ACommonMan

I Hitler, for one, is a great examples of the larger discussion. He was NOT acting in accordance to his Catholic faith. The catholic church would have every right to excommunicate him. While Ms. Kelly's actions were not even closely on par with Hitler, she fundamentally did the same thing. She rejected one of the core principles of the restored gospel. She thought that she could pressure the prophet to go against God's will. Even if her core belief was that President Monson was somehow oblivious to God's will, as she believes in her heart God's will to be, she has already begun separating herself from the LDS gospel. She's forming her own church and wanting the LDS church to bend to her, rather than the other way around. I greatly appreciate SlamJet's open and honest communication about his own excommunication. If he is like others I know, he fully appreciates today that this really is the first step back. Until Kate releases her own pride, she is not going to be able to see the distinction. That is not a judgement against her as much as it is a general observation. We can discuss and debate gender inequalities in the church. (I want a nice sofa or recliner in the men's restrooms) But riling up more than 1000 supposedly active LDS women to think that a lack of priesthood responsibilty is demeaning to them is causing more than just her to question the church as a whole but, pulling others away as well. That is the grounds for this church action. I don't think we should lose sight of that.

I had a conversation with a friend last night. Following her divorce, she decided to take up drinking. (the odd logic involved in that decision is relevant to my point, so I am not going to go into that) One of her comments was that she still believes the church is true but, that she is following a path she feels like she needs right now to better understand herself and become a better person after it's over. She has the right to question herself and just how much the gospel means to her. As long as that stays private, she will likely just face chastisement from her bishop and removal of the blessings of the temple and sacrament, (remember, partaking of the sacrament when one is not truly repentant is a further damnation, so that particular probationary step is a beneficial reminder and not a punishment at all) If, however, my friend begins to go around publicly stating that moderate drinking is not problem and that the Word of Wisdom should be repealed, or at least amended, then her bishop can no longer just lovingly counsel her and hope she comes around. If she begins to imply that many church members agree with her or that even her own bishop has not reprimanded her for it, then the church would HAVE take a stronger position with her. I feel confident that many people privately spoke with President Kimball about their desires for Blacks to hold the priesthood. I'm sure that's part of why it weighed on his mind enough for him to plead with The Lord on the topic. I am equally certain that if one of those same individuals had publicly called the prophet less inspired on the topic than he himself was, he would also have found himself under church discipline.

The law of tithing is a physical manifestation of your personal spirituality. One cannot buy their way into the temple by merely ponying up enough cash. How and when to pay are not specifically spelled out in the handbook. I know of people who only pay one lump sum per year. Paying a lump sum is clearly not the issue at hand. A six month probation is fairly typical. A lot of people have spontaneous desires to do righteous things. Only time can tell if there has been a sincere change of heart. The blessings of the temple come with serious covenants. A bishop would be doing a disservice to the patron if he did not feel extremely comfortable that the patron was truly committed to keeping those covenants.

The Utah County North Mission holds a special class for priesthood leaders each week to introduce them to how it all works, without interjecting them into a regular meeting. I've had a couple of men from a High Priest's Group Leadership attend one meeting for a similar reason. No one said anything to them, that I am aware of. Keep in mind, however, there are some bishops, and stake presidents, that attend as participants. It's not like this problem affects only the weak.

