classylady

I was recently in your exact position. I was inactive for years, I got several tattoos, I drank alcohol every night, and, without going into great detail, I too had issues with the law of chastity.
When the longing to return to Church came upon me, the first thing I did was make an appointment with my Bishop to talk things over, and discuss what I could do to get myself back on track.
There was no punishment or disciplinary action involved at all. My Bishop radiated love and concern, and joy that I wanted to come back.
I encourage you not to be afraid or dread talking with your leader(s) about your concerns. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. I would confess if I were you, just for your own peace of mind. After doing so, you can be confident in your worthiness to partake of ALL the blessings that Heavenly Father has in store for you.
I wondered if I were worthy to take the Sacrament, for example. My Bishop was able to assure me that I was, so I didn't have to be uncomfortable wondering if I ought to take it or not. It gave me great peace within to speak with my leader. I encourage you to go ahead and talk with your leader. I believe you'll have a great burden lifted from your heart as our Father in Heaven welcomes you with open arms and a joyful countenance.

Congratulations, Suzie!

Wuh?  We're talking about one particular man's activities. There is nothing wrong with saying 'praise to the man.' 'praise to the white man,' praise to the American.'  We are referencing one person, Joseph Smith. I am a black female and I find nothing offensive in the words and certainly don't take them as meaning only JS, or only white men, or only Americans can commune with Jehovah.
 
I love this hymn. Not just like, I love it. When I'm working at the computer, I play the MoTab version on YouTube loud and often. I was physically thrilled when one of the Nauvoo pageant actors shouted "Praise to the Man!" and everyone sang the song. It was just great.
 
Lemme tell you, you want to get riled up over something - try having to make your way past shouting narrow-minded bigots before you can get into the Nauvoo pageant. Those were real words. I didn't have to guess at  what they meant.. They were ugly words - directed at me and the family I was with.
 
So, I'm gonna sing Praise to the Man all the time. I like it.

We're just a number. I'm a little jealous of wards with names.

I'm in the younger generation. "Put out" is still considered a coarse description.

They just contracted someone to get it fixed.  I sure hope it's soon.

Hi Stovepipe -
 
The LDS Church prefers to keep apologetics at arm's length.  There are some great sources out there (Maxwell Institute, FairLDS.org, Mormon Interpreter, JeffLindsay.com); but the Church doesn't generally officially endorse any of them--rather, it focuses on teaching members to approach God and get answers directly from Him.
 
 
I don't think there's a one-size-fits-all explanation.  I've posited some theories in a post to these forums here.  You might also want to take a look at Brian Hales' website at http://josephsmithspolygamy.org/.
 
 
Meg Stout (who did a series of blog posts at millennialstar.org entitled "A Faithful Joseph") posits that Emma knew more than she let on.  This is a minority view, though--the majority of scholars believe Joseph did indeed mislead Emma about some (not all) of his polygamous marriages.  The reason, bluntly, is that Emma was extremely hostile to the marriages and (in spite of her other virtues) was not above doing some pretty ghastly things to women she suspected Joseph of having married.
 
 
I believe two or three of Smith's plural wives recalled hearing him say something to that effect--though they were pretty clear that Smith also gave them a great deal of time to consider and that they entered the matches freely.  These anecdotes, and later teachings from other Church leaders, do make it clear that it was vitally important--at least, for a time--that the Church teach and practice the principle of plural marriage.
 
 
Not everything a prophet says is inspired; and sometimes they haven't been terribly careful about which of their sayings the Church should formally embrace and rely upon versus which of their sayings are expressions of their own, potentially misguided opinions.  The promise we do have is that we will not be led "astray from the oracles of God, or from [our] duty" (see the explanatory material to Official Declaration 1)--or, as President Uchtdorf put it last year, "God will not allow His Church to drift from its appointed course or fail to fulfill its divine destiny."
 
