The Nehor Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 When this kind of thing happens, I find that the best strategy is to never directly oppose the assertions or actions of local leaders, but to let them have their way until the situation is diffused. A calling like this is never worth taking abuse from local leaders, and anyone in this situation is better off asking to be released if they are not released by the local leaders. Then, after the situation is diffused and dies down, go to the authorities over their heads and submit a complaint about how they handled the situation. Never confront them, just go around them and over their heads. Somebody above them is more likely to be more reasonable, and will put them in their place.I too would advise you to use the one authorized end-run around leadership in the church. Prayer is always a good choice.
St. Bookmark Posted June 4, 2015 Author Posted June 4, 2015 (edited) Last nights meetingI showed up a bit early and the bishop and the second councilor were in the stake president office talking when they asked me to join them. When I entered the room the 2 councilor had his head down and looked like he was going to be sick.The stake president started with prayer then told me that he was sorry that he did not look in to the situation better and he hoped I could accept his apology.I said yes I do accept his apology.He then started by letting us know that we all need to be humble and forgive one another so this situation will not effect our relationship for the future.He then asked the bishop and second councilor if they had anything they wanted to add. They both said no.The stake president then said ok, and going forward if we hear anything that might be something were not too sure of we will try and find out what was really said and learn the truth.The stake president looked at me and asked, can you sustain your bishop. I said a few days ago I could not but now that we are all sorry and want to put this behind us, then I could sustain him. Then the bishop looked over at me and smiled and said thank you. Then the stake president asked me if I wanted to be a ward missionary, gospel principle teacher, and the high priest instructor again.I sat there a few minutes thinking, then said no, I had enough of that calling for awhile but I do want to continue teaching the high priest group still.The stake president and bishop chuckled a bit because they knew why I did not want to do those callings again.The stake president then said in order for you to be a instructor in the high priest group we need to ordain you one.I almost fell back out of my chair,( I wanted to ask why this time and not back when I was first set apart for the calling but I thought I better not push it) he said I talked with my counsers and the high council and they were all in agreement with the ordanation, and most of them know you and we're very happy to hear about this.Then the stake president dismissed the bishop and 2nd counselor. The 2nd counselor looked very upset and did not say a word.Then the stake president and I talked about the hp office and what it means. Then as I was leaving I asked what about the 2nd counselor, ( I did not want anything bad to happen )he said no worries things are going to change in a few weeks, and not to trouble myself but just go home talk with my wife, family and to pray and study and go to the temple before next Sunday. Then as I was walking by the bishops office the bishop asked me to join him for a few minutes, he told me that he wanted to apologize again and to ask me if my wife and I would like to join him and his family for a bbq, I said sure my family would love that. Then I said I hope you can forgive me for being upset with you, he said thank you and he does. I feel like a great weight has been lifted off of my shoulders and the truth of the power of prayer.I only hope things in a few weeks are good for the 2nd counsoler. Edited June 4, 2015 by St. Bookmark 2
mfbukowski Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 (edited) Nevermind- looks like things are resolved Edited June 4, 2015 by mfbukowski
The Nehor Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 This is one of the weirdest stories I have ever read and I read Lovecraft. 1
St. Bookmark Posted June 4, 2015 Author Posted June 4, 2015 Yes thing feel resolved but there is still a few weeks ahead.
