Bishop On Harry Reid

[Damien the Leper]

I am not a fan of Reid. However, this ignoramus should get an award for idiot of the year.

http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/1797370-155/church-mormon-lds-political-reid-democratic

[Calm]

Absolutely totally inappropriate.

[Avatar4321]

Worthiness is never a question of political belief. It's a question of action. Thankfully I don't have to judge Reid. God can do that. Because it's quite possible my biases would get in the way. Leave it to God.

[thesometimesaint]

This is why I'm for the complete separation of Church and State. Also of note is that the Pope just demoted a Catholic Bishop for the same cause.

SEE http://www.cruxnow.com/church/2014/11/08/pope-makes-it-official-burke-is-out-at-vaticans-supreme-court/

[longview]

This is why I'm for the complete separation of Church and State. Also of note is that the Pope just demoted a Catholic Bishop for the same cause.

SEE http://www.cruxnow.com/church/2014/11/08/pope-makes-it-official-burke-is-out-at-vaticans-supreme-court/

Any individual, any group, any foundation, any organization, any atheist, AND any church has the First Amendment Right to participate on any issues discussed in the Public Square.  I don't think you really understand the issues occurring between the Pope and the American Archbishop.

 

The "Separation of Church and State" concept has been completely distorted by various interest groups in the last several decades.  The "Original Intent" was to keep the national government from "establishing" or "preferring" a religion or institution over any other organisation.  For example, we would be justified in being concerned over the promotion and teaching of Islamic values and culture in public schools.

[thesometimesaint]

Never said they didn't. Our government officials are required by law and oath to support and defend the Constitution. Part of which prohibits the imposition of a religious test to hold public office. The good people of Nevada have consistently returned Senator Reid to office. What this Mormon Bishop is trying to establish a religious test for the non-religious votes of Mr. Reid.

[drums12]

Never said they didn't. Our government officials are required by law and oath to support and defend the Constitution. Part of which prohibits the imposition of a religious test to hold public office. The good people of Nevada have consistently returned Senator Reid to office. What this Mormon Bishop is trying to establish a religious test for the non-religious votes of Mr. Reid.

I doubt more than a handful of government officials have ever read the Constitution. 

[strappinglad]

Our bishops cannot be demoted. On occasion ,perhaps in this case, they should be deshmucked.

[Darren10]

Never said they didn't. Our government officials are required by law and oath to support and defend the Constitution. Part of which prohibits the imposition of a religious test to hold public office. The good people of Nevada have consistently returned Senator Reid to office. What this Mormon Bishop is trying to establish a religious test for the non-religious votes of Mr. Reid.

Legally this bishop may do so regarding his opinion. What he said, however, flies right in the face of the official position of political neutrality of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

[ERayR]

Never said they didn't. Our government officials are required by law and oath to support and defend the Constitution. Part of which prohibits the imposition of a religious test to hold public office. The good people of Nevada have consistently returned Senator Reid to office. What this Mormon Bishop is trying to establish a religious test for the non-religious votes of Mr. Reid.

 

What "this" Mormon bishop was doing was expressing his opinion on Harry Reid's actions.  The last I heard it was alright to have a position and express it without having it cleared by the thought police.

 

Edited to add:  I do not agree with all he has said but he still has the right to say it. 

[Calm]

He has the right to say what he wants as an American citizen. He does not have the right to do so as an LDS bishop, the rules of conduct which apply to that calling being established by church leadership. He chose to speak, IMO, in his role as a bishop to give his personal opinion more weight. That was what was most inappropriate.

Making public judgments about political positions affecting faithfulness when church leadership has chosen not to is also inappropriate. Judging members' overall faithfulness based on political positions is problematic as well. Church leadership has not stated it is unfaithful to believe that different legal laws should apply even where the Church has promoted a particular stance.

From the article linked:

""Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are, of course, entitled to express their own political opinions," spokesman Dale Jones said in a statement. "However, publishing such views while using a title of a church officer, even if only as a leader of a local congregation as in this case, is entirely inappropriate.""

