You can do a lot even without a Temple Recommend

[Anonymous]

Shades of Grey wrote:

The more I think about it the more I feel the this extream alternative black and white thinking is propagated by the advasary in our minds ie. Giving you the feeling continually you don’t belong- At times I was starting to hear the destructive words in my mind: “if you and your little family aren’t all the way in- and dont fit the mold 100% you aught to just give up! …You don’t belong here with your differences- and your not welcome in this club because your name is not on a speacial list that gets handed around in most top level meetings. They are all starring at you wondering what your ” hang-up is? Laziness for Duty, Pornography, WoW, Tithing, Question Church Docterine?”

I can (in my weak moments) just feel Satin making me believe these ?’s/ wheels are turning in the heads of all you brush shoulders with continually…. But now my strength to not care what others think is renewed. Roy your will to fight

through (what i assume) are the occasional same thoughts at times for the good of you and your family inspires me. Thank God for you-Thank God for this community.

I’m glad my comments were helpful to you. Community is meant to assist and uplift the membership – this is true of StayLDS and it is also true of the COJCLDS. Unfortunately, community has drawbacks as well. Sometimes, some places, and for some people the costs to continue the journey with the community are too high and it may be better to sever the union. But there are real benefits to being part of the community and some of those benefits would be very difficult to find elsewhere (especially benefits such as a sense of heritage that may have taken 150+ years to develop or a common religion and sense of religious identity for the extended family).

I said before that I serve and participate within this grey area. Unfortunately that is a rather precarious place to be. The blessings that pioneer women would give to other women during childbirth were also performed in this grey area. There were conflicting accounts of exactly where the women got the authority to do such (was it a special calling, or derived from a calling in the RS pres., or derived from the temple endowment, or an element of priesthood shared with one’s husband). There were occasional requests for clarification on this point and eventually the Church hierarchy of the day issued the directive that this practice was not to continue. So I see this as a metaphor for my current participation in the church – something like “don’t ask, don’t tell.”

I get nervous that sharing the wrong bit of my heterodoxy with the wrong person may result in communal rejection in ways as subtle as passive shunning or as overt as limiting participation (such as not being permitted to stand in the circle of a baby blessing like you had mentioned or being blacklisted from the list of potential SS substitute teachers)

Currently I have just such a quandary. DD is approaching baptism age and I would really like to know if I will be allowed to perform the baptism. I would like to meet with the Bishop – explain my desire and then know better how to proceed with the baptism. If he is agreeable – I can perform the baptism. If he wants me to jump through some sort of repentance hoops, then it is possible to not only lose out on performing the baptism but also be labeled and restricted in other ways as well.

I like my Bishop. He is a good and kind man. I plan to meet with him, but not without some trepidation. I am prepared to accept his decision if he doesn’t feel I should be permitted to perform the ordinance. I would then ask a grandfather to have the honor and I believe the event would be no less meaningful for the difference.

[Anonymous]

I hate to say it, but I no longer trust my local leaders. At least, not with my deepest darkest or even my lighter unorthodox beliefs. Their commitment to the hard core doctrine comes first. And answers to their question would give the minimum information they needed, with the most vague statements of what I believe.

I hate to say that, but I know how they react — I used to react just as they did. It seems that when people are taking the full party line, are sacrificing, serving the way they want, then you are in their favor. But when you do not keep up with the way their way of thinking, you do get blacklisted — not in a mean way, but you definitely become part of the out-group, and usually lose opportunities.

[Anonymous]

SilentDawning wrote:

I hate to say it, but I no longer trust my local leaders. At least, not with my deepest darkest or even my lighter unorthodox beliefs. Their commitment to the hard core doctrine comes first. And answers to their question would give the minimum information they needed, with the most vague statements of what I believe.

I hate to say that, but I know how they react — I used to react just as they did. It seems that when people are taking the full party line, are sacrificing, serving the way they want, then you are in their favor. But when you do not keep up with the way their way of thinking, you do get blacklisted — not in a mean way, but you definitely become part of the out-group, and usually lose opportunities.

Amen!

Absolutely one of the most important principles of StayingLDS is to find the common ground in a positive way with the local leaders. They cannot agree with dissenting opinion. As I see it, faith towards true knowledge is progressive. Those not prepared for truth are not amenable to receiving it, for it cuts into their security blanket. Not a great idea. Not merciful or kind either. The church is in place for those who need it, including ourselves in some dimension. since all are on differing levels, we support each other in this process.

Romans 14 is great advice.

[Anonymous]

SilentDawning wrote:

I hate to say it, but I no longer trust my local leaders. At least, not with my deepest darkest or even my lighter unorthodox beliefs. Their commitment to the hard core doctrine comes first. And answers to their question would give the minimum information they needed, with the most vague statements of what I believe.

I hate to say that, but I know how they react — I used to react just as they did. It seems that when people are taking the full party line, are sacrificing, serving the way they want, then you are in their favor. But when you do not keep up with the way their way of thinking, you do get blacklisted — not in a mean way, but you definitely become part of the out-group, and usually lose opportunities.

Amen +2.

[Anonymous]

cwald wrote:

SilentDawning wrote:

I hate to say it, but I no longer trust my local leaders. At least, not with my deepest darkest or even my lighter unorthodox beliefs. Their commitment to the hard core doctrine comes first. And answers to their question would give the minimum information they needed, with the most vague statements of what I believe.

