Tip from Arrington on How to Become a Stake President

[Storm Rider]

13 hours ago, JulieM said:

If you've read or studied Arrington's life, you'd know this does not describe him at all.  He was definitely not an "underachiever".

You and JKW both seemed to have misread the quote.  Look again at what was written, " He sounds more like a bitter underemployed underachiever lamenting the fact that successful hard working people also tend to have higher incomes."  It does not say he is, but that the comment cited sounded like someone who is a (fill in the blank).  

Just my ****-retentive nature coming through.

[jkwilliams]

8 hours ago, Duncan said:

I'll switch places with you! No, I mean these guys don't call themselves obviously but some just don't get people or they don't get something

FWIW, it was just an observation, not a criticism of you, as I am quite sure there are some lousy bishops out there. I was thinking back on the bishops I've had, and they all had their strengths and weaknesses, but they were doing their best. I've had a couple of stake presidents who left something to be desired, to say the least, but don't get me started. 

I've said before that my father taught us not just to forgive human weakness in our church leaders but to expect it. Of the 4 of us surviving siblings in my family, 2 left the church pretty much when they left home. The other 2 (my sister and I) pretty much followed the plan (attended BYU, temple marriages, my mission, and so on). But in talking to my siblings about the church, none of us ever had a problem with leaders and prophets being human. A few years ago, when my sister was Relief Society president, she was telling me about something her stake president had done that had shocked and upset a lot of people in her stake. She said, "I'm glad Dad taught us to expect things like that, because I've seen church leaders do a lot of things I think are foolish or bad or both. But I've never been surprised or disappointed because they do what every other human does."

I have always liked this quote from Lorenzo Snow: "I saw Joseph Smith the Prophet do things which I did not approve of; and yet ... I thanked God that He would put upon a man who had these imperfections the power and authority which He placed upon him ... for I knew I myself had weaknesses and I thought there was a chance for me. These same weaknesses…I knew were in Heber C. Kimball, but my knowing this did not impair them in my estimation. I thanked God I saw these imperfections." I felt the same way when I worked for the church. People used to ask if working there had damaged my testimony, but I would always say that it was a testimony to me to work there. I figured that, given all the crap we had to put up with, it was pretty miraculous that we usually put out material that was pretty good.

[Duncan]

Just now, jkwilliams said:

FWIW, it was just an observation, not a criticism of you, as I am quite sure there are some lousy bishops out there. I was thinking back on the bishops I've had, and they all had their strengths and weaknesses, but they were doing their best. I've had a couple of stake presidents who left something to be desired, to say the least, but don't get me started. 

I've said before that my father taught us not just to forgive human weakness in our church leaders but to expect it. Of the 4 of us surviving siblings in my family, 2 left the church pretty much when they left home. The other 2 (my sister and I) pretty much followed the plan (attended BYU, temple marriages, my mission, and so on). But in talking to my siblings about the church, none of us ever had a problem with leaders and prophets being human. A few years ago, when my sister was Relief Society president, she was telling me about something her stake president had done that had shocked and upset a lot of people in her stake. She said, "I'm glad Dad taught us to expect things like that, because I've seen church leaders do a lot of things I think are foolish or bad or both. But I've never been surprised or disappointed because they do what every other human does."

I have always liked this quote from Lorenzo Snow: "I saw Joseph Smith the Prophet do things which I did not approve of; and yet ... I thanked God that He would put upon a man who had these imperfections the power and authority which He placed upon him ... for I knew I myself had weaknesses and I thought there was a chance for me. These same weaknesses…I knew were in Heber C. Kimball, but my knowing this did not impair them in my estimation. I thanked God I saw these imperfections." I felt the same way when I worked for the church. People used to ask if working there had damaged my testimony, but I would always say that it was a testimony to me to work there. I figured that, given all the crap we had to put up with, it was pretty miraculous that we usually put out material that was pretty good.

Pres. Snow is one of my Fave's along with Pres. Hunter-thank you for that! I think for me, as long as people are trying and learning from their mistakes or others' then that's great! It bothers me it's when people don't and don't see how they come across to others or think they know everything

[rongo]

We did have a stake primary president who got really tearful describing in an adult session of stake conference how stressful it was for her when the maid wasn't able to work for a couple of weeks. Especially cleaning the toilets! 

