Sort-of Young Mom

I really don't know the policy. I've heard it's necessary for activities with women that might be more risky--like Girls' Camp, but I've never seen men show up for ordinary women's activities. Well...we'll see the policy soon enough. Whenever the church is united on something, that seems to move us closer to the concept of Zion (one heart, one mind)--I'm thrilled for this new handbook and the potential it has to reduce misunderstandings. I'm really curious as to how missions will be handled in the new handbook as they really affect the development and self-esteem of the growing generation of boys. So while we are on the subject of handbooks, policy question...At least half of my Sunday meetings are mission advertisements: I live in Utah, and when there isn't a missionary coming in or going out, an RM from another ward is recruited as a guest speaker or someone is asked to give another homecoming talk even if they've been off the mission for years. I know I seem self-sufficient, and testifying of truths probably helps strengthen me more than it helps others, but to be honest I actually need a lot of spiritual upliftment right now. My husband isn't fond of all the mission recaps either. When he came home from his mission the bishop told him to essentially ramble on about how cool his mission was and make it sound fun. My husband was a rebel and talked about the atonement instead; people are suffering, people need a testimony not a commercial was his explanation. I really wish I was in another ward, but if this is the policy on talks right now, and not some weird arrangement of my stake, then moving won't do me any good, and I'll need to accept it as the will of the Lord. Is this happening in your wards? I debated about starting a new thread, but I didn't want to breed widespread frustration if this is something Christ is directing to happen in his church--since this thread isn't on the main page I figure getting a little feedback from a few people is safer than sending it out to the whole world. If this question is out of bounds, I'll back off.

So I found this app on forbes, coronavirus dot app. In the article I found with it, worst case scenario artificial intelligence says 2.5 billion infected and nearly 53 million dead by March 16. March is apparently about the time it is expected to die down. But that would be if they are unable to contain it and if conditions don't change, which they have. Numbers to watch out for: they predicted about 50,000 infected 1000 dead by today--and that's probably not happening, it's a little over 31,000 infected and over 600 dead right now. I'm not liking that number, but it's definitely improving. A week from now we'll see if it's over 208,000 infected and over 4,000 dead as predicted. I'm not sure if the flu is the best thing to compare it to as the mortality rate for the flu is pretty low compared to those infected. The flu doesn't kill 2% of everyone it infects, it takes several thousand to get a death. But it's not comparable to the Spanish flu as that killed 15% of everyone it infected.

It looks like Buttigeig...who just so happened to have invested a lot of money in the app that failed and then came out really early with a I won speech...who's father was deeply invested in communism. In other words, let the conspiracy theories commence. 😏 I expect some sites will be loving this over the next few weeks. My husband just went to a conference where they used an app and due to thousands trying to use it, it failed there too. I'm not sure why people have so much faith in new technology. Sanders may have won the popular vote, but delegates don't love him, so he's in second. Then came Warren, then Biden. But that's only 60% of the vote, more will come in but it could take a while.

Okay, I finally figured out how to quote. If that was really recent it could be because the church released safety guidelines recommending people don't go into rooms alone--I don't remember if it specified women. I remember reading a Deseret News story where a woman went in with the keys to practice on the piano and met a sad fate. I still do it, and yes I'm a bit spooked out by it, I guess I'm living on the dangerous side. As far as the priesthood holder thing, I don't know the details as that's probably in handbook 1. I don't know how effective it is for safety (I doubt a man could've scared away cougars by virtue of his manhood when I was at girls' camp)--it's probably for blessings, the kind that people without the priesthood could do in Christ's name--I get why it may strike you as odd, but honestly it's not as odd as it used to be. In a ReligionNews article by Jana Reiss on this she quotes a policy from her collection of old handbooks given to her by a scholar where any single woman who moved into a major city had to notify the 12 apostles for safety's sake. Yes women could do blessings according to the church's essays, but it sure is easier having someone do it who has experience instead of doubting ourselves (is this ethical, how do I phrase this?) in an emergency. I imagine that in the future there will be an incident with an elder and a sister alone heading off to the mother's room that will prompt a change or it's possible that might not even be in there as the new handbook is going to be shortened. I thought for sure they'd be adding in more policies and clarifications. Either they're omitting more rules, or the stake president is going to get all his instructions via emails/training (I doubt there's a handbook for general authorities besides the scriptures).

