Question On The Handbook Of Instructions

[Kenngo1969]

Sounds like good advice.

But from my experience, like the one I shared when I first joined the board, just because your a leader does not mean you have all the answers.

And people seem to go to those they trust when seeking advice.

You should still refer people who come to you looking for that information to the person whose stewardship it is.  Whatever knowledge you may have in comparison to anyone else, those with stewardship in such matters have something you do not: They have been called and set apart.  Even if you know more than they do, every opportunity you take to counsel people on such matters is one less opportunity that those with stewardship have to build needed rapport with those over whom they have stewardship by rendering such counsel.

 

P.S.: The Handbook teaches rules, not exceptions.  Simply because one knows the rules doesn't mean one has the discernment required to recognize any exceptions.  And now that you mention the experience you shared when you first joined the Board, I would say that however you, or I, or anyone else feels about the actions of your leaders (even if such actions constitute unrighteous dominion), that's why Stake Presidents have stewardship over Bishops, Area Presidencies have stewardship over Stake Presidents, and the Presidency of the Seventy and the Quorum of the Twelve have stewardship over Area Presidencies.

Edited November 2, 2015 by Kenngo1969

[Tony Frank]

The below is a c/p from an article about a family suing the church. A discussion board I read mentions a church hotline, something in the handbook that says members should call a hotline number before the police, or was this ever in the handbook, or a hotline at all?

"In most of these cases, the defendants either lost in court or settled the cases. Unfortunately, the defendant (Mormon Church) in the pending Jensen case seems to be winning.

Those who commit and conceal child sex crimes often use whatever legal maneuvers, loopholes and stratagems their clever lawyers can devise while at the same time purporting to be “caring shepherds.” Sometimes they win, sometimes they’ll lose.

Those who care about kids must at the very least expose corrupt or callous tactics by those who profess to be “men of God” and who intentionally frighten or discourage child sex abuse victims from exposing criminals in court."

- See more at: http://boz.religionne

ws.com/2015/04/17/victim-pay-sex-offenders-attorney/#sthash.t1QOgUOr.dpuf

 

"Unfortunately, the defendant (Mormon Church) in the pending Jensen case seems to be winning." ???

 

Neither the Church nor the handbook had anything to do with this scumbag maggot, who molested kids when he was 15 years old while babysitting for them in 2007. The kids finally said something about it in January 2012, and the Church sent him home from his mission. The guy was indicted in October 2012, found guilty in February 2013 and sentenced to 35 to75 years.

 

The Church would never, as the lawsuit alleges, cover up the actions of some lowlife child molester. Suing the Church in this instance means someone is after money.

 

The Herald-Mail reported the following:

 

“The lawsuit alleges the church was repeatedly put on notice and/or had knowledge of Jensen’s ‘predatory acts,’ but actively covered up the abuse and assisted him ‘in committing further unspeakable acts, by enabling (Jensen) to babysit for and live with other church families with young children.’

 

“Jensen was convicted in February of sexually abusing two boys while baby-sitting them in 2007, but the children did not report what occurred until 2012, attorneys have said.

 

“In its statement, the church said it did not act negligently or cover up abuse.

 

“‘To the contrary, local church leaders were instrumental in reporting this matter to law enforcement authorities, imposing church discipline on the perpetrator and trying to get needed assistance to the victim families,’ the statement said.

 

“The church said they encouraged the victims and their families to report the allegations of abuse to police when they became aware of them. 

 

“Local church leaders also reported the incident, the statement said.

 

“The church noted that Jensen was immediately released from his mission when criminal charges were filed and sent home to face the legal process. 

 

“Jensen was excommunicated and is no longer a church member, the church said.

 

“‘Anyone who engages in abuse is rightfully subject to both legal prosecution and to formal church discipline,’ the church said in the statement.”

 

http://www.heraldmailmedia.com/news/tri_state/west_virginia/mormon-church-denies-lawsuit-s-claims-of-sex-abuse-coverup/article_609acc52-41c4-11e3-9c5a-001a4bcf6878.html

[Kenngo1969]

I think the steralization thing comes from a salvation of the species fear. Lets say a nuclear holicost happened and 3 women and one man servived. We would need the man to be fertile for the species to survive.

Nothing like a good dose of speculation, combined with an unhealthy dose of paranoia.

 

P.S.: And SpellCheck is your friend.

[Meadowchik]

And when one has a family of twelve sterilization shouldn't be considered an option?

