DiscussMormonism.com

So, as I have stated before, I am a High Priest who has held leadership callings on the stake and ward levels. I am active in the Church in that I hold a calling (that does not require me to have a testimony of all of the truth claims of the church) and attend. For more than a year, I have been struggling mightily with my testimony of the truth claims of the Church. I have confessed this struggle to ward and stake leadership. I have been advised to not speak with ward members about the basis for my concerns.

Because of my circumstances, there are certain activities in which I am curbing/stopping participation. This has clearly led some to wonder why. However, since I have been advised not to discuss the matter with ward members (for the express fear that it will potentially cause them to doubt), all I can do is let them speculate. For example, they can speculate that since they have not heard or read any rational basis for doubt, that I am completely irrational or that my doubt is based on something else in my life that is amiss. However, if I was permitted to explain my concerns, at least those I care about would understand the difficulty of some of the issues and maybe think it is actually possible for me (or others) to have these concerns outside of a desire to sin.

It is just an odd thing, I think, to be so afraid of discussing these matters openly. It shows either little regard for the Church's "side" of these issues, or little regard for the members' ability to deal with the issues--a fear that they all may end up like me. But, at MAAD, I learned that I am an idiot for letting these things bother me and I should have learned all of this stuff in Seminary, so what is the concern with discussing it?

Not enjoying my particular circumstances at the moment. I truly look forward to the day when fear does not govern the Church's approach to these issues. Maybe then, the Church can actually mention the fact that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy on the official Joseph Smith website, which itself is a striking (and rather surprising) example of the continuing fear of dealing with certain facts.

mms wrote:So, as I have stated before, I am a High Priest who has held leadership callings on the stake and ward levels. I am active in the Church in that I hold a calling (that does not require me to have a testimony of all of the truth claims of the church) and attend. For more than a year, I have been struggling mightily with my testimony of the truth claims of the Church. I have confessed this struggle to ward and stake leadership. I have been advised to not speak with ward members about the basis for my concerns.

Many of us here are 'in the same boat' as you -- i.e., active in the Church with callings, but plagued by doubts and questions. Of course, to raise these in a church forum (like Sunday service) is impossible. This kind of a bb offers an outlet to discuss concerns and questions openly, and to even vent our frustrations with Mormonism. This kind of place can be a lifesaver for folks just like you. So, stick around and enjoy. And welcome.

Weekly basis?
Let me guess; is your wife active, or anyone you care is involved in church that you have to go?

If not, do yourself a favor; stop going, if you live in Utah you are surrounded by beautiful environment, go hiking biking.

Rollo Tomasi wrote: This kind of a bb offers an outlet to discuss concerns and questions openly, and to even vent our frustrations with Mormonism.

Just be sure to keep your identity secret. There are some here who have no problem tattling on you for venting those frustrations.

GoodK wrote:

Rollo Tomasi wrote: This kind of a bb offers an outlet to discuss concerns and questions openly, and to even vent our frustrations with Mormonism.

Just be sure to keep your identity secret. There are some here who have no problem tattling on you for venting those frustrations.

Ain't that the truth. It's no wonder Bishops rcrocket and DCP harp on and on about posters using their real names -- so they can tattle the second they know. What rcrocket and DCP did to you was they lowest thing I've seen done on this or other Mormon-related bb (and that's saying something!).

Rollo Tomasi wrote:Ain't that the truth. It's no wonder Bishops rcrocket and DCP harp on and on about posters using their real names -- so they can tattle the second they know. What rcrocket and DCP did to you was they lowest thing I've seen done on this or other Mormon-related bb (and that's saying something!).

I haven't spoken to my step dad since that entire fiasco. Actually, he hasn't spoken to me. Thanks again, bishops.

Families can be together forever, with Heavenly Father's plan...

mms wrote:Not enjoying my particular circumstances at the moment.

I don't envy your position, indeed.

I truly look forward to the day when fear does not govern the Church's approach to these issues. Maybe then, the Church can actually mention the fact that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy on the official Joseph Smith website, which itself is a striking (and rather surprising) example of the continuing fear of dealing with certain facts.

On LDS.org, the "search" feature yields the "Gospel Topics" section as the first result for the term "polygamy." It states that Joseph Smith practiced plural marriage:

After God revealed the doctrine of plural marriage to Joseph Smith in 1831 and commanded him to live it, the Prophet, over a period of years, cautiously taught the doctrine to some close associates. Eventually, he and a small number of Church leaders entered into plural marriages in the early years of the Church (see LDS.org, Gospel Topics, "Polygamy").

You might be interested in a blog post a did a week or so ago.

http://www.lifeongoldplates.com/2008/08 ... hurch.html

GoodK wrote:

Rollo Tomasi wrote:Ain't that the truth. It's no wonder Bishops rcrocket and DCP harp on and on about posters using their real names -- so they can tattle the second they know. What rcrocket and DCP did to you was they lowest thing I've seen done on this or other Mormon-related bb (and that's saying something!).

I haven't spoken to my step dad since that entire fiasco. Actually, he hasn't spoken to me. Thanks again, bishops.

Families can be together forever, with Heavenly Father's plan...

Have you tried to talk to him and see what happens?

[technically the words are "through" Heavenly Father's plan]

Yeah, I know there are some who would want to, for whatever reason, advise my leaders that I am posting here. I know some of you might see this as a mistake, but I have been pretty straight forward with my leaders on the ward and stake level about where I am coming from, including outlining nearly all of my frustrations. In fact, I think (pure speculation) THEY are even uncomfortable with asking me to shut up, as it just seems wrong to fear conversations about our history and scripture (i.e., Book of Abraham) or the discussion of controversial issues especially when we should be able to rely on each other to get through the tough times and issues. I truly believe that anyone who thinks about it would and should be concerned that this Church has such an EXPRESSED fear of its members gaining knowledge about its own history. I have heard several times now that people should not read "Rough Stone Rolling" because it caused "so and so" to leave the Church--no kidding. It seems it is not about fearing some kind of "anti" spin on the history, but the history itself. That is unsettling.

I talk to a lot of folks about books and I've never once heard anyone say RSR should be avoided for any reason. I'm not doubting you have, I can take your word for it, but I wanted to emphasize that it may not be as prevalent as you might fear.