Messenger Posted June 11, 2011 Posted June 11, 2011 The subject is about when someone accepts a calling and we give them a sustaining vote in Sacrament meeting. Have you ever NOT sustained someone??? If so, why? When I was in Australia on my mission, a good member of the ward put up his hand in the Negative when another ward member was getting a new calling. I never found out the details, but it caused quite a stir in the ward.What precedent is there for valid use of NOT sustaining someone?
Duncan Posted June 11, 2011 Posted June 11, 2011 (edited) I have seen when some people have voted in the negative and I admit that there were people I voted for, including myself! that I was less then enthusiastic about. Then there were a small number of people I regretted voting for but all in the past now Edited June 11, 2011 by Duncan
frankenstein Posted June 11, 2011 Posted June 11, 2011 I use too all the time as a kid, like pre sunbeam. For all I knew, no one was "voting" for the person, so I would raise my hand so the person at least got one vote. I really thought I was doing something nice.
Messenger Posted June 11, 2011 Author Posted June 11, 2011 (edited) I've had a situation where someone in another ward, who I've done business with, who also has a pretty significant calling, and to whom I've known as a personal friend for over 15 years, has stolen over $2000 worth of equipment from me. I dont want to go into the circumstances, but there is no doubt about the theft. He is also active in a branch presidency. He's not in the same area as me anymore, but his family lives in Rexburg, so not sustaining him not an option on future callings. But how do you sustain a person as a person friend when something like this has happened?1) walk away and forget it?2) tell his church leader?We've been friends for so long I cant fathem taking any other actions than the ones listed above. I know he's been hit hard with the economy, lost his business, and has been working overseas to try and make ends meet. I know that times are tough, but stealing isnt the answer. The fact is, I would have given the generator to him if he would have asked. He refuses to ask for church welfare or have his family work off the welfare in the church cannery or other church facilities.Its wierd. We've always helped each other out during our friendship. I wish I knew more what was going on. At the same time i dont want people to gossip about his situation. Any ideas? Edited June 11, 2011 by Messenger
Duncan Posted June 11, 2011 Posted June 11, 2011 I've had a situation where someone in another ward, who I've done business with, who also has a pretty significant calling, and to whom I've known as a personal friend for over 15 years, has stolen over $2000 worth of equipment from me. I dont want to go into the circumstances, but there is no doubt about the theft. He is also active in a branch presidency. He's not in the same area as me anymore, but his family lives in Rexburg, so not sustaining him not an option on future callings. But how do you sustain a person as a person friend when something like this has happened?1) walk away and forget it?2) tell his church leader?We've been friends for so long I cant fathem taking any other actions than the ones listed above. I know he's been hit hard with the economy, lost his business, and has been working overseas to try and make ends meet. I know that times are tough, but stealing isnt the answer. The fact is, I would have given the generator to him if he would have asked. He refuses to ask for church welfare or have his family work off the welfare in the church cannery or other church facilities.Its wierd. We've always helped each other out during our friendship. I wish I knew more what was going on. At the same time i dont want people to gossip about his situation. Any ideas?police first, church second 2
Marat Posted June 11, 2011 Posted June 11, 2011 I did right after I joined the church when I was 21. I was sitting with the missionaries the Sunday after my baptism. My left arm was resting on the back of the pew when they started asking for the sustaining for members with new callings. I raised my left hand since it felt natural. One of the missionaries said "no, the right hand" so I then raised my right hand. Of course before I got my right hand up, the guy at the podium asked for all those opposed. My hand was the only one raised. I was so embarrassed. I explained what happened to that member after sacrament meeting so that they would understand. 1
DH Posted June 11, 2011 Posted June 11, 2011 (edited) There was one time when I gave a negative vote. A member of the bishopric they were sustaining in ward conference had been accused of sexual assault. I didn't know if the Church leaders were aware of that, so I voted "no" to his sustaining. A member of the stake presidency met with me after the meeting to inquire why I voted that way, I told him, gave him the name of an alleged victim of the crime, and left the matter up to them to investigate and decide.It was scary for me, and I was literally shaking for a couple of minutes after voting "no," but thankfully a friend of mine was supportive. He had no idea what was going on, but he was a true friend. He turned to me and said something like, "I don't know what this is about, but that must have been difficult, and took courage. I'm here for you." I will forever be grateful to that good man. Edited June 11, 2011 by DH 4
