Honesty with disbelief

[Anonymous]

I went to the temple this past week, and during the endowment session (without giving too much detail), there is a section towards the end where you literally must covenant to concecrate everything and your all to “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints”. For the most part, I’ve been alright thinking “I’m doing this for proxy, and the dead can either accept or reject this.” But when thinking over the wording, it didn’t feel like I was doing it “for and in behalf” of anyone, and when we were all asked to say “yes” in agreement, I held silent. I am more than willing to pledge everything and my all to God, but covenanting to give all that I am to the Church (which I don’t feel is the same) seemed… not quite right.

I am also a Sunday school teacher, and with certain gospel principles I don’t feel like I’m in agreement. What I was wondering is, what do you do personally when asked to say or do something you feel you can’t do honestly? I’d hate to make a scene, and I still believe many parts of the church are good, and even true. What do you do?

[Anonymous]

I try to stay honest, but try to figure out what things mean. While figuring it out, I don’t make a scene, but keep my journey between me and god. Others don’t need to know what I disbelieve, most of the time.

The things that jump out to you in the temple or during church are things you can ponder and meditate on privately until you come to work it out. I have not found things at church or the temple that I feel I cannot believe, and still stay LDS. There is room to vary in our beliefs even if there are things we are asked to do to show comformity.

What does it really mean to you to consecrate everything to the church and the Lord? What are they asking? Despite what they are saying with words, what is the temple teaching?

[Anonymous]

I too stay silent during those parts. I am still working on how to be honest yet respectful of others

[Anonymous]

I usually follow along because I figure it’s not a literal legal contract that I make in religious covenants. During the law of consecration covenant I don’t think there is any way the Lord would expect me to give everything I own, now and in the future, to the church. Just like I don’t think the penalties were literal. Similar to what others said, since it’s symbolic to me I get to define what it means for me.

[Anonymous]

I agree with you roadrunner

If it is a hypothetical thing they are asking, my answer is hypothetical.

I could consecrate everything to the church under the right circumstances. Times like that in the temple help me reflect on the conditions I would make that covenant under.

It’s like wondering if I would follow them in a handcart out west. I would like to think I might. But I dunno for sure. I also think of things that would be ok if I refused. And why.

I want to know what God wants of me.

[Anonymous]

I’m on the bandwagon of each of us figuring out what it means for us as individuals. And, it is all symbolic. I don’t go to the temple often because I don’t like to, but I will say the particular part you mention does rub me a bit wrong and I haven’t taken the time to figure out what it means to me yet. I am reminded of Pres. Uchtdorf’s statement about none of us really doing all we can do. I believe this is where grace comes in to the picture – surely God must know that none of us are really going to give all that we have.

[Anonymous]

If you want a way to parse that statement in a way that might allow you actually to say, “Yes,” look at it this way.

There are TWO things involved:

1) Building up the kingdom of God on Earth;

2) Establsihing Zion.

I would give everything to accomplish those two things – but I would not give up everything for actions or programs that I believe would not accomplish both of them. Thus, I can answer, “Yes,” with complete honesty and integrity, even if I might not give everything to the Church at this particular moment, given how I think it might be used.

[Anonymous]

I think you can hold silent or you can do what Ray suggests. Ray is right, although some of the wording in the temple still bothers me, and parsing it doesn’t necessarily mean you are getting to the intent. For example, the hearken covenant is prima facie completely sexist and unequal. It’s ludicrous that I as a woman have to covenant to hearken unto my husband when he doesn’t have to hearken to me. The statement says “as he heakens unto the Father,” which basically renders it meaningless. How do I know if he’s hearkening to the Father? Well, I decide that. So, IOW, I have to hearken to him when I think he’s right. Well, duh. If I think he’s right, is it hearkening to him or hearkening to my idea of what’s right? And yet, there it is, inserted in there to keep us unequal, to keep me in my place, and swell the men’s fragile masculine pride once again. It’s pathetic.

[Anonymous]

hawkgrrrl wrote:

And yet, there it is, inserted in there to keep us unequal, to keep me in my place, and swell the men’s fragile masculine pride once again. It’s pathetic.

I somehow doubt it is all that effective in “keeping you in your place.” Well I take that back. I suspect you take your rightful place (equal with your spouse). So reguardless of what is said in the temple, you take your rightful and equal place.

I just got back from my 3+ week “vacation” (in quotes as I was done about last Tuesday after spending more than a week with my in-laws – I was ready to get home a week ago if I had my way). I need the rest of this week to unpack/cleanup and water my lawn (my wife accidentally turned off the sprinkler and about 1/2 of my lawn is brown/yellow). I will then give myself a date to throw a draft up to you and/or the W&T bloggers to give it a work-over.

[Anonymous]

I think back to my first time going through the temple. I wish I had had the moral fortitude to stand up and say, “I’m sorry, I cannot do this. How do I leave?”

If I could start a movement, that would be my cause … To stand for truth at all times and in all places.

[Author]

Posts