Soccer Mom's thread grabbed my attention.

[KillerDog]

I hope you don't think I'm being flippant, but that's incredible. I'd be shocked if it didn't become too much one day... that's quite a strain.

I don't think it is as much of a strain as you would think. Most people lie to themselves in this direction and it allows them to lie to others. Me, I just tell myself the truth but lie to others. It comes out in small ways that I'm not as much of a true believer but my personality is such that people think I'm joking.

Frankly, it is easy to look at Church like a scholastic endeavor and go through the motions to keep the status quo.

[JohnnyLingo]

I'm generally with you except maybe a little worse off. Increasingly, I don't believe in God at all but for my family's sake and to avoid social ostracism, I continue to put out the best LDS vibe I can. The result is that I'm always in callings usually held by the faithful where I increasingly have to deny my true beliefs. I wonder if the hypocrisy will become too much at some point or if my legal training has prepared me to say something I don't believe without ramifications.

I hope you don't think I'm being flippant, but that's incredible. I'd be shocked if it didn't become too much one day... that's quite a strain.

[KillerDog]

If you got good legal training, you will be able to lie convincingly as long as you want to.

That's what I think.

[byu71]

I'm generally with you except maybe a little worse off. Increasingly, I don't believe in God at all but for my family's sake and to avoid social ostracism, I continue to put out the best LDS vibe I can. The result is that I'm always in callings usually held by the faithful where I increasingly have to deny my true beliefs. I wonder if the hypocrisy will become too much at some point or if my legal training has prepared me to say something I don't believe without ramifications.

If you got good legal training, you will be able to lie convincingly as long as you want to.

[KillerDog]

I appreciate her post and most of the replies to it.

I, like most here, am LDS. I'm 34. I'm finding as life progresses that things aren't quite as tidy as I once believed them to be at the age of 19-21.

I rarely post on this forum, much less in the "The Foyer", but I have to admit that there is some degree of comfort that comes from hearing other people struggle. Knowing that I'm not the "only one."

Not the only one that doesn't "just love going to the Temple."

Not the only one that is bored by the 3 hour block. Not the only one that goes home from the 3 hour block MORE tired then when I arrived.

Not the only one that doesn't go to the temple regularly.

Not the only one that doesn't get great inspiration from reading a book over and over again.

Not the only one that has a hard time saying "I KNOW" when sharing a testimony...finding I "believe" or I "hope" to be more honest.

Not the only one that doesn't believe that falling asleep at night after "physical acts of love" without the garment is not a one way ticket to a fiery hell.

I guess you get my point. This post is a bit cathartic. To be honest, this is really the first time I've shared a lot of these thoughts with anyone, for many of the reasons stated in that thread started by Soccermom.

I get to the point, a lot of times, where I just start to think, "What is WRONG with me???" When I hear someone going on and on about how much they love the temple. Or when I hear them saying that they never feel any closer to God then in the Temple. Or how strong the Spirit was in a meeting...a meeting in which I was really trying to feel or learn something but came away...well, empty.

Does anyone else feel this way? I guess some of you do. I just get tired of going to Church meetings and hearing other people's glowing reviews of the scriptures, or the Temple and wondering why, if I am TRYING, do i not have the same experience.

I feel love. I feel warmth when I serve and am served. That's really it. It's what I hang onto for dear life. Really, the times when I am most touched at church, or anywhere, are the times when I hear of people reaching out to people and making a difference. But, like someone mentioned, it seems like the more I *think*, the less I feel.

Well, this is a rambling post. Not a good debut for me in "The Foyer." It's to be expected, I suppose. I am not as erudite as others. My vocabulary is not as polished. I am not a wordsmith. My views and opinions flow from observation and emotions, not from deep seated understanding of the great philosophers or authors.

I guess, I just "am." It's good to know that there are others who, like me, want to be part of the Church, and just "are."

I'm generally with you except maybe a little worse off. Increasingly, I don't believe in God at all but for my family's sake and to avoid social ostracism, I continue to put out the best LDS vibe I can. The result is that I'm always in callings usually held by the faithful where I increasingly have to deny my true beliefs. I wonder if the hypocrisy will become too much at some point or if my legal training has prepared me to say something I don't believe without ramifications.

[Art Vandelay]

But don't you just have to ask if they obey the law of chastity for the TR? No gory details?