Messenger Posted June 11, 2011 Author Posted June 11, 2011 (edited) police first, church secondHe finally called today. The first thing he said is that he needed to bring down my generator. I will give Heavenly Father the credit for answering my prayers. Im not sure if this had anything to do with it, but they discovered skin cancer on him and was fairly advanced. Im assuming he was dealing with that for the last several months. He's coming down to chat with me this week ... I wonder what else we will talk about. Edited June 11, 2011 by Messenger
Stargazer Posted June 12, 2011 Posted June 12, 2011 Glad to hear that, Messenger.I have no personal tale to tell, but two instances in the deep past that I either witnessed or was told about.In the England Southwest Mission while John M. Madsen was President, in a Bristol District Conference a man was put forward for a calling, and there was one negative vote. President Madsen acknowledged the negative vote, and later in another meeting indicated that the negative vote was given because the person raising their hand didn't believe the man was "qualified" for the position. Which Pres. Madsen explained was not a valid reason for a negative vote.In the Duesseldorf (Germany) Ward, when a new bishopric was called (this is back in the 1970's), when the second counselor's name was read, he received six negative votes. Six! Understandably this caused a bit of a stir, and the Stake Presidency checked up on the matter. They found that the six brethren just highly disliked the man called as 2nd Counselor (and as I remember, he was a bit of a jerk). After they ascertained it was a personal matter unrelated to worthiness, the next Sunday they had the new bishopric re-sustained, and asked the Six Dissenters to stand as they raised their arms to sustain the new 2nd Counselor, so that the ward would see that there was a unanimous vote, without any abstentions. And I can tell you that that ward, at that time, was a hotbed of politics. I never ran into so many offended members while tracting in any other city in my mission.
Messenger Posted June 12, 2011 Author Posted June 12, 2011 Glad to hear that, Messenger.I have no personal tale to tell, but two instances in the deep past that I either witnessed or was told about.In the England Southwest Mission while John M. Madsen was President, in a Bristol District Conference a man was put forward for a calling, and there was one negative vote. President Madsen acknowledged the negative vote, and later in another meeting indicated that the negative vote was given because the person raising their hand didn't believe the man was "qualified" for the position. Which Pres. Madsen explained was not a valid reason for a negative vote.In the Duesseldorf (Germany) Ward, when a new bishopric was called (this is back in the 1970's), when the second counselor's name was read, he received six negative votes. Six! Understandably this caused a bit of a stir, and the Stake Presidency checked up on the matter. They found that the six brethren just highly disliked the man called as 2nd Counselor (and as I remember, he was a bit of a jerk). After they ascertained it was a personal matter unrelated to worthiness, the next Sunday they had the new bishopric re-sustained, and asked the Six Dissenters to stand as they raised their arms to sustain the new 2nd Counselor, so that the ward would see that there was a unanimous vote, without any abstentions. And I can tell you that that ward, at that time, was a hotbed of politics. I never ran into so many offended members while tracting in any other city in my mission.So what you are saying is that correctly voting in the negative has less to do popularity than being worthy. Im totally with that. This is really an exersize in "what if". Because I know a few people that are dishonest in thier dealings with other people. And I know that dishonestly is one of the tougher temple questions to answer yes on. But theft is definately clearer. Thanks
Jigglysaint Posted June 13, 2011 Posted June 13, 2011 Oh man, what happened to me once is we were sustaining callings in sacrament, and I was kind of not paying attention. Because of that, I didn't raise my hand to sustain, but raised my hand in the negative. Had to explain to everybody that I wasn't paying attention and that I didn't really oppose the calling.
Stargazer Posted June 13, 2011 Posted June 13, 2011 Oh man, what happened to me once is we were sustaining callings in sacrament, and I was kind of not paying attention. Because of that, I didn't raise my hand to sustain, but raised my hand in the negative. Had to explain to everybody that I wasn't paying attention and that I didn't really oppose the calling.At least you provided a moment of entertainment LOL!
