Will we be a family of two church communities and love both?

So the Spirit must be hearing my thoughts, I think.   We attended a Stake presentation of the Youth Trek, a recent activity taken by the young people in the Stake (compilation of several Wards).  Along with their more mature Ma's and Pa's, volunteers who help organize the trek and see to the needs of the participants, once again technology helped to show a precious history.  A dvd showing the highlights of the trek was presented at the Stake building with attendance by mostly young people, and some Ma's and Pa's.  Of course, we attended, because the history of the treks is important to us.  We were gifted a dvd to take home, even though the copies of the dvds that were made available after the presentation were to go to the participating young and their Ma's and Pa's.  It was an exciting presentation and I so appreciate owning the dvd that we might share it with others.

Attending our second Sunday services at our new Ward, and I think the Relief Society sisters just sparkle.   Already two have stopped by our abode to present a welcome gift and info flyer as well as their delightful company.   It was an unexpected, unannounced visit, and in recognition that I was preparing our dinner meal, intended to just drop off the gift and say welcome.  I prevailed upon them to stay and visit, very pleasant young ladies.  And of course, at the end of the visit, the question of would I be interested in doing Visiting Teaching.  Yes, of course.  Meeting different people in different walks of life continues to be interesting, sometimes challenging and sometimes I'm still incredulous.

Last week the Bishop had made arrangements to come by for a visit, and since other priorities for him came up, he needed to postpone the visit to tonight.  We look forward to his visit this evening.

Listening to BYU forum, and was particularly pleased to see Elaine Pagels in the lineup of speakers.  Watched the episode of her presentation, which corresponds to the bible study we are doing at St John's Cathedral on the Gospel of Thomas, and Gnostic influences over the history of church development.  

This morning I found a beautiful piece at Exponent, Relief Society Lesson 13;  Relief Society True Charity and Pure Religion.   Linked as it is well worth the read.  As the lessons are from Lorenzo Snow, this lesson is of particular interest to me and the development of the lesson, sharing history from the origins of Relief Society to today corresponds with my potent feeling about the potential of Relief Society.  It also harkens back to the subject of a talk I was invited to share in Sacrament meeting, taken primarily from then R.S. Julie Beck and the manual Daughters of My Kingdom.  

The grandchildren will be coming soon and will be looking for what we have planned for their afternoon.  I have recently approached their mother, asking if we might take them to what we call for their benefit the 3-hour church as our way of distinguishing it from the 1 hour church (St John's Episcopal Cathedral which is actually about a 2 hour period).  It's a lot to say to youngsters The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints in their first exposure to the Church, so it was easier to make the distinction between the two churches with the Cathedral as one and the 3 hour church as the other.  I may have jumped the gun a bit in asking their mother (my daughter) to talk with their father about having the children baptized.  Might be better for me to work with the Lord's timetable for these two children.

I'm eager for grandson (7 years old) to find the mix that will hold his attention and interest.   Also, I am thinking he may come to appreciate that he would have a rich role in the Priesthood while at the same time I'm not as anxious for granddaughter to settle for the role laid out for her by the Church.  Her ability to serve as an Acolyte at St John's Cathedral would seem to imply more opportunity for her gender role in her long term goal setting beyond the role of marriage and having children, while the long term goal for grandson has more potential, I believe, in the LDS setting.  

Not sure how this will work, having our feet in two churches, however, I am confident that we have the Lord's ear on the matter, and direction will show itself in due time.  I am so pleased to be including the LDS church along with the Episcopal church, having felt the absence of it in these months of our attendance at St John's Episcopal Cathedral.  Somehow what is taught at one church overlaps nicely one with the other and I strongly feel the small voice guiding us in perhaps a non-traditional role in either church, but one that seems to call out to us nonetheless.   

With that I would also like to link the two recent sermons by TVR Bill Ellis, Dean at St John's Cathedral.  In this one, he speaks of participatory observation, the familiar 'Carry no purse, no bag, no sandals; and greet no one on the road'  and I love how he develops that theme, realistically.  In this one, he develops themes familiar to me in speaking to the norm of that time in which another learned (nomikos - loosely lawyer) asks of Jesus questions posed as a 'test' of what Jesus knows of the Law, the Torah.  Of course, it is designed to discredit Jesus, although another vein of thought for me is that it was a venue used at that time to demonstrate who did and did not have correct teachings of the Law and Torah.  The sermon goes on to speak to the two parables, The Good Samaritan and the Prodigal Son that speak to me powerfully as an overarching message of what it means to love your neighbor, and btw, just who is your neighbor?   Bill Ellis hits the mark every time, it seems to me with his open and curious mind in not teaching absolutes, rather potentially alternative ways to look at the same body of knowledge.  I would sorely miss his lectures and sermons. 

note to self; per email received from Q & A  (retired) Bishop John Shelby Spong, I want to look into respected theologian and nuclear physicist, Ian Barbour and book he authored When Science Meets Religion.

