- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Dear Brethren: I’m writing this because I have two huge concerns. I love you guys. I have faith in the Book of Mormon and all the scriptures. I’m 38 years old, returned missionary, and faithful member of the church. I sustain Thomas S. Monson as prophet, seer, and revelator, as well as the other general authorities. I know you guys do have huge burdens and I pray the Lord will bless all of you in your efforts to serve Him. I know the leaders in my ward and stake are called of God. I have faith Joseph Smith was a prophet.
Number One: I’m completely against the new policy that states children cannot be baptized living with gay parents, unless they turn 18 or they live in non-gay household. I understand the doctrine that homosexual acts are against God and all that. I accept the policy of not allowing gay marriage. That I accept. But I this new policy makes no sense to me. It goes against children being responsible for their parents. Why should they be punished for their parents sins? Why is this happening?
Number Two: Why wasn’t members encouraged to deeply study church history as well scripture study? What I mean is, why weren’t members of the church originally encouraged to study study church history in depth? Yes, I agree it some of the things you would learn might be a lot different from what I might have been taught in Sunday school and some of the things can be too negative against the prophets, but it would have been great to have that option then. I love that essays are now available on LDS.org that discuss those things. I think that’s a move in the right direction. Why didn’t this happen much sooner? So many members of the church wouldn’t have resigned.
Number Three: I realize milk comes before meat in the gospel and in the church, but when can we be taught meat as well? Joseph Smith and Brigham Young in old publications taught rich meat in the gospel as well. Are we just supposed to study deeper doctrine are our own and keep it to ourselves? What are we supposed to do there?
Number Four: What do we do when we come to the conclusion that the prophets might be teaching incorrect doctrine? Just be quiet about it and accept it without question? Here’s a quote from Brigham Young:
I will say a few words in regard to your belief in being led, guided, and directed by one man. Brother Jackman has said that our enemies hate the fact of our being led by one man. Thousands of times my soul has been lifted to God the Father, in the name of Jesus, to make that verily true in every sense of the word, that we may be led by the man Jesus Christ, through Joseph Smith the Prophet. You may inquire how we are to know that we are so led. I refer you to the exhortation you have heard so frequently from me. Do not be deceived, any of you; if you are deceived, it is because you deceive yourselves. You may know whether you are led right or wrong, as well as you know the way home; for every principle God has revealed carries its own convictions of its truth to the human mind, and there is no calling of God to man on earth but what brings with it the evidences of its authenticity….
What a pity it would be if we were led by one man to utter destruction! Are you afraid of this? I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by Him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken that influence they could give to their leaders, did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way. Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not. This has been my exhortation continually.9
What do I do then, if the Lord actually does tell me the brethren are wrong? What do I do then? There’s a time when prophets and apostles of this church were testifying of black males being denied the priesthood because they less valiant in the spirit world. And eventually sometime after black males were finally allowed to have the priesthood, that teaching was considered wrong. What’s up with that? How can trust the prophets on any issues when I learned even they can be wrong about doctrine?
Look, I’m sorry if I came across contentious. That was not my intention. I’m just trying to gain some perspective to help me feel at peace, feel the Holy Spirit. Please, whatever you do, don’t tell me the usual that the Lord will never allow His prophets to lead the people astray when I’ve seen the opposite at times. And please, don’t tell me I just need to have more faith that the prophets leading the church the way he wants it when it may not be the change.
And again I’m sorry for coming across contentious. Many times I feel the Spirit from you messages, so I know you all have a heavy burden to carry. I look forward to reading your response.
Sincerely,
Dennis Strack
Well done. The only thought that came to my mind is when you mention the essays. They still have given almost no attention at all to those. I hope this is received well. I suspect it will be sent back to your SP though. I assume they are about to get a ton of mail this week and next.
Do keep us posted.
Your letter is good and articulates your thoughts well, I think. Not to rain on your parade, but do know it’s unlikely any member of the Q15 or Seventy will actually read it, it is most likely to be forwarded back to your stake president who may be asked to address your concerns, and he may forward it to your bishop.
Even with the fact that it might be just forwarded to your stake president, it might still be the thing to do and will make a statement – both to church headquarters when the post office starts using an 18-wheeler to deliver the mail, and if your stake president gets many of these. If he talks to you, remind him what one of my bishops said on another issue, “For every one that brings an issue to me, I know there are 10 more suffering but not willing to talk about it.” LookingHard wrote:Even with the fact that it might be just forwarded to your stake president, it might still be the thing to do and will make a statement – both to church headquarters when the post office starts using an 18-wheeler to deliver the mail, and if your stake president gets many of these. If he talks to you, remind him what one of my bishops said on another issue, “For every one that brings an issue to me, I know there are 10 more suffering but not willing to talk about it.”
Yes, I’m definitely not saying it shouldn’t be written or sent or that others (even many others) shouldn’t. I’m just pointing out that they’re likely to be read only by secretaries and forwarded back. That does not mean that the secretaries don’t say to the leaders “we got hundreds of letters about this this week.”
I personally would do 1 of the following: 1) not send the letter. Sometimes a letter can be cathartic to write but not to send. My extended family is full of examples where a letter was sent and a family relationship died.
2) send the letter but focus on just one issue. I imagine that this would increase the chance of your letter being taken seriously. I do not imagine that any GA has good answers for why our church history was so whitewashed for so long, or why generations of prophets were wrong on the priesthood ban, or what do when you suspect that current leaders may be teaching something wrong today. Even if they did have some answers to these questions I doubt that they would be willing to put them in writing for fear of being quoted in the next NYT or SLT article. If you are actually hoping for an answer – even if just from your SP or Bishop – I would focus on one issue.
I personally try hard to keep my conversations with church leaders vague and hopeful. I have hope and faith in things that are so beautiful that I want for them to be true. I fear that getting into too many specifics will devolve into them wanting to fix my concerns. I am confident that there are no easy fixes for my concerns and I do not want to be labeled as obstinate or recalcitrant (the scriptures might describe this condition as being hard hearted such that I can no longer feel the words of the spirit).
I am non-confrontational by nature and I am trying to keep doors open for me to perform priesthood ordinances for my kids at some point. Your situation and mileage may vary.
I like what you wrote & the comments you’ve received. If I were writing the letter, I would keep it as simple & non confrontational as possible.
I would want to know: What does this policy mean to the average “rank & file” member of the church?
I personally have friends that are gay. What do I do differently with our relationship? (for example)
I believe that there needs to be further clarification & the chance to ask questions.
Good thoughts. I agree it should be simplified and focused tightly on the issue of the policy. One issue about its current form is that it could sound like a form letter that originated with some group – which would destroy its effectiveness immediately. Other things and length could obscure the message – and hundreds of simple, straightforward letters can make a difference.
You know what, I’m not going to send it. I’ll just talk to my bishop about the church essays to see if he knows about that. Probably mention that to my dad, since he likes Hugh Nibley. Thanks for the comments and the advice. I’ll think the only thing that’ll push me out of the church is if it decides to practice polygamy again. Haha. But I highly doubt that’ll happen. Sometimes it helps just to have written the letter without ever sending it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.