After 4 children my mother had a historectomy because of hemeraging that would not stop. She never asked her bishop it was between her, the DR, and the Lord.

My wife also had a historectomy after we had three. She had other female issuse that lead to the deccision made between her and her Dr. Should we really be inviting a bishop into the Dr. patient relationship?

You might have not gathered it from my posts here, but we also made a similar decision, in our case, not even thinking of consulting our bishop.

Yet there are those who opt for sterilisation as a birth control method while not at all being for health reasons, physical or mental. And it's not unheard of for some who've gone that route to regret it and try to undo it later.

Such regret can be deep and painful, which is why being able to counsel a couple who has asked for help is a good thing for a bishop to do.

That's just one relevant scenario, but I'm sure there are more.

Edited November 2, 2015 by Meadowchik

[jkwilliams]

You might have not gathered it from my posts here, but we also made a similar decision, in our case, not even thinking of consulting our bishop.

Yet there are those who opt for sterilisation as a birth control method while not at all being for health reasons, physical or mental. And it's not unheard of for some who've gone that route to regret it and try to undo it later.

Such regret can be deep and painful, which is why being able to counsel a couple who has asked for help is a good thing for a bishop to do.

That's just one relevant scenario, but I'm sure there are more.

 

After my wife had a very difficult seventh pregnancy and extremely difficult sixth delivery, we prayerfully made the decision for me to undergo surgical sterilization. Having another child would have been dangerous for her, and we didn't want to take that risk. It never occurred to us to consult our bishop about it, as it was our decision, not his. I have an uncle who, after 3 of his 7 children died of the same congenital heart disease, decided to undergo the same procedure, again never thinking to consult the bishop. 

 

I would think the only time the bishop would be involved would be if the couple were having second thoughts, but then a doctor would seem more appropriate than a bishop for consultation.

[Meadowchik]

After my wife had a very difficult seventh pregnancy and extremely difficult sixth delivery, we prayerfully made the decision for me to undergo surgical sterilization. Having another child would have been dangerous for her, and we didn't want to take that risk. It never occurred to us to consult our bishop about it, as it was our decision, not his. I have an uncle who, after 3 of his 7 children died of the same congenital heart disease, decided to undergo the same procedure, again never thinking to consult the bishop.

I would think the only time the bishop would be involved would be if the couple were having second thoughts, but then a doctor would seem more appropriate than a bishop for consultation.

Our decision was made upon the 6th pregnancy (but which gave us two! )

I would say that any bishop counsel would be for the purpose of the spiritual nature of the decision, all else considered.

[HappyJackWagon]

It's hard enough to live the gospel, keep the commandments, and be temple worthy. Worrying about the handbook seems to be looking beyond the mark. Apostates seem to love hammering on the handbook, like it is somehow responsible for their apostate views.

I have a few questions:

 

1- Do you have examples of apostates "hammering" on the handbook?

2- If they are referencing the handbook, are they misquoting or misrepresenting the church's position?

3- If worrying about the handbook is looking beyond the mark, why does it exist as an official church manual?

 

In my experience the handbook is referenced often, but usually by the most devout law followers as if it's the new law of Moses being upheld by the pharisees.

[jkwilliams]

Our decision was made upon the 6th pregnancy (but which gave us two! )

I would say that any bishop counsel would be for the purpose of the spiritual nature of the decision, all else considered.

 

Undoubtedly, but again, I think that kind of guidance is helpful only when the husband and wife are not getting a clear answer to prayer. I didn't have any doubt at all, as the delivery of our youngest scared the heck out of me (my wife was moved into the cardiology CCU instead of the L&D recovery after our son was born). My wife was equally certain, but when we were in the waiting room before my procedure, she wanted to be sure, so we went into an empty room and knelt in prayer again. 

[Meadowchik]

Undoubtedly, but again, I think that kind of guidance is helpful only when the husband and wife are not getting a clear answer to prayer. I didn't have any doubt at all, as the delivery of our youngest scared the heck out of me (my wife was moved into the cardiology CCU instead of the L&D recovery after our son was born). My wife was equally certain, but when we were in the waiting room before my procedure, she wanted to be sure, so we went into an empty room and knelt in prayer again.

And that is probably why that message from the Church is in the Handbook and not in a letter to be read over every pulpit,...which pretty much represents the resolution to my OP:

The Handbook, in these non-procedural topics, is about achieving a balance between pastoral care and spiritual self-reliance. That's my take, at least.

