bu11fr0g Posted October 21, 2013 Author Posted October 21, 2013 The question is what to make of the bishop's subsequent callings, blessings and counsel.
rpn Posted October 21, 2013 Posted October 21, 2013 In a stake I was in, everyone who asked for a new patriarchal blessing after the patriarch was arrested for fraud, was allowed to get one. But I think it had more to do with comfort of members, than questioning whether the Lord can inspire errant leaders.
Stroopwafel Posted October 22, 2013 Posted October 22, 2013 (edited) If the gift of discernment does not kick in under this kind of circumstance, then when will it? What is it good for if one can't rely on it when one would expect it should be manifested. I mean, if it was to be useful, it would have to have been there and then. Edited October 22, 2013 by Stroopwafel
Storm Rider Posted October 22, 2013 Posted October 22, 2013 If the gift of discernment does not kick in under this kind of circumstance, then when will it? What is it good for if one can't rely on it when one would expect it should be manifested. I mean, if it was to be useful, it would have to have been there and then.I am not sure these callings are not inspired. Bishops are primarily administrators; they are not holy men. Further, a calling is not based on finding the most righteous person in the ward. For whatever reason he was called of God; I don't understand why, but I believe he was. We are each capable of great sin and great holiness.
halconero Posted October 22, 2013 Posted October 22, 2013 If the gift of discernment does not kick in under this kind of circumstance, then when will it? What is it good for if one can't rely on it when one would expect it should be manifested. I mean, if it was to be useful, it would have to have been there and then. All spiritual gifts kick in when God allows them to. I may not always rely on them, but I can always rely on the belief that they will be given to me in the correct time, manner and place. From personal experience I can say that the gifts of healing, tongues, discernment and faith have always come when the Spirit has confirmed their need.
CV75 Posted October 22, 2013 Posted October 22, 2013 The question is what to make of the bishop's subsequent callings, blessings and counsel.Blessings are easy; the Lord will honor the faith of the one being blessed. Counsel is less easy to address, but essentially the Lord with watch out for the faithful. Of course, it would be better if you have examples of the actual outcomes for his blessings and counsel. Are you talking about subsequent callings he extends, or receives? I think those that he extends follow along the same lines as blessings and counsel. Subsequent callings he receives have so many factors to consider (I suppose the same ones involved with his calling as bishop): the one(s) approving, making and extending the calling; the ones sustaining all those involved wit the process; the ones not coming forth with important information to consider (if any); the Lord's allowance for mistakes and malfeasance. Some people extending callings are comfortable using their own judgement, some are not in a position to receive confirmation themselves, and some assume they are inspired when not, and sometimes maybe the Lord had His reasons to allow an unworthy person to serve in a position of trust. Knowing how the Church is run, I would guess that the ocurrence of unworthy bishops being called is much lower than the number of unworthy candidates in the pool being considered.
Solitario Posted October 22, 2013 Posted October 22, 2013 Unworthy Leaders And InspirationIt's no different than hiring someone who you think will contribute to the growth of your company.....Some undoubtedly will fail.
strappinglad Posted October 22, 2013 Posted October 22, 2013 How long after being made bishop were his crimes revealed?
Popular Post Ushuaia Posted October 22, 2013 Popular Post Posted October 22, 2013 All of your Bishops have been "erring Bishops" to one degree or another. While I'm not condoning anything MacNeill has done or has been accused of, if perfection is the standard, then no one is "qualified" to be a Bishop. The very definition of mercy is what God gives to us, even though we don't deserve it. (I'm not promoting an "Eat, drink, and be merry, for God's going to bless us anyway" attitude. I'm simply saying that if God were to give us only what we deserve, most of us would get few, if any, blessings.) Well said. None of us should ever hope that we get what we deserve when the time comes for that great, personal interview with Jesus Christ in the final judgement. If we got what we deserved, then even the best among us would be forever cut off from the presence of God. The miracle of the atonement, however, is that if we sincerely come to Christ on his terms, then we won't get what we deserve. We'll get tender mercy, instead. 5
Kenngo1969 Posted October 22, 2013 Posted October 22, 2013 Well said. None of us should ever hope that we get what we deserve when the time comes for that great, personal interview with Jesus Christ in the final judgement. If we got what we deserved, then even the best among us would be forever cut off from the presence of God. The miracle of the atonement, however, is that if we sincerely come to Christ on his terms, then we won't get what we deserve. We'll get tender mercy, instead. Thanks for your reply, Ushuaia. Of course, I agree. I don't mean to derail the thread, but I'm curious as to how you chose your screen name. I harbor a secret wish someday to visit Tierra del Fuego. (Well, OK: It's not such a "secret" wish anymore. ) I don't mean to derail the thread. I don't think you can get (or reply to) PMs yet. You can e-mail me at Greatgourdini(at)gmail.com. Thanks! 1
