RMGuy

LOL! You can say that about any group....lol! -RM

There are a lot of individuals that are members of the church that have homosexual friends/family and love, support, and sustain them. I am sure that there are members of the church that have supported gay marriage either financially, or with their time. I personally don't see that as a conflict. There may be others that do. In my mind it is similar to the tithing concept....you get to determine what constitutes a full tithe when you answer the question. If I pay on the net, and say yes I am a full tithe payer did I lie? If you believe we should pay on the gross, did I lie? I think you can apply similar principles here. The question that she is probably concerned with is , "Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? " --If we answer that question very strictly then the answer for all of us is yes. If you associate with someone that drinks that is contrary to the accepted teachings of the Church. Christ himself would answer yes to this question. To my mind this questions has always centered more around the concept of are you trying to undermine the church. For a bit of history it was added to the recommend questions with regards to break-away polygamous sects. -RM

I think that is a question best answered between you and the Lord. One of the primary reasons behind the sacrament is the process of repentance. It by definition is a renewal of our baptisimal oovenants. However, if you are feeling guilty about doing so, then why not take it up with Him whose ordinance this is? If you then feel comfortable moving forward with taking the sacrament and using it to help you move forward in taking upon yourself the name of Christ, then I am not going to be one to argue with that answer. If you feel impressed to talk with your bishop or branch president after counseling with the Lord, then by all means do so, and follow his council since that is what you were impressed upon by the Spirit to do. -RM

LOL, I didn't comment on it earlier because I thought that everyone else would think I was picking nits. Actually the quote that struck me as I read it was this one from Sir Winston Churchill, “This is the sort of bloody nonsense up with which I will not put.” -RM

Happy Birthday!!! Hope you have a good one, and enjoy your time. -RM

Backroads, It is always difficult to lump people into one bucket. I would guess that the answer to your question in a very general sense is, YES. Personally, I find it hard to imagine that anyone who has been a member for any length of time wasn't aware of polygamy for example, but I guess it is possible. However, an individual learning about Joseph and polyandry for the first time may become upset on the basis of the facts, and others on the basis that they were never told this, or it was never presented to them. I can understand the point of view. -RM

Sounds like you did great Judo! Hard age group. -RM

KRCP, My advice would be to continue to love him. Your situation while difficult, is not entirely unique. There are many on this board as well as others who have dealt with a faith crisis of their own or that of a spouse. You do need to take some time and ponder what this means to you. Then you need to be open and honest with your spouse. 1. What if he falls away totally, and even asks for his name to be removed from church records. but in all other ways remains the good upstanding man you married, a fantastic husband and father. What will you do? 2. What if he falls away totally and decides to "sin a little" and decides to have a beer or wine with dinner? What will you do? 3. What if he struggles and is willing to do some gospel related things, callings, attend church, etc. but not others....won't pay tithing or attend the temple? What will you do? You can control you, and you need to know that he is on a journey. At this point even he probably isn't sure where he will end up. I can promise you that if you try to control him that it might "bring him around" for a short while, but in the end he will resent you for it. :-( Best thing is to open up the dialogue, let him know how you feel, your concerns and worries and fears, as well as your hopes and dreams. Let him know you love him, and care for him, and listen to him as well. Really listen. Don't just brush his fears or concerns aside anymore than you would want him to do this to you. Finally, best of luck. It is not an easy road, but you might just find that if it is handled well it brings the two of you even closer together, regardless of where he ends up. -RM

Anne, I didn't say President Packer said that truth wasn't a good thing. My original statment if you look back was, "I tend to subscribe the concept that all truth is valuable (yes Elder Packer and I disagree..." President Packer's exact quote was, "There is a temptation of the writer or teacher of Church history to want to tell everything, whether it is worthy of faith promoting or not. Some things that are true are not very useful." You can find a link to his entire remarks here: https://byustudies.byu.edu/PDFLibrary/21.3PackerMantle-3fec8723-6fb5-4f0a-9257-1bccc325bfe6.pdf -RM

I'm curious. I know in the past the hymn book was revised at relatively regular intervals. Do you think we will see a revision again soon? -RM

Grannyd, I think another thing to remember is the idea that just because someone leaves the church does not make them a bad person. I think we can think of examples in our life where a non-members Christlike attributes shine through, sometimes even greater than many of the members that we know. I don't know your particular situation, but look for the good in your son. Recognize it, reward it, and cherish it. You both have much more in common than just the church. Missionaries are taught to build on common beliefs, you can do the same. Continue to invite him to all the family events, including church activities. Love him, and care for him. Build your relationship together. -RM

Vort, we disagree. The floor is yours. -RM

Backroads, I think the quote you cited is it in a nutshell for a lot of people. I don't know if it is considered hiding or not, but I would love to read Oliver's journal or the Council fo 50 minutes. -RM

Rameumpton, I don't disagree with any of what you said above. I do disagree with diagnosing an addiction on the basis of one anonymous internet post. Especially when it is stated as 'a sexual addiction like yours'. Modified as below, I have no qualms. That word "potentially" is a big one -RM

