Unofficial definition of "active" LDS

[Suzie]

the case of not being able to keep the WOW due to natural weaknesses, we are able to repent and try again. But in the matter of tithe, we are making a conscience decision to not pay. Our heart is with the money and not with the obligation. And the parable of the widow's mite removes any argument based on actual poverty.

Why can't someone repent and try again? (with regards to tithing). And how do we know for sure their heart is with the money, just because they don't pay it? I think there could be many other reasons why someone doesn't pay tithing.

[Bensalem]

Why can't someone repent and try again? (with regards to tithing). And how do we know for sure their heart is with the money, just because they don't pay it? I think there could be many other reasons why someone doesn't pay tithing.

Okay, so give me a legitimate reason for not paying tithe that is also supported in the Word of God.

Repentance is required for rectifying the sin of not paying tithe. And part of the repentance process is to make amends if possible. If you steal something, you should replace the item or the value of the item to the victim. Who is the victim of the non-tither? God himself. When we don't pay our tithe we are robbing God.

May sound harsh but I am not a Bishop so I cannot judge or absolve an Israelite of his debt to God. I'm sure there are allowances made in the office of a Bishop.

[annewandering]

As I said, each person must decide for themselves.

As for the word "condemnation", I accept the presentation given by many a missionary, which states that "damnation" can be thought of as a dam that retains water, aka, blessings from reaching those who are not obedient.

If what I teach condemns, it is only because it must be true.

It seems you take offense at my lesson of obedience to the covenants every saint has made at baptism. Are you suggesting the better lesson is to say it doesn't matter if a saint ignores his promises to God?

Actually what I am going to say is very blunt. Why do you believe YOU have the right to teach people you have deemed condemned and inactive? What stewardship do you have? Are you a missionary? Or are you someone who has taken it upon themselves to promise God that you would see to it, personally, to make sure inactive people are taught that they are condemned? If so I would not be surprised to see those condemned people consider leaving the church to get away from your condemnation and 'teaching'.

I see you list your religion as 'no answer'. I guess that might explain your statements.

[Bensalem]

Actually what I am going to say is very blunt. Why do you believe YOU have the right to teach people you have deemed condemned and inactive? What stewardship do you have? Are you a missionary? Or are you someone who has taken it upon themselves to promise God that you would see to it, personally, to make sure inactive people are taught that they are condemned? If so I would not be surprised to see those condemned people consider leaving the church to get away from your condemnation and 'teaching'.

I see you list your religion as 'no answer'. I guess that might explain your statements.

First, I am a latter-day saint. Notice, I didn't simply say, "I am LDS" or "I am a member of the Church". We become saints when we are baptized and I want us all to remain saints through repentance and partaking of the sacrament.

Second, teaching the gospel comes with the territory. It is a requirement. Maybe you have heard the phrase, "Every member a missionary". I take that to heart. My stewardship over my brothers (and sisters) in the church is directed by the bible. It is supported by the Church. It is an act of Christ's love.

Third, inactivity is a serious problem for the faith and well being of the individual member. It puts in jeopardy their eternal salvation and exaltation in the kingdom of God. Inactivity equals inactive faith.

Forth, in regards to condemnation. The promise of our obedience to God comes with His promise of blessings to us. The example was given that the "damnation" I am speaking of was one of not receiving the blessings. It is the same lesson I have heard out of the mouth of many missionaries.

Fifth, inactive members are already "out of the Church", at least spiritual if not physically. Therefore, my lesson in warning can only have a positive outcome in that they will return to an active faith or withdrawal physically, which is better than living their present hypocrisy.

Edited July 16, 2012 by Bensalem

[mnn727]

. You can't consider yourself active if you don't pay your tithe.

Well that throws out about 30%+ people that show up every Sunday.

note - I disagree with the above statement.

Therefore, my lesson in warning can only have a positive outcome in that they will return to an active faith or withdrawal physically, which is better than living their present hypocrisy.