 
There's been a lot of research done on this by LDS scholars--see Maxwell Institute, FAIR, etc.  Bottom line, in my opinion:  No, the scrolls weren't written by the hand of Abraham itself--they date to thousands of years later.  No, the Book of Abraham as we have it is not a literal translation of those scrolls.  There are lots of interesting theories as to how the two relate--from the notion that the Egyptian funerary rite (which is what the remaining fragments of the actual papyri appear to contain) was a convoluted version of an earlier, pure, divinely inspired endowment; to the idea that the actual papyri were thirty to forty feet long and we only have three to five feet of them at present; to the idea that the scrolls in their entirety were nothing more than a "catalyst" that inspired Joseph to seek further revelation from God and led to the revelation of new scripture (much as the Joseph Smith translation did).  We do have precedent for Joseph Smith working with one text, then getting a revelation restoring the content of another text that no longer existed--see D&C 7.
 
By all means, do your homework on this one.
 
 
Oh, they were here, all right.  Where we get tripped up is when we assume they were the only people here.  :)
 
 
Yep.  You look for explanations, pick them up, weigh them out, and decide which ones make sense and which ones don't.  I also don't expect all of my questions to get answered (though many, many of them have been)--sometimes you just put something "on the shelf" and come back to it later when you have a little more light and knowledge.  The bottom line is that God has revealed Himself to me and given me a testimony; and I'm not going to let the things I don't know lead me to throw away the things I do know.
 
 
The closest you'll get that comes with official Church imprimatur is the Gospel Topics section of the Church's website.  The section is continually being updated, and there have been some really good articles generated in the past few months addressing some of the hairier historical issues.
 
 
I don't completely shut them out, but I don't seek them out either.  If I already have a question about the Gospel and I do some googling and an anti-site comes up--sure, I'll skim the entry as part of the study process.  But I don't read through anti sites looking for more questions or expecting to find "the truth".  If you go digging underneath an outhouse, you might find a few interesting things--but mostly, all you're gonna get is excrement.
 
 
Oh, sure, it's an issue.  LDS leadership has been pretty candid about it.  I think the Church has (belatedly) evolved from a view of history as something that should be specifically written to be "faith promoting", to more of a sense of comfort that even a warts-and-all history can still be just as edifying (perhaps more).  I have a few good friends that left the Church over historical issues, and they are all pretty clear that they could have dealt with the issues themselves--it was the fact that the Church hadn't addressed the issues in a more public way that made them feel "lied to". 
 
The Church is getting better about this sort of thing; but I think there are limits to how far it should go.  Historical interpretations are always evolving; and I don't think it's generally a good idea for the Church to hitch its wagon to any particular theory of history any more than it should come out and endorse particular scientific hypotheses, political platforms, or any other man-made philosophy.  These will eventually stand or fall on their own merits; and the Church will focus on the work of bringing people into communion with God.

Return to Germany, while stationed there it was a divided county and I did not get to see beyond the broader (except through scopes and binoculars). So I would like to see what was East Germany.

I've shared a bit of my story in previous posts, but here are a few more details that may interest you.
 
I have never married, and I converted to the Church in my late 30's.  The experience up to my baptism was quite wonderful, but all the planets lined up after that (in an unfavorable way) and I was hit with a mountain of challenges that caused me to drift away from the Church.  Every challenge was connected to my being around the wrong people at the wrong time, or not having the right attitude myself.  Now, many years later, I am finding my way back into the Church and I really want to kick myself for not trying harder right after my baptism.
 
It is true that single people are treated as the exception and not the norm in many wards.  Talks and Sunday School lessons will often center on being a good spouse or parent and may assume that every adult within earshot is married, with maybe a wink or a footnote that single people are also loved and will be blessed.
 
Here are the mistakes I made:
 
1. I had too thin a skin around being single.  Every time I heard someone assume everyone in the church was married, I got angry or felt diminished.  But I knew disabled people in the ward who didn't get angry when talks and lessons assumed everyone was able-bodied.  And I knew a few unhappily married couples who must have cringed when the talk or lesson focused on the eternal blessings of marriage.  My blunder was assuming that 100% of every talk and lesson should apply to me and if it didn't then something was wrong with me.
 