On a less somber note, I am thrilled that the new handbook will do another thing...unify us and relieve Bishop's loads! Were we really supposed to go to him for every question? And... Funny story about the handbook, so there was a multi-ward Relief Society* activity and I found out there would be no supervision of kids moms brought, so I asked my husband to attend. It was a good thing he did because the kids there were getting into a lot of trouble. Well some of other women were outraged that a MAN was there, and a woman came up to us and said that his presence was traumatic to the women (because a couple of them didn't feel well dressed--no we weren't swimming--just exercising) and the handbook supposedly forbids men from showing up at Relief Society meetings/activities. She asked us to leave, but first asked my husband to take group pictures...huh? We were stunned! Fortunately my husband had access to both handbooks and it wasn't in there. Weird stuff. I'm guessing you guys/girls have a more sane stake** culture. I was disappointed when he got released because I missed having the handbook. *Women getting together from various congregations **Multi congregations

Yikes estradling25. 😲 I didn't mean that! I'm not belittling service missions at all. That's why I put "sort of" I didn't know how else to phrase it. I just hear people outside of the church assume it operates like missions in other denominations, so I wanted to be clear. I think personally think it's wonderful when people who want to go on service missions are able to go and I'm sure they benefit from it. Please, let me show you that my feelings are the opposite of what you think. 👱‍♀️ The Savior's church used to have something called a stake mission which was optional, but choosing it if you didn't have to choose it was frowned upon, not by me--as you will soon see, it's what I'm inferring from the official church publications, "Where will you go on your mission? If you are normal, and we hope you are—in fact that’s one of the requirements—you’ll want to go to some exotic place in a faraway land."--That's from Elder Tuttle 1974 , Your Mission Preparation, General Conference. Or " I decided to stay home and serve a stake mission instead. I thought my dad would be angry, but he just said, 'Well, that’s your choice. But it’s a pretty big decision. Would you be willing to take two separate days and go off by yourself somewhere and fast and pray about this?'"--Friend to Friend July 2005, Answered Prayers. Later we find out that his "mind and heart changed," and "I can’t imagine where my life would have gone if I had chosen to stay home." You'd think he was choosing to not serve at all with that family's attitude towards them. Even today's policy gives preference to proselyting. Most of us imagine you can be excused for that for only a serious disability, but you can be excused for a wrong body mass index or a tatoo. I honestly don't know how I feel about all this, I'm trying to sort out my own feelings, and being labeled as mean (if I read that right) doesn't really help. It's not my place to change the church, it belongs to Christ. Sure if it were me I'd combine the mission handbooks and do everything I could to equalize them, and I'd let the service missionaries wear their nametags all the time instead of being required to remove them. My attitude is quite the opposite of what you're saying, it's actually quite charitable. On the other hand, I do know this: I have a relative who is thrilled that he wasn't automatically reassigned to a service mission, he got turned down before the change and is married now. I also read a LDSLiving story about a boy with down syndrome who refused to go on anything but a proselyting mission. There are very rarely any church publication or media stories or firesides on young service missionaries, so why wouldn't some people turn it down and say that's not what I signed up for? I'm all for upping the status of service missionaries. 😃 ... except that I'm getting all kinds of mixed messages about whether or not that's really appropriate since proselyting is supposed to be the priority, and clearly some people don't want it and it isn't exactly given what most people would define as equal status. The assignments are pulled from justserve dot org and are assigned by the parents according to the young service missionary website (the letter from headquarters just gives the go-ahead) and the church outlined that they won't provide financial support for service missionaries. This doesn't affect how I feel about people who sacrifice to serve, as you said, for some that's the best they've got, and I think that's wonderful. It only makes me realize that if my perfectly healthy son were to say wow it looks like all service is equal to the Lord, so why not skip the fuss of a mission and choose my own path as guided by the spirit, I'd have to clarify things and that makes me cringe. Man, it's really hard to word things online. I hope I haven't offended anyone. If you see my past posts you'll see I'm deeply supportive of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Sure there are things I don't understand because they are brought out in a confusing matter, but hopefully mentioning that is not causing discontent and strife.

