Please read carefully before replying...
I have had to read the Temple Recommend card to many a person in the past in preparation for their visit to the Temple and it always makes you check yourself first to see if you could answer each question positively. At times I have wondered what the purpose of each question was as it pertains to one's ability to enter the Temple. Of course it is obvious that Chastity and one's belief that the Church is True is fundamental, but who is to say that being sympathetic to a group** that is not in connection or should I say against the Church's current teaching is a reason not to enter the Temple. Now, you my be wondering what I am getting at, well, this will all depend on the history of the Temple Recommend. For instance I have been told (unverified) that the reason for that question about being sympathetic to certain groups or individuals stemmed out of fact that some members in olden times did not practise Plural Marriage, but at the same time did not show any signs of being against it and in some cases 'helped' or 'protected' those that did. The other specific question about supporting the General Authorities (this question has been changed over the years) grew out of the need to have members sustain the GA's even if they did not like past / present business dealings with them. Now these of course are not official reasons, just heresy from passing leaders during teaching. However, I am interested, anyone have official facts on how these questions were formed?
** This of course is also left up to interpretation since we belong to many groups of life that may be against the Church's teachings in one form or the other.
In regards to sympathizing or associating with groups contrary to the Church, I associate with the University, whose standards and practices are often in opposition with Church teachings, and I associate with performing arts groups in my community, which are composed mostly of people who abhor the standards we espouse. I support the local interfaith association, which is comprised mostly of people who hold our Church in contempt, and many of my friends have been very anti-Mormon. To me, the question about associating with groups contrary to the Church is really about loyalty. The groups in which I participate do not actively move to defame or hinder the Church, although individual members of those groups may have that intent. However, if one of the performing groups in which I participate were to produce a play that was, say, a critical view of the life of Joseph Smith, of course I would leave the group in protest.
The question you are talking about is a "loyalty oath" and actually came about, as I understand it, under President Grant, when the Church began to persecute anyone who continued to believe in plural marriage.
In some ways, this loyalty oath could be construed to apply to all sorts of things. If you were to discuss this question with your bishop or stake president, I am sure that you would find that he would discount such things as colleges, labor unions, political parties, and other organizations diametrically opposed to the teachings of the Church. However, if you were to express a sympathy to the concept of plural marriage, or any of the other fundamental doctrines that have been disavowed by the Church, the temple recommend would immediately be denied.
But one of the questions is clear:
"Do you support, affiliate, or agree with any group or individual whose practices or teachings are contrary to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?"
We tend to forget the word "agree" and individual. Most people think of Anti-Mormon organizations when they listen to this question but isn't this clear that if we agree with an individual whose practices are against the Church we are not worthy of a Temple Recommend? I can think of several individuals that I agree with in certain points and that for the Church's opinion those views are against current Church policy. So by agreeing with them, am I not worthy of a Temple Recommend?
This is the loyalty clause. It wasn't added until the 1930s, when the Church was desperate to weed out anyone who believes in plural marriage.
I don't believe that this question is, in any way, consistent with the doctrines or principles that the Lord restored through Joseph Smith.
QUOTE |
I don't believe that this question is, in any way, consistent with the doctrines or principles that the Lord restored through Joseph Smith. |
QUOTE |
It wasn't added until the 1930s, when the Church was desperate to weed out anyone who believes in plural marriage. |