RMGuy

Yes, I asked. It was the right thing to do with the people involved and that time and place. Today, I would love it if my future SIL's ask. My answer to them will be, "I trust my daughter. You have my permission to ask her, and I will stand behind her." -RM

I've always thought of it thusly, Faith is needed when there is no sure knowledge, when there is no evidence. The Wright brothers exercised faith when they set out to build their airplane. Edison exercised faith when he encapsulated carbonized bamboo in a sealed glass globe and energized it. But it isn't faith that guides the engineers at Boeing it is knowledge. Hence for me as evidence is revealed it should support the faith that I have had. True principles need not shy away from scientific inquiry. If they are true they will stand, if they are false they will not. I also don't buy into the fact that we make our testimonies stronger by shielding them. We make muscles, plants, steel, and testimonies strong by testing them in the fires of adversity. -RM

Ok, big breath and lets see if I can explain.....Dravin, I think, got it in his post following yours...but Originally I posted a statement that said "I think there is a huge difference between a "righteous" member and a self-righteous member. Righteous people have strong values they wish to live by. Self-righteous people have strong values they wish YOU would live by." The point was that so many times we think that the only way to be righteous is to do it the way that we would do it. Interestingly enough John Doe then responded by accusing me of doing the very thing I pointed out in the statement...i.e. that everything was ok, so long as people did it MY way. (I think he missed the point of the statement) Soooooo, I then responded back to say basically that I don't believe people have to do things my way at all. I could care less what someone wears to church. I then made the statement that if he wanted to pull them aside and explain that isn't how things are done, that of course he could. MEANING, quite the contrary to what he was implying, I have no desire to make people conform to my way of thinking, but that if he did, he was of course free to do so himself. THEN you posted to say where did John ever state he wanted to take people aside and teach them the proper order of things. I was amazed that you as a moderator seemed to be calling my behavior or posting into question for defending my original statement....and were concerned about putting words in John's mouth (so to speak) but didn't call John on not only doing the same. Hence my follow up (sarcastic) post. There is the history. Let see if I can get the message across then without stepping on someones toes. 1. I don't care what someone wears to church 2. I don't care why they wear it (if it is all they have, or even if they are being rebellious) 3. It doesn't bother me. 4. If it does bother someone, then of course they can talk to that individual and explain why they think they should wear something different. In relation to the first statement however. I find it interesting that we spend so much time wondering whether or not the deacon should be passing the sacrament because he is in blue jeans and a sweater as opposed to spending time reflecting on what we can do to apply the atonement in our lives. So I'll reiterate it again. Righteous people have strong values they wish to live by. Self-righteous people have strong values they wish YOU would live by. In church, I would be the guy sitting to your left in a white shirt, tie, and sometimes sandals. Ask yourself why it matters what the guy to your right is wearing. -RM

First, an internet hug (()). Hang in there. Next, a little insight for you, for what it is worth. You asked about what might be going on in his head or going on with him. I will try to address that question and not the right/wrong of the actions of either of you, his parents and friends, or church leaders. So here goes. If all you had done was texted and talked, then had the mission president found out the probability is that he would have been forbidden contact with you until after he was home and released in December, and he would have had some repenting to do, but he would probably not have been sent home. That was more than likely the result of the chastity transgression. When he was sent home he would have been released from his missionary status by the mission president. Everyone in his home ward, his stake, and his family will have also known he was sent home early. They will not know the specifics of why unless he chooses to tell them, or someone that he tells also shares that with others. In the meantime they will wonder. He will be expected by family, friends, and church leaders to begin the repentence process. There will be significant disappointment on the part of his family and church leaders. How they treat him will of course depend on the individuals involved. I have seen some missionaries welcomed home with loving arms and some that are ostracized or shunned. He will likely experience a great deal of guilt. He might use that to repent on move on with his life. He may also internalize that and turn it into feelings of self loathing. He might turn away from the Gospel. He may blame himself, he may blame you. All are possible outcomes. It is hard to know, if he can't or won't share what he is feeling. It is even possible that he has been counciled by family, friends, or leaders to have nothing to do with you. We don't know. What we do know is that according to his text he would still like to be friends. You have written him a letter. I trust that you have explained your feelings, and you have let him know that you are there when he is ready to talk. I think that is the best that you can do in the situation. Advice? I think you bishop counciled you well. Give him some time and space and see what happens. -RM

