carlimac

We all know Jesus was baptized to set an example. But that's not why 8 yr old children are baptized. So the answer to that questions doesn't help. But thanks for the advice anyway.

Awesome response Lilac! Thank you for that perspective.

Ha ha! So the longer the child waits to be baptized, the more sins he gets washed away for free? (jkjk) We just make such a big deal about not baptizing infants. The reason for that is clear. "Men are punished for their own sins and not for Adam's transgressions." But is age 8 too soon? I understand the age of accountability. That makes sense. It's an appropriate time for kids ( more or less) to understand the whole repentance process and take responsibility for their actions. But I also KNOW children understand far sooner than age 8 when they are doing something wrong. My 7 yr old told me yesterday she knows she's a troublemaker (she's right ) and she knew without a doubt that she was in deep doo doo for taking some money that belonged to another family member. But that isn't sin? Well, OK. If it's just a lack of judgement or a little slip up, then I wish we would emphasize the need for baptism at the age of 8 MORE for becoming a member of Heavenly Father's church rather than the washing away sins thing. The pat and standard answer in all the Primary manuals to "Why do we get baptized?" is "To have our sins washed away." ( I'm a Primary teacher of 7 yr olds. I know. ) But if little children can't sin...?? Hmmm! The other thing I wonder sometimes (I don't sit around feeling bothered by this all the time) is that the covenants and committments we make at baptism are rarely taught to pre-8 yr olds. I don't think I fully understood " mourning with those that mourn and comforting those that stand in need of comfort" till I was about 40. I don't recall anyone ever telling me that's what I was committing to do when I was baptized. My parents were very devoted members of the church who took their church responsibilities seriously, but truthfully, The only thing I remember being taught at age 7 3/4 about my baptism is what it would feel like to go under the water and that I'd get to go out to dinner with my family afterwards. I DO recall a very peaceful feeling during my confirmation that I recognize now was the gift of the Holy Ghost being given me. Anyway, this is just observation. Not really complaint. 5 of my own 7 children have been baptized and I'm not sure I did any better a job of preparing them than my parents did for me. Maybe it's time to change that for my last two. I remember being impressed many years ago by the amount of preparation it took for a nearly 13 yr old boy I was aquainted with who was about to go through his Bar Mitzvah. He had to memorize scripture and song and be thoroughly knowledgable about what he was doing. I would feel better about 8 yr old baptism if our children were a little better prepared. Some are, but generallly I think most have a pretty vaugue understanding of what it all means.

Are you saying you don't think there should be any celebration at all after the temple sealing?

In Moroni 8:8 it says, "wherefore, little children are whole, for they are not capable of committing sin.." So why is there so much emphasis in Primary about children's sins being washed away when they are baptized at the age of eight? For example, I think of the song in "I Love to Look For Rainbows" which is a pretty little song, but technically, isn't it teaching an incorrect principle in the line, "I know when I am baptized, my wrongs are washed away"?

Wow, I never felt that way when I was wife to the bishop (he just got released this week). I kept waiting for things to get really bad and lonesome but they never did. I only felt blessed. Guess I lucked out.

As I've thought more about this, it occurred to me that many people who are beloved to me, dear friends and family members weren't in attendance at my actual marriage- the sealing ceremony in the temple that was short - the sealing words take about 2 min. for the officiator to say. There was no grand processional down the aisle or flowers or music- all the things that most people think of in traditional weddings outside the temple. What did occur in the temple was very personal and quiet and sacred- the sealing words that 25 years later I'm still trying to comprehend and grasp. But what happened after - the celebration, the pictures, the food, gathering of hundreds of people, laughter, smiles, well wishes, cutting the cake, tossing rosebuds, and even bagpipers! All that was part of my wedding, too. If non members chose to be offended and miss out on all the joyful celebration simply because they couldn't be in attendance for the 15 min sealing ceremony- how sad for them and me. I had aunts, uncles and many friends who still chose to celebrate with us- to be a part of our wedding to extent that they could. I didn't attend my older siblings temple ceremonies because I hadn't been endowed yet. But I still was very much a part of the wedding. Point being- the temple rooms can only accomodate so many people anyway. There are many - even members of the church who would like to be there for the actual ceremony but have to be cut from the list. The ideal situation would be for those closest to the bride and groom- the parents, grandparents, siblings, etc., to be there. But if they can't- they can still participate in the "wedding" by graciously congratulating and offering love and support before and after the actual temple sealing.

