sensibility
-
Posts
118 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by sensibility
-
-
Just to get my credentials out there, so everyone knows I'm qualified to comment on this post, my husband wasn't a virgin when we were sealed; I was.
I'd be lying if I said it didn't hurt when I found out, but it honestly hasn't bothered me for years -- I was definitely at peace long before we were married. I believe in the Atonement. I believe that God made him a completely different person: the man I married would never commit that sin. He's been healed of that inclination, and I -- as an innocent bystander who was hurt by his sin -- have been healed of the pain his sin caused.
Your wife repented and made recompense to God. When she came to you, she was just as pure and clean as though her sin had never happened, and she has never broken that faith. She never sinned against you. That's how you can know that she has been not just forgiven, but born of God, made a "new creature". She's not the same woman who committed the sin.
I think you should remember that the Atonement is for you too, and that through faith in Christ's power to cleanse your wife, you can be healed of the pain you feel. I would start with a deep study of scriptures and good talks about Christ's mission and Atonement, and lots of sincere prayer to understand what it actually means for you individually (I'd probably also stay away from the chastity talks for a while, if I'm being honest . . .). Christ can heal this pain. Best of luck.
-
I'm something like a 36H or I at the moment (I haven't had the courage to have a bra fitting since I got pregnant, so I'm not sure exactly), so I feel your pain acutely. I get the best results with a round neck, tall, full-cup. However, I'm 5'7 -- I don't know how a tall size would sit on someone your height! It might be worth a try, though.
I tried chemise tops, but there just wasn't enough material to cover my torso (even when I tried the tall) -- they were always coming untucked and sliding up. Very uncomfortable. So I ended up taking most of those back unopened.
As for fabric, I prefer poly-cotton, because my bra doesn't slip around so much as on drisilque. I don't know how much difference there is in fit, and I've only tried those two fabrics.
If absolutely nothing else, Beehive does do custom sizing if you need it. There's no extra charge, but I expect you would have to put in a special order and wait for it to come in.
-
I was basically unschooled growing up. At the end of it, I had standardised test scores in the 98th national percentile and was admitted to the university of my choice (BYU-P, obviously.
), where I got all A's until I dropped out to get married and move to England (as you do).Unschooling worked for me, probably better than any other educational structure would have. However, it only worked because I personally had a very strong drive to succeed and a very thorough understanding of what I needed to do to achieve the university admission that I wanted. So with that end-goal in mind, I independently created and followed a very traditional school curriculum for myself. In the end, I suppose unschooling came full-circle for me, and ended up right back in textbooks and tests.
Unschooling wouldn't have worked for my siblings, because they don't have the same drive and ability to set and achieve goals. At the risk of sounding arrogant, I'll say that I think it probably wouldn't work for most children. I haven't even considered using this approach with my kids, to be honest. Children aren't adults and it isn't fair to expect them to be.
-
As a UK citizen, you can visit the US for up to 90 days on a passport; if you want to visit for longer, you'll need a visitor's visa. They only authorise you to visit, though -- you can't get a job on either.
But I think it's probably a good idea to visit Utah before you commit to anything permanent. Utah is very, very different to England -- especially the Church, and the weather -- and you might get there and decide you hate it. I like Utah and England both, and miss Utah a lot, but they are very different.
If you do decide you want to go ahead with it, I definitely think your strongest option is to go in as a university student, as mormonmusic explained. Best of luck.
-
hCG is working great for me. My clothes are too big, my wedding ring falls off when my hands get cold, and I'm definitely thinner. Of course that's because I've been throwing up everything I eat for the past seven weeks, courtesy of horrible morning sickness. Is that not what you were thinking?
-
Well, the valuable things I own consist of one laptop (several years old) and two wedding rings (~£420 value). Everything else is very cheap stuff, which I'd probably keep anyway (clothing, photographs, that sort of thing). So, yes, easy for me to say, but if I were able to recieve personal witness that I should, I would do it.
I wouldn't without a personal confirmation from the Spirit, and I firmly believe that the Lord would give one if He expected me to do it. The bishop is just a man, and men fall -- in our area, we had one Stake Presidency and the majority of a High Council fall away from the Church en masse a few years back. They've now founded their own church. Very nice.
Personal revelation is one of the most precious things we have in this Church, and I don't think the Lord has ever asked us to sign away our right to it. I am a child of God, and He's just as willing to speak to me as He is to speak to the Bishop. And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.
-
Also, keep in mind that you don't need a calling to be her friend. You can still visit her, fellowship her and teach her even if you aren't her formal visiting teacher. I think it's wonderful that you're reaching out to her in this way; best of luck to you.