From his blog:

"As a bishop, one of my responsibilities is to interview members who wish to enter Mormon temples. During our conversation, I have to ask them 13 or 14 questions (the number depends on whether the person has previously entered a temple). Although I can ask them follow-up questions based on their answers, I am not free to omit a question or substitute other questions for the standardized ones. One of the questions appears above, and I do not know how someone who is a standard-bearer for the Democratic Party can respond in the negative."

[Calm]

Having said that, I don't think he should be released unless he makes a habit of that.

 

For those interested, from Dan Peterson on the subject….

 

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2014/11/in-which-i-defend-senator-reid-against-a-totally-inappropriate-public-attack.html

 

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2014/11/once-more-regarding-harry-reid.html

 

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2014/11/a-final-word-on-the-harry-reid-matter-i-hope.html

 

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2014/11/one-last-comment.html

[thesometimesaint]

I doubt more than a handful of government officials have ever read the Constitution. 

 

That's true, but we keep voting for them none the less.

[Kenngo1969]

For the one or two none of you that are interested, Ken Gourdin's opinion on the subject:

 

https://greatgourdini.wordpress.com/2014/11/08/harry-reids-mormonism/

[ERayR]

For the one or two none of you that are interested, Ken Gourdin's opinion on the subject:

 

 

that Senator Harry Reid (D – Nev.) cannot/should not be considered a faithful member of the Church because of his political leanings, actions he has taken as majority leader, et cetera.

 

I am going to go out on a limb here for a minute.  From my unofficial poll it is not his political leanings that call into question what his status should be but it is rather his actions that have seriously damaged the constitutional process.  For being a member of an organization that believes and teaches that the constitution is God inspired and sanctioned he has worked tirelessly to undermine that constitution.

 

Just my .02 cents worth.

[MormonFreeThinker]

What "this" Mormon bishop was doing was expressing his opinion on Harry Reid's actions.  The last I heard it was alright to have a position and express it without having it cleared by the thought police.

 

Edited to add:  I do not agree with all he has said but he still has the right to say it. 

 

Bishops may express their opinions that do not contradict position of the Church. 

 

Michael Purdy, a church spokesman, said in a statement, "It is patently false for someone to suggest they face church discipline for having questions or for expressing a political view"

[Mystery Meat]

I think all growing up most LDS people who were conservative tried to use their conservatism as some sort of badge of superiority. To a certain extent I think that still goes on. I think it is becoming increasingly similar for the liberal members of the church to do the same thing, even reading support into GC talks that aren't there and twisting words to endorse political positions that were never supposed to be endorsed (or refuted). It is rather silly.

 

God is not a Republican and he ain't a Democrat. He is God. Neither party comes close to realizing the divine order of His kingdom. The best thing members of all ideologies could do is drop the silly notion that God somehow cares about your stance on taxes, educational vouchers or global warming. They don't make you more righteous. They are insignificant issues. God does not endorse one tax policy above another. Quite frankly I am pretty sure he doesn't really care how hot or cold the earth is. We do our best as individuals to make informed choices, but it is far more important to keep our covenants and sustain our modern day prophets.

[Silhouette]

I think all growing up most LDS people who were conservative tried to use their conservatism as some sort of badge of superiority. To a certain extent I think that still goes on. I think it is becoming increasingly similar for the liberal members of the church to do the same thing, even reading support into GC talks that aren't there and twisting words to endorse political positions that were never supposed to be endorsed (or refuted). It is rather silly.

God is not a Republican and he ain't a Democrat. He is God. Neither party comes close to realizing the divine order of His kingdom. The best thing members of all ideologies could do is drop the silly notion that God somehow cares about your stance on taxes, educational vouchers or global warming. They don't make you more righteous. They are insignificant issues. God does not endorse one tax policy above another. Quite frankly I am pretty sure he doesn't really care how hot or cold the earth is. We do our best as individuals to make informed choices, but it is far more important to keep our covenants and sustain our modern day prophets.

Amen. I really enjoyed President Uchtdorf's General Conference talk wherein he asked if we really thought that The Lord cares about how many "likes" we get on Facebook, or how many "follows" we get on Twitter.