That's what I meant. I am the one making assumptions. This is the way the situation appears to me.

I don't know. You say you aren't bitter, but the fact that you felt you had to apologize to your parents and that you think it is a weak symbolism doesn't sound very convincing to me. No wonder your parents don't want to consider the church at all when you apologize to them about it. When we make excuses or apologize for the church, it give people a reason to not take it seriously. Maybe you should apologize to your parents for making the church and it's policies look silly. I'm taking the hard line on this because I really believe from what you've said that this little issue (in the eternal scheme of things) is just an excuse for them to not go to the bother of investigating the church. Your apologizing for the church enables their lack of interest. " Why should we be interested in a church that even our son doesn't think is right.?" Assumptions, assumptions. But that's what it sounds like to me.

Your parents have chosen to continue to be bitter about it. What about THEM being happy For YOU, that with integrity you made choice as an adult and followed through with something you felt was important. Sounds like you are being drawn into their bitterness. Don't allow them to make you feel guilty about it. You made the right choice and will be blessed for it if you allow yourself to be blessed. If you continue to dwell on it, I get the sense that the bitterness will continue to grow and may really become a stumbling block in the path of the growth and progression of your testimony. I think it's OK to question and be frustrated by things that we experience. But continuing to dwell needlessly on the negative for years can't be healthy. Why not focus on all the joys you can share with them right now! Do you have children? Involve them in as many aspects of your life that you can that will give them pleasure in seeing their child act in the role of a responsible, loving adult. In other words, put this behind you.

Over! The only time I wear underwear under my garments is during my female time. Obviously, "wings" don't work so well on garments. If you're not female, and don't know what I'm talking about...ask one.

Maybe the ovation wasn't for what he did as a 28 yr old but what he did this week. He resigned immediately instead of trying to drag it out and defend himself. Though what he has done in the past is sick and deserves some serious repentance and apologies (and possibly therapy), what he did today shows integrity and deserves an ovation (as opposed to say Clinton or the governor of NJ- trying to go forward and hang onto their public office as if what they did was of no consequence or significance). Hopefully Garn's family can receive the help and the privacy now they all must desperately need to work through this.

I served a mission in Argentina in some of the most awkward and odd branches you could imagine. But have never felt the spirit so strong before or since. I agree with you completely. I'm afraid most of these little kids are learning how to just spout off what they think is what we all want to hear rather than what they really feel.

I'm a primary teacher, too. And what I hear in our class together is so spontaneous and genuine- not the canned stuff they say in testimony meeting. I've learned much from my bright, inquisitive 6-7 yr olds. As I've taught them, they've taught me! That's why it's so frustrating to hear them talking like little robots in testimony meeting. What they say in front of all the adults isn't what they really think. They are much smarter and more insightful than that. I guess I just don't like the conditioning and the conforming effect that bearing testimonies can have on them. I'd rather hear their many questions and hear their explanations of how they think Heavenly Father and the gospel work in their lives. Our primary class is so enlightening and a truely spiritual experience for me every week, (as opposed to testimony meetings.)

My husband is the bishop and he won't touch this with a ten foot pole. He's just too nice. And our ward is so full of little performers (children of our friends- several are the children of one of his counselors), he can't imagine offending them by telling them to not let their children stand up to talk.

I hate to admit this. I feel bad for feeling this way, but I get so annoyed by the same little kids getting up every fast sunday to say the exact same thing they say every month. "I'm ____________ for those who don't know me. I love my family and I know the church is true." There was a parade of at least 7-8 kids today who all got up and said the exact same thing, one after another. There were investigators in the audience and I felt almost embarrassed. If any enemies of the Church want to use the argument that we are brainwashed as children, there is exhibit A. There was also the woman (bless her heart, she's a sweetie, but...) who got up with her two year old in her arms and let him babble on into the microphone as if he were bearing his testimony. She said herself that he didn't understand what he was saying or what a testimony even is. But she let it go on for quite awhile. It was distracting and a bit of a spirit killer. It was hard to get back into the feel of the meeting after that. I know there are children who actually DO have a testimony and even though they don't have the words to express it other than the rote "I know the church is true" they truely love the gospel and have sincere feelings. I wouldn't want to deny them the opportunity to share that. But it's painfully obvious when the same kids (usually the ones who love the limelight under any circumstance) get up every month. Just like clockwork. Their parents sit there beaming or giggling at them. I know this is a judgemental, critical attitude, but I'm just wondering if I'm alone in this. Does it bug anyone else?? I surely wish parents would teach children the sacred nature of testimonies and they are only to be shared sincerely and when moved by the spirit- not just when all their friends are going up to the pulpit. It's not a time to show off.

