I think it’s a given that there are many endowed members in the Church who do not wear garments. I’ve always wondered how they come to the decision to stop wearing them. I mean one day they are wearing them, and the next day they’re not. It’s not like they slowly disappear over time.
And for those who do not vehemently oppose the church, I wonder what went through their minds when the decision was made, if a decision was made.
But Mary, as I said before, NO ONE has it all figured out. So does that mean NO ONE can ever call anyone to repentance? If so, let’s dissolve the Church and go home.
not no one, just us lay people. are you Steve’s Bishop?
MahNahvu: I guess I should have said one more thing to be clear in my response to you. I don’t think this blog is an inappropriate place to preach the things that Steve has preached. I think ANYWHERE is an inappropriate place.
Mary, whose duty is it to cry repentance to the entire world? Does that belong to missionaries? Am I a missionary?
What really kills me, Mary, is that you’re so much more concerned about me telling people to do right than about Steve’s comments that seek to justify doing wrong.
Steve, there’s a term for answering “truthfully with some fudging.” It’s called lying.
I have already told you why. He isn’t the only one who justifies it, it happens all over the place. Doesn’t change what I do. But self righteousness has always bothered me. People feeling they are so righteous and obedient that they can tell other how to live their lives. Seems a waste of time when we have our own lives to work out.
Have you been told it is your stewardship to call people to repentance? Is this what the Saviour would do?
My concern is for your ultra-judgmental attitude. You are so convinced you are better than Steve, you have to castigate him in public. Leave it up to the Lord and his Bishop. It’s not your job.
On a side note, if there is anyone interested in posting why people make the decision to stop wearing garments, please don’t let this detour deter you.
I suggest we back off from my situation so as to give breathing room for others who wish to divulge their rationale for not wearing the garment as per Kim’s post. I just realized, I’m not even in that category since I still wear them most of the time, although my motivation could be a lot better.
Kim, I really didn’t think that discussing Steve’s excuses for not wearing garments was a detour.
Mary, I already answered #57 in #54.
And I answered you. It isn’t a missionary’s duty to be a judge in Israel. Are we trying to be like Jesus or the Pharisees?
***yawn***. What else can we discuss?
the topic maybe
ltbugaf,
Your little cruisade just seems a little inmature.
On topic, my dad was not a member for many years and then decided to join the church. He was active in the church for a year, got his endowments, then was active for another year, then took off his garments and went inactive. I’m not sure that he had faith in the first place.
I was gone out shopping today and came back and found my mailbox stuffed with comments on garments and I thought oh man what did I miss??? But what I found I missed was when did Boyd K. Packer became a prophet??Posts keep repeating him being a prophet!! What happened to President Hinckley? Gee I wasn’t gone THAT long
Sally, take a look at your latest April General Conference report. Read the sustaining of Church officers.
Ian, I guess I’ll need you to explain to me what is immature about saying that a temple covenant should be taken seriously or that a Prophet, Seer and Revelator should be followed.
Mary, my comments to Steve have been about his reasons for not wearing garments, which, IS the topic.
Look, I’ll just go if that’s what every single person reading this thread wants. I do find it odd that when one person is saying and Apostle is leading the Church astray and that being casual about keeping temple covenants is OK, and another person is saying the Apostle is right and temple covenants should be taken seriously, everyone decides to turn against the second person and not the first.
ltbugaf
no one wants you to GO. i just have this thing i have always had about people judging other people because of choices they make. and so i have to say something.
kim also wasn’t saying don’t discuss this, he just didn’t want people to think they couldn’t post on the topic at hand. he likes lots of comments. the more the better. and nothing like a good debate.
i am not turning against anyone when i don’t know their heart. all i am saying is it isn’t our place to put someone in judgement and call them apostate or close to since that’s not our stewardship.
i know you think we are a bunch of heathens, and you can’t help but try and put us on the right track (well your right track anyway).
Mary, I’m not trying to put you on any track at the moment. I’m just wondering why everyone is showing far more support for the person who suggests that Boyd K. Packer is a false prophet, that wearing garments is no big deal, and that honesty in a temple recommend interview is something to wink at, rather than the person who suggests that Boyd K. Packer is a true Prophet, wearing garments is a serious obligation, and there’s no compromise with the truth when you’re talking to a judge in Israel.
