Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Boanerges

Qualification for bishop

Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, Prof said:

Agreed. If God has forgiven them and remembers them no longer, the Church should do the same.

It could be a situation of wanting to have records so that repeat offenders can be held more accountable.  If someone keeps breaking the law of chastity, for example, then it might be better for the church to have a record of that so that when a bishop, not knowing the person's past, needs to help that person repent they can have all of the information that they need to know how best to do that (or what discipline will be most appropriate).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Prof said:

Agreed. If God has forgiven them and remembers them no longer, the Church should do the same.

Yes, the very theological idea of forgiveness goes against the current church practice.  This also coincides with Oaks articulation about the word apologize not being found on scripture as a justification for holding a policy of no institutional apologies which also goes against the theology of repentance.  There are other examples I can think of, and these kinds of double standards become frustrating for members.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/8/2019 at 9:48 AM, hope_for_things said:

I agree with much of this, but you haven’t explained how you reconcile the tension of all those people who followed their gut and did horrific things that when judged by society were clearly detrimental and considered evil.  A personal feeling that I’m doing something correct clearly isn’t all there is to it.  How do you reconcile all the evil perpetuated by those who personally felt they were doing something right.  

Evolution eliminates that hopefully, if not, such is life.

So far it has, Nazis insofar as they exist are not too popular in today's world.  Not too many advocating Stalinism or Chairman Mao, the inquisition has ended etc etc etc

The golden rule/categorical imperative is about the best we can do - and why? Because it works. It has defined civilization.  Even if only within one's tribe, one does not eat one's own children or parents.  The 10 commandments can be seen as a documention of social evolution if you like.  They work

We need to bring up babies in peace for mankind to exist.  It has survival value.  They are weak and must have a peaceful structure to even exist much less thrive.  Morality is a matter of survival .

If you want a temple of TRVTH to worship, it has emblazoned on it "What Works".  The universe WORKS because it still exists.  

No one has found a way of making morality objective in 2000 years and Kant in my opinion has the best solution- though of course it is old-fashioned.

But seeing morality as the golden rule- as a standard- is to me the same as the law of gravity or some other "law" that works.

It is as sure as evolution which I suppose you could argue against as not being "objective" but good luck with that.

If that doesn't work for you it doesnt work.

Both of those ideas are the best mankind has come up with, I suggest you come up with your own and publish it and see if it "works" for humanity or not.  :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

Yes, that’s specifically what I was referring to.  I don’t like it, with the exception of significant illegal activity.  

I disagree.  

Besides, what's your definition of "significant illegal activity"?  Perhaps your definition differs from mine.  Whose definition should be operative?

And then we come to this: what is being withheld if a past indiscretion precludes one from being called to be a bishop -- or any other calling?  Who is ambitious to be a bishop?  Or a temple sealer?  I happen to feel that ambition in connection with church callings, especially leadership positions, is disqualifying in and of itself.  I see such ambition as a degree of priestcraft. 

I hope never to be called to be a bishop.  I'm a temple worker now, but if I am never called to be a sealer, that would suit me just fine -- because I am not ambitious for callings.  I have sufficient challenges being second counselor in our Elders Quorum Presidency -- I am not in need of greater ones.

My advice to all is this: continue faithful where you are now called to serve, until you are called elsewhere.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/8/2019 at 5:16 AM, Anijen said:

It is almost impossible to get the tone of sarcasm in words. Evidently my attempt was very poorly worded. Truth being, I never want to be a Bishop, but have been honored to have been considered to be one by my Stake President (I was not eliminated because of a past sin or disciplinary action). The extra conditions to me just seemed a bit, very little bit, of a dbl standard compared to our perfect Saviors ability to remember them no more. I also understand the need for the Church to use caution and the perspective of past victims. 

I have never been one to really get the hang of the humor thing (especially sarcasm), my apologies.

Yes, I was puzzled by your post -- it seemed out of character for you.  Now I see where the problem lay!  

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/8/2019 at 2:56 PM, Doctrine 612 said:

Of all the callings I have done.

two are my favorite.

Gospel Doctrine teacher.

Ward missionary.