Thanks Pam, I used to need that, but after my dearest wife pulled me aside one day shortly after our marriage and explained to me that all I needed to know what that she is usually right, and as long as she is happy then nothing else matters, I've done much better. I still don't understand all of the rules, but when I get something wrong, I just refer to the above and it usually works out for the best....oh yea, that and flowers....lots of flowers. :-) -RM

Yes, thank you for quickly pointing out to me how John never mentioned pulling someone aside to tell them the unwritten order of things. You are quite correct. Thank you also for sharing with John that RM never said, ”By self-righteous, you mean people who disagree with your interpretation of things, right?...But as long as we all accept and see things your way it's okay, right?” :) My original point, or course, still stands. I think we all were granted agency. For my part I will welcome individuals who walk through the doors of my ward and stake even if they are in a t-shirt, shorts, flip-flops. I will do so whether they do so because it is all that they have, or because they have a bit of rebellion. I believe that talking to them about the issue in the first instance is only going to embarrass them, and doing so in the second instance is only going to heighten their rebelliousness. Since we all have agency, you and each of you can choose to act differently in the same situation. -RM

I'll throw in my $.02 I see this as two different issues: 1. Your concern for your nephew's behavior as it relates to your beliefs and morality. I want to be careful here so that you understand I agree with your concerns. Drinking and premarital sex can have huge unintended negative consequences. However, I think we need to remember that your nephew apparently does not share the same beliefs or morality, not does a significant portion of the population generally. As a family member that cares for and is concerned about not just his spiritual but also his temporal welfare, I think you are within your rights and not violating boundaries to share your concerns with him. 2. His interest in your career. For me here, while it is related, I see this a bit differently, and I could go either way. If you were asked by your professional organization to mentor a local nono-member college student would you do so? What if you knew that at least that student was drinking on the weekends, or was living with their significant other? If you would do this for a college student at the behest of a professional organization, then why would you not do the same for your nephew, unless you were concerned about poor behavior being manifest to your clients? Of course, you don't have to do anything for him. There is no obligation, and you can of course set any stipulations on your assistance that you would like. -RM

There are many Sunday's that I wear sandals to church.....<gasp!> Interestingly, it is a way for me to remember the Savior as I do so....it actually helps me to remember him.....sure hope it doesn't challenge any of your testimony's. I'm such a rebel! -RM

Not at all John Doe. I'm not an eternal judge and I don't even play one on TV. I believe firmly in agency. If someone shows up on Sunday in a Rolling Stones T shirt and cut off shorts, I'm all for it. If over time they decide to come in a shirt and tie I'm all for that too. :) If you want to pull them aside and explain the "unwritten order of things" then more power to you. -RM

No worries. It happens. Some others might have a different response, I simply refuse to buy into the guilt thing. It isn't healthy. -RM

I think there is a huge difference between a "righteous" member and a self-righteous member. Righteous people have strong values they wish to live by. Self-righteous people have strong values they wish YOU would live by. --RM

Many of the "signs of the times" have been on going since the dawn of time. Perhaps more important to live each day to the best of your ability. Just my $.02 -RM

Interesting perspective. I tend to see the helping hand t-shirts as advertising. -RM

Thanks John Doe. That is my point exactly. The question was are our dress standards culturally set or eternally set. My original answer which you quoted part of was that this is an easy answer. The dress "code" is culturally set. Show up for church in shorts and it isn't the Saviour that is going to make you feel bad for wearing shorts, it isn't the Holy Ghost that is going to shun you, and it isn't God that is going to pull you aside and tell you that next time you need to come in something a little more appropriate. That would be the EQ President, the people in the pew behind you, or the usher at the door, and THAT makes it cultural. Your point is well taken with regards to individuals wearing there best in the temple or synagogue, and if you would have read the rest of my posts in the thread, like this one or this one it might have helped you to see where the other comment was coming from. The fact of the matter is that cultural standards and expectations change over time BECAUSE of new developments and because individuals change and push boundaries. Otherwise we would all still be wearing the robes, or animal skins, etc. If we are so rigid on this idea of white shirts and ties, and dresses or skirts, and see everyone who doesn't conform as either 1. Too poor to meet the standard 2. Not converted enough to understand the principle 3. In open rebellion Then I think that we do a great disservice to those individuals and to ourselves. Of course your milage may differ, and to me, that is a pretty cool thing. Perhaps allow me to illustrate with two stories. 1. A few years ago I was in a HC meeting. One of our HC's was not there at the start of the meeting. We had our opening hymn and opening prayer. We discussed action items that needed to be addressed, and we moved into the training portion of the meeting. The SP was talking about the need to serve those that we have stewardship over. At about that time our "missing brother" walked in. He was dressed in mucky boots, wet blue jeans and a denim shirt as I recall. The stake president stopped in mid-sentance and looked at this HC'er. His next statement was, "Who told you to come to a meeting dressed like that?" This humble high councilor bowed his head and explained, "President, I am sorry. As I was getting ready for this meeting one of my home teaching families called. Their toilet was overflowing and the husband is out of town on business. I have been over helping them to clean up. When I was done, I came directly here. If I had gone home to change I would have missed your training. What would you like me to do." I think that HC'er trained us more than night than any lesson I have ever heard on the subject of service, and he was not dressed in the standard uniform of the priesthood. But he was dressed in the uniform that I believe Christ would have had him wear that evening. 2. We have a large family in our ward that hail from outside the United States. This family has 5 boys ranging in age from 18 to 10. Each Sunday they come to church in dress pants, ties, and coats. Each Sunday they always have on some of the brightest coloured dress shirts I have seen. Vibrant hues of Blue, Purple, Green, Orange, Red, or Yellow. They do it as a way of honouring their cultural heritage, yet still maintaining a standard of dress that they deem appropriate for honoring their God. Do you find it distracting, demeaning, or rebellious? I cannot speak for everyone in our unit, but I know that I personally, and many others I have talked with find it worshipful and beautiful. -RM