You actually think withdrawing physically is preferable? I certainly hope you are NEVER in a position of authority.

You can't teach them if they are not there.

The Church is not a resting place for the perfect, its an aid station for the ill.

Edited July 16, 2012 by mnn727

[mnn727]

As for my 'teaching', I consider it general, not personal.

Sorry but I consider it incorrect teaching. It is your personal opinion, so it has value to you, but to teach it as fact, well, that's wrong IMHO.

[annewandering]

so you really have NO stewardship over those you wish to counsel and either frighten (teach) them back into activity or get them to get their rears out and stop being hypocrites.

I remember someone else who was determined to get us all saved, no matter what. Sometimes I wonder if he didnt have that little piece of him that KNEW he was not going to succeed in passing through mortal existence with free will and gentle persuasion so latched onto his idea of saving us all with no chance of 'failure'. Of course he was going to get the credit and praise for 'saving' everyone.

He kinda missed the point didnt he. We are here to be tested and overcome our own weaknesses.

Every member is a missionary but we have NO stewardship over other members in the church unless we have been given that by proper priesthood authority. We cant just decide one day we get to go around and fix those 'condemned inactives'. It is wrong. It is insulting. It is judgmental.

By the way we remain 'saints' by not being excommunicated or taking our names off the rolls of the church.

Inactivity does NOT mean inactive faith. I remember a talk not all that long ago by a GA in conference. Sorry but dont remember by who. He said a lot about inactive members and he made a point of making it clear that inactive did NOT mean unfaithful. So is the GA wrong?

[Misshalfway]

This thread highlights one of the things I love the most about the church. Something I think we miss sometimes. And that is that our worship and our relationship with the Lord is such a personal thing! It's such a beautiful concept that God can be strict and strong while being so flexible and individual. We need more of this kind of wise flexibility. Developing such perspectives only makes us better parents and partners and discerners of others.

[NightSG]

You actually think withdrawing physically is preferable? I certainly hope you are NEVER in a position of authority.

You can't teach them if they are not there.

The Church is not a resting place for the perfect, its an aid station for the ill.

Yes, but some of those people remind me of the old guys who try to maneuver a cigarette around their oxygen mask.

[kartvines]

Well then I have a very serious problem.

I was inactive for over 40 years, just return since the death of my wife.

I now consider myself active, and yet I was not active in the building my faith remained strong.

Since returning I have not accepted Sacrament , because I don't feel worthy/entitled because I still have some issues with the WOW I am still dealing with due to bad habits I developed during my inactivity.

For at least 35 of those years I did not step foot in my ward mainly due to the conceived hypocrisy I felt and didn't want to project on those in my ward, by pretending to be what I am not. Should that keep me from attending the services and partaking in the spirit?

I still have a lot of things to work on and out, but returning to church was the step I took in hope I could at least work them out, in hope to better myself and the relationships I have with God and my children.

So far I have not been judged by or have judge others in my ward, and yet it seems as if I may have already been condemned by your and your "fellowship"

In yesterday High Priest meeting we talked about OYM [Open Your Mouth] and how we are all missionary, and how too many members were no longer attending church due to this idea, the church and it's members not setting the proper examples, but walking the walk and not being overly boastful, which has been a major turnoff to non member and member alike.

So let me ask you, what example are you setting? Many convert are made by seeing how we live our lives outside of church, you make me think I am now wasting my time trying to rekindle my relationship with the church and God, because I am far from perfect, I am not even a good Mormon overall but should it keep me from trying to improve myself and my relationship with God??

Should it stop from wanting the fellowship and asking Christ and the Holly Ghost for help to overcome my many shortfalls.

Should my current in obedient of the WOW stop me from attending church to aid me overcome my faults, and out of the church?

First, I am a latter-day saint. Notice, I didn't simply say, "I am LDS" or "I am a member of the Church". We become saints when we are baptized and I want us all to remain saints through repentance and partaking of the sacrament.