Tithing/Temple, a barrier - either/or - not much gray here

Well we knew this time was going to come, and we thought it would be when Arthur and I had our one year interview with the Bishop, me the newcomer, him the returnee.  And something came up sooner -- for me.  It had been suggested that it would be time for me to accompany the young people and new converts in the various Wards in our Stake in their trip to the Temple to perform baptisms for the dead.  And it was set up for me to go with them this month, Oct 29.   I've heard and read about this ritual, performing baptisms for the dead, and the reasons for it, and I have to say it has a sound of peculiar to many who are non-mormons, myself included.  So close to Halloween, and the very name of the ritual, and images do float across my mind, even though I know that is not the aim or intent of the practice.  It is though, one of the unique features of this church, as there are not many other Christian based churches that have this kind of a ritual.  I do know when we lived in Japan, in a Japanese village, not on the military base, that I learned of an annual practice required of the families which involved going into the tombs that dotted the hillsides to perform the ritual of washing the bones of their dead ancestors buried in those tombs.

Later in my life experiences, learning of other faith belief sets that honored ancestors as part of their spirituality.  Putting these together, I don't see the Mormon practice of performing baptisms for the dead as bizarre as it might seem at first glance.  Further that the members feel it is with a great degree of a sense of sacredness that this practice is performed and observed.  In that regard when I was invited to participate, I did feel it was intended as an invitation to participate in an honored and sacred ritual practice.  I would liken it to be invited to participate in a Sweat Lodge ceremony or something along those lines that is a intended as a welcoming gesture to enable a person new to the culture to become more fully part of that culture.

The LDS church has tied Tithing to Temple in a way that affords no or seemingly no wiggle room.  My reaction to it has been strongly in opposition.  My husband's reaction, while somewhat different from mine for different reasons is also strongly in opposition.  While I'm favorable to the concept of generosity, supporting the organization/church/affiliation doing outreach in an effort to help humankind, I'm not comfortable with the monetary amount being identified as an exact amount.  I'm very much not comfortable with tithing being a requirement to enter a temple.  I've had too many years within other faith beliefs, and organizations which also need to be funded and those contributions being both voluntary with the amount being voluntary.  Although, having said all that, I was so very taken and impressed when we visiting the Bishop's tithing house many years ago in Chesterfield, Idaho (a restored and preserved historic town of the Mormon pioneer era).  The building was were food products and such were stored,  intended for use by the community.   It was such a beautiful concept, a concept which lifted my heart and a practice that certainly seemed somewhat lost to this time gone by period in history.  Actually is is not a bygone concept, in historic times, members who could not pay in cash could pay their tithing in kind ie, milk, butter, eggs, produce, meat, grain, hay, etc.  In it's more modernized form, it feels much more industrial and organizational although the generosity underlying the concept remains the same.  Thus is the value of tithing among the membership.

Part of the requirement to enter an LDS temple is an interview with the Ward Bishop in which he has a list of questions to ask and the responses will cause him to make a determination as to whether the person will be given what is called a 'temple recommend'.  In this case, he advised me it would be a one day only temple recommend for the purpose of permitting me to be in that part of the temple in which the baptisms for the dead are performed.  Our Bishop is a loving, compassionate, caring man, and it is obvious in how he handles various sensitive situations.  We moved along through the questions well enough, until he asked me the question about tithing, do I pay a full tithing.  No, I answered.  No, he said with a bit of surprise, but somehow I rather think he would know either outright or subliminally which members are or are not paying a tithing.  He explained that perhaps it was not yet time for me, and that he could not give a temple recommend at this time, that it would be confidential information, and some members might be curious enough to ask him why I was not going to the temple this trip, and that he would indicate that it was just not time yet.  I explained to him that I do respect his sense of confidentiality, and that I have respect for the concept, and that in this instance it was not required.   That I thought it to be a topic of discussion and conversation among the membership as I was not yet satisfied that I had heard enough reasons to justify the practice which I felt was very damaging to some of the membership who were already struggling with the very basic fundamentals of life - shelter, clothing, food.

