have a daily checklist of things to do. Mine includes exercise, listen to 2 or 3 conference talks or a recovery podcast, study scriptures, morning and evening prayer, journal writing or other recover work like 12 steps.

I think the whole thing boils down to a question of how much value we place on differing types, or sources of, knowledge. Empirical knowledge is based on data derived through our five senses and spiritual knowledge derives spiritual feelings, usually experienced, or described as, emotions. There may be other types or sources of knowledge, but these are the two with which I have a degree of familiarity. One of the consequences of the enlightenment was an elevation of empircal knowledge and a devaluing of spiritual knowledge. I think a well balanced person recognises and accepts the importance of both forms of knowledge without trying to play one off against the other. Both types of knowledge are referred to in Doctrine and Covenants 88:118 And as all have not faith, seek ye diligently and teach one another words of wisdom; yea, seek ye out of the best books words of wisdom; seek learning, even by study (empirical) and also by faith (spiritual). (Doctrine and Covenants | Section 88:118)

“The Welfare Responsibilities of the Bishop,” Basic Principles of Welfare and Self-Reliance (2009), 7–10

No, he didn’t. First off, your assertion assumes that Smith was a scriptural illiterate who was unaware that D&C 119:4 describes tithing as “a standing law . . . forever”. Second, your assertion belies ignorance of church practice in the early 20th century. Back then Church members paid tithing, but also made additional donations to the building fund, to the ward operating fund, to fast offerings, to the Relief Society bazaar, and a host of other ad hoc funds. In this context, and after decades of stifling debt, President Smith observed: Today we owe not a dollar that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints cannot pay at once. At least we are in a position that we can pay as we go. We do not have to borrow anymore, and we won’t have to if the Latter-day Saints continue to live their religion and observe this law of tithing. It is the law of revenue to the church. Furthermore, I want to say to you, we may not be able to reach it right away, but we expect to see the day when we will not have to ask you for one dollar of donation for any purpose, except that which you volunteer to give of your own accord, because we will have tithes sufficient in the storehouse of the Lord to pay everything that is needful for the advancement of the kingdom of God. In other words: “Someday we won’t be asking you for donations above and beyond your tithing; tithing receipts will be enough to cover the Church's expenses.” This hope (or ”prediction”, if you must) was fulfilled when the Local Unit Budget Allowance program was implemented in 1989, which (with very few exceptions) did away with the need for any sort of local fundraising above and beyond tithes and fast offerings.

He should have done... exactly what Sinema did. The optics look great for her. For the Church she help bring our Son's and Daughter's home. For everyone else.. she helped bring stranded Americans home.. The only people that plays poorly to are people who are anti American

No. They did - with the logistical nightmare. We're talking 1600+ missionaries arriving at the same time in the same place with less than 24-hour notice on their itinerary having to reach parents who have spent the past week going through the wringer, receiving conflicting information from their mission presidents, stake presidents, social media, and others (information was changing every second and it's not that easy to get information from the mission field in a 3rd World country especially with a pandemic), trying to make sense of everything. The Church put out the directive before the plane landed. Not all 1600+ parents checked on all their communication routes to receive the directive. It is what it is. I received an itinerary for my son. So I thought he's on the plane. He wasn't. I didn't found out about the change until my son himself called me Sunday morning. My friend in Washington got her missionary's itinerary from her Stake Pres stating she's gonna be there at 9AM Monday. She went to the airport to pick her up, she wasn't on the plane. Another communication was sent to the Stake Pres changing the itinerary to the afternoon, the Stake Pres did not check his communications that morning. Imagine the nightmare of expecting your missionary to have made it home only to wait and wait not knowing what's happening! Communication is VERY DIFFICULT with all these things we've been through. You don't need anti-Mormons criticizing missionary families and the Church... you have plenty of LDS members, Romney included, doing it for them.

Good ideas but they need to be his ideas, not his girlfriends or wife's ideas.

I agree with the underlying issues. HE needs professional help. Has this been sought out? When I say professional help I mean that you pay money to someone to find out what is the root cause of his addictive behavior.

Decide if you can live with a relapse, and all the lies and deceit that come with that. It will happen and it doesn't make him a bad person, but it will happen.

Facts on the ground: Parents received flight information on SATURDAY AFTERNOON from their Stake Presidents. The Church directive on airport protocol was not sent via email to parents (like they did for quarantine procedures). I didn't even know about it until AFTER the planes have landed in SLC on SUNDAY AFTERNOON. It is very possible, if not unavoidable, that some parents did not receive the directive. Other parents - if they are like me - will take their entire family to meet the missionary, directive or not, as they plan on going on quarantine with their missionary (we all don't have houses with separate apartments for our missionaries ya know). Social distancing from other families who are also planning to quarantine with their missionary would be unnecessary - if they met their missionary at the airport, they probably plan to quarantine because we DID receive the quarantine instructions via standard missionary communication route. So yeah. These missionaries and their families have been through CRAZY emotional upheaval for a week with all the things that their missionaries have been through and the lack of communication (information was changing every second!) about details of the events, just social media rumors about what's going on that were conflicting as things changed rapidly. Mitt Romney can peacock about being disappointed all he wants. Politicians gonna politik and I'm starting to really hate that guy.