Second, teaching the gospel comes with the territory. It is a requirement. Maybe you have heard the phrase, "Every member a missionary". I take that to heart. My stewardship over my brothers (and sisters) in the church is directed by the bible. It is supported by the Church. It is an act of Christ's love.

Third, inactivity is a serious problem for the faith and will being of the individual member. It puts in jeopardy their eternal salvation and exaltation in the kingdom of God. Inactivity equals inactive faith.

Forth, in regards to condemnation. The promise of our obedience to God comes with His promise of blessings to us. The example was given that the "damnation" I am speaking of was one of not receiving the blessings. It is the same lesson I have heard out of the mouth of many missionaries.

Fifth, inactive members are already "out of the Church", at least spiritual if not physically. Therefore, my lesson in warning can only have a positive outcome in that they will return to an active faith or withdrawal physically, which is better than living their present hypocrisy.

[Dravin]

You actually think withdrawing physically is preferable? I certainly hope you are NEVER in a position of authority.

You can't teach them if they are not there.

The Church is not a resting place for the perfect, its an aid station for the ill.

The brings to mind this scripture:

22 And behold, ye shall meet together oft; and ye shall not forbid any man from coming unto you when ye shall meet together, but suffer them that they may come unto you and forbid them not;

23 But ye shall pray for them, and shall not cast them out; and if it so be that they come unto you oft ye shall pray for them unto the Father, in my name.

24 Therefore, hold up your light that it may shine unto the world. Behold I am the light which ye shall hold up—that which ye have seen me do. Behold ye see that I have prayed unto the Father, and ye all have witnessed.

25 And ye see that I have commanded that none of you should go away, but rather have commanded that ye should come unto me, that ye might feel and see; even so shall ye do unto the world; and whosoever breaketh this commandment suffereth himself to be led into temptation.

***

30 Nevertheless, ye shall not cast him out from among you, but ye shall minister unto him and shall pray for him unto the Father, in my name; and if it so be that he repenteth and is baptized in my name, then shall ye receive him, and shall minister unto him of my flesh and blood.

31 But if he repent not he shall not be numbered among my people, that he may not destroy my people, for behold I know my sheep, and they are numbered.

32 Nevertheless, ye shall not cast him out of your synagogues, or your places of worship, for unto such shall ye continue to minister; for ye know not but what they will return and repent, and come unto me with full purpose of heart, and I shall heal them; and ye shall be the means of bringing salvation unto them.

[annewandering]

The brings to mind this scripture:

Those are some of the most moving scriptures we have. Christs love for us and His guidance to us to help and love each other no matter, is very clear in those passages.

[Vort]

I had understood the OP as asking for personal, private definitions of "active" and "inactive". I took this to mean something like, "What do you need to do in order to consider yourself truly active?" I did not interpret this as being a method of passing judgment on whether others were active or inactive or whatever. Unless we are a bishop, that judgment is not ours to make, nor do I see why anyone would even care to pass such a judgment on a fellow Saint.

[mrmarklin]

Several years ago I was on a Stake mission committee. Activity was defined as attendance once per quarter; essentially 4 times a year.

Nevertheless, don't judge activity by church attendance srtictly.:)

I would venture to say that 90+% of all people who don't even meet the very loose idea of activity above, consider themselves LDS and have good feelings about the church.

I remember my mother being very judgemental about those people that were not there every Sunday, but that is a very incorrect attitude. One doesn't know what's in a heart. And I've personal experience with those who thump a Bible in church, and then go home and thump their wives and children.

The best home teacher in my ward for many years was a person who could not give up smoking. Yet he attended Church every Sunday and was a home teacher. He is now passed away. He will have his reward as a faithful servant of the Lord, I'm sure.

Edited July 16, 2012 by mrmarklin

[Misshalfway]

I do measure my activity level based on my participation in meetings and activities. But not nearly as much as I do with my relationship with God and how well I feel I'm doing at living congruently with my beliefs and values.

