Don’t EVER do this!!!!

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

There is moderation to be found somewhere in the middle. My sweet spot may differ from your sweet spot and there may be awkwardness about how we came to slightly different answers.

I agree.

I also think this is a safe place to have the discussions. I certainly don’t think I’m right. But it helps for us to talk about it with each other, makes it easier to know how to approach others at church too.

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

So…what is your point, nibbler? You think the church winks as they say “we don’t believe in blind obedience”?

No. I think any point I would want to make has been made better by others but that won’t deter me from saying something stupid…

I don’t think the church wants blind obedience out of her members, I believe people bring blind obedience to the church. I don’t know where to begin to explain myself so I’ll toss a lot of words on the screen.

“Blind obedience” can be pejorative, it’s almost never viewed as a positive thing. To rid my point of the baggage that comes along with “blind obedience” I’ll restate my point using a different subject. I don’t think the church wants the members to cuss, I believe people bring cussing to church.

Does that make sense? There are things that are embedded in the human experience, blind obedience, cussing, laziness, drinking tea, etc. If you’re going to have a church, true or false, that church is going to be made up of people that exhibit the full spectrum of human nature.

Blind obedience doesn’t have to be a bad thing, it’s just another place for people to land on their journey. They can either move on from blind obedience or they can remain, it makes no difference. In fact it’s so subjective that “blind obedience” may only exist in the minds of external observers. For example, ask someone you think is obeying blindly whether they believe they are obeying blindly. I bet the answer is, “No.” Who then is correct and does it matter?

Like I said, smattering of random words. I don’t know what I’m talking about.

If “become agents unto themselves” or “become like god” is ever uttered as the ultimate goal I think that implies that any form of blind obedience will eventually need to be replaced by something else. Once you’re top dog there’s no one left to blindly obey… well maybe tradition. I’m straying again.

At church there are people at all stages of the journey toward godhood. Just because someone is a BP, SP, GA, or speaks loud and authoritatively doesn’t mean they’ve transcended human nature or have the answers. Much of this life is about the blind leading the blind, it’s what makes life exciting. So if a leader… heck, make it a prophet, preaches something that can be construed as blind obedience I take it to mean that whatever they said is how they think it works because that’s where they are on their path.

Besides, I’d expect there to be lots of belief policing when the worldview is that there is One True Church. The belief is that you pray until you get my answer because there’s a corresponding belief that there is only one answer.

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

UOM feels they don’t want a TR.

Bishop will, with all the love they can try to have from their perspective of thinking they should say something to challenge the person to progress closer to god and take full advantage of all blessings, invites the UOM to continue to pray and study and meet with him regularly for the next several months to talk about it.

Do the two disagree? Sure.

Does the bishop get direct and say “You are out of compliance. You must obey because as your leader, I say you must. Your own personal revelation is wrong.”

It’s easier when the UOM is in a position where they don’t want something, a BP can’t force someone to hold a TR. It’s a little more difficult when a member (orthodox or whatever) want’s something that the BP holds the keys to doling out but is reluctant to do so.

E.g. you can’t baptize your son because your personal revelation that the first vision didn’t happen is wrong.

House rules I suppose.

There’s the TR interview question, “Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?”

I’ve heard anecdotal stories of people getting their TR pulled by the SP because they supported gay marriage… disclaimer, it was only anecdotal and one side of the story at that. House rules I suppose.

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

ask someone you think is obeying blindly whether they believe they are obeying blindly. I bet the answer is, “No.” Who then is correct and does it matter?

I really like this…great thought! I agree, it is good to recognize this.

I find this is part of church for me…trying to have these frustrating conversations with others because it helps clarify the thoughts i have as I do so. It’s not about who is “right” and can win the argument, as much as can you have the dialogue and come away feeling better for it.

Quote:

you can’t baptize your son because your personal revelation that the first vision didn’t happen is wrong.

Agreed. This is when it becomes real. This is when the skills to have the discussions with the bishop are needed. It is the bishop’s job as judge in Israel to try to do what he thinks is right…doesn’t mean it is. I was in the bishopric assisting the bishop handle issues…and we were wrong. Having seen it from that side, thinking as a bishopric we were trying to do what seemed right but ended up being wrong, I wish I could go back to those families and have a redo… I bet this happens a lot in the church as leaders try their best, but are sometimes right and sometimes not.

So…we deal with authority figures that are wrong sometimes, but think they are right. That is part of navigating in the church. At some point a decision is made and we try to move to action instead of debate endlessly. Often…it frankly don’t matter.