Edited November 2, 2015 by Meadowchik

[jkwilliams]

And that is probably why that message from the Church is in the Handbook and not in a letter to be read over every pulpit,...which pretty much represents the resolution to my OP:

The Handbook, in these non-procedural topics, is about achieving a balance between pastoral care and spiritual self-reliance. That's my take, at least.

 

I like that, and I think that's a perfect resolution.

[The Nehor]

After my wife had a very difficult seventh pregnancy and extremely difficult sixth delivery, we prayerfully made the decision for me to undergo surgical sterilization. Having another child would have been dangerous for her, and we didn't want to take that risk. It never occurred to us to consult our bishop about it, as it was our decision, not his. I have an uncle who, after 3 of his 7 children died of the same congenital heart disease, decided to undergo the same procedure, again never thinking to consult the bishop. 

 

I would think the only time the bishop would be involved would be if the couple were having second thoughts, but then a doctor would seem more appropriate than a bishop for consultation.

 

And I think this is actually fine.

 

I think the CHI is for bishops who have people come to them with questions. I think anyone considering sterilization should make it a matter of prayer and if someone comes to the bishop whether seeking the will of God or seeking a loophole the bishop should enjoin due caution. If someone prays and is unsure seeking the bishop's counsel may be wise.

 

I have made decisions with counsel in the CHI without the bishop's input because I got revelation I trusted. If I had trouble getting it I probably would have considered talking to the bishop.

[The Nehor]

Bishoprics have also been counseled to no longer stone adulterers.

 

One more example of my bishop defying the CHI.

[sunstoned]

After my wife had a very difficult seventh pregnancy and extremely difficult sixth delivery, we prayerfully made the decision for me to undergo surgical sterilization. Having another child would have been dangerous for her, and we didn't want to take that risk. It never occurred to us to consult our bishop about it, as it was our decision, not his. I have an uncle who, after 3 of his 7 children died of the same congenital heart disease, decided to undergo the same procedure, again never thinking to consult the bishop. 

 

I would think the only time the bishop would be involved would be if the couple were having second thoughts, but then a doctor would seem more appropriate than a bishop for consultation.

My wife and I made the decision after our fourth daughter was born.  We sat on the decision for a few months just to make sure that is what we wanted to do.   After a few months, there were no second thoughts, so we went ahead with the surgery. We were both active members at the time with my wife being the RS President.  The thought never entered our heads to consult our Bishop.  It was our decision to make, and we have never regretted it. 

[Thinking]

You might have not gathered it from my posts here, but we also made a similar decision, in our case, not even thinking of consulting our bishop.

Yet there are those who opt for sterilisation as a birth control method while not at all being for health reasons, physical or mental. And it's not unheard of for some who've gone that route to regret it and try to undo it later.

Such regret can be deep and painful, which is why being able to counsel a couple who has asked for help is a good thing for a bishop to do.

That's just one relevant scenario, but I'm sure there are more.

 

My wife developed diabetes with her first pregnancy. The doctor thought it was gestational but she remained a type 1 diabetic after our daughter was born (by c-section). She wanted to have another child so after she felt like she was recovered enough from the first pregnancy, and with the doctor's blessing she became pregnant again. Her insulin needs during the second pregnancy were triple what they were during the first, and as a result her blood glucose control was all over the place. That and morning sickness created several scary scenarios. We decided that we were fortunate to have two children. We decided to have her tubes tied during the second c-section.

Edited November 3, 2015 by Thinking

[Meadowchik]

My wife developed diabetes with her first pregnancy. The doctor thought it was gestational but she remained a type 1 diabetic after our daughter was born (by c-section). She wanted to another child so after she felt like she was recovered enough from the first pregnancy, and with the doctor's blessing she became pregnant again. Her insulin needs during the second pregnancy were triple what they were during the first, and as a result her blood glucose control was all over the place. That and morning sickness created several scary scenarios. We decided that we were fortunate to have two children. We decided to have her tubes tied during the second c-section.

Tangent: modern medicine is a wonderful thing. It has saved my life when my first came fast with a placental abruption.

I'm grateful to still be here

[Steve-o]

After our 4th child we knew it was time to be done. My DW had struggles with each pregnancy that became increasingly worse. It never once occurred to me to get the advice of our bishop when we decided we should be done having children.