This totally makes sense considering where the church is going. Although what about people who don't use smartphones or the internet in the world? Hopefully they'll have a leader who can print things off in Africa or wherever. So where do the missionary handbooks fit in? Yes books! Last I saw the service and proselyting handbooks are separate and physical. I'm guessing this is so they are never without instruction in case the internet connection is bad. The proselyting (not the one published this year) vs. service are VERY different from each other (I haven't looked at the new proselyting one--I have a link to 2006, so I may be making a fool out of myself by not looking at that one, but I haven't had time), but it's clear that service* missions have a very different purpose and there is a very different attitude towards them, they even have a different website than senior (elderly) missionaries. This is interesting because the church said they want both types of missionaries to be treated equally in the church culture. I'm guessing the reason for the separate books and websites is so the service missionaries aren't hurt by the disparities. *Footnote for those who don't know: these are intern-work like assignments the church gives a missionary who doesn't qualify for proselyting, you can't apply directly for them--they are sort of a consolation for those who don't meet requirements, and all missions include service and some proselyting missionaries may do more humanitarian work than some service missionaries

I used to be extremely confused when other Christians explained that they only needed to accept Jesus as their Savior to be saved, and I'd go, yes, that's me. Then they'd say but you're not really Christian so you can't be saved, and it didn't matter what I said. Then it dawned on me...the scripture where people say they've done things in his name and worshipped him, and the Savior says it doesn't count because they didn't really know him. So really, the Bible-bashing and inter-faith struggles out there come down to this: you have to understand his nature or POOF, he's not really Jesus, game over, you fool, you tried to do what is right but accidently consulted the wrong man--stinks to be you, there is no grace for accidental misunderstanding of his nature. In the restored church of Jesus Christ, we understand that story differently. Those people who did things in his name weren't innocent people, they were show-offs who didn't even bother to grow close to Christ. When people reach out to God, even if they only understand him as someone in the sky and want to get to know him, he reaches back: draw near to him and he draws near to you, and he judges people based on their intentions. Many churches base their beliefs on salvation off of a formula that has been scientifically created by their scholars, accept this formula and you've hit the correct Jesus jackpot, but deep down many people don't necessarily believe it, and that is a great talking point. Someday I hope you'll hit on this common ground.

We haven't had a pandemic that ordinary people have had to worry about since WW1 (look up the Spanish flu). Keep your eye out, if only vulnerable people are dying then don't stress. The Spanish flu was a problem because it specifically targeted healthy people in the prime of their life--which just isn't something viruses normally do. Add to that poor science: people relied on unproven things to stay safe. I would say there will be heightened awareness for the next few months, some talk over the year, and then will die out, just like SARS, the swine flu, the bird flu, ebola, and west nile virus (I'm sure I'm missing more from the past couple decades). They stop because people either develop a vaccine (they're working on coronavirus right now), and/or people most easily exposed to them become immune. For every person infected you need at least 2 or 3 people to catch it or the virus will start dying out, coronavirus apparently might be BARELY at that rate, which puts it in the category of what-else-is-new . I'm not a scientist, this is just stuff I found online, I had the same concerns, and I listened to both sides, including the ones that really believed we weren't being told the whole story, but I'm siding with those that aren't worrying. This really is a great time to be alive, past President Gordon B. Hinckley lived through the Spanish Flu, Depression, and two World Wars and I think that's why he would say that all the time. But I recommend using this as an opportunity to remember the important things in life and make sure you have supplies on hand in case of another far more likely emergency (unemployment, storms). You will know if a virus has become a big deal because there will be travel restrictions and signs everywhere and the US President will have no hesistation imposing things that could hurt his re-election because he'll be in trouble either way. Talk of it won't exist merely in sections online.