That was a real eye-roller for the people in the real world . . .  

[Scott Lloyd]

3 minutes ago, rongo said:

We did have a stake primary president who got really tearful describing in an adult session of stake conference how stressful it was for her when the maid wasn't able to work for a couple of weeks. Especially cleaning the toilets! 

That was a real eye-roller for the people in the real world . . .  

Maybe you need to be wealthy to be a stake Primary president. But it's not a requirement for a ward Primary president.

I know, because I'm married to an immediate past one.

 

[rongo]

2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Maybe you need to be wealthy to be a stake Primary president. But it's not a requirement for a ward Primary president.

I know, because I'm married to an immediate past one.

 

Yes, but do you clean the toilets, or does she? . . .  

[CV75]

15 hours ago, cinepro said:

In Greg Prince's recent bio of Leonard Arrington, he includes a list that Arrington made in his personal journal entitled "Things I Don't Like About the Church."

The most interesting one being #2...

Note to self: don't pay tithe.

[jkwilliams]

6 minutes ago, Duncan said:

Pres. Snow is one of my Fave's along with Pres. Hunter-thank you for that! I think for me, as long as people are trying and learning from their mistakes or others' then that's great! It bothers me it's when people don't and don't see how they come across to others or think they know everything

Our stake president in Texas was pretty much like that. Real piece of work. His father had been one of the "pioneers" in being one of the first members to move into the area and start a small branch. The son succeeded his father as stake president, and he basically acted as if his position was his birthright, so he was prone to unilateral decisions without warning and brooking no disagreement. His son was in the marching band with my son, so when we were assigned together to be in charge of a fund-raiser, I tried to get to know him and work with him, but once he realized I was a member, he basically stopped listening and instead told me how he wanted things done and tried to "delegate" all the work to me.

Wow, it sounds like I'm being harshly critical, which I suppose I am, but his being kind of a jerk didn't affect my faith any more than it did when I had a stake president who was embezzling from the church and sleeping with his secretary. My favorite memory of our stake president in Texas was when we had a stake priesthood meeting, and he got up, made a big show of shuffling the pages of his talk, and said, "I had prepared a talk for today, but I feel impressed that there is someone out there in this great congregation of brethren who is struggling with pornography." I was sitting next to our bishop, who turned to me and said, chuckling, "Yeah, that would be about half the stake." He said the SP had been nearly obsessed with pornography use in the stake and had already told the bishops in the stake he would be talking about pornography. Then of course there's the fake "miracle" he talked about that pretty much finished off whatever belief my oldest son had in the church.

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, CV75 said:

Note to self: don't pay tithe.

You just caused me to have a flashback to when I was elders quorum president about 22 years ago in a pretty working-class ward. I had been working for the church, but I was recruited by a software company closer to my home, so I chose the job without the commute. It also involved a 15% pay increase. I hadn't talked to anyone in the ward about my job change, but a week after I handed in my first tithing slip, my wife and I were standing in the foyer talking with several friends after the block when the financial clerk came up and asked, "So, John, how does it feel to be rich?" I was gobsmacked, but my wife went red in the face and looked like she was going to strangle him. So, of course, I had to explain to everyone there that I'd changed jobs and was now making a little bit more. The financial clerk said, "Well, it's more than a little bit." We had to leave. Later that evening my wife said that, if she had to guess, we were probably making more than everyone in the ward except the bishop (who was in management at my company). I think she was probably right, but it was still appalling to have to that man do that.

[stemelbow]

16 hours ago, cinepro said:

In Greg Prince's recent bio of Leonard Arrington, he includes a list that Arrington made in his personal journal entitled "Things I Don't Like About the Church."

The most interesting one being #2...

 

 

Oh....that's why I was overlooked when our Stake Presidency was replaced?  I thought it was for certain all the "problems" I've caused in meetings and all the "issues" I've raised over the years.  I'm only using terms my old bishop ran by me. 

If I think hard I can probably think of a family in my ward that has a lower income than ours, but I can't think of one off the top of my head.  I guess my kids are doomed to have a dad with no respectable calling (and as for the past 7 and a half months a dad who hasn't had a calling and isn't even assigned as a home teacher, but we all go each week anywho). 