 

I think it's a little concerning that the handbook addresses this, expecting that couples will ask the bishop these kinds of questions. It seems like under these kinds of topics in the handbook it should simply say "Pray and make your own decision." It seems lazy for people to expect to get major life answers like this from a bishop.

[jkwilliams]

Tangent: modern medicine is a wonderful thing. It has saved my life when my first came fast with a placental abruption.

I'm grateful to still be here

I'm grateful you're here, too.

I was born with a tracheoesophageal fistula (type B) and had major surgery the day I was born. I was in the hospital for 6 weeks, and then until I was 5 years old, I had to go back to the hospital overnight once or twice a week to have my esophagus dilated. So, I too am grateful for modern medicine. 

 

Going back to the OP, I was the fourth of my parents' children, and given the special care and expense I would need for years, my parents decided I would be their last child. And then my younger brother Danny was conceived, and then my brother Ross. When my mom was pregnant with Ross, my grandparents came to visit, and my mom hadn't told them of the pregnancy. When my grandmother saw my mom's obvious state of pregnancy, she said, "What, do I have to draw a picture for you?"

[Calm]

Her mom or her mother in law?

[jkwilliams]

Her mom or her mother in law?

Sorry, her mom.

[ksfisher]

After our 4th child we knew it was time to be done. My DW had struggles with each pregnancy that became increasingly worse. It never once occurred to me to get the advice of our bishop when we decided we should be done having children.

 

I think it's a little concerning that the handbook addresses this, expecting that couples will ask the bishop these kinds of questions. It seems like under these kinds of topics in the handbook it should simply say "Pray and make your own decision." It seems lazy for people to expect to get major life answers like this from a bishop.

"the persons responsible for this decision should consult with each other and with their bishop and should receive divine confirmation of their decision through prayer."

The handbook does not say do give up your agency and make the bishop decide what you should do. It doesn't say that you should not pray and come to your own decision. In fact it says exactly the opposite. Consult with the bishop, pray, and then make an inspired decision.

[Meadowchik]

I'm grateful you're here, too.

I was born with a tracheoesophageal fistula (type B) and had major surgery the day I was born. I was in the hospital for 6 weeks, and then until I was 5 years old, I had to go back to the hospital overnight once or twice a week to have my esophagus dilated. So, I too am grateful for modern medicine. 

 

Going back to the OP, I was the fourth of my parents' children, and given the special care and expense I would need for years, my parents decided I would be their last child. And then my younger brother Danny was conceived, and then my brother Ross. When my mom was pregnant with Ross, my grandparents came to visit, and my mom hadn't told them of the pregnancy. When my grandmother saw my mom's obvious state of pregnancy, she said, "What, do I have to draw a picture for you?"

 

[Meadowchik]

"the persons responsible for this decision should consult with each other and with their bishop and should receive divine confirmation of their decision through prayer."

The handbook does not say do give up your agency and make the bishop decide what you should do. It doesn't say that you should not pray and come to your own decision. In fact it says exactly the opposite. Consult with the bishop, pray, and then make an inspired decision.

 

There's the rub. When was the Handbook distributed to everybody or when was it declared cannon or when were all members instructed to study it? 

 

That's what this thread addresses and tries to resolve.

[Storm Rider]

My wife and I made the decision after our fourth daughter was born.  We sat on the decision for a few months just to make sure that is what we wanted to do.   After a few months, there were no second thoughts, so we went ahead with the surgery. We were both active members at the time with my wife being the RS President.  The thought never entered our heads to consult our Bishop.  It was our decision to make, and we have never regretted it. 

 

There is not a requirement to consult with a bishop, but some people appreciate being able to talk it over with someone they trust or for whom they value their input.  Some, like you, don't feel a need and that is perfectly acceptable.  Neither situation is wrong or the best; it depends on the choice of the individuals involved.  

 

The main point is that the couple grow in their relationship with knowing God's will for them and having the strength to follow after Him.  Make sense?

[jkwilliams]

 

My grandmother was wonderful. She used to say, imitating her mother's Scottish accent, "For many years have I loved thee with a passion that is slowly and surely consuming me very vitals."

[ksfisher]

There's the rub. When was the Handbook distributed to everybody or when was it declared cannon or when were all members instructed to study it? 

 

That's what this thread addresses and tries to resolve.

 

And I think those questions have been answered.  What Steve-o seemed to be saying was that the handbook instructed people to have the bishop make a decision for them, which is false.