omegaseamaster75
-
Posts
2163 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by omegaseamaster75
-
-
That is not what I said.
That is not what I said.
You are correct, I misread...
-
Handbook 2 20.4.1: Ties and white shirts are recommended because they add to the dignity of the ordinance. However, they should not be required as a mandatory prerequisite for a priesthood holder to participate. Nor should it be required that all be alike in dress and appearance. Bishops should use discretion when giving such guidance to young men, taking into account their financial circumstances and maturity in the Church.
Handbook 2.....looks like I'll wear my pink shirts and bow ties with impunity.
-
Is rebellion fine? I guess if one is rebelling against evil. I'm not sure rebelling against the church and/or the authorities of the church qualifies as "fine" though.
Not wearing or refusing to wear a white shirt is rebelling against the church/authorities of the church?
-
-
The fact that he's Mormon isn't really relevant, except that if he's covenanted in the Temple he has more to answer for. He's a liar and a cheat, and you bought it. There are cheaters and liars in every group and sect in the world.
I agree religion is not the issue here, the guy is a dirt bag and he took advantage of the OP
-
This may have been covered, but I am looking for some enlightenment. There seems to be a "white shirt" culture in our church.
I went on a mission and I get it as a missionary you need to represent the church in a way that has been outlined and that you have agreed to do. I got home from my mission and threw out all of my white shirts swearing to never wear one again. Now I do own 1 white shirt and I have worn it, but it is for temple use only.
I never wear a white shirt on Sunday, never.
There was a talk a few weeks ago given by our ex-bishop. he stated that if white shirts were good enough for the general authorities he would wear on until they told him not to. The basic implication being that it was a requirement of sorts. In a light hearted discussion with the 2nd counsler I said I would never wear a white shirt unless a general authority told me my membership was in jeopardy if i didn't. He said and I quote "That's fine but if your passing the sacrament or are in the bishopric it's not really an option" I let it go and changed the subject because I know that he is wrong. It wasn't the time or place to challenge him on it.
So the question is were did this white shirt only thought process come from?
-
au contraire.
I'm pretty sure my marriage certificate and temple sealing paperwork only includes two names. I'm also pretty sure the scriptures say to cleave unto my wife (spouse) and none other. I have a pernicious in law...and I'm certainly not married to that individual.
Yes, they are an issue in our life and not in a good way.
You are in fact correct your marriage license only has your 2 names on it, but your last statement is the give away. They are an issue in your life and not in a good way. The OP made a decision to get married knowing the attitude of her future in-laws towards her and her kids.
You can say its not but its a package deal.
-
Your whining. Sorry.
I will not deny the social aspect of going to church, it is probably the single biggest reason that people go to church and also the single biggest reason people go inactive or decide that the church isn't for them.
I have very few friends that are members, I do not actively socialize often with church members, I have a life and friends outside of those circles......
The church is either true or it isn't. I know that it's true as a consequence I attend all my meetings and participate friends or no friends.
-
You did not marry your in laws. Discuss how you feel with your husband about how you are treated. Find something equitable for you and your husband. The in laws frankly don't matter if they can't treat you right. Tough row to hoe...been doing it for 24 years now.
You marry the inlaws, you can say you don't but the family is a package deal unless you have 0.0% contact with them. You say and I quote "Tough row to hoe" implies that it has and continues to be an issue in your life.
-
No, I don't call off a wedding for that. I remove the kids from them. My husband is a good dad to them.
your first obligation is to your kids not someone who is not related to you...aka your husband. Yeah you call off a wedding for that without a question or doubt you call it off......Why do people think that if they are engaged they are obligated to see it through?
His parent were jerks before you married into the mess and they are jerks now that's not going to change, but they are still his parents unless your husband is willing to never have contact with them, no X-mas, no holidays, no special events, and keep in mind he has natural born kids that ARE related to them your suck.
You made this bed now do you want to be comfortable in it or not? Apologize.
I know you will feel like I am jumping all over you, and I guess that I kind of am but I think that you need to look back the decision making process that led up to this mess and accept some responsibility
-
I appreciate the advice given about protecting her. That's something I always do. I do find it disrespectful and immature to say "If you expect him to pay for anything you don't need to be married." How do people come to that conclusion from a "What to do about a father in law who refuses to do anything" topic?
You expect him to do something knowing the kind of person he is that's how I come to that conclusion. He wants to contribute nothing does not want to participate and you "expect" him to be someone he is not? He will not change who he is or his attitude towards his daughter. I realize that you are probably "saving" her from a terrible life (that's a subject for another thread) but expecting something different out of her father is unreasonable.
My statement of being able to afford this on your own stands and it is not immature to pay your own way. Some would argue that to have your hand out with expectations is......
I don't want to argue or have contention this is simply one persons opinion and maybe a wrong and misinformed one. This is the internet after all I wouldn't take anything I say to seriously...
-
Concerning
-I have a hard time seeing quitting and/or walking out as the way Christ would handle it. I can see it being appropriate in certain circumstances, I suppose. But my opinion is that those circumstances would need to be quite a bit more extreme than what has been spoken of here. I'm not saying there isn't a problem. I just don't think walking out or quitting is the proper solution. Doesn't seem in line with any principles of the gospel I've ever learned. Patience, humility, long-suffering, etc...
Note, I don't reject the idea of clearly setting a time limit per MOE's suggestion. Just not in terms of rebellion, formal protest, or giving up.
Your right if Christ were in the meeting no one would walk out
-
I eloped. That meant I paid for everything. There was no reception or honeymoon.
You are not entitled to someone else's assets, money, or anything else - regardless of what "cultural tradition" or anyone else says. It's the entitlement mentality that's the problem here.