Okay, I just talked to a ballroom dancer the other day, and this is a straight man who was outraged at the US Supreme Court decision regarding same-sex marriage. He told me that people of the same-sex dancing together for practical (not romantic) reasons has been going on for a long time, and he danced with siblings all the time and rarely danced with someone he wanted to date (dancing with love interests is too distracting, but some people do it, there were gay guys, not at BYU, but they didn't request to dance with men because women always outnumber the men). He pointed to a movie called Strictly Ballroom, which I haven't seen, but apparently the two main girls (they're straight) dance together in competitions. He said it's not a big deal or new, except for the fact that it doesn't avoid the appearance of evil in today's world. He said only people outside of ballroom would get worked up about this. He felt personally that the girls were better dancers because it's more competitive for them to get accepted and they are running marathons backwards in high heels, which is quite a workout, but he's quite sure they'd be at a disadvantage in standard if they paired up--due to two ballroom gowns clashing into each other. He affirmed that lifts are rare. I don't enjoy lowered standards. I get disappointed easily like the rest of you, but I'm trying to overcome that...here are some of the sad things that have crept into our culture: church-owned Deseret News now publishes all week long. BYU's not much better than a public school at times. Every youth meeting growing up had some questionable and rude (not dirty) language BY THE TEACHERS, you know to fit it--and I hear it all the time when I pass the classes. I was a youth teacher once but I was told by leaders that I wasn't cool enough to teach them and that's why I got released. And I have been thinking of writing the Friend magazine and asking them to please improve the manners in their stories (a lot of them seem to have a problem of talking with their mouth full or forgetting to say please and thank you--I still support the Friend in case anyone takes this as criticism). On the other hand I feel grateful that things have gotten better, activity rates are up, BYU used to have a serious cheating problem and have beauty competitions, and now grace is openly talked about at church. I still have hope that Christ will polish us before or during the millennium due to His nature/prophecies, I don't believe we're completely at the mercy of peoples' personal continually lowering standards in the church, although where we are at convinces me the second coming is definitely going to take a while (interesting article on how heaven has very high standards and what our Heavenly Parents likely think of our church culture: Our Refined Heavenly Home, Ensign June 2009). Likely there will be some movement towards better behavior in the future, just as I believe the Lord has influenced people to eat healthier, and treat the environment better, and learn about other faiths and genealogy, and be outraged at feticide. It's as the scriptures allude to in Joel 2:28, the spirit of the Lord will influence not just His church but the outside culture as well. One step back, but two steps forward, the sky is not falling in the church.

anatess2--good point. In a way I guess the same-sex couples will have a leg up because the world likes to reward novelty. On one hand they are at a disadvantage due to visual appeal and likely trying something new in their dance career (this isn't quite the same as boys in a girls' track race where boys are sure to outpace them even with a few late adjustments in life, we don't have evidence that men are better followers than women or women are better leaders in dance). On the other hand they may just win because of that point, people feeling sorry, people wanting to make a statement, or advance a cause. We'll see what happens. JohnsonJones--you are right on point with the whole youth leaving once they leave home--this is definitely a trend. It makes me feel sick that a parent could try and try and kids will just slip through our fingers if we don't do everything right. It may not seem like it, but if you think about it there are MORE young adult programs than youth programs in the church, here are some of them: Institute, Education Week and other Conferences, Pathway (now everyone can go to a church school and I wouldn't be surprised if it became as advertised as missions since the retention numbers for going to a church school are good), Single Adult congregations (hereafter called YSA wards) stuffed with activities, Home Evening, church reponsibilities, and Missions--multiple mission opportunities for women. The church now has a weekly YA (young adult) feature, they stopped separating single and single student wards to improve retention, and there's been a effort to include young marrieds from what I've seen on the Church News, but until I see something substantial come out of headquarters, singles continue to be a top focus. Leaked videos that someone took showed great concern among the church's authorities for the YSA's according to Deseret News' transcripts. For the youth, the program is gone, really the program is just make sure you do what you've been counseled to do plus meet ups for seminary and sponsored activities and keep on making goals but youth don't have to share them. There is definitely a realization that the kids will be okay if their parents are strong, YSA's are at risk and that shift is happening now. I think your prayers and the prayers of others for singles are having their day now. I really do believe that these gradual changes are due to Christ changing the church slowly and sustainably to bring about justice like he said he would in Book of Mormon: Jacob 5. I used to say the church wants or the church thinks, but now I think of the church being Christ's as much as Peter did, and that's why I phrase things that way. I don't think it's pure bureacracy...yes they are people that Christ has to work through and that means vulnerabilities, but I had a choice to make...were all those seemingly unjust things that happened in the scriptures (stoning, sacrificing sweet lambs, polygamy, ditching parents to get sealed--adopted--to your favorite church leader in the eternities, and the like) just a group of culture-constrained people doing what works for them and Christ can't get through much and the church is on course for apostasy again, or is the general rule that Christ is at the head, revelation is real, nothing will stop His grand designs to unfold before His coming, and the policies set forth by God will all work out with occasionally bad calls causing minor hiccups? I guess I shouldn't worry too much about what BYU does or doesn't because it's as likely to derail most young adults as people getting into the Mississippi River and hoping to change the course with their hands. Oh well, same-sex match-ups dancing--what a silly and sadly confused world, what else is new.