It's interesting to hear all these "official" definitions. I've never heard of "4 x per year". I guess I grew up in a pretty orthodox household so I tend to make my assumptions accordingly in this regard. But I like that there is some flexibility in this thinking.

[Bensalem]

Oh my, it appears I have ruffled some feathers and have a lot to answer for. Let me go and have lunch and think about it further. Sometimes I take a lap after lunch, so please be patient with me.

While I am away I hope you will consider all that I have said related to this topic and how the discussion has come to this. We will serve the reader better by removing the emotion and by addressing the doctrinal points I have made.

I remain confident that it is my just duty to have said these things to my brothers and sisters in the Church. I have not cast anyone out. I have only warned them of their own lack of obedience to the covenants they made and "condemned" them to not receiving the blessings promised by God from His side. I believe such a warning is supported by scripture.

It seems to me that my detractors need to prove to me that scriptures support the opposite of what I am sharing. Namely, that broken covenants means nothing to God and that His promises to us are obtainable regardless of our obedience to our covenants.

[Dravin]

It seems to me that my detractors need to prove to me that scriptures support the opposite of what I am sharing. Namely, that broken covenants means nothing to God and that His promises to us are obtainable regardless of our obedience to our covenants.

There is one specific item I am addressing, and that is the idea that it is better that someone who is not paying tithing/being 'inactive' stop coming to Church than to continue to go to Church and not pay tithing/be 'inactive'. Considering Christ wants even those who have not kept their covenants to the point of being excommunicated to be present at Church that seems at odds. If those who aren't keeping their covenants are better off not attending in their covenant non-keeping state than attending in their covenant non-keeping state it suggest there is either something really rather unique about tithing that doesn't apply to excommunicants in general, or Christ really should have stuck in a, "Don't keep them from coming but you really should advise them it's better that they don't come until they've repented."

When you say:

Therefore, my lesson in warning can only have a positive outcome in that they will return to an active faith or withdrawal physically, which is better than living their present hypocrisy.

You're saying, though I'm open to correction if such isn't what you meant, it is better to not pay tithing and not attend church than it is to not pay tithing and to attend church. Which is at odds, as described above, with Christ's desire that even excommunicants keep attending Church.

Edited July 16, 2012 by Dravin

[mnn727]

I remain confident that it is my just duty to have said these things to my brothers and sisters in the Church.

And I would submit that its attitudes like the above that drive many people away from Church and if that is the case, the bearer of such attitudes will need to answer to God for that if they chased someone away.

I think we all need to watch better what we say and how we say it. We all have our personal sins we are loath to give up. You may be perfect at tithing, but since you have not yet been translated I guarantee there's some sin(s) you are guilty of. This applies to all of us - lets not be so quick to cast the first stone, Christ ate with and taught sinners, he didn't go only to the perfected.

[annewandering]

While I am away I hope you will consider all that I have said related to this topic and how the discussion has come to this. We will serve the reader better by removing the emotion and by addressing the doctrinal points I have made.

I remain confident that it is my just duty to have said these things to my brothers and sisters in the Church. I have not cast anyone out. I have only warned them of their own lack of obedience to the covenants they made and "condemned" them to not receiving the blessings promised by God from His side. I believe such a warning is supported by scripture.

It seems to me that my detractors need to prove to me that scriptures support the opposite of what I am sharing. Namely, that broken covenants means nothing to God and that His promises to us are obtainable regardless of our obedience to our covenants.

Emotion is not a negative. Not having emotion is a true negative so no thanks on that suggestion.

I am so glad you havent cast anyone out. I am afraid that the church would be rather 'annoyed' if you had.

Do you actually understand what stewardship means? It would be helpful if you looked it up and did a bit of research on the subject.

You are not called to give warnings is my very strong guess. Since you are not called then it would behoove you to back off and repent of unjust dominion.