MarginofError pitches a nice easy one right over the center of the plate. Appropriate dress for church is a cultural standard that will shift over time for $1000 Alex. No one in the old testament wore a white shirt and tie to church. Nor did anyone in the new testament, or the Book of Mormon. There are many people that didn't wear a white shirt and tie to church in the Doctrine and Covenants either and a good portion of those individuals were righteous Priesthood bearers. -RM

I hope I haven't given the wrong impression here Vort. I do believe that it is important for us to look be at our presentable best, as well as teach our children correct principles. I do think we need to be careful about how we interact with others. I believe Christ would welcome the individual that comes to church in shorts and a tank top, perhaps as that individual becomes more in tune they will choose to dress differently to reflect their reverence of the Saviour. Perhaps not. We don't need to allow that to affect our standards, nor do we need to act as a wedge to drive them away either. -RM

Short answer, You are married either way. Slightly longer answer....See above. -RM

I think we tend to be a bit more pharisaical within the church than we would like to believe. Not saying that Sunday best isn't a good idea or that we should be appropriate. But when it comes to us leaning over and asking why we are mad at God, as indicated above, or if we even find ourselves looking at someone in jeans, or a sun dress and thinking that they aren't dressed appropriately for church, then perhaps, just perhaps we have a bigger issue ourselves that needs cleared up. -RM

I also believe the Book of Mormon so far as it is translated correctly. -RM

I hear what you are saying lizzy, at the same time I prefer to be able to laugh at myself than to be too uptight. Personally, I just find life to be a lot more pleasurable and less stressful that way. Though, I can understand where you are coming from as well. -RM

I'm with MoE. -RM

Lots of good ideas above. I would second the idea of a hike or walk in a nice park, that is always good if you enjoy it. We tend to be outdoors people so that works well for us or canoing, snowshoeing etc. A couple of others that we have enjoyed. If you have kids and can get them out of the house, then baking cookies together is fun, though at our house that generally means food fight, followed by a clean up shower.......anyway, I digress A shopping trip for the next upcoming kids or parents birthday or Christmas can be fun....you get the chance to talk and interact and get something done that the same time. We collect corvettes so sometimes it is as simple as working together to clean one of them, or go for a drive, or to a local car show or cruise night. Picnics are good in nice weather. We've gone to the library before to pick out a book together and then spend the several nights following alternating reading a chapter together. You may want to look into "And they were not ashamed" the homework in that one can be fun. Rameumptom had some good ideas on taking a class together which can be fun and ongoing. We tend to steer away from date nights where we don't interact and talk. For example, the temple is great but other than the drive there and back, or some time in the Celestial Room, we don't really connect or talk....your results of course may differ. Movies are the same way for us....we are together, but not really connecting. So we tend to like to DO things together. Best of luck. It sounds like you have a worthwhile goal....I think the most important thing is to find things that both of you enjoy, or things that you haven't done that would be exciting for each of you to try. -RM

Until you want to stop it will be difficult to talk to the bishop. You need to have a desire to stop before anything else. -RM

Sometimes Iggy, not very often, but sometimes, the little thank you button isn't enough. Thank you for your post. -RM

Dravin, I hadn't even thought about that aspect! -RM