2. I failed to tell the Bishop what wasn't working.  Right after my baptism he paired me with a new "buddy" who was a damaging influence on me, and I got a home teacher who was... well, strange.  I stopped attending because I simply didn't have the energy to be around these people.  (God bless them wherever they are today, of course.)
 
3. I viewed the ward as an alien tribe and not my family.  Again, in retrospect, there were dozens if not hundreds of members who didn't care about my marital status and would have welcomed me into the ward family.  I didn't consciously seek these people out, and I let myself focus on the few people who viewed my singleness with suspicion or alarm.  (Sort of like the old 1960's meme that divorce is contagious.)
 
4. I entered the Church assuming I would find a spouse.  When that didn't happen right away, I got depressed and allowed it to push me away from the ward.  And this was back when the so-called "midsingles" didn't exist... single people today have more options, I think, than I did.
 
To answer your question: no, your marital status is not an obstacle, but your attitude could be a mountain-sized obstacle.  You are setting yourself up for a catastrophe if you walk into the ward with an attitude of "I'll just sit here and only wonderful things will happen to me."  You will probably succeed gloriously if your attitude is "I am a child of God focused on the Gospel of Jesus Christ." 
 
Best wishes!

Right?
 
 
Sorry...humanoid just has too many syllables.

Well, thank you very much.  The tune was always vaguely familiar but I couldn't place it until Classylady wrote her post and ruined my life . . .

My sister (who has a degree in Music, and is a very talented pianist), told me of an experience she had while visiting a ward in the Puget Sound area of Washington.  She was sitting in Relief Society, and then the prelude music started. She says, "I thought I was hearing someone just playing the notes with one finger-like a little kid, or someone who was just learning to play. I thought "what is this?."  But, then she learned that the pianist had a disability (I can't remember if the sister was blind), and had to be led to the piano and her fingers positioned in order to play.  My sister no longer thought the music was awful, but was humbled enough to realize it was beautiful.  The ward has talented musicians, but opted to give this particular sister a calling, so that she could serve in some capacity.
 
I've been in Wards where there wasn't a lot of musical talent. The music and singing was still beautiful. It shouldn't be a paid calling.

My sister (who has a degree in Music, and is a very talented pianist), told me of an experience she had while visiting a ward in the Puget Sound area of Washington.  She was sitting in Relief Society, and then the prelude music started. She says, "I thought I was hearing someone just playing the notes with one finger-like a little kid, or someone who was just learning to play. I thought "what is this?."  But, then she learned that the pianist had a disability (I can't remember if the sister was blind), and had to be led to the piano and her fingers positioned in order to play.  My sister no longer thought the music was awful, but was humbled enough to realize it was beautiful.  The ward has talented musicians, but opted to give this particular sister a calling, so that she could serve in some capacity.
 
I've been in Wards where there wasn't a lot of musical talent. The music and singing was still beautiful. It shouldn't be a paid calling.

I see nothing wrong with praising Joseph Smith. I don't worship him. But, I do honor him. And, I am very grateful for his life, his example, his visions and revelations, and his teachings.
 
Using an existing tune is done all the time. One of my favorites is "Lord, Dismiss Us with Thy Blessing." I always want to start singing "Go tell Aunt Rhody, Go tell Aunt Rhody, Go tell Aunt Rhody, The old gray goose is dead."

My sister (who has a degree in Music, and is a very talented pianist), told me of an experience she had while visiting a ward in the Puget Sound area of Washington.  She was sitting in Relief Society, and then the prelude music started. She says, "I thought I was hearing someone just playing the notes with one finger-like a little kid, or someone who was just learning to play. I thought "what is this?."  But, then she learned that the pianist had a disability (I can't remember if the sister was blind), and had to be led to the piano and her fingers positioned in order to play.  My sister no longer thought the music was awful, but was humbled enough to realize it was beautiful.  The ward has talented musicians, but opted to give this particular sister a calling, so that she could serve in some capacity.
 
