Rome Temple

Public forum for topics that don't fit into the other categories.
AmyJ
Posts: 883
Joined: 27 Jul 2017, 05:50

Re: Rome Temple

Post by AmyJ » 19 Mar 2019, 05:32

nibbler wrote:
18 Mar 2019, 14:08
This is off topic but I think the subject that we never broach at church is what we do if we receive personal revelation that isn't in harmony with the revelation a church leader receives. I think we often resolve that in our minds by making the assumption that a genuine personal revelation would always be in harmony with the revelations received by leaders.

I get having a house of order, where someone needs to direct the ship, and people's revelations only extend to the borders of their church stewardship. At the same time I think many would benefit from more breathing room within the stewardship of self.

I think we do enjoy that freedom, but don't realize it. Though exercising that freedom could come at the cost of social standing.
When I receive what looks like personal revelation that isn't in harmony with the church leader revelation, I tend to ask myself why I am receiving this revelation (am I biased towards it for some reason) and it is really trying to tell me. I also analyze what I know of the leader to see why the leader may advise it and what the principle behind it is. For me, President Nelson's social media fast for women was not inspiring BUT I realized that I needed to drop a Facebook group that I had been following because it was no longer helpful to me and I was no longer helpful to it. The principle of "Monitor your social media more closely" directed my path to a different path then some of my sisters - and I am OK with that.

User avatar
dande48
Posts: 1443
Joined: 24 Jan 2016, 16:35
Location: Wherever there is danger

Re: Rome Temple

Post by dande48 » 19 Mar 2019, 06:10

nibbler wrote:
18 Mar 2019, 14:08
This is off topic but I think the subject that we never broach at church is what we do if we receive personal revelation that isn't in harmony with the revelation a church leader receives. I think we often resolve that in our minds by making the assumption that a genuine personal revelation would always be in harmony with the revelations received by leaders.
If one person's revelation contradicts another person's revelation, it de-legitimizes the concept of revelation altogether.
"The whole world is a comedy to those that think, a tragedy to those that feel." - Horace Walpole

"Even though there are no ways of knowing for sure, there are ways of knowing for pretty sure."
-Lemony Snicket

User avatar
nibbler
Posts: 4084
Joined: 14 Nov 2013, 07:34
Location: Ten miles west of the exact centre of the universe

Re: Rome Temple

Post by nibbler » 19 Mar 2019, 07:58

I think one person's personal revelation can be different than another person's personal revelation because we are all unique and require different things.

Not to over-trivialize with this example, but take two people that are allergic to peanuts. Person A receives revelation, inspiration, whatever you want to call it, to begin exposure therapy. In time Person A overcomes the most adverse reactions to their allergy. Person B receives revelation to avoid exposure therapy. Who knows, maybe Person B wouldn't have responded at all and their life would have been put at risk.

Where I think we get into trouble is Person B telling Person A that they can't do exposure therapy because they received a revelation to avoid it. In that scenario Person A never receives the benefit that exposure therapy could have afforded them. Likewise there are issues when Person A tells Person B that they should do exposure therapy because they received a revelation that it was okay. Now Person B's life could be at risk.

It's a poor example, since following what we feel to be genuine revelation isn't a guarantee of a good outcome. It's just an example of how one person's revelation can contradict another and how it can be okay.

Revelation as it pertains to church policy is a whole other animal.

But back to the subject of Nelson inviting the entire Q15 to Rome and citing revelation as the reason. I'll be honest, it's weird to me. I've sat in on more than a few lessons about personal revelation and in more than a few of those lessons I've heard the joke that we don't need revelation for every little thing. You wouldn't wait for a revelation to pick out which cereal you wanted for breakfast... and then the joke teller gets a little worried that they may have offended someone with that, so they throw in a quick, "Or you might." to cover the base.

That's what the Q15 get a trip to Rome revelation feels like to me... the rough equivalent of asking god which cereal to eat, aka feeling like you've got to get permission from god for every little thing. Can't Nelson take the Q15 on a Rome vacation/photo op "because I want to" and that's good enough. We're not talking about some earth changing event, we're talking about where a few people spend their weekend.

Maybe it's not about that though. Maybe it's more about communicating to members that top brass is both receiving and acting on revelations.
If one dream dies, dream another dream. If you get knocked down, get back up and go again.
― Joel Osteen

User avatar
dande48
Posts: 1443
Joined: 24 Jan 2016, 16:35
Location: Wherever there is danger

Re: Rome Temple

Post by dande48 » 19 Mar 2019, 10:41

nibbler wrote:
19 Mar 2019, 07:58
I think one person's personal revelation can be different than another person's personal revelation because we are all unique and require different things.
To your peanuts allergy example I wouldn't say that's a contradiction, since we're talking about two different people in two different (but similar) situations. But it would be a contradiction if person A was a parent of person B, and received revelation to push exposure therapy onto person B? Or if Doctor A told person A, "I recieved revelation not to allow you to participate in exposure therapy"? Or a better, and far more common example, what if person A receives revelation that they should marry person B, but person B receives revelation they should break up with person A? If a revelation involves anyone else, that is a place for contradiction.