JohnsonJones, I'm concerned about slipping standards too, but some people with weak testimonies get so worked up about the church caving that they fall away. I made a promise to defend the church, so, like it or not I need to say something--this is not an attack on you. Yes there are weird and inconsistent decisions out there--but I really believe the horse and pony shows are done to protect the path the church needs to take to liberate the world and prepare for Christ's return, it also prevents unnecessary persecution. Christ is playing chess and throwing things under the bus--but he always makes up for it later. I really believe he's at the head. For example the therapy issue, meh, not important to our personal salvation to take a stance on exactly how private therapy choices play out--but in an age and time where attacks on the church are increasing, little things like that keep the mobs away. If someone in our family were to think they were gay we'd take it to the Lord on what to do for us personally--we don't put too much stock into newsroom wording. As far as the scouting decision, in order to help encourage my husband to invest more in our child, I've been keeping track of statistics and the young people of the church, starting in 2009 or so have been falling behind their evangelical peers spiritually and are not as committed as former generations. Christ, acting through the church, has been working hard to save them, and throwing out everything including the kitchen sink isn't surprising. A relative of mine working at headquarters told me the church had been preparing for a scout-exit since the 90s, but was waiting for the right time. Yes, Elder Ballard's recent word choice was weird and I wish I could have commented on that thread, but in a sense they have been growing incompatible spiritually (I'm not looking at their recent policies but declining respect for our church, recently a prominent scout leader trashed our church as too boring and predicts at least 1/5 of our youth will rejoin scouts, look up the story in the archives of ReligionNews dot com. On the other hand, if you send your kids to public school, you can't act appalled at the scouts' too much, I'm pretty sure they are more faith friendly than any public school). But really, I think the departure was more pragmatic, the BSA just doesn't manage their funds well, overcharges scouts to pad their leaders' chairs, endangers kids (scout leaders do dumb stuff all the time like exploring abandoned mines), pull little kids away from their families too early (I'm so glad we never adopted the younger programs), and according to ReligionNews are on the verge of bankruptcy (and that's pre-church pull-out, it has nothing to do with the church's decision). If we hadn't acted now who knows what would have happened .

Curious as to what BYU's boundaries are. Yes, keeping the school insulated from criticism is important so that families can be provided for and get jobs...but, so far BYU has been surprisingly quite accommodating when people boycott the university. None of this should be taken as a criticism, as I believe Christ leads the church and he'll intervene to prevent a frustrated purpose, and BYU was clearly meant to be, my thoughts aren't His, I get it. I'm just thinking aloud. I keep thinking now's our chance to...um I guess not. Is this indefinite, or does it reach a point where we do our own thing? I'm not trying to hijack the conversation, but if you can fit it in, do any of you personally believe that BYU has limits, or that it's existence is good enough and that we'll see a very different BYU in the next 10-15 years that keeps up with whatever beliefs the mainstream absorbs? I'm totally fine if Christ wants to turn BYU into an accommodating school to attract diversity to the church, but I'm wondering if it's worth encouraging my child to attend. Not because of this reason, although it has been part of a long pattern, see, I went over a decade ago and it wasn't what I was expecting in a faith-based school and didn't pay off for my husband (who also went) financially. Once again, no one has to answer that, it would be nice, but I'm not in charge of this thread. Jane Doe, you have a good point. The ACLU wanted to ban single people from becoming homecoming/prom king/queen, and require that it be couples that were dating (they said they had same-sex couples in mind)--I don't think that lawsuit made it far. The fact that people are even thinking of male-female match-ups that likely have no romantic interest in each other (my married ballroom relatives do it all the time) being universally portrayed as something worth suing or protesting over shows some serious boredom on the part of some people who want to be a part of something important but are easily confused on what counts. LiterateParakeet, you're right, I don't think there will be many homosexuals choosing this option, unless they are really newly infatuated with each other and can't dance with anyone else. There's going to be a huge learning curve for that man who has recently decided to take up the opposite role unless he's been identifying with that since the start. Once again people put up fusses (which is why BYU did this in the first place) as a matter of principle. TheFolkProphet--I think some people post in hopes of getting their views into church culture, but a lot of people just need to talk--this is an interesting sign of the times. I'm glad for an opportunity to process this as it feels crazy and I'm glad I'm not alone as I probably couldn't say that on many websites. I really think choosing to dance as a same-sex couple is rare and you're more likely to see trans couples out there, which is saying a lot because they are also really rare. Has anyone seen these in ballroom or are they just a theoretical possibility? Perhaps this was behind BYU's thinking? From my understanding they only host standard at BYU due to immodest moves and clothing from Latin, but that was years ago--has it changed? Latin is where all the "why-are-single-latter-day-saints-even-engaging-in-this-art-is-not-an-excuse" stuff is--they are literally out there in pseudo lingerie busting out seductive moves. Standard's much more wholesome, but it can be a little too close if you want an A in the class. If parents stop sending their pre-teens to Latin, BYU will follow. If college age students decide to find spouses in more intellectual ways than physical contact, BYU will follow. I'm not saying get rid of dances, church youth are good at choosing to have space between them, just ones that REQUIRE being close for winning's sake.

