Tacenda Posted September 23, 2012 Posted September 23, 2012 I was reading on another forum and read a post by someone that said they knew someone that couldn't bless his baby until he was current on his tithing and had been living paycheck to paycheck. Then they mentioned that their own father had blessed them and performed other ordinances for years without being a full tithe payer. They asked if this was a new policy, is it?
CV75 Posted September 23, 2012 Posted September 23, 2012 They asked if this was a new policy, is it?Sounds more like a new way to confuse the facts! 1
Garden Girl Posted September 23, 2012 Posted September 23, 2012 I was reading on another forum and read a post by someone that said they knew someone that couldn't bless his baby until he was current on his tithing and had been living paycheck to paycheck. Then they mentioned that their own father had blessed them and performed other ordinances for years without being a full tithe payer. They asked if this was a new policy, is it?Tacenda...Where do you come up with this stuff??? Someone said that they knew someone that...The first thing that comes to mind is myself... I am a full tithe payer and have been since I reactivated 17 years ago... however, being widowed, alone, living on pension/social security there have been tiimes when I had to make a partial tithe payment in a given month due to an unexpected expense, etc... I then put a ledger sheet with my bills with the amount I owe and each month I pay toward the owed amount along with my regular amount for tithing, usually clearing it in one to three months so that I am again up to date. The bishop doesn't know when this happens, and there is no reason for him to know because I am always up to date by time I go to tithing settlement or for a TR interview. Just because I might lag for a month or two does not mean I am not paying a full tithe. I know some people who do not pay tithing during the year but keep a record and then pay all at once at tithing settlement at the end of the year, as full tithe payers.GG
Tacenda Posted September 23, 2012 Author Posted September 23, 2012 I just worry about legalism, if it were true that this man would not be able to bless his baby until he became current on his tithing especially if it wasn't like that before or in the past. And if it became policy recently. I just wondered if anyone was aware of this. Maybe it's in the church handbook. Or maybe this is a case by case basis. If you haven't noticed I really hope the church stays Christlike and am concerned with some manmade policies that might not be according to Him.
The Nehor Posted September 23, 2012 Posted September 23, 2012 I just worry about legalism, if it were true that this man would not be able to bless his baby until he became current on his tithing especially if it wasn't like that before or in the past. And if it became policy recently. I just wondered if anyone was aware of this. Maybe it's in the church handbook. Or maybe this is a case by case basis. If you haven't noticed I really hope the church stays Christlike and am concerned with some manmade policies that might not be according to Him.If God needs to fix something He can. 1
KevinG Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 Being a full tithe payer has nothing to do with holding and exercising the priesthood. If there was a reason the father could not bless the child it was probably something besides tithing. Something serious enough that he was disfellowshipped or excommunicated.But you will never hear the other side of his story because the church does not publish or reveal that someone is under church discipline. This makes it easy for someone to claim their Bishop or Stake President did this or that without worrying that they will be contradicted.Seriously Tacenda you spent too much time listening to the critics and out and out anti-Mormons and not enough time praying to God if you really want to know the truth. 2
KevinG Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 ...if it were true... Don't worry about that. Its not. 2
Garden Girl Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 I just worry about legalism, if it were true that this man would not be able to bless his baby until he became current on his tithing especially if it wasn't like that before or in the past. And if it became policy recently. I just wondered if anyone was aware of this. Maybe it's in the church handbook. Or maybe this is a case by case basis. If you haven't noticed I really hope the church stays Christlike and am concerned with some manmade policies that might not be according to Him.I agree with KevinG that you spend too much time listening to critics and anti's, and IMO not enough time studying accurate and official papers/publications and scriptures, building your own knowledge base and testimony of what we actually do teach and believe. If you did that and spent more time in prayer for confirming answers, you'd have fewer "concerns" or questions... you've posted one thing after another searching for "answers" in regard to scenarios many of which have little to do with reality, this post being an example. Also, IIRC the Church Handbook is available online, which would provide answers to a variety of your questions that you pose here, but then you wouldn't be able to initiate posts with provocative titles that you use to criticize the Church. from the beach on a real fall afternoon... slightly breezy, leaves falling from trees... GG 2
daz2 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 Tacenda, the requirements for performing blessings are in 20.1.2 of volume 2 of the Church Handbook of Instructions (the public volume available on lds.org). The bishop in his discretion may permit a non-temple recommend worthy brother to name and bless his baby. He may also baptize his children and stand in the circle for confirmation (in the bishop's discretion). He may not act as voice in the confirmation.These policies are new, in the sense that there were no written policies in the past (of which I am aware) and different church leaders had different requirements for performing ordinances. 1
Hamba Tuhan Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 Tacenda...Where do you come up with this stuff???Seek, and ye shall find.
Tacenda Posted September 24, 2012 Author Posted September 24, 2012 Seek, and ye shall find.When there isn't alot of traffic on this board I wander onto other boards and this subject was on there so I had to get the "rest of the story" and come back here.