Besides, I’m also providing a large quantity of posts, which seems to be desired here :)
i told you, for myself, i believe that we need to let people work out their own issues and not judge them when we have so much to work on, on ourselves. it’s not a matter of winking at it. whatever steve believes, doesn’t affect my testimony that BKP is a prophet of God, nor does it affect the fact that i wear my garments for everything except a bath/shower or…well, anyway, all the time, or to be honest in my recommend interview. i don’t need steve to validate what i know and believe. i think it is far more important to not judge or tell him how to live.
are you a judge in israel? i didn’t know you are a bishop. however, if that is the case, you know there is a lot to be said for forgiveness and compassion, rather than calling someone to judgement you only vaguely know through blogging. like i said, it’s a matter of stewardship.
yeah it is, lol
I notice Kim hasn’t chimed in much. Is he busy, or just weary of my endless bickering?
I think generally or specifically stating your testimony on a topic in question such as “I believe BKP to be a prophet….etc is all that’s necessary. The act of questioning how another can feel they are “believing and active” while still doing x, y, and z and feel ok about it is up to the person, their leaders and the Lord. Defend the faith by bearing testimony, not by specifically bringing another’s beliefs and actions into the “ring”.
mtnnomad: There are lots of people who claim to be active and believing as they go about campaigning to destroy others’ faith. They use it as a disguise. I don’t think it’s always adequate to respond to such persons with nothing more than one’s own declaration of belief. Sometimes it’s necessary to point out what’s wrong with what they are saying. Since Steve’s claim was so inconsistent with what he was doing (i.e., denouncing President Packer as a false prophet), it seemed like a good time to do that.
I didn’t read all the comments but I personally believe that if you are an endowed member and do not wear your garments then there is something fundamentally wrong with 1)your testimony 2)your attitude 3)or you just don’t get it…it being the convenants you made. Wearing your garments has nothing to do with fashion, or comfort or whatever other EXCUSES people make for not wearing them. (“oh it’s TOO HOT…I live in a hot climate is the whiniest one I have ever heard to date…wahwahwah) Wearing your garments is “an outward expression of an inward committment”. That is pretty plain and simple to me, but apparently not to a lot of other people. This conversations and the ensuing excuses people make for not wearing them/not wearing them correctly/altering them to fit your fashion “sense” just drives me nutso…to be perfectly blunt.
K.
HOLY CRAP! I went back and read the comments…first of all, I thought Steve (EM) meant “ex-mormon” and I am sure that I am not the only one who thought that after reading some of his comments. Basically, he is an apostate member who regularly lies to get a temple recommend (why would he want to go to the temple if he doesn’t even believe basic LDS principles?)…Oh I don’t get it but people like Steve make no sense…just leave the church ALREADY!
hmmm, that’s interesting, i haven’t heard steve say anything about not believing basic principles.
and really, i keep saying this, please stop judging him. when anyone here becomes perfect, they can start calling someone else apostate. however, when we become perfect, it will be perfect in charity and then there won’t be any self righteous judgement.
I don’t particularly care what Steve does…I wasn’t judging him (see the I don’t care part)…but I was calling it as I see it. BTW, and I don’t mean this to offend but honesty and the law of chastity IS a basic priciple of the LDS faith, as is garment wearing to an endowed member. Like I said, just calling it as I see it.
K.
I also believe honesty and the law of chastity are basic principles, however, I also see that forgiveness and tolerance and Christlike love are basic principles. I don’t disagree with that (as I have said in previous posts), but I dont’ see why people are wasting time on haranguing Steve, or anyone for choices they make, when we do not know his heart. You said (as has ltbugaf) that Steve is an apostate member. I don’t see that there is any need to say it. Why not say ” I don’t agree with what you say, or do” and leave it at that? Why bring in the apostate part? We all have our own lives to work out, no need to start wasting time on working out other individual’s lives for them.
One of my most favourite hymns is “Truth Reflects Upon our Senses”.
I should clarify, I don’t agree that breaking commandments (whatever they may be) is right, but we all do it all the time. When we face the Lord at the judgement, He isn’t going to ask us how so-and-so did, or what we did to put them on the straight and narrow. He is going to ask us how we loved our neighbour. And by putting effort into correcting others’ wrong doings, we aren’t doing what we are supposed to be doing. When we are told to “be our brother’s keeper”, it is meant that we are to look after them, love them, uplift them. You can change someone’s heart better by showing compassion, rather than listing all their wrong doings.