Mudcat Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 It appears the problems started in earnest in 2013 when the second counselor told you he didn't agree with the bishop in extending the callings of gospel essentials teacher and ward missionary to you. You should have told him right then and there that you would not accept the new callings without the bishopric being fully united and comfortable in extending the callings to you. Things started out on a discordant note and have ended up in a mess.This seems an odd way to think. Why put the responsibility off on someone who has a less authoritative situation? 2
Bobbieaware Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 This seems an odd way to think. Why put the responsibility off on someone who has a less authoritative situation?I believe you misunderstand. I put the ultimate responsibility on the second counselor. Bishoprics are supposed to be united in their decisions, and if a second counselor came to me with the same vote of no confidence as this counselor did when he called St Bookmark to those new callings, I would send him back to the bishop with word that I won't accept any new callings until the members of the bishopric are united in their decision. This would likely cause friction between the bishop and his second counselor because being unsupportive and harshly critical of members while calling them to service is bad form, immature and just plain wrong. 1
The Nehor Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 I believe you misunderstand. I put the ultimate responsibility on the second counselor. Bishoprics are supposed to be united in their decisions, and if a second counselor came to me with the same vote of no confidence as this counselor did when he called St Bookmark to those new callings, I would send him back to the bishop with word that I won't accept any new callings until the members of the bishopric are united in their decision. This would likely cause friction between the bishop and his second counselor because being unsupportive and harshly critical of members while calling them to service is bad form, immature and just plain wrong. Yeah this whole story is just weird. I can tell you that if I was a Bishop and one of my counselors was undermining my decisions before the members I would release him. A counselor is supposed to advise, disagree, and counsel in meetings but when the presiding leader makes a final decision you go along with it even if you disagree with it and you do it without complaining about said decision. If you cannot do that you should avoid church leadership positions. I'm still baffled by the whole story and find it hard to believe. I just don't know. 1
Robert F. Smith Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 ............................................................................................ Personally, I'd be quite reticent to display such petulance to the Lord of the Universe, .......................................................................................Remember the prophet Johah? Wasn't he quite petulant toward the Lord of the Universe?
The Nehor Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 Remember the prophet Johah? Wasn't he quite petulant toward the Lord of the Universe?Uhhhh, are you suggesting Jonah is a good model to follow at that point in the story? Seems like the equivalent of recommending the lifestyle of Alma the Younger and specifically including his playboy lifestyle in his youth?
Robert F. Smith Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 This is one of the weirdest stories I have ever read and I read Lovecraft.I don't favor Lovecraft, but my best friend returned to the USA from a couple of years of doctoral work in a foreign country, and he and his wife and children spent a short time in a ward on the Eastern Seaboard. He is an anthropologist accustomed to a variety of kinds and types of people, including all manner of Mormons. Yet he was shocked to find that this ward he was attending was on the verge of going straight to Hell. The backbiting and evil was tangible, and he had never seen anything like it before. He was placed on the Stake High Council and found things not much better at that level. He was quite happy to get out of there. Later, when that ward and some of its members became infamous, he discussed it with me.
Robert F. Smith Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 Uhhhh, are you suggesting Jonah is a good model to follow at that point in the story? Seems like the equivalent of recommending the lifestyle of Alma the Younger and specifically including his playboy lifestyle in his youth?Kenngo bravely stated that he wouldn't be petulant toward the Lord of the universe. Yet there was Jonah, a prophet of the Lord, who got indignant and enraged that he had wasted his time in Nineveh -- only to have the Lord show compassion. He even told the Lord, "I told you so." Despite Jonah's petulance, the Lord showed compassion toward him, and carried on a conversation with him. It is so easy to be theoretically brave, until push comes to shove . . .
The Nehor Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 Kenngo bravely stated that he wouldn't be petulant toward the Lord of the universe. Yet there was Jonah, a prophet of the Lord, who got indignant and enraged that he had wasted his time in Nineveh -- only to have the Lord show compassion. He even told the Lord, "I told you so." Despite Jonah's petulance, the Lord showed compassion toward him, and carried on a conversation with him. It is so easy to be theoretically brave, until push comes to shove . . .I have been petulant with God more then once in my life. I have found God equally merciful. I still would not recommend the practice. 1
Maedros Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 The local leaders of the church are not all righteous and good men and they are not all called by inspiration (at a local level) however their priesthood offices are inspired by God. Unfortunately the natural man is real and is an enemy to God - this situation doesn't even surprise me because I've witnessed it countless times - there's a lot of cronyism at local levels and I think its a bit worse for you guys in the States because of the Mormon-culture which is very different from latter-day saint culture; but this is such a testament to the workings of God and how our challenges are suited to our weaknesses, for instance such a thing would never happen to me - I don't get bullied in the church, no one condescends me or has power to exercise unrighteousness dominion over me because I don't allow it. I am too well versed and my testimony is too strong. For you though, this scenario is suited to you and there's a lesson for you to learn and perhaps not just for you - so truly don't be discouraged and don't condemn anyone - "love...them that despitefully use you and persecute you" even though they are latter-day saints, the Lord loves them and you. So perhaps this is the adversary wanting to destroy you - don't let him!
