mdfxdb

Silhouette, If your husband has decided that church is not for him, then your marriage counselor is right. You are being unreasonable to expect your husband to do something he has clearly disavowed/dislikes. That being said, you are in an abusive relationship. You need to get out. I see you are located in CA. Divorce laws are favorable to spouses in CA. If you have been married for some amount of time you will be entitled to alimony. Get an attorney, a good one. Move out. Find a job. You are scared for nothing. It is never as bad as you imagine it will be.

She shouldn't bring it up in the short term. She should be as active as she can if her husband doesn't have a problem with it. He sounds like a somewhat standard Catholic to me. He likely has deep belief in his religion, and can't understand why anyone would want to change that. Is the OP catholic as well? Were they the same religion when they got married and now she wants to leave the reservation? What if one spouse from an LDS couple who had been temple married decided to turn Catholic? Would we give the same advice?

Timing isn't important. Writing the check number somewhere on the slip, and getting the names right is a biggie as well I can't tell you how many times people put Mr. Smith on their tithing slip, as if they were the only mr. smith in the ward......or with families with Juniors and such they don't make a differentiation. We're somehow supposed to figure it out, or some people use an alias, or aka for their tithing slip which doesn't match their legal name, or church records.... The names are frustrating.

Omega is mostly right on this one. Whether or not to confess to the bishop is dicey here. I would probably not...If I had done the steps you have done to repent, and I felt like I was truly forgiven. I do not want to diminish the sin, but on the other hand your bishop could really blow it up. I say this because this is take it to the grave type stuff where your wife is concerned. There is no benefit in telling your wife about this. If you were addicted to porn, had physical intimacy with the other woman, committed adultery, then your wife has a right to know. But this instance isn't one of them. However, if you do it again, then there are greater problems/issues and full confession would have to be made to bishop and wife.

I think this is on the home repentance plan. As Omega said, unless this is a pervasive problem it is not a talk to the bishop type problem.

As per my previous post. You would only need to confess if you enjoyed it.

No, you would not need to confess for a one-off... Well, maybe if you enjoyed it... Seriously, you would be wasting the bishops time. If you have had a problem with that sort of thing in the past, then you clearly know the line that needs to be crossed. Did you go back for seconds? Did you sin further?

Gods law must be executed upon all who sin. Grace is given to those who truly repent of their sins. Our lives must be lived in such a way that we strive to keep Gods law continually. Where we fall short we repent, and continue forward. This is only made possible through the atonement of Jesus Christ.

no rule against having a beard for church leadership positions. A search of handbook 1 reveals no references for the term beard or shave

Ignore Omega on this one. Don't set any expectations or any self-fulfilling prophecies about your husband and his conversion. Taking a step towards baptism is a big one, and shows commitment, especially since you are already married. Go to the ward functions with or without him. Be a good example, always remember to invite him, and make sure he feels invited and welcome.

I think the heartburn is where it says "pray for us sinners" am I right?

..

off topic.

You are not the childs dad. You need to serve your mission. See life a little bit. One way or another these things work out. She may wait for you while you are away, and she might not. Seek not your will, but the Lords will. You are young, and are picking up a burden you might not fully understand if you do not go on your mission.

I was very aware of the ex cathedra concept existing, but also of it not being used by the popes. Several popes are quoted as saying they will never invoke/use ex cathedra. but doctrinally speaking, if we apply the concept of those moved upon by the spirit as speaking scripture, then what is our cannon to include? Our official cannon of scripture is pretty tight, and doesn't get changed very often, although I think they did a revision just this last year. As previously mentioned we do not add to it (proclamation on families). of course our scripture is relatively old, except D&C. The people in the book of Mormon times were warned by the prophets, just as we are today. Somehow their warnings made it to scripture (canonized), and the warnings we are hearing today do not make it into D&C..... Is this a problem that time will solve? Will the warnings of past prophets be told historically though scripture to our descendants?

..........

Ex Cathedra is the Latin phrase which means "from the chair". It refers to the binding and infallible papal teachings which are promulgated by the pope when he officially teaches in his capacity of the universal shepherd of the Church a doctrine on a matter of faith or morals and addresses it to the entire world. How is this fundamentally different from when our prophets speak at conference? Is it different? Do we regard the words of the apostles/prophets to be "ex cathedra"? There are some who regard the conference talks as scripture. I'm not so sure. We have scriptures. Bible, New Testament, Book of Mormon, Doctrine & Covenants. When new scripture is promulgated, it is added to our cannon. Thoughts?

I would have a problem with it. A one off.... OK, but every time? I would ask, and then I would not permit it. They can pray in their car.

I posted because I had never even heard of it until I moved into my new ward about a year and a half ago. It turns out it is a real thing and there are active members with callings and stuff that celebrate it. They do a cake and everything.

I will answer the movie question first. It is only a sin if you enjoyed it... Seriously, though. God knows your heart. If you die on your way to confess to the Bishop, and you are/were truly repentant, then you don't have anything to worry about. If you feel you have sinned to the point where you need to talk with the Bishop, then don't put it off. ever.

wow Omega........ Big turn around? I never doubted that you were a believer. I always felt you were trying to point out the human side of our leaders. The fact that they were not perfect, and had the ability to sin just like us "normals" who put our pants on one leg at a time, rather than levitate into them..

I think in our throwing around accusations, and apologizing for misdeeds, or perceived misdeeds we have strayed from the point. Which is that prophets are imperfect men. Men just like most of us, subject to temptation, and weakness. What makes them different is that they can overcome those temptations, they are called of God, and the behavior of the individuals in no way negates the truthfulness of the church of God. Let's be honest, by today's standards most of our early prophets would not even be allowed to have a temple recommend (word of wisdom nonsense).....

- I agree that our leaders were, and are righteous, but not perfectly so, as you seem to believe. They need to repent of their follies, and sins just as we do. Mosiah 27:8. Alma the younger was "wicked". Nevertheless he repented, and became a powerful prophet. Did he instantly become perfect? I doubt it. - Was Brigham Young led by the spirit. I believe he was. Did the spirit reside with him at all times in all instances. Probably not. it has been opined on this thread that a drunken man cannot possibly be led by the spirit. Even if he wasn't drunk, it is unreasonable to believe that he was guided by the spirit 100% of the time because that would imply he was 100% righteous and worthy 100% of the time. That would be impossible for a mortal to accomplish. I believe only one individual has been able to accomplish that feat. -Having a drink (Joseph, Brigham, Joseph Sr.) does not steep them in the devils ways.... ridiculous. - Gods plans are accomplished in many ways by wicked men. WWI, WWII, unrest in the middle east. - Gods plans are also accomplished in very very important ways by righteous (imperfect), but righteous men. - Deification is used not to promote an agenda, but to illustrate how many feel our prophets are infallible. Even in these the latter days our prophets have been reprimanded, and excommunicated (quorum of the 12). - The belief that we cannot become as our prophets is flawed. We are individually all empowered with the same priesthood that they hold. We are entitled to the same confirmations, visitations, spiritual experiences as they. We are limited by our unworthiness, just like they are.

Does anyone here celebrate it?

I see no character assassination going on. I see inquiry, and someone trying to point out that while prophets are prophets, they are not infallible. There is enough true "bad" stuff about some of our early church leaders that we do not need to engage in character assassination. As far as prophet worship? Well that might be something for another thread. Maybe we don't worship our prophets, but we definitely put them on a pedestal which I think Joseph Smith himself would deem to be unseemly.