Watershed Moment in General Conference?

[zerinus]

But see when the Holy Ghost reveals to him the truth of the inspiration, it is now his revelation since he is the only one that can receive revelation for the stake or ward. A council member cannot receive revelation for the stake or ward, they can be a source of inspiration for revelation. That inspiration my have a divine source or not, but only the person with the proper keys can receive revelation for a group.

Just like Emma was the inspiration for the Word of Wisdom, that revelation was still received by Joseph Smith even though Emma was the inspiration for the revelation.

I never argued that the Relief Society President usurps the keys or authority of the presiding officer. All I am saying is that her membership of the council confers on her the privilege of acting in that way.

[consiglieri]

If a Relief Society President is able to receive revelation on what the Priesthood leadership should do because of the relationship between the Relief Society sisters and their husbands, then why shouldn't I, as a parent, be able to receive revelation for the Primary since my kids are part of Primary? Why can't the parents of teenagers receive revelation for the Youth programs, since it affects their children and families?

I didn't hear Elder Cook's story, but based on what has been said in this thread, it does seem to have broadened the principles of revelation and stewardships beyond what has been traditionally taught in the Church.

In thinking more about the story shared by Elder Cook, I have come to a similar conclusion that if this principle is allowed to stand, it opens the door to anybody receiving revelation for anybody else on the basis that it affects them in some way.

I suggest we nominate this talk as the LDS version of the Commerce Clause.

Either the church will back away from it and issue corrections and refinements (with or without a cough track), or this is a step in a very different direction from what has been taught at church for over a century.

Thanks for the cite, Cinepro.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[consiglieri]

He isn't saying that the Sister received revelation for the Stake President, he is saying the Sister received revelation to help here fellow sisters find worthy men to marry (or have get an inactive husband worthy to marry there wife in the temple) she brought this idea to the Stake President about these inactive men during a Stake reactivation meeting, and the Stake President received revelation that the Sister's message was inspired and true. The Stake President and Stake Relief Society President worked TOGETHER, not one over the other.

In your recaputulation of the story, you have termed the Sister's revelation both an "idea" and a "message," but reserved the sobriquet of "revelation" to what the priesthood leader received.

Why is that?

This is not my recollection of how it was phrased in Elder Cook's address.

We must remember this was the entire thrust of Elder Cook's talk--the proper role of women in the church.

It is not something out there on the side that had nothing to do with his theme.

Elder Cook has limited time to speak and must choose carefully what he wishes to include.

Why mention the detail of the relief society president's revelation at all if it was not germane to the point he was making?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[consiglieri]

The story illustrates how counsel is given and taken and revelation follows.

Once more a sister's revelation is termed "counsel."

Why are we so loathe to accept the revelation came first, that it came to a sister, and that it was then acted on by the priesthood?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[zerinus]

In your recaputulation of the story, you have termed the Sister's revelation both an "idea" and a "message," but reserved the sobriquet of "revelation" to what the priesthood leader received.

Why is that?

This is not my recollection of how it was phrased in Elder Cook's address.

We must remember this was the entire thrust of Elder Cook's talk--the proper role of women in the church.

It is not something out there on the side that had nothing to do with his theme.

Elder Cook has limited time to speak and must choose carefully what he wishes to include.

Why mention the detail of the relief society president's revelation at all if it was not germane to the point he was making?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

What an idiotic comment.

[consiglieri]

Error

I am finally in complete agreement with you.

[zerinus]

I am finally in complete agreement with you.

That was meant to summarise all your posts here today!

[consiglieri]

It's only when we start to claim that the good idea is "revelation" that we get into sticky areas.

And I think Elder Cook opens that door by saying the stake president confirmed by "revelation" that her idea was correct.

I suppose we could just say she made a lucky guess and fortunately it happened to line up with subsequently received priesthood revelation.

But I think that is not the point Elder Cook was making.

And I agree that he was choosing his terms carefully as if aware of a morning mine field stroll.

Which again makes me wonder why even bother with so potentially policy-altering a story unless he had a very good reason to do so.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[zerinus]

And I think Elder Cook opens that door by saying the stake president confirmed by "revelation" that her idea was correct.

I suppose we could just say she made a lucky guess and fortunately it happened to line up with subsequently received priesthood revelation.

But I think that is not the point Elder Cook was making.

And I agree that he was choosing his terms carefully as if aware of a morning mine field stroll.