[stemelbow]

2 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

You just caused me to have a flashback to when I was elders quorum president about 22 years ago in a pretty working-class ward. I had been working for the church, but I was recruited by a software company closer to my home, so I chose the job without the commute. It also involved a 15% pay increase. I hadn't talked to anyone in the ward about my job change, but a week after I handed in my first tithing slip, my wife and I were standing in the foyer talking with several friends after the block when the financial clerk came up and asked, "So, John, how does it feel to be rich?" I was gobsmacked, but my wife went red in the face and looked like she was going to strangle him. So, of course, I had to explain to everyone there that I'd changed jobs and was now making a little bit more. The financial clerk said, "Well, it's more than a little bit." We had to leave. Later that evening my wife said that, if she had to guess, we were probably making more than everyone in the ward except the bishop (who was in management at my company). I think she was probably right, but it was still appalling to have to that man do that.

Hah...Some people are such boneheads when it comes to stuff like that. 

[jkwilliams]

1 hour ago, Storm Rider said:

You and JKW both seemed to have misread the quote.  Look again at what was written, " He sounds more like a bitter underemployed underachiever lamenting the fact that successful hard working people also tend to have higher incomes."  It does not say he is, but that the comment cited sounded like someone who is a (fill in the blank).  

Just my ****-retentive nature coming through.

Sure, saying someone "sounds like" something isn't the same as saying they are something. But the difference is negligible, IMO.

You sound like a bleeding-heart liberal.

You sound like a frustrated homosexual. 

You sound like someone who's never accomplished anything in his life.

You sound like jkwilliams.

[Duncan]

3 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Our stake president in Texas was pretty much like that. Real piece of work. His father had been one of the "pioneers" in being one of the first members to move into the area and start a small branch. The son succeeded his father as stake president, and he basically acted as if his position was his birthright, so he was prone to unilateral decisions without warning and brooking no disagreement. His son was in the marching band with my son, so when we were assigned together to be in charge of a fund-raiser, I tried to get to know him and work with him, but once he realized I was a member, he basically stopped listening and instead told me how he wanted things done and tried to "delegate" all the work to me.

Wow, it sounds like I'm being harshly critical, which I suppose I am, but his being kind of a jerk didn't affect my faith any more than it did when I had a stake president who was embezzling from the church and sleeping with his secretary. My favorite memory of our stake president in Texas was when we had a stake priesthood meeting, and he got up, made a big show of shuffling the pages of his talk, and said, "I had prepared a talk for today, but I feel impressed that there is someone out there in this great congregation of brethren who is struggling with pornography." I was sitting next to our bishop, who turned to me and said, chuckling, "Yeah, that would be about half the stake." He said the SP had been nearly obsessed with pornography use in the stake and had already told the bishops in the stake he would be talking about pornography. Then of course there's the fake "miracle" he talked about that pretty much finished off whatever belief my oldest son had in the church.

Holy Moses! I feel for our current SP, he's a great guy, some kind of a doctor's assistant, 7 kids, seems genuine!but I hope his kids stay active as he'll be around for quite awhile i'm sure. People who don't live with their own advice. Our Stake was created in '77 or something and every SP has moved away when they got released and so we are stuck with screwy boundaries, buildings placed outside of ward boundaries etc. but I digress.I don't think anyone likes a phony and you can tell who is or who isn't.They are in it for their own ego/church career or think they can get away with anything because of whatever

[rongo]

2 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Oh....that's why I was overlooked when our Stake Presidency was replaced?  I thought it was for certain all the "problems" I've caused in meetings and all the "issues" I've raised over the years.  I'm only using terms my old bishop ran by me. 

If I think hard I can probably think of a family in my ward that has a lower income than ours, but I can't think of one off the top of my head.  I guess my kids are doomed to have a dad with no respectable calling (and as for the past 7 and a half months a dad who hasn't had a calling and isn't even assigned as a home teacher, but we all go each week anywho). 

