The Covenant Path is paved by heterosexual marriage.
Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2018 2:45 pm
According to this graphic, the Covenant Path is paved with heterosexual marriage between one man, one woman, bearing three white and delightsome kids!
A place to love and accept the people who think about and live Mormonism on their own terms.
https://tranzatec.net/
Yes!!^^ This is why this is destructive. This focus on the "ideal" family is also destructive because abuse victims will have a harder time reaching out for help. They won't want to risk leaving the "ideal." Or now, "leaving the covenant path."Not Buying It wrote: ↑Wed Jun 06, 2018 5:29 am Pity the poor member who sees that graphic with the happy, smiling forever family dressed in white at the end and thinks “my husband/wife/father/mother/son/daughter has left the Church, that can never be my family”. The Church works for people so long as everyone they love stays in it, but let one person leave and the idea of “families are forever” becomes “families are forever apart”.
Are you LGBT? This graphic isn’t for you. But hey, you can be forever celibate and still be in the Church, isn’t that a wonderful blessing? Tender mercies!
Are you unmarried for whatever reason? That’s OK, you’ll find someone in the next life, even if you don’t get your happy smiling family in white in this life.
The Church is so incredibly insensitive to those who don’t fit the mold.
Well, that's kind of true. Us apostates are told we've lost our temple blessings when we leave the church, and they're a little vague on whether I'll be numbered among the Sons of Perdition. However, my parents are still told that if they remain faithful, their family won't be denied them in the next life. So one or more members of the family can leave, it condemns them to a lower kingdom, but if my parents are righteous enough and faithful enough they can have me with them.Not Buying It wrote: ↑Wed Jun 06, 2018 5:29 am Pity the poor member who sees that graphic with the happy, smiling forever family dressed in white at the end and thinks “my husband/wife/father/mother/son/daughter has left the Church, that can never be my family”. The Church works for people so long as everyone they love stays in it, but let one person leave and the idea of “families are forever” becomes “families are forever apart”.
Not only a harder time asking for help, but a harder time even recognizing the abuse as abuse. Then there is the forgiveness thing, so rather than asking for help and breaking up the family, you just forgive 99 times while the abuse continues. This whole *over* focus on the ideal family just becomes a trap for abuse victims.MoPag wrote: ↑Wed Jun 06, 2018 8:18 amYes!!^^ This is why this is destructive. This focus on the "ideal" family is also destructive because abuse victims will have a harder time reaching out for help. They won't want to risk leaving the "ideal." Or now, "leaving the covenant path."Not Buying It wrote: ↑Wed Jun 06, 2018 5:29 am Pity the poor member who sees that graphic with the happy, smiling forever family dressed in white at the end and thinks “my husband/wife/father/mother/son/daughter has left the Church, that can never be my family”. The Church works for people so long as everyone they love stays in it, but let one person leave and the idea of “families are forever” becomes “families are forever apart”.
Are you LGBT? This graphic isn’t for you. But hey, you can be forever celibate and still be in the Church, isn’t that a wonderful blessing? Tender mercies!
Are you unmarried for whatever reason? That’s OK, you’ll find someone in the next life, even if you don’t get your happy smiling family in white in this life.
The Church is so incredibly insensitive to those who don’t fit the mold.
Yeah, the doctrine on preservation of family relationships of those who leave the Church is pretty squishy though. And Elder Bednar did his best to quash any hope parents of those who left the Church have with this Ensign article (and I have to say, it takes a cold, heartless man to destroy the hope of parents who have had children leave the Church. It was a pretty dick move in my estimation. I don't have a lot of respect for Elder Bednar, for this and other reasons):IT_Veteran wrote: ↑Wed Jun 06, 2018 8:51 amWell, that's kind of true. Us apostates are told we've lost our temple blessings when we leave the church, and they're a little vague on whether I'll be numbered among the Sons of Perdition. However, my parents are still told that if they remain faithful, their family won't be denied them in the next life. So one or more members of the family can leave, it condemns them to a lower kingdom, but if my parents are righteous enough and faithful enough they can have me with them.Not Buying It wrote: ↑Wed Jun 06, 2018 5:29 am Pity the poor member who sees that graphic with the happy, smiling forever family dressed in white at the end and thinks “my husband/wife/father/mother/son/daughter has left the Church, that can never be my family”. The Church works for people so long as everyone they love stays in it, but let one person leave and the idea of “families are forever” becomes “families are forever apart”.
They'll only tell you that if you're really grieving the eternal loss of a son or daughter though. It's not really advertised. If it were, why would it matter if sons and daughters left the church?
Just another example of how the church does everything they can to keep people in the church and engaged with it. Threaten the doubters, comfort the believers in ways that help them become more fervent in their belief.
The statements by Joseph Smith and Orson F. Whitney are construed by some members of the Church to mean that wayward children unconditionally receive the blessings of salvation because of and through the faithfulness of parents. However, this interpretation is moderated by the fact that the most complete account of the Prophet’s sermon was not available to Church historians at the time they compiled an amalgamated version of his teachings from the notes of Willard Richards and William Clayton. In the more complete set of notes recorded by Howard and Martha Coray, Joseph Smith is shown to have qualified his statement to make the promised blessings conditional upon the obedience of the children:
“When a father and mother of a family have [been sealed], their children who have not transgressed are secured by the seal wherewith the Parents have been sealed. And this is the Oath of God unto our Father Abraham and this doctrine shall stand forever.”4
This clarification is more consistent doctrinally. Except for the additional information contained in the Coray records, the concept of unconditional salvation for disobedient children would contradict many foundational teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, including the second article of faith that “men will be punished for their own sins” (Articles of Faith 1:2).
