Jump to content
The Nehor

Reorganization of the Melchizedek Priesthood

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, bluebell said:

You're going to teach it to your ward that this change is the result of having to live a lesser law?

I'll offer that as a thought --- that often major changes like this are a result of and a reaction to failings on our part. President Benson (Elder Benson, then) pointed out multiple examples where God has kept spelling things out in more and more detail, and altered things in reaction to disappointing response on the part of the Saints. In these cases, he taught, the "new" instructions are divinely appointed, but our reward is less than it could have been if we had been faithful. I think I'll encourage people to look forward with faith and renewed commitment, but also to be aware of the context and history. 

As Brigham Young taught, the time to be bold is when those who can correct us are there. 

I sense an insistence on the part of some to think that the only time God has had to adjust his program in response to people was the people of Moses. That in our day, changes to programs are only ever the implementing of a higher law, and that we ourselves never disappoint as a people or drop the ball. I think there are many examples that could be added to Elder Benson's examples.

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, rongo said:

I'll offer that as a thought --- that often major changes like this are a result of and a reaction to failings on our part. President Benson (Elder Benson, then) pointed out multiple examples where God has kept spelling things out in more and more detail, and altered things in reaction to disappointing response on the part of the Saints. In these cases, he taught, the "new" instructions are divinely appointed, but our reward is less than it could have been if we had been faithful. I think I'll encourage people to look forward with faith and renewed commitment, but also to be aware of the context and history. 

As Brigham Young taught, the time to be bold is when those who can correct us are there. 

I sense an insistence on the part of some to think that the only time God has had to adjust his program in response to people was the people of Moses. That in our day, changes to programs are only ever the implementing of a higher law, and that we ourselves never disappoint as a people or drop the ball. I think there are many examples that could be added to Elder Benson's examples.

No member of the church who is aware of the changes to living the law of consecration should make that mistake.

Still though,  some of the worst messes that the church has ever had to deal with have been caused by leadership teaching "reasons why" that were just their opinion.   

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Rain said:

My original plan was to take notes and post them as I did like I did last fall for Jeanne and others who were not able to watch at the time. After my first post or two I decided against it. So you have me on posting during the meeting, but not on wanting to be "first".

To tell you the truth, I am ok with posting during meetings depending on circumstances. My husband oddly ends up traveling for work during stake conference sometimes. Since they don't record the meeting and he is doing his best to keep the Sabbath holy I will take notes by text and send them to him. He especially appreciates it when he is sitting in an airport for 6 hours.

I get it

I didn't mean for a minute to make it personal or to make you uncomfortable sorry about that. I was just commenting on what we all like to do.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

We were using PEC as a kind of Ward Welfare/Missionary meeting and included the Relief Society President every week. This gave us all the leaders over the adults and the Ward Mission Leader so seemed ideal to discuss welfare situations and missionary work. We only held it once a week. Pretty sure we will just have another Ward Council meeting going forward.

The line between the two meetings was getting more and more blurry all the time so just made sense to do away with it. Now all the sisters get to come every week too I guess  ;)

Another victory for women's equality.

 

Edited by mfbukowski

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, rongo said:

I really think that is what this is. Really God's will and authorized, but a lesser law because we couldn't/wouldn't keep the higher law. It saddens me, but I also felt at peace last night. 

I'm thinking about talking about this in ward conference in a couple of weeks. Elder Benson gave a talk in the 1960s about how we lose blessings the more God has to spell out for us or when he has to give us lesser laws. But when he does give us lesser laws, then we are blessed for keeping the law given, and his people are blessed because of it. And, even under the lesser law, some still held the Melchizedek priesthood, even though it was under the Levitical. 

I don't see high priests ever being abolished as an office at the local level (like seventies were). Too few literal descendants of Aaron, so bishops have to be high priests. And have counselors. ;) 

Either that or get the missionaries to pull out the phone book and hammer on everyone named Cohen. ;)

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I'm really confused. Why would this be a lesser law?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

The line between the two meetings was getting more and more blurry all the time so just made sense to do away with it. Now all the sisters get to come every week too I guess  ;)

Another victory for women's equality.

 

I already go every week.  We alternate Sunday morning meetings between the Missionary Committee meeting and Ward council.   I'm supposed to attend both (as the YW president).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, bluebell said:

I already go every week.  We alternate Sunday morning meetings between the Missionary Committee meeting and Ward council.   I'm supposed to attend both (as the YW president).

what is the missionary committee mtg? is that like ward correlation meeting?

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Duncan said:

what is the missionary committee mtg? is that like ward correlation meeting?

Yeah, that's basically what it is, only it's expanded because each auxiliary is expected to send a representative twice a month.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Edited. It was voice to text gibberish. And unimportant besides

Edited by mfbukowski

Share this post


Link to post
35 minutes ago, Rain said:

I'm really confused. Why would this be a lesser law?

Me, too. Could someone explain this?

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, cinepro said:

It will definitely change the dynamic in the meeting.