ERMD Posted October 23, 2013 Posted October 23, 2013 Sometimes we are called to our condemnation. It is up to us. I believe blessings and ordinances are still valid. There will however, be a price to be paid by the individual who administers them unworthily--heaping coals upon one's head is the phrase that comes to mind. 3
Garden Girl Posted October 23, 2013 Posted October 23, 2013 Sometimes we are called to our condemnation. It is up to us. I believe blessings and ordinances are still valid. There will however, be a price to be paid by the individual who administers them unworthily--heaping coals upon one's head is the phrase that comes to mind. I agree... the person who has the faith and is worthy to receive the blessing, etc., will receive the blessing... it's not the individual's fault if he has an erring leader that is deceptive... woe be unto such a leader... GG 1
EllenMaksoud Posted October 23, 2013 Posted October 23, 2013 I am very bothered by Martin MacNeill who is on trial for murder. He had multiple affairs, forgeries, probable murder, faked religious experiences. He was predatory in at least some of his sexual misbehavior including molesting a daughter. He had been called to be bishop and had issued multiple callings and ordained multiple people.Is any modicum of worthiness necessary?Is there any inspiration in his callings or his being called? I am very bothered by Martin MacNeill who is on trial for murder. He had multiple affairs, forgeries, probable murder, faked religious experiences. He was predatory in at least some of his sexual misbehavior including molesting a daughter. He had been called to be bishop and had issued multiple callings and ordained multiple people.Is any modicum of worthiness necessary?Is there any inspiration in his callings or his being called?I was just looking at ABC News on the Trial. You mean that he is still seated as a Bishop? I would at least put him on leave pending the outcome. Depending on how the church handles this will affect my confidence in the Church. I doubt that the case could be made that Mormons are any more likely than anyone else to fail magnificently.
Rob Osborn Posted October 23, 2013 Posted October 23, 2013 The actual "sealing power" of the priesthood is wholly dependant upon the worthiness of the leader giving the blessing. For example, taking this to an extreme- Lets say that you have a priesthood holder by "name" who is a serial killer and secretly worships the devil and is in fact a true son of perdition.but no mortal person knows this. Then on Sunday he comes to church and officiates in callings and gives blessings out. He actually has no "sealing power" as he literally has no "power" to seal things both on earth and in heaven as the heavens themselves have withdrawn themselves from him- he has no true authority. And so it is on our own levels of priesthood power and authority. It means nothing for a priesthood holder who is a gross sinner to have any authority from heaven to deal in heavenly things on earth. The priesthood power is entirely dependant upon our own worthiness to hold and administer in the ordinances thereof. No "priesthhod holder" (by name only) has any authority at all if his life is not in harmony to be "worthy" to hold and officiate in heavenly things.
Rob Osborn Posted October 23, 2013 Posted October 23, 2013 (edited) 36 That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness. 37 That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man. (D&C 121:36-37) Edited October 23, 2013 by Rob Osborn
Kenngo1969 Posted October 23, 2013 Posted October 23, 2013 I think the purpose of those verses, Rob Osborn, is to deter leaders from acting unrighteously or unworthily. I don't think it's to say that the blessings and ordinances received (righteously and worthily) even at the hands of those who bestow such blessings who have acted otherwise unrighteously or unworthily are "null and void" or of no effect. I'm unaware of any case (though I would welcome correction from anyone more in-the-know than I am) of blessings or ordinances needing to be redone because of the unrighteousness or unworthiness of the leader who performed them. (We don't require ordinances to be redone even if the officiator is unworthy.) In such cases, I believe the righteousness and worthiness of the recipient controls.
Judd Posted October 23, 2013 Posted October 23, 2013 The keys of the sealing power (to bind on heaven and earth) are in place with the church, so of the church recognizes it then it is binding and not necessarily because of any one priesthood holder who performs and ordinance.
Rob Osborn Posted October 23, 2013 Posted October 23, 2013 I think the purpose of those verses, Rob Osborn, is to deter leaders from acting unrighteously or unworthily. I don't think it's to say that the blessings and ordinances received (righteously and worthily) even at the hands of those who bestow such blessings who have acted otherwise unrighteously or unworthily are "null and void" or of no effect. I'm unaware of any case (though I would welcome correction from anyone more in-the-know than I am) of blessings or ordinances needing to be redone because of the unrighteousness or unworthiness of the leader who performed them. (We don't require ordinances to be redone even if the officiator is unworthy.) In such cases, I believe the righteousness and worthiness of the recipient controls. I have thought about this long and hard concerning my own position and worthiness to perform blessings for others. My personal belief is that the priesthood power hinges entirely off our own worthiness just as the scriptures I quotes states. We are not able to go around and wield the powers of heaven unworthily, it cannot work that way. Its our own duty and responsibility to be "worthy" to officiate in priesthood ordinances and blessings. An unworthy priesthood holder has no authority and the heavens are withdrawn from his words.