There's good reason to believe that he may have overcome this. I know that sounds puzzling, yes that's wrong that he gave well wishes to someone who was a little too good of a friend and lied about it (but I definitely let out a sigh of relief that there was no steamy talk or pictures--he was fooling himself and doing a sin common to man--but it was not something like King David). So did he cross the line and is there no hope for the future? James E. Faust had incredible wisdom on the consequences of divorce: read the Enriching of Marriage. I recommend looking up more talks to decide what justifies divorce and then take your answer to God--who I believe does care about your marriage. For example, his meeting her would have been a huge mistake, but by the grace of God she backed out; I was not expecting that, were you? You had every reason to believe she's wanting to divide you, by causing you to doubt your husband, by tattling on a harmless well-wish (I'm sure he reasoned it's just a friend contact, but lied because he didn't want you to take it the wrong way, it's not smart but it's not adultery). Normally women would just back away instead of saying something, "hey your husband's into me, bet you're soooo mad." Might as well have added, "so when are you going to break up over this?" Him meeting with her probably was innocent in his mind, he would have said this is just a friendship and felt okay because he had your blessing, but it might not have played out that way. I think he's paying you a compliment for sticking with him; that was a humble thing to say as he probably feels unworthy for being tempted, even though Christ himself was tempted, many people still feel like they shouldn't be tempted even if they didn't sin and beat themselves up over it. About leaving him...are you sure this will be worth it? It may seem like a strong independent thing to do, and sometimes it is--but I'm talking about wives who are so emotionally or physically beaten down that they probably won't live long. Divorce can fill people with such sorrow that they become weaker and more prone to attacks from Satan. Not many people are walking on a cloud years after a divorce, dancing in the streets about their freedom, praising the day of their divorce and saying that it was the best several hundred or thousand that they've ever spent (they're expensive, even without children or assets). I've even seen divorce regret blogs--and those aren't even temple marriages. If you have any children they are going to be hit hard. From what I studied in college, kids tend to do better with their father because he can pay for high quality care and take paid time off, but many moms send their kids into the streets or put them in front of the TV to get more time to make more money or go back to school themselves and that can be really hard developmentally and morally on children who then become very friend or media dependent. Yes, moms matter tremendously with development, but it's all for nothing if they're too busy. If he's on the right path he should be willing to come up with a plan. Boundaries for talking with other women, what is and isn't flirting, ways to enhance your marriage and keep it from deteriorating (couples getaway, class, regular dating), and counseling if you continue to fight about this. I felt alone when my husband always belittled me and had a temper problem and a memory problem (which is not fun), and there's little no hope of having children again with how miserable he made me feel as a mother. But that's what Satan wanted...he wanted me to feel alone. Slowly I began to realize that I'm not alone with God's grace, even though I can't talk in person about these things. Hey, he blessed both of us with the internet!