Hamba Tuhan Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 When there isn't a lot of traffic on this board, I wander onto other boards, and this subject was on there ...And what exactly do you expect to find at disgruntledexmormonwhingers.org? 4
MormonMason Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 When there isn't alot of traffic on this board I wander onto other boards and this subject was on there so I had to get the "rest of the story" and come back here.Why don't you spend your spare time outside of this board in the scriptures rather than message boards? You would not be tossed about like a reed in the wind if you did that. 1
volgadon Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 And what exactly do you expect to find at disgruntledexmormonwhingers.org?You should register the domain name and make a fortune. 2
Tacenda Posted September 24, 2012 Author Posted September 24, 2012 You're all a bunch of comedians on here. But you might be calling the kettle black by calling me out on reading other boards (which btw isn't exmormon) and reading the scriptures instead.
TAO Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 (edited) Tacenda, I think there may be a certain degree of lenience given in the situation. Bishops are all about faith. But they also understand extenuating circumstances.In any case, like the others, I'd be cautious about assuming this to be correct. It could be... but it might not be, as well. In any case, it's not truly our business, I guess one could say. It's between that man, the Bishop, and the Lord. So it is with all tithing issues. =)Best of Wishes to you!-TAO Edited September 24, 2012 by TAO
Tacenda Posted September 24, 2012 Author Posted September 24, 2012 Tacenda, I think there may be a certain degree of lenience given in the situation. Bishops are all about faith. But they also understand extenuating circumstances.In any case, like the others, I'd be cautious about assuming this to be correct. It could be... but it might not be, as well. In any case, it's not truly our business, I guess one could say. It's between that man, the Bishop, and the Lord. So it is with all tithing issues. =)Best of Wishes to you!-TAOYea you're probably right Tao. That's why I use this board. I can't stay away because I need the faith promoting answer too but hopefully the true one!
TAO Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 (edited) Yea you're probably right Tao. That's why I use this board. I can't stay away because I need the faith promoting answer too but hopefully the true one!No prob! Don't worry about it! Just remember, the board just gives answers, like any other board. God is the only one who can guarntee you the true one. So talk to him about it, with patience. I think it'll help... or at least it so does with me =D. Edited September 24, 2012 by TAO
Storm Rider Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 I just worry about legalism, if it were true that this man would not be able to bless his baby until he became current on his tithing especially if it wasn't like that before or in the past. And if it became policy recently. I just wondered if anyone was aware of this. Maybe it's in the church handbook. Or maybe this is a case by case basis. If you haven't noticed I really hope the church stays Christlike and am concerned with some manmade policies that might not be according to Him.Tacenda, I am not aware of any policy in the Church that demands that a priesthood holder be a full tithe payer prior to being able to bless his own child. Having said that, the Bishop is responsible for approving every priesthood action in their ward i.e. all priesthood activity run through him. If you want to bless the sacrament while on a family trip and not attending the ward, he must give his approval for it to be approved. If a bishop determines that a man is not worthy to exercise the priesthood, then that man will not exercise the priesthood in that bishop's ward. Garden Girl stated something that I would emphasize: hearsay is just that hearsay and it has less value than a plug nickel. If you are worried about legalism and you look for it, you will find it. If you seek out truth and light, you will find it. If you seek out all things lovely and of good report, you will find it. The Church of Jesus Christ is made up of humans that are just as flawed and just as good as you are. Some bishops make mistakes at times and at other times they act as if they are angels from God. As an aside, an unworthy father may not be able to exercise his priesthood authority in ordinances of the Church, but he is always worthy to give a father's blessing as led by the Spirit. The most important question for a man to be able to answer honestly while looking in the mirror, "Am I worthy to act in the name of God?"
Monster Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 Tacenda, the requirements for performing blessings are in 20.1.2 of volume 2 of the Church Handbook of Instructions (the public volume available on lds.org). The bishop in his discretion may permit a non-temple recommend worthy brother to name and bless his baby. He may also baptize his children and stand in the circle for confirmation (in the bishop's discretion). He may not act as voice in the confirmation.These policies are new, in the sense that there were no written policies in the past (of which I am aware) and different church leaders had different requirements for performing ordinances.The net effect of the new policy is that the bishop can prevent you from performing ordinances, or even stand in the circle during a blessing. I have seen it first hand in my ward. Everyone standing in the circle has to be temple worthy. Sure a Bishop can make exceptions, but he also does not have to. So yes you have to be a full tithe payer to perform ordinances anymore in most instances. Another example of having to pay to play, so to speak.
The Nehor Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 The net effect of the new policy is that the bishop can prevent you from performing ordinances, or even stand in the circle during a blessing. I have seen it first hand in my ward. Everyone standing in the circle has to be temple worthy. Sure a Bishop can make exceptions, but he also does not have to.How is that a new policy? He holds keys and can tell anyone in the ward that they can or cannot use their Priesthood for any reason.
theplains Posted September 26, 2012 Posted September 26, 2012 I agree with KevinG that you spend too much time listening to critics and anti's, and IMO not enough time studying accurate and official papers/publications and scriptures,In reference to the father giving [or not being qualified to give] the child a blessing, would you provide a link to some accurateand official papers and publications that explains the approved way?ThanksJim
CV75 Posted September 26, 2012 Posted September 26, 2012 In reference to the father giving [or not being qualified to give] the child a blessing, would you provide a link to some accurateand official papers and publications that explains the approved way?ThanksJimMalachi 3:10 -- the windows of heaven are open to those who pay tithe. I think refers to the privileges of administering and participating in the ordinances, receiving revelation to do so appropriately, and knowing the Lord's will in making pronouncements upon His children, in additio to other material and spiritual blessings.
Recommended Posts