Duncan Posted October 23, 2013 Posted October 23, 2013 I have thought about this long and hard concerning my own position and worthiness to perform blessings for others. My personal belief is that the priesthood power hinges entirely off our own worthiness just as the scriptures I quotes states. We are not able to go around and wield the powers of heaven unworthily, it cannot work that way. Its our own duty and responsibility to be "worthy" to officiate in priesthood ordinances and blessings. An unworthy priesthood holder has no authority and the heavens are withdrawn from his words. and that's the thing how is the recipient to know if the guy giving the blessing is speaking the truth or just a bunch of mumbo jumbo, I think too as Elder Groberg said the power of the priesthood is unlimited but our power in the priesthood is limited by our worthiness
Kenngo1969 Posted October 23, 2013 Posted October 23, 2013 I have thought about this long and hard concerning my own position and worthiness to perform blessings for others. My personal belief is that the priesthood power hinges entirely off our own worthiness just as the scriptures I quotes states. We are not able to go around and wield the powers of heaven unworthily, it cannot work that way. Its our own duty and responsibility to be "worthy" to officiate in priesthood ordinances and blessings. An unworthy priesthood holder has no authority and the heavens are withdrawn from his words. and that's the thing how is the recipient to know if the guy giving the blessing is speaking the truth or just a bunch of mumbo jumbo, I think too as Elder Groberg said the power of the priesthood is unlimited but our power in the priesthood is limited by our worthiness OK. Administratively, how does that work? Say I receive an ordinance performed or overseen by Bishop Beelzebub whose Devilish Deeds later come to light, deeds which clearly place him in the category of having wielded the Priesthood power unworthily. Since you seem to be indicating that those ordinances are null and void and/or of no force and effect due to the unworthiness of the person who performed or oversaw them (notwithstanding my own personal worthiness), are you aware of any cases of ordinances which have been redone as a result of the officiator's unworthiness?
Duncan Posted October 23, 2013 Posted October 23, 2013 OK. Administratively, how does that work? Say I receive an ordinance performed or overseen by Bishop Beelzebub whose Devilish Deeds later come to light, deeds which clearly place him in the category of having wielded the Priesthood power unworthily. Since you seem to be indicating that those ordinances are null and void and/or of no force and effect due to the unworthiness of the person who performed or oversaw them (notwithstanding my own personal worthiness), are you aware of any cases of ordinances which have been redone as a result of the officiator's unworthiness? I think they are valid at least in the mind of the recipient but I wouldn't want to be the doer of the deed on doomsday is what I am saying. What is more if you are given a blessing from Bishop Bozo who doesn't have the Holy Ghost and says whatever then how is the recipient to know what will come to pass and what won't? I am trying to see a compromise between yours and Rob Osborn's posts no, but I do know that our Patriarch went inactive some years ago and so he never even mailed out the blessings that he had given somewhat recently. I know because a couple in my ward had it doen in spring and by oct. still hadn't gotten theirs so I told them to see the new Patriarch and see what he says.
EllenMaksoud Posted October 23, 2013 Posted October 23, 2013 It is surprising and dismaying to me that there could be any debate what so ever on this issue. Until guilt or innocence is determined, he should not serve. His leave should be without prejudice. If he is found guity then he never was worthy. 1
Calm Posted October 23, 2013 Posted October 23, 2013 (edited) Until guilt or innocence is determined, he should not serve.I believe this is the procedure with any criminal charges. He was not a bishop at the time. I have not found anything that says how long ago it was that he was a bishop. Anyone find that out? http://www.wheatandtares.org/12942/the-latest-mormon-murder-trial-the-macneill-murder/ Edited October 23, 2013 by calmoriah 1
FriedofJesus Posted October 23, 2013 Posted October 23, 2013 I get that but what about unrepentant people called into being Bishops or people who beat, cheat on their wife, or molest their kids whilst serving? among other indiscretionsThey should not serve in a church capacity. Read 1 Tim 3:1-7 This is what is says among other things:A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; He must be the husband of one wife. This scripture therefore also disqualifies Joseph Smith from being an overseer in the church.
FriedofJesus Posted October 23, 2013 Posted October 23, 2013 I think they are valid at least in the mind of the recipient but I wouldn't want to be the doer of the deed on doomsday is what I am saying. What is more if you are given a blessing from Bishop Bozo who doesn't have the Holy Ghost and says whatever then how is the recipient to know what will come to pass and what won't? I am trying to see a compromise between yours and Rob Osborn's posts no, but I do know that our Patriarch went inactive some years ago and so he never even mailed out the blessings that he had given somewhat recently. I know because a couple in my ward had it doen in spring and by oct. still hadn't gotten theirs so I told them to see the new Patriarch and see what he says.Any unrepentant person will not be in the presence of God in the life hereafter. If you are selfish and live for yourself and do whatever you lust after you will be condemned to hell. That is what the Bible teaches.
Recommended Posts