Agree Or Disagree: Church Handbook Of Instructions: Book 1

[seriously honestly]

Why, as a non-LDS would you have any interest in the CHI?

see my above answers

[ERayR]

I just want to point out a few things:

1. is it established that the Bishop has to grant you access to CHI 1? could he refuse? and if he can refuse to show you, is that really access to CHI 1?

2. What would be the harm in providing CHI 1 on LDS.org? is there really anything in the manuel that would harm the church? (the answer is no from what I have read of CHI1.)

3. I think there is a fundamental difference between protecting individuals rights to unwarranted searches and seizures and a members right to access documents governing the organization he/she is a member of

4. Of course you can always ask your bishop for guidance but you don't always think to ask him or know that something is wrong. Riding in the car with a married woman who isn't your spouse is an example, cremation, vasectomies, and hypnosis are also examples where the average member might not know that there is anything wrong and wouldn't even think to ask about.

1) No he is not compelled to give you accsess. If you have a proceedural question or problem any bishop I have known will look it up with you and go over it. Remember doctrinal issues are not solved whith the CHI only proceedural issues.

2) What would be the value.

3) When a member is called to an administrative position then they have unfettered access to the copy their organization has (which is identical to all other copies). It after all is nothing more than a proceedures manual.

4) The answer to those questions are in the correct principles taught from the scriptures and do not come from a proceedures manual. However some of them are reiterated there.

[Saints Alive]

4) The answer to those questions are in the correct principles taught from the scriptures and do not come from a proceedures manual. However some of them are reiterated there.

Ok well then what about the churches stance on vasectomies? where do the scriptures say that it is a no no? In fact based on the modern revelation from prophets, that it is between a couple and god to decide when and how many kids to have, one could logically infer that it would be ok to get a vasectomy.

[thesometimesaint]

Rongo:

I've never been a Bishop, but have served in a Bishopric. So I quite understand.

[Saints Alive]

Saints Alive: The only "Final Word" is what the Spirit tells you to do. You alone are responsible for what you do with that inspiration. I have no idea as to what that disclaimer would/should be. There already provisions within the CHI that allow for differents needs, being met differently. The Church, as an established body, has rules on how to form it various subdivisions, conduct its meetings, and general policy statements. Those rules are contained in the CHI. The CHI was never intended nor designed to be the "Final Word" on anything.

If you reread my post I think you will see that that was my point. however, the CHI does provide a frame of reference for what the First Presidency expects for the average ward and it has already been stipulated that local revelation and interpretation is acceptable.

[ERayR]

Ok well then what about the churches stance on vasectomies? where do the scriptures say that it is a no no? In fact based on the modern revelation from prophets, that it is between a couple and god to decide when and how many kids to have, one could logically infer that it would be ok to get a vasectomy.

I have not looked that one up but will now have to but will say this I don't think a vasecty negates any of the saving ordinances. If that were so thousand of priesthood holders are in some real trouble. While I am at it I will look up tubal ligations. If I remember. I don't remember those being doctrinal issues, so of not much import to me but I will try and remember and report back.

[thesometimesaint]

Saints Alive:

As a general rule the Saints are advised not to become sterilized. However there are individual exceptions, usually due to health concerns, to that general rule.

[KevinG]

But as a practical matter, I cannot keep the Bishop's number on my speed-dial and ask him for permission for everything I do. Isn't it better if the church "teaches us correct principles and lets us govern ourselves"?

If you need to be guided in all things you are doing it wrong.

[Cobalt-70]

The Church does teach correct principles. They come from The Bible, The Book of Mormon and The Pearl of Great Price not from the CHI.

But the Book of Mormon doesn't say anything about attending hypnotist shows, or giving married people a ride to church without a chaperone. If these type of things are important enough to be included in church policy, then why not just teach members these things openly--even broadcast it from the rooftops--and let them exercise their God-given agency to make their own choices?

[Cobalt-70]

If you need to be guided in all things you are doing it wrong.

That's why I'm saying we shouldn't be kept in the dark about what church policy is, so that we don't have to run to the Bishop and ask him permission for everything we do.

[KevinG]

To cut through some of the hypothetical clutter...

For those of you who feel you need direct access to the CHI:

What are the specific questions you have and why would direct access be better than to ask the Bishop (who is on a lot of peoples speed dial already)?

[Sky]

For anybody who is just itching to know what the Church says about vasectomies – it just so happens to be in Book 2 which is on the Church’s website and available for anybody to access who wants to:

It’s actually kind of boring if you ask me.

Surgical Sterilization (Including Vasectomy)

The Church strongly discourages surgical sterilization as an elective form of birth control. Surgical sterilization should be considered only if (1) medical conditions seriously jeopardize life or health or (2) birth defects or serious trauma have rendered a person mentally incompetent and not responsible for his or her actions. Such conditions must be determined by competent medical judgment and in accordance with law. Even then, the persons responsible for this decision should consult with each other and with their bishop and should receive divine confirmation of their decision through prayer.

