Big Brother Priesthood

[Anonymous]

I didn’t really think this could get much worse, but I was wrong. The stake President seems to be hell bent on not letting me get sealed in the temple. He told me he is the guardian of the temple and that even if I have a testimony, I need to offer a “statement of conviction” in order for him to not stop my sealing. I wrote him this email:

Hi President,

All of my frustrations and stress aside, I love my fiance with all my heart. I have worked my whole life to be worthy to go to the temple so that when I found a man like him I could marry him there. Although I did not have a great experience in the temple, I have a hope that one day I will have a strong testimony of it’s blessings. I was honest with you and have shared my strong testimony and my concerns. I have lived worthily and kept my relationship with my Father in heaven at the top of my priority list. Please understand that I want to sort through my feelings and really delve deep into this, but for now I have to go on the simple faith that I have and get everything I need to done so that I can enjoy my wedding day.

But apparently this wasn’t enough for him. This is some of what he said (too long to post all of it.)

Thank you for your testimony. I have never doubted your testimony. It has always been abiding. And, again, I am sorry that the comments and questions continue as they may seem pestering. New, just baptized members of the church may also have strong testimonies and may have the strongest desires to go to the temple, but we do not let them because they are not ready. The issue with you goes towards the depth of conviction of the heart regarding the temple. It is to have the testimony you have with the added faith and conviction to state that one intends to go to the temple on a regular basis with the eagerness to follow-through on the covenants made in the House of the Lord and the desire to learn more. Covenant making and keeping and repeating is paramount in the gospel and church of Jesus Christ. It is what separates us from everything else in the world because it recognizes the presence of priesthood in its fullness. It recognizes blessings, even mysteries being bestowed from on high, therefore, the presence and provision of continued revelation. Regarding the temple, it is to sincerely see, recognize, and yearn for it as the House of the Lord.

Simply, I am not hearing that from you. To repeat, you express and I feel of your abiding testimony. You love the Lord. You love your fiancée. You are getting married and you should. The question of: Are you prepared to make additional sacred covenants in God’s temple, is another thing.

Complicating your situation further, last night I was made aware that you may be talking about the temple very negatively with others. This may or may not be true, but it confuses me. If it is, why would you say this to others and something different to your fiancée and your priesthood leader?

I had to call and commit to going to the temple once a month. I quoted that Boyd K packer quote to him, so thanks for that! The second that I gave him a timeline he said, “Well, now I know of your abiding conviction and determination for the temple. Thank you so much for sharing your testimony with me!” He never, in any of our meetings asked me, gave me or required a timeline from me! And it turns out that my bishop has been calling my best friends into his office and grilling them to find out my deepest feelings on the temple. Excuse my language, but this is bullshit! I really rarely swear, but I feel it is appropriate in this situation. The covenants that I made in the temple-all except the garments, which I am seeing a therapist for per SP request-I ALREADY LIVE BY!!!! They all know that! Why would being sealed to my husband ever be a bad thing. I had such a strong testimony of the power of the priesthood, but my faith is severely damaged from this incident.

They want me to shut up and lay down and do whatever they tell me to do, and if I don’t they take whatever they can from me. That is really how I feel. I went in and was so honest with the Stake President and gave him sincere and heartfelt concerns and looked to him for inspired guidance. In return he has put me on a roller coaster, put undue stress on my family and my relationship with my fiance. And quite frankly my relationship with the church. I’m sorry if this is venting, frustrated or angry sounding. I know the intent of this is looking for ways to stay and build each other up.

I just feel like they have taken away all my outlets and this is all I have left. I don’t feel like these men should have this much control over my life. It doesn’t seem right to me.

[Anonymous]

Wow HSAB, I am so sorry.

Is it possible that the Bishop has dealt with others who have gone to the temple too soon and then had issues with the covenants or the church? Is it possible he is letting prior bad experiences color his interactions with you?

I can’t think of any justification for him calling in your friends to interrogate them about your feelings. That’s so far out of the norm of my experiences in the church that I don’t even know how to respond.

[Anonymous]

HSAB, I’m sorry you’re going through this. It’s not easy.

in some ways, the concept of lay ministry is part of the beauty of the church. it helps people develop their faith and reliance on god. it prevents us having a professional priesthood separate and distinct from the members. It’s also the reason that we don’t have a lot of consistency or expertise on the part of priesthood leaders to appropriately handle concerns like yours, or any of our faith issues.

I think it is an immutable fact, that being in the middle requires a high degree of discretion. We cannot and should not talk about our faith issues with true believing members: they won’t understand, because they’re not prepared to understand. As well, faith issues should not be shared with church leaders whose only job is to prevent our faith issues from spreading to others in their flock. Expressing our concerns about a doctrine or the temple is quickly interpreted as ‘questioning’, and that is the first and most significant step toward ‘apostasy’. Apostasy is as grave a concern to church leaders as incest and murder, according to the Church Handbook of Instructions, requiring a church court.