This understanding also is in accordance with numerous examples in the standard works. For instance, Alma explained to his son Corianton:
“But behold, ye cannot hide your crimes from God; and except ye repent they will stand as a testimony against you at the last day.
“Now my son, I would that ye should repent and forsake your sins, and go no more after the lusts of your eyes, but cross yourself in all these things; for except ye do this ye can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God. Oh, remember, and take it upon you, and cross yourself in these things” (Alma 39:8–9; emphasis added).
Samuel the Lamanite declared to the Nephites:
“And this to the intent that whosoever will believe might be saved, and that whosoever will not believe, a righteous judgment might come upon them; and also if they are condemned they bring upon themselves their own condemnation.
“And now remember, remember, my brethren, that whosoever perisheth, perisheth unto himself; and whosoever doeth iniquity, doeth it unto himself; for behold, ye are free; ye are permitted to act for yourselves; for behold, God hath given unto you a knowledge and he hath made you free.
“He hath given unto you that ye might know good from evil, and he hath given unto you that ye might choose life or death; and ye can do good and be restored unto that which is good, or have that which is good restored unto you; or ye can do evil, and have that which is evil restored unto you” (Helaman 14:29–31; emphasis added).
A number of additional scriptures likewise substantiate the principle that men and women are agents blessed with moral agency and are accountable for their own thoughts, words, and deeds...
Gag. I need to go puke now....Devoted discipleship is the best and only answer to every question and challenge.
So, in other words, "I know this has been comforting to you, but you're wrong. Your kids are condemned because they fell away." Now combine that with the promise that if parents are faithful enough in holding FHE and scripture study, their kids can't fall away. No wonder our parents are so upset about those of us that leave.Statements by General Authorities of the Church describing the influence of faithful parents on wayward children have been and continue to be a source of great familial comfort.1 The consolation arises from the hope these messages seem to proffer that parents who honor gospel covenants, obey the Lord’s commandments, and serve faithfully can influence the salvation of their sons and daughters who go astray. However, the interpretation of these statements by some members of the Church has contributed to a measure of doctrinal misunderstanding.
Yeah, Elder Bednar was a pretty big jerk about it. How many sleepless, tear-filled nights did LDS parents spend after reading that article? How much unnecessary heartbreak did it cause? How much hope did it snuff out? How much despair did it inspire in the hearts of believing parents with non-believing children? And all of that for what, so Elder Bednar can stroke his own ego about how he has corrected a “doctrinal misunderstanding” in the Church? I would have expected more kindness and compassion from a true disciple of Christ, what did it hurt that some parents had hope that their unbelieving children might still be with them in the next life?IT_Veteran wrote: ↑Wed Jun 06, 2018 10:57 am Well, damn. I stand corrected. Interesting that the items that were "not available to Church historians at the time" he chooses to use are those that tear down a comfort to grieving parents, rather than say... multiple accounts of the first vision that tear down the truth claims of the church. Funny how that works.
So, in other words, "I know this has been comforting to you, but you're wrong. Your kids are condemned because they fell away." Now combine that with the promise that if parents are faithful enough in holding FHE and scripture study, their kids can't fall away. No wonder our parents are so upset about those of us that leave.Statements by General Authorities of the Church describing the influence of faithful parents on wayward children have been and continue to be a source of great familial comfort.1 The consolation arises from the hope these messages seem to proffer that parents who honor gospel covenants, obey the Lord’s commandments, and serve faithfully can influence the salvation of their sons and daughters who go astray. However, the interpretation of these statements by some members of the Church has contributed to a measure of doctrinal misunderstanding.
This is a perfect example of cherry picking by the church. Howard Coray was a hired scribe to help Joseph with his history. They'll quote Coray above but discredit him when suggesting the angel visiting Joseph was named Nephi.Not Buying It wrote: SNIPThe statements by Joseph Smith and Orson F. Whitney are construed by some members of the Church to mean that wayward children unconditionally receive the blessings of salvation because of and through the faithfulness of parents. However, this interpretation is moderated by the fact that the most complete account of the Prophet’s sermon was not available to Church historians at the time they compiled an amalgamated version of his teachings from the notes of Willard Richards and William Clayton. In the more complete set of notes recorded by Howard and Martha Coray, Joseph Smith is shown to have qualified his statement to make the promised blessings conditional upon the obedience of the children:
“When a father and mother of a family have [been sealed], their children who have not transgressed are secured by the seal wherewith the Parents have been sealed. And this is the Oath of God unto our Father Abraham and this doctrine shall stand forever.”4
This clarification is more consistent doctrinally. Except for the additional information contained in the Coray records, the concept of unconditional salvation for disobedient children would contradict many foundational teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, including the second article of faith that “men will be punished for their own sins”
He's a conformity fetishist. He was probably terrified that some Mormons might have justified themselves in not being Mormon enough by believing they could ride their parents' coattails into Super VIP Heaven.Not Buying It wrote: ↑Wed Jun 06, 2018 11:26 am Yeah, Elder Bednar was a pretty big jerk about it. How many sleepless, tear-filled nights did LDS parents spend after reading that article? How much unnecessary heartbreak did it cause? How much hope did it snuff out? How much despair did it inspire in the hearts of believing parents with non-believing children? And all of that for what, so Elder Bednar can stroke his own ego about how he has corrected a “doctrinal misunderstanding” in the Church? I would have expected more kindness and compassion from a true disciple of Christ, what did it hurt that some parents had hope that their unbelieving children might still be with them in the next life?