Which again makes me wonder why even bother with so potentially policy-altering a story unless he had a very good reason to do so.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Did you read my post #33 by any chance?

[consiglieri]

I think your "watershed moment" is nothing more or less than a Church council performing as it should.

And this, I think, is at the heart of what I perceive to be a shift in stewardship as defined in the Church.

By creating ward and stake councils, and allowing sisters to act as counselors to the bishop or stake president, the Church has effectively broadened authority of sisters over members they hitherto were denied.

These are my thoughts.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[LDS Guy 1986]

And this, I think, is at the heart of what I perceive to be a shift in stewardship as defined in the Church.

By creating ward and stake councils, and allowing sisters to act as counselors to the bishop or stake president, the Church has effectively broadened authority of sisters over members they hitherto were denied.

If they were denied it was by the ignorance of men, not the design of God since he modeled the RS after the priesthood not beneath the priesthood. What is a big reach though is to assume that the church emphasis on the proper role of the RS in the Ward and Stake is some forerunner of women being ordained into the Priesthood I think you are mildly delusional, especially given Elder Cook's talk which specifically stated that the Stake President was the only one to receive revelation.

[LDS Guy 1986]

I never argued that the Relief Society President usurps the keys or authority of the presiding officer. All I am saying is that her membership of the council confers on her the privilege of acting in that way.

I disagree completely, councilors are just that they offer advice they do not offer revelation. A councilor cannot give his superior revelation in this Church, you can only give revelation to the members entrusted to your stewardship, the Stake RS President is under the stewardship of the Stake President so regardless of her position on the council she cannot receive revelation for him, only council him.

The same applies to the Bishops, the High Council, and the Quorum Presidents.

[zerinus]

And this, I think, is at the heart of what I perceive to be a shift in stewardship as defined in the Church.

By creating ward and stake councils, and allowing sisters to act as counselors to the bishop or stake president, the Church has effectively broadened authority of sisters over members they hitherto were denied.

These are my thoughts.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

LOL!

[zerinus]

I disagree completely, councilors are just that they offer advice they do not offer revelation. A councilor cannot give his superior revelation in this Church, you can only give revelation to the members entrusted to your stewardship, the Stake RS President is under the stewardship of the Stake President so regardless of her position on the council she cannot receive revelation for him, only council him.

The same applies to the Bishops, the High Council, and the Quorum Presidents.

Sorry, I don't agree. The counsellors are entitled to revelation as they discharge their duties as counsellors to the bishop. The bishop makes the final decisions, I agree; but the counsellors are entitled to revelation in the discharge of their duties as counsellors. The same principle applies to the members of the Ward Council.

[consiglieri]

LOL!

Is this, together with calling my comments "idiotic," the best you can do by way of persuasive dialogue?

[bookofmormontruth]

consiglieri was shown how we was completely wrong by multiple users, yet he continues to propagate his "watershed theory".

What a shocker!

[zerinus]

Is this, together with calling my comments "idiotic," the best you can do by way of persuasive dialogue?

Look who is talking. You never engage anybody who disagrees with you in a serious dialogue, including me.

[Scott Lloyd]

Did you catch Elder Uchtdorf comments in Preisthood? For some odd reason I thought of you when he was talking.

Perhaps it was when President Uchtdorf said this:

Revelation and testimony do not always come with overwhelming force. For many, a testimony comes slowly

[Scott Lloyd]

And this, I think, is at the heart of what I perceive to be a shift in stewardship as defined in the Church.

By creating ward and stake councils, and allowing sisters to act as counselors to the bishop or stake president, the Church has effectively broadened authority of sisters over members they hitherto were denied.

These are my thoughts.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Um, ward and stake councils with mixed female and male membership have been a part of the Church for a long, long time.

Here's a snippet from a talk given by Elder M. Russell Ballard titled "Counseling with Our Councils" He later published a book by the same title which is widely circulated and is sold at Church distribution centers:

The third is the ward council. It includes the priesthood executive committee; the presidents of the Relief Society, Sunday School, Young Women, and Primary; and the activities committee chairman. The bishop may invite others to attend as needed. This council meets at least monthly to correlate planning for all ward programs and activities and to review ward progress toward accomplishing the mission of the Church. The ward council brings a varied group of priesthood and women leaders together to focus on the broad range of issues that affect ward members and the community. The council reviews suggestions from home teachers and visiting teachers.

Recently, a bishop who was concerned about reverence in his ward expressed his concern to the members of the ward council and asked for their suggestions. Hesitantly, the Primary president raised her hand.