I wanted to apologize. I didn't carefully read everything you wrote and what I put sounded bad--like victim shaming or something. I just really feel for others who are having a hard time with their husbands who are going through hard times, so sometimes I go overboard with sharing what's helping me, still I hope it helps if you haven't read it yet. Okay, so my thought on your POSTED questions/concerns. I know you are already taking steps, but I advise against getting your local leaders coming out with pitchforks to try him for sin with scant evidence. Not letting you snatch his phone isn't evidence; my husband is constantly micromanaging what I do on the computer because he feels I'm wasting my time so now I don't let him know what I do even though everything is kosher--like checking email or favorite sites or the weather, but he takes it as evidence that I must be doing something horrible--no, I just don't like criticism. The church doesn't hold disciplinary trials for suspected thoughts so this probably won't save him--it will just make him more resentful. So far your search for the truth has led you to feeling awful and I don't believe that's how the Spirit enlightening our minds works. When I was almost kidnapped, twice, both times the Spirit strengthened me and warned me in a kind way and even gave me the words to say and energy to fend off the abduction--I didn't feel impending doom or fear but pure love. As far as why you can't get him to get help on depression, I found that not all counselors have the same opinion on depression. Some believe depression is beyond our control and the only solution is medication, the drug consequences of it don't matter, and all who think differently are part of the problem. Others believe very strongly that it's overprescribed and very rare, and most so-called clinical depression is just grief and overload of disappointment that can be worked through. If it is grief that your husband traces to his dead end job/friend dying, and not something your husband is describing as weird out of the blue dehabilitating feelings, then he probably feels in control of the situation. If he didn't he would be far more desperate in getting help and nothing, not even her could restore hope. I saw an interesting study that showed that psychology isn't much more effective than talking to a wise friend--hence the Spirit may have told him to seek out friendship since he's not open to counseling and he interpreted it in a very bizzare way--Satan can hijack our thoughts when we're down; I know it sounds so unfair. Making him direct his deep need for friendship towards someone who's conveniently cute. I don't want to blame you as not being that friend, but do you go on dates? I do think you'll need to dance around his defensiveness as I explained in my last post response. If my husband reacted to me opening up a sacred (what I think is revelatory) thought during a time I was feeling hopeless by calling church discipline on me for something I don't think is a sin, confiscating or throwing things of mine away (such as the pictures), spying on or gathering evidence to prove me wrong (I don't know if that's what's going on here--I put that in here just in case), and insisting that I get on medication when I don't think it's the answer, I would feel attacked. I wouldn't say thank you. He would lose all credibility as a friend, and I would crave a new husband badly. I do have a lot of hope for your relationship, it doesn't sound dire, but I can't say the same if it turns into a power struggle where the only right answer is that he's supposed to raise the white flag and admit he can't receive revelation or be trusted with technology or take care of his health and needs to be disciplined.

Good detective work Needle, I thought something was a little off. But, why? Boredom? I don't see anything potentially embarrassing to the church here--what kind of responses were they trying to mine? Yikes, I hate wasting my time.

Perhaps it was awkward talking to his parents because he was a missionary and he didn't know what to say? Did you have a talk with him about what you feel comfortable discussing and what you didn't? Maybe he was scared off...church President Gordon B. Hinckley asked missionaries to stay on topic in their letters and focus on the work. But that shouldn't have affected him talking to his father. Since you say you are Baptist, I'm guessing you have a whole set of beliefs and are not an investigator or less-active--so it may have been really weird for him. Yes I have different beliefs but don't feel guilty about following what you feel is right I am not blaming you for that, and it's pretty shallow if he doesn't respect your different faith. Now for the ward avoidance: did he speak a foreign language and is afraid people may want him to perform? Does he fear people setting him up for dates? Anyhow, this is an alternative speculative theory, but if my last post was more spot-on (parent problems) then I love Gallant Pioneer's approach to the problem.