When I say addiction, I mean compulsive use for about 15 years for him, but with a desire to stop. He has now stopped using for about 4 months successfully.

Thanks for sharing. It puts a unique perspective on "when there is a will there is a way" and the Lord will provide.

I could be wrong, but that looks like a reunion of a missionary who just returned home.

Or get hotel rooms and charter jumbo jets to move a massive number of missionaries to their home countries in the middle of a pandemic. $25B travel expense is what I heard over the grapevine.

Or in otherwords... the Church practices what it preaches and does not need someone to Bail it out in times of trial and hardship.

I received a PM here this morning, from an admirer (wink), suggesting that I might be (while inadvertently) spreading Anti-Mormon talking points with the above sentiment. So... along those lines, please allow me to further clarify: 1. The Church has their financial reserves. 2. Some individuals will face hard times. 3. Those individuals will approach the Church for assistance. 4. The Church is prepared for rainy days via their financial reserves. Reserves that, among other things, can continue to pay the salaries of Church employees, say for example full time beef ranchers and citrus growers. 5. Now they (the Church) can "continue" to have the ability to help others during their rainy day. The church has the ability to maintain: electricity in their canneries, gas to their trucks, wages for employees that produce/bring resources to those in need. As individuals face mounting bills; fast offerings, bishop's storehouse, etc. remain the avenue to seek relief. "Now they (the Church) have the ability to help others during their rainy day" VS. "Now they (the Church) will use their financial reserves to start paying everyone's bills during this rainy day". Two different thoughts, the latter is not what I wrote nor my intended sentiment. Thanks morning PM.

https://www.deseret.com/faith/2020/3/23/21191679/church-mormon-lds-missionaries-early-releases-united-states-canada

Side note: It is interesting to see how, in our minds, "A recent widow" easily turns into "poor little old widow". We all make these mental jumps from time to time. Yes, my scenario comes from a similar type indecent. Anyone is welcome to insert themselves into this situation and ask, "What would you have done?". Rather, "What do you think the Spirit would have directed you to do?". About 5-6 years ago, the Bishop in a neighboring ward went from conducting meetings one week to deceased the next. He, in his mid-40s, left behind his wife and 7 kids. She was not a little old widow, simply a very recent widow. She apparently had left finances up to her husband. How all the nuts and bolts played out between her and the Stake President is between them. As an ultimate result she was given financial assistance, mortgage being part of it. Was she a fool with her money? Was she fiscally irresponsible? I guess one could argue one way or another if they had all the facts and if they cared to. I guess one could argue that the SP was or wasn't inspired to help relieve some immediate suffering on her part through financial assistance, if they cared to. Educating her to the ways of finance, delving into her spending habits, etc., while definitely helpful at a later date, probably wasn't what she needed or was even mentally capable* of absorbing in that exact moment of financial need. *She shares about this time in her life fairly openly.

The first sentence is clearly false. The Church in no way micro manages thoughts and beliefs of its members. The higher amount of inactivity is due to personal choice and faithfulness. This is plainly taught in the parable of the sower and also in Lehi's vision. If the Church micro managed people's thoughts we wouldn't have the Journal of Discourses. The meaning of Joseph Smith's statement is already clear and plain. How would it take on any new meaning.

We cant! The church in its current format, although well intentioned, is micromanaging peoples thoughts and beliefs. This works for some but not many, as evidenced by higher amount of inactives on our rosters then actives. My little sister and her family in vegas are the last of my siblings to go inactive, shes not anti or disbelieving but just tired of the mind games and needs time away to "deconstruct" her testimony. The answer to this problem is already in play, the change that Pres Nelson envisioned with come follow me home learning and worship. Its a start but it still has a long way to go before our lost sheep return home. For example my sister avoids any contact with her home ward leaders but will allow me to discuss gospel items with her, unfortunately I, nor another male relative of ours are not in her ward boundary therefore have no right to excercise any priesthood ordinances with her. IMHO we just need to wait a few more years before the term "I teach them correct principles and they govern themselves" takes on a whole new meaning.