Though I generally don't like asking closed-ended questions to youth, that could be a good compromise for a situation like RB's.

[cowboy]

However, I don't have the authority to change the questions for temple recommends (required to do baptism for the dead) or ecclesiastical endorsements so I won't be able to sign either of those things for your daughter.

But don't you just have to ask if they obey the law of chastity for the TR? No gory details?

[byu71]

Interviewing young ladies is one reason I would never want to be a Bishop. If you accept the calling and asking a young lady if she touches herself is part of the responsibility, I think it needs to be done. However, I just don't think I could do it.

My opinion would be most Bishops get absolutely no kick out of this. I was golfing with someone I know very well and at this time he was a Bishop. He got a phone call. I heard him say, "we have already talked about this. I have told you what you need to do. We don't need to talk about it again if you are doing what I asked you to do." Apparently a young lady in his ward admitted to an indescrection and wanted to keep telling him about it over and over again. He felt she wanted to get assurance she was forgiven and he told her he didn't need to hear the details more than once. Apparently she just didn't believe him. My guess is most Bishops are like he is.

[Surfah]

I read Rosebud's post earlier and have been pondering it all evening. Considering this is the 3rd or 4th time you have mentioned this, you obviously feel passionate about it. Good for you. I think Robin gave some great advice.

I have been thinking what would I do if a parent came into my office to set parameters as to what I could or couldn't speak to their child about. I'm rarely if ever offended so I doubt that would be the case. I would want to know why they were having concerns. I would hope it was because they thought the teen was innocent and pure, not that I wanted to have an intimate sexual discussion with a YW. In either case, I would explain how I generally interview a girl.

With Beehives most of the time I focus on modest dress and read from the Strength of Youth about not dating until 16. With Mia Maids I ask do they have a boyfriend to which they always respond no, even when I know they do. I then ask them what the law of chastity means to them. To which I follow-up with has there been a problem with any of those things for you? I will read in the SOY about avoiding passionate kissing. With a Laurel I usually talk about how I'm sure it must be difficult to be a teenager in the world today. I also ask them about what their understanding of the law of chastity is. In most cases with the older girls I then state , "there are inappropriate ways we can allow boys to touch us and their are inappropriate ways we can touch ourselves, have you ever had a problem with either of these"? If nothing comes up with any of these simple inquiries I quickly move onto to discussing other issues.


After having that discussion with the parent if he or she still didn't want me to discuss that with their child, I would tell them I respect your opinion and won't bring any of those things up. However, I don't have the authority to change the questions for temple recommends (required to do baptism for the dead) or ecclesiastical endorsements so I won't be able to sign either of those things for your daughter.

I have found with most kids who have been involved with some type of moral transgression their biggest fear isn't that I know, but that their parents find out. I promise them that what we talk about is confidential, I don't share with my counselors, my wife, the YW President or their parents without their permission.

I have a 13 year old daughter who by the world's standards has lived a relatively sheltered life. My biggest concern if I told her not to tell the bishop something was that she would have the misconception an interview with the bishop is for him. Interviews rarely if ever are for the benefit of the leader, they are for the individual - to share concerns, fears, doubts and to unburden themselves from mistakes if necessary. I want her to know the Lord has provided someone to help her the difficult and challenging periods in her life and hopefully she will be as lucky (I forget who used that word above) as I have and will always have men who take their stewardship seriously and honor the office they hold.

Thanks for sharing that. As some here have already said you could be my Bishop any day.

[Art Vandelay]

I agree with all of this, too. It was a mistake for me to use the word "only" especially considering that most people probably read my post with thoughts of minor upsetting/hurtful encounters in mind. I tried to keep my post benign because I know that LDS people generally don't want to talk about the idea that Mormon communities may be less safe than we'd like. I'm not going to get into my rant again, but my point isn't that people are justified in holding grudges over trivialities, but that there are those who take advantage of the trust inherent in LDS communities to hurt people in BIG ways. I'm bothered by the notion of innocent members holding onto the church for the sake of community with the naive assumption that they can trust everyone in their wards. As you know, I believe that most major issues could be addressed through the implementation of strong policies. Unfortunately, it is difficult to address what people are generally unwilling to talk about.