Arkholt Posted June 13, 2011 Posted June 13, 2011 If I'm visiting another ward, I just won't raise my hand for anything, because I feel I have an inability to sustain or oppose. Never directly opposed a vote, though, and never experienced it happening. I wonder how common it is, actually.
TAO Posted June 14, 2011 Posted June 14, 2011 (edited) I've heard of someone doing this when someone else was unworthy. The girl who raised her hand was pulled aside, so they could discuss the reason, and it turned out that the guy who she did not sustain could not be ordained. Even though the guy later left the church, yes, the women who did not raise her hand did the right thing. Edited June 14, 2011 by TAO 1
Messenger Posted June 14, 2011 Author Posted June 14, 2011 I suppose its one of those things where the Holy Ghost tells you of your duty to raise your hand in the negative, & you just do it. But I think one has to be absolutely sure. And, it would have to be a worthiness issue. Does dishonesty alone, such as knowing that the person was involved with theft, make that person unworthy for a Scout Leadership calling? What about other callings such as 1st councilor in the bishopric, or even Stake President? I suppose it all goes back to the Holy Ghost. It would be weird being the Bishop if some didn’t sustain someone. Further there could be things he repented of, which makes that person worthy now. I think as soon as we think this is our decision, we lose our correct objectivity.
Jigglysaint Posted June 14, 2011 Posted June 14, 2011 I think what people tend to do now, is if they are concerned about somebody's worthiness, they would prefer to just not raise their hand at all and then later speak with the bishop, rather than raise their hand in contest and attract attention, especially if the called in question is a beloved member. A friend of mine told me a story similar to what I mentioned, and I don't think it's unreasonable to take the issue to the bishop rather than openly defy a calling(even if right).
Messenger Posted June 15, 2011 Author Posted June 15, 2011 He finally called today. The first thing he said is that he needed to bring down my generator. I will give Heavenly Father the credit for answering my prayers. Im not sure if this had anything to do with it, but they discovered skin cancer on him and was fairly advanced. Im assuming he was dealing with that for the last several months. He's coming down to chat with me this week ... I wonder what else we will talk about.I met with my buddy last night. He was just dealing with family after being away for several months in Afghanistan. He brought back the generator, and I was amazed it was all cleaned up without any dust or anything. He told me about the cancer on his forehead, they got that removed and you can hardly tell anything was there. We shared stories over from events over the last 5 months. I told him about my ADHD discovery and all the symptoms. He also apologized for his wife's behavior towards me - Every time I go near his house his wife always has several acidic rude remarks directed at me. He's thinking now that she might have ADHD after listening to me with all of my symptoms. They have two kids that do, so it’s possible. He's going to go to some websites that have ADHD tests and take them and see if he sees any patterns in his wife’s behavior that might be ADHD related. But, to be honest, I think there are still some underlying issues with my friend that were not brought up on our meeting. Hopefully someday we can discover what those issues are. But, perhaps it’s just the stress of having 4 months of solid work 7 days a week in Afghanistan, with only one month back in the states to recover. One very nice thing that came out of the conversation was this: I told him that people with ADHD tend to burn through friendships because the social nature of them tends to be out of our grasp of understanding. I asked him why he didn’t stop being my friend year’s ago. He said that he just figured that was the way I was, and accepted it. 15 years of just accepting it - that’s pretty amazing to me. I'm glad I held off on calling the police and his bishop. I know I'll be thinking about this whole thing for sometime.