Gospel Doctrine teacher -- yes, I would love it.  Which is probably why I have never been called to do it!  Got to be a SS teacher for the 16/17 year olds once, and really liked it.

Ward missionary -- I was a stake missionary for 8 years once, and I enjoyed it, but I would prefer to let someone else do it now.

My current calling in the ward, counselor in the EQ presidency, gives me the opportunity to teach adults from time to time.  It was especially fun today, since the usual instructor couldn't make it at the last minute, the quorum president was ill, and so I had to get the lesson ready during the three whole hours before priesthood meeting started.  Weirdly enough, I get a thrill about teaching or giving talks that are assigned at the last minute!  So, in a sense I am in a dream calling, as I am in a relatively small ward.  

Share this post


Link to post

I haven't read anything here on this thread yet...I don't think...but I will try and do that.  My biggest hope is that a new Bishop who stands at the pulpit for the first time will truithfully and admit that though he will try and do his very best for the ward and families...he does not have a power of discernment any more than the head of any household.  That he will do his best to advise and look into matters...that he does not have a direct line to to know who lies and who is good or evil.  That his biggest assingment is to listen, share and help in whatever capacity he can.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Prof said:

Agreed. If God has forgiven them and remembers them no longer, the Church should do the same.

I would agree if we could be sure the repentance was complete (a complete reformation with the desire for that sin expunged). The revelation that a God has forgiven someone else on that level is rare.

There is no theological problem.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

I haven't read anything here on this thread yet...I don't think...but I will try and do that.  My biggest hope is that a new Bishop who stands at the pulpit for the first time will truithfully and admit that though he will try and do his very best for the ward and families...he does not have a power of discernment any more than the head of any household.  That he will do his best to advise and look into matters...that he does not have a direct line to to know who lies and who is good or evil.  That his biggest assingment is to listen, share and help in whatever capacity he can.

“Having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof.”

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

nevermind

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/6/2019 at 1:52 PM, Anijen said:

For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.

However, evidently, His Church will:

  • Bishop, not likely
  • Temple Worker, nope
  • Faculty at a Church School, ug, not you
  • CES position, in your dreams

This is the policy and culture I have the hardest time accepting. Preach repentance but its not good enough to help build the kingdom? I don't believe these policies are from God but silly admin rules.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, gregory_underscore said:

This is the policy and culture I have the hardest time accepting. Preach repentance but its not good enough to help build the kingdom? I don't believe these policies are from God but silly admin rules.

If one feels one needs a prominent position to build the kingdom one is doing it wrong.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/7/2019 at 7:53 AM, Kenngo1969 said:

 

I don't know the reasons for all of the restrictions that, currently, are in place (these and numerous others), or why, apparently, exceptions are granted in some cases and not others.  I might think I wouldn't make a bad bishop or a bad stake president, and perhaps I wouldn't, but there is that whole husband-of-one-wife thingy getting in the way. ;) However, as MFBukowski has pointed out, it does make sense, in a world in which (unfortunately) appearances do matter, that people not be put in an "and-when-they-saw-your[-or-my]-conduct-they-would-not-believe-my-words" position (see Alma 39). 

My brother asked to be released as a stake president when it became clear that his son and my nephew was not going to serve a mission.  No, I don't believe that anyone should hold someone else's choices against a particular person, but, sometimes, that's not the world we live in.   I don't know the whole back story, but I believe my brother's reasoning was, "I can't very well ask all of the young men in the stake to do something my own son won't do," which makes sense.  (I don't think my nephew had done anything disqualifying up to that point.  It's simply that he's stubborn, like his dad, and he's not going to do something simply because everyone else in his world thinks it's a good idea. :D)  So ... my brother was granted an honorable release.

I don't think God loves me any less just because I'll never be a bishop or a stake president or [apparently, in this life] a husband or a father.  I don't think he loved my brother any less after he was released as a stake president than he did before he was called, or that he loves my nephew any less simply because he didn't serve a mission.  That's one of the very few answers I have: "Ken, don't worry about it.  I love you."  Lots of questions and comparatively few answers, except that one: "Ken, don't worry about it.  I love you."

That's life.