I can't quite figure out how to respond, so I will throw out some thoughts and see what, if anything, happens. I don't know if it fits the "newness" of the idea, but I might say that my first faith deconstruction was 30 or so years ago. As a teenager, I had a decent testimony of creationism (waffled a bit on the old vs. new, but definitely creationist). Then I chose a bio-ag major at BYU and, to be brief, "deconstructed" my testimony of creationism (assuming this is what we mean by deconstruction). After all is said and done, I now find myself with many of the attitudes mentioned in the OP towards creationism. I tend to see my own view as better rooted in facts, history, and science where the creationists are more faith and emotion based. I tend to think that, if I could just get them to understand science and scripture the way I do, they, too, could be more enlightened like me, and so on. I try to be mindful that the creationists I worship with are not ready for the more complete truth that I believe, so I try to keep my opinions to myself at Church to avoid stirring pots that don't want stirring. If this is what we mean by deconstruction, then I tend to see it as merely part of the process of replacing erroneous beliefs with truth. Along the way, it seems possible to replace truth with error, but somewhere along the way, I cannot become completely paralyzed in my search for truth by the possibilities that I might be wrong. Is it only a faith deconstruction if the result is animosity towards the Church as a whole? As a concluding thought, I heard some interesting stuff said about the poor translation in the KJV for Jude verse 22. Looking at Biblehub, I see that a high percentage of translations render this verse as something like "have mercy/patience/grace for those who doubt." I sometimes feel like one of the things that is missing is this patience towards those whose faith is deconstructing. While acknowledging the need for boundary maintenance sometimes, how can we better interact with others to help them deconstruct/reconstruct their faith in a way that avoids the animosity that I see in the OP?

"He said that this government would dissolve pretty much all the laws passed by our legislature, and that the time would come when the government would stop the Saints from holding meetings. When this was done the Lord would pour out His judgments." Life of Heber C. Kimball, pg. 442

Sorry, forgot to post. The one above about the missionaries is one of them. I'll look for the other right now and post it if I can find it.

Let's put it to bed. it is my OPINION that paying someone mortgage is not a good usage of church funds. As I have previously stated I am not nor want to be a Bishop and have to make these very difficult decisions. I do know that missing a mortgage payment will not make you homeless. I think this defines clearly that it is not a short term shelter problem if a member fails to meet this particular financial obligation Let's use your example. A recent widow who uses all of her liquid funds to pay for a funeral instead of paying her mortgage. You can't be serious with this can you? Who would be so fiscally irresponsible? The poor little old widow was a fool with her money and now you want to trust her with the Lords? Like many here I have held those positions as previously stated. I have seen these items paid and when "asked" offered my opinion/counsel. Sometimes taken sometimes not. Never once have I voiced an unsolicited opinion as a ward clerk or finance clerk at the end of the day the Bishop should heed his own counsel and do as the spirit dictates. As a stake auditor I often had very frank discussions with bishops and clerks about the handling of fast offerings.

Correct. It depends. It depends on how the Bishop, who holds the keys and is the judge (like you mentioned), decides to define short-term shelter. Short-term "rent" shelter? Short-term "mortgage" shelter? If there is a distinction between shelters, great, what is it? If there is a policy, official doctrine, that excludes a mortgage payment, as a short-term option please provide it and lets put this debate to rest. Perhaps it is easy to envision a flashy member who needs help paying their mortgage to maintain a lifestyle vs. a recent widow who just used the rest of her liquid funds to pay for a funeral. All the canned goods at the Bishop's store house isn't going to pay her mortgage this month. Like @NeuroTypical, many of us have been clerks and auditors before and our findings tend to harmonize with those Bishops that have met the short-term needs of a member by paying a mortgage payment.

Any extent within the bounds of God's covenant and no farther.

The very quotation above belies your interpretation. "Donations" will not be required "BECAUSE WE WILL HAVE TITHES SUFFICIENT". The fact of sufficient tithes belies the need for donations. Tithing is not done away; rather, tithing becomes sufficient. Tithing is not a "donation" in the eyes of the Lord. Tithing is the Lord's money, not yours.

Where in my post did I criticize the church? Discussion was ongoing about what constituted a rainy day. I merely provided empirical evidence from the mouth of the fund manager himself as to what it had been used for in the past. I think you are assuming way too much. if hoping they use it to help someone is being critical then so be it. As the church does not provide transparency as to exactly what the fund is for I dont see how we are not allowed to speculate.

Yeah, I am less concerned about the virus and more concerned about the widespread panic and societies reaction in terms of food. Our grocery stores are mostly empty.

Save the trees. Don't bother with the hose from the sink. You can get this from Amazon with free 2-day delivery with Prime. Or you can do what hikers do:

Apropos of nothing, I love how the entire lower 48, but not Alaska or Hawaii, are shown as the United States when singing about the origin of the US constitution. Not the original 13 colonies. Not all 50 states. Just the good ol' U S of A during most of the Eisenhower administration. EDIT: Look at that. Arizona and New Mexico are actually only one state. ANOTHER EDIT: Canada is smaller than the US. Take that, Canada!

I have been relatively outspoken in believing that the covid-19 scare is a vast overreaction on a scale I have never before witnessed. And I do still believe that. But I wonder if the Lord's kingdom is not using this hysteria and foolishness as a dry run to gauge our preparedness for when something happens that actually is really serious.

Oh good, this is sure a relief.