Vort, it is interesting that God didn't choose to shield us from Satan's plan. You mentioned that "We do not become "informed" merely by reading an anti-Mormon's novel." I agree wholeheartedly. We also do not become "informed" merely by reading one side of an issue either. I think we may disagree on some fundamental concepts, and that is ok. From our interactions in the past I understand that loyalty to you is a very big issue. It is a bright star in your firmament and that is a wonderful thing. I can see that from that perspective everything that is not intricately aligned with the plan as laid out by the brethren is seen as disloyal and therefore bad, wrong, or "anti". I tend to subscribe the concept that all truth is valuable (yes Elder Packer and I disagree, and from your perspective that may make me disloyal). I don't consider Rough Stone Rolling, In Sacred Loneliness, Mormon Enigma, Origins of Power, etc. as Novels. In fact, while they are in many cases NOT what you have read as part of your Gospel Doctrine lessons, they are not what I would consider to be anti. In fact, in most of those instances they are relatively neutral, and in all of the above instances are VERY well documented....in fact, better documented than any of the manuals that I have read. Just because we don't like something, don't agree with it, or it causes us to rethink our preconceptions does not make it "anti" nor does it make it a novel. This article to which the OP refers, I believe, is a perfect example of what Elder Brown meant by "informed". Are we going to dismiss what the author wrote because we don't like it, or it isn't our experience? Or are we going to embrace it for THE TRUTH WE CAN LEARN FROM IT, and realize that some individuals (not all, not a majority, perhaps not many at all), but some experience similar things, and instead of casting aspersions at the individual, perhaps look inward and ask what we can do differently as Saints to forestall that happening from someone else. -RM

So long as we don't label everything which which we don't agree as assumption and rumor then you and I are in complete agreement. -RM

If it is true (and the sources they are reading are factual) we shouldn't have to worry about faith being destroyed, but please don't take my word for it... Hugh B. Brown in a speech to BYU in 1958: “Only error fears freedom of expression… Neither fear of consequence nor any kind of coercion should ever be used to secure uniformity of thought in the church...…we should also be unafraid to dissent - if we are informed. Thoughts and expressions compete in the marketplace of thought, and in that competition truth emerges triumphant” J. Reuben Clark: “If we have the truth, it cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed.” "Each of us has to face the matter-either the Church is true, or it is a fraud. There is no middle ground. It is the Church and kingdom of God, or it is nothing." - President Gordon B. Hinckley -RM

Rameumptom, I think that we need to be very careful about how we throw around the word "addiction". We have become VERY sensitized to this in the church over the last couple of years. I am not saying that the OP doesn't have a problem, but labeling it addiction may or may not be true. Just because someone has a drink with dinner does not them an alcoholic make. I can't speak for you local area, but here everytime someone seems to have a problem we seem to be pointing them towards addiction recovery. We may all have things that we would like to work on or overcome or change that hard for us, but that does not make them "addicitions" Classifying them as such, undermines the difficulty associated with real addiction, and can in fact be harmful the mental health of the individual who then begins to see themselves as an addict, or in someway seriously flawed, where such a self-image did not previously exist. In extreme cases it can provide a rationale for the individual to continue a behavior that they otherwise would not because after all "they're addicted". The addiction recovery program is a great thing, and it may be helpful for the OP, but respectfully, can we please not label individuals with such language as "for sex addictions like yours" unless you are qualified to make such a diagnosis. -RM

I'm with Anatess, That seems a bit high. -RM

Yes, I think that being willing to say "we don't know" rather than just sweep the question under the rug is important. So is telling the truth. If you don't know, say "I don't know", don't make something up, or just repeat what you have heard. Then if the questioner finds out that they were told or lead to believe something that was not correct (especially if they have heard the same things multiple times that isn't true) they begin to believe that it is a whitewash attempt. Even if it wasn't. -RM

If it is only one or two people, (like our ward) the individuals bring their own (in our case I beleve it is almost cracker like as opposed to bread....no matter) then pretty much the same as above. Those officiating bless it along with the normal sacrament. They actually place it in sacrament cups to avoid cross contamination, but place it in the same tray and away it goes. Works great. -RM

There is a similar article today in the Salt Lake Trib particularly dealing with church history etc. I think it is something that we will see more of as information both pro and con surrounding the church becomes available. Whether we agree or disagree I think those types of discussions are healthy. We have always been a religion that encourges questioning, seeking after knowledge, agency, and allowing others to challenge us. I beleive that the dialoge (while not what we might like) is a good thing overall. -RM

Thank you for being willing to share. First let me tell you that you are not alone. Many individuals in and out of the church have experienced exactly the same thing. The question is: now what? If you feel like it is taking control of your life then perhaps it is something that is leading you to addiction- you might need help with that. If it is something that is causing you to feel great guilt/self-loathing etc. then you do need help with that. The pattern you are in is not unique. Some say that it is the natural road for porn addiction....that you keep getting sucked in farther and farther (you started with honest questions and got sucked in). Others will tell you that it is a result of not knowing what is acceptable and not. For example, you start with honest inquiry and research....feel guilty for something that you should not feel guilty for.....and then figure well, if I've already done that I might as well do this. Only you know where you really are in regards to this. If it is something that you need help to control then talk to someone you trust: a parent, bishop, school counselor etc. If you are continuing down the path only because you think that you have already done to much wrong, then know that this is not the case! You will know between you and the Lord if it is something that you need to repent of, think it through, inquire of Him if you are on the right track, and then act accordingly. -RM

This -RM