Here's a minor example: I think that there should be a policy against priesthood leaders discussing sex with teenage girls. I wish that I didn't feel compelled to let my bishop know that he is not allowed to talk to my beautiful teenage daughter about sex because, like Cardiac pointed out, bishops don't usually appreciate interference and I'm likely to lose credibility for sticking my nose into what he believes is his duty. OTOH, I don't believe that I should have to prep a child for a discussion about sex with an adult man who she will perceive (no matter how much I tell her otherwise) to have authority over her. I'll prep her for dealing with teenage boys, but not her bishop. I'm the adult. It's my responsibility to face him -- even if I lose credibility -- not hers.

I don't think my bishop is "crazy." I think he's a great guy. I actually doubt he'll even bring sex up. This probably won't really be an issue until my son (almost 11) hits puberty and the masturbation discussions begin. OTOH, why take chances? It IS possible to believe my bishop is probably a fabulous, honest guy without trusting him to talk to my daughter about sex alone in his office. (Why should that conversation even be on the table?) There are plenty of bishops and SPs who aren't "crazy" who are also susceptible to sexual temptation.

[Plus (being a woman) I'm with Tick's wife: I think that hard ons are a real possibility in these interviews. Maybe you'd have to have a woman's experiences with men to understand.... I don't know. And please.... no one take this as an anti-male statement. I love you guys/men in general.]

Hey RoseBud, I think this is very cool the way you plan on prepping your Bishop for an interview with your daughter rather than the other way around. If you feel strongly about this, as you seem to, then you must follow your heart and do what is right by your child. I don't know how anyone could reasonably argue otherwise. I would want to know exactly what kinds of questions were going to be asked, and what kinds of followup question might come (depending on the answers to the first questions). If anything bugs you, request that the Bishop not ask those questions. Offer alternative questions that are appropriate, and if the Bishop can't respect your parental authority, then don't allow him to interview your daughter. It will be a fantastic lesson for your daughter about how serious you take your parental duties, and it will teach her to stand up for herself. Taking such a stand, if necessary, would do far more good for her than anything the Bishop might offer in a probing interview about your daughter's sexuality. More people should have your courage.

I read Rosebud's post earlier and have been pondering it all evening. Considering this is the 3rd or 4th time you have mentioned this, you obviously feel passionate about it. Good for you. I think Robin gave some great advice.

I have been thinking what would I do if a parent came into my office to set parameters as to what I could or couldn't speak to their child about. I'm rarely if ever offended so I doubt that would be the case. I would want to know why they were having concerns. I would hope it was because they thought the teen was innocent and pure, not that I wanted to have an intimate sexual discussion with a YW. In either case, I would explain how I generally interview a girl.

With Beehives most of the time I focus on modest dress and read from the Strength of Youth about not dating until 16. With Mia Maids I ask do they have a boyfriend to which they always respond no, even when I know they do. I then ask them what the law of chastity means to them. To which I follow-up with has there been a problem with any of those things for you? I will read in the SOY about avoiding passionate kissing. With a Laurel I usually talk about how I'm sure it must be difficult to be a teenager in the world today. I also ask them about what their understanding of the law of chastity is. In most cases with the older girls I then state , "there are inappropriate ways we can allow boys to touch us and their are inappropriate ways we can touch ourselves, have you ever had a problem with either of these"? If nothing comes up with any of these simple inquiries I quickly move onto to discussing other issues.


After having that discussion with the parent if he or she still didn't want me to discuss that with their child, I would tell them I respect your opinion and won't bring any of those things up. However, I don't have the authority to change the questions for temple recommends (required to do baptism for the dead) or ecclesiastical endorsements so I won't be able to sign either of those things for your daughter.

I have found with most kids who have been involved with some type of moral transgression their biggest fear isn't that I know, but that their parents find out. I promise them that what we talk about is confidential, I don't share with my counselors, my wife, the YW President or their parents without their permission.

I have a 13 year old daughter who by the world's standards has lived a relatively sheltered life. My biggest concern if I told her not to tell the bishop something was that she would have the misconception an interview with the bishop is for him. Interviews rarely if ever are for the benefit of the leader, they are for the individual - to share concerns, fears, doubts and to unburden themselves from mistakes if necessary. I want her to know the Lord has provided someone to help her the difficult and challenging periods in her life and hopefully she will be as lucky (I forget who used that word above) as I have and will always have men who take their stewardship seriously and honor the office they hold.