"Remember, our real calling to be a compassionate Christian came when we stepped out of the waters of baptism. The gift of the Holy Ghost is ours by right of confirmation. We don't need to check it out of the meetinghouse library. We don't need a bishop's assignment to be kind. We don't need to sign up to be thoughtful. We don't need to be sustained by our wards to be sensitive. Rejoice in the power you have within you from Christ to be a nucleus of love, forgiveness, and compassion. Do not feel that your gift is insignificant. Be an instrument in His hands so that He can use you anytime, anywhere."
-- Chieko N. Okazaki
-
Wow, that's a lovely song. Thanks for sharing. :)
-
In my personal opinion, yes, choosing not to wear the garment would affect a sealing, exactly the same as unrepentantly breaking any other covenant or disobeying any other commandment. It also does prevent you from renewing your temple recommend.
Temple matrons used to instruct that you should wear your garments next to your skin; however, now they are told not to give instruction either way. It's perfectly acceptable to wear your bra under your garments if you're more comfortable that way.
Unlike some people,
I've always found garments to be perfectly comfortable, from the moment I put them on. I think the only major issue I've encountered is that I recently started a new job, and the seams of my uniform are so harsh that they're actually putting runs in the fabric (DriSilque), so I've had to borrow my husband's tops until I can get to a distribution center to buy some cotton-type tops. And that's really more of a problem on the part of the bright person who designed my uniform . . . -
Often, in the way we use the terms "love" and "in love", we imply that love is the long term commitment that sometimes becomes mundane and routine. Love is usually accompanied by commitment and dedication. In love on the other hand, is usually a temporary (it can last for months) and is accompanied by passion, restlessness, and often an inability to think about anything else.
It is important for long term love relationships to have moments of in love. Otherwise, life gets too routine and loses the excitement and novelty that people so desperately crave (see "Dialectic Theory"). But love is necessary to carry you in the periods between being in love.
Yeah, I see what you're saying. I'm sad for any marriage that doesn't include moments of infatuation and besottedness. The problem comes when people think that a marriage relationship feels like that all the time, and that if it doesn't then they must not be meant for each other. It's a problem that some people expect romantic love to feel unlike anything else they've ever experienced, since most of the time it doesn't.
You can be giddily besotted without love, and you can have love without ever being giddily besotted. Neither is a particularly good place for a marriage to be. But I believe that if you can start from a foundation of basic, boring, everyday, humdrum love, you can probably rekindle the giddiness. I just don't think romantic love is as mystical or fragile as our culture sometimes assumes.
-
I'm truly not convinced that there is a difference between 'loving' someone and 'being in love' with them. The idea that there's a whole separate type of love for our spouses is, I think, mostly erroneous. I love my husband like I love my friends and family; the foundational feelings of care, concern, attentiveness, and willingness to serve him are the same things I feel for anyone I love. The difference is that I love my husband a lot more and with added physical attraction. I think if he does love you, that's enough for a marriage.
The difference in resolving problems just sounds like a typical misalignment of communication styles. He's almost certainly not being malicious, he just approaches things differently. I hate to throw another book at you, but if you haven't read 'Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus', you might find some useful things in it: it didn't really apply to my marriage, but from what you've said here I think it might apply to yours very well. It talks about the different ways men and women might approach relationship difficulties and is a pretty quick read.
I agree that sometimes the basics of the gospel are the very hardest. If I were in your situation, I'd probably focus on developing one righteous habit for now, whether that's reading the scriptures every night, saying a prayer with husband and/or family, attending Church meetings . . . I'd probably start with saying a daily prayer with my husband. If he weren't willing, I'd start with daily personal scripture study. It isn't so overwhelming if you start with just one thing, I've found.
Regarding the fact that he thinks about being single or with other women (and, indeed, the fact that you feel attracted to his bandmate . . .), I think that's 100% normal when we feel hurt by our partners -- we instinctively start looking for someone more accepting and comforting. It's not a problem as long as we stop as soon as we notice it's happening, and try to remember that the grass is always greenest over the septic tank.
-
I'm so sorry. My extended family didn't come to my wedding either, even though they're members, just because of distance; neither did my husband's family, who aren't members -- in fact I didn't even meet my in-laws until I moved to the UK about four months after the wedding. They didn't want to come when they couldn't even watch the ceremony.
We don't have any hard feelings on either side, but it was a little bit lonely. I'm sure it was much worse for my husband -- at least my parents were there, and I invited four or five people from my branch to come. He didn't know anyone at our sealing or reception except me and my parents (and my siblings at the reception). I'm still humbled that he was willing to do that for the sake of a temple marriage.