Mudcat Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 I believe you misunderstand. I put the ultimate responsibility on the second counselor. Bishoprics are supposed to be united in their decisions, and if a second counselor came to me with the same vote of no confidence as this counselor did when he called St Bookmark to those new callings, I would send him back to the bishop with word that I won't accept any new callings until the members of the bishopric are united in their decision. This would likely cause friction between the bishop and his second counselor because being unsupportive and harshly critical of members while calling them to service is bad form, immature and just plain wrong.If it worked for Constantine, I guess it would work for anybody.
Jeanne Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 It sounds tome like even the Bishop may be experiencing problems of his own with the 2nd counselor. Compromising is a part of the bishopric I suppose.but still, this sounds so unfair and what would a bishop do? Depends on the bishop. That being said..this is just a beginnong of what wanes the member from fully sustaining and trusting a leader in any capacity. Yes, infallibility is real..but is being "called" by revelation just as real?
mfbukowski Posted June 6, 2015 Posted June 6, 2015 I don't get bullied in the church, no one condescends me or has power to exercise unrighteousness dominion over me because I don't allow it. I am too well versed and my testimony is too strong. For you though, this scenario is suited to you and there's a lesson for you to learn and perhaps not just for you -Perhaps some improvement in humility might be in order 1
Tacenda Posted June 6, 2015 Posted June 6, 2015 Perhaps some improvement in humility might be in orderHumble Pie indeed! Confidence is nice, but there is a limit.
Avatar4321 Posted June 6, 2015 Posted June 6, 2015 Perhaps some improvement in humility might be in orderPerhaps? It's in order on a global scale. Is there even on person on this board who could do to learn humility better?
Bobbieaware Posted June 6, 2015 Posted June 6, 2015 (edited) If it worked for Constantine, I guess it would work for anybody. You may be unaware of the fact that it's a long-established LDS Church doctrine that all presidencies and other presiding leadership councils must be united in their decisions before they can move forward in any way. Edited June 6, 2015 by Bobbieaware
The Nehor Posted June 6, 2015 Posted June 6, 2015 You may be unaware of the fact that it's a long-established LDS Church doctrine that all presidencies and other presiding leadership councils must be united in their decisions before they can move forward in any way.No, the presiding authority makes the decision and others are expected to fall in line.
Meadowchik Posted June 6, 2015 Posted June 6, 2015 Without reading all the other replies I would say that, at first blush, if a counselor had asked to speak with me in the hall and I refused at the time, I'd seek them out later at a more appropriate moment. IMO, we should be responding to leaders' requests to communicate as best as we can. Is it possible that you gave the impression that you don't want to listen or understand, or that you'll only do so on your terms?
Bobbieaware Posted June 6, 2015 Posted June 6, 2015 (edited) No, the presiding authority makes the decision and others are expected to fall in line.Valid additional clarification. But Isn't that tantamount to saying the same thing I said? For instance, if a counselor doesn't agree with the bishop, he has made his own decision and the bishopric is not in agreement. I have heard of instances where the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve were in near total agreement on certain important matters, but the majority, including the Church President, were overruled by a lone member of the Twelve. The near majority could not move forward with what they emphatically wanted to do. Edited June 6, 2015 by Bobbieaware
mfbukowski Posted June 6, 2015 Posted June 6, 2015 Perhaps? It's in order on a global scale. Is there even on person on this board who could do to learn humility better?"I am too well versed and my testimony is too strong. For you though, this scenario is suited to you and there's a lesson for you to learn and perhaps not just for you -"
Recommended Posts