I think our politics are the same. He doesn't care about our political standpoint. He just wants us to

choose the right in all that we do.

[Kenngo1969]

that Senator Harry Reid (D – Nev.) cannot/should not be considered a faithful member of the Church because of his political leanings, actions he has taken as majority leader, et cetera.

 

I am going to go out on a limb here for a minute.  From my unofficial poll it is not his political leanings that call into question what his status should be but it is rather his actions that have seriously damaged the constitutional process.  For being a member of an organization that believes and teaches that the constitution is God inspired and sanctioned he has worked tirelessly to undermine that constitution.

 

Just my .02 cents worth.

He's not Mormon, so perhaps the comparison is inapt, but people said the same thing about President George W. Bush.

[ERayR]

He's not Mormon, so perhaps the comparison is inapt, but people said the same thing about President George W. Bush.

 

Me too.

[Kenngo1969]

What "this" Mormon bishop was doing was expressing his opinion on Harry Reid's actions.  The last I heard it was alright to have a position and express it without having it cleared by the thought police.

 

Edited to add:  I do not agree with all he has said but he still has the right to say it. 

 

 

He has the right to say what he wants as an American citizen. He does not have the right to do so as an LDS bishop, the rules of conduct which apply to that calling being established by church leadership. He chose to speak, IMO, in his role as a bishop to give his personal opinion more weight. That was what was most inappropriate. 

Making public judgments about political positions affecting faithfulness when church leadership has chosen not to is also inappropriate. Judging members' overall faithfulness based on political positions is problematic as well. Church leadership has not stated it is unfaithful to believe that different legal laws should apply even where the Church has promoted a particular stance.

From the article linked:

""Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are, of course, entitled to express their own political opinions," spokesman Dale Jones said in a statement. "However, publishing such views while using a title of a church officer, even if only as a leader of a local congregation as in this case, is entirely inappropriate.""

From his blog:

"As a bishop, one of my responsibilities is to interview members who wish to enter Mormon temples. During our conversation, I have to ask them 13 or 14 questions (the number depends on whether the person has previously entered a temple). Although I can ask them follow-up questions based on their answers, I am not free to omit a question or substitute other questions for the standardized ones. One of the questions appears above, and I do not know how someone who is a standard-bearer for the Democratic Party can respond in the negative."

This. 

[ERayR]

This. 

 

I too am deeply troubled by his using the cloak of his ecclesiastic calling.  I am confident that by now he has been apprised of this error.

[BCSpace]

I think our politics are the same. He doesn't care about our political standpoint. He just wants us to

choose the right in all that we do.

 

 

That would make our politics all the same.

[BCSpace]

"Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are, of course, entitled to express their own political opinions," spokesman Dale Jones said in a statement. "However, publishing such views while using a title of a church officer, even if only as a leader of a local congregation as in this case, is entirely inappropriate."

 

 

I found it interesting that the Church's response, similar to a response given to outcry over a recent talk given by a Stake President, did not address the actual opinions or truths stated.

 

But I would agree that in this case, he should have made his opinion known without identifying himself as a Bishop.

 

A better question might be, would we still respect a person's right to this opinion and allow it to be heard if we knew he was a Bishop but he didn't present that detail in his opinion?

[Robert F. Smith]

"Now we do not care a groat* about your political differences, but we wish to say to you, do not permit trivial matters to influence you in the least, and never, no never, no never drag Priesthood into a political Gentile warfare.  Let no religious test be required, or the holy influence and power of the Priesthood be brought to bear in any political question.  If the intrinsic merits of all such matters will not furnish arguments sufficient--for all necessary purposes--then let them go, for it is better that the whole political fabric, corrupt as we know it to be, should totter and go to destruction, than for one Saint to be offended."

 

Letter of First Presidency (Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, Willard Richards) to Orson Hyde, in “Brigham Young Manuscript History,” July 20, 1849, p. 105 (LDS Church Archives).

 

*  "a proverbial name for a small sum" Webster's Dictionary, 1828.