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.

Well excuse me all to pieces. yes, the ward had sacrament and yes I know that it's Sacrament Meeting and the real purpose of being there is the sacrament. You clearly missed the point, by choice or otherwise. Let me give you another example. A sacrament meeting, two talks about the priesthood and church organization. A lovely older sister gave a beautiful talk about the priesthood, especially priesthood blessings, with several uplifting stories. The brother that followed spoke about the organization of the church and its relationship to the priesthood. He used scripture from the Bible and the Book of Mormon showing how Jesus exercised the priesthood and organized the church. He also used many other scriptures relating to the organization of the church. While Christ was not the subject of focus of his talk, he made sure he emphasized Christ as central tot he theme. The sister did not mention the Savior except in the obligatory "in the name of...." She could have, though - she could have pointed out Christ's healing of the sick. So, no we don't need to be like some evangelicals who seem to need to end every other sentence with "praise be" but more direct reference to Jesus Christ in relation to those gospel principles would go a long way in others recognizing that we are Christian.

I understand your feelings, Jane_Doe, and indeed share them. In fact it's a main reason I don't attend church. While I don't believe the people there are being insincere or hypocritical, I do mostly believe they are superficial and often don't know what they're actually saying. I'm not telling you not to go to church, there are other reasons I don't go and if it were just this reason I would go. As others have pointed out, the people are not the gospel or even the church, both are far greater than people. Here's something I have done in the past that might work for you. Once you find out what the topic is (sometimes that's difficult with what appear to be pointless talks but many times they just blurt it out) begin composing your own talk on the subject in your head. I also agree that the church generally does not emphasize Christ enough. People here are going to respond that it's all about Christ because even a talk on paying tithing is teaching a Christlike principle, etc. I'm sorry, but that doesn't cut it. I have often heard this criticism from non-members after they have attended Sacrament Meeting, and they're correct. There does need to be more direct reference to the Savior - this is the Church of Jesus Christ, after all. I'll give you my own example, also. Once many years ago when I was in the army I was visiting another ward on Easter Sunday. I'm not sure if the bishopric forgot it was Easter or whatever, but there was not a single talk about Easter, the Savior, the atonement, nothing related to Easter. The guy conducting did say happy Easter but that was it. The songs weren't even Easter hymns! Were I a non-member visiting that day, I would have had no reservations about telling people Mormons are not Christians.

That's just it. Amish culture is tied to their religion to the Nth degree more than anyone else's - including LDS. The Amish truly live their religion. I'm not saying that their religion is in direct conflict with other Christians, it's certainly not and other Christians could certainly learn much about being Christian from them. I understand what you're saying - they've always had this lifestyle and Amish is their culture, but it's also their religion and the two are inseparable. People, including Amish and former Amish, are free to live as they please, drive cars of they want, have electricity if they want, etc. But there is a huge part of their culture that these "Amish Saints" are certainly no longer a part of - fellowship of the Amish. In a very real sense, they are no more Amish than a Catholic or Jew is still Catholic or Jewish after becoming LDS. Their way of dress. etc., does not make them Amish any more than yours makes you LDS, their religion makes them Amish.

I'd suggest you do some internet research on the subject. I'll just say that many of the early leaders of the church were Masons and that is the only connection that I am aware of. Be sure to include in your search the origins of Free Masonry. I do have my own belief as to why the symbolism, etc., is very similar to that of the Free Masons, but that would be the gospel according to me and I found it's usually best not to share that part of the gospel. I recall way back when being told as you, if you have a question to ask the missionaries. A couple years after joining the church I was a missionary. I would modify that statement to if you have a question about basic gospel principles and beliefs of the church, ask the missionaries. Otherwise, it's best to do your own research or ask a senior member of the church who knows - you figure out who they are by attending meetings and listening to their comments. Frankly, 20-year-old kids know very little about the church history and more intricate doctrines and beliefs. I don't think they hid stuff from you on purpose, I think they were just ignorant. I do think the church could do better about coming clean and do less glossing over in some areas, but then again, nobody like airing their dirty laundry.

I am glad your nephew is safe and well.

While fast offerings are connected to fasting, fasting is not necessarily connected to fast offerings. Fasting is a gospel principle in and of itself, independent of fast offerings and much more connected to faith than it is to church attendance. I sincerely hope that your nephew is found alive and well and returned to his family.

I actually believe very few live the letter of the law (eating meat only in winter and famine, etc.). On the other hand, I'm not sure most live the spirit of the law, either. There must be some other in-between.

Yes, it is true of most Christian religions as well as Jews and Muslims. I suppose if you're Buddhist there really is no measure of outward activity.

So, if they've converted to Mormonism, even though they still live Amish ways, they're not Amish any more. From the Amish I know in my area, I would guess that they have at least been shunned if not excommunicated.

I think there is a little danger in making board statements about Latter-day Saints being healthier (or skinnier) than others because of the Word of Wisdom. While it would make sense to believe so, and may actually be true to an extent, it is certainly not true across the board. Let's look at a case study to illustrate: my mom vs. my mother-in-law. Both are widows living alone and both are in their 70s. My mom has six children, mother-in-law has seven. My mom does not affiliate with any church, but isn't atheist, either. She does not smoke (but used to), drinks socially, and drinks a few cups of coffee daily. She lives in her own home by herself, mows her lawn, cleans, cooks, etc. She works a part time job as a cashier at a small convenience store/gas station. She drives and does so quite well but doesn't like to drive at night. She has two dogs and a cat which are well cared for. Several times per week she helps my sister with her children and housework (my sister's husband is out of town all week and my sister works full time). She also frequently shares her meal with an older lonely lady in her neighborhood. She is not skinny but is not really overweight, either. My mother-in-law is a member and does live the Word of Wisdom. Only a couple years older than my mom, she uses a walker and is essentially home bound. She does have a car but it needs repairs and the children have decided to not assist her in fixing it because the idea of her driving is scary. She lives in an elderly housing complex and has an aide who helps her with cleaning and laundry once a week. She has not worked in over 30 years, even when she was healthy enough to do so. She has a dog that we all feel sorry for - it is rarely let out (it goes on paper) unless a family member takes it out. My sister-in-law manages her finances. She has short-term memory issues - frequently forgets things she was just told, often gets mixed up on the date/day of the week or even what month it is, although she is otherwise quite lucid. She is incontinent, and because the aide only comes weekly, if a family member doesn't take out the garbage with her diapers and the dog do, her place smells so bad most can't stand to be in there. If we take her somewhere we have to drive with the windows open. She is obese. So in this case, they're opposites - the one who doesn't keep the Word of Wisdom is the picture of health - I expect she'll live well into her 80s or 90s (her doctor says the same thing). The one who keeps the Word of Wisdom is a literal mess. Truth is, I don't think the Word of Wisdom has anything to do with it. Likewise, I don't think an observation that women of another religion attending a conference being skinnier than LDS women has anything to do with the Word of Wisdom, either.