[mUUser]

Hey Port, you're obviously in good company. I've never been a "spiritual" guy, rather the Holy Ghost speaks to my common sense. I don't often answer the question, "how does this make you feel?", rather, I usually ask myself, "does this make sense with what I know/believe/hope to be truth?"

Over time, I think you'll flesh out your beliefs and become more honest about them to those around you. Two quick examples:

1. Baptized my son this year. In his confirmation, I said something to the effect that he would "live his life worthy enough to prepare to serve a mission, if he so chooses." My wife asked about this afterwards, and when I asked her if she was mad or disappointed, she said absolutely not.

2. I taught GE a couple of weeks ago on tithing. I bore testimony on it, but, preceeded it with the caveat that I have a testimony of the Gospel, especially as it relates to the Atonement, and its companion teaching of Eternal Families. Further, parts of my testimony are stronger than other parts, and tithing happens to be strong because of past experiences. I can probably count on one hand the times I've shed a tear about a spiritual experience, or church doctrine. The testimony on tithing was one of them.

[Surfah]

I wonder if it is easier for people in other churches to not accept all teachings from their leaders and still feel OK about worshipping there. Are we the only church that drives this all or nothing mentality?

I don't think so. I think many other Christian faiths and especially those outside Christendom do the same. Judaism and Islam for example.

[Tick's wife]

FTR, I do have a testimony in many aspects of the church and gospel. Much of my doubts and struggles stem from our church's polygamous past and the Priesthood ban. I have some issues with the general patriarchal nature of the church as well. While I struggle with these issues, I still believe in the power of prayer. I believe in a God who loves me and is concerned for me. I think Utah Dan brought up a good point. I wonder if it is easier for people in other churches to not accept all teachings from their leaders and still feel OK about worshipping there. Are we the only church that drives this all or nothing mentality?

You have said a lot about how I feel about church...thanks, it helps to know that I am not the ONLY one that feels this way. I have many things I don't understand...There are many positive things about the church and I have to try and focus on that. Right now, I'm not interested in joining any other church or leaving 'the church' just don't feel like going. Does that make sense? I love my life but get tired of being beaten up for happy thoughts and confidence, which is interpreted by some as pride.

Thanks again.

[RobinFinderson]

Here's a minor example: I think that there should be a policy against priesthood leaders discussing sex with teenage girls. I wish that I didn't feel compelled to let my bishop know that he is not allowed to talk to my beautiful teenage daughter about sex because, like Cardiac pointed out, bishops don't usually appreciate interference and I'm likely to lose credibility for sticking my nose into what he believes is his duty. OTOH, I don't believe that I should have to prep a child for a discussion about sex with an adult man who she will perceive (no matter how much I tell her otherwise) to have authority over her. I'll prep her for dealing with teenage boys, but not her bishop. I'm the adult. It's my responsibility to face him -- even if I lose credibility -- not hers.

Hey RoseBud, I think this is very cool the way you plan on prepping your Bishop for an interview with your daughter rather than the other way around. If you feel strongly about this, as you seem to, then you must follow your heart and do what is right by your child. I don't know how anyone could reasonably argue otherwise. I would want to know exactly what kinds of questions were going to be asked, and what kinds of followup question might come (depending on the answers to the first questions). If anything bugs you, request that the Bishop not ask those questions. Offer alternative questions that are appropriate, and if the Bishop can't respect your parental authority, then don't allow him to interview your daughter. It will be a fantastic lesson for your daughter about how serious you take your parental duties, and it will teach her to stand up for herself. Taking such a stand, if necessary, would do far more good for her than anything the Bishop might offer in a probing interview about your daughter's sexuality. More people should have your courage.

[LA Ute]

This is a great thread. For me, the issue seems to be that most of the time, the Lord wants us to go through the motions and do what we need to without the Spirit leading us along every step of the way. And from time to time, we are blessed with spiritual experiences to let us know what we're doing is right. And this is what sustains me / keeps me going in the "in-between" times. I have had great spiritual experiences in the temple ... but not every time. I'd go so far as to say most of the time it's a chore. Same thing with the 3-hour block ... maybe even more so.

For the most part I think we are supposed to just work out our salvation on our own ... and we get little nuggets as gifts from time to time that provide testimony and spiritual growth.

That's my take on it anyway.

Well said.