Dark_Jedi

OK, so if I convert back to Catholicism (or any other church for that matter), but continue to wear my temple garments, live the Word of Wisdom, sustain the prophet in general conference, and have family home evening every week, am I a Mormon Catholic?

I don't disagree. I was just pointing out that there are people out there for whom assistance may have been given but is no longer. The OP mentioned several people in his ward who had hit upon "hard times" (like many Americans) but were not getting assistance from the ward. He didn't specify otherwise - whether they hadn't sought any assistance, assistance had been offered but refused, or whether they had received assistance but don't any longer. There does seem to be some subjectivity on the part of bishops in how much they offer. I personally am aware that our ward paid one family's mortgage for over three years. The husband/father was employed as a truck driver, the mother wasn't employed. There were two teenage children in the home. They were less active, attending church on holidays and an occasional other day here and there, and none of them held a calling. The mother, in fact, had refused to participate in things like building cleaning, and while she was capable of working she refused to go to work. Same ward, same bishop, same time frame, another active recommend holding family of six who only received food assistance (storehouse) were cut off after six months though he remained unemployed but he substitute taught and the wife went to work for a minimum wage job at night - their financial needs were still not met. The explanation for ending the food assistance was hat it was meant to be temporary. The husband in this case was devastated, but they ended up getting federal food stamps to meet their needs. I home taught both of these families. I don't disagree that assistance is meant to be temporary and I don't disagree that there should be a limit to the amount assistance that should be offered. The church welfare program is there to temporarily help individuals in need, and I think it does what it is supposed to do for the most part. There are government programs to help otherwise. There is, however, some subjectivity involved and this may be what the OP has observed.

I totally agree. Referring to the same thread as Pam, some don't seem to think so.

Not necessarily. There is a limit to how much and how long some bishops will offer assistance. I have seen that happen in my own ward. In answer to the question at hand, I think tithing is as much a spiritual principle as it is physical. I'm not going to elaborate because tithes and offering seem to have many myths and teachings of men (rather than doctrine) associated with them. I am not one to teach as doctrine something that is not.

This may have validated that point of view. Why make a publicly stated emphasis of such a change if someone in authority didn't think it might be a problem? That said, I think it's a great idea.

I think this is an interesting thought as well, but because I believe transfiguration and resurrection are different things. I believe it is the resurrected Jesus, not the transfigured one, who appeared to Joseph Smith. Transfiguration could, however, show us what our perfected bodies would be like. Trouble is, most of us aren't going to be transfigured.

I think most of what we know on this subject is speculation, however, Alma did provide us with a couple insights. Alma 11:43 The spirit and the body shall be reunited again in its perfect form; both limb and joint shall be restored to its proper frame, even as we now are at this time; and we shall be brought to stand before God, knowing even as we know now, and have a bright recollection of all our guilt. Alma 40:23 The soul shall be restored to the body, and the body to the soul; yea, and every limb and joint shall be restored to its body; yea, even a hair of the head shall not be lost; but all things shall be restored to their proper and perfect frame. So, if your body is in it's "perfect form" and it's "proper frame, even as we now are at this time" then it would appear you get what you have now. If "all things [are] restored to their proper and perfect frame" you could get something different (if what you have isn't proper and/or perfect).

Generally speaking I think it's a waste of time and effort and generally speaking, cunselors prey on the weak and weak minded. Just my opinion.

I am not a huge fan of counseling and usually wouldn't recommend it. Have you had counseling? Real, professional counseling, not bishop counseling. Can you get the bishop to refer you to LDS Family Services or can you find that info on your own (it's on LDS.org)? You have presented a very sad side to a story, and suicide, or even contemplating it, is not to be taken lightly - but it's not the answer, either. Please, get counseling.

42. I liked it, maybe it could have gone a little farther into his career. Harrison Ford was excellent. I knew they used the N-word in the movie beforehand, I was surprised at how much considering it's more likely to get a worse rating for that than the F-word (which was not in the movie).

You are welcome to disagree, that is the greatest beauty of our free country. I'll pass on trying to remove the kilt.

No, love God and love thy neighbor were not a replacement for Mosaic law, and are, in fact, the essence of Mosaic law. The Jews regard these as the greatest commandments and Jesus confirmed this (Matthew 22:35-40) when asked. This was not new to the Jews, and in fact stymied the question asked of Jesus. That doesn't answer your initial question. It is my understanding that Christ fulfilled the law of sacrifice with the shedding of his innocent blood. We do still need to obey the commandments. You'll find that all of the commandments fall under one of the two broad categories above, they either show love for God or love for your neighbor. While the Jews live the law of sacrifice, we live the law of obedience. See 1 Samuel 15:22. The question of marriage is a whole different subject. Do you need to be married to be a Christian or LDS? No. LDS teachings do require temple marriage, among other things, in order to enter the highest level of the celestial kingdom.

I agree, it's worth the read. I think many parents fall under the umbrella of thinking their child is the exception. We learned the hard way. Make no mistake, our kids are wonderful, active, worthy kids. But the prevalence and ease of access is so overwhelming.

I wish I had discovered it long ago, too. It needs to be moved closer to the top of Google searches!

I know this was back in the dark ages (1981!) but I got the priesthood almost right away - within a month or so, and I was ordained a priest. I really came here to recommend a site for you, Mike. It's Stay LDS / Mormon | New Ways to Stay Connected. I recently discovered it, and I like it. The people there are very receptive and it is most definately NOT anti-Mormon.