It is unusual for the SP to ask for your statement of conviction. It’s also very unusual, as m&G notes, for them to probe your friends. But I think it can be understood that if you have expressed doubts, or are questioning, they requiring a ‘statement of conviction’ may, in their mind, be the required step to confirm that you are not on the road to apostasy. You are on their radar scope, and will be for some time. The key thing to do now is remove yourself from that radar scope by a low profile, by keeping your comments to yourself, by venting here as needed, and by seeking to find the good in the church, temple, and people.

It’s too bad that all this comes at a time when you should be celebrating your love and joy of being married. Since the SP has now given you the official pass to go to the temple for your sealing, then I hope you can find the way to put this behind you, deal with the joys and happiness of your upcoming events, and take life one day at a time.

Our hopes, prayers, and love are all here behind you.

(((HSAB)))

[Anonymous]

I join with you in being surprised about their overall reaction…at least, at one time in my church-innocent period this kind of thing surprised me .

It doesn’t anymore.

The problem is that the church has a very strong self-protective culture, perhaps born out of the challenges it experienced early in its history. The other problem is that the lay ministry has a dual role — to try to balance the church interests to prevent apostasy and protect the church, while still trying to do what is best for the individual. They don’t get it right some of the time — particularly when their decisions have the potential to come back and hurt them personally in some way. In fact, on the really critical issues I’ve faced them on, the hammer tends to come down on the side of the individual, and in favor of the church more often than the other way around.

In this case, they knew you said some things that were negative on the temple, and may have felt it would be wrong for them as managers/leaders to let you into the temple knowing those things. The Bishop risks censure from the SP, the SP risks censure from the BP and the people above him, etcetera. I’m sure they are also covering themselves by getting “statement of conviction” to put in a file in case this comes up again. They checked the box….

That is why I try not to disclose my angst or doubt with church leaders — you never know how they will use it to protect themselves, or the church, and what sanctions they might place against you — that can actually be harmful to your well-being.

But I think you have learned something highly valuable — that you have the power to share as much as you feel is important about yourself in these interviews. Don’t lie about behavior, but recognize there are shades of doubt, shades of belief, and shades of knowledge. It rests with you individually to decide how much of these shades you share. You can also claim the right to worship and believe according to the dictates of your own conscience. And you only need to share what is minimally necessary in the interview.

So, in a few years, this experience’s impact may not be important, but what it has revealed about how much to share, and how much to keep for yourself in these interview — is highly valuable.

[Anonymous]

What comes to mind is that priesthood leaders are not to expound on or further interpret TR interview questions beyond asking exactly what is in the book. Any interpretation is between the individual and God. Why would he feel justified in asking for an additional committment beyond what is asked in the interview and in the temple?!?!? 😯

You are now an endowed member with a valid recommend, I can’t think of any reason a PR leader wouldn’t give full encouragement to go through with the temple sealing — It’s not like you can take back the endowment. Short of some sin that would justify disciplinary action there is nothing that should stand in the way at this point.

So sorry, best wishes to you.

[Anonymous]

HSAB–I am very sorry. I hope you know that you have many supporters here. It may not be much consolation right now, but there are many priesthood leaders who “get it” out there, and you may be working with one that doesn’t.

Wayfarer-On the apostasy thing, it’s interesting that although murder and adultery have very specific definitions, apostasy is open to interpretation. It’s not well-defined in the CHI. That’s problematic.

[Anonymous]

turinturambar wrote:

Wayfarer-On the apostasy thing, it’s interesting that although murder and adultery have very specific definitions, apostasy is open to interpretation. It’s not well-defined in the CHI. That’s problematic.

indeed. hence the church is all over the map on this.

you are one really insightful dude…

[Anonymous]

I wrote a long comment that got lost when the system timed out. Oh, well. The short version:

I understand the concern of a Stake President who is hearing from an over-zealous Bishop. I feel for your Stake President; I don’t have much sympathy for your Bishop.

Having said that, you are a temple worthy member who answered honestly the questions that are asked to grant attendance. Be meek and mild (and I can’t emphasize that enough), but don’t let anyone keep you from attending the temple you have qualified to attend by all objective measures. You answered in good conscience, and actually went above and beyond the minimum requirements in doing so. You received a temple recommend.

Again, be meek and mild. Turn the other cheek. Don’t rail against anyone. Don’t complain to friends “in real life”. Be supportive and sustaining and express gratitude for your Stake President’s concern. Continue to see the therapist.

Go to the temple.

[Anonymous]

ONE….do you live in the cache/Franklin Co. Area?

TWO…breath, relax. Listen to me. Take a breath, relax. And say very little to your bish or SP.

Time is your best ally…let it work for you.

They WILL use pressure…but…if that does not work…They will come back to love. TIME.

I know.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2

[Anonymous]

Your SP and Bishop are exercising unrighteous dominion. You need to chill them out.

Grin and bear it through the week to get what you need, and as others have said, don’t share your negative feelings with others who they will hear it from.

