Approached in Church

[Anonymous]

This last Sunday after sacrament meeting a guy I know came to me and basically said “I’m wondering if you can help me, I was confused about some things in section 132 so I went to the internet to search it out – and came across a whole lot of stuff that really has me messed up…”

After I picked my jaw up off the floor I started to wonder if I was being set up somehow. I have no idea how far the “whispers” reached through the ward over 6 years ago when I was having the hardest time, but apparently this brother heard something of it and thought to approach me. I have never discussed anything openly enough that he would have known from me. He asked if I was familiar with much of the stuff out there – I told him I had read enough that I was confident nothing could surprise me. He said “well if you’re still here it must be right” I offered to talk with him anytime, there wasn’t time to get into any depth.

I want him to lead with what is bothering him, I certainly don’t want to assume anything or introduce even more challenges. I sent a short note yesterday just to say I am willing and available, so many other members really don’t want to talk about any issues. I’ll let you know how it goes.

[Anonymous]

Bill Smith on BCC did an excellent 12 part essay on this topic – it’s incredibly thorough and very well researched. But don’t expect to feel better about section 132 after it. The whole thing is an appalling exercise in unrighteous dominion and self-justification IMO. I have nothing good to say about it.

[Anonymous]

I agree with Ang about Section 132.

If it was me, I might say simply:

Quote:

We all agree not everything prophets and apostles say is perfect – that they are human and make mistakes, too. President Uchtdorf said that explicitly in our last General Conference, and the Church’s latest addition to the Gospel Topics section online says that quite clearly about the Priesthood ban. (That might be a good way to share it with him, if he hasn’t heard about it.) Honestly, I view Section 132 as something that was compiled after-the-fact to explain and justify polygamy, and, just like The Song of Solomon in the Old Testament, I simply choose to ignore it when I study the D&C. Polygamy isn’t part of our church now, so I chalk it up to something that happened in the past that I will understand better, one way or another, when I die. Honestly, I know quite a few members who approach it that way.

I would say it while smiling, but I might say it like that.

Also, I doubt this is a set-up in any way. Most Mormons I know just don’t operate that way.

[Anonymous]

Thanks guys, that is good information to have – from both.

I did send a note with a link to PeggyFS’s Tribune article on the new LDS.org page on racism. I pointed out a quote from Bushman about leaders making mistakes and got a positive response.

I didn’t mean a serious set-up, this guy is something of a practical joker, it is very hard to translate over text — and in the Elders Q presidency. Right after this we had a lesson on keeping your testimonies strong where two of the presidency voiced concern for the strength of every testimony in the quorum.

[Author]

Posts