- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Having joined the board after this thread peaked, I hope no-one minds me coming to it late. 3 things:
1. The 4 x covenants have clear parallels to stages and ordinances in our own life as they are symbolised in the endowment. So they should be taken in the context of what we are already living to be temple-ready. I don’t think we’re being asked to live anything new, but to reaffirm our commitment.
2. There is a wording difference in the 4th covenant. The first 3 law we covenant to live it. The 4th, Consecration, we ‘accept it’ but don’t covenant to ‘live it.’ I consider the wording difference to be significant and not by chance. I can be given and accept a book by a friend but not read it. If that friend then asked me to read it and I promised I would, then I would fulfil my promise. Equally I accept the law of consecration, but also realise it’s a dormant principle. Therefore, until I’m asked (under covenant) to live it, I’ll happily accept it and set it on the bookshelf unopened.
3. I wear my garments daily and wouldn’t leave the house with them on. There is an exception made saying “for other activities that can reasonably be done with the garment worn properly beneath the clothing.” Therefore I am given discretion over what is reasonable. Although I have very few exceptions, I think the church is offering this discretionary opportunity (but NOT IN THE YARD!)
I can’t help if the, very specific, came out of someone on the policy committee getting sick of the site of his fat neighbour sweating it out topless over the vegetable patch next door. Or maybe it’s the opposite and he’s fed up of his wife lusting after the neighbour on the other side doing a workout in his short shorts! A bit like Emma and the tobacco spitting.
(Apologies for the flippancy at the end there. Sometimes I think we take ourselves too seriously).
Just bumping up this thread. I enjoyed re-reading it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.