Jaye wrote:
JLD wrote:
Life Rocks wrote:
It's unfortunate as wonderful as emails are we can't see or feel the humanity behind them. For all you know I could be hiding inside your computer monitor.

I thought I made it clear. I'm not a member of the Church any longer. For over 25 years I was really active. Went on a mission. With no family support I actually worked 18 months to save up all of my mission money.

I didn't really learn to read until I was 20.
I was pretty naive and accepting about what I was told. I read only what was "approved by the Church". A few years ago some events occurred that had me really question things. The more I thought about it, the more I learned,I got to a point where, out of integrity, I couldn't say I believed it anymore and I couldn't pretend, so rather than lie about, I chose to leave.

At the outset, I appreciate those that take their valuable time to comment. We can engage in a discussion here and even if we disagree can still be thoughtful and considerate. I may not agree with your point of view, but I'll be respectful of it. To imply that there's something wrong with me, that I need counseling for being frustrated or angry or hurt at not being able to attend my kids weddings when marriage is such an important event has me wonder even more about those in the Church.

I have a better idea. Why not change the rules for all those parents and family members that are in this situation? There are tens of thousands of us.

Now I know a devout religious person wouldn't consider that. You have your rules and revelations from God. We have little in common in that regard.

But you're really disappointing a lot of people. Since we have more in common as parents I'd rather appeal to you as another parent. I've been through some tough things in life, but this beyond hard.

You know, at first I wasn't even going to attend the Temple to stand outside, at all because I knew how disappointed I was about it. In those tough moments I ask myself, "What would a good dad do?"
I knew what was going to happen and someone suggested to support my daughters I should be there when they came out. So I did.

It's been insightful on this forum.

Those who are in the Church clearly defend or support their ideas. I should just get counseling and get over it. Be a big boy. Love your children no matter what.

But I don't think those in Happy Valley have a clue as how the world perceives them for practicing this. It may work for those who get to see their kids weddings, but for the 10's of thousands of us who don't get to go, they don't understand it. We're angry as hell and like someone said, might just as well do something about it. We intend to.

If you can, try zooming out of this situation and get a broader perspective. Outside of Utah, a convert couple gets married. Say they're Catholic with a large extended family that doesn't get to go to the wedding. So among the entire family, parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles and cousins, brothers and sisters who have a culture of attending family weddings... all don't get to go. You're stealing a long anticipated experience from them. How do you think they perceive the Church?

I remember getting married in the Los Angeles Temple. My brother flew all the way from easter Canada to attend the wedding. I was new to the Church and didn't understand that he couldn't go. It's 25 years later and what does he still remember?

You go to a restaurant and have bad service. What happens? You tell everyone. So this extended Catholic family tells everyone how their kids got married in the Mormon Temple and not even the parents could go. Excuse me, that was only one side. Even worse if one family is in the Church and the other isn't. My daughters inlaws to be, hardly even knew her and they got to go and I understood it...well not really.

Those outside the Church, I'm sure I've talked to at least 150 people and to a person, all find this idea of parents going to their kids weddings as just part of what it means to be a human being.

I just learned this morning that exclusion of family even non-LDS from the weddings in the Temple was only instituted after the Church started following polygamy. Further, that there are other countries in the world where people must first be married in a public place and then they get sealed.

Given the Church says it doesn't practice polygamy any longer why not resume things as they were. Why not make some concessions for people who have more at stake in this.

The very idea that your "temple recommend" makes you worthy to go compared to my 25 years of service as a dad makes your idea of "worthiness" look stupid. As a Mormon you'll argue with me. But as a parent you'll agree.

It's duplicitous for the Church to project a public image of family and marriage and then have this. This is the fine print that sure takes some of the fun out of the experience.

In all honesty, why not just have a 2nd ceremony?

But back to the issue at hand, you are asking a religious organization to change their standards to allow anyone into the temple. Those who respect the temple as a "house of God" and have had to strive in their lives to be "worthy" to enter the temple do so knowing it will bring them closer to God in a way that walking into no other place will. Why should that change? Why do you think your child wanted a temple marriage if there was nothing significant about it???

And you are intermingling worthiness as a parent to be the same as worthiness as an LDS member with a temple recommend and they are two different things. Your not being able to enter the temple has nothing to do with your parental devotion.