It stings. But our wedding day was still beautiful and I wouldn't trade it for any other ceremony in the world. The most important thing to us was that we begin our family in our Heavenly Father's house. I'm so grateful we did.
I'm sorry your extended family have withdrawn their support. I hope you still find peace and contentment on your wedding day.
-
I hope this is a hypothetical question, and that you aren't here looking for people to say it's fine to walk unworthily into the house of the Lord and to mock His ordinances by pretending to make sacred covenants whilst refusing to obey even the most basic tenents of the Gospel. Because it isn't fine. It is inviting the condemnation of God.
There is nothing to be gained by going to the temple unworthily. It's like partaking of the Sacrament unworthily -- the ordinance has no validity and no benefit to us. In fact, Christ says that it is eating and drinking damnation to our souls. Participating in sacred ordinances unworthily actually harms us more than abstaining, and we're commanded to refrain until we have repented of our sins.
The blessings of the temple are sealed upon us not through the words we say, or the clothes we wear, or the building we're in. They are sealed upon us 'through your faithfulness'. My interpretation of that phrase is that without the faithfulness -- without the broken heart and the contrite spirit and the determination to obey the Lord -- there is no sealing.
As other people have said, the legal standing of the marriage wouldn't be affected. But you can get a legal marriage in any JOP's office. We don't go to the temple for legal recognition, but for eternal covenants -- and those covenants are only valid for the penitent.
There is everything to be gained by owning up to any previous sin, going humbly through the repentance process, and allowing Christ's Atonement to fully heal us from our sins. The miracle of the Gospel is that after we have done that, we can walk into the temple, clean in every way and fully prepared and worthy to receive every promise and blessing the Lord has to offer us.
-
Your quote from President Faust is very moving. I listen to it often on the Special Witnesses of Christ dvd....very moving. In 1982 Apostle Bruce R McConkie addressed several issues at a BYU fireside, among the issues were the desire that many have to seek a special relationship with Christ.
I think Brother Bruce is there discussing something quite different to President Faust; it seems to me that he's talking about people who feel they're uniquely close to Christ, that they have an unusual relationship with Him, to such a degree that it disrupts their understanding of the Father's place in creation and salvation. That's obvious heresy and entirely different to the idea that we should have an appreciation for the role Christ plays in saving us personally. Language is fantastically vague sometimes.
-
Jim, I completely agree with you. I feel a relationship with Christ is a deeply personal and individual matter. That doesn't mean that religion or worship of Christ is self-interested or self-centred; it means that Christianity must be approached and learned by every individual. We all need to come to recognise our Master and what His sacrifice means to our personal salvation, just as our Master knows and calls us personally by name, and comes after the one lost, even if the ninety and nine remain faithful.
I did a quick search on lds.org for 'personal relationship', and found this very moving talk by President Faust: A Personal Relationship with the Savior. I've included one lovely quote from it below (emphasis added):
During the years of my life, and often in my present calling, and especially during a recent Gethsemane, I have gone to my knees with a humble spirit to the only place I could for help. I often went in agony of spirit, earnestly pleading with God to sustain me in the work I have come to appreciate more than life itself. I have, on occasion, felt the terrible aloneness of the wounds of the heart, of the sweet agony, the buffetings of Satan, and the encircling warm comfort of the Spirit of the Master.
I have also felt the crushing burden, the self-doubts of inadequacy and unworthiness, the fleeting feeling of being forsaken, then of being reinforced an hundredfold. I have climbed a spiritual Mount Sinai dozens of times seeking to communicate and to receive instructions. It has been as though I have struggled up an almost real Mount of Transfiguration and upon occasion felt great strength and power in the presence of the Divine. A special sacred feeling has been a sustaining influence and often a close companion.
It is my testimony that we are facing difficult times. We must be courageously obedient. My witness is that we will be called upon to prove our spiritual stamina, for the days ahead will be filled with affliction and difficulty. But with the assuring comfort of a personal relationship with the Savior, we will be given a calming courage. From the Divine so near we will receive the quiet assurance:
“My son, peace be unto thy soul; thine adversity and thine afflictions shall be but a small moment;
“And then, if thou endure it well, God shall exalt thee on high; thou shalt triumph over all thy foes.” (D&C 121:7–8.)
-
That's my ultimate calling as well, so I know where you're coming from.
I don't have access to the Handbook of Instructions, but I believe that the rules are that you must not have been subject to Church discipline within the past five years. If that's so, then it's definitely a possibility for you. -
I believe you can use a driver's license to purchase garments, though ceremonial clothing does require a current temple recommend. Garment purchases do not require a recommend; they just need to be able to verify that you're an endowed member.
