RMGuy

I'll refer you to the classic and perhaps apocryphal quote by none other than J. Golden Kimball. To paraphrase: There are four great 'tions' by which individuals are called to positions in this great church, inspiration, revelation, desperation, and relation. Perhaps this is one of the latter as opposed to the former. -RM

Sarah, Welcome. I hope that what I might type below will be of some help. I think first of all, it is important to realize that you are not alone, I mean that quite literally, and in so many ways. You still have your faith, as such, you can turn to your Father in Heaven. Also, it sounds like you have a good support structure in family, church leaders, and friends. You should also be aware that there are many, many families going through the same scenario that is playing out in your home. Earlier this year Elder Marlin K Jensen of the 70 stated, “Weve never had a period of apostasy like we are having right now, largely over these issues.” He was speaking about many of the same issues your husband has mentioned to you. Finally, you are not alone in the sense that your husband seems to have remained a good husband and father in all aspects except his faith/belief in the church. I think that many, perhaps even most, members of the church have had doubts about some item of doctrine or policy, or historical fact from time to time. Perhaps some self introspection would be good before your conversation this weekend. Covey wrote that it is important to "seek first to understand, then to be understood". I understand that with all your heart and soul you would like your husband to recognize that he is wrong, to acknowledge the error of his ways, to repent, and return to the gospel. Let me pose a hypothetical question: What if he is right? Consider that for a moment. Would you want to know? Are you willing to acknowledge that it might be you that is wrong? Perhaps his issues with the church are genuine? Recognize that this is exactly what you want him to do, or to consider....that he might be wrong. If we can't be willing to discard our most cherished and prized beliefs when we enter a discussion like the one you are about to have, then it is unrealistic for us to ask the other individual to do that, and then what is the point in having the conversation? I think you will find that almost everyone on this forum stands behind you 100% and reaffirms your believe and faith. That is important. At the same time, your husband needs to you listen, consider, and seek for understanding with him. If he is the person you describe above, he cares about your insight, your thoughts, and your feelings, but he needs to know that you do the same for him. So my advice, if you want it, and for what it is worth: listen to him. Consider what he has to say, weigh it. And then provide your thoughts and feelings on the matter. After all you guys are a team. "If we have the truth, [it] cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed." said J Reuben Clark. If you need some credentials as to why I advise the above? I lived it. -RM

Having married an RM, I think opening up opportunities for more sisters to serve is a wonderful idea. For me, I always need to recognize that what works for one individual may not be ideal for another. Since I would ask that Joanna and those that think like her, respect my perspective and opinions, I likewise read her comments with a view to finding insight and understanding for those I disagree with. I always thought that as members of the church we sought after truth, even if it was things we didn't want or like to hear. There is some truth in what Joanna is saying for some people. Just not for all. -RM

MoE is pretty much spot on from my understanding. Sacrament meeting as it currently exists is early 20th century. Prior to that, meetings of the church looked a bit different. Some early journals are indicative. As Apple indicated however, sacrament (Lord's supper) and fasting have been in evidence from the earliest days of the restoration, though not necessarily in the same manner we observe them today. -RM

Go for it! -RM

Well I would hate for anyone to rush to judgement, so I can make it easy by admitting that not only am I self-righteous, but also egotistical and arrogant too :-) -RM

Dravin is spot on. There is a guy that my wife jokes around with all the time. I'm cool with it, and there is nothing going on, except that it is pretty humourous. If I wasn't then we would talk about it, and it would stop. But each couple is different. -RM

I think a lot depends on why she is inactive. IF it is because she just doesn't want to go to church, feels guilty for not paying tithing, or something along those lines...then I agree it shouldn't make a difference. She could approach anyone and see if they were interested in babysitting. That individual might need the money and it could be of mutual benefit to both parties. IF on the other hand, she is inactive because she does not believe in the church, then she may not want to have her child indoctrinated by a member of the church and may just be using her own inactivity as a way to avoid hurting yours or your co-workers feelings. -RM

Spiderman is real. I read the book! -RM

Blackmarch, I get what you are saying. As I have heard it, it wouldn't remove the ordination, but rather would extend emeritus status to members of the 12, in much the same way that is currently done with the 70. Remember that until 1978 the members of the 70 also served life appointments. So there is some precedent for a change such as this. -RM

It sounds like you live in a scary place. I live in a beautiful world Heavenly Father created for me, with wonderful brothers and sisters, members and non-members alike that were valiant in the pre-existance. It is too bad you haven't had the same experience, or unable or unwilling to see some of that good too. -RM