I know I said this before, but I'll say it again. This was for your daughter and not for you. She chose to marry in the temple and hopefully she knew exactly what she was doing when she did it. Be happy for her, respect her choice, be proud that despite the obvious hardships and hurt feelings she felt it was important to her and her spouse to pursue a temple marriage, something that likely really means a lot to them.

Why not have a second ceremony? Because the Brethren have forbidden this...or at the very least...discouraged it strongly.

And we all know that when the Brethren speak...the fold obeys.

Too bad really. Can't see where a second ceremony for the benefit of these parents would upset the Lord in any way.

After all...what is gained by enforcing the absolute exclusion of non-member parents, relatives and friends?

Only further distancing and misunderstanding.

I'm not talking about changing rules to allow them into the Temple...but to allow them the right to see the children that THEY raised and THEY supported...and the wedding that THEY are paying for, for THEIR children...they will open the doors to mutual respect and understanding...and closing an old chapter of misunderstanding and separatism.

I've never heard that they frowned on a 2nd ceremony...

Dubbs wrote:
KitKat wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Should all religions change their sacred buildings "rules" to accomodate the non beleivers? come on dude, your being ridiculous. Get back to church and get worthy bro, you can do it. Give your family a real worthy priesthood holder in their home that they deserve and are begging for in their prayers.
Don't be so arrogant. The man said he no longer believes, so it isn't a case of "getting temple worthy".

The things you say are just incredibly ignorant.

It's a matter or prayer and study, not studying the anti's nonsense, get back with the spirit, and the truth, he'll be ok. That stuff confuses even the elect, he just needs a push to get back on track.

Probably a little repenting needs to happen also, he knows what I mean.

OY-FLIPPIN-VEY!!!

Life Rocks wrote:
My youngest son was due to be baptized and rather than lie about it, I chose to leave. That some would suggest I was living a sinful life is so absurd. I was not excommunicated.

Your decision to leave rather than to perpetuate a lie is the ultimate indication of your honesty.

Don't let Dubbs get to you...he just thinks he speaks for the LDS Church.

Life Rocks wrote:

It's a matter or prayer and study, not studying the anti's nonsense, get back with the spirit, and the truth, he'll be ok. That stuff confuses even the elect, he just needs a push to get back on track.

Probably a little repenting needs to happen also, he knows what I mean.

I find your suggestion that I was somehow sinful and that's why I don't believe this to be incredibly condescending and self-righteous. Apparently you feel that anyone who has a different world view than yours must be sinning if he doesn't accept the LDS version of life. And because I was active in the Church and have come to see things differently, and left the Church why that must of course mean I've done something wrong.

And of course you know you're right because the "spirit" told you.

Yeah. That's how it is.




It's just his way.

Life Rocks...meet Dubss...the self-appointed voice and defender of the LDS Church.

Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
KitKat wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Should all religions change their sacred buildings "rules" to accomodate the non beleivers? come on dude, your being ridiculous. Get back to church and get worthy bro, you can do it. Give your family a real worthy priesthood holder in their home that they deserve and are begging for in their prayers.
Don't be so arrogant. The man said he no longer believes, so it isn't a case of "getting temple worthy".

The things you say are just incredibly ignorant.

It's a matter or prayer and study, not studying the anti's nonsense, get back with the spirit, and the truth, he'll be ok. That stuff confuses even the elect, he just needs a push to get back on track.

Probably a little repenting needs to happen also, he knows what I mean.

OY-FLIPPIN-VEY!!!
LOL... I know!

WaynesWorld wrote:
Life Rocks wrote:
That's not something that is taught to people when they're investigating the Church. As for myself, I was the only member of my family and didn't know my brother was coming to visit.

To say that a child's wedding isn't about the family or the parents or the all the extended family seems crazy. If it's just about the kids, why not exclude everyone from the wedding ceremony worthy or not?

Maybe it's just an LDS way of seeing marriage. Is that it?

I'm not sure this is the place to talk about why I left the Church. It was an excruciating and informed decision. I think that principles are beyond even the Church. I couldn't lie and pretend to be a believer.Why did they choose a temple marriage than over a civil one?

Because the Brethren discourage this.