I'm so sorry you are in this situation. We had a lesson at home recently on what revelation is and isn't--it's from the article by Dallin H. Oaks, August 2013, In His Own Time, In His Own Way, from the Ensign magazine, it's full of good quotes but my favorite was, "Those who pray that the Spirit might give them immediate guidance in every little thing throw themselves open to the false spirits that seem ever ready to answer our pleas and confuse us...the people I have found most confused in this Church are those who seek personal revelations on everything." I liked this because that Sunday in a member in church was chewing everyone out for not having revelation/answer for everything because to her anything that popped into her head was clear revelation AND it happened everytime and we were just all spiritual weaklings according to her who didn't have enough faith. This is a dangerous theory to hold. I knew a sister who had to leave her husband because the thought popped into his head in the temple that he needed to have incestuous relations with his daughter, and he was determined it was revelation. Whenever I think God is asking me to break a covenant, I just remember that story from the Old Testament where a prophet had an angel appear to him and tell him to break a covenant--and then God punished him with a lion eating him--moral of the story, it's a test, don't break your covenants. It's totally possible that things will work out with your husband, but you have to get around his knee jerk defensiveness, defensiveness is THE big challenge of relationships because people have low self-esteem and they're trying to defend themselves. He really feels this is revelation, false revelation alone isn't a reason to break up--it's what he does with it, and let's face it God might go easy on him because he made an innocent mistake. So you need to plan out CAREFUL conversation--go and get yourself some high quality books on communication to navigate the discussion. "Okay, I haven't received personal revelation on this," (he thinks yeah, you get it) let's say that I'm spiritually weaker than you," (he thinks probably) and the revelation is real and none of my business (he feels heard), is it possible that it's a test to see if you'll keep your covenants? Just wondering cause...(cue the man-eating lion Old testament story--he thinks maybe, but he might still defend, that's okay you're not here to fight) I am not saying you are like this, but see I get really concerned when I hear about some of the early saints where some men got a big self-esteem boost from the possibility of having another wife and some got themselves kicked out of the church over their obsession with it (don't worry he defends, so not me). It crushes me because without revelation I can only conclude that I'm not a fulfilling wife, and that you need another wife to be happy--please honestly tell me that you can be happy with just me and you're not even fantasizing over how much better things will be with her. (I have no idea what he'll say, you definitely need a good relationship with the Spirit of God here to navigate this tricky subject, but if he says don't worry...) I'm wondering if it would be safer to just not think about it anymore and have getting to know her in the next life be a fun surprise, I know if God allowed multiple husbands and revealed to me who number two is you wouldn't be comfortable with me dreaming about him, however innocently. Also have you ever considered that she might turn you down? Lots of men receive revelations on future wives but get turned down; I'm wondering if it's wise to put stock in this, after all you did say 'probably'. Surely there's got to be a way to have hope again beyond dreaming of your mansion above." (and who can argue with those last words, they're in a hymn) If that doesn't work, and he's determined to make her a hobby...then...and I'm probably making a huge mistake advising you on this as she might talk to him about it, call the cops, or welcome his advances. But if there's anyway you can get her to abandon her friendship with him that would be great, as I'm sure most good women don't want to sabotage anyone's relationship. However it will probably only buy you time and he may be angry even if he doesn't think it's you. You probably need a marriage counselor that's good, believes in the church, and won't make your husband defensive and work through his low self-esteem as it's clear he believes the revelation is real. I'll pray for you. Don't let it shake your faith. I used to believe that God had to constantly flame men's egos and give multiple wives and the priesthood to men because their self-esteem is so fragile or something. But over the years I've found that God is much more just and wise than that and has different purposes in mind. Getting self-esteem over power is called priestcraft and is dangerous to tolerate in heaven--why would God let your husband in there if he demands a different woman to be happy? However, forgive me if I'm wrong, it seems like you are looking for resources to defend yourself and back yourself up when the priority might be to save your relationship and show your floundering husband that you are his support and are worth many wives to him in his hardest times. At BYU we learned that defensiveness, criticism, contempt, and stonewalling (essentially separation) are the four horsemen of a marriage apocalypse, you don't want these in your life (I won't post the author but you can look him up). I know I good book about finding the hero in your husband, basically helping him feel good about himself, but I won't post the details to avoid advertising--but I think it is important that you find a way to support him and give him an alternative to dreaming of his mansion above to be happy.

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned that sometimes people don't get along with their families, don't want to talk to them (my family gossips and twists things to no end--so I say the bare minimum) and may not have mental issues at all--it drives me crazy that my family now suspects I have issues just because I don't like them (the church is really great at screening those out and making sure companions say something--I believe in the old handbook before they just barely updated it said that mission companions would face church discipline if they didn't report it, plus most of those people don't want to extend their missions). He may love the gospel, but just not want anything to do with his home ward (I can't stand my home ward knowing all the things my mom has said about me over the pulpit--but I am totally active/devout, however if I was visiting I might just come up with an excuse not to attend that Sunday--awful I know), and be planning on being fully active once he moves out. Digging into this may cause him to resent you both even more (great they never let me grow up/figure things out on my own/they still think I'm I kid). While it's possible that your child was disappointed with how few people he helped convert and is feeling like a failure and doesn't want to talk to his family or his ward for fear of that question (my husband hated his mission and doesn't like to talk about it because of that, but he didn't take it to the extreme your son did or extend his mission in hope that maybe he could baptize someone), it also could be a parent-child struggle and your child is probably perfectly healthy. Instead ask your husband how many details he shares with others at church on his son or if he gossips about others in front of your son (leading him to believe no secret is safe), and if you both are only treating him like a pseudo-adult--he seems to be acting like someone who wants space, chances are he wrote lengthy letters to other people, especially friends outside of the ward. A mission companion, not the president, is the best resource here. If they are tight-lipped, suspicious, or acusatory, you can bet your child isn't putting his family in the best light.