There has been some discussion that one of the big announcements may be an implementation of mandatory retirement age for general authorities including members of the 12, or that there may be a change in the manner of selection. Does anyone put any credence in this? -RM

You cannot control the other child. You can make the parents aware. You can have discussions and talks with your child. For us, we have found that openness, and honesty works well, but it takes time (not something you can simply turn on or off) and it takes understanding. The first time they open up and tell you something you don't want to hear and react badly will be the last time they open up and tell you something you don't like. -RM

I would welcome that change -RM

She'll be married about the same time you make DL. -RM

A member of our ward just got a report date about 5 weeks after the paperwork would have arrived. You do have the option of including an availability date, and it is rare if ever that you would have a report date BEFORE that time. -RM

Whose religious views are you NOT willing to tolerate? Whose views should not be aired? I think we always want to talk about freedom of speech or freedom of religion when we are the ones feeling attacked, yet very quick to use those same freedoms to try to circumscribe the rights and freedoms of others. just two examples (and please, they are examples...not to derail the original conversation) If we really believe in freedom of religion, then why are we not willing to support two episcopal men getting married. They believe there is nothing wrong with this. If we really believe in freedom of speech, then why would we want a site that we see as "anti-mormon" closed down? Perhaps because we have a hard time seeing the same freedoms that we so earnestly claim extended to others when we disagree with how they use them. Just my $.02 -RM

I guess I see the world as a fundamentally positive place. I think that people are generally good, whether members or not. Perhaps that means I am naive of view the world through rose colored glasses. I wasn't always that way. However, in recent years I have had some experiences that have lead me to understand that the world is not black and white. It is not binary or digital, but very very analog, with lots of shades of grey. I've learned to love different perspectives, and I've come to understand that there is some evil in the world and we have to be aware and guard against it. Much of what we might see as evil or bad, is simply chance, happenstance, misunderstanding, or viewed that way because of our perspective. And there is good. An amazing amount of good, in people and in the world. -RM

Interesting that if he would have lied about his worthiness went through the motions, returned after two years and they picked up where they left off most people would have been perfectly fine with that. So instead we judge the individual that decides to be honest? Help me understand the logic in that please? -RM

I have sat in a lot of councils over the years. Some good, some bad, some meh. With the number of hours that your typical ward leaders spends in meetings making them productive and beneficial is important. Yet if there is one lesson I have taken from my experience with meetings and councils in the church it is this: That generally if the individuals present in the council spent the time in actually working on the project, or helping the individual/family as opposed to sitting in chairs at church talking about the issue/individual/family, everyone would be a lot better off and further ahead. Not always, but in my experience, more times than not. -RM

That is not a reason that I would ask for my name to be removed for. -RM

We used to have them regularly. We do not do so any longer. -RM

What I am going to say here will probably make me unpopular (if I wasn't already). Situations like these are why I would get married civilly first...even if I had to wait 1 year to be sealed in the temple. 1. We claim that family is central to the church, but I have seen this exact situation cause so much heartache and grief among families in the church. Imagine for a moment that you are a good, upstanding christian whose spouse converts to the church, you allow your children to be raised LDS, you firmly support them, but retain a strong believe in your own faith, and then are told that you cannot attend the wedding of this child. 2. Sometimes individuals use the argument "what if something happens to you before you are able to be sealed?" Perhaps the classic example is a car crash that kills one or both before attending the temple. Yet, isn't that what vicarious work is for? Is it of any less validity than for my grandparents who knew of the gospel, believed it, but could never bring themselves to join due to their attachment to their own religion? 3. This situation already plays out in many other areas of the world. In fact, my wife and I were married civilly in the country of our residence and then sealed later the same day. Hence, we must acknowledge that doing so is not doctrinally incorrect, but is rather a policy of the church. Those are my thoughts, but I can support others in theirs. In this situation, the bride and groom have made a decision to move forward with a temple wedding. In doing so they place a premium on certain priorities over others. In this instance that means excluding certain close families members from the ceremony. Clearly that is their choice to make and I am sure they understood the ramifications when them made that choice. However, I think they have an obligation to share this information with these family members so that they can also make an informed decision. -RM

Jesus can change physics, just watch that last second field goal again, and you'll be a believer. BYU doesn't play on Sundays...even overtimes. ;-) -RM

I see Twinkies as enlarging the tent. That way there is more room for my Spirit to roam free :) -RM