Mary…I understand and agree with your points however I personally think Steve is not motivated by trying to express his position in a truthful manner but more of an attempt to create controversy (which he has done spectaculary). I am not judging him for his wrongdoings I am calling into question his MOTIVATION for doing so. I am not going to argue this with you Mary because we obviously do not share the opinion as to why Steve even posted here to begin with. There is a difference between FORGIVENESS and TOLERANCE. The Lord WILL NOT tolerate sin but for those who repent forgiveness is POSSIBLE. Furthermorem, you CANNOT pick and choose which parts of the gospel you are going to follow (which Steve has plainly pointed out that he does); either you do or you don’t, it has nothing to do with being judgemental. I really have nothing more to say on the topic.
K.
I stayed away since Friday to give room to others to divulge their rationale for not wearing temple garments as per Kim’s post. Since my hiatus didn’t help, I’ll now respond to some comments about my situation.
In brief, I believe, but am obviously unorthodox. I’m with the program in most areas, but where things don’t make sense to me, I do my own thing. I appreciate many things in the temple and, perhaps wrongly, fudge some things so as to keep a recommend. I don’t consider the fudging to be outright lying and honestly believe that a Bishop/SP would withhold a recommend from someone who really wasn’t fit for temple attendance regardless of how they answered the questions. Perhaps I should be more forthright and let the cards fall where they may regarding my holding a recommend.
In addition, I’ve developed no hesitation in writing off and ignoring a few past and present GAs that, IMHO, spout nonsense. That said, I certainly respect those with more orthodox standpoints or those who can parse between inspired and less inspired teachings of a church leader I’ve chosen to ignore.
The LofC difficulties I mentioned in passing were before my marriage. I probably shouldn’t have said anything about that in this thread. Sorry.
What perplexes me is that I’ve obviously gotten under the skin of some of the more orthodox here, whereas someone who questions things and walks, doesn’t seem to make their radar. I believe at least one commenter invited me to leave the church. Just why would many prefer an unorthodox believer join non-believers and disappear from their sight?
Steve, actively working against the General Authorities of the Church, as you just continued to do, is not merely being “unorthodox.” It is working AGAINST the Church. The other word for that–which for some reason is really bothering Mary–is apostasy.
Making a passing statement about the legitimacy of BKP’s apostleship is hardly “actively working against the general authorities”.
Kim, I have to disagree. This is a very public forum. Posting a comment here is posting it to the world. Posting a comment to the effect that President Packer is a delueded, false prophet teaching cruel doctrines is, despite Steve’s protestations, inviting others to agree with him. That is working against the Church and its leaders. I also fail to see how Steve’s remarks were “passing.”
Some of the remarks here remind me of a passage from Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith page 156.
“That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives.”
ltbugaf
I think you are missing my whole point. What bothers me is not the “word” apostasy, it is the attitude that you and perhaps some others have, in justifying judging Steve, strictly based on what he has said on the bloggernacle. You have said that you are a “judge in Israel”. Well unless you are a bishop, no you are not. Holding the priesthood does not give yhou the right to berate someone so publically. Whatever Steve may or may not be doing ios not up to any of us to decide or judge. I do have a problem with people who believe they are better than others and who say this in no uncertain terms, calling someone “to repentance” when they have no right or stewardship to do so. I quoted a scripture from D&C on another post. Perhaps you read it. You continue to avoid most of what I say on this topic while professing hurt that the “good guy” gets told off while the “bad guy” gets justified. My contention isn’t what Steve is doing wrong and what you are doing right (or anyone for that matter). It is for the self righteous-holier-than thou tone that lacks compassion, humility and understanding of the Atonement of Christ.
Kris: I don’t want Steve to leave the Church. I want him to repent and get back IN the Church.
Mary, since you’ve told me approximately twenty times that you disapprove of what I’m saying, can we just proceed on the assumption that I know you disapprove?
By the way, Mary, I DIDN’T say I was a “judge in Israel.” I said that Steve was being dishonest with a judge in Israel, which, by his own description, is true.
Yes, but I only respond when you say something.
yeah but that’s got nothing to do with you.
When he publicly advocates that course of action, as he does here, then it becomes everyone’s business.
“Mary, since you’ve told me approximately twenty times that you disapprove of what I’m saying, can we just proceed on the assumption that I know you disapprove?”
Yes, but you keep doing it. I am not concerned whether you know I disapprove or not. I just wish you could be nice.
oh whatever. That’s such a load of hogwash. He isn’t advocating it. He just is stating what he does/says. He isn’t saying “everyone do what I do”. For pity’s sake, stop taking what he says so personal. If Steve were running for a governmental position, then perhaps. If he were a leader telling us how we should live, then that’s another story too, but he made a COMMENTARY. I do hope you spend as much time on your hometeaching as you do in trying to put Steve on the straight and narrow path.