In my ward, our EQ meetings tended to be very..."entertaining."  We had good lessons, to be sure, but there are a lot of personalities and we all felt a lot of freedom to make jokes and comments that weren't something you would find in the manual.  But we had great attendance because it was a fun place to be.

But in those weeks when we've combined with the HP, it's a very different type of class.  The HP would make the majority of the comments, and it was a much more serious (and boring) meeting.  And I distinctly noticed that more Elders would have their phones out and just disengage from the lesson.

That's just my ward, but it will be interesting to see how different people experience this change.

 

3 hours ago, rongo said:

I'll offer that as a thought --- that often major changes like this are a result of and a reaction to failings on our part. President Benson (Elder Benson, then) pointed out multiple examples where God has kept spelling things out in more and more detail, and altered things in reaction to disappointing response on the part of the Saints. In these cases, he taught, the "new" instructions are divinely appointed, but our reward is less than it could have been if we had been faithful. I think I'll encourage people to look forward with faith and renewed commitment, but also to be aware of the context and history. 

As Brigham Young taught, the time to be bold is when those who can correct us are there. 

I sense an insistence on the part of some to think that the only time God has had to adjust his program in response to people was the people of Moses. That in our day, changes to programs are only ever the implementing of a higher law, and that we ourselves never disappoint as a people or drop the ball. I think there are many examples that could be added to Elder Benson's examples.

 

42 minutes ago, Rain said:

I'm really confused. Why would this be a lesser law?

 

5 minutes ago, Prof said:

Me, too. Could someone explain this?

 

3 hours ago, bluebell said:

No member of the church who is aware of the changes to living the law of consecration should make that mistake.

Still though,  some of the worst messes that the church has ever had to deal with have been caused by leadership teaching "reasons why" that were just their opinion.   

 

Rongo, I put the quotes in order for a reason. Already this “idea” is beginning to evol into “mormonmyth Gospel Truth”, please consider what Bluebell posted about “opinions”.

As for my myself, I try to stay of the “why did the Church .....” philosophications, because I don’t speak for the Church and I have had to be part of teying to correct someones personal opinion that was received as Gospel Truth.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

One thing I hope doesn't get lost in this combining is a sense of "the one", instead of 10 elders and everyone knows everyone else, you could have now 25 brethren and people can slip away without being noticed or used or whatever

Share this post


Link to post

If you haven't already, sync your LDS Tools.  High Priest Groups and Elders Quorum presidencies are GONE.  President Nelson wasn't kidding with his blanket release.  Also, Visiting Teaching Supervisors have been changed to Ministering Supervisors.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, provoman said:

 

 

 

 

 

Rongo, I put the quotes in order for a reason. Already this “idea” is beginning to evol into “mormonmyth Gospel Truth”, please consider what Bluebell posted about “opinions”.

As for my myself, I try to stay of the “why did the Church .....” philosophications, because I don’t speak for the Church and I have had to be part of teying to correct someones personal opinion that was received as Gospel Truth.

Just to be clear - nothing about my post goes into me believing that this is a gospel truth. I'm just not seeing any basis for the idea so I'm curious how rongo and any others see it that way. It's a question about how he thinks, nothing more. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Traela said:

If you haven't already, sync your LDS Tools.  High Priest Groups and Elders Quorum presidencies are GONE.  President Nelson wasn't kidding with his blanket release.  Also, Visiting Teaching Supervisors have been changed to Ministering Supervisors.

 

Yep, I talked with my brother who is also a clerk and same in his ward. My dad is/was a High Priest Group leader and he lost access. They also released our Home Teaching supervisors and quorum instructors in both quorums.

I just sent an email to the Bishopric recommending an email to the Ward Council letting everyone know so that the effected presidencies are not confused.

On the bright side the Quarterly Report does not need Home or Visiting Teaching numbers for the First Quarter and you did not do it it will not be recorded on earth. I have no idea if it will be recorded in heaven. :) 

The church put a document detailing the changes on LDS.org in the Official Communications section which might be accessible to all members who log in. It is by the link to Handbook 2. Not sure on availablility. Everyone in my family I was with at the time we were playing with this after Easter dinner has a leadership calling. There is a letter that will be read in sacrament meeting.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

One thing that wasn't, I hope permanently affected, is the food orders for people. I, as a preparer, took one tonite for a brother, so I had access to that gratefully. Access to other stuff was denied.

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎3‎/‎31‎/‎2018 at 7:45 PM, jkwilliams said:

That’s interesting. We have quite a few high priests in our ward, plus a large elders quorum. It’s going to be a big meeting

This was my thought too. In my ward we have large, active quorums. Combining them could be a challenge. In my experience I have definitely noticed that people hide more easily in, or disappear entirely from, large groups. But it will be interesting to watch these changes unfold.