I hate to say that, but I know how they react — I used to react just as they did. It seems that when people are taking the full party line, are sacrificing, serving the way they want, then you are in their favor. But when you do not keep up with the way their way of thinking, you do get blacklisted — not in a mean way, but you definitely become part of the out-group, and usually lose opportunities.

Amen +2.

So, do I understand you correctly in suggesting that I just remove myself from the baptism negotiation table? To just plan the baptism with sombody else doing the ordinance? Unfortunately, I was really hoping to do the baptism. Both because it is expected (by myself and others) and because it seems to be quite doable according to the CHI. It seems like the proverbial rock and the hard place. If I perform neither the baptism nor the confirmation, this may send a message that something is amiss. Perhaps all would be left to speculate as to the reasons as opposed to having some sort of official church restriction to reference – but I’m not sure how that would be essentially better. What say you?

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

…

So, do I understand you correctly in suggesting that I just remove myself from the baptism negotiation table? … What say you?

That is not what I was saying.

If your bish is okay with you doing the ordinance and you want to do them — do it. All these local leaders are different and some see the world in shades of gray, and some don’t. Some read the CHI one way, others interpret it another.

I was agreeing with SD — that since it became known to my leaders that I am unorthodox and “middle way” – I have been black listed and lost some opportunities that I had before.

[Anonymous]

I was just thinking no wonder so many of us in this middle-way mindset feel a closer kinship to the Gay and Lesbian community within the church than the average party line TBM. For many of us know what it’s like to go to battle daily (literally or spiritually in our case) for a cause we feel in our spirit….nevertheless, we are socially not allowed to let our true light shine as when hoping to create true closer bonds with unconditional Love with those we serve with and around, but we must just shut up in person about the things we discuss in this forum even though the thoughts nearly leap from our soul. I hear in SD’s, CWalds and others previous posts that it’s best to somewhat adopt the practice with our leaders of “Don’t ask Don’t tell”.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

So, do I understand you correctly in suggesting that I just remove myself from the baptism negotiation table? To just plan the baptism with sombody else doing the ordinance? Unfortunately, I was really hoping to do the baptism. Both because it is expected (by myself and others) and because it seems to be quite doable according to the CHI. It seems like the proverbial rock and the hard place. If I perform neither the baptism nor the confirmation, this may send a message that something is amiss. Perhaps all would be left to speculate as to the reasons as opposed to having some sort of official church restriction to reference – but I’m not sure how that would be essentially better. What say you?

Definitely not — go to the baptism negotiating table. But go in faith…and by that I mean, indicate to the Bishop you would like to baptize your child and wondered what the process was for making it happen. Act as if. If he asks you questions about your faith, I would likely answer the questions in ways that are honest but ambiguous.

Now, if he starts drilling into basic commandments, at that point you’d have to make a decision how much to say, but definitely, keep unorthodox ideas out of it. If the outcome of the meeting is that you can’t baptize your daughter without jumping through repentence hoops, you’ll have decisions to make.

[Anonymous]

Just bumping this to the top wondering if you (Roy) or anyone else whos been in similar position- made any progress with this tentative part part of StayLDS journey….one you were heading into a few months back? What was your Bishops ultimate reaction to sitting down with him and was there any further resolution on this?

P.S. I have the same baptism conundrum I will be facing myself soon. My wife became a little upset (not at me but the process) when I told her more than likely I could perform baptism but “voice” confirmation of HG and membership would most likely need to be done by Grandpa according to CHI of needing strict faith to one true church temple recommend standards.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

according to CHI of needing strict faith to one true church temple recommend standards.

“One true church” is never mentioned in the temple recommend interview questions.

Just saying. :geek:

[Anonymous]

Old-Timer wrote:

Quote:

according to CHI of needing strict faith to one true church temple recommend standards.

“One true church” is never mentioned in the temple recommend interview questions.

That’s a great point, ray. In fact, most people don’t realize that the temple recommend interviews are designed for you to declare your own worthiness. From my point of view, those who intelligently seek middle ground and are authentic in their faith are rigorously honest as well. This is a good thing, it’s certainly is indicative of ethical worthiness.

So what to do?

There seem to be several approaches for the temple recommend:

1. Recognizing that you are not a believer, and not attempt to get a recommend.

2. Acknowledge your disbelief to the interviewer, and see if he will still give you a recommend.

3. Obscure your disbelief, and get a recommend on false pretenses.

4. Redefine your belief, and answer the questions according to how they’re asked.

5. Make the statements in the questions true for you, fully and legitimately, and answer the questions directly.

In no case does the TR interview ask you if you “know” anything, and nothing asks “one true church”. I attempt to get to level 5 in the TR interview, but in some cases, I use level 4. This does require compliance with the rules of the church at least in some legitimate way: tithing and WoW are not entirely ‘optional’, but there are broad definitions within their compliance.

I don’t think it’s right to lie — level 3 – I reject this. And I don’t think it’s a good idea to acknowledge disbelief to the interviewer, it probably won’t result in a TR. I also think that many people overengineer this, and hence, some are afraid to have the interview because they don’t believe in any traditional way.

anyway — this is worth a separate guide — how to get a TR as an unorthodox believer….

[Author]

Posts