Oh, come on now. Income has nothing to do with ward callings. Even for "big" callings, I don't think it plays much of a role. I've been a bishop twice in the same stake, and I'm at the very bottom end of the income spectrum, based on tithing (teacher, stay-at-home wife, four kids). A member of the Seventy once told me that when people complain about not having a calling, there is a simple solution for that: come to every meeting, be ten minutes early, be cheerful and say Hi to people, and cheerfully do whatever needs to be done. You'll have a calling in no time --- probably a leadership one, because you stand out and are in elite company. I think the handful of people in each ward who stand out because they cheerfully live the gospel and enjoy it is a much bigger factor than money or status. I like B.H. Roberts's description in CHC of how an "aristocracy of service" inevitably develops where people separate themselves among obvious lines of cleavage, based on genuine service and attitude. 

[stemelbow]

2 minutes ago, rongo said:

Oh, come on now. Income has nothing to do with ward callings. Even for "big" callings, I don't think it plays much of a role. I've been a bishop twice in the same stake, and I'm at the very bottom end of the income spectrum, based on tithing (teacher, stay-at-home wife, four kids). A member of the Seventy once told me that when people complain about not having a calling, there is a simple solution for that: come to every meeting, be ten minutes early, be cheerful and say Hi to people, and cheerfully do whatever needs to be done. You'll have a calling in no time --- probably a leadership one, because you stand out and are in elite company. I think the handful of people in each ward who stand out because they cheerfully live the gospel and enjoy it is a much bigger factor than money or status. I like B.H. Roberts's description in CHC of how an "aristocracy of service" inevitably develops where people separate themselves among obvious lines of cleavage, based on genuine service and attitude. 

I'm not itching for a calling at all.  I'm early every week (which really annoys my wife), talking to people, hearing all the stories from the retired folks.  I also attend all my meetings, much to the chagrin of my wife, as well, and the rest of the ward, for that matter.  So at some point that bishop's going to have figure out something for me.  Ive had tons of callings over the years, but nothing near Bishop.  Probably won't be considered for that, which is fine for me.  It'd be scandalous, and I don't need that. 

But with that said, I think tons of people just feel a little less respected and as such they keep a little more to themselves, a little more skeptical of the "in" crowds and stuff like that.  Some seem to even be concerned that those who seek callings in the way you describe do so because they love themselves that much--want that kind of fame and status.  Eh...we're all a little broken. 

[jkwilliams]

31 minutes ago, Duncan said:

Holy Moses! I feel for our current SP, he's a great guy, some kind of a doctor's assistant, 7 kids, seems genuine!but I hope his kids stay active as he'll be around for quite awhile i'm sure. People who don't live with their own advice. Our Stake was created in '77 or something and every SP has moved away when they got released and so we are stuck with screwy boundaries, buildings placed outside of ward boundaries etc. but I digress.I don't think anyone likes a phony and you can tell who is or who isn't.They are in it for their own ego/church career or think they can get away with anything because of whatever

When I worked for the church, there were people who were obviously "running for office," IOW trying to brown-nose their way into a GA calling. Generally speaking, though, very few GAs come from the ranks of the paid employees at the COB. One exception was Jay Jensen, who was director of our department (Curriculum) when I started working for the church and then was called to the Seventy. Wonderful man, btw. I used to ride the bus with him to and from Utah County (even after he became a GA). Almost without exception, the people who were running for office never made it.

After I left church employment, my new boss (the one who had previously worked at the COB and who had recruited me to the new job) got talking about such people. She mentioned one guy in particular, who she said was a horrendous person and who had been campaigning for GA-hood for a long time. She said, "I'm glad he was never made a GA because that would seriously damage my testimony." I then showed her that he was in the First Quorum of Seventy. She was horrified. 

My first job was at a small software company in Provo run by 3 guys who had founded the company in their garage just after college. The CEO was a rather unpleasant and self-righteous man who ran the company like it was his personal kingdom (he would dress as a king every Halloween). My wife, for reasons I won't go into, despised him. It takes a lot for my wife to dislike someone, but she really didn't like him (for good reason, IMO). A few years later (I was a believer then), I was reading the Ensign and noticed he had just been called to the First Quorum of Seventy, and I laughed out loud. She asked me why I was laughing, and I said, "Look who got called as a GA." She looked at the picture, and after a moment's puzzlement, said, "Why? How on earth could a dirtbag like that be called as a GA?" We both decided that he must have some skill or quality--invisible to us--that the Lord needed.