No one said broken covenants mean nothing to God. Nevertheless they are between GOD and the church member except in certain cases such as adultery and even then it is only to facilitate repentance which is between God and the church member in question. It is NOT between God, the church member and some random guy off the street.

[Bensalem]

And I would submit that its attitudes like the above that drive many people away from Church and if that is the case, the bearer of such attitudes will need to answer to God for that if they chased someone away.

I think we all need to watch better what we say and how we say it. We all have our personal sins we are loath to give up. You may be perfect at tithing, but since you have not yet been translated I guarantee there's some sin(s) you are guilty of. This applies to all of us - lets not be so quick to cast the first stone, Christ ate with and taught sinners, he didn't go only to the perfected.

You say, "(my) attitudes will need to answer to God". Yet they come out of love for my brother. Meanwhile, many here seem to be saying that obedience is not required. Will they have to answer to God for such a lesson? Or how about the inactive in faith, will they be held accountable for their inactivity?

My words may offend, but that does not make them any less true. If the truth offends them and they are "chased away" they will be held accountable, not me. My words, which call them to action and activity, are the same as calling them (back) to Christ.

You say, "I think we all need to watch better what we say". I say, we all need to watch what we don't say. If God was standing in front of these interactive members, would He be silent? Or would He call them back to obedience? As a priest I have the authority to act in His name; so I open my mouth.

I never claimed to be sinless. And I never called the inactive to perfection. I called them to repentance and the sacrament. Neither did I cast stones. I spoke the truth; it is God that wields the sword.

[Misshalfway]

I remain confident that it is my just duty to have said these things to my brothers and sisters in the Church. I have not cast anyone out. I have only warned them of their own lack of obedience to the covenants they made and "condemned" them to not receiving the blessings promised by God from His side. I believe such a warning is supported by scripture.

It seems to me that my detractors need to prove to me that scriptures support the opposite of what I am sharing. Namely, that broken covenants means nothing to God and that His promises to us are obtainable regardless of our obedience to our covenants.

I don't think anyone is saying that covenants don't mean anything. God will not be mocked. I've been chastised by God and I never want to experience that again. So, I support this position with a nice big cavat for tender mercies and grace.

I have recently spent some time on the outskirts of "mormon town". You see, life had thrown me some painful curveballs. Actually it felt more like a tornado and somehow my testimony ended up in a tree. My entire belief system was literally fragmented to bits and I was entirely disoriented. And this caused me to "wander" a bit in the wilderness. This wandering actually was the source of a lot of guilt as I was sure God would condemn me. But you know what? He didn't. He walked with me, led me, and gave me precious tutorials. And now as I am coming to terms and reconnecting with the truths I love, I would never trade my time in the wilderness. It is as precious to me as my time in more orthodox obedience.

So, what I am saying is that while I agree with your position, I think it needs a big giant dose of perspective. There is such a thing as being so straight you are crooked.

You ever watch "Steel Magnolia's"? You know how Annelle went from being a "jezabel" to being so "good" that she prayed when her panty hose got a run? Happy ending though. She didn't end up in either extreme. She figured it out and ended up in a nice wise balance. That balance? It's a pretty awesome place to worship and grow from.

[Bensalem]

Emotion is not a negative. Not having emotion is a true negative so no thanks on that suggestion.

I am so glad you havent cast anyone out. I am afraid that the church would be rather 'annoyed' if you had.

Do you actually understand what stewardship means? It would be helpful if you looked it up and did a bit of research on the subject.

You are not called to give warnings is my very strong guess. Since you are not called then it would behoove you to back off and repent of unjust dominion.

No one said broken covenants mean nothing to God. Nevertheless they are between GOD and the church member except in certain cases such as adultery and even then it is only to facilitate repentance which is between God and the church member in question. It is NOT between God, the church member and some random guy off the street.

You just gave me a warning and you called me to repentance. By my words, I have done the same. Are you allowed to, but I am not, or are we both allowed to?