He told you what he's going to do. You can both either:
a. accept it,
b. whine and complain about it.
I recommend that you take the situation as it is, make the best of it.
Life is a series of adjustments. How you handle them, shows the kind of man you are, and will continue to become.
You forgot c. Don't marry into this family (unlikely I know) but still an option
-
So I just had a huge falling out with my in laws. I don't even know where to start. So they treat me and my kids like temporary family. like they expect us to just go away at someopint. so they never bother with us, they never talk to us. and they treat my kids poorly. (My kids from another marriage)
Today I told them off. Poor husband is stuck in the middle. Now what. I feel like our marriage is never going to be the same either
How did you think they would treat you before you got married?
They do see you as temporary, and will never treat you or your kids like "family" I am sure in their hearts they did not want their son to marry someone with kids from a prior marriage. This is to be expected in these types of marriages you will always be second best.
Now if you want to preserve a relationship with them first accept your place. Understand that neither you or your children will have a true "family" relationship with them, your kids aren't even related to them. Second suck it up and apologize just like Anatess said it does not matter who was at fault. Third is the same as the first accept your place in their lives and lower your expectations.
-
Uh... good luck finding the perfect child who was raised in a perfect family with no 'scars' whatsoever.
If you find one... would YOU be good enough for her? It goes both ways.
I don't want to side track this thread, but no one is perfect and everyone has "issues" I personally would not marry someone with the problems that the OP has outlined. I live my life so that I do not have these kinds of family issues.
Regarding the OP's last post about tradition and the father chipping in or paying. The OP should not be getting married if this is his attitude, or if he is going to hold a grudge towards his father in-law because of it. Not one wedding photo? that's pretty small and petty.
Suck it up and pay for it yourself if those aspects of the wedding are important to you, otherwise not another word about it.
-
This is a sore spot for me. We were having them for at LEAST three hours twice a month. Here's why I think it was happening, maybe you can find some help in dealing with it.
No agenda: Probably the biggest culprit
"magnifying" calling: Hey, if one hour once a month is good, THREE hours twice a month should be AWESOME!!!
Personality types: Some folks really like hanging with the saints/feeling important in a meeting/avoiding problems, responsibilities at home. Coupled with no agenda, and the meetings would really drag on.
Boyd K Packer had a talk in a training meeting about overloading members and compared it to loading a camel. You can load a camel to a point, but one thing too much and the camel will just sit down and won't move at all until it is completely unloaded. A three hour meeting is disrespectful of a members time (particularly Sunday-sacred time) to be with and edify family and self.
Anyway, good luck. I ended up quitting my calling over this very issue.
No Agenda?
find your executive secretary take him out back and rough him up a little bit. He is responsible for the agenda. I see that you ended up quitting because of it.. Good for you.
-
Don't marry her....run ....fast and far
-
He is who he is your future wife grew up with him and there will be residual affects from growing up in that environment. I would say at best emotional abuse from her father and who knows what lies beneath the surface.
Your not just marrying her you are marrying her family.
Don't do it.
-
Ted,
As a young married couple you shouldn't have many problems.
I don't know how religious you are but LDS are much more liberal with regards to birth control and abortion. We do not believe in the trinity as Catholics do. We have a different view point on marriage and the finality of it.
I am sure I am missing things that others can comment on.
Some things to consider going forward if you have kids and this is were the issues will arise
will your child be catholic or LDS?
If LDS expect your wife to want to bless the child about one month after birth
No baptism until age 8
heavy involvement in young mens/ scouting or young womans activities during teenage years
A mormon mission at age 18...this will cost you 10k
My advise convert to LDS dive in and accept and live the principles or find a nice catholic girl. Your going to do whatever you want anyways, but marriage is difficult enough without throwing conflicting religious beliefs in the way.
Ask your priest he will tell you not to marry outside of your religion.
- Sunday21 and NeuroTypical
-
2
-
Try to go to church, wait until your 18 then you can join.
-
Edited to add:
I found it online. It isn't black and white as I remember it but advises not to deviate from the outlined questions.
"Generally, do not deviate from the recommend interview questions. If, during an interview, an applicant asks about the propriety of specific conduct, do not pursue the matter. Merely suggest that if the applicant has enough anxiety about the propriety of the conduct to ask about it, the best course would be to discontinue it. If you are sensitive and wise, you usually can prevent those being interviewed from asking such explicit questions."
I still do not believe that Bishop was acting appropriately by pursuing a specific answer regarding tithing. It is either a yes or no. We have been told countless times that it is between us and the Lord.
They are asked not to deviate because the bishop often will not be conducting the temple recommend interview, often renewal interviews are conducted by his counselors. If you need clarification about tithing or the WOW you should not be sitting for a temple recommend interview
-
I have made this several times.....always a big hit
http://www.foodnetwork.com/recipes/anne-burrell/beef-bourguignon-recipe.html
-
Is it okay to approach the Bishop just before sacrament meeting?
Call his executive secretary and set up an appointment. He has plenty of people bugging him just before sacrament.
-
The last thing you should be thinking about is money. I think that it is great that you were able to save almost half of what a mission costs. That you had to use it for your moms cancer treatment shouldn't bother you at all. There is a church missionary fund and the ward missionary fund. ANYONE who wants to serve will be able to. I served in Mexico and all of my companions were from Mexico. I do not want to generalize but "my" companions came from very humble situations and were still able to serve. Talk to your bishop don't delay your mission by even one day.
-
Earrings
in General Discussion
Posted
Because it is not doctrine.....it is one persons opinion a suggestion.....