[LDS Guy 1986]

Sorry, I don't agree. The counsellors are entitled to revelation as they discharge their duties as counsellors to the bishop. The bishop makes the final decisions, I agree; but the counsellors are entitled to revelation in the discharge of their duties as counsellors. The same principle applies to the members of the Ward Council.

Well, you are not correct, a councilor in a Bishopric has a specific calling that give him keys to revelation for the Ward. The Relief Society Presidency does not have these same keys, her keys pertain to the Sisters only not the entire ward.

One can only receive revelation in respect to the keys they hold, one cannot receive revelation from God for someone that is in charge of them, they can have thoughts which lead to revelation for the one who holds the keys (as we say revelation doesn't happen in a vacuum) but the doctrine of the Church is crystal clear here no one can receive revelation at all for someone that presides over them EVER.

I respect your belief and your right to belief what you choose, all I point out if that your beliefs are inconsistent with the doctrine of the LDS Church.

[Deborah]

Once more a sister's revelation is termed "counsel."

And you don't think counsel is revelation? However, her revelation is within her stewardship so she can counsel with the stake leader on her revelation but his purview is the stake and so only he has the authority to enact what he perceives as good counsel. Her revelation caused her to counsel with the leader and his revelation was to accept the counsel as something that would benefit the stake.

Semantics.

[zerinus]

Well, you are not correct, a councilor in a Bishopric has a specific calling that give him keys to revelation for the Ward. The Relief Society Presidency does not have these same keys, her keys pertain to the Sisters only not the entire ward.

One can only receive revelation in respect to the keys they hold, one cannot receive revelation from God for someone that is in charge of them, they can have thoughts which lead to revelation for the one who holds the keys (as we say revelation doesn't happen in a vacuum) but the doctrine of the Church is crystal clear here no one can receive revelation at all for someone that presides over them EVER.

I respect your belief and your right to belief what you choose, all I point out if that your beliefs are inconsistent with the doctrine of the LDS Church.

Keys or no keys; the counsellors have a responsibility to act as counsellors (i.e. to give counsel), and they are entitled to revelation to discharge that responsibility. Members of the Ward Council have similar responsibilities, and are entitled to revelation for the same reasons.

[LDS Guy 1986]

Keys or no keys; the counsellors have a responsibility to act as counsellors (i.e. to give counsel), and they are entitled to revelation to discharge that responsibility. Members of the Ward Council have similar responsibilities, and are entitled to revelation for the same reasons.

A councilor hold no keys, they offer advice not revelation only one who has the proper priesthood keys can receive revelation. For a members of the Bishopric they have the keys to receive revelation for every one that resides in there ward. A Relief Society President can only receive revelation about the Sister or non member women in the ward, and she definitely cannot receive revelation for the Bishop or Stake President.

Now a Stake President can receive revelation for a Bishop in his ward, and a member of the Seventy or an Apostle can receive revelation for a Stake President, but the auxiliary presidencies can only offer advice to the leadership they cannot give them revelation because it is against Church doctrine.

To state or imply this is to contradict the doctrine of the Church found in teh D&C, Joseph Smith specifically received revelations because members without the proper keys started making revelations that were dividing the membership of the Church.

Like I said believe what you want personally, but do not try an take your personal beliefs and put them about the doctrine of the LDS Church.

[Scott Lloyd]

Well, you are not correct, a councilor in a Bishopric has a specific calling that give him keys to revelation for the Ward. The Relief Society Presidency does not have these same keys, her keys pertain to the Sisters only not the entire ward.

As one of the speakers at the priesthood session of the conference noted, there are only four individuals in the ward who hold keys. He was referring specifically to the deacons quorum president, but the other three are the bishop, the teachers quorum president and the elders quorum president. Even the high priests group leader does not hold keys.

[zerinus]

And you don't think counsel is revelation? However, her revelation is within her stewardship so she can counsel with the stake leader on her revelation but his purview is the stake and so only he has the authority to enact what he perceives as good counsel. Her revelation caused her to counsel with the leader and his revelation was to accept the counsel as something that would benefit the stake.

Semantics.

I don't think that members of the Ward Council may receive revelation only for their own "stewardships". The Ward Council is the place where many subjects relating to many "stewardships" may be discussed; and any member of the council is entitled to comment on any subject that is being discussed; and hence is entitled to receive revelation in relation to it in discharging his/her responsibility as a member of the council; otherwise the thing is not acting as a "council".