Unfortunately, I am not in a position to offer advice on what to do. My advice is more along the lines of what I know did not work. (and divorce is always on the table, even if you are not willing to play that card, she might) The notion of punishment and reward should never exist in marriage. I don't care what examples where she started providing more sexual favors, so he started doing more dishes anyone can cite. Those are statistical anomalies and don't actually prove anything. There are many more short term examples than there are long term resolutions, because the notion is a short term solution. In my case, we were clinically sexless. (Therapists define sexless and less than six times a year, and we averaged about twice a year for the last 10 years.) It wasn't until the ink was drying on her divorce filing that I began to see many of the mistakes I had made. I tried to accept and understand that see had "good-girl" issues and other such theories. But one fundamental problem was that when she rejected my advances, I was hurt. As much as I thought I was "manning up" and accepting the situation, she could still feel that I was hurt, and that hurt her. There were countless other ways she misinterpreted my sincere intentions, and in almost every instance, it was because I wasn't reacting well to situations. The book I read, which helped me see the critical errors I was making, is called "Real Love" by Dr. Greg Baer. If it's fair to boil a book down to a couple of sentences, the book states that you must love your spouse with the pure love of Christ. You cannot expect anything from them. Your love for them cannot be conditioned on anything they do, or don't do. Ultimately, says Baer, you only ever have three choices: 1. Live with it and like it 2. Live with it and hate it 3. Leave it Nothing else works. While other theories, like Love Languages, are important to make sure that your communications of love are being most effectively received by your spouse, They don't work when you're trying to manipulate someone into either giving you love or to protect you from from being hurt.

As I understand it, the ARP has struggled with the role of a sponsor over the years. They currently recommend it and have a sheet, distributed through the service missionaries, to help guide the addict in choosing a sponsor. I presume the crux of the issue is that the church wants to make sure your bishop is involved in the process and you don't presume that your sponsor is a better counselor just because they've been through it. Another important thing is to realize that the ARP manual was vetted and approved by The Brethern. Since Step 3 is about completely surrendering to God, it would make sense to follow the text approved by His prophet, rather than the AA version which, even though I believe it was inspired, is missing the whole truth, so to speak. That said, it is more important to be sober than it is how you maintain sobriety.

There has already been a lot of great information given here. I add only a couple of additional comments. Read through the instructional materials and follow their outlines precisely. It may seem awkward, at first, to read the welcome and instructions verbatim, but the consistency is important. If you are curious about exactly how the meetings work, The Mormon Channel has audio recordings of actual meetings. (http://www.mormonchannel.org/addiction-recovery-program) and there are live meetings you can attend over the phone. Lastly, I understand the thought about dressing down to avoid setting yourself on a pedestal, but It's also important for attendees to know who is hosting the meeting. In the "missionary" run meetings, the group leaders and the facilitators wear Sunday dress. The issue with being too "Molly Mormon" is in the way you interact with others. Never indulge judgmental thoughts. As you go through the steps, and you should go through them yourself, you will find that they are helpful for anyone and you will gain an appreciation for what the addicts experience. Also, you need to have an addict who has been successful in their recovery acting in the role of Facilitator. They are the one who brings legitimacy to the meeting, not you.

Vitamin Z

Inigo Montoya: Fezzik, jog his memory. Fezzik: Sorry Inigo, I did not mean to jog him so hard. Count Rugen: I've just sucked one year of your life away. I might one day go as high as five, but I really don't know what that would do to you. So, let's just start with what we have. What did this do to you? Tell me. And remember, this is for posterity so be honest. How do you feel? Inigo Montoya: You seem a decent fellow. I hate to kill you.The Man in Black: You seem a decent fellow. I hate to die. Prince Humperdinck: Tyrone, you know how much I love watching you work, but I’ve got my country’s 500th anniversary to plan, my wedding to arrange, my wife to murder and Guilder to frame for it; I’m swamped. Fezzik: Inigo, I saw the Prince's stables, and there they were, four white horses. And I thought, there are four of us, if we ever find the lady. [buttercup appears at the window] Hello, lady! So I took them with me, in case we ever bumped into each other. I guess we just did.Inigo Montoya: Fezzik, you did something right.Fezzik: Don't worry. I won't let it go to my head. (NOTE: I say "Hello Lady" as a greeting to women way too often) Man in Black: I asked him what was so important for him. "True love," he replied. And then he spoke of a girl of surpassing beauty and faithfulness. I can only assume he meant you. Inigo Montoya: He's right on top of us. I wonder if he is using the same wind we are using. Westley: Who are you? Are we enemies? Why am I on this wall? Where is Buttercup? Westley: I'll explain and I'll use small words so that you'll be sure to understand, you warthog faced buffoon.

X

Lionel Ritchie

Vanilla Ice

Natalie Imbruglia

Indigo Girls

UB40