Edited July 18, 2016 by jkwilliams

[Gray]

Maybe that was how it was done in brother Arrington's day. Our stake president seems pretty middle class.

Mission Presidents, however, seem to be pretty universally well-off. 

[ALarson]

10 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Even if this were the correct term (it's actually high councilor) you misspelled it. The correct spelling (assuming correct terminology) would be councilman. The concept is that he serves on a council, not a counsel.

A counselor to a president, on the other hand, is spelled the way it is because it stems from the concept of him providing counsel to the president.

Thanks Scott!  I knew it was wrong when I typed it, but I was on my way out the door for a meeting, so just left it  

Another 2 words that can be tricky (at least for me) are:  affect & effect.  I often look those up as I can't always remember which one is usually a verb and which one is a noun!

Edited July 18, 2016 by ALarson

[jkwilliams]

5 minutes ago, Gray said:

Maybe that was how it was done in brother Arrington's day. Our stake president seems pretty middle class.

Mission Presidents, however, seem to be pretty universally well-off. 

My first mission president was a store owner from Argentina, so fairly well-off by South American standards, I guess. My second mission president was a religion professor at then-Ricks, as well as the Democratic leader in the Idaho legislature. So, he was better off than most religion professors, but not wealthy by any means. 

[Gray]

4 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

My first mission president was a store owner from Argentina, so fairly well-off by South American standards, I guess. My second mission president was a religion professor at then-Ricks, as well as the Democratic leader in the Idaho legislature. So, he was better off than most religion professors, but not wealthy by any means. 

Both of mine were very well to do, but I guess that shows the limits of my sample size.

[Hamba Tuhan]

33 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

It was still appalling to have to that man do that.

Indeed. I've been both a financial clerk and a member of bishoprics. I can honestly say that if someone had held a gun to my head on a Sunday afternoon, I couldn't have recalled or recounted what someone's tithing contribution had been.

[Hamba Tuhan]

11 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Another 2 words that can be tricky (at least for me) are:  affect & effect.  I often look those up as I can't always remember which one is usually a verb and which one is a noun!

Affect is the action (verb). That's how I remember.

[Scott Lloyd]

9 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Thanks Scott!  I knew it was wrong when I typed it, but I was on my way out the door for a meeting, so just left it  

Another 2 words that can be tricky (at least for me) are:  affect & effect.  I often look those up as I can't always remember which one is usually a verb and which one is a noun!

Here is the tool I gave you nearly a year ago to help you remember.
 

Quote

 

Been thinking about this, and I've come up with a key to help you remember which is a verb and which is a noun.

The word the can always precede a noun but never a verb; if you try, it makes no sense. The ends with the letter e. Ask yourself which of our two words begins with e, affect or effect. The answer is effect. That's the noun.

It may take a period of mental exercise to get used to this, but you'll get it.

 

 

[Nevo]

6 hours ago, Freedom said:

I am familiar with his credentials. I stand by my comments. He is completely out to lunch on how a stake president is called, and completely out to lunch on the type of person that is required to run a stake. There is no truth to his claims. 

So you knew that Arrington had a PhD in Economics, taught economics, and made his name as a an economic historian but you still stand by your comment that he should take a course in economics? And though Arrington had served as a branch president, was on numerous high councils and in a stake presidency, worked with church administrators for much of his career and wrote biographies of church administrators, etc., according to you, he didn't know anything about church administration and was clueless about how a stake president is called and what it takes to run a stake.

"There is no truth to his claims"? How would you know? Was Arrington ever claiming that this was the universal practice of the Church in 2016 (or in 1992 for that matter)? There's no reason to think that he was. Had he anticipated that this throwaway comment in his diary would be discussion fodder on an Internet forum 25 years later presumably he would have appropriately qualified and sourced it.

Edited July 18, 2016 by Nevo

[ALarson]

11 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Here is the tool I gave you nearly a year ago to help you remember.
 

 

Yup!  That has helped 

(You've got a great memory!  I don't remember what I posted yesterday....ha ha  )

.

Edited July 18, 2016 by ALarson