Edited October 14, 2011 by Sky

[Cobalt-70]

What are the specific questions you have and why would direct access be better than to ask the Bishop (who is on a lot of peoples speed dial already)?

I don't have any specific questions myself, because I already have access. However, the problem is that members may not even know what questions to ask until they read church policy? Therefore, they have to ask the Bishop about everything they do, on the off chance that it might be against some secret church policy.

[KevinG]

I don't have any specific questions myself, because I already have access. However, the problem is that members may not even know what questions to ask until they read church policy? Therefore, they have to ask the Bishop about everything they do, on the off chance that it might be against some secret church policy.

If I am shown a case where a Church memeber was disciplined or even scolded for not knowing something in the CHI1 I will be more inclined to believe in a hypothetical problem with hypothetical secret church policy. (yes this is a CFR)

The CHI1 is primarily instructions for administrative functions of ward and stake leadership.

Questions that members are likely to have are published in a variety of resources including CHI2.

[Deborah]

Once again people, the handbook is a guide for church leaders, who also are to be led by revelation. Therefore it is a big mistake to assume because it's in the CH it is the final word on any matter. Therefore it is of no benefit for anyone, particularly non-members, to have easy access. Rules are established but there may always be circumstances where an exception needs to be made and in many cases has been.

[jskains]

Saints alive? Wasn't that the name of the Godmaker's group?

[mfbukowski]

I have ready access to the CHI, but then I'm a member of the Church. Most of the time it's about my Calling in the Church that I ask about. But I've never been denied for other concerns either.

IMNTBHO nonmemebers should MYOB and memebers should stiil go their Bishop for the information.

LSMFT

[thesometimesaint]

Please clarify.

[Arkholt]

All of this information is available. You can find out what Church policy is at any time, even anything that is in the CHI whenever you want to.

It's called "ask your bishop." If you want to know about a particular Church policy on something, they will tell you. It's not that complicated.

[mfbukowski]

Please clarify.

That's the point. I couldn't read yours because of all the abbreviations.

LSMFT= "Lucky Strike Means Fine Tobacco" a well-known 1950's advertising slogan if you were around that long ago. It also acquired various other meanings among that generation.

[cinepro]

Reading this thread, I imagine a bunch of Catholics sitting around 1,000 years ago and discussing whether the parishoners should be able to read the scriptures on their own, and having these same arguments being brought up.

"Why would we need that? You can ask your priest about the Bible anytime you like?"

"But if people had the Bible, that would just give our critics ammunition to criticize the priests and the church about all the stuff that we're doing wrong..."

Of course, this is totally different in many important ways, but it was just a funny thought.

Edited October 15, 2011 by cinepro

[Calm]

LSMFT

MYOB....mind your own business, the first is a variation on in my humble opinion.

[thesometimesaint]

I answered this before, but don't mind answering again. In My Never To Be Humble Opinion

I am making fun of myself. My Patriarchial Blessing has as one whole paragraph. "Be Humble". Obviously I still need to work on it.

Edited October 16, 2011 by thesometimesaint

[Saints Alive]

If I am shown a case where a Church memeber was disciplined or even scolded for not knowing something in the CHI1 I will be more inclined to believe in a hypothetical problem with hypothetical secret church policy. (yes this is a CFR)

The CHI1 is primarily instructions for administrative functions of ward and stake leadership.

Questions that members are likely to have are published in a variety of resources including CHI2.

I actually know of such a case involving an Elders Quorum president who got a vasectomy (after him and his wife decided that 4 kids was enough) When the Bishop asked him if he planed on having any more kids he told him that he couldn't because he had gotten a vasectomy. The bishop acted very displeased and told him he wished that he would have asked him before making such a big decision. EQP thought it was a strange thing to say, two months later the Church releases CHI 2 with selected policies and EQP finds out why the Bishop was disappointed.

Reading this thread, I imagine a bunch of Catholics sitting around 1,000 years ago and discussing whether the parishoners should be able to read the scriptures on their own, and having these same arguments being brought up.

"Why would we need that? You can ask your priest about the Bible anytime you like?"

"But if people had the Bible, that would just give our critics ammunition to criticize the priests and the church about all the stuff that we're doing wrong..."

Of course, this is totally different in many important ways, but it was just a funny thought.

Very good parallel, I don't think it is at all different in some important ways.

Edited October 16, 2011 by Saints Alive

[Ariarates]

When the Bishop asked him if he planed on having any more kids (...)

None of his business, I'd say (as per the handbook, if I'm not mistaken).

The bishop acted very displeased and told him he wished that he would have asked him before making such a big decision

These are adults we're talking about, right?

EQP thought it was a strange thing to say

I'm with him. It's not just strange, it's beyond belief that an ecclessiastical leader would assume that he needs to be consulted by two adults on a matter of personal health.