 

Our son was sent home from his mission and excommunicated while I was serving as a bishop.  I too had doubts as to whether or not I should have continued in the call.  "If I can't get my own house in order," and all that stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
58 minutes ago, ERMD said:

Our son was sent home from his mission and excommunicated while I was serving as a bishop.  I too had doubts as to whether or not I should have continued in the call.  "If I can't get my own house in order," and all that stuff.

Oh, my goodness!  That must have been so hard on him, on you, and on your family.  I hope you've found some silver linings and rainbows amidst all of the dark clouds.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, ERMD said:

I must admit, there is one calling I covet: 2nd counselor in the SS presidency.

What does that guy do, anyway?  Ring the bell when the other two don't show up?

I served briefly as the secretary in my ward Sunday school presidency, then I was called as the secretary in my stake Sunday school presidency.  The ward Sunday School president was the stake Sunday school president's son, and the elder threatened the younger that if he didn't let him have me, he wouldn't be invited any longer to family dinners.

It's nice to be fought over. :D:rofl::D

Edited by Kenngo1969
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
26 minutes ago, ERMD said:

It was a difficult time for all of us, and to a degree it still is.  Our solution is to just love him. ... [Emphasis added by Kenngo1969]

Sounds like the best possible solution.

What else is there? :unknw:

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, ERMD said:

I must admit, there is one calling I covet: 2nd counselor in the SS presidency.

What does that guy do, anyway?  Ring the bell when the other two don't show up?

Ours runs and teaches the Parenting class we have outside of the block and sometimes does the Teacher Development Training (or whatever it is called now).

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, ERMD said:

I must admit, there is one calling I covet: 2nd counselor in the SS presidency.

What does that guy do, anyway?  Ring the bell when the other two don't show up?

Teach the class for all the folks hanging out in the foyer and hall?

Edited by Bernard Gui
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Evolution eliminates that hopefully, if not, such is life.

So far it has, Nazis insofar as they exist are not too popular in today's world.  Not too many advocating Stalinism or Chairman Mao, the inquisition has ended etc etc etc

The golden rule/categorical imperative is about the best we can do - and why? Because it works. It has defined civilization.  Even if only within one's tribe, one does not eat one's own children or parents.  The 10 commandments can be seen as a documention of social evolution if you like.  They work

We need to bring up babies in peace for mankind to exist.  It has survival value.  They are weak and must have a peaceful structure to even exist much less thrive.  Morality is a matter of survival .

If you want a temple of TRVTH to worship, it has emblazoned on it "What Works".  The universe WORKS because it still exists.  

No one has found a way of making morality objective in 2000 years and Kant in my opinion has the best solution- though of course it is old-fashioned.

But seeing morality as the golden rule- as a standard- is to me the same as the law of gravity or some other "law" that works.

It is as sure as evolution which I suppose you could argue against as not being "objective" but good luck with that.

If that doesn't work for you it doesnt work.

Both of those ideas are the best mankind has come up with, I suggest you come up with your own and publish it and see if it "works" for humanity or not.  :)

So the idea that evolution will eventually lead us away from large scale atrocities or even smaller scale ones, I believe is wishful thinking.  Its not how evolution works.  And while I'm encouraged by many things about the human trajectory, and I like Steven Pinker and decline of violence statistics are interesting and substantial in many respects, the fact that humans have developed technologies that can cause destruction many orders of magnitude greater than was possible in our past, also increases the likelihood of future catastrophes.  

Also, the golden rule is great, but it seems to have a pretty poor track record with respect to people actually following it throughout history.  Going back to Kant's categorical imperative seems to introduce this component of groups coming to a collective agreement using reason to determine what is best, which also seems to run against your idea that anyone can be trusted to just do "what works" based on their own individual subjective perspective.  

Sociological studies have also shown some compelling data around the power of diversity to enable groups to perform better than less diverse groups.  So, getting away from the tribal group think mentality and getting a variety of perspectives engaged on issues has utility, which also goes against the individual trust your gut way of operating.  

I feel like its important to point out these tensions, because in our Mormon culture there are fallacies of thinking that our tradition perpetuates due to theological teachings about the spirit.  I think trusting your gut, in the way Mormons often talk about it, can be extremely dangerous if it is done in isolation and without serious critical thinking and perspective seeking.  When taken in isolation, an individual's gut feeling will often be a reflection of their implicit biases, rather than a measured decision based on the best information available and deduced through reason as Kant might suggest is necessary. 