I've been in Wards where there wasn't a lot of musical talent. The music and singing was still beautiful. It shouldn't be a paid calling.

Just a quick update. Samsung attempted to charge $160 plus tax and other charges for the repair under the category of "abuse". After a bit of correspondence, they eventually said that they had "examined the device very closely", and will now repair it free of charge.
 
Finally! Thanks all.

I understand you Pipeorgan.  I spent 2 years teaching public speaking and hearing so many Mormons with horrendous public speaking skills makes my ears want bleed.  I confess to occasionally having to step out of Sacrement Meeting because of the speaker's exceptional lack of skill.
 
There is something that helps me though....Does anyone remember the show "Full House"?  There's an episode where Jesse (a pro musician) here's his wife singing to their little boys.  Jesse cringes- his wife has a horrible voice!!  He then spends the entire episode trying to teach her to sing, but it's a lost cause and he has to give up.  Then towards the end of the episode, he walks upstairs and here's her singing to the kids again.  This time he listens-- not to the notes, not to the words, but to the emotions.  And he bursts into tears at how beautiful she is: her voice carries such a magnitude of love for her babies!  
 
When it comes to the Lord, it's the heart that counts more than skill.

I don't really care what meaning you personally glean from one hymn we sing. We don't worship our prophets. We don't worship Joseph Smith Jr.
It's like telling a catholic that they worship their Saints, ask any catholic, they don't. It's just a popular lie, propaganda if you will, that certain people use to make us look bad.

No, it isn't.
 
 
 
Well, maybe that's true.  But it is similar to praise given to pivotal members of humanity who depart.  Like Ronald Regan or Martin Luther King or a Pope, etc.
 
 
 
Honestly, it sounds like the problem here is with you not knowing what worship means.   The extol and revere verse is pushing it a bit, granted.  But Singing a triumphant song about someone who was killed and taking comfort that he's in heaven, isn't worship.  Recognizing greatness isn't worship.  Heck, being great doesn't even mean someone was good.  Lucifer is great.  Speculating about the circumstances of the deceased isn't worship.  (It should be a lower case 'g' as in 'gods'.)  Acknowledging people will meet again in the next life isn't worship. Many folks I've met who have pushed this criticism, seem to not know a lot about what they believe or why they believe it.

Thanks for that...it's all I'm going to hear now.  Lol!
But on the vein of interchangeable tunes, this was something I learned about either on my mission or shortly before, and I enjoy doing it from time to time.  A companion (the same one I mentioned earlier in this thread, in fact) and I used to really enjoy singing Joseph Smith's Prayer to the tune of In Humility Our Savior, since they've got the same meter.  I also found that it makes you actually listen to the words more closely.

All the repentance and love that a person has for his ex would not negate the choice of the ex.  If takes both parties to agree to being together. If one party does not want to be with the other, in this life or the next, they won't be together.

I see nothing wrong with praising Joseph Smith. I don't worship him. But, I do honor him. And, I am very grateful for his life, his example, his visions and revelations, and his teachings.
 
Using an existing tune is done all the time. One of my favorites is "Lord, Dismiss Us with Thy Blessing." I always want to start singing "Go tell Aunt Rhody, Go tell Aunt Rhody, Go tell Aunt Rhody, The old gray goose is dead."

I see nothing wrong with praising Joseph Smith. I don't worship him. But, I do honor him. And, I am very grateful for his life, his example, his visions and revelations, and his teachings.
 
Using an existing tune is done all the time. One of my favorites is "Lord, Dismiss Us with Thy Blessing." I always want to start singing "Go tell Aunt Rhody, Go tell Aunt Rhody, Go tell Aunt Rhody, The old gray goose is dead."