Or, if you're more comfortable buying your garments privately, you can buy them online at ldscatalog.com (click the Temple Clothing link on the left-hand side, then Endowed Members, then Garments). You'll need your membership number and confirmation date--you can get both of those from your ward clerk if you don't have them to hand. Hope that helps. :)
-
Qtpie, what qualifies as an extraordinary life to you? What kind of life would you like to have?
As someone coming out of nine months of unemployment next week, I will say that sometimes security is a far greater blessing than you could ever anticipate before you lose it. It's very difficult to be extraordinary when you know that soon you won't be able to buy food to eat.
-
You're under no obligation to explain garments to someone who's only trying to annoy you. Just laugh, say, "Did you seriously just ask about my underwear? Do you often start conversations like that?" and refuse to entertain them further. Because honestly, it is rather out of line to ask someone about their underwear.
-
To offer another perspective, one reason my husband and I were married in the US (he's a British citizen, I'm a US) was that I actively didn't want to have a civil ceremony. I've always wanted my marriage to begin with an ordinance before God, sealed by His priesthood -- not with a promise before a legal authority.
I think Saints in this green and pleasant land are raised to anticipate a civil ceremony, and therefore care about it a great deal more; on the other hand, I wasn't raised with that vision, and so the idea of a civil ceremony was distasteful to me when I knew I could begin my marriage with the simple, eternal beauty of a sealing instead. Our temple ceremony was satisfying and real in every way; I didn't feel at all cheated.
By the way, Soul_Searcher, there are vows in the sealing, and you do speak, though you say 'Yes' rather than the more traditional 'I do'. It's a very lovely ceremony, though a bit much to grasp the first time you hear it. I certainly didn't catch it all, even the first time I went back to do sealings. :)
Dravin, temple marriages are definitely not recognised here. If they were, the UK would have the same rules regarding the one-year wait after a civil wedding.
-
It's church policy that, except in countries where temple marriages are not recognised by the government, a couple must wait a year following a civil ceremony. See here, under the heading 'Less than a year'.
-
As they've said, yes, you can, but you'd then have to wait a full year before going to the temple because temple marriages are legally recognised in the US.
Looking at your profile, though, it looks as though you aren't a member right now--it's possible that you might have to wait a year from baptism anyway, so getting a civil marriage wouldn't slow you down any. I'm not sure about the rules concerning rebaptism.
-
Oh, that does sound nice. We live in Somerset, so we're only a few miles away . . . we may have to stop by there sometime. :)
-
I would just stay clear of divorced people in general, (and I am one) especially ones who have minor children (cause dating hurts the children so much) or who have abandoned their spouse,(of course they usually would have another story) for so many of them are not truely justified (Prophets say a justified divorce is very rare) in being divorced & thus are really still married according to God & committing adultery just by even being on the dating site (as one seasoned Stake Patriarch said). You don't want to join them in that act, even on line & have to share in their punishment because you were deceiveable.
While I know the scriptural basis for this view, Elder Oaks has said that right now we aren't living under that law:
In the temples of the Lord, couples are married for all eternity. But some marriages do not progress toward that ideal. Because “of the hardness of [our] hearts,” the Lord does not currently enforce the consequences of the celestial standard. He permits divorced persons to marry again without the stain of immorality specified in the higher law.
So just to be quite clear, right now, people who remarry after divorce are not committing adultery, according to an apostle of the Lord.
Desire to take out my endowment
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted · Edited by sensibility
I've posted this quote a few times before, but here it is again, since it's the clearest public statement of official policy that I know:
"Recent instruction from the First Presidency clarifies the policy for obtaining temple recommends and receiving endowments. It was reiterated that receiving one’s temple endowment is a serious matter that should be extended only to those who are sufficiently prepared and mature enough to keep the covenants they enter into. They also affirmed that single members in their late teens or early twenties who have not received a mission call or who are not engaged to be married in the temple should not be recommended to the temple for their own endowment. Every member who is 12 or older can, however, receive a Limited-Use Recommend to perform baptisms for the dead." -- Sister Beck, at a recent CES broadcast (emphasis added)
This policy is new, however (last few years), so there are definitely plenty of people wandering around the Church who received their endowments as single teenagers or in their early twenties. But it is the policy now. I wasn't too happy about it either, but personally I think it's in place because both a mission and a marriage are an automatic support system for newly-endowed members. The temple covenants are very serious, and the temple itself can be overwhelming, and I think people do better when they can have that support from either the mission structure and a companion, or from a new spouse.
If you do decide to meet with your Stake President, I hope it all goes well. :)