Freedom Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 I disagree. The basic unit of the Church is the stake, not the ward . The ward is an appendage of the stake. The stake president has the authority to tell a bishop how the ward is to be organized except, perhaps arguably, the priests quorum. (The current manual has a table which shows who extends calls and makes decisions, but when it comes to the sisters, the priesthood and the youth, the stake president's power is delegated to the bishop, a delegation he can revoke.) The D&C talks about stakes, not wards. "Ward" is merely name that applied to a segment of a city, and the stakes in Nauvoo were organized along municipal ward lines. In Nauvoo, the stakes didn't necessarily have bishops. An ancestor of mine was a bishop for 25 years in Payson. In each ward, in addition to a bishop, there was a ward president. The ward president reported to the stake president and organized weekly meetings. The bishop was the Church's agent for property and tithing. Having personal experience, I can tell you that this is not the case. There is a complete separation of authority. Although a stake president can step in when a bishop is completely out to lunch, they generally cannot dictate the functioning in a ward. A stake president cannot call a ward teacher or officer. The stake president cannot dictate church disciplinary councils that are under the preview of the Bishop. It cannot be done. I am sure you can identify practices in the distant past that may be different but we are a church of revelation and past practices that were wrong have been corrected over time. 2
HappyJackWagon Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 Having personal experience, I can tell you that this is not the case. There is a complete separation of authority. Although a stake president can step in when a bishop is completely out to lunch, they generally cannot dictate the functioning in a ward. A stake president cannot call a ward teacher or officer. The stake president cannot dictate church disciplinary councils that are under the preview of the Bishop. It cannot be done. I am sure you can identify practices in the distant past that may be different but we are a church of revelation and past practices that were wrong have been corrected over time. The Stake President is the line priesthood leader of the Bishop who operates under the keys given him by the SP. A SP could micromanage a ward but he shouldn't. Regarding DCouncils, a SP definitely plays a role as authorization should be received by the SP before the Bishop holds a council. The SP could also overturn the Bishops decision via appeal.
Freedom Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 The Stake President is the line priesthood leader of the Bishop who operates under the keys given him by the SP. A SP could micromanage a ward but he shouldn't. Regarding DCouncils, a SP definitely plays a role as authorization should be received by the SP before the Bishop holds a council. The SP could also overturn the Bishops decision via appeal.Again, having personal experience, the bishop does not require authorization from the stake president to hold a disciplinary council and no, a stake president has no authority to call any ward officers unless the bishops fails to do so. A bishop may consult the stake president, but the stake president has no authority to issue such callings. The callings that a stake president can issue are very clearly laid out in the hand book of instructions and I have personally attended many training sessions on this very subject directed by apostles and other general authorities of the church. I had three experiences with wards that had no bishops. No callings were issued and no action was taken by the stake to intervene until a new bishop was called.
rchorse Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) Again, having personal experience, the bishop does not require authorization from the stake president to hold a disciplinary council and no, a stake president has no authority to call any ward officers unless the bishops fails to do so. A bishop may consult the stake president, but the stake president has no authority to issue such callings. The callings that a stake president can issue are very clearly laid out in the hand book of instructions and I have personally attended many training sessions on this very subject directed by apostles and other general authorities of the church. I had three experiences with wards that had no bishops. No callings were issued and no action was taken by the stake to intervene until a new bishop was called.Well, Handbook 1 states that a bishop does need to get authorization from the stake president to hold a disciplinary council. I'm not sure what your personal experience is, but I'll go with what's explicitly stated in the handbook. Edit: Here's the relevant bit from 6.10.1: "The bishop always consults with the stake president and obtains his approval before convening a disciplinary council." Edited January 13, 2015 by rchorse 1
Freedom Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 Well, Handbook 1 states that a bishop does need to get authorization from the stake president to hold a disciplinary council. I'm not sure what your personal experience is, but I'll go with what's explicitly stated in the handbook. Edit: Here's the relevant bit from 6.10.1: "The bishop always consults with the stake president and obtains his approval before convening a disciplinary council."This is in reference to excommunicating Melchizedek priesthood holders which is under the responsibility of the stake. Likewise, endowed members must also go to the stake. Otherwise, the bishop has full authority.
HappyJackWagon Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 This is in reference to excommunicating Melchizedek priesthood holders which is under the responsibility of the stake. Likewise, endowed members must also go to the stake. Otherwise, the bishop has full authority. Wrong. Here's the full quote. Ward Disciplinary CouncilsAll three members of the bishopric and a clerk participate in a ward disciplinary council. If the bishop is unable to participate, he refers the case to the stake president, who convenes a stake disciplinary council. The bishop may not assign a counselor to convene or preside over a disciplinary council. If a counselor in the bishopric is unable to participate, the bishop may ask a high priest in the ward to take the counselor’s place. If a high priest is unavailable, the bishop refers the case to the stake president, who convenes a stake disciplinary council. In these circumstances, as with other stake disciplinary councils, the participation of the stake presidency and high council is required as outlined above.The bishop always consults with the stake president and obtains his approval before convening a disciplinary council.A DC where a MP holder may be excommunicated is held at the stake level so it would not be a part of Ward Disciplinary Councils.Also, there is no requirement that the stake convenes councils for anyone who is endowed, only MP holders. Whatever experience you have is either outdated or remembered incorrectly.