How about we obey to love each other…you do it because of blind obedience if you want, I’ll do it because it is what God wants me to do…the principle behind it is the same, whatever individuals find the need to do it.

Stepping back like that, it frankly doesn’t matter if I have a TR or not. Bishop can yank it from me if he feels he needs to. I can fight it with the authorities if I feel I need to. We make choices on handling stuff. Can we walk away from how we handle it and feel good about ourselves?

Quote:

House rules I suppose.

…[snip]…

I’ve heard anecdotal stories of people getting their TR pulled by the SP because they supported gay marriage… disclaimer, it was only anecdotal and one side of the story at that. House rules I suppose.

Yes, it comes with being part of an organization, there are rules and there should be order.

If the SP yanked a TR because of support for gay marriage (by the way, I support gay marriage and I have a TR…leadership roulette makes it complicated!), it depends on the circumstance and what “support” meant, but I don’t believe the church would agree that I can’t have my own opinion about gay marriage and hold a TR. It is more around if “support” was actively doing something against the church. Or it means the SP was wrong, and should be fought so they don’t get away with doing wrong things. That’s pretty idealistic, but I believe in those principles. We fight for the ability to have our own testimonies. It is easy to have blind obedience, but that doesn’t make it right or the way the church ultimately wants it. It usually comes down to the details of how a person handles it, and how their actions are seen.

Church leaders aren’t complete idiots. They are good folks with good hearts trying to do the best they can.

This is good discussion from everyone.

It just hasn’t changed my prior post:

Heber13 wrote:

SilentDawning wrote:

The church would say you just do whatever the leaders ask — obedience. There is no model for resolving conflict in the Lord’s kinggom when that conflict is with the inspired leaders.

I disagree with this. I heard things in the last general conference contrary to those statements.

[Anonymous]

Thank you Heber for your thoughtful reply and to everyone else who is contributing on this thread. The obedience subject is such a sore spot to me that now when I hear the word I immediately don’t want to obey. (childish, I know) I want to hear a message that inspires me to obey not demands or strongly suggests that I obey.

Nibbler had a good point about the TR aspect, though. Since one of the questions is “do you sustain your leaders?”, you could technically have your TR taken away if you do not meet the Bishop or SP’s definition of sustaining your leaders. There’s a chance that one of my children could get married in the temple in the near future. If I say I don’t believe in polygamy, even eternal polygamy and I don’t think it came from God, that Joseph Smith made a huge mistake, I could possibly be denied the chance to see my child get married. I really don’t think my bishop is the type of person who would do that but who knows?

Of course, I can just be authentic to myself and just take the beautiful parts of church and leave the rest, but when the church holds things over your head such as seeing your children’s marriage ceremony, then I start to feel trapped and very resentful. I believe this type of control that leaders can have over your life is what makes some people have hard judgements against the church organization.

[Anonymous]

kate5 wrote:

Since one of the questions is “do you sustain your leaders?”, you could technically have your TR taken away if you do not meet the Bishop or SP’s definition of sustaining your leaders. There’s a chance that one of my children could get married in the temple in the near future. If I say I don’t believe in polygamy, even eternal polygamy and I don’t think it came from God, that Joseph Smith made a huge mistake, I could possibly be denied the chance to see my child get married. I really don’t think my bishop is the type of person who would do that but who knows?

This has been discussed in the temple recommend section of this forum before, but I just point out that the TR questions are yes/no questions. There’s a whole host of pretty compelling reasons to be able to honestly and authentically say “yes” to these questions while simultaneously personally having more liberal viewpoints. We are under no obligation to explain ourselves during the interview. If it’s important to you to maintain your TR, simply say yes (honestly) and move on. Your “yes” may be different than the “yes” of the one conducting the interview, but we are not required to think identically. The church needs diversity! (But this is a different discussion altogether).

[Anonymous]

kate5 wrote:

Thank you Heber for your thoughtful reply and to everyone else who is contributing on this thread. The obedience subject is such a sore spot to me that now when I hear the word I immediately don’t want to obey. (childish, I know) I want to hear a message that inspires me to obey not demands or strongly suggests that I obey.

Nibbler had a good point about the TR aspect, though. Since one of the questions is “do you sustain your leaders?”, you could technically have your TR taken away if you do not meet the Bishop or SP’s definition of sustaining your leaders. There’s a chance that one of my children could get married in the temple in the near future. If I say I don’t believe in polygamy, even eternal polygamy and I don’t think it came from God, that Joseph Smith made a huge mistake, I could possibly be denied the chance to see my child get married. I really don’t think my bishop is the type of person who would do that but who knows?