I wanted this to be a discussion/conversation with the Bishop, not a justification or explanation of why I wasn't in compliance on my part. He asked if I understood the premise of tithing and  I pointed out that I had given a lesson on tithing recently, so my head understands the concept, and my life experiences tell me otherwise.   He spent a great deal of time with me after, and I very much liked that he was not moving in a heavy handed direction, rather was very much attempting to find different approaches that might resonate with me, including some personal experiences of his own.  It felt it was a productive shared discussion and exploration of this particular topic, and I'm fairly sure it will come up again soon.  

I shared some of that conversation with my husband afterwards on our way home, he was quiet and said to me that he was very proud of the way in which I handled myself in this interview, as well as the approach I chose to use.  We spent a great deal of the evening later discussing tithing/temple again; we have discussed it often and many times before.  To me it feels like an absolute - a non-wavering obstacle in the path for me ahead.   It equates one to the other, we don't pay tithing, there will be no temple, and Temple is a Big part of the Mormon/LDS experience.  I'm also intuiting that the path the Bishop, Stake President, and membership would like to see me take leads directly to the temple, capital T.

Can one be a practicing Mormon, a participating member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and not participate in the tithing/temple joining experience, I wonder?  

The experience in my Ward, in communion among the membership has felt to me to date spiritual enough in it's own right without the temple experiences.   As I explained to the Bishop in the ensuing discussion, many other of the religions have beautiful Cathedrals and do not prohibit people from entering that sacred space; this being the only church I know about that has these beautiful sacred building in which people are not permitted to enter without having paid for the privilege via first having a temple recommend, of which tithing is a requirement.   I will leave it at that for now.  It is a thing to continue to ponder and time, Holy Ghost, spirit of the soul will guide me in this one.

A Calling, Home Teaching, Visiting Teaching

Last Sunday I was given my first 'Calling'.  What does that look like?  The Ward Bishop asked to speak with me, asked my husband if he would mind, to which my husband, with a big smile on his face, shook his head no and said go right ahead.  Because my husband already knows how much of this works, he was amused, lovingly so, but amused nonetheless.   The Bishop asked if I would agree to being called to be a Relief Society (R.S)  Teacher (once a month, third Sunday, even numbered lessons).  Ahh, sure, I can do that is what I said.  He talked with me a while longer, and my questions for him were along the lines of being very new to these doctrines, I was very likely to be more off track than on track in 'teaching' anything.  I have no wish to offend the sisters.  He encouraged me with some instruction in how this church conducts situations in which 'discussion' is encouraged and  some methods to ensure it remain gentle, loving discussion.    Okay, so this is my new function in R.S. meetings, and I already envision the sisters teaching me more than I would be 'teaching' them.  I'm both flattered and also mildly amused as this may be a gentle, loving method to get me up to speed in learning some of the doctrine of this church.

Tuesday night my husband went out with another male member of the church to complete 'Home Teaching Visits' to the families assigned to them.  Better that he should write or talk of his own experiences, these are not new to him, new to me as his newly baptized wife, but not new to him at all.

Wednesday night R.S. President visited me at my home to help orient me to my new function (calling).  There will be the usual formalities on a Sunday where it is announced and followed at some point by a process of 'setting apart'.  My first 'teaching' experience will be this Sunday, using the manual/book the church uses and the lesson will be on tithing.   How fitting since I still have personal issues to work through with the concept of tithing.  She and I  talked some about how I viewed tithing, especially in relation to my prior employment and the impact on families at lower end of economical scale, for which this county is particularly known.   What is the difference between a church requesting a collection and a church requesting a tithing?  Well, there is to be the crux of my 'teaching' this Sunday in giving this lesson.

She also asked me if I would be willing to be a Visiting Teacher.   Home Teacher, Visiting Teacher ...  I hear these words used frequently, and haven't figured out which is which, why, and functions.  She explained that Home Teachers are male (priesthood) who visit the family and Visiting Teachers are women who tend to the women.   I agreed to participate as a visiting teacher.  Since we are located some miles from the town served by the Ward, and we are down to one vehicle temporarily, I had some concerns about time frames.  She explains that the visiting teaching can be done by phone calls, letters, or home visits.  Another sister who lives in our little village does her visiting teaching by phone calls.