The new EQ Pres. will have a massive responsibility, essentially being responsible for every household in the ward, similar to the bishop. But I don't think this will "free up" the bishops to work more with the YM/YW as was stated to be one of the benefits of this change. As long as the bishop is the only judge in Israel, for hearing confessions of all members, and releasing financial assistance, there will still be a bottle neck at the bishop. Those things must go through him and those are the things that have always pulled the bishop's attention away from the youth.

Is anyone aware of a scripture or doctrine that teaches that ONLY a bishop can be a judge in Israel within the ward? Can a ward only have one judge? Or would it be possible to also assign those keys to another key-holder, like an Elders Quorum President? As we've seenbviously, there are many things that can change. I'm just wondering if there would be any room to have a 2nd judge in a ward to truly free up the bishop as seems to be the desire.

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

This was my thought too. In my ward we have large, active quorums. Combining them could be a challenge. In my experience I have definitely noticed that people hide more easily in, or disappear entirely from, large groups. But it will be interesting to watch these changes unfold.

The new EQ Pres. will have a massive responsibility, essentially being responsible for every household in the ward, similar to the bishop. But I don't think this will "free up" the bishops to work more with the YM/YW as was stated to be one of the benefits of this change. As long as the bishop is the only judge in Israel, for hearing confessions of all members, and releasing financial assistance, there will still be a bottle neck at the bishop. Those things must go through him and those are the things that have always pulled the bishop's attention away from the youth.

Is anyone aware of a scripture or doctrine that teaches that ONLY a bishop can be a judge in Israel within the ward? Can a ward only have one judge? Or would it be possible to also assign those keys to another key-holder, like an Elders Quorum President? As we've seenbviously, there are many things that can change. I'm just wondering if there would be any room to have a 2nd judge in a ward to truly free up the bishop as seems to be the desire.

In theory you could split the administration a bit. Bishop is an Aaronic Priesthood office. You could have the bishop take care of the youth, the judge stuff, and a lot of the rest. You could then assign a different High Priest to be the Presiding High Priest and put them in charge of Temple recommends, spiritual counseling, presiding in  Ward Councils, working with Elder’s Quorum and Relief Society, and dealing with a lot of the administration.

Doubt it will happen. Their resposibilities overlap so much they would have to update each other constantly.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

D&C 107:68-76 has a good summary.  Basically, no, a bishop cannot delegate the confession of sins.  Anyone with that authority would be a bishop.  And I would not want multiple bishops in a ward.  Leadership roulette is bad enough with one per ward.

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, revelstoked said:

D&C 107:68-76 has a good summary.  Basically, no, a bishop cannot delegate the confession of sins.  Anyone with that authority would be a bishop.  And I would not want multiple bishops in a ward.  Leadership roulette is bad enough with one per ward.

What about the financial piece? Could that be delegated so the bishop isn't the one required to make the decisions for the release of financial assistance?

Share this post


Link to post
47 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

What about the financial piece? Could that be delegated so the bishop isn't the one required to make the decisions for the release of financial assistance?

Not as we've been clearly instructed. When they emphasize the things that cannot be delegated, those things are 1) common judge (confession and repentance), and 2) finances (fast offering disbursement and tithing settlement). Things that fall under "president of the Aaronic priesthood" and "presiding high priest," such as setting apart all presidents, also cannot be delegated. 

In other words, it is precisely those things that some are suggesting could be delegated out that, by Church doctrine and policy, cannot be. Not without a very radical shift that would call into question the foundations of D&C definitions of priesthood, offices, keys, and duties/roles.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, revelstoked said:

D&C 107:68-76 has a good summary.  Basically, no, a bishop cannot delegate the confession of sins.  Anyone with that authority would be a bishop.  And I would not want multiple bishops in a ward.  Leadership roulette is bad enough with one per ward.

This is a very good point. I think people who want to dilute the calling and role of bishops should think very carefully about what the ramifications and implications of that would be --- think beyond "Hey, it would really lighten his burden and share the load if we . . ."

Overall, not a good thing. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think finance falls under "administering all temporal things."  Bishops already have clerks and usually a clerk assigned just to finance.  They prep all the reports and balance all the books but the bishop still must sign all accounting paperwork in the end.  I think this is also why the church doesn't do "standard" audits (like a publicly traded company would do).  For ward level spending the Bishop's authority alone is sufficient for most kinds of spending.  There are some controls in modern accounting that require two or more authorizations for some spending that is limited to a single point of authority by scripture.  But there may be wiggle room.

 

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, rongo said:

Not as we've been clearly instructed. When they emphasize the things that cannot be delegated, those things are 1) common judge (confession and repentance), and 2) finances (fast offering disbursement and tithing settlement). Things that fall under "president of the Aaronic priesthood" and "presiding high priest," such as setting apart all presidents, also cannot be delegated. 

In other words, it is precisely those things that some are suggesting could be delegated out that, by Church doctrine and policy, cannot be. Not without a very radical shift that would call into question the foundations of D&C definitions of priesthood, offices, keys, and duties/roles.

I know that a bishop can't delegate those things as currently organized. My question is more about which church policies could be changed without altering doctrine. My guess is most of them.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...