Of course, I can just be authentic to myself and just take the beautiful parts of church and leave the rest, but when the church holds things over your head such as seeing your children’s marriage ceremony, then I start to feel trapped and very resentful. I believe this type of control that leaders can have over your life is what makes some people have hard judgements against the church organization.

I don’t believe in polygamy. Not everybody knows that because I don’t wear a lapel pin that says so. If the subject comes up and I feel I’m in safe company I’ll say so. In “public” I make a joke of it. (“One wife is plenty for me!”) My SP does know I don’t believe in polygamy. I’m not sure he does either, he doesn’t defend it. My last TR interview was a few months ago. I don’t remember there being a question about polygamy. I also don’t remember there being questions about the Book of Mormon, prayer, FHE, or lots of other things. The sustaining question starts with “Do you…?” It’s asking you, not your bishop. It’s not about what he believes it’s about what you believe. Other than your yes or no answer (obviously it needs to be yes to get a TR) he has no way of knowing if you sustain him (or anyone else) or not – and he’s not allowed to ask further. Polygamy and sustaining church leaders are completely separate issues and one is a TR question the other is not. Seriously, the best policy in a TR interview is to answer only yes or no as appropriate – elaboration is neither necessary nor desirable.

I have said this in public before (not from the pulpit though): The church is very much like Satan – it only has as much control over you as you let it have.

And FWIW, obedience is not my favorite topic either. I love Pres. Uchtdorf’s words:

Quote:

If grace is a gift of God, why then is obedience to God’s commandments so important? Why bother with God’s commandments—or repentance, for that matter? Why not just admit we’re sinful and let God save us?

Or, to put the question in Paul’s words, “Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?” Paul’s answer is simple and clear: “God forbid.”27

Brothers and sisters, we obey the commandments of God—out of love for Him!

ETA: Tom and I were typing at the same time

[Anonymous]

kate5 wrote:

Of course, I can just be authentic to myself and just take the beautiful parts of church and leave the rest, but when the church holds things over your head such as seeing your children’s marriage ceremony, then I start to feel trapped and very resentful.

Well said, Kate. Thanks for sharing. I agree, those are the kinds of things that make these things real…they really impact us and our families on how we navigate through it. I certainly don’t dismiss those challenges in any way.

…also…I don’t think it is childish to react to that.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

I don’t believe in polygamy. Not everybody knows that because I don’t wear a lapel pin that says so. If the subject comes up and I feel I’m in safe company I’ll say so. In “public” I make a joke of it. (“One wife is plenty for me!”) My SP does know I don’t believe in polygamy. I’m not sure he does either, he doesn’t defend it. My last TR interview was a few months ago. I don’t remember there being a question about polygamy. I also don’t remember there being questions about the Book of Mormon, prayer, FHE, or lots of other things. The sustaining question starts with “Do you…?” It’s asking you, not your bishop. It’s not about what he believes it’s about what you believe. Other than your yes or no answer (obviously it needs to be yes to get a TR) he has no way of knowing if you sustain him (or anyone else) or not – and he’s not allowed to ask further. Polygamy and sustaining church leaders are completely separate issues and one is a TR question the other is not. Seriously, the best policy in a TR interview is to answer only yes or no as appropriate – elaboration is neither necessary nor desirable.

If I don’t believe in polygamy though then aren’t I not sustaining Joseph Smith as a prophet? I don’t believe in that the LGTB children policy was revelation but Russell Nelson said that it was. Does that mean I don’t sustain him? I’ll be honest, when I see quotes from Harold B. Lee that I have to treat their words as if coming from God himself, I don’t believe that either. So do I really sustain my leaders? I’m being honest hopefully it’s not coming off as snarky. I don’t know what sustaining really means. I respect them in that I really believe they are trying to do their best. (Joseph Smith I’m not so sure. My opinion of him is pretty low right now) I hate the thought of lying in an interview but I also hate the though of not seeing my kid get married, if it ends up happening.

I

Quote:

have said this in public before (not from the pulpit though): The church is very much like Satan – it only has as much control over you as you let it have.

That is a great thought. I’m going to have to remember this when I start letting myself get stressed over it. I also love the Uchtdorf quote, listening to his talks is what gets me through much of the time.

Thanks Doubting Tom and Dark Jedi for your TR interview advice. It is causing me a lot of anxiety right now. I felt like I was already teetering on the edge of dishonesty during my last interview but I have been feeling even worse lately about answering the sustaining and believing question honestly.