Regarding your accusation of unjust dominion I would like to direct you to Paul in the epistles, who teaches to call a brother aside and reprove him and if he does not change to seek the counsel of an elder regarding the matter. I have done the same, albeit, electronically.

I don't mind being corrected, so long as the correction is supportable in the Word of God. In other words, please address the incorrectness of what I have said, not the offence you my feel by the words.

[Bensalem]

I don't think anyone is saying that covenants don't mean anything. God will not be mocked. I've been chastised by God and I never want to experience that again. So, I support this position with a nice big cavat for tender mercies and grace.

I have recently spent some time on the outskirts of "mormon town". You see, life had thrown me some painful curveballs. Actually it felt more like a tornado and somehow my testimony ended up in a tree. My entire belief system was literally fragmented to bits and I was entirely disoriented. And this caused me to "wander" a bit in the wilderness. This wandering actually was the source of a lot of guilt as I was sure God would condemn me. But you know what? He didn't. He walked with me, led me, and gave me precious tutorials. And now as I am coming to terms and reconnecting with the truths I love, I would never trade my time in the wilderness. It is as precious to me as my time in more orthodox obedience.

So, what I am saying is that while I agree with your position, I think it needs a big giant dose of perspective. There is such a thing as being so straight you are crooked.

You ever watch "Steel Magnolia's"? You know how Annelle went from being a "jezabel" to being so "good" that she prayed when her panty hose got a run? Happy ending though. She didn't end up in either extreme. She figured it out and ended up in a nice wise balance. That balance? It's a pretty awesome place to worship and grow from.

Thanks for sharing so tenderly. Great to have you back. It is clear you first condemned yourself, no doubt you repented, and God was there for you.

If my words shed light on His condemnation, perhaps it will start the process of self-evaluation and lead others to repentance. That is my goal.

I think the greater sin would be to portray to the inactive that there disobedience does not come without consequences.

[Misshalfway]

Thanks for sharing so tenderly. Great to have you back. It is clear you first condemned yourself, no doubt you repented, and God was there for you.

If my words shed light on His condemnation, perhaps it will start the process of self-evaluation and lead others to repentance. That is my goal.

I think the greater sin would be to portray to the inactive that there disobedience does not come without consequences.

I actually didn't repent and condemnation was not at all what I experienced. It's interesting that this is what you inferred from my comments....that I needed repentance.

What if I were to tell you that God himself led me out from amongst the church. What would you say to that? Do you think its possible that God would give someone an experience like that?

[Bensalem]

There is one specific item I am addressing, and that is the idea that it is better that someone who is not paying tithing/being 'inactive' stop coming to Church than to continue to go to Church and not pay tithing/be 'inactive'. Considering Christ wants even those who have not kept their covenants to the point of being excommunicated to be present at Church that seems at odds. If those who aren't keeping their covenants are better off not attending in their covenant non-keeping state than attending in their covenant non-keeping state it suggest there is either something really rather unique about tithing that doesn't apply to excommunicants in general, or Christ really should have stuck in a, "Don't keep them from coming but you really should advise them it's better that they don't come until they've repented."

You're saying, though I'm open to correction if such isn't what you meant, it is better to not pay tithing and not attend church than it is to not pay tithing and to attend church. Which is at odds, as described above, with Christ's desire that even excommunicants keep attending Church.

No, that's not what I am saying at all.

I am saying it is better to be a sinner outside of the Church, than a hypocrite inside the Church.

There are plenty of examples in scripture of Christ pointing out his disdain for hypocrisy, but in regards to Church inactivity I will highlight his teaching of the father who asks one son to go and work in fields. The son refuses, so he asks another son who agrees to go but does no work. Christ leaves us with the question, which son is more condemned?

I am answering that question. The more condemned is the son who made an agreement with his father. The first exercised his free will before making the promise. He at least was truthful. The second son was a hypocrite.