Comments on: Questions from the Grass Roots, 1948 (17)

By: Ardis E. Parshall

Ardis E. Parshall — Wed, 18 May 2011 14:55:46 +0000

Ashes to ashes, Eric.

By: Eric Boysen

Eric Boysen — Wed, 18 May 2011 14:52:15 +0000

Re: 10 – I would certainly not recommend re-cremation. I don’t think it would accomplish anything!

By: Chad Too

Chad Too — Fri, 13 May 2011 02:47:22 +0000

Re: Deaf people in the Temple

I think this goes a long way in showing just how far we (as a people) and we (as a Church) have come in our understanding of the needs of those with disabilities. I have no stats to offer, but in the 1948-era I know mothers who had children with Down Syndrome, or were blind, or deaf for that matter, were actively encouraged to institutionalize their babies and forget they’d ever been born. How Christlike does that strike you?

Perhaps I go a bit overboard with that last sentence, but let’s just say I’m so happy anytime I see a Church program that helps brings all God’s children back to their Savior. Are we not all imperfect in someway?

By: David B

David B — Thu, 12 May 2011 20:23:24 +0000

Lots of modal-verb (e.g., would, should, &c.) weasel-wordness in this installment. Also, in regard to the whole discussion of the disabled in temples—it’s worth remembering that these weren’t binding statements of church policy, dogma, or doctrine (though they were likely normative). Also, that answer’s one of the principal locations of weasel words in this group.

By: E. Wallace

E. Wallace — Thu, 12 May 2011 20:05:10 +0000

Among the myriad social, political, and doctrinal changes of the intervening 50+ years, it’s comforting to know that the “Mormon” vs. “member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints” debate remains a constant.

By: queuno

queuno — Thu, 12 May 2011 17:32:35 +0000

Re cremation – “never encouraged” DOES NOT MEAN “discourages”. It just means the Church isn’t going around saying, “you really should cremate”.

We’ve had this come up a bunch lately in our stake…

By: Clark

Clark — Thu, 12 May 2011 16:19:02 +0000

So are the stakes covering the geographical area of Jackson county, Mo. not called stakes? What do they call their conferences? “The Kansas City Missouri tentpeg of Zion”?

These answers in this post are more strained than the others in the series, OMHO.

By: kevinf

kevinf — Thu, 12 May 2011 16:03:38 +0000

Sorry, I meant to add that the bishopric member was my dentist. That was kind of important.

By: kevinf

kevinf — Thu, 12 May 2011 16:02:52 +0000

Regarding the handicapped serving in the temple, we have a brother who is severely physically handicapped and confined to a motorized wheelchair here in our temple district. He usually is at the temple on a daily basis, and I believe he did between 400 and 500 endowments last year. I doubt there is any concern about his service on the other side.

I once was talking to a member of our bishopric a couple of years back about the temple recommend questions, and we both agreed that this question should be added, though:

“Do you floss?”

HokieKate, no chocolate cake at church functions? Blasphemy!!!

By: Ardis E. Parshall

Ardis E. Parshall — Thu, 12 May 2011 15:31:55 +0000

At least not without lots of napkins, HokieKate, and a reminder to use them!

The handicapped-as-proxy question was the one I found the most interesting, too. Is the question one of whether or not the spirit of the deceased would get the full instruction if the proxy were blind or deaf? Or is it an extension of the symbolism of Christ as the perfect lamb cruelly expanded to all proxies? Either one is doctrinally and logically flawed, and a vivid reminder of the often unimaginable hurdles faced by the deaf and blind (and lame and so many others).

This is a case where I’d really, really like to know who answered the questions, in order to guess better how widespread or “official” an answer like this was.