Freedom Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 Wrong. Here's the full quote. A DC where a MP holder may be excommunicated is held at the stake level so it would not be a part of Ward Disciplinary Councils.Also, there is no requirement that the stake convenes councils for anyone who is endowed, only MP holders. Whatever experience you have is either outdated or remembered incorrectly.As of two years ago, under the instructions of Boyd K Packard, the bishop should consult with the stake but the stake cannot dictate how a bishop proceeds. I would have to look at the manual to see what the current working is in this regard. Regardless, the bishop holds his own keys and the stake does not get involved in the running of the ward because the bishop holds those keys. The stake can advise, but not dictate. The bishop holds his own keys, they are not derived from the stake. He has full jurisdiction over this own congregation.
Shizfan Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 I've heard that if the man's wife has a breast augmentation, that it prevents that man from being called as a bishop. No I'm not joking This isn't anymore appropriate than your screen name.
The Nehor Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 I've heard that if the man's wife has a breast augmentation, that it prevents that man from being called as a bishop. No I'm not joking I heard that Mormons grow horns at puberty. 2
Duncan Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 I've heard that if the man's wife has a breast augmentation, that it prevents that man from being called as a bishop. No I'm not joking that baffles me, I don't know why anyone else would even care, if men notice then they should get slapped
The Nehor Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 that baffles me, I don't know why anyone else would even care, if men notice then they should get slapped If at least one man does not notice then they should probably ask for a refund. 3
Tacenda Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 If at least one man does not notice then they should probably ask for a refund.I didn't know when a former next door neighbor had breast implants. All I knew was that her husband said she had some female surgery done. I took them dinner and everything. Only to find out what that surgery actually was!! Turns out they are now divorced and she made sure she got that surgery before springing on him that she wanted to split. And how dumb I felt when I found out later from the neighbor gossip.
Hamba Tuhan Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 I heard that Mormons grow horns at puberty. That's simply not true. I had mine from birth. 1
The Nehor Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 That's simply not true. I had mine from birth. Did your mother ever forgive you after the birth?
Hamba Tuhan Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 Did your mother ever forgive you after the birth? I came feet first.
stemelbow Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 I've heard that if the man's wife has a breast augmentation, that it prevents that man from being called as a bishop. No I'm not joking Rumors are cute. My old bishop's wife had breast cancer. Had breast augmentation after recovery. This all before he was called.
rchorse Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 As of two years ago, under the instructions of Boyd K Packard, the bishop should consult with the stake but the stake cannot dictate how a bishop proceeds. I would have to look at the manual to see what the current working is in this regard. Regardless, the bishop holds his own keys and the stake does not get involved in the running of the ward because the bishop holds those keys. The stake can advise, but not dictate. The bishop holds his own keys, they are not derived from the stake. He has full jurisdiction over this own congregation. You're mistaken. I've been a bishop for 3 1/2 years, and no new instructions superseding the handbook on this matter have come through any official channel in that time. That includes a training for bishops that I attended with President Boyd K. Packer, at which he made no mention of anything of the sort of which you're suggesting. I have never once heard from any official channel that the stake president does not have the authority to step in and/or override the bishop on almost any matter in a ward within his stake. I'm really not sure where you're getting this.
Avatar4321 Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 I've heard that if the man's wife has a breast augmentation, that it prevents that man from being called as a bishop. No I'm not jokingI doubt that's true. But I bet if the man gets breast implants that would keep him from being a bishop 2
toon Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 I doubt that's true. But I bet if the man gets breast implants that would keep him from being a bishop Maybe he was just working out.
mtomm Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 Maybe he was just working out. More than like not working out at all. Or getting "help" with his workouts will also do that.
Bob Crockett Posted January 15, 2015 Posted January 15, 2015 You're mistaken. I've been a bishop for 3 1/2 years, and no new instructions superseding the handbook on this matter have come through any official channel in that time. That includes a training for bishops that I attended with President Boyd K. Packer, at which he made no mention of anything of the sort of which you're suggesting. I have never once heard from any official channel that the stake president does not have the authority to step in and/or override the bishop on almost any matter in a ward within his stake. I'm really not sure where you're getting this.You are right. Bishop has original jurisdiction over a priests quorum but every other power is delegated by the stake president. Bishop is presiding HP in his ward unless his ward includes the SP, who is then the presiding HP. Bishops running Sunday ward meetings is a Salt Lake Valley innovation.
mfbukowski Posted January 15, 2015 Posted January 15, 2015 Bishops running Sunday ward meetings is a Salt Lake Valley innovation.What does that mean?
mfbukowski Posted January 15, 2015 Posted January 15, 2015 You're mistaken. I've been a bishop for 3 1/2 years, and no new instructions superseding the handbook on this matter have come through any official channel in that time. That includes a training for bishops that I attended with President Boyd K. Packer, at which he made no mention of anything of the sort of which you're suggesting. I have never once heard from any official channel that the stake president does not have the authority to step in and/or override the bishop on almost any matter in a ward within his stake. I'm really not sure where you're getting this.Yep you are right. I am aware of one case where the SP got word that the bishopric was doing some improper things regarding church funds, and he marched into a Sacrament meeting in progress, and, not mentioning the reason, he released the entire bishopric on the spot, and said that he would be presiding in the ward for a while. That was it.
Mars Posted January 15, 2015 Posted January 15, 2015 Yep you are right. I am aware of one case where the SP got word that the bishopric was doing some improper things regarding church funds, and he marched into a Sacrament meeting in progress, and, not mentioning the reason, he released the entire bishopric on the spot, and said that he would be presiding in the ward for a while. That was it. I never get to see anything fun. 1
HappyJackWagon Posted January 15, 2015 Posted January 15, 2015 Yep you are right. I am aware of one case where the SP got word that the bishopric was doing some improper things regarding church funds, and he marched into a Sacrament meeting in progress, and, not mentioning the reason, he released the entire bishopric on the spot, and said that he would be presiding in the ward for a while. That was it.Wow. That must have been quite the Sunday drama.
Recommended Posts