Thursday night, we had Home Teachers visiting us at our home.  Awkward as that feels to me, it went fairly well in that it was more of a get acquainted visit.  I was pleased that both of the men have formal professions one as superintendent of the local school district, and the other a retired college counselor.  I'm not going to say I was altogether comfortable with the visit, given some of the topics and at one point one made use of the word 'liberal' somewhat disparagingly.  It quickly became clear though, that his intent was in a different direction related to his professional field, and perhaps not aimed at those of us who may hold and cherish our 'liberal' views.  I wanted to be entirely honest and forthcoming in my belief set, the story of my husband's return and my reasoning for baptism into this church in sharing information about us with them.  The discussion took on a respectful tone, a sharing that I found useful, and the discussion soon shifted away from topics that are not yet comfortable for me.  As I explained, I am not a 'convert' in the traditional sense of the word and bring with me my own testimony of faith which is steadfast irrespective of the differences in doctrinal teachings.  There are aspects of this religion that I much respect, and aspects that I am not likely to value as much.  I prefer to set my own pace, and not be instructed as to what I need to or should believe, nor the manner in which to express my beliefs, although I see learning the Mormon vernacular and the symbolic definitions as relevant to shared communication.  It was a good visit, and I think I shall appreciate their future visits as appreciable opportunities.

It has been an interesting week.   I can feel myself softening a little, pulling down some of the walls.  Given that my orientation to the LDS religion has been from an unfavorable vantage point from several directions, understandably I have adopted a somewhat defensive position.   It does indeed appear that these are caring people who do have an interest in caring for one another.  I'm not yet sure that the established methodology for how the members care for each other is in the best interest of the individual or the best interest of the organization.  My thinking is that it is in best interest of the organization, rightly so, with the bigger challenge being addressing the individuals as to their best interests when those interests conflict with the organizational interests.

Cleared for Baptism - April 30, 2011

Had another missionary lesson/discussion last week, March 9th.  And this time the young missionary brought with him the mission leader, another young, energetic missionary.  We started off the discussion in good hearted and light humor, and as it turned out it was a planned 'interview' with questions put to me that I was to answer...yes, those questions that have concerned me like do you believe Joseph Smith was a prophet; do you believe the Book of Mormon; will you live the Word of Wisdom, and on down the list.  Then I was given a samll card with the last questions which are of an intrusive and sensitive nature, and instructions to merely answer yes or no.  Uh, more about this in another post, and I could answer no easily enough, yet it was very worrisome to me that if I had reason to answer yes, what would be the next steps, and if I had answered yes, that would mean these young men would now know something about very personal decisions which are not the business of the church in any capacity.

But that is not the purpose of this post.  So, I am good to go now in proceeding with baptism, and the young missionaries are most pleased.   Next, we are waiting for Arthur's follow up interview with the Bishop.  The women's monthly potluck dinner is scheduled for the next evening, and the Bishop is agreeable to doing the interview with Arthur during that time.   I had a pleasant time at the potluck meal - the feminine influence was there with beautiful roses on the tables, tablecloths, and a set up for a lovely shared meal.

Arthur and the Bishop showed up after the meal was fininshed (some thoughtful women had taken plates into the Bishop's office for he and Arthur), and Arthur is cleared to proceed with baptsim.  Now it is a matter of setting the date.  The Bishop was slightly disappointed that we needed to put it out into April, but understands why as we are coordinating a date with Arthur's brothers from Utah to be here for the baptsim.  He informs Arthur that one of the young missionaries may be reassigned within the next two weeks and was hopeful to be here for the baptisms.

Next day is the horrific tsunami that did so much damage to Japan.  We are on tsunami alert here in Western WA on the coastline which is where we live.  Spent an anxious day.  The young missionary phones during that day to inquire about Arthur's interview with Bishop, to which I tell him that he has been cleared to proceed with baptism, and the potential date.  He is disappointed that the date is out so far, catches himself and rearranges his expression to one of congratulatory rather than disappointment.  I tell him that I will see if we can move the date up prior to the other Elder's mission reassignment date, and he is pleased.

Quick exchanges with Arthur's brothers and they cannot be freed up to get here earlier than April, if anything the date is pushed even futher out in April to the last weekend.  I phone the young missionary to advise we weren't able to get the date early enough, but would it be okay to phone the Misson President to ask permission that both missionaries be freed up that day to attend.  He is pleased with the suggestion, and provides me the contact information, although he is not optimistic that special allowance will be given.

Church on Sunday, which is quiet and uneventful.   It was the weekend of the Daylight Savings time change, to switch the clocks an hour forward (Fall Back/Spring Forward).  Many were not at church Sunday, likely due to the time changes and their clocks were not yet on Daylight Savings time.