Other than that, I don’t have any good advice for you, but I sympathize for your situation.

And after this, if you need someone to come in and verbally beat them up with a potent blend of candid observation, irreverance and sarcasm, I’m here for you. That is one of my gifts of the spirit.

[Anonymous]

I don’t know how to say what I have to say and stay within the confines of this forum, so I guess I’ll just say what I have to say and let the admins sort out if it is acceptable.

I see what the stake president and bishop are doing to you as abusive and demeaning. They have no business going around collecting gossip on you among other things. Why are you participating in allowing them to do this to you?

This should be a wake-up call. If the church provides a spiritual home for people and is helpful to them great. However, you shouldn’t allow it to be hurtful to you – I see it causing real damage in your case and I think you should take a step back and re-evaluate things. (This doesn’t mean you can’t jump through some hoops and avoid some embarrassing situations in the mean time.)

[Anonymous]

bc_pg wrote:

I see what the stake president and bishop are doing to you as abusive and demeaning. They have no business going around collecting gossip on you among other things. Why are you participating in allowing them to do this to you?

To turn that thought into a solution-oriented recommendation, perhaps it’s an opportunity to tell those leaders how this has affected you HSAB. You could tell them that you feel like it crosses a line to bring in other people to interview and collect gossip about you, and that the whole experience makes you feel like their efforts are working against you feeling like the church is a blessing in your life.

They should know better. But the ideal world often isn’t the real world. People don’t know to do things different if we don’t tell them what their actions are doing.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

Perhaps it’s an opportunity to tell those leaders how this has affected you HSAB.

Thank you for framing it that way. I guess from my standpoint I view this as harmful, emotional abuse and I can’t implicitly condone it by not saying anything.

Here are a few links with different perspectives I found that could be helpful:

http://voices.yahoo.com/5-steps-confront-emotional-abuser-574403.html

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_do_you_get_an_abuser_to_recognize_the_abuse_for_what_it_is

http://www.pandys.org/articles/confrontingyourabuser.html

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Should_you_confront_your_abuser

I think something needs to change or you are going to have some long term negative consequences to your self-esteem and well-being.

[Anonymous]

In the short term I guess I disagree with Brian on this one — HSAB’s objective is to get married in the temple. Our church intertwines obedience to authority with their interactions with members frequently. They often require expressions of humility to “prove” that one is humble when they feel there has been outside-the-norm behavior from the members. I’ve seen it in disciplinary councils, here on this forum when people want access to certain ordinances, and its HSAB’s perception that they just want her to lie down and do what they say — confirming this perception of mine is alive and well in the minds of these leaders.

To express disapproval, or share negative emotional impact as Brian suggests could risk triggering their obedience/overt humlity requirements and make this messier.

I say give them minimal information, do what they want, and get your objective — married in the temple. Keep any commitments you made to get there…but remember, after the sealing is recorded it is harder to take that away from you so long as you are obeying the basic commandments etcetera.

At some point, when or IF there is an opportunity, share the impact with the Bishop who seems to be the source of the problem. But don’t focus on it or let it make you miserable.

As I said earlier, I think this only confirms that priesthood leaders are to be interacted-with carefully because of their power to counsel and withhold priviledges and also punish…a rather conflicted mix of powers really.

[Anonymous]

I am with SD on this — You can think of this as abuse, and in the context of HSAB getting married it certainly is, but that context is soon over. It doesn’t excuse or condone the behavior, but it at least puts a bounds on it.

From one of the articles bc_pg referenced, it noted the reasons to confront an abuser:

Reasons to confront:

1) Validation of memories

2) Make those you confront feel the impact of what was done to you

3) See your abuser suffer

4) Revenge seeking

5) To seek payment for therapy

6) To try to establish a real relationship

None of these are valid with respect to the Stake President. In fact, confronting the Stake President essentially will force them into a position to take their toys (viz., Temple Recommend) and go home. They can do that. They will do that. And their motive to protect the flock from threat is greater than their mission to care for the individual. Sorry to say that, but it’s true.

Frankly, we need to detach the emotions from these situations, and realize that the church cannot abuse beyond it’s scope. Jesus, in facing the fact that both the Romans and the Jews had control over the people, suggested rendering to ceasar the things that are ceasars, and to placate the jews so that they did not have control over the believers and followers of the Way. This accommodation is yucky, to say the least, but perhaps necessary. Here’s why:

1. It’s a human church — forgiveness of humans is part of Christ’s model: if any man compel you to go a mile, go with him twain….

2. The church is not asking HSAB to do anything evil here.

3. At the moment, emotions are high, and we’re in the last week before the wedding. one cannot effectively negotiate when one is under a deadline and emotions are involved.

So, frankly, one does what is needed to get by in this circumstance. No sense in sweating the details. What comes after is entirely another matter, because at that point, the Church doesn’t have any leverage.

So for the sake of the wedding, one moves forward. it’s only common sense.

[Author]

Posts