Both my husband and I talked to our stake president individually and explained the situation about this job possibility. He was totally unfazed and said it is aboslutely alright to consider it and that the brethren (general authorities) have advised that we shouldn't ever be held hostage by our church callings if opportunities to move, expand our career experiences or famly needs come our way. We both felt such a warmth and relief. I knew I was right about that but it was nice to have that notion confirmed. Unless we are called on a full time mission, we are free to move around as we see fit. And even in some circumstances, it's appropriate to interrupt missionary work. Just thought I'd pass that along.

TMI!! (But my husband always thought the nursing garments with "windflaps" were cute)

"This glorious truth of celestial parentage, including specifically both a father and a mother, is heralded forth by song in one of the greatest of Latter-day saint hymns, O My Father by Eliza R. Snow, written in 1843, during the lifetime of the prophet, includes this teaching: In the heavens are parents single? No; the thought makes reason stare! Truth is reason, truth eternal, Tells me I've a Mother there. " This is a wonderful expression. How I would love to know and be able to communicate with mother in heaven. But I read a book one time that said Eliza Snow wasn't talking about a divine mother when she wrote those words, but about her own mother who had passed away. Can't remember who it was written by but it was one of her close family members or friends. I haven't read through all the posts so don't know if this was addressed already.

TO mztrniceguy Soooo, (cough, cough...um) I take it from the cover of one of the books that she (and you?) aren't exactly mainstream. That book would never make it into Deseret Book. I'm curious about this series and how it came about. Maybe you should start a new thread to tell us about it, or maybe you already have sometime in the past? I've been on this forum about two days now.

You seem to be rather paranoid (at the very least "enraged") of paranoia. Why does it bother you so much if people want to take precautions to protect their children? It's simply common sense. I suppose you've never been a victim of something like this. Perhaps you would change your song and dance if you had been. Just wondering why the ruffled feathers?

It was the "convicted/accused" words that puzzled me. Obviously that kind of thing should be made public- not necessarily over the pulpit in sacrament meeting- perhaps an email of some kind. No parent is going to allow their kid to be in that kind of situation anyway. (Would they? yikes) ON a lesser note, we have been told not to let our young children go out to the bathrooms by themselves during church. There HAVE been strangers (unidentified men not dressed for church) lurking in womens' bathrooms in our stake on Sundays. Police called, guy took off in a hurry. Our buildings are public and open to anyone who wants to wander in. It's wise to take caution.

I don't think a bishop can be too careful. My husband will never interview a woman in his office without other people nearby in the building. And one time he asked me to accompany him to deliver some papers (BYU application stuff) to a teenage girl he knew was home alone. He didn't want the non-member neighbors getting any funny ideas. Bishops do need to be very careful. And I would think there should be a little caution on the part of any woman meeting with any man in a room with closed doors. Even with bishops and stake presidents. Take your husband or a good friend along to wait outside. That's not paranoia- just smartness.

Aren't these folks identified in the news or on the state govt. websites? THat seems a funny response by a bishop if there is someone that dangerous. And those kinds' of people aren't generally allowed to be around kids anyway.

They used to be all the time for the young women. My daughters went to one just over a year ago but I don't think the bishop was even aware of it. I would have chosen differently about letting them go if I had to do it over again. Nothing bad happened but I just felt icky about it later. It was an unnecessary activity and I don't think it served any purpose at all. I think all those problems with child molestation, exposure to porn, possible false accusations are realistic problems. But the biggest problem I see with sleepovers are that children lose sleep and are GRUMPY the next day. I remember feeling that way after sleepovers as a kid. I was always glad to just sleep in my own bed the next night. We don't nix sleepovers altogether but we do limit them to special occasions only (birthday parties) and we'll often suggest the kids have a late night with games/ movies/ whatever and then the kids go home, or we retrieve our kid from the party by around 11 PM. Works for us.