[Anonymous]

kate5 wrote:

It is causing me a lot of anxiety right now.

I do think this can get tricky as we wrestle with ourselves about how to be honest. The good thing is that you know the questions they’ll ask, so you can work through it ahead of time.

My short and direct answer for you is that none of the questions that relate to sustaining our leaders mean you must agree with everything they ever said.

I can sustain them, and also disagree with the church’s current stance on gay marriage, and I have a TR and have answered as I feel it is honestly answering what is being asked.

But…it takes some reflection and some prayer to think through it so you feel at peace with how you will answer it. But it can be done…honestly and without guile. It all depends on how you view it and come to peace with it. Sometimes that takes time, and so we can work well ahead of the interviews needed to prepare for it.

[Anonymous]

kate5 wrote:

If I don’t believe in polygamy though then aren’t I not sustaining Joseph Smith as a prophet? I don’t believe in that the LGTB children policy was revelation but Russell Nelson said that it was. Does that mean I don’t sustain him? I’ll be honest, when I see quotes from Harold B. Lee that I have to treat their words as if coming from God himself, I don’t believe that either. So do I really sustain my leaders? I’m being honest hopefully it’s not coming off as snarky. I don’t know what sustaining really means. I respect them in that I really believe they are trying to do their best. (Joseph Smith I’m not so sure. My opinion of him is pretty low right now) I hate the thought of lying in an interview but I also hate the though of not seeing my kid get married, if it ends up happening.

IMO, no, not believing in polygamy or not agreeing with the gay policy has nothing to do with sustaining. Here’s an oldie but a goodie (I struggled with this too):

http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=4538&p=61635#p61635” class=”bbcode_url”>http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=4538&p=61635#p61635

(Note that my opinion of TSM has changed considerably since then.)

Also, you’ve read the TR question threads here? http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=6117” class=”bbcode_url”>http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=6117

[Anonymous]

DarkJedi wrote:

Brothers and sisters, we obey the commandments of God—out of love for Him!

This is one thing that I really wish was true of my experience with the church. I really feel that the church culture was that we were following all of these steps as requirements to earn God’s love/favor/blessings.

This is at odds with the concept of having an inalienable father son relationship with my God. That He will love me and do what is best for me no matter what I do. And that I can choose to obey out of love for Him – knowing that my position with Him was always secure and never hung in the balance.

I do believe that the church teaches grace here and there but it has been my experience that you need to know where to look for it… and you need to get better at ignoring all the stuff that says you must earn your way into heaven.

[Anonymous]

kate5 wrote:

Of course, I can just be authentic to myself and just take the beautiful parts of church and leave the rest, but when the church holds things over your head such as seeing your children’s marriage ceremony, then I start to feel trapped and very resentful. I believe this type of control that leaders can have over your life is what makes some people have hard judgements against the church organization.

Disclaimer. I’m not correcting, I’m digging.

I’m a convert so none of my family was present during my marriage ceremony. I didn’t really see it as the church holding my marriage ceremony hostage from my family. It was more an unfortunate condition created by the rules we’ve put in place with respect to the temple. That doesn’t minimize the impact in any way but it’s the sort of thing that happens when we put the rules before people. So less holding hostage and more “I’m sorry, my hands are tied.”

Edit: but the hands being tied is more of a mental barrier than something that can’t be changed.

[Anonymous]

kate5 wrote:

So do I really sustain my leaders?

Here’s a thread with more discussion. Question 4: Sustaining LDS Leadership

My short version is that sustain means: they aren’t good enough to be a prophet, but with my help…

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

DarkJedi wrote:

Brothers and sisters, we obey the commandments of God—out of love for Him!

This is one thing that I really wish was true of my experience with the church. I really feel that the church culture was that we were following all of these steps as requirements to earn God’s love/favor/blessings.

This is at odds with the concept of having an inalienable father son relationship with my God. That He will love me and do what is best for me no matter what I do. And that I can choose to obey out of love for Him – knowing that my position with Him was always secure and never hung in the balance.

I do believe that the church teaches grace here and there but it has been my experience that you need to know where to look for it… and you need to get better at ignoring all the stuff that says you must earn your way into heaven.

I totes agree Roy. I think maybe what DFU was really trying to say is that we should obey because we love God, not out of fear or because we’ll get a reward, or whatever. I think he’s expressing the ideal, and I do think some members get it. Nevertheless, you are right – there are far more Pharisees than there are those who do get it.

[Author]

Posts