Meeting with the Bishop

Sunday, Feb 6, 2011.  We attend the church meetings.  First meeting is what is called Sacrament Meeting, and I enjoy the ritual of the young men preparing and sharing the communion bread and water.  It falls short of the Eucharist services that I am used to at St John's Episcopal Church, and there are some of the elements of the communion in that it is a somber and sacred ceremony.  I don't know about water instead of wine, but the idea of bread (body of Christ) and wine (blood of Salvation) has enough similarity to be comforting, comfortable.   Although Arthur tells me we cannot partake as we are not yet baptized members of this church.  Hmm, well, that seems a bit harsh, as we are assuredly in communion in the body of Christ already, but it's their church rules, so we will go with the flow.

Off we go now to another meeting they have set up seemingly just for us, as we are the only two in attendance, with two older men who are instructing.  We are reading out of a book, Gospel Principles.  The content structure of the book offers an idea, which includes some verses, followed by some discussion questions.  I liken it to the confirmation lessons we had to take at St John's before becoming confirmed, or a catechism, although I'm fairly sure the LDS people would not appreciate that comparison.

And now off we go in separate directions, he to what is called a priesthood meeting and me to what is called a relief society meeting.  I suppose I should capitalize the first letters in those named meetings.  I'm still struggling a bit though with the gender distinctions, and men being almost automatically in a priesthood while women are what....oh, women, doing what women do best, enduring to the end.  Okay, that was snarky.  I'm a newcomer, I'm permitted to have impressions.  I came from a small local church in our region that had a male and female priest, and across the larger church has a mix of genders who are priests, including women who are Bishops.   Arthur and I had begun the long three year process of training towards becoming priests for the church.  Actually, we hadn't come to that decision, it was a path that we were encouraged to begin to walk, and we were aiming towards becoming licensed preachers, meaning being recognized by the Church to preach, having taken and completed some hermeneutics trainings.   I digress, well not really, as the all male priesthood does seem to me to be a bit of a step backwards, and I'm willing to be patient in learning how this church structures itself, appreciating that while I know some things about this church, I am also in a learning curve with much more yet to learn.

Meetings are concluded and we are off to meet with the Bishop.  He is an engaging and  kindly fellow, with a ready smile, one of our own (by that I mean he has a long history here in the region with it's lumber, fishing industries and his secular career was working in the forests).   We all share some stories about our affections for the area, share some stories about our secular careers, and somewhere in all that friendliness, we shift to the business at hand.  He is in no hurry and pulls out an instruction manual (I assume it is a manual for Bishops and other ranking stewards of the church).  We are amused as it much resembles the RCWs, WACs, and Instruction Manuals we have used in the course of our work with Washington State.

So the bottom line is that when a person such as Arthur, raised in the church, returned missionary, married in the Temple, raised his children in the church, held callings and church offices, and came to point of disenchantment with the church, requesting his name be removed from the church records, is required to go through the same process of return to the church as someone who has been ex-communicated by the church. Go figure.   The night before, with not some degree of anxiety, upon hearing there was to be this interview with the Bishop, while they were reassuring me that I could be baptized, but they were not sure Arthur could be baptized, I had said to the men in the room, that I would not be baptized into this church if my husband was not also going to be baptized.  Once again they tried to reassure me, not fully understanding or appreciating what I was trying to say, which was not that my path to baptism was in jeopardy, but that I had no wish to be part of this church unless it was with my husband, this being a male dominated church structure. They were eager to reassure me that the women had a very active role in this church, and it was at this point that Arthur suggested we all needed some time out from what he described as the train wreck we had just been hit with.

I liked the Bishop, and his approach was inviting, welcoming, but I still took issue with what was seeming to me to be a punitive course laid out for Arthur.  As the Bishop continued to explain, Arthur could indeed be baptized with me, he could not baptize me, and Arthur had already told me he was okay with that, but we had been laboring under the impression that he was not going to be permitted to be baptized until a year had passed.  And I was absolutely sure I had no wish to be baptized into this church if he was not.  As it was explained then, seems it is not nor was it an an issue of baptism.  We both could be baptized.  The issue was the procedure that treated returning people who had their name removal in the same manner as people wanting to return from  an excommunication.  Arthur would have to wait a year for restoration to the priesthood, callings, temple recommend and well, frankly, I don't know what all else.  I was not grasping how this was not punitive, but Arthur was assuring me by that time, that he was okay with it, understood it and wanted us to proceed.

The Bishop explained that he had already sent up his recommendation for our baptism, that it would to to the Stake President, and then up to headquarters (okay that's the word I use, not the word the Bishop used) in SLC.  Or at least that was my impression of the administrative procedure the Bishop was explaining.  He told us the Stake President was going to be at the Ward next Sunday and we could meet with him after the church meetings.

I'm completely happy with the Bishop's handling of the situation inasmuch as it is agreeable to Arthur and he assures me it is.  Next...meeting with the Stake President.