Mormon tradition takes stories, like the story of how Joseph Smith caved into the pressure of Martin Harris and allowed him to borrow the 116 pages, because Joseph wouldn't just "trust his gut" when God told him not to give the pages away.  That story is used as a story to reinforce trusting intuition and not critically thinking about any decision too much.  This is dangerous and there are many other stories throughout scripture and tradition that could be used to reinforce critical thinking in partnership with feelings(the spirit) in a much more healthy direction, unfortunately that Martin Harris story is the dominant story that is often reinforced.  

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

So the idea that evolution will eventually lead us away from large scale atrocities or even smaller scale ones, I believe is wishful thinking.  Its not how evolution works.  And while I'm encouraged by many things about the human trajectory, and I like Steven Pinker and decline of violence statistics are interesting and substantial in many respects, the fact that humans have developed technologies that can cause destruction many orders of magnitude greater than was possible in our past, also increases the likelihood of future catastrophes.  

Also, the golden rule is great, but it seems to have a pretty poor track record with respect to people actually following it throughout history.  Going back to Kant's categorical imperative seems to introduce this component of groups coming to a collective agreement using reason to determine what is best, which also seems to run against your idea that anyone can be trusted to just do "what works" based on their own individual subjective perspective.  

Sociological studies have also shown some compelling data around the power of diversity to enable groups to perform better than less diverse groups.  So, getting away from the tribal group think mentality and getting a variety of perspectives engaged on issues has utility, which also goes against the individual trust your gut way of operating.  

I feel like its important to point out these tensions, because in our Mormon culture there are fallacies of thinking that our tradition perpetuates due to theological teachings about the spirit.  I think trusting your gut, in the way Mormons often talk about it, can be extremely dangerous if it is done in isolation and without serious critical thinking and perspective seeking.  When taken in isolation, an individual's gut feeling will often be a reflection of their implicit biases, rather than a measured decision based on the best information available and deduced through reason as Kant might suggest is necessary. 

Mormon tradition takes stories, like the story of how Joseph Smith caved into the pressure of Martin Harris and allowed him to borrow the 116 pages, because Joseph wouldn't just "trust his gut" when God told him not to give the pages away.  That story is used as a story to reinforce trusting intuition and not critically thinking about any decision too much.  This is dangerous and there are many other stories throughout scripture and tradition that could be used to reinforce critical thinking in partnership with feelings(the spirit) in a much more healthy direction, unfortunately that Martin Harris story is the dominant story that is often reinforced.  

Good. I nominate you for dictator of the universe to establish objective morality :)

 I'm not quite sure what you think you're arguing against.

I never said anything remotely implying that evolution will make evil disappear 

Sorry but yet again it seems there is no communication here.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, mfbukowski said:

think trusting your gut, in the way Mormons often talk about it, can be extremely dangerous if it is done in isolation and without serious critical thinking and perspective seeking.  When taken in isolation, an individual's gut feeling will often be a reflection of their implicit biases, rather than a measured decision based on the best information available and deduced through reason as Kant might suggest is necessary. 

Duh. Why do you think I quoted him?

Share this post


Link to post
49 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Good. I nominate you for dictator of the universe to establish objective morality :)

 I'm not quite sure what you think you're arguing against.

I never said anything remotely implying that evolution will make evil disappear 

Sorry but yet again it seems there is no communication here.

Ha!  Thats the last job I would want to have.  

I'm just pointing out problems that I think complicate what you're saying.  It seems to me like you're viewing our topic through rose colored glasses, although I have a hard time believing you actually view things this way because of how well read and experienced you are.  Perhaps you're just not as concerned about the problems as I am.  

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

  When taken in isolation, an individual's gut feeling will often be a reflection of their implicit biases, rather than a measured decision based on the best information available and deduced through reason as Kant might suggest is necessary. 

President Oaks agrees with you.  That is why our Father in Heaven has given us prophets and apostles.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2010/10/two-lines-of-communication?lang=eng

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.

Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...