alter idem Posted June 15, 2011 Posted June 15, 2011 I suppose its one of those things where the Holy Ghost tells you of your duty to raise your hand in the negative, & you just do it. But I think one has to be absolutely sure.Hmm..If the Holy Ghost were to tell me to raise my hand in the negative, I'd question it. There's no reason for the Holy Ghost to reveal to me that the person shouldn't have the calling and yet, not reveal this to the church leaders who've called the person. Now, if I know something about the person that the leaders might not be aware of, that's a different story. And, it would have to be a worthiness issue. Does dishonesty alone, such as knowing that the person was involved with theft, make that person unworthy for a Scout Leadership calling? What about other callings such as 1st councilor in the bishopric, or even Stake President? I suppose it all goes back to the Holy Ghost. It would be weird being the Bishop if some didn’t sustain someone. Further there could be things he repented of, which makes that person worthy now. I think as soon as we think this is our decision, we lose our correct objectivity.Theft IS a worthiness issue.When leaders ask for a sustaining vote from the congregation, it is important that we are able to give it. If a person feels they cannot, they should raise their hand in opposition. If it is a matter of knowing the person is unworthy because they are involved with theft, dishonesty, abuse, etc. then they ought to let the church leaders know of their concerns.Further there could be things he repented of, which makes that person worthy now. I think as soon as we think this is our decision, we lose our correct objectivity.Choosing who will serve in leadership positions is not our decision; the decision is whether or not we can raise our hand up to say that we will support the person our leaders have chosen in their particular calling. I'm not sure objectivity is important, unless you think that your own feelings towards the person are influencing you. If you feel that you cannot support the person, you need to determine why. If it is because they are unworthy, then leaders should know this--if it's already been repented of, they will know of it. If it's a matter that you don't like the person, then best to look at your own heart to see if you need to change your attitude. And if you can't support them, but it's not a worthiness issue, I guess you could just abstain from sustaining or opposing the action. 1
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted June 15, 2011 Posted June 15, 2011 I did right after I joined the church when I was 21. I was sitting with the missionaries the Sunday after my baptism. My left arm was resting on the back of the pew when they started asking for the sustaining for members with new callings. I raised my left hand since it felt natural. One of the missionaries said "no, the right hand" so I then raised my right hand. Of course before I got my right hand up, the guy at the podium asked for all those opposed. My hand was the only one raised. I was so embarrassed. I explained what happened to that member after sacrament meeting so that they would understand.Too funny...
Silver Girl Posted June 15, 2011 Posted June 15, 2011 (edited) Hmm..If the Holy Ghost were to tell me to raise my hand in the negative, I'd question it. There's no reason for the Holy Ghost to reveal to me that the person shouldn't have the calling and yet, not reveal this to the church leaders who've called the person. I don't think this holds true in every situation... I know of a man who was called to be a member of the Branch Presidency... The District and Mission Presidents had no idea this man was not worthy to hold the calling... They both prayed about the calling and felt it was right to proceed...The call was issued, the man was sustained, and he served for 2 years before it was revealved that he had a MAJOR worthiness issue (which resulted in criminal charges)... It is my very firmly held belief that the truth of this matter was not revealed to the District and Mission Presidents, because this was an oppertunity for the man to admit his sin and say, "Hey, sorry... I can't accept the calling and here is why..." He could have begun the repentance process 2 years earlier, and confessed, rather than being "found out"...He did not... Much to his damnation...And, he has to live with that for the rest of his life!!So, I do not think we should refuse to sustain a person on a whim, or because we do not like them... But, just because someone is being called, does not mean that they are worthy, and we should ignore promptings we might feel...Just My .02Silver Girl Edited June 15, 2011 by Silver Girl 1
Messenger Posted June 15, 2011 Author Posted June 15, 2011 (edited) Hmm..If the Holy Ghost were to tell me to raise my hand in the negative, I'd question it. There's no reason for the Holy Ghost to reveal to me that the person shouldn't have the calling and yet, not reveal this to the church leaders who've called the person. Now, if I know something about the person that the leaders might not be aware of, that's a different story. I meant if you should take the action of raising your hand in opposition, If the spirit directs, and you KNOW its the Holy Ghost, I dont have a problem doing what I am told. I understand why you would not and the example you give, but there could be other factors that we simply do not know about; not just the senario you supply. But when you are in doubt, ask two or three times! Just in case you are not sure. Edited June 15, 2011 by Messenger
wcdrotar Posted June 19, 2011 Posted June 19, 2011 I support the revelation of my local leaders, for the road to apostasy begins when we begin to place our judgment above that of our priesthood leaders. I always sustain their motions.
Arkholt Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 I support the revelation of my local leaders, for the road to apostasy begins when we begin to place our judgment above that of our priesthood leaders. I always sustain their motions.Even if you knew there was a good reason why that person should not be sustained to that calling, you would sustain them?Also, why do they ask for an opposing vote if we are all meant to simply raise our hands in support? Why vote at all?
Recommended Posts