In the Church, there's a relevatory chain of command. Anyone can receive personal revelation for themselves. Parents receive revelation for their children. Bishops receive revelation for anyone in their ward, and SP for anyone in their stake. The Q15 receive revelation for the entire Church and world. If any of these contradict each other, for example if a gay person receives revelation they should get SS married, but the Q15 receives revelation that it is a sin worthy of excommunication... well, both can't be right. And in the Church, the "revelation" of the higher Church leaders trumps the "revelation" of the lower, with personal revelation taking last place.
"The whole world is a comedy to those that think, a tragedy to those that feel." - Horace Walpole

"Even though there are no ways of knowing for sure, there are ways of knowing for pretty sure."
-Lemony Snicket

Roy
Posts: 5640
Joined: 07 Oct 2010, 14:16
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: Rome Temple

Post by Roy » 19 Mar 2019, 12:39

I mostly agree with you except that the church and church leaders can recognize exceptions.

I love the clause in the Family Proclamation that says to use "individual adaptation" based on our unique circumstances.

However in discussing this in SS we were admonished not to excuse noncompliance by thinking that we are the exception and that exceptions should be rare. I call baloney on that. I believe that each of us can adapt the ideals or best practices to our situations as we see fit. Rather than seeing this as binary with the two acceptable options being compliance or adaptation due to rare extenuating circumstances, I prefer to look at it as a bell curve where most people might need to adapt the counsel to some small degree. The further you get away from the apex the greater the adaptation needed.

This is straying pretty strongly from the OP. If we want to continue in this revelation direction it might be helpful to create a new thread.

In the spirit of getting the thread back on track. President Nelson said the following upon departing Rome:

"This is a hinge point in the history of the church. Things are going to move forward at an accelerated pace, of which this is a part," he said, later adding, "The church is going to have an unprecedented future, unparalleled; we're just building up to what's ahead now."

Maybe President Nelson sees the Rome temple as a hinge point, or turning point, or linchpin that forecasts a mighty future for the LDS. Maybe it is just hyperbole and rhetoric.
I think President Nelson is reasonably succesful in changing the feeling in the church over the last decade. I think the church has been beset with requests for change. If the church changes then it is seen by some as accommodation. If the church does not change then it is seen by some as retrenchment. President Nelson seems to be choosing a third path. The church is changing, some of those changes you may like and some others you may not, but the changes are directed by God with much more to come and at an "accelerated pace."
"It is not so much the pain and suffering of life which crushes the individual as it is its meaninglessness and hopelessness." C. A. Elwood

“It is not the function of religion to answer all the questions about God’s moral government of the universe, but to give one courage, through faith, to go on in the face of questions he never finds the answer to in his present status.” TPC: Harold B. Lee 223

"I struggle now with establishing my faith that God may always be there, but may not always need to intervene" Heber13

Curt Sunshine
Site Admin
Posts: 16533
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 20:24

Re: Rome Temple

Post by Curt Sunshine » 20 Mar 2019, 09:54

I have no doubt the church leadership sees this as revelation. To repeat what I said earlier, I have no way of knowing whether it came from God, so I won't dispute the claim. I think it is fine to talk about our perceptions of revelation, but I personally am not comfortable making statements about whether or not it was revelation - because I don't want others doing that to me.
I see through my glass, darkly - as I play my saxophone in harmony with the other instruments in God's orchestra. (h/t Elder Joseph Wirthlin)

Even if people view many things differently, the core Gospel principles (LOVE; belief in the unseen but hoped; self-reflective change; symbolic cleansing; striving to recognize the will of the divine; never giving up) are universal.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken

User avatar
Sheldon
Posts: 443
Joined: 14 Aug 2013, 13:44

Re: Rome Temple

Post by Sheldon » 21 Mar 2019, 16:21

mom3 wrote:
12 Mar 2019, 12:58
Sheldon and I rarely see eye to eye, but I am with him on this one.
I'm hurt Mom3! I thought we were best buds! :lol:

User avatar
mom3
Posts: 3955
Joined: 02 Apr 2011, 14:11

Re: Rome Temple

Post by mom3 » 21 Mar 2019, 16:28

I'm hurt Mom3! I thought we were best buds!
I see myself as the cute blond across the hall giving you push back. A Penny to your Sheldon? ;)
"I stayed because it was God and Jesus Christ that I wanted to follow and be like, not individual human beings." Chieko Okazaki Dialogue interview

"I am coming to envision a new persona for the Church as humble followers of Jesus Christ....Joseph and his early followers came forth with lots of triumphalist rhetoric, but I think we need a new voice, one of humility, friendship and service. We should teach people to believe in God because it will soften their hearts and make them more willing to serve." - Richard Bushman

Post Reply